Kremlin Focuses On 2022 Draft Deal For Proposed Russia-Ukraine Peace Talks
Moscow:
Russian President Vladimir Putin's proposed peace talks with Ukraine will take into account an abandoned 2022 draft deal between the two countries and the reality of Russia's control over almost a fifth of Ukraine, the Kremlin said on Sunday.
Putin on Sunday proposed direct talks with Ukraine aimed at bringing a durable peace to end the war, an initiative welcomed by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who said Kyiv was willing to talk but that Moscow must first agree to an immediate ceasefire.
Kremlin foreign policy aide Yuri Ushakov told reporters after Putin's early-morning statement that the proposed talks would take into account both the draft abandoned in 2022 and the current situation on the ground.
Days after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Russia and Ukraine began talks in Belarus that later moved to Istanbul. A draft agreed there setting out a framework for a possible settlement became known as the "Istanbul Communique".
The talks broke off in May, but Russian officials have long argued that a settlement can be reached along the lines of the Istanbul Communique. Steve Witkoff, US President Donald Trump's special envoy, has also referred to the 2022 draft as a possible guide to future peace.
Under the draft, a copy of which Reuters has reviewed, Ukraine would agree to permanent neutrality in return for international security guarantees from the five permanent members of the UN Security Council: Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, and other nations including Belarus, Canada, Germany, Israel, Poland, and Turkey.
Ukraine essentially agreed provisionally to non-nuclear neutrality and not being a member of the NATO military alliance in return for a security guarantee which, if Russia invaded, would oblige the United States and its allies to fight Russia directly.
The question of territory in the 2022 draft was secondary to the security guarantee - seen by diplomats on both sides as by far the biggest hurdle to peace.
Ukraine, after being invaded, wanted its security to be guaranteed but the United States and its allies were wary of locking themselves into a future war with Russia.
Under the 2022 draft, Ukraine's path towards possible European Union membership would be facilitated and Russia wanted limits on Ukraine's armed forces, and the repeal of laws that Moscow considers discriminatory against Russian speakers, according to Reuters reporting.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
16 minutes ago
- Indian Express
With Israel-Iran conflict, a dilemma grows for stakeholders in the region
In the early hours of June 13, Israel announced it had launched a large-scale airstrike against Iran, targeting key nuclear and military sites across the country. The operation, named 'Rising Lion,' reportedly involved over 200 Israeli aircraft executing multiple waves of attacks on approximately 100 targets. Alongside the strikes meant to debilitate strategic infrastructure, the operation also killed Major General Hossein Salami, the commander-in-chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and other senior military officials and nuclear scientists. Iran immediately called the attack a 'declaration of war' and launched a retaliatory drone strike, which was intercepted by Israeli air defences. Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the military operation on Iran would 'continue for as many days as it takes' to 'roll back the Iranian threat to Israel's very survival.' The international community has expressed concern over the escalation, with calls for restraint from various states. What can account for the nature and timing of the Israeli offensive? And what are the implications for ongoing regional security dialogues, and for India's own interests in the region? First, the motivations for the operation, and especially for its timing, are mixed. The strikes were driven by a combination of long-term and more immediate security concerns, as well as strategic and political calculations. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu emphasised that Iran's capability to produce nuclear weapons within months posed a direct danger to Israel's survival. The operation targeted Iran's main uranium enrichment facility in Natanz (but interestingly not the Fordo or Isfahan sites). The operation also aimed to degrade Iran's ballistic missile production capabilities and air defence systems, including the Russian-made S-300, which was reportedly destroyed in the attacks. By targeting these assets, Israel sought to diminish Iran's ability to retaliate effectively. It is also possible that the Netanyahu government felt the window for the strikes was closing, given the ongoing US-Iran nuclear negotiations, which were scheduled to resume in Oman on Sunday. In addition, these strikes also happened in the run-up to the UN conference scheduled for June 17–20 and sponsored by Saudi Arabia and France. The gathering's agenda, which includes discussions on regional security and economic cooperation, aims to deliver a practical action document for the establishment of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, the most immediate consideration is to be found in Israel's own domestic compulsions. Internally, the Netanyahu government has been increasingly facing pressures related to military conscription and public opinion. The preemptive action may have been partially motivated by a desire to consolidate political support and demonstrate strong leadership in the face of external threats. On June 11, the Israeli Knesset narrowly voted against a motion to dissolve the parliament, a move that would have forced early elections and posed a significant challenge to Netanyahu's government. This episode underscores the fragility of Netanyahu's coalition, which relies heavily on ultra-Orthodox parties. The Israeli airstrikes on Iran will most likely lead to heightened tensions and uncertainty in the region. Iran perceives the Israeli actions as a direct affront, especially given the US's prior knowledge of the operation, and has warned of severe consequences for American personnel and interests in the region. This has complicated the US's position, as it seeks to balance its commitment to Israel's security with the need to engage Iran diplomatically. The heightened uncertainty and risks of a military escalation, as well as increased oil prices and concerns about global economic repercussions, also directly affect the US long-term strategy of disengaging its military from the region and pivoting to other security theatres in East Asia and the Indo-Pacific. The Israeli strikes could also complicate ties with states with which Tel Aviv aimed to normalise relations. