Azernews.Az

Akbar Novruz

Read more

Both Ukraine and Russia have officially proposed ceasefire initiatives and peace negotiations — but beneath the surface, these overtures appear less about genuine de-escalation and more about strategic posturing in a complex geopolitical game. At the heart of it lies not just the battlefield, but the evolving tug-of-war between the European-Ukrainian alliance and the Trump-Putin tandem, now maneuvering for leverage ahead of an uncertain diplomatic season.

On May 10, European leaders—representing France, Germany, the UK, and Poland—stood beside Ukraine’s president in Kyiv to call for an “unconditional 30-day ceasefire” in Ukraine. This initiative was publicly framed as a coordinated effort with the United States and an endorsement of President Trump’s prior calls for ending the war. The Ukrainian side responded positively, saying they were prepared to implement a ceasefire starting May 12 if Russia agreed. Andriy Yermak, head of Ukraine’s presidential office, emphasized that a complete and uninterrupted ceasefire was the first, non-negotiable step.

Putin responded the same day. Standing before journalists after what he called “long discussions,” he accused Ukraine of violating previous ceasefire agreements—including the Easter truce and the Victory Day pause initiated by Moscow. Nevertheless, he expressed readiness for peace talks, proposing to resume the stalled Istanbul negotiation process from 2022, starting May 15. He noted plans to speak with Turkish President Erdoğan about hosting the talks.

This move sparked immediate international speculation. Was Putin genuinely interested in peace, or was this a tactical countermove to prevent Trump from appearing diplomatically isolated? After all, following the recent US-Ukraine minerals deal, Trump’s tone had shifted. His confidence in achieving peace had reportedly diminished, and he seemed increasingly distant from the negotiation table. The European proposal on May 10—endorsing Trump’s ceasefire line—was not just a call for peace but a test: would Trump stand against Putin or act as his silent ally?

Putin’s swift proposal to restart the Istanbul talks did two things: it countered the European move and also offered Trump a lifeline. Trump, in turn, quickly backed Putin’s initiative. Their shared endorsement of a negotiation path in Türkiye served to reframe the ceasefire narrative, effectively halting any European attempt to set the tone or timeline unilaterally.

Responding to French President Emmanuel Macron’s call for an immediate ceasefire, Russia’s Foreign Ministry said that only a restart of the Istanbul process could make such a ceasefire realistic. So, why Istanbul?

The Istanbul process refers to a draft agreement reportedly developed during Russia-Ukraine negotiations in March–April 2022. The New York Times later published details from the draft, revealing key demands and concessions. Ukraine agreed to limit its military capabilities and sought strong security guarantees from major powers. Russia, meanwhile, insisted on the recognition of Crimea, the independence of Donetsk and Luhansk, and the removal of anything it interpreted as "Nazi propaganda"—including street names and memorials.

On March 29, a shortened two-page document called the “Istanbul Communiqué” outlined tentative compromises. Ukraine would not attempt to retake Crimea by force, and a broad group of countries—including China, France, the US, and Türkiye—would provide future security guarantees. Yet this agreement collapsed when Russia inserted a clause requiring unanimous approval from all guarantors before military aid could be triggered—effectively granting Russia veto power. Ukraine saw this as a trap and pulled out of the talks.

Putin’s renewed insistence on Istanbul in 2025 may reflect a broader strategic play. While Europe has been attempting to bring Türkiye closer to its own political axis in recent months, Putin is doing the opposite—drawing Türkiye into a bloc aligned more with his and Trump’s interests. By offering Erdoğan a leading role again, Putin is both courting Türkiye and limiting European influence in any future settlement process.

So far, Ukraine has not confirmed its participation in the proposed May 15 Istanbul talks. If it refuses, it could be interpreted as Ukraine distancing itself from both the Putin-Trump axis and Turkish mediation. Meanwhile, Türkiye is reportedly accelerating its coordination with the US across multiple strategic areas, raising further questions about where Ankara truly stands.

In short, the recent proposals for ceasefires and peace talks are less about peace and more about leverage. Each side is trying to corner the other on the geopolitical chessboard. The battlefield may still be in Ukraine, but the real contest—diplomatically—is being played in world capitals, not trenches.