ISTANBUL – When President Vladimir V. Putin launched his invasion two weeks ago, he said a primary goal was the “denazification” of Ukraine. He referred to the Ukrainian government as a “gang of drug addicts and neo-Nazis,” making it clear that his goal was to overthrow it.
But in recent days, the language has changed, with the Kremlin signaling that Mr Putin is no longer locked into a regime change in Kiev. It’s a subtle shift, and it could be a head fake; but it leads officials in haste to mediate to believe that Mr Putin may be seeking a negotiated way out of a war that has turned out to be a much bloodier slog than he anticipated.
On Thursday, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov is expected to meet his Ukrainian counterpart, Dmytro Kuleba, in Turkey during the highest-level talks between the two countries since the war started on Feb. 24. Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whose top diplomat has held a total of 10 talks with Mr Lavrov and Mr Kuleba since the start of the war, said on Wednesday the meeting “could open the door to a permanent ceasefire” .
In the run-up to the meeting, both sides have toned down their public stances, although they remain far apart. Russia has limited its demands to focus on Ukraine’s “neutrality” and the status of Russian-occupied regions, declaring on Wednesday that Russia was not trying to “overthrow” the Ukrainian government. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky on Tuesday suggested he is open to reviewing Ukraine’s constitutionally entrenched aspirations to join NATO, and even to a compromise on the status of Ukrainian territory now controlled by Russia.
“The changes are noticeable,” said Ivan Timofeev, program director at the state-funded Russian Council for International Affairs, about the evolution in Russia’s negotiating position. “This position has become more realistic.”
The Kremlin’s position now, according to the comments of its spokesman, Dmitri S. Peskov, is that Ukraine should recognize Russian sovereignty over Crimea and the independence of the Russian-backed, separatist “people’s republics” in the east of the country and must anchor a status. neutrality in its constitution. That’s far from what Mr Zelensky has said he would be willing to accept — and it could also tarnish Mr Putin’s image at home, leaving him open to criticism for waging a massive war for limited gain.
“As for NATO, I cooled off on this question for a long time after we understood that NATO is not willing to accept Ukraine,” Mr Zelensky said in an interview with ABC News on Tuesday.
Ukraine was also willing to discuss how the breakaway territories “will live on,” added Mr Zelensky. “What is important to me is how the people will live in those areas who want to be part of Ukraine. The question is more difficult than simply acknowledging them.”
With Russia escalating its bombing of Ukrainian cities in recent days, there are few signs on the ground that the Kremlin is ready to pull out. For Mr Putin, analysts say, Ukraine’s fate is fundamental to how he sees his legacy: that of a leader who reunited what he believes to be historically Russian countries divided by the collapse of the Soviet Union. In the early days of the conflict, he repeatedly called on the Ukrainian military to lay down arms and negotiate, apparently expecting Ukrainians to sided with Russia.
But Ukraine’s fierce resistance and the West’s unanimity in imposing crushing sanctions have revealed Mr Putin’s miscalculation. Now, Timofeev says, the Kremlin must choose “between the lesser of two evils”: either accept a compromise that a pro-Western government could keep in Kiev, or fight on, risking huge losses, both to the Russian military and among the Ukrainians.
“He has a clear plan at the moment to brutalize Ukraine. But for what purpose?” That is what US Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken said on Wednesday. “What’s his endgame?”
The best option, Mr Blinken said, was to maintain extreme pressure on Russia and hope that Mr Putin “will decide to finally try to reduce the losses he inflicted on himself and the Russian people.”
The United States has avoided high-level cooperation with the Kremlin since the start of the war, following intense diplomatic pressure from Mr Blinken and President Biden in the months leading up to the invasion. Instead, amid the fighting, some US allies have stepped up their own efforts to end the war — most notably Israel and Turkey, both of which have close ties to Russia and Ukraine.
