
In Istanbul, Russia and Ukraine talk peace but are still far apart on truce
A much-awaited meeting between the Ukrainian government delegation and their Russian counterparts, on Monday, ended within an hour and with little progress in negotiating the end to the war that started in 2022.
While agreements were reached on prisoner exchange, there has been no word on talks to potentially end the decades-long conflict.
The slow pace of the talks was attributed to the lackadaisical effort from the Russian delegation that refused to share their agenda with the negotiating teams ahead of the meetings. 'We didn't receive the document until the meeting began. And therefore, we can't provide any feedback until we have had the chance to study it,' Rustem Umerov, the Ukrainian Minister of Defence, said at the end of the meetings.
Organised under the aegis of the government of Turkiye, this was the second such meeting in Istanbul in the past month, between two warring parties and came less than a day after a large-scale Ukrainian attack on Russian military infrastructure.
Operation Spiderweb
Ukraine claimed that their attack, codenamed 'Operation Spiderweb', targeted over 40 planes, including surveillance and bomber aircraft, across several Russian bases, even as far east as Siberia. The resulting damage is estimated to be in billions of dollars for Russia.
The impact of this intrepidity was undeniable felt at the Çırağan Palace, overlooking the Bosphorus sea, in Istanbul, as interactions between the rival delegations remained tense.
'The war goes on,' an official from the Ukrainian embassy in Turkiye said when asked about the drone attack. 'Ukraine had proposed a ceasefire on March 11. And if Russia agreed to it, I guess their planes would be intact right now,' he said, adding that the Russians remained deterrent to the idea of pausing conflicts.
In fact, a 'full and unconditional ceasefire on land, at sea and in the air' remained a key demand and central to the Ukrainian agenda. 'The ceasefire is a basis for future talks of substance. We really can talk only when the weapons are silent,' Mr. Umerov said. 'Russia tries to get us into the dialogue on substantive issues like territories, like security guarantees, sanctions and whatsoever before we reach the ceasefire,' he added.
However, Russia has its own terms for a ceasefire. It says the 'root cause' of the conflict should be addressed for durable peace, referring to its opposition to NATO's eastward expansion.
Vladimir Medinsky, who led the Russian delegation in Istanbul, said they had proposed a 'two or three days [of ceasefire] in certain areas to collect bodies of soldiers on the fronts'. This was dismissed by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who wrote on social media, 'the whole point of a ceasefire is to stop people from becoming dead'.
Meeting of the leaders
The Ukrainian delegation also pushed for a direct meeting between Mr. Zelenskyy and Mr. Putin. 'We propose to the Russian side to hold a meeting [of the leaders] by the end of this month, from June 20 to 30. This is crucial for making progress in the negotiation process,' Mr. Umerov said.
The Ukrainians have very little faith in the authority of any delegation sent by Russia, one of their official said. 'In Russia, Putin is the person who decides everything… decisions on the ceasefire, on other crucial elements,' he said.
'Our president is ready to meet tomorrow, if Putin says I'm ready. President Zelenskyy will meet him right away.'
Mr. Zelenskyy had also offered to meet with Mr. Putin during the last Istanbul talks, a move that was initially supported by the U.S. and Turkish officials. However, the invitation was rejected by Mr. Putin.
Prisoner exchange
Despite the brevity of the meetings and the escalation of violence, some progress was made in the form of a deal on the exchange of prisoners of war.
Similar to the outcome of the last Istanbul meeting, which resulted in the largest yet prisoner exchange, it is expected that both sides will commit to an exchange of 1,000 prisoners, prioritising young soldiers, those between 18 and 25 years, and the severely sick and wounded. 'We also agreed to return 6,000 to 6,000 bodies for fallen soldiers,' Mr. Umerov said.
Another key demand put forth by the Ukrainian side was the return of nearly 400 Ukrainian children who were allegedly abducted by Russian forces from the territories Russia captured. 'This matter is a fundamental priority for us,' Mr. Umerov said. 'If Russia is genuinely committed to the peace process, the return of at least half of the children from this list would be serving as a positive indication,' he added.
An investigation by Yale researchers, published in 2024 , found 20,000 children were reportedly taken and transferred to Russian and Belarusian territories where they were enrolled into 're-education' camps. The case of the alleged abduction of children also led the International Criminal Court, in 2023, to issue arrest warrants against President Putin and other Russian officials.
While the Russian delegation confirmed to a section of the media that they had received a list of 339 individuals, they did not elaborate whether it was a demand they would consider.
As the brief meeting came to a close, the members of both delegations stayed behind to address the media, starting with the Ukrainians, held in one of the many grandiose rooms in the Ottoman-era palace.
However, as the first press conference ended and the Ukrainian flag was swapped with the Russian one to set the stage for the next media briefing, journalists who interacted with the Ukrainian officials were asked to leave. The Russian delegation held a closed-room briefing with journalists from largely their own national publications and broadcasters.
The meagre success of the negotiations was tested in the following hours as Russia launched airstrikes and shelling across multiple locations on the eastern Ukrainian provinces, and Ukraine launched an underwater attack at the Crimea bridge, which connects the Black Sea peninsula, annexed by Moscow in 2014, with Russian mainland.
