Tensions ran high this week as pressure mounted on Vladimir Putin to attend direct talks with Volodymyr Zelensky in Istanbul. On 10th May, four European leaders travelled to Kyiv in a clear show of solidarity, urging the Kremlin to follow through on its own initiative for face-to-face talks with Ukraine’s President. Donald Trump raised the stakes further – suggesting he might come to Turkey himself, should the meeting materialise.
The European Union reinforced its position with a 17th round of sanctions targeting Russia’s shadow fleet – oil tankers operating under foreign flags to ship sanctioned crude, sustaining Moscow’s war chest.
For the first time since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014, Putin appeared cornered. Journalists flocked to Istanbul, hopeful they might witness an historic day. But the disappointment followed swiftly.
In classic fashion, Putin sent a low-level delegation instead of showing up. This was no coincidence. It was a calculated move to downgrade Zelenskyy while elevating the Russian President as Trump’s equal in direct talks. The Americans took the bait. Both administrations are now reportedly arranging a Trump-Putin meeting “to stop the killings on the frontline”.
Meanwhile, Ukrainian and Russian negotiators did meet in Istanbul. Ukraine reiterated its demand for a 30-day ceasefire – something it had already accepted weeks ago under US pressure. Russia in turn has unleashed fire on Ukraine turning April into the deadliest month in terms of civilian casualties since September last year. Ukraine also insisted on return of Ukrainian children and a full exchange of prisoners of war.
Russia predictably stuck to maximalist positions: demanding control of five Ukrainian territories, including areas it doesn’t even hold, and the full disarmament of Ukraine. The only agreement was on the exchange of prisoners.
Crucially, Ukraine continues to insists on direct meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin. And rightly so. These talks are not merely about military or political outcomes – they are about Ukraine’s sovereignty.
Russia’s war has never been about the protection of Russian speakers or the supposed encroachment of Nato. The real threat to Putin has always been Ukraine’s independence: a free, democratic Slavic nation on Russia’s doorstep choosing its own path. That, to the Kremlin, is a virus capable of spreading across its borders.
That is precisely why Putin refuses to acknowledge Ukraine’s agency, preferring instead to negotiate with Trump directly. He believes he can extract more concessions from Washington than from Kyiv.
If this bilateral Trump-Putin meeting goes ahead, it will shape not just the outcome of current talks, but Ukraine’s future. President Trump must demand that Putin meets Zelenskyy face to face. Ending this war at the negotiating table, not on the battlefield, is a noble goal. But any agreement must begin with a basic truth: Ukraine is a sovereign, independent European state with full Western backing. It will never return to Moscow’s sphere of influence.
If that message isn’t delivered – and accepted by the Kremlin – any ceasefire will be temporary, and the war will inevitably continue. Only a settlement that secures Ukraine’s sovereignty can bring lasting peace.
Trump holds real leverage. Congress is currently considering the Sanctioning Russia Act, introduced by Senator Lindsey Graham with broad bipartisan support. The bill mandates severe penalties if Russia refuses to negotiate in good faith, including secondary sanctions and tariffs of up to 500 per cent on countries that continue buying Russian oil and gas. This would strike at the heart of Russia’s economic partnerships.
Donald Trump has all the cards: over Russia, and over the nations that could pressure it into a real peace. He must play them wisely. The future of Ukraine – and global security – depends on it.
Lord Ashcroft is a businessman, philanthropist, author and pollster. His research is at LordAshcroftPolls.com. X/Facebook @LordAshcroft
Tensions ran high this week as pressure mounted on Vladimir Putin to attend direct talks with Volodymyr Zelensky in Istanbul. On 10th May, four European leaders travelled to Kyiv in a clear show of solidarity, urging the Kremlin to follow through on its own initiative for face-to-face talks with Ukraine’s President. Donald Trump raised the stakes further – suggesting he might come to Turkey himself, should the meeting materialise.
The European Union reinforced its position with a 17th round of sanctions targeting Russia’s shadow fleet – oil tankers operating under foreign flags to ship sanctioned crude, sustaining Moscow’s war chest.
For the first time since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014, Putin appeared cornered. Journalists flocked to Istanbul, hopeful they might witness an historic day. But the disappointment followed swiftly.
In classic fashion, Putin sent a low-level delegation instead of showing up. This was no coincidence. It was a calculated move to downgrade Zelenskyy while elevating the Russian President as Trump’s equal in direct talks. The Americans took the bait. Both administrations are now reportedly arranging a Trump-Putin meeting “to stop the killings on the frontline”.
Meanwhile, Ukrainian and Russian negotiators did meet in Istanbul. Ukraine reiterated its demand for a 30-day ceasefire – something it had already accepted weeks ago under US pressure. Russia in turn has unleashed fire on Ukraine turning April into the deadliest month in terms of civilian casualties since September last year. Ukraine also insisted on return of Ukrainian children and a full exchange of prisoners of war.
Russia predictably stuck to maximalist positions: demanding control of five Ukrainian territories, including areas it doesn’t even hold, and the full disarmament of Ukraine. The only agreement was on the exchange of prisoners.
Crucially, Ukraine continues to insists on direct meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin. And rightly so. These talks are not merely about military or political outcomes – they are about Ukraine’s sovereignty.
Russia’s war has never been about the protection of Russian speakers or the supposed encroachment of Nato. The real threat to Putin has always been Ukraine’s independence: a free, democratic Slavic nation on Russia’s doorstep choosing its own path. That, to the Kremlin, is a virus capable of spreading across its borders.
That is precisely why Putin refuses to acknowledge Ukraine’s agency, preferring instead to negotiate with Trump directly. He believes he can extract more concessions from Washington than from Kyiv.
If this bilateral Trump-Putin meeting goes ahead, it will shape not just the outcome of current talks, but Ukraine’s future. President Trump must demand that Putin meets Zelenskyy face to face. Ending this war at the negotiating table, not on the battlefield, is a noble goal. But any agreement must begin with a basic truth: Ukraine is a sovereign, independent European state with full Western backing. It will never return to Moscow’s sphere of influence.
If that message isn’t delivered – and accepted by the Kremlin – any ceasefire will be temporary, and the war will inevitably continue. Only a settlement that secures Ukraine’s sovereignty can bring lasting peace.
Trump holds real leverage. Congress is currently considering the Sanctioning Russia Act, introduced by Senator Lindsey Graham with broad bipartisan support. The bill mandates severe penalties if Russia refuses to negotiate in good faith, including secondary sanctions and tariffs of up to 500 per cent on countries that continue buying Russian oil and gas. This would strike at the heart of Russia’s economic partnerships.
Donald Trump has all the cards: over Russia, and over the nations that could pressure it into a real peace. He must play them wisely. The future of Ukraine – and global security – depends on it.
Lord Ashcroft is a businessman, philanthropist, author and pollster. His research is at LordAshcroftPolls.com. X/Facebook @LordAshcroft