“I am ready to meet with Putin; the truth is on our side… However, I believe Putin does not want the war to end, does not want a ceasefire, and does not want any negotiations,” said President Volodymyr Zelensky, commenting on a potential meeting with the Kremlin leader set for Thursday, May 15, in Turkey. Zelensky is also scheduled to meet with President Erdogan during his visit.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz added that “Russia must announce its readiness for an unconditional 30-day ceasefire.” He further stated that if Putin fails to take tangible steps, Germany would push for stronger sanctions against Russia, targeting the energy and financial sectors. “It would be a good step if they (Zelensky and Putin) actually sat down for talks. But I don’t think Putin will have the courage,” said European diplomat Kaja Kallas. While the Kremlin has yet to confirm whether Putin will attend Thursday’s talks, there is still no word on the makeup of the Russian delegation. In contrast, a U.S. delegation, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoys Steve Witkoff and Keith Kellogg, has already arrived in Turkey. Donald Trump has expressed hope that the meeting between the two leaders will take place — and that it will be successful.
In reality, there are many questions surrounding the definition of “success.” Above all, successful for whom? Negotiations will only be truly effective for Ukraine if the discussions focus on a genuine ceasefire and peace, rather than providing a platform for the aggressor to impose more demands. We have already been presented with numerous proposals for Ukraine’s capitulation — such as surrendering its territories, reducing its military, limiting its armaments, and lifting sanctions on Russia.
First and foremost, it’s essential to recognise that any changes to Ukraine’s national borders are solely a matter for Ukraine to decide. We need not bow to the demands of Russia, the U.S., or anyone else. Failing to uphold this would amount to a disregard for international agreements and set a dangerous precedent, where the brazen annexation of one country’s territory by another could be easily legitimised. And in that case, President Trump’s statements about Greenland might not seem so outlandish after all.
On the other hand, what sense is there in discussing the reduction of Ukraine’s army or disarming the country? Over the years of independence, Ukrainians have come to recognise that a strong military is the bedrock, the crucial institution that guarantees the protection of national interests and state sovereignty. The presence of an army does not equate to a desire for war; it is about safeguarding against the encroachments of “friendly” neighbours on territory, natural resources, human capital, or any other vital assets. The overwhelming majority of Ukrainians – 82% – unequivocally reject Russia’s proposals to scale back the Ukrainian military and relinquish territory in exchange for what would clearly be a fragile peace. This is borne out by the results of a recent poll conducted by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KMIS).
It’s clear that Russia’s goal is, so to speak, to demilitarise Ukraine, setting the stage for a future attempt to execute its previously failed “Kyiv in 3 days” occupation plan with greater certainty and finality. But will Putin stop there? That’s a rhetorical question. European leaders now clearly grasp this reality, as shown during their recent visit to Kyiv, where they underscored that the key guarantee of Ukraine’s sovereignty and security lies in the strengthening of its Defence Forces. As a result, they are prepared to invest in Ukraine’s arms production and ramp up sanctions against Russia.
Ultimately, by agreeing to Putin’s proposal for direct negotiations, Zelensky once again signalled his readiness for talks aimed at achieving peace and a ceasefire. In contrast, Putin’s silence feels like a step back, a refusal to negotiate on any terms other than his own. Predicting the outcome of tomorrow’s meetings, even at the ministerial level rather than the presidential one, is a thankless task. What is clear, however, is that Ukraine needs a lasting peace with guarantees, not another plan for capitulation. I hope that this will be the key message of the Istanbul negotiations.
