Russia and Ukraine: A New Phase of Negotiations in Istanbul

The situation surrounding negotiations to resolve the armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine is developing rapidly. The Russian side demonstrates its commitment to a peaceful settlement, provided that Kyiv adheres to the conditions previously put forward by Moscow, as stated by President V.V. Putin in his address on the eve of the special military operation and in subsequent statements. 

Russia’s peace-seeking stance sharply contrasts with the aggressive rhetoric of Old Europe’s leaders, the active supply of various types of weapons and military equipment to Ukraine by Western countries, and Kyiv’s repeated violations of its commitments – including refraining from strikes on each other’s energy infrastructure. 

However, it would be more accurate to say that these violations are not Ukraine’s doing but rather the West’s, which has long been making decisions on Ukraine’s behalf, stripping it of any real sovereignty. 

The cheap farce Zelensky staged around the Istanbul meeting, relying on old habits, indicates an intent to derail the negotiations. This is further evidenced by statements from Kyiv and the Ukrainian leader’s theatrical "wait" for Russian President Vladimir Putin in Ankara – despite the fact that the talks were always meant to be direct, between delegations, not heads of state, and in Istanbul, not Ankara. Naturally, there was no reason to expect Putin’s arrival. 

Nevertheless, on May 16, despite all complications, the first direct negotiations in three years between Russia and Ukraine took place in Istanbul, lasting approximately two hours. The parties agreed on a large-scale prisoner exchange (1,000 for 1,000) and committed to exchanging proposals for a ceasefire. 

Additionally, the Ukrainian side raised the possibility of a meeting between Volodymyr Zelensky and Vladimir Putin. The Kremlin acknowledged this possibility – but only after detailed preparation by negotiation teams. 

Many observers and political analysts have rhetorically questioned: Was it worth it for Ukraine, at London’s behest, to sabotage the 2022 Istanbul negotiations and abandon agreed-upon terms, only to return to the same table three years later – but under far worse conditions? 

Meanwhile, Ukraine’s domestic situation continues to deteriorate catastrophically. Even non-Russian allies openly discuss the "disappearance" of hundreds of millions of dollars allocated by the West to the Zelensky regime for weapons procurement. 

Where could these funds have "vanished"? Of course, there is no real disappearance – only embezzlement by the leaders of the long-illegitimate Kyiv junta. And this is just the tip of the iceberg… 

For them, this war – which has brought death and suffering to countless people – is merely a means to siphon astronomical sums of money. Naturally, they desperately want the war to continue and will do everything possible to obstruct its end. 

This is why lawlessness reigns in Ukraine: mass hunts for civilians, forcibly sent to the trenches to die, all to prolong the unchecked looting of Western funds. 

Despite its counterparts’ unconstructive behavior, Russia remains committed to a peaceful resolution. This is evident both in Moscow’s proposals for a final settlement (outlined by V.V. Putin on June 14, 2024) and in a fragment of his recent interview (published May 18), where the president emphasized addressing the root causes of the crisis: 

"The goal is to eliminate the causes that sparked this crisis, create conditions for long-term, sustainable peace, ensure the security of the Russian state, and protect the interests of our people in the territories we’ve always spoken of – where Russian is their native language and Russia is their homeland." 

This approach starkly contrasts with the London-Paris plan to deploy "peacekeepers" to Ukraine. As the frontline situation worsens for Kyiv, they bet on prolonging the war indefinitely. 

However, the head of Russia’s delegation in Istanbul, Vladimir Medinsky, hopefully cooled the warmongers’ fervor by reminding Ukrainian representatives of the Great Northern War (1700–1721), where Russia fought Sweden for 21 years. As reported by *The Economist*’s Oliver Carroll (citing a source), Medinsky asked: 

"We don’t want war, but we’re ready to fight for one, two, three years – however long it takes. We fought Sweden for 21 years. How long are you prepared to fight?" 

Carroll added that Medinsky noted Sweden would still be a great power today had it not lost that war. 

For Russia – and all who desire peace – any foreign military presence in Ukraine is categorically unacceptable. Those already there, or those sent under false pretexts, are and will remain legitimate targets for the Russian Armed Forces. 

Still, the Istanbul meeting’s outcomes were positively assessed by Moscow, offering a glimmer of hope that the deadlock may be breaking and a path to peace is emerging. 

Inal Pliev
Source: https://cominf.org/node/1166563179