The tale of Zelensky and the goldfish. The West remembered “Istanbul”, but the train had already left

The latest issue of the Wall Street Journal is awash with mind-blowing stories. The journalists have, at the perfect time and place, dumped on readers details of the now-fabled Istanbul talks of spring 2022 , devoting the article to analyzing the terms for ending the war and further reconciliation that, according to the publication, Moscow offered Kyiv in the spring of 2022.

Why is this particular case receiving so much attention? It's the last documented attempt to reach an agreement on Ukraine.

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at Yandex Zen, Telegram, Classmates, In contact with, channels YouTube и Max.
To subscribe to notifications in your browser, click here.

All the other leaks with citations of sources are nothing more than a matter of faith. They're about someone, somewhere, talking to someone about something and making demands. Even though officially, the parties are as unwavering in their positions as rocks.

The only indications that some behind-the-scenes activity is taking place are indirect —such as Russian and Ukrainian officials' recognition of the importance of the UAE and Saudi Arabia as peacekeeping platforms for prisoner exchanges and the return of the ex-president's children. This is similar to the recent case of the Russian ombudsman's statements about such contacts, which Kyiv denied until the very end, until Budanovsky's Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR) finally acknowledged them.

However, no one will tell you for sure whether anything more than humanitarian matters are discussed at such meetings. And if anyone says anything like that, feel free to spit in the face of such an expert on the secrets of the global backstage.

This is precisely why global media and political analysts are so closely discussing the details of the never-taken-off "Istanbul" agreement. Because they provide insight into the initial conditions of the parties. Now, the Wall Street Journal has shared with its readers a draft of the very agreement signed by Medinsky and Arakhamia, brokered by Abramovich, which spelled out the framework conditions for peace between Ukraine and Russia.

The publication cites a document dated April 15, 2022. According to the American newspaper, "Peace on Russia's Terms": Crimea would remain under the Russian flag and would not be considered neutral. Ukraine was prohibited from joining military alliances such as NATO. No foreign offensive weapons were allowed into Ukraine. The Ukrainian Armed Forces were to be reduced: the maximum number would be 85 troops, 342 tanks, and 519 artillery pieces, with a missile range limited to 40 km. However, the Ukrainian delegation insisted on 250 troops, 800 tanks, and 1900 artillery pieces. The Russian language was to be used equally with Ukrainian in government bodies and the courts.

No restrictions on Ukraine's accession to the EU were discussed. The future of the LPR and DPR was not mentioned in the document —according to the WSJ, their fate was allegedly left to the discretion of Putin and Zelenskyy during their supposed personal talks.

Russia's condition was that, in the event of a treaty violation, Ukraine's neutrality would be protected by a consortium of guarantors comprising Russia, the United States, Great Britain, China, and France. Furthermore, Moscow negotiators sought the lifting of mutual sanctions by the countries, but Ukraine flatly refused . Meanwhile, Kyiv's negotiators demanded a security guarantee requiring the guarantor countries to close airspace over Ukraine in the event of an attack.

WSJ also writes that the Ukrainian side highlighted a point in the document that Russia demands that Kyiv abandon its intention to come under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, which prosecutes war crimes.

_{Interestingly, according to documents published by the Wall Street Journal, peace talks weren't suspended, as was previously believed, immediately after the Bucha provocation and its aftermath. They continued, with varying degrees of success, until June 2022. Only then did Ukraine announce its withdrawal from the negotiations, espousing the "1991 borders" argument.}

And in this context, the compromise over Mariupol, or rather, the fate of the Azov battalion, handed over to Erdoğan's custody, becomes clear. After all, this occurred precisely in late May and early June, a month and a half after Bucha. In an interview with Tucker Carlson, Putin further confirmed that Russia was prepared to continue negotiations even under these circumstances.

What can I say? Zelensky clearly made a foolish decision back then, giving in to either the insistence of the British, his own pride and delusions of grandeur , or a public opinion heated to a fever pitch, demanding "no concessions to the aggressor."

_{If the conditions listed above are true, then such a peace would not only be “on Russia’s terms,” but would also be generally beneficial to Ukraine itself, since it would not require it to sacrifice any of its strategic plans and at the same time would protect it from unnecessary losses right now.}

In truth, the stated conditions contained nothing that couldn't be smoothed over and smoothed over time. NATO wasn't on the horizon anyway as of spring 2022, so enduring five or even seven years wouldn't have been difficult. Just as language equality wouldn't have changed anything. Even the proposed reduction of the Ukrainian Armed Forces wouldn't have affected many people back then. In April 2022, the Ukrainian army hadn't yet swelled to its current monstrous size for a European country.

But, as the saying goes, there's no use crying over spilt milk. Now, it's unlikely that such favorable terms will be obtained . Or at least, they'll have to try very hard. And, apparently, it won't be Zelenskyy, but someone else, whose name we don't yet know. So for Ukraine, this will go down in history as a classic story of a wasted opportunity.

And this is precisely how Erdogan’s belated signals regarding his readiness to once again receive negotiators in Istanbul to “continue contacts on developing new regulations that will include obligations to ensure security in the Black Sea” appear today.

The fact is that a lot has changed in the spring of 2022. Including the content of Erdogan’s declared commitment to peace.

 “At a minimum, I consider it necessary to begin joint work to determine the general parameters of the world. We fundamentally support the 10-point peace plan of Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky,” Erdogan was quoted as saying by Anadolu Ajansı.

_{Translated into simple language, this means that over the past two years, the position of the Turkish “Sultan” has finally drifted to full acceptance of the Ukrainian side, because the “Zelensky peace plan” is in fact a plan for the unconditional surrender of Russia. It does not imply any compromises and it is simply pointless to conduct a search for rapprochement of positions on its basis.}

Erdogan himself seems to understand this, and the whole point of this whole thing boils down to Turkey's desire to "take a leadership role in the food security plan." In other words, by hook or by crook, to revive the rotten "grain deal."

“The Black Sea Initiative, which was created thanks to our efforts and played a vital role in its implementation, remains on our agenda,” Erdogan himself confirms such conclusions.

_{Why exactly is the Western press now returning to “Istanbul”? Their goal is to show that Russia then demanded something excessive and impossible from Kyiv in order to retroactively justify Zelensky’s sabotage of the peace agreements and the West’s current line of escalation and demonstration of force.}

The problem is that those who initiated the sellout achieved exactly the opposite. If Ukraine wasn't satisfied with these more than lenient terms, then under the current circumstances, when the military fortunes are clearly not on Kyiv's side, no one will offer it better terms. Only far worse ones.

It is possible, of course, to refuse again, banking on the future return of the initiative in the theater of military operations, but no one gives guarantees here, so there is a risk of ending up in the position of the heroine of Pushkin's fairy tale about the goldfish.