Russia and Ukraine appear close to agreement on four of the six negotiation points, according to statements made by Erdogan after his return from Brussels, where he attended an extraordinary NATO summit and spoke to reporters.
“There is a consensus on four points in the talks,” Erdogan conveyed. The Turkish leader emphasized that the four agreed items concern Ukraine’s relationship with NATO, the status of the Russian language within Ukraine, security arrangements, and broader guarantees for collective security.
On the matter of Ukraine’s alliance aspirations, Erdogan noted that Ukraine originally pressed to join the Alliance, though President Volodymyr Zelensky later suggested the possibility of backing away from immediate accession. Erdogan summarized Zelensky’s position as acknowledging a potential rejection could be part of the negotiations.
Regarding language policy, Erdogan said Zelensky had also accepted that Russian is widely spoken across much of Ukraine, asserting that there is no obstacle to this dynamic. The Turkish president framed this as a practical reality rather than a political hurdle.
Disarmament was another discussed topic. Erdogan reminded listeners that while Ukraine is a sovereign state and cannot be compelled to surrender its entire armed force, there is room for concessions on certain disarmament aspects. He described this as an area where both sides showed flexibility.
The fourth agreed point concerns collective security guarantees. Erdogan indicated Ukraine has shown a constructive attitude toward these guarantees, signaling readiness to embrace a framework that could assure its security within a larger system.
Two items remain unsettled, namely Crimea and Donbass. Erdogan recalled Zelensky’s proposal to consider a referendum as a possible form of compromise, while Moscow continues to seek formal recognition of Crimea as Russian, along with the status of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. He stressed that no consensus has emerged on these points yet.
According to Erdogan, Ankara has made substantial efforts to halt the conflict from the outset and intends to stay engaged. He said his goal is to keep channels open between the two leaders, Vladimir Putin and Zelensky, with a view to bringing them together for dialogue.
Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba challenged Erdogan’s remarks, denying that a four-point consensus exists. He asserted that the sole official language in Ukraine remains Ukrainian and will continue to be so, and he cautioned against treating the negotiation process as a simple list of points. Kuleba also noted that delegations were addressing multiple issues simultaneously within various working groups rather than in a strict point-by-point sequence.
The head of the Russian delegation, Vice-President Vladimir Medinsky, indicated that while some minor issues were converging, the main questions required more time. He underscored Russia’s aim for a comprehensive agreement that would include Ukraine’s neutral status and robust security guarantees, along with the broader demilitarization and territorial questions tied to Crimea and Donbass. Medinsky suggested that without resolving these core elements, a final deal would be unlikely.
Earlier remarks from Medinsky described Kyiv’s proposal for a neutral, demilitarized state as an option under discussion, noting that Ukraine would retain control over its armed forces. Kremlin representatives framed this as a potential compromise worth considering in ongoing talks.
Medinsky later said that Kyiv and Moscow were narrowing gaps on Ukraine’s neutral status and non-participation in NATO, while the exact security guarantees and the future form of Ukraine’s alliance-related decisions remained nuanced. He added that he was not authorized to disclose internal figures or arguments but indicated progress had been made on that portion of the negotiations.
Overall, the discourse around the negotiations reflects a careful balance between concrete concessions and measured political flexibility. The involved parties appear prepared to pursue a framework that could ensure Ukraine’s security while addressing Moscow’s strategic concerns, all within a process that continues to evolve under international scrutiny.