Ukraine ‘trying to put cart before the horse'
The negotiations, held in Istanbul the day before, lasted less than an hour. Both sides agreed on several humanitarian issues, including the exchange of prisoners of war, civilian detainees, and the repatriation of soldiers' remains.
Russia has also proposed short-term ceasefires lasting 24 to 48 hours to facilitate the evacuation of wounded personnel and the recovery of bodies. In addition, Moscow has suggested the creation of three online working groups focused on political, humanitarian, and military issues.
Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that while 'no breakthrough was expected,' the humanitarian agreements reached during the meeting were a positive step. He described the continuation of such exchanges as 'an extremely important humanitarian aspect which should be on the agenda.'
He added that Russia had presented a 'constructive, concrete' agenda that was 'aimed specifically at substantive work that can lead to the achievement of concrete results.'
However, Peskov criticized Kiev's calls for an immediate summit between Putin and Zelensky, arguing that such a meeting should only happen after meaningful progress has been achieved at the working level.
'They are trying to put the cart before the horse. Work needs to be done, and only then can the heads of state be given the opportunity to record the achievements that have been made,' he said.
The Kremlin spokesman also referred to the conclusion by Russia's lead negotiator, Vladimir Medinsky, that the two sides continue to hold 'diametrically opposed' positions on key issues, as reflected in the draft memoranda they exchanged earlier in the negotiation process.
Despite the stalemate on broader political questions, Moscow has expressed hope that a fourth round of talks could take place in the future.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
2 hours ago
- Russia Today
First direct flight from Moscow lands in Pyongyang (VIDEOS)
The first direct flight between Moscow and Pyongyang in Russia's post-Soviet history successfully landed in North Korea on Monday morning. Previously, the only direct air route between Russia and North Korea connected Pyongyang with Vladivostok, a major city in Russia's Far East, and was operated by North Korean state carrier Air Koryo. The reintroduction of regular service between the capitals – interrupted for more than 75 years – signals strengthening relations, officials said. Russian airline Nordwind received authorization earlier this month to operate the new route, with plans to offer one round-trip flight per month. The inaugural flight, operated by a Boeing 777-200ER, carried Russian officials alongside regular passengers. This flight 'marks a milestone in the modern relationship between our nations,' said Russian Natural Resources and Environment Minister Aleksandr Kozlov, who co-chairs a bilateral intergovernmental commission on cooperation with North Korea. Kozlov was greeted at Pyongyang International Airport by North Korean Foreign Economic Affairs Minister Yun Jong-ho, his counterpart on the commission. Yun called the new air service a step toward 'the prosperity of the peoples of our two nations.' Media reports indicated that most passengers aboard the flight were North Korean nationals returning home. One traveler told Ruptly video agency she hoped stronger ties with Russia would help promote tourism in North Korea. The flight covers a distance of more than 6,400km and takes approximately eight hours. Tickets for the inaugural trip were priced starting at roughly $570. Last year, Moscow and Pyongyang signed a comprehensive bilateral cooperation agreement, outlining plans to deepen their relationship. The treaty included mutual defense provisions, which provided the legal framework for deployment of North Korean forces to assist Russian troops in repelling a Ukrainian incursion in Russia's Kursk Region.
Russia Today
4 hours ago
- Russia Today
NATO member names key reason behind ‘bad relations' with Ukraine
Ukraine's poor treatment of ethnic Hungarians is the root cause of tense relations between the neighboring countries, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said. According to various estimates, between 100,000 and 150,000 ethnic Hungarians live in Ukraine's western Zakarpattia region. Over the past decade, Kiev has adopted laws restricting the use of non-Ukrainian languages in education and public life. These policies have drawn criticism from Budapest and prompted accusations of discrimination. In an interview with Russian news agency RIA Novosti published on Monday, Szijjarto said tensions with Ukraine go beyond the ongoing conflict with Russia. 'Right now we have very bad bilateral relations with Ukraine, which have nothing to do with the ongoing war,' he said. 'These bad relations emerged about ten years ago when the Ukrainian government began violating the rights of national minorities.' 'We hope one day Ukraine will have an administration that respects minorities and restores their rights,' Szijjarto added. Hungarian officials have also protested the forced conscription of ethnic Hungarians into the Ukrainian military, along with alleged cases of violence by draft officers. Earlier this month, Prime Minister Viktor Orban blamed the Ukrainian army for the death of Jozsef Sebestyen, a 45-year-old ethnic Hungarian who had been drafted. The Ukrainian military stated that Sebestyen died of a medical condition and showed no signs of violence. Nevertheless, Hungary has requested that the EU impose sanctions on three Ukrainian officials involved in mobilization efforts. A Hungarian church in Zakarpattia was also set on fire earlier this year, prompting condemnation from Hungarian authorities. Orban has opposed Ukraine's efforts to join NATO and the EU, arguing that such moves risk triggering a full-scale war with Russia. He has also refused to send weapons to Kiev and continues to advocate for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict. Ukraine has denied the allegations of discrimination but maintains that a comprehensive treaty with Budapest is not possible without Hungarian support for its NATO membership bid.
