In a recent development concerning the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin sent a relatively low-level delegation to peace talks in Istanbul. This dramatic action has raised, to put it mildly, through-the-looking-glass eyebrows, especially as the Russian leader picked Vladimir Medinsky to lead that delegation. Medinsky, who was Russia’s culture minister from 2012 to 2020, has led Moscow’s war efforts in Ukraine. Chief among his British Bulldog-style achievements was the overhaul of history textbooks to better reflect Kremlin-approved narratives.
Those peace talks, held in Putin’s absence, raised immediate doubts because of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. He painted the Russian delegation as just “decorative.” Meaning, their involvement was more gesture than engagement. The absence of Putin at these negotiations has led many to question Russia’s commitment to achieving a peaceful resolution to the conflict.
The Role of Vladimir Medinsky in the Delegation
Vladimir Medinsky heads the delegation, named by Putin personally. He is this world expert because he’s intimately familiar with the Kremlin’s approach to historical narrative and national identity. His tenure as culture minister involved overseeing significant changes to school textbooks, aiming to reinforce a version of history that supports Russia’s political agenda.
This obfuscation of truth is part of the Kremlin’s larger strategy to weaponize historical memory. Medinsky and other Russian government officials have been proactively involved in re-routing the course of history in schools. Their aspiration is to cultivate nationalism and legitimize their burgeoning international aspirations.
Medinsky’s choice further emphasizes the intent behind Putin. Analysts think that by bringing Medinsky into the fold, the Kremlin hopes to project an image of diplomatic engagement. That’s not saying that he’s committing to substantive discussion.
Putin’s Conditions for Peace
During the ongoing negotiations, both Putin and his closest advisors have painted clear red lines on what they’re willing to settle on in any peace agreement. These conditions include the recognition of Crimea and four eastern oblasts as part of the Russian Federation, guarantees that Ukraine will never join NATO, and a commitment to keeping Ukraine geopolitically neutral. Putin is calling for harsh restrictions on Ukraine’s future military power.
Analysts agree that these phrases would in practice mean the end of Ukrainian sovereignty. Zelenskyy has made it clear that he cannot accept any of these demands, knowing that to do so would deeply mar Ukraine’s sovereignty and control over its territory.
“I didn’t think it was possible for Putin to go if I’m not there.” – Donald Trump
It’s not just U.S. leaders who feel this way. Or in other words, they question how sincere negotiations can be if one side is setting preconditions that the other side believes are in principle unacceptable.
The Strategy Behind the Negotiations
Putin’s plan seems designed to upend the sequence of talks. Analysts say he’s looking for a ceasefire that suits his interests. They feel he has lost the plot in terms of engaging in real dialogue that could lead to genuine reconciliation and sustained peace. This dangerous tactic points to fear that Russia may not actually want peace after almost three years of war.
Zelenskyy’s statements all point to the unmistakable message he wants sent with his arrival at the negotiations. He stated, “I’m here. I think this is a very clear message,” emphasizing Ukraine’s commitment to engaging in dialogue despite the challenging circumstances they face.
Despite the ongoing discussions, many experts agree that Putin shows little serious interest in negotiating an end to the conflict. His diplomatic moves reveal a dupe’s plan to keep the world cloistered into Ukraine so he can make further territorial advances while pretending to engage in real diplomacy.
Leave a Reply