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), which have some of the closest links with Israel of any country in West Asia, have strongly condemned the strikes, labelling them a breach of Iran's sovereignty and a serious threat to regional stability. Despite often being at odds with Shiite Iran, the largely Sunni Arab countries have been trying to avoid a regional war that could also prove damaging to their economies and see them caught in the crossfire. Not surprisingly, India has also expressed deep concern regarding the escalating tensions between Israel and Iran. The Ministry of External Affairs issued a statement urging both nations to exercise restraint and avoid further escalation. This reaction is similar to India's official response to the escalating tensions between Israel and Iran in April 2024. However, the conflict raises concerns over regional stability, especially considering India's significant energy imports from West Asia and the safety of over nine million Indians living in the region. Furthermore, India still has close ties with Iran, notably through its investments in the Chabahar port. India's broader regional connectivity strategy is at risk of derailment given its strong commercial stakes in the development of the India-Middle East Economic Corridor. A deepening Israel-Iran conflict will therefore put India into an acute geopolitical dilemma when it has been successful in balancing ties with Israel, Iran and the Gulf Arab states for the past decade. India's shifting statements on the Gaza crisis had already led to some questions in the region over its positioning on important West Asian security issues. While one cannot expect an active mediating role, India, which historically has good relations with both Israel and Iran, could play a more immediate part in providing a channel of communication and ensuring a dialogue, along with regional players like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, to ensure a de-escalation of the current crisis. The writer is Associate Professor of International Relations at the Institute of Political Science, Leiden University in the Netherlands. He studies India's foreign and security policy-making, the politics of migration governance, the international politics of South Asia, and India's relations with the Middle East
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
Israel attacks Iran: Who are the top Iranian generals eliminated by Israel
In this operation, three top Iranian leaders were killed. The three were Hossein Salami , head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards; Mohammad Bagheri , Chief of Staff of Iran's armed forces; and Ali Shamkhani , former national security chief and senior advisor. The three musketeers Major General Hossein Salami born in 1960, was the leader of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and later in 2019 he became the head of the IRGC. He reported directly to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The IRGC is Iran's most powerful military group. Salami led the IRGC when Iran fired hundreds of drones and missiles at Israel in April and October 2023, as per reports. In Jan 2024, Iranian media showed Salami at an underground missile site linked to those attacks. At that base, he walked over U.S. and Israel flags and viewed 'new special missiles.' He was also the head when the IRGC accidentally shot down a Ukrainian passenger plane in 2020. That crash killed all 176 people on board. CNN analyst Beth Sanner said killing Salami is like killing the U.S. Chairman of Joint Chiefs, a very big deal. Since 2016, Major General Mohammad Bagheri has been the Chief of Staff of Iran's Armed Forces. His office, the General Staff, runs and coordinates all military activities. In 2019, the U.S. punished him with sanctions for supporting terrorism and hurting the rights of Iranian people, as stated by CNN report. In April, Bagheri had a meeting in Tehran with Saudi Defense Minister Khalid bin Salman. In that meeting, the Saudi prince warned Bagheri to accept Trump's nuclear deal offer to avoid war with Israel, according to the report by Reuters. Live Events Ali Shamkhani was a trusted advisor to Khamenei, who is Iran's Supreme Leader. He helped Iran and Saudi Arabia become friends again after years of problems. His death was confirmed by Iran's IRINN TV network after Israel's strike. Shamkhani was Iran's top national security chief from 2013 to mid-2023. Before that, he worked in the IRGC and Iran's defense ministry, according to the report by CNN. He was well-known internationally, especially in U.S. and European foreign policy circles. In 2023, he led China-brokered talks with Saudi Arabia which ended years of hostility. But he was suddenly replaced later that year. Analysts say Shamkhani was very ambitious, he even ran for President in 2001. Some experts believed Khamenei thought he was getting too powerful, as per reports. Still, he stayed close to the Supreme Leader and gave advice during Trump-era nuclear talks. In April before U.S. talks, he warned that Iran might expel UN nuclear inspectors if threatened. FAQs Q1. Who did Israel kill in the Iran strike? Israel killed Hossein Salami, Mohammad Bagheri, and Ali Shamkhani. Q2. Why is this attack important? These leaders helped run Iran's army and nuclear plans, so their deaths could weaken Iran's response.
