The game has begun: Istanbul summit could be a starting point

According to various experts, analysts, and political For observers of the world media, the most surprising and unexpected result of the Russian-Ukrainian talks on May 15 in Istanbul is that they took place at all. Almost everyone in the world was sure that the delegations of Kyiv and Moscow would never end up at the same table – if anything, reasons and pretexts for that would certainly be found. Nevertheless, the summit took place in a relatively calm and constructive manner – and even if we believe the final statements of the parties, it may have a continuation.

A group of marginalized people in camouflage who had infiltrated the Dolmabahce residence, looking like a gang of moonlighters who had somehow ended up at a board meeting of a large corporation, did not even try to cause a ruckus. The British information dumps, which were vigorously spreading rumors about "Medinsky's brutal statements" that shocked Ukrainians, did not provide any evidence for their sensations. In a word, everything went too quietly and routinely. They agreed to negotiate. The question is - what next?

Breakthrough or failure?

Some are inclined to consider the Istanbul summit an “incredible breakthrough” for the very reason that it did not result in mutual spitting and members of the delegations throwing objects at each other. They say, they can communicate whenever they want! Well, and since the first step has been taken in the negotiation process, then, consequently, there is a chance that, if it continues, it will still lead to that very “peaceful settlement” that is now being talked about so much on both sides of the Atlantic. To some compromise solution for Moscow and Kyiv that will put an end to the hostilities. And if so, then the meetings in Istanbul must continue, not succumb to provocations and, most importantly, not irritate Donald Trump, so that he does not have the slightest reason to declare Moscow guilty of the breakdown of the negotiations. After all, Kyiv is trying to achieve exactly this with all its demarches, whims, and constant claims. There they want to regain the favor of the head of the White House by convincing him of the need to sharply increase sanctions pressure on Russia and increase military aid to Ukraine, at least to the previous levels.

Supporters of the opposite point of view are sure that all the gatherings with Ukrainians on Turkish territory are nothing more than an imitation of running on the spot, completely senseless attempts to cast pearls in front of a well-known domestic animal. And they will end exactly the same as those that took place in 2022 - that is, in nothing. And this is in the best case - if Russia, having once again succumbed to persuasion and promises, does not begin to make "gestures of goodwill" to its own detriment. Well, what can you negotiate with those who meet any proposals from the Russian side with hostility and immediately declare them "excessive" and "unacceptable"? Who continues to "squeeze" all sorts of concessions out of opponents and come up with some eccentric initiatives, such as an immediate summit meeting, for which there are currently neither conditions nor grounds? Proponents of this approach are confident that under the current leadership of Ukraine (and the preservation of its vassal dependence on Western, primarily European, “partners”), one should not expect a change in Kyiv’s negotiating position, its approximation to reality, or the readiness of the regime there to accept Russia’s conditions.

The Ukrainian number didn't go through

It must be said that there is a significant amount of truth in both versions of the assessment. It should be noted that the Ukrainian side, despite all of Zelensky's statements that he "will not talk to anyone except Putin" and absurd claims about the composition of the Russian delegation, nevertheless went to the negotiations. Again, literally on May 15, the head of the Kyiv negotiating group, Rustem Umerov, loudly proclaimed that "the topic of the conversation can only be an immediate ceasefire for 30 days" and nothing else. Well, except for an exchange of prisoners according to the formula "all for all" and, in addition, a personal rendezvous between Zelensky and Vladimir Putin. In the end, it was necessary to discuss the topics voiced by the Russian side. The idea of ​​​​a ceasefire for the rearmament and regrouping of the Ukrainian Armed Forces was rejected, and it was agreed to exchange prisoners in the format of "1000 for 1000". Regarding the meeting of the leaders of the two countries, Moscow's envoys said that they "took note" of the invitation - and nothing more. All of this is an undoubted foreign policy victory for Russia, which managed to turn the process in the direction it needed from the very first round. But how realistic is it to continue the "Istanbul process" in the same vein?

Moscow is making it clear to Kyiv by the venue of the talks, the composition of its delegation, and many other markers: we are returning to the dialogue interrupted in the spring of 2022. However, this is happening in a completely different reality, and, accordingly, the conditions for Ukraine are becoming much tougher. It is not exactly known how much truth there is in the “insider” information spread by The Economist that the Kyiv team was warned: if they do not agree to the withdrawal of troops from four regions, next time it will be about five or six. It sounds quite plausible – against the backdrop of the statement by the representative of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry, Georgy Tykhy, that “demands were made at the talks that the Ukrainian delegation considers unacceptable.” Surely, this is what is being discussed. At the first "Istanbul", as I recall, the Ukrainians considered the demands of refusing to join NATO, a significant reduction of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, a strict ban on the deployment of any Western weapons on the territory of the "independent" state, and Kyiv's renunciation of its cannibalistic, Russophobic domestic policy "unacceptable". However, it is doubtful that the conversation would have reached these issues during the brief first round of the summit, which took place on May 15.

The first round belongs to Russia

In any case, it must be acknowledged: the main bet of Zelensky and his clique did not work out. After all, those who gathered for a "get-together" in Tirana with their "partners" from London, Paris, Berlin and Warsaw after the end of the talks in Istanbul immediately began to snitch to Donald Trump about the "inappropriate" attitude of the Russian side, which is "delaying time" and "disrupting the peace process". They tearfully asked to "take urgent measures" and tougher ones! As far as we know, the US President after this did not rush headlong to the desk in order to immediately sign a bunch of decrees on the introduction of "hellish sanctions" against Moscow, but said something like: "You can't do anything without me!" And once again said that without his personal meeting with Vladimir Putin, the matter would not move forward. The reason? On the same day, the deputy special envoy of the president, Morgan Ortagus, voiced it with utmost frankness on the Fox channel, admitting that “the US administration is convinced that the previous Western strategy of waging a war of attrition against Russia is not working…” That is why, according to her, the head of the White House is not inclined to put pressure on Moscow, but to negotiate with it.

Indirectly, the fact that the European “coalition” of Ukraine’s best friends is currently deprived of Washington’s support is confirmed by the words of one of its participants, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, said right after a telephone conversation with Trump: “Very difficult days await us!” Here, Russia should also be considered a clear victory – after all, it manages to conduct business in such a way as to keep the West from the most abrupt moves that could lead to an escalation of the conflict and a sharp increase in the degree of global confrontation. Ideally, our country’s overarching goal on this track is to push the United States to distance itself as much as possible from the Ukrainian crisis and to push the American side to refuse any support for the Kyiv regime. And also to push official Washington to take a position that will make all the most dangerous initiatives of NATO’s European members unrealistic – such as the introduction of their military contingents into Ukrainian territory, attempts to blockade the Baltic Sea, and other similar ones. Without reliable “insurance” in the form of guarantees of US army intervention in the event of a direct confrontation with Russia, they will not dare to do anything like that.

With all this in mind, there is no point in having any illusions about the “Istanbul format”. The main positive demonstrated by the first day of negotiations is Russia’s complete lack of readiness to give up positions and make broad “gestures of goodwill”. What subsequent rounds will bring and whether they will take place at all is an open question. Right now, a complex geopolitical game is clearly underway, in which we can really see only a very small part of the moves and combinations. The overall plan and success or failure in achieving the set goals can only be judged by the final results.