Russia-Ukraine Negotiations Have Made Considerable Progress. Why Is the West Denigrating Them?

On March 29, Russian and Ukrainian negotiators held their first face-to-face negotiations in nearly three weeks in Istanbul, Turkey. After over three hours of talks, both sides issued statements. Compared to the previous deadlock in negotiations, talks this time saw success. The Turkish foreign minister said that this round of negotiations has made the most important progress so far in Russia-Ukraine negotiations. Negotiators from both sides expressed optimism about the progress and were even confident it was a sufficient foundation for Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy to move on to their first in-person heads of state meeting.

After the talks, Russia expressed that it would mitigate the situation with adopted measures, the most important of which would be a reduction in military operations around Kyiv. Russian Deputy Minister of Defense Alexander Fomin said decisions were made to build mutual trust and create the necessary conditions for further negotiations. It stands to reason that this should be considered a sign of goodwill, as Russia seeks to end the conflict. Unexpectedly, however, U.S.-led Western nations along with Zelenskyy have sought to spoil the progress. Not only was no recognition or appreciation shown for this act to establish mutual trust, but instead, the West and Zelenskyy called the credibility of the talks outcome into question and persisted in keeping their guard up. What reasons does the West have for denigrating the talks?

Before answering that, let’s examine what was achieved in the March 29 talks. Ukraine proposed that in exchange for its neutrality, it would get a security guarantee. This means Ukraine wouldn’t join any military alliances and wouldn’t have military bases. The proposal also included a 15-year consultation period on the status of Crimea, effective upon a complete cease-fire. Ukraine envisaged obtaining a security guarantee similar to NATO’s Article 5 collective defense clause, with Poland, Israel, Turkey or Canada serving as potential security guarantors. Ukrainian negotiator Oleksandr Chaly said, “If we manage to consolidate these key provisions, and for us this is the most fundamental, then Ukraine will be in a position to actually fix its current status as a non-bloc and non-nuclear state in the form of permanent neutrality. We will not host foreign military bases on our territory, as well as deploy military contingents on our territory, and we will not enter into military-political alliances.” These proposals are the most detailed and concrete Ukraine has publicly expressed to date.

On March 29, Russian and Ukrainian negotiators entered a new round of talks in Istanbul, Turkey at the office of the Turkish president in the Dolmabahce Palace. When Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan met with representatives of both parties before the start of the peace talks, he expressed his willingness to facilitate a future Russia-Ukraine meeting.

Take another look at Russia. The head of the Russian negotiation delegation, Vladimir Medinsky, said on March 29 that the Russia-Ukraine talks were constructive. “We have received proposals from the Ukrainian side for consideration, clearly formulated their position on inclusion in the treaty. These proposals will be considered in the near future and will be presented to the president. And our response will be given accordingly,” Medinsky said. He further stated that Putin is likely to meet Zelenskyy as long as an agreement is ready for signing. He even suggested “a meeting between President Vladimir Putin and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelenskyy be organized concurrently with the initialing of a bilateral treaty by the two foreign ministers.” According to German media coverage, shortly after the end of the Russia-Ukraine negotiations, Russia did seem to put its announced measures into practice; Ukraine’s General Staff of the Armed Forces announced that they observed the withdrawal of Russian troops from in and around the capital, Kyiv. Russia’s also reduced bombing.

When reports of the outcome of these talks were first seen, many probably believed that the end of the war was imminent. As the news spread on March 29, two major international benchmark oil prices dropped by more than 5% and major stock indexes in Europe and the U.S. rose sharply. However, on March 30, Western leadership, which had been strongly condemning the war, did not express the slightest affirmation or welcoming of the progress of the peace talks. Instead, they voiced mistrust.