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
India moves to conserve its rare earths, seeks halt to Japan exports, sources say
India has asked state-run miner IREL to suspend a 13-year-old agreement on rare earth exports to Japan and to safeguard supplies for domestic needs, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters, aiming to reduce India's dependence on China. IREL also wants to develop India's capacity for rare earth processing, which is dominated globally by China and has become a weapon in escalating trade wars. China has curbed its rare earth materials exports since April, pressuring automakers and high-tech manufacturers worldwide. In a recent meeting with auto and other industry executives, Indian Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal asked IREL to stop its exports of rare earths, mainly neodymium, a key material used in magnets for electric vehicle motors, one of the sources said. The Commerce Ministry, IREL and the Department of Atomic Energy, which oversees IREL, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The sources declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter. Under a 2012 government agreement, IREL supplies rare earths to Toyotsu Rare Earths India, a unit of Japanese trading house Toyota Tsusho, which processes them for export to Japan where they are used to make magnets. In 2024, Toyotsu shipped more than 1,000 metric tons of rare earth materials to Japan, commercially available customs data showed. That is one-third of the 2,900 tons mined by IREL, although Japan relies mainly on China for its rare earths supply. Toyota Tsusho and Toyotsu did not immediately respond to requests for comment. IREL has been exporting rare earths due to a lack of domestic processing capacity, but following the recent disruptions to supplies of Chinese material it wants to keep its rare earths at home and expand domestic mining and processing, a second source said, adding that IREL is awaiting statutory clearances at four mines. However, India may not immediately be able to stop supplies to Japan because they fall under a bilateral government agreement, the person said. IREL wants this to be "amicably decided and negotiated because Japan is a friendly nation", the person added. Japan's Trade Ministry said in a statement to Reuters: "We would like to refrain from answering questions about bilateral exchanges in general, not just about this matter." Expansion plans China's recent export controls on rare earth materials have rocked the global auto industry, which has warned of supply chain disruptions and production halts. China also weaponised its supplies in 2010, when it briefly stopped shipments to Japan. That prompted the Japanese to turn to India for rare earths. India has the world's fifth-largest rare earth reserves , at 6.9 million metric tons, but there is no domestic magnet production. India relies on imported magnets, mainly from China. In the fiscal year to March 2025, India imported 53,748 metric tons of rare earth magnets, government data showed. These are used in automobiles, wind turbines, medical devices and other manufactured goods. Rare earth mining is restricted to IREL, which supplies India's Atomic Energy Department with materials for nuclear power projects and defence-related applications. India lacks wide-scale technology and infrastructure to mine rare earths, and the development of any commercially viable domestic supply chain is years away, analysts said. IREL has a rare earths extraction plant in the eastern Indian state of Odisha and a refining unit in Kerala, in southern India. The miner, founded in 1950, plans to produce 450 metric tons of extracted neodymium in the fiscal year to March 2026 with a plan to double that by 2030, the second person said. It is also looking for a corporate partner for the production of rare earth magnets for the auto and pharmaceutical industries, the person said. India is firming up plans for incentives to companies to set up rare earth processing and magnet production facilities to meet local demand, people familiar with the matter told Reuters earlier this month.
