TL;DR
Get movie nights delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
A Financial Times report describes how American lawyer Richard Conn helped relay a Biden administration message to Vladimir Putin through intermediaries in 2022, amid concerns about nuclear escalation. Conn and associates later pursued an unofficial peace proposal, but the channel was effectively ended by early 2023; the report says later U.S. negotiating efforts used other people and have not succeeded.
Conn, a corporate lawyer and investor who had worked in Russia since 1992, began exploring a backchannel in March 2022 after an unnamed Russian businessman warned him that Putin might consider using tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Conn contacted Eric Green, then responsible for Russia policy at the U.S. National Security Council. Green agreed to the idea, but it took until September for Conn to reach Putin’s circle, the Financial Times reported.
Conn worked with American investor Bob Foresman and Matthias Warnig, a German businessman with a longstanding relationship with Putin. On October 4, 2022, Conn and Foresman met Warnig in Zurich. Conn later passed on a message from Green: “The US is not pursuing regime change. We’re not trying to destroy Russia. There is no existential threat. We’re trying to support international order and the UN. We want peace.” The wording was quoted by the FT.
Warnig relayed a response attributed to Putin at Frankfurt Airport on October 26. The FT reported that Warnig had written it down, while noting uncertainty over whether the words were Putin’s exact phrasing or Warnig’s account of his position. The reported response said Putin was “entirely open to negotiations” but also “ready to fight.” Around the same time, official contacts on nuclear risks were taking place between U.S. national security adviser Jake Sullivan and Russian official Yuri Ushakov, the report said.
Conn and Foresman then tried to move beyond passing messages and support a negotiated settlement. With help from businessman Michael Calvey, Conn connected with Ukrainian producer Alexander Rodnyansky, who knew President Volodymyr Zelensky. Warnig and Rodnyansky carried proposals to the Russian and Ukrainian leaders. The proposal included Russian withdrawal from most territory Moscow had recently claimed to annex, while Ukraine would recognize Russian control of Crimea and allow passage along a route. The available source account ends before detailing the full proposal or the responses to each term.
An Informal Channel Amid Nuclear Fears
The account describes an attempt to communicate outside the usual diplomatic chain at a point when Conn and his contacts feared the war could escalate to nuclear use. The reported message was intended to convey that Washington did not seek regime change or Russia’s destruction, while Putin’s reported reply expressed both openness to negotiations and willingness to continue fighting.
The episode also illustrates the limits of unofficial diplomacy. Conn’s network could carry messages and explore possible terms, but it did not produce a settlement. The report says official negotiators Yuri Ushakov and Eric Green had effectively brought Conn’s channel to an end by early 2023. That distinction matters: the backchannel was not a formal U.S.-Russia negotiation process, and its reported exchanges should not be mistaken for an agreed framework or a breakthrough in the war.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How Conn Reached Putin’s Circle
Conn had worked in Russia for decades, founding the Moscow office of Latham & Watkins in 1992. The FT account says he used his relationships among investors with Russian business connections to build a route toward Putin. Foresman had worked in banking and investment firms active in Russia and knew Warnig through his work at Dresdner Bank.
Warnig had done business in Russia since the early 1990s and later led the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 projects. People cited by the FT described him as one of the few figures with direct access to Putin because of their longstanding relationship. Conn had discussed the idea of a backchannel with Green as early as 2021, before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Conn did not reach Putin’s circle until September 2022, after formal talks in Istanbul had failed and Russian forces had withdrawn from the outskirts of Kyiv. The FT says Conn and Foresman interpreted Putin’s subsequent public remarks at the Valdai Discussion Club, in which he said nuclear weapons had no political or military purpose for Russia, as a sign that the nuclear danger had eased. The report also notes that official discussions on the issue were occurring at the same time.
US Russia relations diplomacy books
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
What the Report Leaves Unresolved
The reported Putin response is not independently established as a verbatim statement: according to the FT, Warnig recorded it in a notebook, and it remains unclear whether the wording came directly from Putin or reflected Warnig’s understanding. The source material also does not provide a complete account of the proposed settlement, how each leader responded to its terms, or why the proposal failed.
The source says official negotiators Ushakov and Green had effectively ended Conn’s channel by early 2023, but it does not specify the precise exchanges or decision that closed it. It also does not establish that the backchannel caused Putin’s public remarks on nuclear weapons to change. Conn and Foresman regarded those remarks as an indication of success, while the report notes parallel official discussions.
Ukraine peace negotiations analysis books
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
The Search for a Negotiated End
The backchannel described in the report is no longer active: it had effectively ended by early 2023, before the Biden administration left office. The source account says later U.S. efforts to negotiate an end to the war involved different people and had not succeeded by the time of the report.
The available reporting does not identify a new milestone or scheduled negotiation arising from Conn’s initiative. Further details about the proposal’s reception, the reasons the channel closed, and the subsequent diplomatic efforts would be needed to clarify how much influence the unofficial contacts had on later policy or negotiations.
nuclear risk and arms control books
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
Who was Richard Conn?
Conn is an American corporate lawyer and investor who began working in Russia in 1992. The Financial Times reported that he used his longstanding contacts to help establish an unofficial route for messages between the Biden administration and Putin’s circle.
What message did the Biden administration send?
The message, relayed by Conn to Matthias Warnig in October 2022, said the United States was not seeking regime change or the destruction of Russia and wanted peace, according to wording quoted by the Financial Times.
Did Putin agree to the proposed peace plan?
The available source material does not establish that Putin accepted the proposal. It says Warnig and Ukrainian producer Alexander Rodnyansky carried proposals to the Russian and Ukrainian leaders, but the effort fell apart and the account does not give a full record of their responses.
When did Conn’s backchannel end?
The report says official negotiators Yuri Ushakov and Eric Green had effectively brought Conn’s channel to an end by early 2023. It does not specify a single date or a detailed account of the closing exchanges.
Source: rss
Evergreen bestsellers Picks
bestsellers
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
