The keys to peace in Ukraine are not in Zelenskyy’s hands

The open letter sent by Volodymyr Zelenskyy to Russian President Vladimir Putin, along with Putin’s response, has drawn international attention.

In an interview with Sputnik Türkiye, Associate Professor Mehmet Perinçek discussed the obstacles standing in the way of the peace process, Türkiye’s potential role, and the ongoing debate over Zelenskyy’s legitimacy.

Zelenskyy’s letter came shortly after Putin’s remarks at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF). The Russian leader said that if the authorities in Kyiv were willing, counterparts could be found to sign a peace agreement. Putin noted that Zelenskyy’s presidential term had expired two years ago, stressing that Moscow would sign international agreements only with “legitimate representatives”.

In an open letter published on his official website, Zelenskyy addressed Vladimir Putin directly, calling for bilateral talks aimed at ending the war. “Ukraine proposes ending the war solely between us and you, in a bilateral format,” Zelenskyy wrote in the letter.

“The decision for peace is not made in Kyiv”

Saying that the key decisions regarding war and peace are not ultimately determined by Zelenskyy himself, Perinçek offered the following assessment:

Zelenskyy’s words alone are not enough to secure peace in Ukraine. For a peace to become possible, the forces behind Ukraine must also want it, the pro-war forces in Europe and in the US. Looking at the developments of the past four years, it is clear that Zelenskyy doesn’t have an independent agency when it comes to decide on war and peace.

Ukraine entered the war because the Atlantic wanted it to, and it continues to fight because Atlanticist forces in Europe and the US want the war to go on. So, Zelenskyy’s letter is less like a genuine call for peace and more like an attempt to buy time.

Perinçek stated that previous peace talks and mediation efforts failed because such initiatives were used as a means of buying time and stabilizing Ukraine’s position on the battlefield.

“Putin is taking a cautious approach due to experiences”

According to Perinçek, Russian President Putin’s cautious tone in his recent remarks is due to the lessons taken from earlier attempts at negotiations:

“The various peace talks and mediation initiatives so far were not genuinely aimed at achieving peace. And that’s why all of them failed. Rather, they were used to gaining time and improve the situation on the battlefield.

President Putin’s cautious response to Zelenskyy’s proposal, and his emphasis on the need for a permanent and sustainable peace rather than a temporary arrangement, is a position shaped by these experiences.”

Türkiye’s possible role

Turning to the role Türkiye could play in a future peace process, Perinçek argued that Ankara has the potential to assume an important role:

“Türkiye can play an important role in achieving peace. As I said, Zelenskyy doesn’t have the authority to make a decision in this regard. The ones to make a decision are in Europe and the US. They are pursuing their own geopolitical and imperialists ambitions and are trying to prevent the transition from a unipolar world to a multipolar one.

In these circumstances, Türkiye can throw its weight on the Eurasian side, and this might push the Atlantic camp, which is facing growing economical, militarily and political difficulties, toward peace. If Türkiye positions itself not alongside those fueling the war, but on the side of peace and regional security, it will place Europe’s pro-war forces under pressure to abandon their imperialist ambitions.

Zelenskyy’s “legitimacy” and “constitutional status”

Perinçek concluded by arguing that another major obstacle to a permanent peace agreement is the question of Zelenskyy’s legitimacy and constitutional status:

“Another important factor in achieving peace is the issue of Zelenskyy’s legitimacy. If he is no longer an elected president, and if his position is not considered legally valid under the Ukrainian Constitution, then having a peace agreement signed by such a person wouldn’t produce the desired results. At a later stage, it could be argued that such a signature was invalid, providing grounds for the war to continue. From this perspective as well, it appears that Zelenskyy’s proposal is not being put forward with a genuine commitment to achieving peace.”