While referring to their operations, a day earlier, a Ukrainian diplomat in Turkiye rejected assertions equating hostilities on both sides. 'Russia is the aggressor and Ukraine is a country that is defending itself,' he said, adding that Russia hits Ukraine's residential areas, kills children and civilians, while Ukraine only targets legitimate military sites inside Russia. 'They are not comparable… but the war goes on,' he said.
On the other side, Russian officials have repeatedly accused the Ukrainian forces of targeting civilian areas in Donbas and Russia's border regions.
(Ruchi Kumar is an independent journalist based in Istanbul.)
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hindustan Times
16 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Germany's Merz says 'no doubt' US to stick with NATO
Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Friday he had "no doubt" the United States would remain in NATO after a high-stakes meeting with President Donald Trump in the White House. Merz said he had raised the issue directly with Trump in talks on Thursday, during the chancellor's first trip to Washington since taking office last month. "The question that was asked was: do you have any plans to leave NATO? I can say it was answered with a very clear no," Merz said at an event hosted by the German family-owned business association. "I have no doubt at all that the American government will stick to NATO now after we all said we're doing more, we're making sure that we can defend ourselves in Europe. "I think this expectation was not unjustified. We have unfortunately been free-riders on American security guarantees for years and that's changing," he said. Merz earlier this year spearheaded moves to exempt most defence spending from Germany's strict constitutional debt limits and has signalled his intention to raise military spending by tens of billions of euros. During an Oval Office press conference Thursday, Trump welcomed Merz's moves to increase spending to patch up Germany's dilapidated military. "I know that you are spending more money on defence now, quite a bit more money, and that's a positive thing," Trump said. The US president has lobbied NATO partners to up their spending commitments to five percent of GDP from the current level of two percent. Defence ministers from the US-led military alliance met in Brussels on Thursday to discuss a change to the spending target ahead of a NATO summit later this month. US defence chief Pete Hegseth indicated allies were close to a deal to boost military budgets. NATO chief Mark Rutte has put forward a proposal to meet Trump's target that would see members spend 3.5 percent of GDP in core military areas by 2032, and 1.5 percent on broader security-related items such as infrastructure. sea/sr/jhb


Time of India
22 minutes ago
- Time of India
Germany's Merz says he found Trump open to dialogue and committed to Nato
Germany's Merz says he found Trump open to dialogue and committed to Nato (Image: AP) BERLIN: German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Friday, a day after meeting with President Donald Trump at the White House, that he encountered a US administration open to discussion and returned confident that Washington remains committed to Nato. Merz described his Oval Office meeting and extended lunch with Trump as constructive but also candid, noting that the two leaders expressed different views on Ukraine. "Yesterday, in the meeting at the Oval Office, I expressed a distinctly different position on the topic of Ukraine than the one Trump had taken, and not only was there no objection, but we discussed it in detail again over lunch," Merz said in Berlin after his return. Thursday's White House meeting marked the first time the two sat down in person. Merz, who became chancellor in May, avoided the kind of confrontations in the Oval Office that have tripped up other world leaders, including Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelenskyy and South Africa's Cyril Ramaphosa. The two leaders opened with pleasantries. Merz presented Trump with a gold-framed birth certificate of the president's grandfather, Friedrich Trump, who emigrated from Kallstadt, Germany. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với sàn môi giới tin cậy IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo Trump called Merz a "very good man to deal with." The American administration, he said, is open to discussion, listens, and is willing to accept differing opinions. Add he added that dialogue should go both ways: "Let's stop talking about Donald Trump with a raised finger and wrinkled nose. You have to talk with him, not about him." He said he also met with seNators on Capitol Hill, urging them to recognize the scale of Russian rearmament. "Please take a look at how far Russia's armament is going, what they are currently doing there; you obviously have no idea what's happening," he said he told them. "In short, you can talk to them, but you must not let yourself be intimidated. I don't have that inclination anyway." Merz, who speaks English fluently, stressed the need for transatlantic trust and said he reminded Trump that allies matter. "Whether we like it or not, we will remain dependent on the United States of America for a long time," he said. "But you also need partners in the world, and the Europeans, especially the Germans, are the best-suited partners. "This is the difference between authoritarian systems and democracies: authoritarian systems have subordinates. Democracies have partners - and we want to be those partners in Europe and with America." He reiterated that the US remains committed to Nato, particularly as Germany and others boost their defense spending. Trump has in the past suggested that the US might abandon its commitments to the alliance if member countries don't meet defense spending targets. "I have absolutely no doubt that the American government is committed to Nato, especially now that we've all said we're doing more. We're ensuring that we can also defend ourselves in Europe, and I believe this expectation was not unjustified," Merz said. "We've been the free riders of American security guarantees for years, and we're changing that now."


Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
Fact check: Is Russia's new fact-checking platform credible?
