Istanbul: Although the main agenda of the Russian-Ukrainian talks held in Istanbul yesterday was the exchange of prisoners and bodies, the fate of missing children and political prisoners, fundamental contradictions still played a major role.
According to Azeri-Press News Agency, although the Russian side tried to present the meeting as a humanitarian initiative, Ukrainian representatives called it formal and fruitless. Moscow once again demanded the recognition of Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye regions as Russian territory, Kyiv’s refusal from NATO, and transition to neutral status. It is no secret that these conditions clearly contradict Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Although the meeting generally showed that the diplomatic process is ongoing, it revealed that there has been no serious progress on the path to peace.
Ukrainian political expert Valery Dymov noted in his interview with APA that the last Russian-Ukrainian meeting held in Istanbul was far from real negotiations, was formal in nature, and no serious result was expected from the beginning. According to him, the Russian side is still not taking a constructive position and is presenting the “prisoner trade” under the guise of “exchange” with a terrorist approach.
‘I had no expectations from this meeting, and what happened in Istanbul was just a meeting, not negotiations… If someone wants to destroy you, and you are fighting for your life, then it is impossible to reach any agreement in such conditions. It is also difficult to come to a common denominator in a situation where someone believes in the devil and you believe in God. If you are facing a murderer who wants to kill you and you still hope for international law, conflict resolution, or that your proposals will be taken seriously, this means not assessing reality correctly. In that case, you are already considered dead. That is why I did not expect any results from this meeting. As a result, this meeting ended as before. Russia, as a terrorist state, has turned the exchange of prisoners into a kind of ‘trading’. However, given the current situation, we are pleased with the possibility of returning some gravely injured and sick people to Ukraine. The agreement on the return of young people aged 18-25 is especia
lly encouraging. Also, the mutual exchange of 6 thousand bodies is in a sense a result. Because Russia even trades in corpses. We have put forward these proposals many times. Against the background of the chauvinism, sexist rhetoric, and general indifference to what is happening demonstrated by Russia, there are reasons to rejoice at these developments.’
In an interview with APA, the general director of the Caspian Institute for Strategic Studies (Russia), Igor Korotchenko, assessed the Russian-Ukrainian meeting in Istanbul as a positive step towards resolving the conflict. According to him, the Russian side is ready to hand over to Kyiv the remains of 6 thousand dead Ukrainian soldiers: “The second round of negotiations between the delegations of Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul is assessed by Moscow as a positive step aimed at finding ways to resolve the Ukrainian crisis. First of all, of course, on the most important issues – this is the exchange of memoranda of the parties – it was possible to come to an understanding of each other’s positions.
The conditions put forward by the Russian side are in sharp contrast to the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine recognized by international law. Moscow’s demands, such as the recognition of Crimea and other occupied territories as part of the Russian Federation, Ukraine’s refusal to join NATO, and the adoption of neutral status, are assessed as direct interference in Kyiv’s state independence and decision-making sovereignty.
Ukrainian expert Dymov also believes that the conditions put forward by the Russian side are in serious contradiction with the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine: “Moscow demands the recognition of Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye regions as part of the Russian Federation and states that the status of these territories is not subject to discussion. Also, Ukraine’s refusal to join NATO and remaining a neutral state are put forward as a condition. These demands violate the principle of territorial integrity of international law and are assessed as steps aimed at limiting Ukraine’s state sovereignty.”
The discussion of specific mechanisms at the Istanbul meeting on the abducted children and the agreements reached on this issue are considered important elements of the negotiations. According to Ukrainian political scientist Dymov, the Istanbul meeting yielded important but limited results in terms of the return of Ukrainian children: ‘Of the thousands of abducted Ukrainian children, only a very small part, perhaps one hundred, has the possibility of being returned to Ukraine. Although Russia, as before, denies the abductions, by accepting the submitted lists, it has in fact admitted that these children are on Russian territory. This gives at least a little hope for the families.
Russian expert Korotchenko, who commented on the issue, believes that Ukraine is politicizing the issue of missing children: ‘The issue of the ‘missing’ of Ukrainian children has been extremely politicized. Of course, we cannot leave children, women, and the elderly alone in the territories that are part of the Russian Federation or that we have liberated today. It is impossible to leave this category of citizens under constant fire and attacks by the Ukrainian Armed Forces.”