The negotiation process between Russia and Ukraine has once again become the center of global attention—wrapped, as ever, in uncertainty, behind-the-scenes maneuvers, and contradictory political signals. On May 11, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky publicly offered to meet Vladimir Putin in person for peace talks—on one condition: Russia must agree to a ceasefire. As of this writing, the Kremlin has refused.
“I’ll be waiting for Putin in Turkey on Thursday,” Zelensky wrote on social media. “I sincerely hope that this time Russia won’t come up with excuses.” This challenge marked the climax of a turbulent week of diplomacy involving not only Kyiv and Moscow but also former U.S. President Donald Trump and several key European leaders. While the situation remains highly unstable, this diplomatic momentum is being viewed as one of the most hopeful developments in the conflict in the past three years.
The Turkish Threshold: Genuine Talks or a Kremlin Trap?
The starting point came on May 10, when four European leaders—including the new British Prime Minister Keir Starmer—visited Kyiv. There, Starmer called Ukraine’s offer of a 30-day unconditional ceasefire a major step toward peace, emphasizing that the burden of continued war lies entirely with the Kremlin. According to The Economist, the goal of Western leaders was to publicly demonstrate who is really prolonging the conflict and to pressure Trump into taking a firmer stance against Putin.
But this moment of apparent unity crumbled the very next day. In an early morning televised address on May 11, Putin ignored Zelensky’s ceasefire offer and instead expressed willingness to negotiate in Istanbul on May 15—but with numerous conditions. His foreign policy advisor, Yuri Ushakov, clarified that any talks would be based on the framework of the spring of 2022, when extremely sensitive issues were being discussed, including the potential reduction of Ukraine’s armed forces.
This is dangerous territory for Kyiv: returning to the point at which negotiations broke off in 2022 could imply that Ukraine’s two years of resistance were in vain and that thousands of lives were lost for nothing.
Trump as Arbitrator: Pressure or Evasion of Responsibility?
Nonetheless, Zelensky found himself cornered when Donald Trump posted on social media urging the Ukrainian president to “agree to this, IMMEDIATELY.” According to Trump, even if an agreement is not reached, “European leaders and the US will know where everything stands and can proceed accordingly.” He added that Putin is “too busy celebrating the Victory of World War II” to engage seriously.
As The Economist notes, Trump’s position might suggest that the U.S. could start applying stronger pressure on Moscow if it becomes clear that the Kremlin is sabotaging the peace process. By agreeing to attend talks in Turkey, Zelensky is trying to portray Putin as the main obstacle to peace—and push Trump toward a more definitive stance.
On May 11, Ukrainian officials said Zelensky plans to implement a unilateral ceasefire on land, sea, and air starting May 12, and will then wait to see whether Russia reciprocates. Should Moscow ignore the ceasefire, it risks incurring Trump’s displeasure. Yet, Kyiv remains aware of the risks. Even before Trump’s comments, Zelensky stated: “The first step to ending any war is a ceasefire.” General Keith Kellogg, Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine, echoed this view, posting on social media: “A ceasefire must come first—then negotiations. Not the other way around.”
This flurry of public statements suggests that intense, perhaps decisive, behind-the-scenes negotiations are underway. According to The Economist, Trump remains the central figure in this diplomatic chess match: each party—from Europe to the Kremlin—carefully crafts its rhetoric in hopes of influencing his stance. But Putin, as always, is playing his own hardball game, offering no real concessions.
The four European leaders in Kyiv directly challenged Trump: either he increases pressure on Putin, or he risks being reduced to a passive observer. So far, the former president has chosen evasiveness—he has neither condemned Putin nor clearly backed Ukraine, instead continuing, as The Economist puts it, to “dance around” the issue without revealing any firm intent.
However tense the coming days may seem, the probability of a ceasefire remains low. Putin has consistently refused to even discuss one, and Trump has not insisted on it. Even if negotiations take place, a resolution is unlikely to come quickly. Still, amid this chaotic diplomatic theater, there is at least a sliver of hope for progress—even if only symbolic.
This article was prepared based on materials published by The Economist. The author does not claim authorship of the original text but presents their interpretation of the content for informational purposes.
The original article can be found at the following link: The Economist.
All rights to the original text belong to The Economist.
