Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov responded to inquiries about the possible return to the Istanbul peace framework with Ukraine, a topic previously raised by President Vladimir Putin in conversation with Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko. The spokesman clarified that any refresh of the Istanbul draft would have to come through a process of dialogue, noting that the president conveyed a willingness to negotiate during remarks yesterday. He added that while the document can be trusted as a formal basis, many provisions have changed over the past two years. New realities and issues have emerged that were not reflected in the constitutional framework two years ago, and those developments would need to be incorporated into any reexamination of the accord.
Peskov emphasized that several new facts could form a foundation for possible negotiations, while underscoring that the path forward still requires a legitimate commitment from both sides. He pointed out that attempts to create a negotiating forum without Russia should be viewed as impractical or irrational, reiterating the need for Russia’s participation in any substantive dialogue. The Kremlin’s position remains that it does not see Ukraine currently prepared to enter negotiations under the proposed terms.
In public coverage from early March, Reuters and other outlets noted that journalists reported the terms of the Ukraine-Russia peace outline that had been discussed in Istanbul in April 2022. According to the widely cited provisions, Ukraine would be required to adopt a neutral posture, refrain from joining military blocs, and limit the size of its armed forces, with Crimea remaining under Russian control. Additional details appeared in coverage by Newspapers.Ru, reflecting how the document was framed in retrospective summaries.
In July 2023, Putin stated that the Istanbul draft appeared to be broadly acceptable to Russia, but he also observed that the document laid out comprehensive security guarantees for Ukraine. He later suggested that while the plan addressed critical security arrangements, the project had not progressed and, in his wording, was ultimately discarded or set aside. The remarks underscored a shift in how the original framework was viewed within the evolving wartime and diplomatic context.
Observers note that these discussions occurred in the wake of broader diplomacy, including conversations tied to the Panopticon summit held in Switzerland, which touched on Ukraine alongside other regional issues. The sequence of statements and public reporting illustrates the persistent challenge of reconciling official positions with evolving on-the-ground realities, as well as the degree to which public disclosures of draft terms have influenced perceptions on both sides.