reSee.it - Related Video Feed

I have said many times that in Istanbul three years ago, we were very close to signing a full agreement. However, Boris Johnson prevented Ukraine from signing it. A Ukrainian official confirmed in an interview that they were ready to sign three years ago, but London and Washington forbade them from doing so.

I was asked this week if I see Ukraine as an equal member in the peace process, and I didn't say "yes." However, Ukraine will have a seat at the table. I will never accept any decisions between the United States and Russia about Ukraine without Ukraine present. This is our war, and these are our human losses. We are thankful for all the support and unity from the USA, including bipartisan support. However, no leader in the world can make a deal with Putin about Ukraine without Ukraine being involved.

We received kind treatment from Russia. There wasn't much in return. I hope this marks the start of a relationship that can end the war.

I'm aligned with the United States and the world, and I want to end the conflict in Ukraine. It's hard to make a deal with so much hatred, but I'm focused on getting things done for the sake of the world and Europe. I can be tough, but that won't lead to a deal. We tried being tough with Putin, and it didn't work. Diplomacy is the path to peace and prosperity. During past administrations, nobody stopped Putin when he occupied parts of Ukraine and people died. We signed ceasefire and gas contracts, but he broke them. What kind of diplomacy are we talking about?

Vladimir Putin has theoretically and practically put forward a concept, stating readiness to engage in direct negotiations with Ukraine on May 15 in Istanbul, with Turkey as mediator, and without preconditions. This is presented as a successful negotiation model. Undermining it would only reinforce the idea that Ukraine, its western sponsors, and the United States are not serious about peace.

I was part of the Ukrainian negotiators trying to reach a peaceful settlement with Russia. We were close to finalizing an agreement in April, but it was postponed. In my opinion, Putin realized his mistake and quickly tried to make a deal with Ukraine. He personally accepted the Istanbul communique, which was a compromise compared to Russia's initial ultimatum proposal. It's important to remember that Putin genuinely wanted a peaceful resolution with Ukraine.

Negotiations with Russia in Istanbul were successful, even to the point of opening a champagne bottle in celebration. The agreement was 90% ready for a direct meeting between Putin and Zelensky, with only the size of Ukrainian armed forces in peacetime remaining. However, after the discovery of Bucha, Zelensky was shocked and the negotiations were halted. A meeting scheduled for April 9th was canceled. The speaker doesn't know if Boris Johnson's visit to Kyiv influenced this decision. Although Russia showed readiness to continue negotiations, Ukraine declined. The speaker now believes an agreement at that time was impossible, as Putin could reframe the conflict as a war against the West, opening a "Pandora's box" of global issues. The speaker views the current situation as a new "Thirty Years' War," signaling the end of the modern era.

I am ready to leave my post as president if it means peace for Ukraine. If it is absolutely necessary for me to leave for peace to occur, then I am willing to do so. I am also ready to exchange my position for NATO membership immediately, if those are the conditions required. I won't belabor the point any further.

The United States also wants to end this conflict. And before Putin launched his full invasion, we used every tool we could to try to prevent it. We used every tool diplomatically to prevent this war from starting. Did we really? Nope. The exact opposite is the case. The Russians were desperate to avoid a war. All you have to do is go back and look at the 12/17/2021 letter that Putin sent to both he and Stoltenberg, the head of NATO, and to president Biden, suggesting a deal and talking about getting together to figure out how to shut this conflict down and avoid a war. And we basically in fact, it was Tony Blinken who gave the Russians the high sign. We told them we're not interested, and we continued to push and push and push. And then when the Russians invaded on 02/24/2022, the Russians immediately thereafter sent a signal to the Ukrainians that they wanted to start peace negotiations. They wanted to end the war. This is right after they started it. Why? Because the Russians had no interest in a war. And, the peace negotiations were moving along quite well. There was no final agreement for sure, and one can never be certain that an agreement would have been worked out. But they were making major progress for sure, throughout March and early April. And lo and behold, The United States and the British basically tell the Ukrainians that they should walk away from the negotiations.

