Four years on, Russia had declared war on Ukraine, kickstarting the worst conflict in Europe in over two generations. The war has claimed nearly 500,000 lives so far, and despite early peace talks in the ensuing weeks, no resolution was achieved, and the brutal conflict continues. However, in recent news, Russian President Vladimir Putin has expressed readiness for peace talks with Ukraine, suggesting that India, China, and Brazil could mediate.  

This follows Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visits to Moscow and Ukraine, where he urged both nations to negotiate and offered India’s active role in restoring peace. Putin mentioned an initial agreement from early war negotiations in Istanbul as a potential basis for talks. Modi’s visit to Ukraine, the first by an Indian PM since 1991, and his meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, emphasized India’s commitment to peace and willingness to contribute to resolving the conflict. 

In early 2022, Russian and Ukrainian negotiators, including Vladimir Medinsky and David Arakhamia, engaged in talks addressing military, humanitarian, and political issues. The negotiations began on February 28th near the Belarusian-Ukrainian border and later moved to Turkey. Key points included Ukraine’s willingness to remain neutral, and limit military drills with foreign participation. Despite progress and the Istanbul communique, the final agreement was postponed until late April. 

Key areas of contention for peace 

Initial talks of peace were held in Belarus and through several video conferences just a few weeks after the war began. 

A major sticking point for Russia pertains to its annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the status of breakaway regions of Donetsk and Luhansk. Russia wants these areas, which were given special status in 2014, to be strictly recognized as Russian territories by Ukraine.   

Russia also wants Ukraine’s willingness to not join NATO as Russia views this a direct threat to its security. Russia wants Ukraine to maintain neutrality and not join any military alliances. Under international law, neutrality means the obligation of a state, brought about by unilateral declaration or coercion, not to interfere in military conflicts of third states. Kyiv has already acknowledged that a neutral Ukraine would no longer be a NATO partner. 

Russia also called for demilitarization of Ukraine to an extent, which entailed decommissioning of several nuclear weapons and severe disarmament of Ukraine’s defenses. Ukraine would not be allowed to carry out international military exercises without the approval of the “guarantor states” as outlined in the peace treaties, which Russia is a part of. 

Ukraine called for an immediate withdrawal of Russian troops and security guarantees from ally nations in case of forced aggression against Ukraine.  

The Istanbul Communiqué 

The negotiations were heading to a settlement following the surprise setbacks faced by the Russian forces. After each setback, the preposterous demands of Russia were slowly taking a more reasonable form. Russians appeared to be more amenable to Ukraine’s stance of neutrality and their security guarantees from other nations. They were reportedly also less focused on their territorial demands. 

Ukraine’s demands were laid out in a two-page document which it termed the Istanbul Communiqué. The documents, the contents of which were revealed by The New York Times, entailed that the two presidents, Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy, would meet to finalize the territorial arrangements regarding Crimea and nearby regions.  

The Communiqué also highlighted the mechanism for the military aid that Ukraine would receive in case of aggression. Article 5 of the Communique demanded security from the possible guarantor states – Great Britain, China, Russia, the United States, France, Turkey, Germany, Canada, Italy, Poland, Israel. The guarantor states that would later sign the treaty – Great Britain, China, Russia, the United States and France – would come to Ukraine’s aid in case of an armed attack on the country. 

The Dealbreaker 

Following the Istanbul talks, there was skepticism between Ukrainian negotiators regarding Russia’s sincerity towards the peace talks. Some were calling Putin’s attempts at peace a bluff to bring down Ukraine’s defenses, while others were calling it a sincere effort on his behalf.  

There was constant back-and-forth of the drafts between the two governments with several revisions and changes to the demands by the Russians.  

However, in the draft of the agreement that reached the Presidents’ desk in April 2022, the Russians added a clause that would require the guarantor states, including Russia, to unanimously approve the military defense that would be provided to Ukraine. This essentially provides Russia to veto against any defensive aid that Ukraine would receive in case of an attack, which in this case was perpetrated by them.  

“The Guarantor States and Ukraine agree that in the event of an armed attack on Ukraine, each of the Guarantor States … on the basis of a decision agreed upon by all Guarantor States, will provide … assistance to Ukraine, as a permanently neutral state under attack…” 

 – From the official documents translated and published by The New York Times. 

The absurd detail was identified as an immediate dealbreaker by the Ukrainian negotiators and all talks of peace were halted with the Ukrainian negotiators stating that they were “no longer interested in continuing the talks”. 

Now, four years of conflict later, Putin has expressed interest in resuming the peace talks, with the discussion held in Istanbul as the basis of the discussion. In response to President Putin’s proposal, India, Brazil, and others have shown interest in playing a mediating role. They aim to balance their diplomatic relations with both Russia and the West, seeking a peaceful resolution. However, Ukraine and its Western allies are cautious regarding involving “middle powers” in the peace process. They stressed that any mediation should uphold international law and Ukraine’s territorial integrity.