The futility of the russia-ukraine peace talks

The futility of the russia-ukraine peace talks

Play all audios:

Loading...

For two days, the international press corps waited outside of the presidential office at Dolmabahce Palace, an opulent European-style Ottoman residence on the shores of the Bosphorus that served as the last home of the sultans. They waited and waited but nothing happened. The week had promised something big: historic peace talks between Ukraine and Russia, the first direct meeting between the warring sides since the first months of Russia’s full-scale invasion in early 2022. At various points, Putin, Zelensky and Trump all had said they might be there. But as the hours passed, and the talks kept being delayed, it became clear that none of the leaders who’d said they’d come would show. Milling around the presidential office gates, the story about the peace talks became one about futility and waiting. By midday on Thursday, people started using the word “farce”. By Friday afternoon, the obvious reference was Samuel Beckett’s _Waiting for Godot,_ with its perennially absent protagonist, a play Irish critic Vivian Mercier had once described as one in which “nothing happens, twice”.  The whole thing had been Putin’s idea. Last weekend, leaders of the UK, France, Germany and Poland issued Russia an ultimatum from Kyiv: agree to a 30-day ceasefire or face “massive” new sanctions. Putin responded with an offer of his own: direct peace talks between Russia and Ukraine, to be held in Istanbul. Zelensky agreed to attend and said he’d be “personally” waiting for Putin in Turkey, but reiterated Ukraine’s expectation that a ceasefire be observed beginning on Monday 12 May “to provide the necessary basis for diplomacy”. Putin refused to agree to this precondition. Russian attacks on Ukraine continued throughout the two days of scheduled peace talks.  In its messaging ahead of the talks, the Russian side depicted the talks as a return to the failed Istanbul negotiations of early 2022. The implied message was that the Ukrainians could have taken what the Russians offered then, and now, after the loss of so much human life, they were back to where they started. Early Tuesday morning, Russia’s TASS press agency announced that the talks would begin at 10 am at Dolmabahce Palace – the site of the 2022 talks. Ukrainian media immediately denied the news, claiming that the Russians had been lying. The Ukrainians were sensitive to any attempts to connect the negotiations to those held three years ago. “The Russians want to build associations with 2022. But all that is similar is the city of Istanbul. And nothing else,” Andrii Yermak, Zelensky’s chief of staff, wrote on Telegram after the meetings finally started on Friday. “All Russian attempts to link today to 2022 will not work.”  Much is still unknown about the 2022 peace talks and they remain highly contentious. But what is known is that they produced something called the Istanbul Communiqué, a draft treaty that would have declared Ukraine a permanently neutral state, meaning it would agree to never host foreign military bases or to join Nato. Further, the proposed treaty listed a number of potential guarantors of Ukraine’s future security, including the permanent members of the Security Council, (including Russia), Canada, Turkey, Poland, Belarus, and Italy. These states would be obliged to assist the Ukrainians in restoring peace in the event of an attack on its territory. Though Ukraine would have had to agree to military neutrality, the Communique envisioned a path for the country’s eventual EU membership. While some of this was promising, there were also some glaring omissions. Most significantly, the Communique did not address the burning issue of territory and borders. The Russian side has claimed that both sides were close to an agreement, but that it was ultimately thwarted by Boris Johnson, who purportedly pressured the Ukrainians not to sign because he wanted them to fight in order to weaken Russia at any cost. Though Western leaders were indeed skeptical of the talks, and Johnson reportedly told Zelensky that any deal with the Russians would deliver the Kremlin a victory of sorts, the West’s main issue with the treaty was reportedly that it would have necessitated engaging Russia diplomatically in order to hammer out the specifics of Ukraine’s security guarantees. And neither direct diplomatic engagement with Russia nor the provision of security guarantees were things the West was interested in doing. The Ukrainians were also infuriated by the discovery of Russian atrocities against Ukrainian civilians, including women and children, in the city of Bucha. Further, Russia’s failure to take Kyiv convinced Zelensky that with sufficient Western military aid, Ukraine could win the war. Hopes that this week’s talks would produce much progress began unravelling early, when Russia produced the list of individuals it was sending as part of its delegation: neither Putin nor his foreign minister Sergei Lavrov were on it. In another nod to 2022, the Russian delegation would once again be led by the Ukraine-born Russian nationalist and Kremlin aide Vladimir Medinsky. He was accompanied by three others, including the head of the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence agency. The Russians are reportedly looking at any potential settlement on Ukraine as part of a larger “grand bargain” with the Americans, one that would also keep the Trump administration onside.  The talks were also a test of both American and Turkish diplomatic acumen. On the US side, Trump sent state secretary Marco Rubio to Istanbul, along with real estate investor-turned-Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg. On the campaign trail, Trump repeatedly promised to “end the war in Ukraine in the first 24 hours” of his presidency. Back in office, he has found himself bumping up against the limitations of US power. As this week’s peace talks failed to deliver, Trump asserted that no deal on Ukraine was possible until he met with Putin. And perhaps he’s right. Turkey, meanwhile, has emerged as a mediation powerhouse – a role that has been a lifeline for President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan as he presides over a devastated economy and the twilight of Turkish democracy. But from the outside, all the diplomatic activity looks impressive: just this week, Turkey hosted Russia-Ukraine talks, nuclear talks between the Europeans and Iran, and the Nato foreign ministers’ meeting. Though this week’s peace talks failed to deliver peace, at the end of Friday, it was announced the Russia and Ukraine had agreed to exchange 1,000 prisoners each, the largest of the war. It wasn’t peace; it wasn’t even a ceasefire, but it was more than nothing.  _[SEE ALSO: MISOGYNY IN THE METAVERSE]_ 