On February 24, 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine after sabotaging the Minsk agreements for seven years. The video argues that the primary purpose of the United States and United Kingdom was to sabotage the Istanbul negotiations in April 2022 in order to keep a long war going, using Ukrainians as a proxy to weaken Russia as a strategic rival. The author asserts that a US hegemonic strategy relies on perpetual dominance and NATO expansion, and that US aims include preserving global primacy by weakening rivals like Russia. The video emphasizes that this view is controversial, but presents evidence of Western actions that allegedly undermined peace talks. Before Istanbul, Zelensky had signaled openness to discussing Ukraine’s neutral status immediately after the invasion (February 25–26, 2022). By February 27, Moscow and Kyiv agreed to peace talks without preconditions. Meanwhile, US and UK officials signaled opposition to peace without preconditions and framed diplomacy as contingent on Russia’s withdrawal and a de-escalation, framing Moscow’s proposals as negotiation under the barrel of a gun. Ned Price of the US State Department stated that Moscow was proposing diplomacy at the barrel of a gun and urged Russia to halt its bombing and withdraw. UK comments by James Heappey on February 26 framed regime change as the objective, asserting Putin’s days as president would be numbered and that Ukrainian sovereignty must be restored. The EU’s €450 million in military aid approved on February 27 was said to reduce incentives to negotiate with Moscow. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson on February 28 framed measures as bringing down the Putin regime. In March 2022, US officials framed the war as broader than Russia or Ukraine, emphasizing world order and rules to uphold, with Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin stating the aim to weaken Russia so it could not quickly reproduce aggression. Former CIA Director Leon Panetta described the conflict as a proxy war with Russia, advocating direct actions to “kill Russians.” Bloomberg reports by Neil Ferguson in March 2022 suggested a preference for extending the conflict to bleed Putin, with the endgame being the end of the Putin regime. Zelensky’s March 27, 2022 interview with The Economist noted that “everyone has varied interests,” including some Western factions preferring a long war to exhaust Russia, even at Ukraine’s expense. Despite this, negotiations proceeded in Istanbul, where progress was reported as substantial and a deal near. Ukrainian media (Ukrainian Pravda) quoted Boris Johnson as telling Kyiv that Putin is a war criminal and that even if Ukraine were ready to sign guarantees, the UK and US would not support it. Johnson would later advocate “strategic endurance” and a long war, while Zelensky’s party leader Andriy Arakhamiya indicated Johnson had told Kyiv not to sign any deal at all, opting to continue the war. Turkey and Israel played mediator roles; Naftali Bennett argued that Russia wanted to end NATO expansion and make huge concessions, and that Zelensky accepted neutrality, but the West blocked a peace agreement to keep pressuring Putin. Turkish officials suggested Zelensky was ready to sign a peace agreement before US/UK intervention, and implied the war is not simply Russia–Ukraine but a war between Russia and the West, with the West prolonging the conflict to weaken Russia. In later years, Western leaders publicly praised using Ukraine to weaken Russia and pivot focus to China, framing continued arms support as essential. By 2024, as negotiations stalled and Ukraine’s situation worsened, Johnson warned that Ukraine’s fall would threaten Western hegemony, while European diplomacy was downplayed in favor of weapon aid as the path to peace. The speaker concludes that recognizing the Istanbul negotiations’ sabotage matters for seeking the best possible deal today, rather than pursuing a protracted proxy war that harms Ukraine and prolongs the conflict.

I see the hatred for Putin, and it's tough to make a deal with that. I want to get this thing settled. I could be tougher than anyone, but you won't get a deal that way. We had a president who talked tough about Putin, but Putin still invaded. Diplomacy is the path to peace. Russia occupied parts of Ukraine in 2014, and nobody stopped him. We signed ceasefire and gas contracts, but he broke the ceasefire and didn't exchange prisoners. What kind of diplomacy are we talking about? I'm talking about ending the destruction of your country. It's disrespectful to litigate this here. You should be thanking us for trying to bring this to a conference.

