By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The upcoming Ukraine-Russia talks, scheduled for May 15th in Istanbul, will be led by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. He will head the Russian delegation, which will also include Yuri Ushakov, presidential aide on foreign policy. These high-level representatives underscore the importance Russia places on these negotiations.
Read the original article here
Lavrov leading the Russian delegation to talks with Ukraine in Istanbul is a significant development, but one that’s met with considerable skepticism. Many believe that Putin’s absence speaks volumes about his commitment to genuine negotiations. The very fact that Putin, seemingly unwilling to face the consequences of his actions or even venture beyond his perceived safe spaces, chose to send his foreign minister instead, casts a significant shadow on the possibility of any meaningful progress.
The widespread perception is that Lavrov’s presence signifies a lack of serious intent on Russia’s part. Instead of a genuine attempt at peacemaking, many view this as a mere public relations exercise, a theatrical performance designed to project an image of engagement while achieving little of substance. The expectation is a repetition of Russia’s well-worn talking points, avoiding any concessions and deflecting responsibility. Some even describe it as Russia attempting to appear more powerful than its current circumstances warrant.
The choice of Lavrov, arguably the second most powerful figure in Russia, carries symbolic weight, but also fuels doubts. His track record suggests a focus on rhetoric and justification rather than compromise. Many expect him to utilize familiar tactics, including accusations of Nazism and other unsubstantiated claims designed to shift blame and obfuscate reality. Instead of constructive engagement, many predict a continuation of disinformation and the relentless pursuit of Russian objectives without genuine negotiation.
The decision to send Lavrov rather than Putin himself is seen by many as a sign of Putin’s cowardice. His reluctance to participate personally is interpreted as a demonstration of his fear of facing Zelenskyy directly, a reluctance to enter a setting where he might be held accountable for his actions. This cowardly behavior is seen as further diminishing Putin’s international standing and strengthening the perception of his regime’s weakness. The widespread ridicule and memes predicting this outcome only reinforce this perception.
Some observers suggest that even if Zelenskyy attends the talks, it might be a strategic error to engage directly with Lavrov. The lack of Putin’s presence diminishes the potential for meaningful negotiations, making any concessions granted appear as appeasement. The alternative, however, is perceived as leaving the diplomatic field open to Russia’s propaganda machine, a machine capable of twisting any perceived Ukrainian refusal into a symbol of intransigence and unwillingness to negotiate.
The overall sentiment is strongly negative, with many viewing the talks as inherently pointless. The lack of Putin’s personal involvement significantly reduces the chances of any breakthrough. There’s a widespread belief that Lavrov is merely an errand boy, lacking the authority or inclination to make any significant concessions. Furthermore, the lack of faith in the Russian delegation’s good intentions leaves many questioning the entire process, deeming it an elaborate exercise in political theatre designed to prolong the conflict rather than to end it. Instead of progress, the prediction is a continuation of the status quo, marked by stalled negotiations and continued suffering in Ukraine. The only potential positive is the possibility of exposing the weakness and lack of commitment to real peace on the part of the Russian leadership.
Ultimately, Lavrov’s attendance in Istanbul feels less like a genuine attempt at peace and more like a continuation of the current conflict, veiled under the guise of diplomatic engagement. This, many believe, is exactly the outcome Putin desires: to continue the war while maintaining a semblance of negotiating.