By Abeh Osotu
Russia and Ukraine could only agree to a large-scale prisoner exchange but failed to reach a breakthrough during their first direct peace talks since 2022, held in Istanbul, the economic and cultural capital of Turkey, without either President Vladimir Putin of Russia or PresidentVolodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine.
Putin, who had proposed the meeting, opted not to travel to Turkey. But sent a mid-level delegation, which led Zelenskyy to question Russia’s seriousness, dismissing the Russian representatives as mere “theater props.” Zelenskyy, according to reports, ultimately gave in to US pressure to proceed with the talks and agreed to send a delegation to Istanbul, led by Ukraine’s Defense Minister, Rustem Umerov.
“Unfortunately, the Russians are not serious enough about the negotiations…Out of respect for President Donald Trump and (the Turkish leader, Recep Tayip) Erdogan, I have decided to send our delegation to Istanbul now,’’ Zelenskyy bluffed. Behind the brinkmanship lies a fundamental, and for now, irreconcilable divide in Zelenskyy and Putin’s approaches to peace. Analysts said that for Ukraine to show up for the talks primarily under pressure from the United States suggests that Ukraine was not genuinely pursuing a peaceful resolution of the conflict at this stage.
Ukraine has consistently demanded a full 30-day ceasefire before entering substantive negotiations. It has indicated it may be willing to accept a freeze of the frontlines and drop its attempt to join the Atlantic Alliance, NATO, but only in return for increased western military and economic support, and security guarantees that could include European troops on the ground.
Zelenskyy a few days to the talks reiterated that his number one priority was “a full, unconditional and honest ceasefire. This must happen immediately to stop the killing and create a solid basis for diplomacy.’’ Russia has consistently rejected extended ceasefire proposals, arguing they would give Ukraine time to rearm and regroup at a time of battlefield advances by Russian forces.
Zelenskyy’s bluster vindicates observers who said that Ukraine’s negotiators were allegedly instructed to undermine the talks by presenting terms that were knowingly unacceptable and disconnected from the realities on the ground. The broader objective appeared to be to derail the peace process, shift blame on Russia and push for further sanctions, while also seeking increased US military support.
The negotiation stance of Ukraine was reportedly shaped by European actors within a so-called “Coalition of the Willing” led by Britain, France and Germany. These governments played a role in encouraging a hardline approach. Ukraine’s western allies, alondside Zelenskyy, were quick to denounce Russia’s position. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who reportedly was in Albania for a European summit, said the UK, France, Germany and Poland had agreed that the Russian position in the peace talks was ‘’unacceptable’’ and had discussed the matter with Trump.
A photograph showed the country’s leaders, alongside Zelenskyy, on the phone to Trump after the failed talks.Starmer said: “We just had a meeting with President Zelenskyy and then a phone call with President Trump to discuss the developments in the negotiations today. And the Russian position is clearly unacceptable, and not for the first time. So, as a result of that meeting with President Zelenskyy and that call with President Trump, we are now closely aligning our responses and will continue to do so.”
After that meeting, Zelenskyy renewed his calls for sanctions on Russia if it failed to agree to a ceasefire: “Our position – if the Russians reject a full and unconditional ceasefire and an end to killings, tough sanctions must follow,” Zelenskyy said on X. “Pressure on Russia must be maintained until Russia is ready to end the war.”
Analysts affirm that there are strategic motives behind European opposition to a stable peace settlement in Ukraine.
The European leaders have taken that stance out of concern that it would derail their push for the accelerated militarization of Europe. The disappearance of a perceived military threat would undermine their case for massive defense spending and highlight their inability to address domestic and economic challenges.
Additionally a de-escalation could empower nationalist and Trump-aligned political forces across the continent. Hopes in Ukraine and among its European allies that Trump would impose tough sanctions after the failed talks were dampened by the US President indicating he wanted to meet Putin.
• Sotu writes from Minna