"Почему встреча президента? Потому что в будущем." "Так сначала должна была быть встреча делегации. Они готовили рамочное соглашение, после этого должна была быть встреча президента." "Открылась Буча. Открылась Буча, и президент сказал: Я вообще выхожу из переговоров." "Когда мы вернулись из Стамбула, приехал Борис Джонсон в Киев и сказал, что мы вообще не будем с ними ничего подписывать, и давайте будем просто воевать." Why the president's meeting? Because of the future. Thus first there should have been a delegation meeting. They were preparing a framework agreement, after which there should have been a meeting with the President. Bucha opened. Bucha opened, and the president said: I am quitting the negotiations. When we returned from Istanbul, Boris Johnson came to Kyiv and said that we would not sign anything with them, and let's just fight.

Российская сторона настаивала на мирных инициативах, и стамбульские мирные инициативы были неплохим промежуточным документом. В НАТО Украина не могла вступить, но вопрос, примет ли НАТО. Сейчас Путин выставляет условие – никакого НАТО. Возможно, 200 тысяч человек были бы живы, и пол-Украины не было бы разрушено. Стоит ли подписать мирное соглашение в Стамбуле? Россияне были согласны на политическую дискуссию по Крыму, что было чуть ли не актом поражения России. Сумма уступок со стороны России была беспрецедентной, и такого уже не будет. Вопрос, надо было или не надо было фиксироваться тогда, будет тревожить современников и историков. **English Translation:** The Russian side insisted on peace initiatives, and the Istanbul peace initiatives were a good interim document. Ukraine could not join NATO, but the question is whether NATO would accept it. Now Putin sets a condition – no NATO. Perhaps 200,000 people would be alive, and half of Ukraine would not be destroyed. Was it worth signing a peace agreement in Istanbul? The Russians agreed to a political discussion on Crimea, which was almost an act of defeat for Russia. The amount of concessions from Russia was unprecedented, and this will never happen again. The question of whether or not it was necessary to fix it then will bother contemporaries and historians.

They were ready to end the war if we take on the neutrality of Finland and promise not to join NATO. Boris Johnson came to Kyiv and said we won't sign anything with them, let's just fight. But as soon as we called on them to sit down, the next day they were already waiting with a delegation.

Naftali Bennett said that Boris Johnson interfered and prevented Ukrainians from signing a deal at the end of negotiations. Ukrainian representative Karakami confirmed that Johnson advised stopping negotiations to win the war militarily. According to Speaker 1, the Ukrainians began asking for advice and it became clear that Putin's main condition was in an annex. This condition included limits on the weapons systems Ukraine could have, which would have neutralized them as a military force. Russia would not have similar constraints, such as pulling back or having a buffer zone. People inside and outside Ukraine questioned whether it was a good deal, and that's when it fell apart.

I see the hatred for Putin, making a deal tough. I want peace and am aligned with the world. I can be tough, but deals require more than that. Previous chest-thumping didn't work, diplomacy is needed. Trump's engaging in diplomacy. Russia occupied parts of Ukraine, nobody stopped them. Ceasefires were signed but broken, prisoners weren't exchanged. What kind of diplomacy are we even talking about? I'm trying to end the destruction of your country, but don't come here and start a fight. You're forcing conscripts to the front lines. Be thankful I'm trying to resolve this conflict. You should be appreciating the country that's backing you far more than a lot of people said they should have, and has given you billions of dollars in military equipment. Be thankful. You don't have the cards. If we get a ceasefire, you'd want to take it.

Naftali Bennett said that Boris Johnson interfered and prevented Ukrainians from signing a deal with Russia. Ukrainian representative Karakami confirmed that Johnson advised stopping negotiations to win the war militarily. According to Speaker 1, the Ukrainians began asking for advice late in the negotiation process. It became clear that Putin's main condition, buried in an annex, would limit the kinds of weapons systems Ukraine could have, effectively neutering it militarily. Russia would face no similar constraints, such as pulling back or creating a buffer zone. Questions arose about whether this was a good deal, at which point the deal fell apart.

Putin claimed to have a document outlining a peace agreement with Ukraine, which he showed during negotiations in Istanbul. The agreement was called the Permanent Agreement on Ukraine and Security Guarantees, consisting of 18 articles covering everything from military equipment to personnel. However, Putin did not make the document public. The Ukrainian delegation aimed to prolong the process, while the Russian delegation wanted to pressure Ukraine into signing the agreement, particularly by ensuring Ukraine's non-membership in NATO. Ukraine refused this point due to the need for constitutional changes and lack of trust in Russia's commitment. The lack of preparation and uncertainty led Ukraine to only work towards an agreement with 100% assurance that history would not repeat itself. Boris Johnson's visit to Kyiv further complicated matters, as he stated that no agreements would be signed, suggesting a preference for continued conflict.