For two days, the international press corps waited outside of the presidential office at Dolmabahce Palace, an opulent European-style Ottoman residence on the shores of the Bosphorus that


served as the last home of the sultans. They waited and waited but nothing happened. The week had promised something big: historic peace talks between Ukraine and Russia, the first direct


meeting between the warring sides since the first months of Russia’s full-scale invasion in early 2022. At various points, Putin, Zelensky and Trump all had said they might be there. But as


the hours passed, and the talks kept being delayed, it became clear that none of the leaders who’d said they’d come would show. Milling around the presidential office gates, the story about


the peace talks became one about futility and waiting. By midday on Thursday, people started using the word “farce”. By Friday afternoon, the obvious reference was Samuel Beckett’s _Waiting


for Godot,_ with its perennially absent protagonist, a play Irish critic Vivian Mercier had once described as one in which “nothing happens, twice”.  The whole thing had been Putin’s idea.


Last weekend, leaders of the UK, France, Germany and Poland issued Russia an ultimatum from Kyiv: agree to a 30-day ceasefire or face “massive” new sanctions. Putin responded with an offer


of his own: direct peace talks between Russia and Ukraine, to be held in Istanbul. Zelensky agreed to attend and said he’d be “personally” waiting for Putin in Turkey, but reiterated


Ukraine’s expectation that a ceasefire be observed beginning on Monday 12 May “to provide the necessary basis for diplomacy”. Putin refused to agree to this precondition. Russian attacks on


Ukraine continued throughout the two days of scheduled peace talks.  In its messaging ahead of the talks, the Russian side depicted the talks as a return to the failed Istanbul negotiations


of early 2022. The implied message was that the Ukrainians could have taken what the Russians offered then, and now, after the loss of so much human life, they were back to where they


started. Early Tuesday morning, Russia’s TASS press agency announced that the talks would begin at 10 am at Dolmabahce Palace – the site of the 2022 talks. Ukrainian media immediately denied


the news, claiming that the Russians had been lying. The Ukrainians were sensitive to any attempts to connect the negotiations to those held three years ago. “The Russians want to build


associations with 2022. But all that is similar is the city of Istanbul. And nothing else,” Andrii Yermak, Zelensky’s chief of staff, wrote on Telegram after the meetings finally started on


Friday. “All Russian attempts to link today to 2022 will not work.”  Much is still unknown about the 2022 peace talks and they remain highly contentious. But what is known is that they


produced something called the Istanbul Communiqué, a draft treaty that would have declared Ukraine a permanently neutral state, meaning it would agree to never host foreign military bases or


to join Nato. Further, the proposed treaty listed a number of potential guarantors of Ukraine’s future security, including the permanent members of the Security Council, (including Russia),


Canada, Turkey, Poland, Belarus, and Italy. These states would be obliged to assist the Ukrainians in restoring peace in the event of an attack on its territory. Though Ukraine would have


had to agree to military neutrality, the Communique envisioned a path for the country’s eventual EU membership. While some of this was promising, there were also some glaring omissions. Most


significantly, the Communique did not address the burning issue of territory and borders. The Russian side has claimed that both sides were close to an agreement, but that it was ultimately


thwarted by Boris Johnson, who purportedly pressured the Ukrainians not to sign because he wanted them to fight in order to weaken Russia at any cost. Though Western leaders were indeed


skeptical of the talks, and Johnson reportedly told Zelensky that any deal with the Russians would deliver the Kremlin a victory of sorts, the West’s main issue with the treaty was


reportedly that it would have necessitated engaging Russia diplomatically in order to hammer out the specifics of Ukraine’s security guarantees. And neither direct diplomatic engagement with


Russia nor the provision of security guarantees were things the West was interested in doing. The Ukrainians were also infuriated by the discovery of Russian atrocities against Ukrainian


civilians, including women and children, in the city of Bucha. Further, Russia’s failure to take Kyiv convinced Zelensky that with sufficient Western military aid, Ukraine could win the war.


Hopes that this week’s talks would produce much progress began unravelling early, when Russia produced the list of individuals it was sending as part of its delegation: neither Putin nor


his foreign minister Sergei Lavrov were on it. In another nod to 2022, the Russian delegation would once again be led by the Ukraine-born Russian nationalist and Kremlin aide Vladimir


Medinsky. He was accompanied by three others, including the head of the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence agency. The Russians are reportedly looking at any potential settlement on Ukraine


as part of a larger “grand bargain” with the Americans, one that would also keep the Trump administration onside.  The talks were also a test of both American and Turkish diplomatic acumen.


On the US side, Trump sent state secretary Marco Rubio to Istanbul, along with real estate investor-turned-Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg. On the campaign


trail, Trump repeatedly promised to “end the war in Ukraine in the first 24 hours” of his presidency. Back in office, he has found himself bumping up against the limitations of US power. As


this week’s peace talks failed to deliver, Trump asserted that no deal on Ukraine was possible until he met with Putin. And perhaps he’s right. Turkey, meanwhile, has emerged as a mediation


powerhouse – a role that has been a lifeline for President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan as he presides over a devastated economy and the twilight of Turkish democracy. But from the outside, all the


diplomatic activity looks impressive: just this week, Turkey hosted Russia-Ukraine talks, nuclear talks between the Europeans and Iran, and the Nato foreign ministers’ meeting. Though this


week’s peace talks failed to deliver peace, at the end of Friday, it was announced the Russia and Ukraine had agreed to exchange 1,000 prisoners each, the largest of the war. It wasn’t


peace; it wasn’t even a ceasefire, but it was more than nothing.  _[SEE ALSO: MISOGYNY IN THE METAVERSE]_