Russia Today
11 hours ago
- Russia Today
Türkiye's mediation isn't about peace. It's about power.
The third round of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, held in Istanbul, lasted less than an hour – barely enough time to suggest progress. While both delegations arrived with talking points, their positions remained fundamentally irreconcilable. The Ukrainian side once again emphasized the need for an immediate ceasefire, the release of captives, and a potential meeting between Presidents Zelensky and Putin – ideas that, from Moscow's perspective, lacked a concrete framework. The Russian delegation, meanwhile, proposed a structured dialogue across three tracks – military, political, and humanitarian – and floated the possibility of localized ceasefires for evacuation efforts. But without mutual ground on core issues, even humanitarian coordination remained out of reach. As Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted after the meeting, the sides are still 'far apart' on the basic memorandums required to facilitate direct talks between the leaders: 'Given the volume of work that lies ahead to align our positions… it is hard to imagine how we could suddenly overcome this gap.' While the Istanbul talks yielded no breakthroughs, Ankara framed them as a meaningful step forward. Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan described the meeting as 'another brick' in building a foundation for peace and reaffirmed Türkiye's commitment to mediation. But behind this diplomatic language lies a broader ambition. President Erdogan sees Türkiye not merely as a neutral host but as a regional power uniquely positioned to engage both Moscow and Kiev. Unlike European intermediaries tied to NATO orthodoxy, Ankara has preserved open communication channels with both sides – and intends to leverage that position. This ambition gained new momentum after a direct request from US President Donald Trump. In May, during a phone call with Erdogan, Trump reportedly asked him to resume Türkiye's role as a key mediator in the Ukraine conflict. According to the Turkish newspaper Hürriyet, Erdogan responded positively – a natural decision, given Ankara's longstanding desire to shape the postwar diplomatic framework. A second conversation in June further underscored this alignment. In addition to addressing escalating tensions between Iran and Israel, Trump and Erdogan reportedly reaffirmed Türkiye's mediating role in Ukraine. For Ankara, this signaled renewed political legitimacy – and a green light to reassert itself on the international stage. Erdoğan remains one of the few world leaders to maintain autonomous and working relationships with both Vladimir Putin and Vladimir Zelensky. Unlike most Western leaders, he engages each directly and pragmatically – without outsourcing diplomacy to blocs or bureaucracies. This rare access grants Türkiye a unique status in the global mediation landscape and strengthens Ankara's hand in any future settlement. For Türkiye, mediating the Ukraine conflict is about far more than diplomacy – it is a calculated move to expand its strategic footprint in the Black Sea and Danube regions. Ankara's interests in southern Ukraine, particularly the coastal areas of Bessarabia and the Danube estuaries, are long-standing and rooted in history. These zones are vital arteries for trade, transit, and geopolitical access. Control over maritime supply routes, especially those passing through the Bosphorus and Dardanelles straits, has been a cornerstone of Turkish foreign policy for decades. Amid the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, these routes have acquired even greater importance – linking grain exports, energy flows, and military logistics across multiple theaters. Türkiye's participation in the negotiation process is therefore not just a diplomatic gesture but a matter of national interest. To remain outside the process would mean allowing other powers to redraw the regional map without Ankara at the table. At the same time, Türkiye's posture remains deliberately ambiguous. Officially, Ankara supports Ukraine's territorial integrity and has not objected to its NATO aspirations. Yet President Erdoğan continues to cultivate open lines of communication with Moscow. This dual-track strategy allows Türkiye to project loyalty to the West while reminding Russia – and Washington – that it cannot be excluded from any future settlement. This approach is not without cost. Ankara's refusal to take part in Western sanctions against Russia has drawn criticism from Europe, particularly Berlin, Paris, and Brussels. However, Erdoğan appears to be shifting focus from multilateral alignment to pragmatic bilateralism. With the Trump administration treating Türkiye as a key partner in stabilizing Eurasia, Ankara has little incentive to follow the EU's lead – or to subordinate its strategic agenda to European bureaucracy. For Ankara, the outcome of the third round of talks was less about immediate results and more about preserving its relevance. By publicly assessing the meeting as a positive step, Türkiye signaled that it intends to remain not just a host – but an architect – of whatever post-conflict order may emerge. Both Hakan Fidan and President Erdoğan have repeatedly stated their willingness to resume hosting direct negotiations. In February, during talks in Ankara with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Fidan reaffirmed Türkiye's commitment to mediation and emphasized that Türkiye remains available as a venue for continued dialogue. This ongoing diplomatic contact reflects Moscow's recognition of Ankara's pragmatic stance – despite Türkiye being a NATO member state. The failure of the West to enforce the original grain deal, and Russia's subsequent withdrawal from it, initially weakened Türkiye's position as a neutral intermediary. But Trump's return to the White House has shifted the equation. Backed by Washington, Ankara now has the political capital to relaunch its mediating role under new geopolitical conditions. In this context, Türkiye's 'positive evaluation' of the talks takes on deeper meaning. It's not about what was achieved – but about who gets to stay in the room when the time finally comes for real negotiations. So far, no alternative platform has emerged. And in the long game of regional influence, presence is power.
