Russia and Ukraine to talk about peace but are still far apart
Russian and Ukrainian officials are due to sit down on Monday in Istanbul for their second round of direct peace talks since 2022 with no sign they are any closer to an agreement, one day after Kyiv struck some of Moscow's nuclear-capable bombers.
The two sides are expected to discuss their respective ideas for what a full ceasefire and a longer term path to peace should look like, amid stark disagreements and pressure from US President Donald Trump, who has threatened to walk away from talks.
Vladimir Medinsky, the head of Moscow's delegation, said that Russia had received Ukraine's draft memorandum for a peace accord ahead of the talks. There was no word on whether Kyiv had received Russia's draft. Ukrainian Defence Minister Rustem Umerov will head the Ukrainian delegation.
Their last round of talks in Istanbul on May 16 yielded the biggest prisoner swap of the war with each side freeing 1,000 prisoners, but no sign of peace - or even a ceasefire as both sides merely stated their opening negotiating positions.
Kyiv regards Russia's approach to date as an attempt to force it to capitulate - something it says it will never do - and Moscow, which advanced on the battlefield in May at its fastest rate in six months, says Ukraine should submit to peace on Russian terms or face losing more territory.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, speaking in Lithuania on Monday, said ceasefire and humanitarian issues, such as returning more prisoners, from Russia would be a priority for Kyiv at the Istanbul talks.
Kyiv has said Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin should hold direct talks when the time is right.
Amid low expectations of a breakthrough, a Ukrainian source told Reuters ahead of Monday's talks that Kyiv was ready to take real steps towards peace if Moscow showed flexibility and what they described as a readiness to "move forward, not just repeat the same previous ultimatums".
Ukrainian officials met with officials from Germany, Italy and Britain ahead of the talks to coordinate their positions.
GRIM MOOD
The mood in Russia before the talks was grim with influential war bloggers calling on Moscow to deliver a fearsome retaliatory blow against Kyiv after Ukraine on Sunday launched one of its most ambitious attacks of the war, targeting Russian nuclear-capable long-range bombers in Siberia and elsewhere.
Ukraine's air force said Russia had launched 472 drones at Ukraine, the highest nightly total of the war.
Trump envoy Keith Kellogghas indicated that the US will be involved in the talks and that representatives from Britain, France and Germany will be present too, though it was not clear at what level the United States would be represented.
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan was due to chair the talks, which are expected to get underway at 1000 GMT.
The idea of direct talks was first proposed by Putin after Ukraine and European powers demanded that he agree to a ceasefire which the Kremlin dismissed.
Last June, Putin set out his opening terms for an immediate end to the war: Ukraine must drop its NATO ambitions and withdraw all of its troops from the entirety of the territory of four Ukrainian regions claimed and mostly controlled by Russia.
According to a proposed roadmapthat will be presented by Ukrainian negotiators in Istanbul, a copy of which was seen by Reuters, Kyiv wants no restrictions on its military strength after any peace deal, no international recognition of Russian sovereignty over parts of Ukraine taken by Moscow's forces, and wants reparations.
The document stated that the current location of the front line will be the starting point for negotiations about territory.
Russia currently controls just under one fifth of Ukraine, or about 113,100 square km, about the same size as the US state of Ohio.
Putin ordered tens of thousands of troops to invade Ukraine in February 2022 after eight years of fighting in eastern Ukraine between Russian-backed separatists and Ukrainian troops. The United States says over 1.2 million people have been killed and injured in the war since 2022.
