Kremlin expects 'difficult' talks with Ukraine in Istanbul
Both delegations have arrived in Istanbul and are expected to meet later in the evening, according to Russian state media and Ukrainian officials.
The two sides previously met in the Turkish city in May and June, but managed to agree only on exchanges of prisoners and soldiers' bodies.
US President Donald Trump last week gave Russia "50 days" to end the war or face sanctions, but the Kremlin has not indicated it is willing to compromise on its demands.
"No one expects an easy road," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters when asked about his expectations for the talks.
"It will be very difficult," he added.
Ukraine said it hoped the two countries would discuss the release of prisoners and lay the ground for a meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.
"Everything will depend on whether Russia stops speaking in ultimatums and takes a constructive position," a source in the Ukrainian delegation told AFP.
"This will determine whether results can be achieved at this meeting," the source added.
But Moscow has said that a lot of work is needed before even discussions can take place about possible talks between Putin and Zelensky, who last met in 2019.
- Radically different positions -
The two sides have radically different positions for ending the conflict.
Russia has called on Ukraine to effectively retreat from the four Ukrainian regions Moscow claims to have annexed in September 2022, a demand Kyiv has called unacceptable.
Ukraine has ruled out any negotiations on territory until after a ceasefire and says it will never recognise Russia's claims over occupied territory -- including Crimea, which Moscow annexed in 2014.
Russia's full-scale invasion, launched in February 2022, has ravaged swathes of eastern and southern Ukraine, killing tens of thousands of soldiers and civilians.
Ukraine said former defence minister Rustem Umerov, who currently serves as security council secretary, would head its delegation.
The Kremlin said it would send political scientist Vladimir Medinsky to lead its negotiating team.
Medinsky, who led the Russian delegation in the two previous rounds of negotiation, is not seen as a powerful decision maker. He has been described by Ukraine as a puppet.
At the last talks on May 16 and June 2, the two sides agreed to large-scale prisoner exchanges.
They also exchanged their draft terms for ending the conflict, which the Kremlin said were "diametrically opposed".
- Russia claims advances -
Wednesday's talks come as the White House steps up pressure on Russia to agree a compromise.
Trump announced last week he was giving Russia until September to strike a peace deal with Ukraine or face bruising sanctions.
The US leader has been trying to broker an end to the war since his inauguration in January, but has failed to extract any concessions from the Kremlin, despite repeated phone calls with Putin.
Russia has meanwhile intensified its bombardment of Ukrainian towns and cities, while advancing across several different areas of the front line.
Between late Tuesday and early Wednesday, Russia fired 71 drones at four different regions of Ukraine, said the Ukrainian air force.
The Russian defence ministry said Wednesday it had captured the village of Varachyne in Ukraine's northern Sumy region, where Moscow has been advancing for weeks.
A Russian drone attack on the Sumy region cut power to more than 220,000 people earlier Wednesday, Zelensky said.
Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan last month called on both sides not to "shut the door" on dialogue.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Israeli military expert predicts Gaza war to continue for 10 years
Warning: This story contains language that could be distressing. Across Gaza, rows of blue tarpaulin sheets are home to hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. As summer temperatures soar, these tents are stifling. For people who have had to move countless times during 21 months of war, the shelter they provide is still welcome. There is a sense of frustration and desperation among the Palestinians living in this community in central Gaza. As the war in Gaza rages on, Israeli forces' displacement orders threaten to send them elsewhere in the strip. And amid all this is uncertainty about the future and what it could bring. "My biggest fear is to lose my parents, my children, my wife — the people I love," Mohammed Skiek, 40, told the ABC. If his family are killed, they will join more than 59,000 other Palestinians who have lost their lives during Israel's war in Gaza, according to Gaza health authorities. With Israel showing little sign of easing its bombardment of Gaza, his concerns are well-founded. Images of devastation across the territory and of starving children lying helpless in hospital beds have again fuelled debate about Israel's ultimate goal in Gaza. The criticism levelled at the Netanyahu government is that it has moved well beyond trying to retrieve Israeli hostages and destroy Hamas and that its rhetoric and actions are indicative of more sinister plans for Gaza. As the war in Gaza approaches its second anniversary, there is a sobering prediction from former members of Israel's military. Gabi Siboni is a colonel in the Israel Defense Forces reserves and an expert in military strategy at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security. He told the ABC he believed fighting would continue for another decade. "What's the alternative? We need to clean Gaza. This is a task for years," he said. His views stand in stark contrast to the overwhelming majority of international opinion, which has been critical of Israel's conduct in the war in Gaza and, in particular, the lack of aid entering the strip. "Israel is conducting this war in the most humanitarian way ever, both in the humanitarian supply that the population is receiving and in the non-involved deaths that we have," he said. "We try to reduce that as much as possible." Last week, Australia joined more than two dozen other countries in condemning restrictions on aid deliveries and demanding an end to the war. More than 100 humanitarian agencies have warned: "The Israeli government's siege starves the people of Gaza." Colonel Siboni does not see it that way. "The Gazan population is a parasite population," Colonel Siboni said. "They have lived on humanitarian aid for the last 20 years. "And so the current situation is that the aid funnelled into Gaza is much, much more than sufficient to the needs of Gaza." Palestinian health officials say at least 101 people, including 80 children, have died of hunger — most of them in recent weeks. Recent events have shown the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) are prepared for the total occupation of Gaza. Since the last ceasefire was shattered in mid March, and Israel launched Operation Gideon's Chariots, the IDF's control of Gaza has grown exponentially. Data collected by the United Nations suggests evacuation and displacement orders issued by the military have left 93 per cent of the strip either under Israeli military control or declared combat zones. Palestinians have already been squeezed into a tiny part of Gaza. Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz has floated the idea of moving at least 600,000 Palestinians into what he has called a "humanitarian camp" built on the ruins of Rafah in Gaza's south. Humanitarian advocates have likened the proposal to something more like a concentration camp, designed to depopulate the north of Gaza. Citing a "need to eliminate Hamas", Colonel Siboni outlined the plans. "Palestinians who enter would not be allowed to leave," Colonel Siboni said. "We invite the population of Gaza to go to areas with full control of the IDF, what is called a humanitarian town, city or compound, and they will be there until we finish Hamas. "I don't see the problem." Even before the kite-flying exercise of the Rafah "humanitarian city" idea began, Mr Katz described the goal of taking control of large swathes of the strip. "The population of Gaza is evacuating from the fighting zones, and large areas are being seized and added to Israel's security zones, leaving Gaza smaller and more isolated," he said in April. Israeli media have reported deep concerns about the idea within the government and the IDF. There has been discussion about the viability and merits of the camp: Could it be built quickly enough? Would it be too expensive? How would it be run? The IDF chief of staff, Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir, has