The meeting planned to be held in Türkiye on May 15 between Russia and Ukraine has dominated the global agenda. Türkiye considers this meeting important as a diplomatic mediation mission and views it as an opportunity to advance dialogue between the parties. Ankara also hopes that this meeting will be a significant step toward reducing tensions and resolving the conflict through peaceful means. However, the uncertainty over whether Russian President Vladimir Putin will participate has raised questions about the potential outcome of the talks.
According to unofficial information, the Russian delegation at the Istanbul talks will be headed by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. Experts believe that Russia’s stance creates some uncertainties regarding the potential success of the meeting.
In an interview with APA, Ukraine's military-political analyst Oleksandr Kovalenko said that Russia cannot be trusted or believed: “It merely creates an illusion. Right now, Russian forces are preparing for the summer campaign of 2025. They are planning to launch a large-scale offensive in the summer. So, any meeting that takes place will essentially be just for show. Russia is not engaging in real diplomacy, because a party preparing for the next phase of a military campaign cannot truly speak of diplomacy. This is nothing but imitation. Volodymyr Zelenskyy will only speak with Putin. It doesn’t matter who else is present – whether it’s Sergey Lavrov or someone else – it makes no difference. Zelenskyy has made a direct appeal to Putin. But Putin has not responded to this call yet. In reality, he’s afraid because he is in a very uneasy position and is not ready for such a dialogue. It’s likely he never will be, because with each passing day, both his own position and Russia’s situation in general continue to deteriorate and become more unstable. That’s why, yes, Volodymyr Zelenskyy won’t talk to anyone but Putin. But considering all the factors mentioned above, most likely he won’t talk to anyone at all.”
Is Russia interested in genuine talks?
When considering the Russian Federation's current geopolitical stance—shaped by both the military dynamics on the ground and the West’s increasing sanctions—it raises serious doubts about Moscow’s commitment to full-scale peace negotiations at this stage. At the same time, it can be interpreted as a symbolic sign that the Kremlin is not yet open to reaching any agreements.
Kovalenko emphasized that Russia is not ready for such meetings or dialogue: “Russia is not ready for talks. It still fails to grasp that its ultimatums to Ukraine are unacceptable, yet it continues to speak in the language of ultimatums. For this reason, Russia lacks any diplomatic basis to meaningfully discuss matters at such a meeting. On the other hand, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s participation in Türkiye would be beneficial for Ukraine. At the very least, he will meet with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Given the close positions and strong relationship between Türkiye and Ukraine, which is based on mutual support, there will be plenty of important topics for discussion. All signs indicate Russia is not genuinely interested in negotiations right now. Russia has twice declared a ceasefire—once during Easter and once in May. However, it did not abide by either. During the Easter ceasefire, attacks continued. Strikes also occurred on May 8, 9, and 10. Moreover, during the so-called May ceasefire, the average number of daily Russian attacks was 190–195, compared to 150–160 in April. In other words, the number of attacks actually increased during the ceasefire. That cannot be called a ceasefire in any way…”
How could Putin’s absence affect the talks?
Vladimir Putin’s personal absence from the meeting could have a significantly negative impact on the negotiations. The direct participation of leaders brings both political weight and momentum toward achieving results. Without Putin, the Russian side will be represented more on a technical and tactical level, which makes reaching agreements more difficult.
The Ukrainian political analyst noted, however, that even if Putin did attend the talks, it would not positively influence the negotiation process: “Putin is not ready to talk about peace. So, his presence or absence wouldn’t change the outcome—the result would be the same: no progress. However, his refusal to participate damages his own reputation. This was a direct call from Zelenskyy to Putin. By avoiding this call, Putin reveals himself as the weaker party and shows that he is not prepared for direct dialogue. Despite the Kremlin’s frequent aggressive and pompous rhetoric, this behavior completely contradicts those statements. Therefore, we can’t say this is a loss—in fact, it once again proves that Russia does not want peace. Putin is a rather weak partner in one-on-one, personal negotiations and lacks self-confidence. So, at least for the reasons listed above, this meeting is unlikely to happen anytime soon.”
Deputy Director of the Russian Institute for Political Studies, political analyst Darya Grevtsova, in an interview with APA, said that Putin’s absence from the Istanbul negotiations could actually prevent Zelenskyy’s show-like performances and make the process more constructive.
“In my opinion, Putin’s decision not to personally attend the talks in Istanbul will have a positive impact on the dialogue. We know that Zelenskyy is very prone to theatrics—he comes from the show business world. Creating a show-like event during negotiations would likely be his main goal. Therefore, if Putin does not take part in the talks, there will be no show either. As a result, the negotiations will proceed in a more constructive manner. The Russian side will be represented by the foreign minister and the Russian President’s aide Ushakov. This will serve as a preparatory stage ahead of any potential meeting between the two leaders and lay the groundwork for matters that can be discussed at a higher level between the countries' representatives. This phase can eventually lead to talks between the presidents of Russia and Ukraine. So, with Putin not attending, there will be no theatrics or farce, and the negotiations will continue in a more constructive and business-like format. This is undoubtedly more beneficial for building peace than making provocative statements for the media. Everyone understands very well that Zelenskyy would try to make a lot of noise if he were to sit down with Putin in such talks. European countries that support the war will surely oppose this, but others realize that dialogue must take place at various levels. First and foremost, it's important to lay the groundwork, gather information, and build bridges between the countries. That’s exactly what the businesslike delegations from Russia and Ukraine will do,” the expert emphasized.