Trump has called Putin "crazy" and berated Zelenskyy in public in the Oval Office, but the US President has also said that he thinks peace is achievable and that if Putin delays then he could impose tough sanctions on Russia.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
26 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
Turkey delivers T129 Atak helicopters to Somalia
Turkey has ramped up its defence support to Somalia in its fight against al-Shabab militant group this week, following a phone call between Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his Somali counterpart on Saturday. Sources familiar with the issue told Middle East Eye that Ankara delivered three T129 Atak attack helicopters to the Somali government this week. Ankara also simultaneously handed over two utility helicopters to the Somali navy, as part of a defence agreement signed between the two governments in February 2024, which mandated Ankara to establish a naval force for Mogadishu. Turkey has been training several Somali pilots to operate Atak helicopters for the past year. The shipment of the helicopters was delivered after the pilots completed their final stage of training. Open-source data shows that around six Turkish A400M and Qatari C-17A transport aircraft have arrived in Mogadishu over the past week, potentially transporting the helicopters. MEE has reached out to Turkey's defence ministry for a comment. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters 'The delivery of the Atak helicopters to Somalia is an indication that Ankara is not only aiming to transfer weapons but also to build up an integrated war capacity for Somalia,' said one of the sources familiar with the shipment. During the phone call on Saturday, Erdogan told Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud that Turkey supports Somalia's vision of development through democracy. Erdogan also affirmed that Turkey's support to Somalia in counter-terrorism efforts would continue and be further expanded, according to a statement released by the Turkish presidency. The timing of Turkey's military aid suggests it aims to stabilise Somalia ahead of elections planned for 2026, which would be held through direct voting instead of tribal electoral system. Somalia has faced a resurgence of al-Shabab attacks in recent months. The group, which aims to topple the government, has intensified its militant campaign in the country. Al-Shabab has made significant gains in central Somalia, notably capturing villages south of the capital Mogadishu last month. However, the group made similar advances in previous years, later abandoning its positions due to military pressure from Somali forces. Unprecedented military support Middle East Eye reported in April that Ankara has boosted its military presence in Mogadishu, doubling its troop numbers in the country to over 500. These forces are tasked with protecting and maintaining the Turkish military base, Turksom, as well as operating armed drones and securing Mogadishu's ports. How Somalia-Turkey defence deal torpedoed a rival UAE agreement Read More » Although Turkish TB2 Bayraktar drones were already in operation, Ankara has recently transported two Akinci drones to Somalia. These drones, capable of flying at high altitudes for extended periods, are considered more effective against al-Shabab due to their advanced night vision and 24-hour operational capabilities. Turkey's unprecedented increase in military support - at a time when the US is scaling back its assistance to Somalia - signals Ankara's intent to prevent a power vacuum in the country. While the US has doubled its air strikes targeting Islamic State affiliates in Somalia this year, it also cut funding in March to the country's elite Danab unit, a force that has played a crucial role in the fight against al-Shabab. Turkey has maintained a significant presence in Mogadishu since Erdogan's first visit to Somalia in 2011, which was conducted as part of a humanitarian mission. Since then, the relationship has deepened into a comprehensive commercial and security partnership. Last year, Ankara also signed an energy exploration and drilling agreement with Somalia, which has led to Turkey sending technical exploration ships to the Somali coast. The exploration data has not yet been publicly revealed. However, during televised remarks on Monday, Erdogan said that 'good news' on energy would be forthcoming in due time. This has led to speculation in Ankara that the announcement may be related to Somalia's energy resources.
