Ukrainian and Russian delegations are due to meet on July 23 for peace talks, the third round in a series of negotiations that began on May 16 -- and the first since US President Donald Trump threatened to impose new sanctions on Moscow if it doesn’t reach a deal with Kyiv by early September.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said earlier this week that the negotiations would be held in Istanbul on July 23. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov eventually confirmed that, telling journalists on July 23 that the talks would take place in the evening.
The first two meetings, which lasted no more than an hour or two, produced agreements on sizable prisoner swaps and the exchange of the remains of some of the soldiers killed in the biggest war in Europe since 1945. But there was no sign of progress toward a cease-fire, which Russia has resisted for months, let alone a comprehensive peace deal.
On the contrary, the sides have exchanged memorandums laying out their positions, which are separated by a huge gap on key issues from territory to security and more. On July 21, Peskov said they were “diametrically opposed so far.”
Expectations for the talks are low.
Aside from potential further prisoner exchanges, “my instinct is to say I expect nothing,” Kadri Liik, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said in an e-mailed comment. “I do not see either Kyiv or Moscow modifying their basic positions.”
At the same time, analysts say, both sides may feel that given Trump’s continued efforts to push them towards peace, they cannot afford to abandon the process at this point – and that they, in addition to reuniting prisoners with their families, may have something to gain.
'A Political Game'
“I suspect both Kyiv and Moscow are looking to show the US, with its 50-day deadline and newfound willingness to sell, if not give, weapons to Ukraine, that they are…eager and willing to negotiate (and that any lags are therefore the fault of the other side),” Olga Oliker, program director for Europe and Central Asia at the International Crisis Group, told RFE/RL.
Sam Greene, a professor at the Kings Russia Institute in London and director for democratic resilience at the Center for European Policy Analysis, offered a similar view.
“I think that there is a political game going on, which revolves, frankly, around the commitment of the Trump administration to some version of this process, and a sense that neither side really is willing to lose what they take to be the goodwill of the Trump administration.”
After several months in which he repeatedly criticized Zelenskyy and cast blame on Kyiv for the lack of progress toward peace, which he had said he could achieve in a day or two after taking office in January, Trump has taken aim at Russian President Vladimir Putin in recent weeks.
In particular, he has expressed mounting anger over Russia’s massive air attacks on Ukrainian cities and has described Moscow as an obstacle to peace.
“I think the Ukrainians will want to make sure that that continues,” Greene said.
“And they think that one way to help that continue is to project goodwill -- to say, ‘Look, we are willing to talk with the Russians, the problem is the Russians. And so, you know, President Trump, you are right to be frustrated with them.’”
Zelenskyy, Oliker said, “may be trying to raise that bar by saying these talks should lay groundwork for a meeting between him and his Russian counterpart, something Moscow has rejected since negotiations resumed in May and Zelenskyy famously showed up for a first meeting and Putin did not.”
Seeking to blunt such efforts by Kyiv, Peskov said on July 22 that there is “a lot of work to be done before we can talk about the possibility of some top-level meetings."
He also suggested the chances of substantial progress are almost nonexistent, saying, "There is no reason to expect any breakthroughs in the category of miracles -- it is hardly possible in the current situation."
'A Closing Window'
But Putin may believe Moscow has far more to gain -- or less to lose -- by continuing negotiations rather than by rejecting them.
“From the Russian side, there does not appear to be any indication that they're interested in a peace deal or even a cease-fire. But they're not interested in seeing the Trump administration walk away from the table entirely,” Greene said.
“And so they have to make at least a show of some kind of willingness to engage. Otherwise, they do risk a more significant pivot [against Moscow and in favor of Kyiv] in US policy.”
“On the face of it Kyiv would look to be in the weaker position, with Russia's slow advances continuing, US support uncertain, and other backers scrambling to assure continued assistance,” Oliker said. But "the Kremlin surely knows Russia's own economic and political fault lines better than anyone else does, and Ukraine's European backers have ably demonstrated their intent to keep Kyiv in the fight."
"Moscow may read American willingness to keep weapons coming, albeit for a price, as an indicator that the Trump administration is becoming more favorable to Ukraine," she said. "This would both imply more wherewithal for Kyiv and, whether or not the Kremlin truly fears American sanctions threats, a closing window for Moscow to cut deals with Washington.”
So, Moscow may be hoping for a US pivot back in the other direction, with Trump placing at least partial blame on Kyiv, reconsidering plans for putting more weapons in Ukraine’s hands, and, come September, holding back on the threatened sanctions.
On July 8, Trump said "we get a lot of bullshit thrown at us by Putin."
A week later, in comments where he issued the 50-day ultimatum and announced plans to get more Patriot air defense batteries and other weapons to Ukraine by funneling them through Europe, Trump further focused on Moscow as an obstacle to peace, saying he was “very unhappy…with Russia.”
But he also stressed that he hoped the push for a deal within 50 days would “have an impact on Ukraine" as well, saying, “All of a sudden, they may feel emboldened and maybe they don't want [a deal] -- this is a very difficult situation.”
Still, it could be hard for Russia to dispel Trump’s concerns about its commitment to seeking peace.
On July 21, Peskov stressed that while Moscow welcomes new talks, the “most important thing for us is to achieve our goals,” which he said “have not changed” since Putin launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
Moscow's Maximalism
He did not enumerate the goals, but Russia has put forth several conditions for peace that Kyiv says are unacceptable.
Among them: Ukraine ceding five regions that Moscow claims as its own, including the parts that its forces do not occupy; permanent neutrality for Ukraine; and strict limits on the size of its military.
While the prospects for progress toward peace may be dim, exchanges of prisoners and the remains of the dead are a meaningful outcome, “particularly to the families involved and prisoners involved,” Greene said.
“Even if there is no real progress, but the two sides agree to new humanitarian measures, building on the prisoner exchanges arranged in their previous talks and returning more Ukrainian citizens, including children, home, that is also valuable,” Oliker said.
Beyond that, Greene said that despite the wide divide between the firmly stated stances of the two sides, “at some point there will be a breakthrough in negotiations, and nobody's going to telegraph that beforehand. The only way you're going to find out when that happens is if you continue to meet.”
