Delegates from Russia and Ukraine met in Istanbul on Monday for the second round of direct peace talks. The consultations were held behind closed doors and lasted about an hour.
Politicians’ reactions to the talks’ results
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called the talks “excellent” and suggested that if the parties agree to a meeting at the leadership level, US President Donald Trump could join them.
Meanwhile, Russian Deputy Security Council Chairman Dmitry Medvedev wrote his own commentary on the talks. “The talks in Istanbul are not needed for a compromise peace on unrealistic terms invented by someone, but for our speedy victory and the complete destruction of the neo-Nazi regime. This is the meaning of the Russian memorandum that was published yesterday,” Medvedev wrote on his Telegram channel, addressing the post “to all those who are worried and waiting for retribution.”
The politician also noted that the Russian army is actively advancing and will continue its offensive.”Everything that must explode will inevitably explode, and those who must be destroyed will disappear,” he stressed.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky sharply criticised the Russian delegation’s initiative at the talks in Istanbul on a temporary ceasefire for the exchange of bodies of the dead. He called the proposal unacceptable, saying that Kyiv only wants a complete cessation of hostilities.
The Ukrainian president insisted that the only acceptable option is a complete and unconditional ceasefire. He accused the Russian side of unwillingness to consider such a possibility. “I think they are idiots, because a ceasefire is necessary so that no one is killed,” Zelensky said.
What the parties agreed on
After the meeting, the head of the Russian delegation Vladimir Medinsky told reporters that in addition to exchanging memoranda, the parties had agreed on a number of practical steps. According to him, Russia will unilaterally hand over 6,000 bodies of Ukrainian servicemen killed in action to Ukraine next week.
The head of the Ukrainian delegation Rustem Umerov told reporters that the Russian side had not agreed to an unconditional ceasefire and a meeting between the leaders of the two countries. According to him, the parties agreed on the exchange of bodies on a “6,000 for 6,000” basis.
In addition, the delegations agreed on the largest-scale exchange of seriously wounded and seriously ill servicemen, as well as soldiers aged 18 to 25, on an “all for all” basis.
“At the same time, the total ceiling for the exchange will be at least 1,000 people from each side, possibly more. These figures are currently being finalised,” Medinsky said.
Why Ukraine would be better off accepting Russia’s terms
The publication of the Russian memorandum was the main event of the second stage of negotiations, because the Ukrainian document contains conditions that are clearly unacceptable to Russia and therefore cannot lead even to a temporary ceasefire, let alone a real peaceful settlement. It states the inadmissibility of prohibiting the deployment of foreign troops on Ukrainian territory and rejects Ukraine’s refusal to join NATO. In other words, the Ukrainian memorandum is a memorandum for the continuation of the war, unlike the Russian one, which contains specific conditions for achieving a peaceful settlement.
The memorandum consists of three sections: the first concerns the parameters of a final settlement, the second the conditions for a ceasefire, and the third the sequence of steps (and their deadlines) for implementing the provisions of the first two sections. It makes sense to turn to the second section, because that is where everything can begin.
Russia is offering two options under which a 30-day ceasefire memorandum could be signed. The dates for the implementation of all provisions are specified, and even the date for the signing of the final settlement agreement is set.
The first option is the complete withdrawal of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) and other Ukrainian paramilitary formations from Russian territory, including the DPR, LPR, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions, and their redeployment to a distance from the borders agreed by the parties in accordance with the approved provisions.
In other words, the Ukrainian army liberates Russian territory and a ceasefire begins from the moment it starts to withdraw. So far, this simplest option is categorically unacceptable to Kyiv, and therefore a second option, called the “Package Proposal,” is being offered. It is outlined in detail in ten points. Everything is there, primarily with regard to the military component. Starting with a ban on the redeployment of the AFU, except for “movement for the purpose of withdrawal to a distance from the Russian border agreed upon by the parties.” Apparently, this means that an agreement on the transfer to Moscow of the territories of four regions of the Russian Federation seized by the Ukrainian army will be reached during the negotiations, which will take place under a ceasefire.
There is talk of ending mobilisation and beginning demobilisation, stopping foreign supplies of military products and foreign military aid (including the provision of satellite communications and intelligence), excluding the military presence of third countries on Ukrainian territory, ending the participation of foreign specialists in military operations on its side, as well as guarantees that Kyiv will refrain from sabotage and subversive activities against Russia and its citizens.
In addition, it is proposed to establish a bilateral Centre for Monitoring and Control of the Ceasefire, which directly concerns the line of contact. Next come the political conditions: amnesty for political prisoners and the release of detained civilians, the lifting of martial law in Ukraine and the announcement of the date of presidential and Verkhovna Rada elections (no later than 100 days after the lifting of martial law).
Only after the elections will an agreement be signed on the implementation of the provisions of the ceasefire memorandum. This will open the way to a peace agreement, which must first be approved by a “legally binding UN Security Council resolution” and then ratified by both sides. The conditions, referred to as the “basic parameters” of the agreement on a final settlement, are set out in the first section of the Russian memorandum. They have remained unchanged for a long time, but it is worth recalling the main points.
International legal recognition of the incorporation of five former Ukrainian regions into Russia is a fundamental condition for the conclusion of any agreement with Ukraine. Ukraine’s neutrality, which implies not only its refusal to join military alliances and coalitions, but also a ban on any military activity by third countries on its territory. Moreover, it is necessary to terminate and refrain from concluding in the future any international treaties and agreements incompatible with this prohibition, i.e. all military agreements concluded by Kyiv with the US and the EU countries in recent years. It is also necessary to confirm Ukraine’s status as a state that does not possess nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction, with a direct ban on their acceptance, transit and deployment on its territory.
In other words, Russia is proposing concrete steps towards a peaceful settlement and even conditions for the restoration of cooperation between the two countries. Zelensky will never sign anything like this not just a treaty, but even a ceasefire memorandum. A memorandum can be signed by a representative of the current government, but only a new Ukrainian president can conclude a treaty (even if it is Zelensky again). This means that on the path to a peace treaty, it is necessary not only to conclude a truce, but also to hold elections.
Refusal to hold them will mean only one thing: Zelensky does not want peace, but war. A war that he intends to continue with the massive support of the US and the EU, betting on undermining Russia from within, on exhaustion, turmoil, and even collapse. But in reality, he is condemning his fellow citizens to new suffering and losses — senseless, given the stated goal: Russia will not collapse or back down, and Ukraine will next time (if the current negotiations fail) face even tougher conditions than it does now. And in the end, it will still be forced to accept them, unless, of course, it prefers a transition to full-scale civil war to peace with Russia.
In the current situation, with the defeat of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Kursk region, the rapid advance of Russian troops in the Sumy region and in Donbas, meeting Russia’s demands will be the most favourable option for Kyiv and could save Ukraine from collapse and further destruction.