reportedly said the proposal has "more holes than cheese". The debate has reached Gaza's desperate residents. "Katz's proposal is hopefully a failed one. They want to forcibly deport people to Rafah, and I hope it will fail," Saja Al-Bahisi, 21, told the ABC. "It is an uncomfortable feeling for sure." Umm Fadi said if people wanted to move from their homes to Rafah, they would have done it on the first day of the war. "Why would we have paid this high price — blood, genocide, people who died — to end up in a small lot in Gaza to be concentrated there?" she asked. Rami Jaber Nawfal said Israel wanted to displace the Palestinians and take control of Gaza. "We refuse this," he said. "We are ready to die altogether if that's the case." Maya Rosenfeld, an expert in Israeli Palestinian policy at the Hebrew University, was not convinced the Israeli government would ever pursue the Rafah city proposal. "The whole thing is that you do not leave [the Palestinians] any means of re-establishing themselves," Dr Rosenfeld said. Dr Rosenfeld said Israel's real intention could be seen through its widespread destruction of Gaza as, according to the Israeli government, it targeted Hamas fighters and facilities. She described it as destroying the "infrastructure of existence" — not only things like housing, water and sewerage pipelines and roads, but also schools and workplaces where Gazans have the opportunity to learn and provide for their families. "Gaza has been under extreme conditions for many years now," Dr Rosenfeld said. She argued the high death toll across the strip, now reaching towards 60,000 people, according to local health authorities, was evidence of a dramatic shift in policy. "What do you think, you can bombard a place day after day … and you say, 'OK, to reach one Hamas militant, we kill 40, 50 people?'" she said. "It's clear that the target here is to kill the people and to destroy their existence. "I think Israel has actually entered a war of annihilation — annihilation doesn't necessarily mean, you know, the killing of 2 million Palestinians … but it is to make life in the Gaza Strip impossible." The current war began after Hamas launched deadly attacks in Israel in October 2023, killing about 1,200 people and taking another 250 hostage. About 50 hostages are still in Gaza, 20 of whom are still believed to be alive. "I don't want to belittle Hamas's responsibility here, I don't want to overlook it," Dr Rosenfeld said. "Without the attack on the seventh of October, all this would not have taken place. Perhaps Israel would have looked for another opportunity." With the war dragging on, thousands of Israeli reservists are now refusing to serve. Among them is Yotam Vilk, who spent more than 230 days on the front line in Gaza. "I proved myself. Like, I was willing, I put myself in danger, I was willing to take the actions in need," he told the ABC. "I know I'm not a pacifist. Again, we understand that war has consequences. We understand that the situation is complicated. We don't advocate for Hamas. "I was fighting Hamas for a year. I lost friends in this war." But for Mr Vilk, a 30-year-old master of law student, the shifting goalposts became too much. "At some point, I think everyone in Israel will have to face the facts of the situation; that we're all in in Gaza currently," he said. "At no point did anyone in the IDF get a command to do actions to ethnic cleanse Gaza as a means of killing civilians. "But the IDF is oblivious towards what we'll call collateral damage, so it doesn't really matter, so you could kill a lot of people under that justification." Three reservists took their concerns about Israel's actions to Israel's Supreme Court. They challenged the legality of displacement orders across the Gaza Strip and the so-called humanitarian city under Operation Gideon's Chariots. The court has dismissed their petition. Mr Vilk argued loud voices within the Netanyahu government were demanding that the war continue and that Hamas and the Palestinian population be destroyed. Two far-right ministers have been sanctioned for inciting extremist violence and serious abuses of Palestinian human rights. Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has said he will not allow "even a grain of wheat" to enter Gaza, which he says will be "entirely destroyed". National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has called for the Palestinian population to be pushed out of Gaza, saying "we must encourage emigration". "We have to end this war at any means necessary. We have to stop digging the hole that we're currently still digging," Mr Vilk said. That would be achieved, he said, through a ceasefire and hostage deal with Hamas. But Colonel Siboni argued there was very little room for negotiation, insisting a deal with the militant group was a fruitless pursuit. "We took the issue of hostages to the extreme," he said. "I've made my choice between the national security and the security of the hostages. I choose our national security, which is a very hard thing to say, but such is life."
Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
The two-timing Chinese act that made a complete fool of Albo's charm offensive as the world again sits on the brink of all-out war
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's recent six-day visit to China has once again raised hard questions about Labor's stance on our relationship with Beijing, which runs in parallel to our allied commitments to the US, the UK and other core security partners. Trade was on top of the PM's China agenda, despite renewed fears of Beijing's plans to resolve the Taiwan dilemma by force. Australia finds itself in a far more complex region than was envisaged a decade ago, a fact the recent talks seem to largely neglect. From 'undefeated combat brotherhood' to loose security triangles The problem with understanding the current geopolitical setting - who is your friend, who is your ally, and who is your foe - is no longer straight and clear as it used to be. We have truly entered the phase of geopolitical fluidity when old norms and rules are no longer set in stone. A need for an adaptive approach is of growing relevance when it comes to assessing allied dynamics in the Indo-Pacific, particularly with respect to our geopolitical rivals. The Moscow-led allied relationship between Russia and North Korea continues to progress and mature, as was noted during the visit of Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to the country on July 12. During his meeting with the North Korean counterpart Choi Son-hui, Lavrov described the bilateral strategic treaty as "the basis of undefeated combative brotherhood". The alliance between the two nuclear-armed autocratic states will have to form a part of any future strategic calculus vis-a-vis power dynamics in northeast Asia and beyond. It is also worth reminding ourselves of China's close strategic relations with both Moscow and Pyongyang. Following his stopover in North Korea, Lavrov travelled to China to hold a series of strategic talks with his counterpart Wan Yi, even though he spoke to him just days before at the ASEAN summit in Malaysia. Although, it's too soon to look at this trio through the prism of a formed triangular security partnership, such as the 2023 Camp David agreement between the US, South Korea and Japan, the intensity of at least Russia-China high level contacts is telling and should not be dismissed as it happened to date. I doubt anyone imagined five years ago that Russia-North Korea rapprochement would reach current levels and that DPRK troops would see combat in the eastern European theatre of war. Being trapped in a set of self-comforting perceptions in such a dynamic and fluid geopolitical environment is a road with a dead end. What also requires closer attention is another emerging allied security triangle, China-Pakistan-Iran, in which Beijing is claiming a leadership role. It is a well-documented fact that China has close strategic ties with both countries, just like there is a close relationship between Islamabad and Tehran. Over the past two months, these deepened ties were put to the test during two major regional crisis, a near-war between India and Pakistan, and the 12-day war between Israel, the US and Iran. During the latest round of hostilities between New Delhi and Islamabad in May, Beijing was believed to be supplying Pakistani military not just with armaments and training but also with operational intelligence. According to the Depurty Chief of the Indian Army Lieutenant-General Rahul Singh, Islamabad received 'all possible support' from its de-facto ally, including 'live inputs' on India's defensive layout. Aside from political declarations, Beijing's military support for Iran during its latest open clash with Israel last month was more evasive. Yet, it had a limited footprint. During the intensive phase of the conflict, Chinese aircraft were believed to be delivering defence supplies into Iran, while an electronic warfare vessel was operating in the Gulf area, possibly tracking the trajectory of Israel's aerial and missile missions. In early July, the 47th Naval Escort Task Force of the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), while operating in the Red Sea, was involved in a dangerous standoff with a German surveillance aircraft. This action could be perceived as a covert show of support for the Iran-backed Houthi militants, which stepped up their spectacular strikes against western shipping of the coast of Yemen. Pakistan was bolder in its support of the Iranian regime, by also escalating its political rhetoric with references to its nuclear capability and promises to offer its neighbour a de-facto extended deterrence. It is doubtful that the Chinese authorities were blissfully unaware of Pakistan's war of words over Israel. In the future, this triangular relationship may mature into a more substantive organisational structure. No appetite to 'discuss hypotheticals' This message from Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy, was designed to be a bold response to equally bold messaging from Pentagon and the White House, which are seeking a clear commitment to a possible war contingency in the Taiwan Strait from Australia and Japan. 'The decision to commit Australian troops to a conflict will be made by the government of the day, not in advance…', Mr Conroy said. Clearly, Canberra was reluctant to engage in warmongering rhetoric prior to the PM's visit to China. This is all very well. But what is equally clear is that while Albanese prioritises trade with China, others like Minister Lavrov are busy discussing a whole range of strategic matters. 'The importance of strengthening close coordination between the two countries [China and Russia] in the international arena…. jointly respond to the challenges brought about by a turbulent and changing world," read extracts from the statement issued by the Chinese Foreign Ministry following Lavrov-Wan Yi talks. At the same time, Canberra finds it completely normal to engage in political fencing with our key security and defence ally, instead of securing a sit-down meeting between the PM and US President Donald Trump. Labor's ongoing balancing act may have worked in the past when the world's geopolitical dynamics were different. But not now, when geostrategic competition between great powers and respective allies gave way to power contests and conflict. Dr. Alexey Muraviev is Associate Professor of National Security and Strategic Studies at Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia.
ABC News
20 hours ago
- ABC News
Iran meets E3 in Istanbul to discuss nuclear program
Iranian representatives have met with European powers in Istanbul to discuss the Islamic republic's nuclear program - the first discussions since the 12 day war between Iran and Israel in June.
