International Talks: Results? Meh. Methods? Still Here.

Source: Author’s Facebook page

Umerov’s appointment as chief negotiator feels like a replay of history’s worst moments. The very man who stumbled through Istanbul 1 is now expected, for reasons unclear, to mastermind Istanbul 2. The stakes are high, and the memory of past failures looms large.

But one thing stuck in my memory: in the previous negotiations, he was more of a bystander than an active participant. Not initiative, no strategy, no attempt to apply pressure on the Russians. And now, when such a “diplomatic titan” is put in charge of the talks, the message is clear: just don’t let Budanov take the lead.

Umerov’s approach—or lack thereof—was particularly evident during the prisoner exchanges. While Budanov literally wrestled people out of Russian hands, Umerov looked as if he were merely waiting in line to collect a ticket at a window. The result was predictable: without Budanov, there was no shift in positions, no progress. This is not a criticism—it is a fact. And now, this same person is expected to lead key negotiations with the West on the future of the war?

This is not politics—it is fear. Fear that a strong player could shift the centre of decision-making. Fear that Budanov, in Geneva or Washington, would tell partners not what Bankova wants to hear, but what truly serves the interests of the state. Anxiety that Ukraine will at last be heard through the voice of its military, rather than the voice of PR managers.

The irony is that Budanov, though he does not claim to be a “peacemaker,” has everything Umerov lacks: public trust, respect from the military, and credibility with international partners. He is not distracted by fancy words and never loses his way amid the so-called ‘red lines.’ Perhaps that is exactly why he is kept far from the talks.

The result is obvious: high-level negotiations are led by someone who, historically, has gained nothing from the Russians, achieved no results without Budanov, and steered Istanbul into failure. And now this weakness is being spun as “diplomatic flexibility.”

The day before, a Ukrainian delegation left for the United States of America to hold key negotiations on protecting national interests and accelerating the end of the war. The Foreign Ministry stated that the mission has clear directives and a decisive diplomatic nature.

Earlier, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy approved the updated composition of the Ukrainian delegation, which will participate in negotiations with the United States, other international partners, and Russian representatives aimed at achieving a just and lasting peace.

Also, follow “Pryamyi” on Facebook, Twitter, Telegram, and Instagram.

• Materials published in the “OPINIONS” section reflect the opinion of the author of the publication, who bears full responsibility for the accuracy of the information.
• The editorial staff of prm.ua may not share the opinions expressed in the author’s material.
• The owner of the webpage in the “OPINIONS” section is the author of the publication.