On 28th February 2025, the highly controversial meeting between US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Vlodomir Zelensky at the White House raised new questions about who are the actors demanding peace or war in Ukraine. Before events reached to this point, the intensification of technical and interdelegation talks between the Russian and American committees on a ceasefire and peace agreement to put an end to the war in Ukraine, as well as the exclusion of Ukraine from the talks in Saudi Arabia, gave some indications as to between whom the war was being fought. In this context, the world community was reminded once again that Russia’s war in Ukraine has been waged against the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the United States of America (USA) from the very beginning.
During this process, Türkiye hosted the technical talks between the Russian and American committees on the peace agreement, while also welcoming Ukrainian President Vlodomir Zelenski and maintaining close contacts with Western actors following the controversial Zelenski-Trump meeting at the White House. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s phone call with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on the night of the incident and his reiteration of support for peace in Ukraine, followed by Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan’s participation in a meeting on Ukraine and European security in London, are the latest examples of Ankara’s proactive diplomacy to end the Russian-Ukrainian War.
While the Trump administration suspended its military and intelligence support to Ukraine in the face of Zelensky’s behavior in the Oval Office, Zelensky’s messages of readiness to return to the mineral agreement and peace talks with the US remain unanswered. It is still unclear whether such steps, which are presumably used by the US as a means of pressure for Zelenski to take a seat at the negotiating table, will change Ukraine’s decision. It is accepted that Russia, which has gained an advantageous position in the field, will also be advantageous at the table under the current conditions. On the other hand, Ukraine seems to be less confident of protecting some of its territories, which it has de facto lost to Russia, at the table. Even though the United Nations Charter emphasizes the principle of respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of states, sitting at the table under the current circumstances is seen as a clear defeat for Ukraine. Therefore, Ukraine does not yet see itself in an advantageous position to sit down at the table with Russia. Trump himself told Zelensky in the Oval Office that Ukraine had no choice but to do so (sit at the table).[1] Thus from the US perspective, there is a conjuncture in which Ukraine is being forced into peace.
Zelensky’s meeting with European leaders in London after the verbal altercation with Trump and particularly the agreement to “continue military aid to Ukraine” at the summit led to discussions that Europe does not want peace in Ukraine. Moreover, European actors have expressed their discomfort with the talks between the American and Russian delegations, calling for “Kiev to be at the table in peace negotiations”[2] As an exception, Türkiye’s simultaneous, equal, impartial and fair diplomacy with both the Ukrainian delegations and the Russian and American delegations can be characterized as an exemplary and appreciated foreign policy stance.
On the other hand, the recent efforts of Saudi Arabia and Belarus to mediate in the Ukraine Crisis have lagged behind especially the diplomatic success achieved by Türkiye. Nevertheless, Russia’s pointing to Minsk as the venue for peace talks,[3] may point to the aim of creating a conjuncture in which more pressure can be exerted on Ukraine. Indeed, in a statement on 5th September 2024, Russian President Vladimir Putin hinted that actors such as China, Brazil or India could become mediators in the Ukrainian peace talks.[4] At this point, it has become clear that actors such as China and India cannot make a sufficient contribution to the Ukrainian peace talks process. It has become clear that the greatest progress in this process will be achieved through diplomacy between Türkiye and Ukraine, Russia, European countries, the UK and the US.
Europe expects a fair and inclusive settlement between Russia and Ukraine with equal participation and continued support for Ukraine in this process. The exclusion of Ukraine from this process by the US and the direct addressing of Russia is the clearest indication to date of the deep rift in transatlantic relations. Both Kiev and continental Europe are concerned about a possible negotiation process between the Russian and American delegations in which Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty are not taken into account. Due to these fears, Europe seems to be taking a stance in favor of the continuation of the war in Ukraine as long as there is no equal participation. In a conjuncture where Europe’s security is ignored by the United States, it can be said that the divergence of views between European states and the United States has reached its peak.
To conclude, while the war between Russia and Ukraine is now in its third year, concrete steps have started to be taken rapidly in the peace efforts with the election of Donald Trump in the US. Since the beginning of the war, the support of the UK and the US to Ukraine has been remarkable. Therefore, the UK and the US can be characterized as the most powerful actors that can force Ukraine to peace. However, the extent to which the UK is willing to do so under the current circumstances is the subject of another study. On the other hand, Continental Europe’s main priority is its own security. Unless these conditions are met, or certain security guarantees are provided in the technical negotiations, it can be assumed that Europe will not welcome Ukraine and Russia to start negotiations. It can be said that the UK’s stance on this issue is clearer. For instance, on the 14th of May 2024, UK Defense Minister Grant Shapps stated that he would not force or persuade Ukraine to accept a bad peace deal, especially one that entails territorial loss.[5]“There is no point for the UK, whether by force or otherwise, persuading Ukraine to agree to give up part of its territory. This is a decision entirely concerning Ukraine,” Shapps said.[6] According to the UK, the most important factor that would normally make Ukraine strong at the diplomatic table would be its success on the front of war. This is why London has long pursued a “War for Peace” policy in Ukraine. At the point reached with the Trump administration, it can be expected that the US will enter into a process of reconciliation with the UK (on the future of the war in Ukraine) and that Ukraine will sit at the negotiating table with Russia if a consensus is achieved.
[1] “Donald Trump CNN Türk’ün sorusunu yanıtladı: Zelenski’nin elinde koz yok barış istiyorum”, Hurriyet, https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/dunya/donald-trump-cnn-turkun-sorusunu-yanitladi-zelenskinin-elinde-koz-yok-baris-istiyorum-42712661, (Date of Access: 06.03.2025).
[2] “Ukrayna krizi: İngiltere Başbakanı Starmer Avrupa’nın dört maddelik planını açıkladı”, BBC, https://www.bbc.com/turkce/articles/czrnvprv7n6o, (Date of Access: 06.03.2025).
[3] “ABD-Ukrayna kavgasından Rusya karlı çıktı! Kremlin müzakere yerini açıkladı”, TGRT Haber, https://www.tgrthaber.com/dunya/abd-ukrayna-kavgasindan-rusya-karli-cikti-kremlin-muzakere-yerini-acikladi-3206217?s=1, (Date of Access: 06.03.2025).
[4] “Prez Putin says he’s constantly in touch with India, China, Brazil over Ukraine conflict”, Repository, https://repository.inshorts.com/articles/en/PTI/58b9825b-5678-4336-ad49-b85dffaaa24d?utm_campaign=fullarticle&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=inshorts, (Date of Access: 06.03.2025).
[5] “‘We will never force Ukraine to accept peace treaty,’ says UK defense secretary”, Kyiv Independent, https://kyivindependent.com/we-will-never-force-ukraine-to-accept-peace-treaty-says-uk-defense-secretary/, (Date of Access: 06.03.2025).
[6] Ibid.