Gulf Today
an hour ago
- Gulf Today
Right-wing Nawrocki wins Polish presidential poll by narrow margin
Every election in Europe is now turning out to be an existential battle between liberals and conservatives, between pro-European Union (EU) and Euro-sceptics. After the Romanian presidential election, where the pro-EU candidate Nicusor Dan clinched the election over the anti-EU conservative George Simion. Dan won a comfortable 54 per cent of the vote, though it was not overwhelming one in his support or for liberalism. The conservatives lost but they are in the field. In Poland, it was the turn of the conservative Karol Nawrocki who edged past his liberal rival, Rafal Trzaskowski, by a narrow margin. Nawrocki got 50.82 per cent of the vote. But the Euro-sceptics were happy. George Simion, who was the runner-up in the Romanian election, wrote on X, 'Poland WON'. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban called Nawrocki's win a 'fantastic victory'. The political divisions are sharp across the national boundaries in Europe. Nawrocki is opposed to refugees, and in Poland the refugees are from Ukraine. Nawrocki will inevitably be at loggerheads with Prime Minister Donald Tusk's liberal Civic Coalition. Tusk has been trying to reverse the previous conservative government's judicial reforms which raised objections from the European Constitutional Court. It said the process of the appointment of judges does not ensure impartiality of the judges. The conservatives think it is interference from Europe. Nawrocki has already declared that he intends to protect Poland's sovereignty and support laws that favour the Polish. As president, Nawrocki has but little leeway in thwarting the liberal government. The presidential veto can be overturned by a specific majority rule of parliament. But Prime Minister Tusk does not command the required majority in parliament. It is because of the shortfall in the parliamentary numbers, that Nawrocki's predecessor, another conservative, Andrzej Duda, was able to block the reformist legislation of Prime Minister Tusk. The divisions seem to be almost evenly balanced, with conservatives accounting for half the electorate, and the liberals comprising the other half. A 32-year-old IT specialist, Patryk Marek, summed it up well: 'Everything was on a knife edge. Feelings are for sure mixed for this moment. But how small this margin was, it tells us how divided we are almost in half as voters.' European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said she believed EU's cooperation with Poland will continue. She is a conservative herself but a nuanced one, and quite opposed to the right-wing nationalism dominating European politics. Krzysztof Izdebski, director of think-tank Batory Foundation commented, 'Trump will have more to say in Polish politics.' It is a reference to the fact that European nationalists and right-wingers are inspired by US President Donald Trump's worldview and his electoral success. European conservatives are indeed on the rise and riding a success wave in many countries in France, in Italy, Germany, and in many of the former Soviet satellite countries in Eastern Europe. The success of the right-wing parties is mainly due to the economic crunch that most European countries are witnessing, where lack of growth is affecting the job market and it is increasing the frustration of the people. The right-wing politicians are directing this frustration and anger on to the immigrants. Turning away the immigrants will not put Europe back on the path of economic growth. And the right-wing governments and leaders have no easy answers or plans to boost economic growth. It is the same problem that Trump is facing in America. With his tariff wars and his hostility towards immigrants, he is not able to turn around the American economy. And that is the reason that many of the Americans who had voted for Trump are disappointed with him. The same challenge awaits right-wing governments in Europe as well.
Arabian Post
3 hours ago
- Arabian Post
Zelenskyy's Reckless Gambit: A Tactical Masterstroke That Threatens Strategic Collapse
M A Hossain By any military measure, Ukraine's 'Operation Spider Web' was an astonishing success. In a meticulously planned operation, Ukrainian drones struck deep into Russian territory, obliterating at least 40 military aircraft—including nuclear-capable Tu-95 and Tu-22M3 bombers—in a single, devastating blow. The attack revealed not only meticulous Ukrainian planning over 18 months but also the glaring vulnerabilities of Russia's so-called impenetrable airspace. It was a coup de main that will be studied in military academies for decades. But as history too often reminds us, tactical brilliance can be the prelude to strategic disaster. The world now holds its breath, waiting to see what comes next. The immediate question is not whether Russia will respond—it will—but how. