The Ukraine conflict could have ended very quickly if Kiev had chosen to negotiate from the beginning rather than heed its Western backers and fight Russia, Vladimir Medinsky, head of Moscow’s delegation at the Istanbul talks, said in wake of the negotiations.

Medinsky made the comments after nearly two hours of talks between the Russian and Ukrainian delegations in Istanbul on Friday. The two nations agreed upon a major prisoner swap involving 1,000 POWs from each side, as well as to continue contacts once each side has prepared a detailed ceasefire proposal, the Russian delegation said.

After the meeting, the presidential aide and professional historian sat down for a major interview with the Russia’s Rossiya 1 broadcaster.

The hostilities between Moscow and Kiev, which have already dragged on for more than three years, could have ended in mere weeks, Medinsky believes. Ukraine just needed to stick to the arrangements it had reached with Russia during the initial rounds of peace talks in the Belarusian city of Gomel in late February, he stated.

Kiev could have “agreed to a peace in late February [2022], but they did not and dragged their feet instead,” the official said. The Russian peace proposal presented at the following round of talks, which was held in Istanbul in the spring of 2022, was already less favorable to Ukraine, as it already reflected some “changes on the ground,” he added. 

“The Istanbul process was also regrettably disrupted because of the West’s direct involvement,” Medinsky stated, blaming then British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s visit to Kiev in May of 2022 for scuttling the initial peace negotiations. According to David Arakhamia, who headed the Ukrainian delegation at that time, Johnson told Kiev to “just fight.”

Attempts by Western nations to influence other countries’ policies have historically brought catastrophic consequences to the European continent, Medinsky warned. As a vivid example, he took the Berlin Congress held in 1878, which was called by a coalition of Western countries to revise the results of the Russian-Turkish war that had ended earlier the same year.

Western nations, including the UK, France, Italy, and Germany, thought the peace treaty, which led to the liberation of a host of Balkan nations from Ottoman control, was too favorable to the Russian Empire, as they thought it would give it too much clout over the Balkans.

As a result of the West’s interference, the borders of the newly-liberated states were redrawn, thus laying the foundation for the territorial disputes that ultimately triggered World War I, Medinsky said. 

“Unregulated problems in the Balkans led to WWI,” he stated. “This was a direct consequence of interference by Western nations.”

Medinsky has dismissed Ukraine’s demand for a ceasefire as a precondition for any peace talks as unnecessary and excessive. “A war and talks are being conducted simultaneously,” he said. “Only people who know nothing about history” can claim that a ceasefire has always preceded peace talks, the official maintained. 
Kiev has repeatedly demanded that Moscow agree to a 30-day ceasefire before any talks take place. Russia has rejected that demand, arguing Ukraine would merely use the pause to rearm and regroup its troops.

https://www.rt.com/russia/617745-ukraine-conflict-end-weeks-negotiator/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GG7V6-9gLMo

CNN reports that the Russians are preparing a major offensive in Ukraine, aimed at capturing territory right up to the outskirts of Kiev. Marco Rubio has stated that he doesn’t expect that the negotiations is Istanbul between Russia and Ukraine will reach a conclusive result. He added that the only way to sort this war in Ukraine out is through a meeting between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. Mark Rutte has also criticised Vladimir Putin for missing the opportunity to have genuine peace talks with Zelensky. Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsakhna has stated that Russia has violated NATO airspace by sending an SU-35 fighter jet to protect a tanker of Russia’s shadow fleet. Romania has given a major infrastructure contract to the Ukrainian company Avtomahistral-Pivden for the construction of a motorway.

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-WzSZcLig8

Mixed Messaging from U.S. Leadership:

Trump has alternated between saying the U.S. might walk away from the conflict and suggesting he could negotiate directly with Putin.

Administration officials like Marco Rubio and Trump’s spokeswoman have publicly declared the U.S. would no longer mediate peace talks — only to contradict those claims by continuing to do so, undermining U.S. credibility.

Russia's Negotiation Stance:

Putin would agree to a ceasefire only if Ukraine accepts harsh terms: ceding all of the four annexed regions, recognizing Crimea as Russian, demilitarizing, and abandoning NATO aspirations.

These conditions are non-starters for Ukraine and the West.

Strategic Reality of the War:

The war is a stalemate. Despite some Russian territorial gains (approx. 1,827 square miles), progress has been slow.

Russia is waging a war of attrition, aiming to destroy Ukraine's military capacity rather than quickly seize territory.

Ukraine, with far fewer resources and manpower, is suffering massive losses, which the speaker calls a human tragedy.

Critique of Western Strategy:

The West continues to support Ukraine but has no realistic plan or clear diplomatic goal.

European leaders appear to be prolonging the war under the illusion that Russia can be pressured to surrender on Western terms — a delusion, according to the speaker.

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

SEE ALSO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpdp6WKotvk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKl1HOBCiCs

Leaders from both Russia and the West accused each other of not wanting peace in Ukraine. Western leaders, including those in Istanbul, claimed Putin isn't serious about peace. Conversely, some figures argued that Berlin, Paris, Brussels, and especially London also don't genuinely seek peace.

