By John Q. Hosedrinker 
President Zelensky extended an invitation to President Putin for direct peace talks in Turkey on May 15, a meeting that would mark the first such engagement since 2022. While Ukraine remains prepared to discuss all options, contingent upon a ceasefire, a failure by Putin to attend would strongly indicate Russia’s unwillingness to pursue peace. Ukraine’s readiness for negotiations contrasts sharply with Russia’s continued attacks despite international calls for an unconditional ceasefire. The absence of a response from the Kremlin regarding Putin’s participation leaves the prospect of peace talks uncertain.
Read the original article here
Putin’s refusal to attend the Istanbul talks would be the ultimate confirmation that he has no intention of pursuing peace, a clear signal that his actions are solely driven by aggression and expansionist goals. This isn’t a new revelation; his lack of commitment to genuine negotiations has been evident since the invasion began, if not even earlier. The whole premise of these talks feels like a carefully orchestrated performance aimed at shifting the blame for the stalled peace process onto Ukraine. It’s a cynical ploy designed to mislead those who might be susceptible to propaganda, a theatrical display meant to portray Ukraine as the obstacle to peace.
This charade is easily seen through by anyone who understands the realities of the conflict. Russia’s behavior is fundamentally inconsistent with any serious desire for peace. While they threaten the world with nuclear annihilation, they react with complaints when confronted with consequences for their actions, revealing a weakness masked by bombastic rhetoric. Their constant bluster is a tactic to compensate for a lack of genuine power and resolve. This behavior is not surprising; from the beginning, it was clear that Putin’s aims extend far beyond the immediate objectives of the conflict.
The war itself is a testament to Putin’s true intentions. He has shown no hesitation in inflicting immense suffering on both Ukrainians and his own citizens, seemingly indifferent to the economic fallout and international sanctions. His worldview, shaped by the rise of right-wing populism worldwide, sees chaos and instability as opportunities for his agenda. The conflict, therefore, isn’t a regrettable detour; it’s a deliberate strategy in achieving his larger goal of reshaping the world order in his favor.
The idea that Putin is even remotely afraid of anyone, or that Western words will deter him, is simply naive. His ambitions are far too grand to be deterred by words alone. His admiration for figures like Trump stems not from fear, but from a shared affinity for authoritarianism, for silencing dissent and consolidating power through any means necessary. He seeks to emulate Trump’s style of rule, but without the constraints of a functional democracy. The only thing that might force him to negotiate seriously is the threat of direct military intervention on Ukrainian soil, a significant escalation that carries its own set of risks and consequences.
The notion that Putin’s supposed attendance at these talks was ever a genuine possibility is highly questionable. He may eventually send representatives, but his personal presence was never truly on the table. Any hope that a figurehead such as Putin himself would actively participate in direct negotiations was always an unrealistic expectation. It’s simply not the way he operates. Attributing any expectations to Putin’s presence at these talks was always wishful thinking.
The suggestion that Ukraine might be responsible for sabotaging the negotiations is utterly absurd. The unprovoked invasion itself was the clearest possible signal of Russia’s unwillingness to pursue peace. The idea that further signals are needed is ludicrous; the invasion was the ultimate, irrefutable signal of Russia’s hostile intentions. The blame for the breakdown of these talks, and the continuation of the war, rests squarely with Russia and its leadership.
Ultimately, Putin’s absence from these talks, should it occur, is simply a confirmation of what was already obvious: the conflict is not about peace; it’s about conquest. It is a calculated move to consolidate power, destabilize the world order and create a new sphere of influence. Increased sanctions, coupled with continued support for Ukraine, are the only logical responses to such blatant disregard for international law and human life. The hope for peaceful resolution through negotiation with Putin appears to be a fallacy, a false hope founded on wishful thinking rather than realistic assessment of his intentions and actions.