Istanbul Protocol: A Diplomatic Breakthrough or a Geopolitical Gamble?
- International Affairs Nato & Alliance News On Russia North America
Shreya Naskar- 0
- 6 minutes read
The ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict has led to immense devastation, geopolitical instability, and humanitarian crises. However, recent statements by Steve Witkoff, a key advisor to U.S. President Donald Trump, have brought renewed attention to the Istanbul Protocols as a possible framework for peace. This development suggests a shift in the U.S. approach under Trump’s leadership, contrasting sharply with the policies of the previous Biden administration. The Istanbul Protocols refer to negotiations between Ukraine and Russia held in March 2022, facilitated by Turkey. These discussions took place between February and April 2022, even as the war continued. However, the negotiations collapsed due to Russia’s maximalist demands, while Ukraine, receiving strong U.S. support under Joe Biden, refused to concede. Now, with Trump in office, the U.S. stance appears to be evolving. Witkoff, in an interview with CNN, suggested that the Istanbul Protocols should serve as a guidepost for a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia.
Trump has recently shifted from being critical of Ukraine to openly hostile. He has falsely accused Ukraine of fabricating the war and has labelled President Volodymyr Zelenskyy a dictator. His administration has also pressured Ukraine to make concessions while avoiding similar demands on Russia. Witkoff’s reference to the Istanbul Protocols aligns closely with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s demands, leading critics to argue that Trump’s plan effectively hands a victory to Russia. The New York Times reported several
broad points that were discussed under the Istanbul Protocols:
1. Ukraine’s Neutrality
One of Russia’s primary demands was Ukraine’s neutrality. This meant:
- Ukraine would never join NATO.
- It would not host foreign military bases or conduct military exercises involving NATO troops.
In a significant concession, Ukraine had agreed to this demand during the 2022 talks.
2. Security Guarantees
Security guarantees were a major point of contention. Ukraine has long insisted that any peace agreement must include guarantees from the United States and its allies to protect Ukraine in case of future aggression.
However, Russia insisted that:
- It should be included among the security guarantors.
- Russia should have a say in decision-making regarding Ukraine’s security.
3. Territorial Disputes
While Zelenskyy has repeatedly stated that Ukraine would not cede any territory, he was more flexible during the 2022 negotiations. Key points included:
- Ukraine agreed not to attack Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014.
- Ukraine considered allowing Russia to retain control over certain occupied areas, without officially recognizing them as Russian territory.
However, Ukraine refused to formally cede any land, instead proposing that territorial disputes be settled through diplomatic negotiations.
4. Military Limitations on Ukraine
Russia has also demanded restrictions on Ukraine’s military capabilities. Under the 2022 discussions, Ukraine considered limitations on its armed forces to prevent future conflicts.
What’s Next?
While Trump’s administration appears to be reviving interest in the Istanbul Protocols, critics argue that accepting this framework would be a win for Russia at the cost of Ukraine’s sovereignty. The biggest concern remains whether Ukraine would accept such a deal without ironclad security guarantees from the West. With ongoing U.S. political shifts and the unpredictable nature of war, the future of these negotiations remains uncertain. If Trump formally pushes for the Istanbul Protocols as a foundation for peace, it could reshape global geopolitics and alter the course of the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