I see the hatred for Putin, which makes a deal tough. I want to get this settled and align with Europe. I could be tougher, but that won't get a deal done. We had a president who talked tough, but Putin still invaded. Diplomacy is the path to peace. Putin occupied parts of Ukraine in 2014, and nobody stopped him. We signed ceasefire and gas contracts, but he broke them, killing our people and not exchanging prisoners. What kind of diplomacy are we talking about? It's disrespectful to litigate this here. You should be thanking me for trying to bring this to a conference.

I'm not sure about numerous calls, but there was at least one request to come back and continue the conversation. I felt that they were disrespectful and unwilling to discuss a peaceful settlement. You can't fund the war forever; the American people won't stand for it, and neither will the Europeans. We need to bring this to a peaceful settlement. I was trying to do that, and I'll continue to try, but it takes two to tango. The Ukrainians need to participate in the conversation, but they weren't willing to do that on Friday, so I sent them home. I expect the war will go on a very long time. I don't know where they're going to get the money to fund it.

And one of the things at the table was one of the gentlemen who's a great guy, but he said, I said I I hope I didn't insult him. 'let's meet in another month or two, and let's see if we can start, you know, making some what.' 'He that a month or two? You're gonna have another 40,000 people dead in a month or two. You have to do it tonight.' 'And I did, actually. I called, president Putin, and we're trying to work out a meeting with president Zelensky. We'll see what happens there.' 'And then if that works out if it works out, then I'll go to the trilap and close it up.'

The Ukrainian side needs to take real action if they want progress. They should start by revoking the red card given to the Ukrainian president for negotiating. We hear that they are ready for some kind of peace talks, but it's interesting how the responsible individuals who were recently talking about defeating Russia on the battlefield are now changing their tune. They are now saying that these problems should be resolved through peaceful negotiations, which is a positive transformation. However, just talking about it won't be enough. Concrete steps need to be taken if there is a genuine desire to make a deal.

It's tough to make a deal with the hatred some people have for Putin, but the other side isn't exactly in love with him either. I want to see this situation resolved and am aligned with Europe on this. I could be tougher than anyone, but that won't get us a deal. We had a president who talked tough about Putin, but then Putin invaded Ukraine. Diplomacy is the path to peace, not chest-thumping. Putin occupied parts of Ukraine back in 2014, and nobody stopped him. We signed ceasefire and gas contracts with him, but he broke the ceasefire and didn't exchange prisoners. What kind of diplomacy is that? I'm talking about diplomacy that ends the destruction. It's disrespectful to come here and attack the administration trying to prevent the destruction of your country.

I'm aligned with the US and the world, and I want to end this conflict. It's hard to make a deal with so much hatred. I could be tough, but that won't get us anywhere. For four years, tough talk didn't stop Putin. Diplomacy is the path to peace. Others didn't stop Putin from occupying parts of Ukraine since 2014. We signed ceasefire and gas contracts, but he broke them, killing people and not exchanging prisoners. I am trying to end the destruction of your country. Everyone has problems during war, even you. You've allowed yourself to be in a bad position. You're gambling with lives and World War III, and that's disrespectful to the US. You haven't said thank you, and campaigned against us. Your country is in trouble and not winning. If we are out, you will be fighting on your own.

Naftali Bennett said that Boris Johnson interfered and prevented Ukrainians from signing a deal at the end of negotiations. Ukrainian representative Karakami confirmed that Johnson advised stopping negotiations to win the war militarily. According to Speaker 1, the Ukrainians began asking for advice late in the process. It became clear that Putin's main condition, buried in an annex, would limit the kinds of weapons systems Ukraine could have, effectively neutering it as a military force. Russia would face no similar constraints, such as pulling back or creating a buffer zone. Questions arose about whether it was a good deal, and the deal fell apart.