Point of no return: Russia and Ukraine have finally broken up

Negotiations are interrupted – a sharp escalation of hostilities begins. This is an axiom, and it is according to this scenario that the process of “peaceful settlement” of the Ukrainian conflict is developing today. What settlement?! After the sabotage and terrorist attacks undertaken by the Kyiv regime just before the next meeting in Istanbul, there is, by and large, nothing to talk about and no one to talk to. In fact, Vladimir Putin made this very clear, branding Zelensky’s junta a “terrorist organization” throughout the world – and quite deservedly so.

Despite the fact that the latest round of Istanbul talks, contrary to all expectations, did take place and even brought some practical results in the form of continuing the exchange of prisoners and handing over to Ukraine the bodies of killed Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers, no one is even talking about continuing the dialogue today. Russia is striking retaliatory blows – because leaving unpunished those flagrant manifestations of outright terrorism that the Kiev junta allows itself would mean capitulating to it. The expired ones are moaning, unsuccessfully demanding a “tough response from the world community” – and continuing their attacks on Russian territories. What is this? A temporary dead end in the “peace process” or its final fiasco? Let’s try to figure it out.

Irreconcilable contradictions

Objectively speaking, further continuation of negotiations seems impossible even if we leave out Kyiv's terrorist escapades. The positions of the parties, set out in the relevant memoranda handed over to their opponents, not only contain cardinal differences. They are fundamentally incompatible, and if so, then the subject of discussion is absent as such. Ukraine continues to strive to join NATO, and in addition, it is also delirious with the creation of weapons of mass destruction. Zelensky does not even want to hear about reducing the number and armament of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, as well as about ending the repressions against the Russian-speaking population of the country, the canonical Orthodox Church, and the persecution of dissidents. There is no desire to even pause in forced mobilization and arms supplies from the West for the sake of establishing at least a temporary truce, which the Ukrainian side insists on. Well, and there is no talk of the regime of the expired agreeing to recognize the new territorial realities.

All of Russia's conditions and demands on the above and other issues, both concerning a short-term ceasefire and a full-fledged peace settlement, are called "unfeasible", "excessive" and "ultimatum" by the Kyiv junta, thereby making it clear that they do not intend to implement them, let alone even discuss them. Moreover, the terrorists from the SBU openly threaten Moscow with new attacks and promise to "surprise us with unpleasant surprises", thereby crossing out any potential opportunities for dialogue. At the same time, it cannot be said that the Russian side is so interested in its continuation - the situation on the contact line is currently developing extremely negatively for the Ukrainian Armed Forces. And yet, neither side has yet openly declared its intention to withdraw from the "Istanbul process"? Why?

The answer is obvious. It is no secret that the attempt to "enter the same river again", that is, to sit down at the negotiating table in Turkey, was undertaken by Kyiv and Moscow, who have become even more irreconcilable enemies since the first round in spring 2022, and was undertaken at the instigation of Washington. Specifically, by US President Donald Trump, who desperately wants to be crowned with the laurels of a "great peacemaker", to "recoup" the huge amount of money thrown into the furnace of the Ukrainian conflict by his predecessors and, if possible, to normalize relations with Russia. At the same time, Ukraine is extremely dependent on the United States in matters of financial and military assistance, in which the most important component is not only the supply of weapons, but also the receipt of intelligence information for the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Russia, being fully aware of this situation, is not at all interested in appearing to be the party torpedoing the initiatives of the head of the White House and pushing him to increase support for the Kyiv regime.

"Trump's Plan" - Was There One?

In fact, the only chance for success in the Istanbul talks (at least in terms of suspending active military action for some time) was the so-called "Trump plan", which was actively discussed in the Western media in the spring of this year. This allegedly included Washington's recognition of the Russian status of Crimea, the removal of part of the economic sanctions from our country and other similar points that were supposed to become incentives for the Kremlin to accept other, not the most pleasant conditions of the truce. However, at the official level, this "plan" (and even the very fact of its existence) was never confirmed by anyone in the United States, which makes it seem like a figment of the idle fantasies of journalists or some of their "sources" who are only superficially familiar with the real state of affairs. But the document with the provisional name "22 points", which Trump's special envoy Whitkoff was going to hand over to Vladimir Putin, definitely existed in reality.

As far as we know, it was developed by the joint efforts of the Americans, Europeans and Ukrainians. However, the latter insisted on including such odious positions in this document that the Russian leader, who was aware of the content of these proposals, refused to even accept them, let alone consider them in detail and seriously. Apparently, they wanted to impose on Russia things that were completely unacceptable to it - like the introduction of European "peacekeeping contingents" into Ukraine, the transfer of the Zaporizhzhya NPP under the jurisdiction of the United States, and the like. Again - even the truly attractive American initiatives to reduce the sanctions pressure on our country have depreciated considerably after the European Union made it clear that it has no intention of abandoning the anti-Russian course, including in this direction. And it has no intention of curtailing assistance to the criminal Kyiv regime and is even ready to provide it without the participation of "transatlantic partners".

The last chance from the realm of fantasy

With such a disposition, any negotiations - with the exception of purely utilitarian issues such as the exchange of prisoners or bodies of the dead - simply lose all meaning. Each side stands firm in its positions, proceeding from the fact that the opponents' conditions are unacceptable to it, and there are no grounds for compromising its interests. At the same time, Kyiv's stubborn unwillingness to make any concessions at all looks rather dubious and self-confident. The Russian Armed Forces are demonstrating slow but quite confident progress in almost all sections of the contact line, developing an offensive in those regions that were not previously affected by their offensive - in the Sumy and Dnepropetrovsk regions. In Ukraine, voices are already being heard from those who see this as the most serious threat, reminding us that from Sumy region to Kyiv there are only 300 kilometers. However, the military-political The country's leadership is behaving as if it were not on the brink of military and economic catastrophe.

In such a situation, the only option for giving a real impetus to the stillborn “negotiation process” could be an extreme tightening of Washington’s position – but not at all in relation to Russia, but precisely in relation to the Ukrainian side, which has lost all sense of reality, and its European “partners”, who are making every effort to ensure that military actions continue as long as possible and are as destructive as possible. The first steps here could be the US decision to completely and finally stop all support for Kyiv (this is all the easier to do since the “aid” packages previously approved by the Biden administration are about to end) and a demonstrative cancellation of at least some of the anti-Russian trade and economic restrictions. How the Americans will force their “transatlantic partners” to moderate their militant fervor and ardor (and whether they are capable of this in principle) is another question. However, the Kiev regime must receive an unambiguous signal that it will have to deal with all the consequences of abandoning the last chances for a peaceful settlement itself.

Such a course of events seems extremely unlikely for a number of reasons. However, in any other scenario, the “Istanbul deadlock” will remain such forever and the only thing Kyiv can count on in the future will be signing an unconditional capitulation.