In early April, Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs unveiled the Global Fact-Checking Network (GFCN) — a self-proclaimed international alliance of fact-checkers and media outlets. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The initiative was first presented at the "Dialogue about Fakes 2.0" forum in Moscow in November 2024. At a press briefing following the April announcement, Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova framed the GFCN as a counter to what she called the West's "relentless stream of fake stories and disinformation campaigns," accusing Western fact-checkers of engaging in "biased pseudo-fact-checking. " "This global civic initiative," Zakharova said, "will enable us to counter destructive Western actions using our own constructive agenda." But established fact-checking sites such as Facta and Maldita have raised red flags over the GFCN's Kremlin-aligned backers, opaque operations, and overtly one-sided narratives. DW Fact check takes a closer look Who's behind the GFCN? The GFCN was co-founded by TASS, Russia's state-run news agency, and the Autonomous Non-Profit Organization ANO Dialog — both known for their close ties to the Kremlin. TASS was suspended in 2022 by the European Alliance of News Agencies (EANA) over concerns about its editorial independence. In 2023, the European Union sanctioned ANO Dialog for its role in spreading disinformation and for operating the pro-Kremlin website War on Fakes. Ahead of Russia's 2024 presidential election, the US Treasury also sanctioned the group under Executive Order 14024, targeting individuals and entities linked to the Russian government. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Does the GFCN meet global fact-checking standards? Independent fact-checking relies on transparency, verifiable sourcing, and open methodologies. Leading organisations such as the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) require fact-checks to cite public data and provide transparent methods that others can replicate. DW reviewed several GFCN articles and found consistent problems with sourcing and methodology. In one article titled "The Romanian Elections: How Did the West Win Only on the Second Try?", the author cites the 2024 Eurobarometer, claiming only 22% of Romanians support aid to refugees, only 14% back the EU's actions on Ukraine, and only 13% favor Ukraine's EU candidate status. But these figures are false. DW cross-checked the data and found significantly higher levels of Romanian support for EU policies on Ukraine in the 2024 Eurobarometer contradicting the article's core claim. Another piece alleges that the Soros family was the "shadow organizer" behind the "HANDS OFF!" protests against US President Donald Trump's second administration, which took place across the United States on April 5, 2025. The article argues that, since some organizers had previously received grants from the Open Society Foundations, the Soros family must have orchestrated the protest. That's misleading. The piece focuses narrowly on two groups — MoveOn and Indivisible — and ignores the broader coalition behind the rallies. While both organizations have indeed received funding from Open Society Foundations, the grants supported general programming, not the April 5 protests specifically. Moreover, these groups list dozens of funders, not just the Soros-backed foundation. Receiving support from Open Society Foundations doesn't prove direct involvement on the part of the Soros family, whose philanthropic work has long been targeted by conspiracy theorists. These narratives often paint Soros as a puppet master behind protests, migration, or global unrest — claims that have been widely discredited. Another GFCN article titled "Is ChatGPT Prone to Russian Propaganda?" fails to seriously engage with the question it raises. Instead, it spends most of its word count defending TASS and attacking a Norwegian media outlet that questioned the Russian agency's credibility. The article barely mentions recent investigations — such a report by NewsGuard, which DW covered — which document Russian attempts to manipulate generative AI platforms. The piece's only conclusion appears in the final paragraph, which vaguely states: "It is incorrect to give a chatbot human qualities and accuse it of 'preferring' one of the sources to the others." GFCN: Who is writing these stories? One contributor to the GFCN is Sonja van den Ende, a Dutch journalist living in Russia who has been embedded with Russian troops in Ukraine. Some Dutch media have described her as a conspiracy theorist. On X, she recently posted: "Germany is the country of knife pullers, used to be a country of beer and bratwurst, now asylum seekers, i.e. radicalised rebels from Syria, Iraq etc." Other GFCN contributors include Tim Anderson, director of the Centre for Counter Hegemonic Studies. He has called the massacre of Ukrainian civilians in Bucha a "scam" and falsely claimed that Russia's invasion of Ukraine did not involve the targeting of civilian infrastructure. A familiar Russian playbook: mimic and confuse Observers say the GFCN's name — just one letter removed from the IFCN — is no accident. The International Fact-Checking Network, founded in 2015 by the Poynter Institute, is a respected consortium of more than 150 independent fact-checkers worldwide. It trains journalists, enforces professional standards, and certifies outlets based on transparency and editorial independence. The GFCN, on the other hand, appears to follow a long-standing tactic of the Russian state: imitating legitimate institutions to blur the line between journalism and propaganda. "We do not consider their activities to fall within the professional fact-checking ecosystem," IFCN director Angie Drobnic Holan told DW, citing Russia's consistent suppression of independent journalism. "Professional fact-checking requires the ability to independently verify claims across the political spectrum," she said. "Journalists must be free to publish findings that contradict the government. We are highly dubious that this effort allows for that." Tommaso Canetta, a policy officer with the European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO), called the GFCN a classic case of political appropriation. "This is a tactic we've seen many times; co-opting terms with credibility, like 'fact-checking,' and stripping them of meaning," he explained. "Political actors often label partisan narratives as 'fact checks' when they clearly are not." He stressed that affiliations with networks like the IFCN or the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN) help distinguish legitimate outlets from those engaged in manipulation. "Without such standards, we end up with initiatives — like this one from Russia — that pollute the term and muddy the waters."