How realistic are the expectations for peace?
At the current stage, expectations for peace do not appear very realistic. At best, agreements may be reached on technical matters such as humanitarian issues, temporary ceasefires, and prisoner exchanges. However, deep disagreements remain at the strategic and political level—particularly regarding Ukraine’s territorial integrity and the issues of Crimea and Donbas. For this reason, expecting a comprehensive peace agreement from the talks is not convincing in the current context.
Ukrainian political analyst Kovalenko also believes that peace will not be achieved as a result of the Istanbul talks: “I would even say that any peace prospect in 2025 appears as much an illusion as a May 15 meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin. So, it is not worth having high hopes for these negotiations. Even though this platform may be favorable for Ukraine, any diplomatic efforts will still be undermined by Russia. Because today, Russia is not at all interested in peace. And since it is not interested, it will only engage in imitation rather than real diplomacy.”
The Ukrainian side is cautiously speculating whether the meeting will take place, as they still do not know for sure how sincere or serious Russia is about the negotiations. The Ukrainian leadership believes that the meeting will only be useful if Russia presents genuine diplomatic progress and concrete proposals for a ceasefire.
"I can say with complete certainty that this meeting will not take place. Today, Ukraine conducts itself as a civilized, democratic country and does not miss the opportunity to resolve the complex conflict through diplomatic means. Like any democratic and civilized European state, we prefer to solve the problem not through bloodshed, but by giving diplomacy a chance. Russia's position is completely different. We have repeatedly shown that we are ready for dialogue—but acceptable dialogue, i.e., dialogue that is not in the form of ultimatums and diktats. Russia, however, does not engage in such dialogue. If we consider it from a historical context, it can be stated with certainty that the true identity and character of Russia are clearly revealed in this conflict. Russia is a revanchist, predatory, and expansionist country. While dialogue with this country is possible, it will be a long and difficult process, and in most cases, time will be wasted. We are demonstrating this to the international community as well, so they understand—who Russia is and how to speak to it. Only in the language of pressure. Russia understands only the language of power. We are trying to convey this," said Kovalenko.
Darya Grevtsova stated that the negotiations are expected to be difficult and complex, but the initiation of dialogue is an encouraging step toward peace after the war: "It is difficult to say anything definitive about what each side will agree or disagree on, but it can be assumed that these negotiations will be very complex. This will be the first negotiations after several years of war. Each side has its own views and desires regarding the resolution of the conflict. How much they will align and whether an agreement will be reached is uncertain. It is very likely that it will not be possible to reach a real compromise for the first time. However, at least the initiation and restoration of dialogue is already a very positive step, because in any war, peace can only be built through dialogue. The sooner the parties sit at the negotiation table, the better it will be for both them and the entire global community."
Türkiye's role in the Russia-Ukraine negotiations
Ukrainian political scientist Kovalenko also spoke about Türkiye's role as a platform for negotiations between Russia and Ukraine: "Türkiye will serve as the platform for such meetings, and it will mainly take place in Istanbul because the Russian side is not willing to meet in Ankara. Apparently, this comes from their internal historical complexes. Overall, Türkiye currently holds a leading position in providing a diplomatic platform for such efforts. We are fully satisfied with this platform because there have been long-standing friendship relations between Ukraine and Türkiye. Additionally, there is very good communication established between Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Erdoğan is also an experienced, pragmatic, and rational politician. He is not as unstable as Donald Trump, and it is easier to engage in dialogue and reach an agreement with him. If the negotiation process moves to Türkiye and the Trump Administration agrees to this, it will be a very positive signal for Ukraine."
Russian political scientist Grevtsova, on the other hand, emphasized that while Türkiye is playing the role of a platform for the negotiations, the main dialogue is happening between Ukraine, Russia, and the USA, and Türkiye's additional role beyond mediation remains uncertain for now.
"Türkiye is currently providing the infrastructure for the negotiations, while the United States is playing the role of mediation. This dialogue and negotiations will take place between Ukraine, Russia, and the USA. Türkiye, however, will mainly play the role of the platform for holding the negotiations. If Türkiye finds another role in these negotiations, it will undoubtedly be positively received. However, since the key issues are related to Ukraine, Russia, and the USA, Türkiye's role here, and how clear and positive that role will be, remains unclear," the Russian expert added.
Follow us on Telegram
t.me/apanewsaz
Follow us on Instagram
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
