Russian and Ukrainian negotiators comment on Istanbul talks: As it happened

The Istanbul talks are “a step towards peacefully settling” the Ukraine conflict and “saving thousands of lives,” Leonid Slutsky, the head of the Russian parliament’s foreign affairs committee, has said.

While the MP warned it would be “naïve” to expect an “immediate breakthrough,” he still hailed the agreement on a POW exchange as “a significant outcome.” Slutsky also blasted Kiev’s Western backers for claiming Moscow’s delegation wasn’t high-level enough and calling for more pressure to be put on Russia.

“Reaction to the Istanbul meeting clearly shows who is really for peace and who’s in the thrall of their own… ambitions,” he said.

Western media reacts to Russia-Ukraine talks:

The New York Times: “The Istanbul negotiations were not expected – even by President Trump, who initially supported them – to yield any huge breakthroughs.

But the meeting itself marked a tactical win for Mr. Putin, who managed to start the talks without first agreeing to a battlefield cease-fire that Ukraine and almost all of its Western backers had sought as a precondition for negotiations.”

The Times, citing Samuel Charap, a senior political scientist at the US-based Rand think tank: “The largest single PoW exchange and an agreement to keep talking about ceasefire modalities – I would consider that ‘better than expected’ as an outcome for the first direct talks in three years.”

The Guardian: “While the meeting appeared to achieve little toward ending the conflict, it represents a symbolic win for Putin, who refused to accept the 30-day ceasefire that Ukraine and its European allies had demanded as a prerequisite for talks.”

CNN: “It was more positive than expected. They didn’t use accusatory language,” a Turkish official told CNN hours after the discussions wrapped up in Istanbul.

A member of the Ukrainian delegation claimed Moscow is planning to attack Poland in 2030 during peace talks, a source present at the Istanbul negotiations has told RT.

The Russian side reportedly burst into laughter at the Ukrainian delegate’s claim, with Vladimir Putin’s aide, Vladimir Medinsky, saying: “Let’s not turn these negotiations into a fantasy novel,” RT’s source says.

The West’s interference in other nations’ affairs, including those of Russia, has already had grave consequences for all of Europe in the past, Vladimir Medinsky, Russia’s top negotiator at the Istanbul talks and a professional historian, has said.

Speaking to Rossiya 1, he pointed to the 19th-century Berlin Congress convened by a coalition of Western nations, including the UK, France, Italy, and Germany, to revise the results of a Russian-Turkish peace treaty that had led to the liberation of a number of Balkan nations from Ottoman control. The coalition deemed it too favorable for Russia.

As a result, the borders of the newly liberated states were redrawn, Medinsky said, adding that the move led to a series of Balkan wars in the early 20th century and ultimately to World War I.

The Ukraine conflict could have ended in weeks if Kiev had stuck to the arrangements it reached with Moscow in the first rounds of peace talks, which were held in the Belarusian city of Gomel in late February 2022, Russia’s top negotiator at the Istanbul talks, Vladimir Medinsky, said.

”They dragged their feet,” he told Rossiya 1, adding that Kiev’s actions led to a less favorable deal with Moscow in the next round of talks in Istanbul in the spring of 2022. “The Istanbul process was also regrettably disrupted because of the West’s direct involvement,” he stated, pointing to then British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s visit to Kiev in May 2022.

Kiev’s repeated demands for a ceasefire before any peace talks have taken place are excessive, Vladimir Medinsky, Russia’s top negotiator at the Istanbul talks, believes.

Speaking to Rossiya 1, Medinsky, a professional historian, maintained that peace negotiations were usually conducted as the warring parties were still fighting. “A war and talks are being conducted simultaneously,” he said, adding that only “people who know nothing about history” could claim that a ceasefire has always preceded peace talks.