Prime Minister Naftali Bennett flew to Moscow on an urgent mission to see Mr Putin last Saturday, making the trip even though it was the Jewish Sabbath. He spoke by phone with Putin on Tuesday, their fifth meeting since the start of the war.
Israeli officials believe that Mr. Bennett is in a unique position to convey messages between the two sides, as Israel is one of the few countries with a relatively functional relationship with both Kiev and Moscow. Israel coordinates with Russia its military activities in Syria and wants to protect Jewish minorities in both Russia and Ukraine.
In a separate effort, Turkey is also trying to facilitate talks between the two sides. Turkey’s Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu has spoken four times with his Russian counterpart Mr Lavrov and six times with his Ukrainian counterpart Mr Kuleba since the war broke out.
Turkey is a NATO ally, has provided Ukraine with deadly effective weaponized drones and has strong cultural ties to the Crimean Tatar minority in Russian-occupied Crimea. But Mr Erdogan has also formed a strong personal bond with Mr Putin and, unlike other NATO leaders, has stopped imposing sanctions on Russia over the invasion.
“Turkey’s key position of being able to talk to both sides is appreciated around the world,” Erdogan said on Wednesday, ahead of talks between Mr Lavrov and Mr Kuleba. “I hope this meeting will open the door to a permanent ceasefire.”
A ceasefire would bring relief to the Ukrainian public, but it would not necessarily mean the end of the war. Instead, analysts warned that both sides could use it to build strength ahead of further escalation in the fighting.
“For Ukraine, they would use it to get some civilians to safety, but also to continue to receive supplies from the West,” said Ozgur Unluhisarcikli, director in Ankara, Turkey, of the United States’ German Marshall Fund. “I am afraid that both sides would use such a ceasefire to step up their offensives.”
Russian and Ukrainian officials have already held three rounds of talks in Belarus since the war began, clashing over issues such as a limited ceasefire and civilian evacuations that could pave the way for a broader settlement. Peskov described Thursday’s meeting of foreign ministers, which will take place in the Turkish resort of Antalya, as “a very important continuation of the negotiation process”.
War Between Russia and Ukraine: Important Things to Know
“The Russian position has been formulated and passed on to the Ukrainian negotiators,” Peskov said. “We are interested in new contact rounds as soon as possible.”
On Monday, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said the Biden administration will support diplomacy with Mr Putin by other foreign leaders, including Mr Bennett, as long as those leaders also deal with the Ukrainian government. She added that the United States is also speaking with Putin’s interlocutors “before and after all these talks”.
Biden spoke jointly on Ukraine on Friday with President Emmanuel Macron of France and Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany, along with Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain. The White House said Mr Macron and Mr Scholz discussed their recent talks with the Russian leader.
As for a direct phone call between Mr Biden and Mr Putin, Ms Psaki said “now is not the time” given the Russian leader’s “cruel, horrific” invasion.
“But that doesn’t mean he never will,” she added. “We assess that over time.”
Samuel Charap, a former US State Department official and a Russia analyst at the Rand Corporation, said the United States has not put diplomacy above economic and military pressure on Mr Putin.
“I assume that’s because so far they think it’s a dead end and the Russians can’t be convinced to change their immediate war targets,” Charap said, warning the approach could open up the possibilities for a diplomatic endgame. to limit. “According to Putin, the President of the United States is the only interlocutor that matters.”
He added that direct channels of communication have inherent value, even if an agreement seems unlikely, because they can set the stage for later negotiations, prevent misinterpretations and potentially help soften Mr Putin’s most paranoid beliefs, including that it Westen tries to bring about his overthrow. †
“Putin’s policies and views can change, and the only way to find out is to talk to him,” Charap said.
Anton Troianovski reported from Istanbul, Patrick Kingsley from Chisinau, Moldova, and Michael Crowley from Washington. Safak Timur and Ivan Nechepurenko contributed from Istanbul, and Carlotta Gall from Lviv, Ukraine.