Outcome of Talks in Istanbul:

Talks were brief (about an hour) and largely symbolic.

Most participants seemed to expect little outcome.

Only Russia and Ukraine had formal talks, with additional meetings involving the U.S., U.K., Germany, France, Turkey, and Ukraine.

Marco Rubio (U.S. Secretary of State in this narrative) said only a direct Trump–Putin meeting could lead to progress, despite prior interactions between them.

Russia’s Position:

Russia reiterated demands made in 2022 and June 2023:

Recognition of administrative borders.

Demilitarization.

"Denazification."

No NATO membership for Ukraine.

Russia remains open to conditional ceasefire talks but rejects any unconditional ceasefire.

Ukraine’s Position (Zelensky’s Comments):

Ukraine’s delegation had authority to negotiate, but claims Russia repeated old positions.

Zelensky sees the talks as a performance and reaffirmed past demands:

30-day ceasefire on Ukraine's terms.

No territorial concessions.

Continued military support and security guarantees from the U.S. and Europe.

He publicly appealed to Trump, seeking continued U.S. backing.

U.S. Position and Internal Disarray:

The U.S. appears inconsistent:

Rubio calls for Trump–Putin talks.

Trump claims urgency to end the war, but contradicts Ukraine’s goals (e.g., no NATO or security guarantees).

Western leaders made bold demands (e.g., ceasefire or sanctions) but took no follow-up action, weakening their credibility.

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

BY Jennifer Kavanagh ,  Peter Slezkine

Predictions to the contrary, Ukraine and Russia’s first direct talks in three years, held in Istanbul on May 16, went quite well. Most importantly, the two sides agreed to keep talking. 

For the Trump administration, which has made ending the war in Ukraine a priority, this initial round of negotiations marks the exact sort of breakthrough it had hoped to create. Washington’s priority now should be to encourage continued talks between the combatants, even as fighting persists. This will require pushing back on Europe’s calls for more pressure on Putin and resisting the temptation to interfere before the two sides are ready to tackle issues that cannot be addressed without American involvement. After all, the most sustainable peace will be one agreed to by Ukraine and Russia together, not one coerced by the United States or Europe. 

Despite naysayers on both sides of the Atlantic and the uncertainty up to the last minute, Russian and Ukrainian negotiators not only met, but achieved notable results. According to statements made by the heads of the Ukrainian and Russian delegations, the two teams agreed to at least three next steps: to conduct the largest single POW exchange to date (1,000 personnel on each side); to produce a written version of their vision for peace for discussion at a future session; and to hold initial discussions about a meeting between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky.

The positive report from the Russian and Ukrainian delegations, as well as their Turkish hosts, contrasted sharply with the negative reactions of Zelensky himself and key European leaders, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk, and the UK’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer. This group, assembled for a meeting in Albania, called the Russian refusal to accept an unconditional ceasefire “unacceptable,” and urged Trump, once again, to join them in imposing greater costs on Russia. Tusk even argued the Russians had “de facto broken off negotiations” and now was the “time to increase the pressure.”

The European assessment is as unsurprising as it is inconsistent with the facts on the ground. Since Trump’s election, European leaders have sought to convince him that Putin would never seek a stable settlement in Ukraine. As Trump and his team sought ways to resolve the brutal war, Europe has interfered with and even undermined U.S. efforts. Europe’s leaders have, for instance, encouraged Zelensky to set maximalist conditions for peace, adopted new sanctionspackages aimed at Russia, floated plans for “reassurance forces” that would require an American backstop the Trump administration opposes, and offered unsubstantiated warnings of Russia’s plans to invade NATO territory. The European reaction to talks in Istanbul was simply more of the same—an attempt to extend the war, reconstitute Biden’s “coalition of democracies,” and pull the United States deeper into a conflict that does not advance its interests.

If Trump is serious about peace, he won’t listen. Trump should rule out new ultimatums and coercive measures targeting Russia of the kind pushed by Europe. These sticks are unlikely to work against Putin. As Russian negotiators indicated in Istanbul, Moscow is ready to keep fighting for several more years if necessary and believes that it can withstand additional Western punishment whether in the form of sanctions or whatever additional military aid might be sent to Ukraine.

Instead, Trump should encourage Ukraine and Russia to keep talking. The administration can support continued negotiations by framing today’s meeting in Istanbul as a constructive first step and signaling its support for further working level discussions. A Putin-Trump meeting—a prospect floated by President Trump himself—could help signal American support for the Ukraine–Russia negotiations and indicate that the United States sees Russia as an essential interlocutor in any effort to resolve the conflict. But a potential presidential meeting should not be billed as an all-or-nothing occasion to determine Putin’s willingness to end the war in Ukraine. There is no simple test, or single headline, that can settle this question. Continued conversation between the combatants—and away from the spotlight—will be far more revealing of each side’s motivations.

Ending the war between Russia and Ukraine will take time and require many rounds of talks. At this point, process is more important than high profile summits or dramatic dealmaking. It may take longer than he originally hoped, but with a little more patience, Trump’s goal of peace in Ukraine looks increasingly achievable. 

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-istanbul-talks-were-a-success/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.