Only a certain model of possible agreements
Forecast: “Geopolitical events of October 2026 and their further development. A prospective scenario for many major geopolitical players” (published October 4, 2026, link).
S. Dragan:
And around October 27, 2026, negotiations or some form of negotiated compromise may take place, seemingly close to decisions resembling the achievement of a certain consensus. But again, for now this will only be a certain model of possible agreements…
In confirmation of “The negotiation process appears important” dated October 28, 2026, it was noted that after a long break, plans once again emerged at the end of October 2026 to hold a trilateral meeting of negotiating groups on the Ukrainian conflict.
At the same time, S. Dragan forecast an important event — “around October 27, 2026 … negotiations or some form of negotiated compromise.”
And indeed, such an event took place on October 27, 2026 — the so-called “Scandinavian call.” The fact that many political scientists and experts gave it a wide variety of interpretations demonstrated its significance.
Behind the “Scandinavian call” of October 27, 2026, were Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre — they called Vladimir Putin on their own initiative. But later, Stubb stated that the call had been made at Zelensky’s request.
The main officially stated topic was the prospects for a peaceful settlement in Ukraine. European politicians wanted to convey a certain message directly to the Russian leadership regarding future negotiations. The matter concerned trilateral consultations among Russia, Ukraine, and the United States, which were viewed “only as a certain model of possible agreements.” This meeting was tentatively scheduled for the first half of November in Abu Dhabi. That is, the call became a step in support of these discussions.
Context: shortly before this, U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff traveled to Moscow, and it was the Norwegian prime minister who received him before and after this trip. This may have prompted Stubb and Støre to also establish contact with the Russian side. The media also discussed that Stubb had previously generally advocated for “countries bordering Russia” to participate more actively in the dialogue.
Political scientists believe that the call is a reaction to U.S.-Russia negotiations taking place without Europe.
“Europe has somewhat lost its importance in recent months, as the United States is conducting direct negotiations with both Ukraine and Russia,” experts said.
In their view, European countries are trying to return to the process, but time will tell whether this will change the balance of power for long.
Norway traditionally acts as a humanitarian guarantor in Africa and the Middle East, and if negotiations are held there, it will be to its advantage. At the same time, Norway does not forget its economic interests — coordinating gas and oil pricing policy in connection with D. Trump’s temporary lifting of sanctions on Russia’s sale of energy resources. But nothing is more permanent than the temporary.
Stubb is called a possible negotiator on behalf of the European Union: he has experience communicating with the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump and early contacts with Russia. Støre, meanwhile, was foreign minister until 2013, during the years of fruitful cooperation between Moscow and Oslo.
The two countries will not be able to influence the terms of a future agreement due to their limited military and financial potential, an expert believes. But they can influence who becomes Europe’s main negotiator.
Experts note that no easing of escalation should be expected in the near future, but the resumption of negotiations is a good sign.
Among other things, for Norway and Finland — effectively the only countries of Old Europe with extensive land and maritime borders with Russia — it is extremely dangerous to continue whipping up military hysteria toward it.
Not everyone in Europe approved the initiative of the “Scandinavian call.” Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen publicly criticized her Scandinavian neighbors, calling the move skeptical and uncoordinated with the other countries of Europe.
In response, Kirill Dmitriev, head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, posted a harsh comment on social media.
Western media attempted to downplay the significance of the event by planting fakes about the “emptiness of the negotiations that took place.”
An article in the Financial Times claimed that the Russian president allegedly devoted most of his conversation with the Scandinavian leaders to “a lecture on Slavic history,” as well as a lengthy speech on the root causes of the Ukrainian conflict.
Norwegian authorities demanded that the Financial Times correct its article devoted to the telephone conversation between Russian President Vladimir Putin, Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, and Finnish leader Alexander Stubb. TV2 reported this on October 28, 2026.
“This is incorrect. We asked the Financial Times to correct it because it is untrue,” Støre told the channel.
The Norwegian prime minister emphasized that during the conversation, Putin explained Russia’s position in this conflict, analyzing events from 2014 to the present.
But the Financial Times refused to correct its falsehood, believing it would do as it was. Western media carry out the social order of their masters, forgetting journalistic ethics.
Earlier, on October 27, 2026, some outlets reported that Vladimir Putin’s telephone conversation with Alexander Stubb and Jonas Gahr Støre had caused a rift between Ukraine and its allies.
Advance also writes about the negative reaction in Europe to Stubb and Støre’s call to Putin. The publication emphasizes that unity with Ukraine, constantly invoked in the EU, is turning into a demand to do nothing without permission. In trying to preserve this imaginary “unity,” Europe is losing its political importance.
Overall, the event was perceived as an attempt by certain NATO countries to establish direct contact with Russia on the Ukrainian issue, despite the still-declared “common unity in the alliance on this issue” — active Russophobia and support for Ukraine to continue the war.
S. Dragan, considering the further prospects of the negotiating process, notes that the trilateral meeting planned for November 2026:
…will not become the final stage of the agreements. The next phase of negotiations and, one might say, the final one, will occur closer to March 12, 2027…
To be continued…