The U.S. said Russia’s reduction in military operations was a “redeployment, not a withdrawal,” and the world must prepare for further large-scale Russian offensives in other parts of Ukraine. Joe Biden held a conference call with leaders of four of the U.S.’s main Western European allies: Britain, France, Germany and Italy. The White House released a statement saying the five leaders agreed not to ease severe economic sanctions on Russia. Asked by reporters whether progress in the negotiations brought the war near to an end, Biden responded, “I don’t read anything into it until I see what their actions are.” In a press release, a spokesman for the British prime minister said, “there can be no relaxation of Western resolve until the horror inflicted on Ukraine is over.” On March 29, Zelenskyy stated that “the Ukrainians are not naive people. Ukrainians have already learned during these 34 days of invasion and over the past eight years of the war in Donbas that only a concrete result can be trusted.”

Of course, there are different views inside Russia. Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov declared that the Russian military’s special military operations in Ukraine cannot be stopped, and Kyiv must be captured. Kadyrov has arrived in the southern Ukrainian city of Mariupol to boost morale on the front lines. On March 29, he said, “I declare that it is necessary to complete what has been started, not to stop. We must go to Kyiv and capture it.” Kadyrov expressed doubts about Russia-Ukraine negotiations. He said, “I don’t think these puppets have any power to make decisions. They take their orders from the disciples of Stepan Bandera and Nazis.” Russian negotiator Medinsky also said the reduction in military action did not mean a ceasefire.

Regarding the current situation, an analyst at Germany’s newspaper Handelsblatt believes that the market is currently happy, but not optimistic about the future; it’s hard to imagine that, after four weeks of war, Putin would be satisfied with the fruits of the Istanbul negotiations. There are many signs that Putin is really regrouping his armed forces and redeveloping his plans. The New York Times believes, despite the positive signs of progress, innumerable diplomatic pitfalls remain. For example, international security guarantees are not applicable to the disputed Donbas region, while separatists claim Donbas’ territorial sovereignty extends significantly beyond the territory they controlled before the war. Thus, reaching an agreement will take several weeks of further negotiations.

According to analysts at Bloomberg, Russia’s order to withdraw troops from around Kyiv is likely a tactical decision. Russian commanders have already said that they plan to concentrate their forces on the east in order to liberate the Donbas region. Bloomberg cited a source close to the Kremlin claiming that the de-escalation of the conflict did not mean a ceasefire or a full withdrawal of troops from around the capital and Russia is still making demands for sweeping concessions that are impossible for Ukraine to agree to. Evgeny Minchenko, a Moscow-based political adviser, said, “I think there was very serious misunderstanding of what both sides said in Istanbul after the talks. So far I just heard that there will be less action near Kyiv and Chernihiv, because the Russian army is concentrating its resources against the Ukrainian army in Donbas.“ One source familiar with the Kremlin’s thinking said Russia’s aim now is probably to take all of the territory of the eastern provinces Luhansk and Donetsk, as well as a land corridor from the Russian border to the Crimean peninsula. In short, this would require Ukraine to agree to permanent loss of about 20% of its territory.

In another article, a source close to the Kremlin was quoted as saying that a solution could only be reached if the battlefield situation was in line with Russia’s goals, and that a massive Ukrainian military defeat the was likely necessary to achieve that. Pentagon Press Secretary John Kirby said Putin’s goals extended far beyond the Donbas region and that people should not deceive themselves by accepting Moscow’s suggestions that it would reduce attacks around Kyiv. Kirby said of the Pentagon, “we’re not prepared to call this a retreat, or even a withdrawal.” Analysts believe that an immediate cease-fire between both sides is highly unlikely.

Notably, on the same day as the Russia-Ukraine negotiations, Kirby announced that the United States would send 400 more troops and more fighter jets to Eastern Europe to strengthen NATO’s defense capabilities in the region. On the same day, Denmark also announced that it would counter the Russian threat by sending an 800-person battalion to NATO bases in the Baltic states. U.S. Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Wally Adeyemo said the U.S. and its allies intend to impose new sanctions on Russia’s many key industries, including those connected to military operations’ supply chains. Just a day earlier, on March 28, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov emphasized that Russia was looking forward to resolving the conflict through diplomatic channels but would not accept Western mediation. “I’ve given you examples, but there are a lot of other examples where diplomatic achievements were destroyed by our Western counterparts. They can’t be trusted now,” Lavrov said.