According to a recent analysis by the Institute for the Study of War, any framework for peace talks between Ukraine and Russia based on the Istanbul 2022 talks would require Ukraine to essentially concede to Russian requests. Steve Witkoff a former U.S. Special Envoy made similar comments. He suggested the Istanbul protocol as a potential starting point for new discussions.
Istanbul Protocol Framework Concerns
A potential adoption of Istanbul Protocols as the basis for negotiation raises concern, especially given the historical context and changing geopolitical dynamics. Donald Trump’s criticisms of Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and Zelenskyy’s subsequent response that Zelenskyy was susceptible to Russian misinformation highlights the tensions. A perceived move towards an agreement similar to the Istanbul Protocols could be seen as a reward for Russian aggression. This is especially true in light of the strained relationship between Kyiv, Washington and other European countries.
Understanding the Istanbul Protocols
Istanbul protocol was born from the direct peace talks that took place between Ukrainian and Russian officials during the initial stages of invasion 2022 (February-April) in Istanbul. The discussions are a rare example of direct negotiations. These reports are taken from publications such as The Wall Street Journal You can also find out more about the following: The New York Times According to the reports, Ukraine made significant concessions in order to accept these proposals. This included renouncing its NATO aspirations and retaining a permanent neutral status. Kyiv is also prohibited from receiving or hosting foreign troops, as well as maintaining a small military. Restrictions on Ukrainian missiles ranges allow Russia deploy systems at the border without similar risk. Belarus, another close ally to Vladimir Putin and a potential guarantor, is also part of the treaty.
ISW Analysis: Ukrainian Surrender?
ISW claims that accepting an agreement on peace based upon the Istanbul talks would be a complete capitulation of Ukraine’s war goals in the long term. This approach, according to the think tank, would be a concession to Russia’s “denazification” goals, which imply regime change in order to install a pro Russian government. It also severely limits Ukraine’s militaries, making it more vulnerable to Russian aggression.
Russia’s position on Ceasefire Negotiations
Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, said that Moscow will only accept a ceasefire when negotiations result in a positive outcome for Russia. The difficult environment in which it is possible to reach a compromise that both parties can accept is reflected by this stance.
U.S. The Potential for Incentives and Engagement
In addition, the United States also held direct discussions with Russia. Ukraine was excluded from this initial discussion. Russia could be encouraged to compromise by adjusting the U.S. presence in Europe, and returning to Western diplomatic forums. Organizations like the Quincy Institute, however, recommend that meetings between U.S. presidents and Russian counterparts are contingent on tangible progress in ending the conflict in Ukraine.
Key perspectives on the Negotiation Framework
Steve Witkoff, former U.S. Special Representative to the Middle East: They described the Istanbul protocols as “convincing and substantive” negotiations and said they provide a “framework and guideposts” for reaching a peaceful agreement.
Institute for the Study of War A document based on the Istanbul Protocols was referred to as “a capitulation” and deemed unacceptable by Ukraine because it aligned with Russia’s war objectives.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov: Affirmed that Russia would only end hostilities if negotiations produced a “firm, durable result” that satisfied Russian interests.
The Future and Diplomatic Activities
White House officials have indicated that ongoing diplomatic efforts, including additional talks in Saudi Arabia, may include a possible peace agreement with Russia. According to reports, preparations are underway for an upcoming meeting between Donald Trump & Vladimir Putin. The feasibility of such an agreement and its terms remain uncertain due to the divergent objectives and viewpoints of all parties.