Dmitry Kuleba, the head of Ukraine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, expressed strong confidence that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan could play a pivotal role in sustaining the grain export arrangement. Speaking to Corriere della Sera, he outlined the importance of Ankara’s influence in keeping the path open for shipments that are critical to global food security and especially to Ukrainian exporters. The statement underscored Kyiv’s trust in Turkey as a stabilizing partner capable of bridging gaps between competing interests and facilitating practical solutions for grain flow from Ukrainian ports.
While Kyiv recognizes and appreciates Turkish diplomacy as an integral channel in ongoing negotiations, it also highlighted a broader strategy. Ukraine is actively pursuing alternative corridors for wheat export that would lessen dependence on routes through the Black Sea. This approach reflects a practical diversification plan designed to reinforce resilience against geopolitical disruptions and to ensure reliable access to international markets for Ukrainian farmers and traders. The goal remains to secure consistent supply chains that can operate even if maritime passages are temporarily affected.
Despite the emphasis on broadened channels, Kuleba signaled that direct talks with the Russian leadership are not on the table at this stage. The Ukrainian posture prioritizes mediation and multilateral frameworks over bilateral negotiations that could be perceived as legitimizing Moscow’s current military and political agenda. This stance aligns with Kyiv’s long-standing preference for international oversight and mutually agreed humanitarian checkpoints as prerequisites for any grain-related arrangements.
Reflecting on the grain agreement struck last year, officials noted that the arrangement benefited from the combined mediation of United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres and Turkish President Erdogan. The process involved separate understandings with Ukraine and with Russia, illustrating a dual-track mechanism aimed at preserving humanitarian access while addressing each side’s concerns. A creative, results-focused approach was urged as a means to navigate persistent obstacles and to identify workable compromise solutions that could sustain food shipments in the longer term. This perspective emphasizes problem-solving over rigid positions, encouraging ongoing dialogue within inclusive international channels.
Earlier statements from Russian officials, including Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin, have stressed that the grain agreement could be revived only if Moscow’s conditions are met. He also reiterated that any renewal would depend on adherence to humanitarian commitments and the parties’ compliance with the stated humanitarian goals. The current discourse, therefore, centers on balancing Moscow’s strategic demands with humanitarian imperatives and the overarching need to prevent volatility in global grain markets. Analysts note that continued negotiations will require transparency, verification, and credible guarantees that grain shipments will reach vulnerable populations in need. The latest developments show the interplay of regional diplomacy, economic interests, and humanitarian concerns as key determinants in the path forward.
The last ship previously covered by the grain agreement has now departed the Black Sea, signaling at least a temporary pause in active maritime transfers under the earlier framework. Observers caution that any revival will depend on a careful re-establishment of trust among all stakeholders, including Turkey, Ukraine, Russia, and international organizations. As planning continues, attention remains on practical mechanisms, such as secure corridors and monitoring protocols, to ensure that grain exports can resume in a manner that preserves market stability and minimizes risk to grain-producing nations and import-dependent economies alike (Source: UN and participant governments).”