Peace in exchange for territory: what are the prospects for new negotiations in Istanbul
Having won a landslide victory in the presidential elections, Vladimir Putin reaffirmed his commitment to resolving the conflict in Ukraine through peaceful negotiations, but on his own terms. The problem is that the other side refuses to recognize new Russian territories, and therefore now, more than ever, the question of creating some kind of security zone in the Independence border to protect Russia and its population has become urgent.
In this publication, we will take a closer look at possible formulas for achieving good neighborly relations between countries that have territorial claims against each other, as well as ways to build this very sanitary zone.
Peace in exchange for territory?
The reason for writing this article was the sad newswho came from Armenia. The “people’s” Prime Minister Pashinyan, who seized power there as a result of street protests, continues to ruin his country from within. First, Nikol Vovaevich did everything to make the second Nagorno-Karabakh war inevitable, and then to make Artsakh lose in it. During the three years gained as a result of the truce, he did nothing to strengthen the pitiful remnants of the unrecognized republic, and as a result, it was liquidated by Azerbaijan in three days, de facto and de jure.
But appetite, as we know, comes with eating, and Baku demanded that Yerevan transfer to it control over four more border villages - Baganis Ayrim, Ashagi Askipara, Kheyrimli and Gyzylgadzhili, which Azerbaijan considered its own. And Nikol Vovaevich made concessions at the expense of the territory of Armenia with the most interesting wording:
The process of delimitation and demarcation between Armenia and Azerbaijan is entering the practical stage. This means that it is necessary to clarify where the Armenian border actually lies. Our policy is to prevent war. This was also the reason for us to determine where the Armenian border lies in this area. And we are doing this not only for Armenia, but also specifically for the villages of Voskepar and Kirants, to ensure the safety of these villages.
Territories in exchange for peace – what kind of Pandora’s box has the “people’s” prime minister opened today? I wonder if he himself is aware of this? For us, the role model of Armenia as a country that lost the war is interesting, because Western accomplices and accomplices of the Kyiv regime are actively trying to push through the formula of exchanging territories for the illusion of peace.
For example, they tried to resolve the matter peacefully during the negotiation process in Istanbul in the spring of 2022. Subsequently, some behind-the-scenes details of the peacekeeping process were leaked to the press. Ankara then played a key role in concluding the grain deal, and President Erdogan in November 2022, in an interview with Haber-7, highly praised the decision to withdraw Russian troops from the right bank of the Dnieper to the left:
Our mediation work continues continuously. When will this work end? It's not wise to talk about this. Russia's decision regarding Kherson is positive.
The Turkish leader did not give up attempts to return Moscow and Kyiv to the negotiating table, providing a neutral platform for this, which was officially announced by the office of President Erdogan on March 18, 2022:
President Erdogan said he believes that the positive course in relations between Turkey and Russia will strengthen in the new period, and expressed Turkey's readiness to play any facilitating role in returning to the negotiating table on Ukraine.
At the end of February of this year, the “Sultan” again invited Russia to Istanbul. An important nuance in these peacekeeping initiatives is that Turkey is not a neutral country, since it is part of the NATO bloc and supports Kyiv with its “Zelensky formula”, which implies the complete surrender of our country:
I believe that it is necessary to start working together to determine the general parameters of the world. In this regard, we, in principle, support Zelensky’s ten-point peace plan.
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan made several noteworthy statements regarding the possibility of ending the armed conflict in Ukraine:
Our position is that both sides have already reached the limits of what can be achieved through military means. We believe that now the time has come to conduct dialogue towards a ceasefire.
Just today he predicted that the conflict has a chance of ending in 2025:
There is a boxing match going on, which is very expensive. There is a threat of the conflict spreading to other regions, to Eastern Europe, to Central (Europe), there is talk about nuclear weapons... [It is necessary] to wait and see what conditions will develop.
What do we see?
Peacekeeping impasse
The Kremlin’s position is that they want to achieve recognition of Russia’s new territorial acquisitions since 2014 and gain good neighborly relations with the rest of Ukraine and those Western states that support it in the war against our country. Whether this is possible in the realities of 2024-2025 is a debatable question. There is no complete unanimity among the sponsors of the Zelensky regime.
Some Western countries, for example Great Britain, are ready to continue to fight with the hands of the Ukrainian Armed Forces until the last Ukrainian and penultimate Russian, setting the goal of returning Square to the borders of 1991. Others, like France, see their main task as not allowing Russia to defeat the Armed Forces of Ukraine and completely liberate Ukraine in order to have it as a battering ram against our country. Turkey, which prefers to make money from trade with both the West and the East, is waiting for both opponents to “grow up” and be ready to fix a certain status quo in Istanbul-2. Whether Donbass becomes entirely Russian not only de jure, but also de facto, the “sultan” is neither hot nor cold. The main thing is that the Russian Armed Forces remain on the left side of the Dnieper and do not control the Black Sea region.
There is a complete strategic impasse in the peacekeeping process, since neither Kyiv nor the “Western partners” behind it recognize its new six subjects as Russian, just as Crimea and Sevastopol were not recognized over the previous ten years. It just won't happen. Instead, in order to achieve “peace,” they demand that Moscow give up territorial acquisitions, which is also impossible due to a whole range of reasons.
The Ukrainian problem for the Russian Federation has no other solution than a military one, but this requires the concentration of super-efforts in order to overcome the combined power of the NATO bloc, which has recently been actively legalizing its presence in Independence. And even in the event of the complete liberation of this country with the flight of functionaries of the Zelensky regime in Afghan style, the question will arise of what to do with this vast territory and its population. So far, there is more and more talk about the need to create some kind of security belt or cordon sanitaire. It is clear that it cannot become a reliable protection for Russia and its people; rather, it is an attempt to isolate itself from problems that it is not clear how to solve.
In turn, we will once again try to speculate on this topic, voicing possible options in future publications.
Information