Talks between Russian and Ukrainian delegations are to take place in Istanbul today, and expectations are not high. That was the message from Marco Rubio last night, yet the US Secretary of State was not revealing anything unexpected. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky earlier admitted that he had chosen his Defence Minister Rustem Umerov to lead Kyiv’s delegation “out of respect” for US President Donald Trump and Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. He did not express confidence that such an act would spur progress towards peace.

That was not the only indication of an absence of faith. Zelensky noted this week that past talks between officials have not succeeded in negotiating a full ceasefire because “without signals from the leaders, or a meeting of the leaders, this format doesn’t work.” Meanwhile, Ukrainian diplomats indicated that they would only engage once they established that Moscow’s delegation had the authority to make decisions.

The problem is that it doesn’t. As Zelensky himself phrased it: “we all know who makes decisions in Russia.” The Kremlin delegates were handpicked for their ability to hamper the process. Besides the issue of their junior rank, the choice of aide Vladimir Medinsky to lead was especially provocative. A man who has tried to justify the invasion of Ukraine in print, he also participated in the 2022 peace talks which fell apart over Russia’s maximalist terms. Those included demands that Ukraine cut its military to 50,000 troops; reduce the numbers of ships, helicopters and tanks; and not produce any new weaponry.

Unsurprisingly, those discussions ended in acrimony. As such, the choice of Medinsky was a sign that Moscow views these discussions as a resumption of the earlier talks, complete with similar terms. Adding insult to injury, Kremlin Ambassador Rodion Miroshnik suggested this week that the 2022 template could be a basis, “provided that certain adjustments are made based on the developments of the past three years”. That is to say, to permit Russia to keep the territory it currently holds.

So what conclusions can be drawn from this reduced spectacle? Ukraine had pushed a message that Putin’s refusal to attend would be the “last signal” that the Russian President does not want peace, the first sign having presumably been the invasion itself. Yet America doesn’t seem to be listening. Rubio’s statement that there can be no breakthrough until Trump and Putin “interact directly” will be music to Moscow’s ears, encouraging Kremlin hopes that a deal can be concluded bilaterally without Zelensky and then foisted upon him. Such a situation would also suit Putin’s own personal worldview: two superpowers meeting to negotiate a new Yalta Agreement which carves up Eastern Europe.

The first meeting of Russian and Ukrainian delegates since those failed talks of 2022 should have been a momentous day in the journey to peace. Instead, this is pure theatre. As the ex-showman Zelensky said, Moscow’s delegation is a “prop”. However, the non-appearance of Russia’s lead actor might not even have been sufficient to convey to Trump that Moscow is the obstacle to peace. The US President attributed Putin’s absence to his own. While Zelensky may have dashed abroad to prove his willingness, Trump may be coming away from this believing that US-Russia bilateral negotiations are needed. Putin’s show has impressed the intended audience.

---

Bethany Elliott is a writer specialising in Russia and Eastern Europe.

BethanyAElliott

---