Kyiv, July 15 — For more than two years, the quest for a diplomatic resolution to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has moved through a series of failed attempts, each revealing the depth of mistrust between the warring parties. What began as face-to-face negotiations in neighboring Belarus has evolved into a rigid standoff over competing peace visions, with neither side willing to yield on the core issues of territory, neutrality and accountability. The process, as defined by U.S. diplomat Harold H.
Saunders after the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, involves politics, diplomacy, changing relationships, negotiation, mediation and dialogue across official and unofficial arenas. Yet the conflict in Ukraine has so far defied that framework, moving through stages of peacemaking aimed at stopping the fighting without reaching the peacebuilding needed to prevent its return.
From Minsk to Istanbul: The Anatomy of a Missed Off-Ramp
The first substantive talks between Ukraine and Russia took place in Belarus in February and March 2022, shortly after the full-scale invasion began. A neighbor of both countries, Belarus offered a neutral venue for mediated dialogue. These initial rounds set the stage for what would become the most promising moment of the entire peace process: a series of face-to-face meetings in Istanbul, Turkey, in March 2022. In the corridors of that session, a draft framework emerged that proposed a potential off-ramp: Ukrainian neutrality in exchange for international security guarantees.
That draft appeared to offer a path forward, one that could have reshaped the security architecture of Eastern Europe. However, the Istanbul talks collapsed abruptly in April 2022 following the discovery of war crimes in the town of Bucha.
The atrocities shattered the already fragile trust between the two sides and hardened Ukraine’s negotiating stance. What is at stake in that abandoned framework is now a matter of historical analysis, with the draft serving as a reference point for what might have been.
Zelenskyy’s Maximalist Formula and the Deepening Divide
In November 2022, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy presented a comprehensive 10-point peace formula to replace the collapsed Istanbul process. The plan lays out a maximalist set of demands: the full withdrawal of Russian forces from all Ukrainian territory, the restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity, and accountability for war crimes committed during the invasion. This formula has since become the official basis for any future diplomatic engagement from Kyiv’s perspective.
On the other side, Russian President Vladimir Putin insists on recognition of occupied land as Russian, a ban on Ukraine joining NATO, and the lifting of Western sanctions. These positions remain far apart.
As of August 2024, the most recent point for which verifiable facts are available, no substantive progress had been made toward a ceasefire or a political settlement. The two sides are deadlocked over the core issues of territory, neutrality, and accountability.
Mediation Efforts and the Stakes for European Security
International mediators have attempted to bridge the gap without success. Turkey, which hosted the earlier Istanbul talks, has continued to offer its good offices.
Saudi Arabia and Switzerland have also served as mediators, but no breakthrough has been achieved. The conflict continues with no cease-fire in place. The outcome of these talks will shape European security for decades.
It will determine the fate of millions of displaced people, the future of Ukraine’s sovereignty, and the broader international order that bans aggressive war. Peace processes are seldom linear, but each failed round raises the human and economic cost of the war.
The coming months will test whether the diplomatic track can be revived or whether the war will continue to define the European landscape for years to come. The positions are clear; the will to compromise is not.