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy must now reckon with that distinction. Launched on the eve of scheduled peace talks in Istanbul, Spider Web didn't just dismantle a third of Russia's strategic bomber fleet—it may also have dismantled the fragile architecture of diplomacy that remained. If this was a calculated move to strengthen Ukraine's bargaining position, it was cynically timed and perilously shortsighted. It risks transforming what was still, however tenuously, a brutal regional war into an epoch-defining catastrophe. ADVERTISEMENT We've seen this before. In 1914, the assassination of an Austrian archduke triggered a cascade of commitments, mobilizations, and miscalculations that led to a global conflagration. In 1941, Japan, feeling cornered by U.S. embargoes, attacked Pearl Harbor—a masterstroke of surprise that ultimately led to its own annihilation. And in 1962, the Cuban Missile Crisis brought the planet within inches of nuclear oblivion, saved only by backchannel diplomacy and the mutual recognition of unacceptable costs. Ukraine's gamble did not occur in a vacuum. It came at a time when President Trump has been seeking to limit American exposure and end the war, while Europe is increasingly divided over how far to support Kyiv without inviting catastrophe. It also came amid a U.S. political landscape reshaped by Donald Trump's return to the White House, a president who has made clear his disinterest in 'forever wars' and who, notably, has remained silent on this latest escalation. The American public, too, seems less inclined to bankroll Kyiv's ambitions, particularly when those ambitions risk dragging NATO into a direct confrontation with a nuclear adversary. Zelenskyy's supporters will argue this operation was necessary—a bold stroke to jolt Russia from its entrenched positions and to demonstrate Ukraine's capability for long-range asymmetric warfare. They will say it sends a signal to Moscow: Ukraine cannot be intimidated and has the resolve to strike at the heart of Russian military power. They may even compare it to Israel's 1981 strike on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor—a preemptive blow to degrade a long-term threat. But the analogy doesn't hold. Israel acted in secrecy against a latent, undeclared threat. Ukraine struck openly, on the record, against a nuclear-armed power just hours before peace talks. Worse, it struck not against fielded forces in battle, but strategic nuclear bombers inside Russia, a move that risks prompting a doctrinal response from Moscow. Since its updated nuclear posture last year, Russia allows for nuclear use in response to conventional strikes that threaten its strategic deterrent—exactly the kind of attack Spider Web represents. It is no exaggeration to say that Zelenskyy has lit a fuse dangerously close to a powder keg. Which raises a larger question: What exactly was the purpose of this attack? ADVERTISEMENT Some suspect it was less about battlefield utility and more about political optics. With Western support waning and battlefield momentum stalled, Zelenskyy may have felt compelled to show that he still commands initiative—that he remains a credible partner worth backing. There's also speculation that this operation was a plea for continued arms shipments now under threat from Trump's 'America First' administration. But if this was an attempt to impress or pressure Western allies, it may backfire. The attack has already emboldened voices in Washington and Brussels who argue that the war is spiraling out of control. And it gives ammunition to Moscow's propaganda machine, which is portraying the strike as Russia's own Pearl Harbor. When a nuclear power perceives itself as the victim of an existential assault, dangerous decisions follow. We must also ask: was NATO involved? Did European allies—through satellite intelligence or remote drone operations—have a hand in the planning or execution? If so, this operation could cross a previously avoided threshold, bringing NATO into direct conflict with Russia. That's not just a strategic misstep—it's a generational blunder. President Zelenskyy must now answer for the consequences of his audacity. Yes, the strike humiliated Russia. Yes, it exposed the rot within Moscow's security establishment. But the cost of that humiliation could be paid not just in Ukrainian lives, but potentially in the lives of millions across Europe and beyond, should Putin interpret this as justification for escalation. History is littered with leaders who mistook tactical victories for strategic triumphs. Napoleon's march into Moscow, Hitler's advance into Stalingrad, even George W. Bush's 'Mission Accomplished' moment in Iraq—all stemmed from an overestimation of short-term success and a blindness to long-term consequence. Zelenskyy, admired as he rightly is for his courage and resolve, must now be judged for his judgment. By launching Spider Web when he did, and in the manner that he did, he may have sabotaged the very peace he claims to seek. Worse, he has placed the entire international order at the mercy of a man like Vladimir Putin, whose worldview is shaped not by cost-benefit logic but by grievance, pride, and a paranoid sense of historical destiny. The West must now perform a high-wire act. It must reaffirm support for ending the war. It must also demand restraint and a return to diplomacy. A nuclear confrontation, even a 'demonstrative' one over a deserted military base, would rewrite the rules of war and peace for generations to come. It would show that nuclear blackmail works—or that nuclear retaliation can be normalized. Neither outcome is acceptable. Operation Spider Web may be remembered as a brilliant military feat. But unless it is followed by swift and sober diplomacy, it risks becoming a historical monument to hubris—the kind that ignites wars from which there is no return. The lesson from history is chillingly clear: great fires often begin with a single, dazzling spark. Also published on Medium. Notice an issue? Arabian Post strives to deliver the most accurate and reliable information to its readers. If you believe you have identified an error or inconsistency in this article, please don't hesitate to contact our editorial team at editor[at]thearabianpost[dot]com. We are committed to promptly addressing any concerns and ensuring the highest level of journalistic integrity.
