As always with talks about peace in Ukraine, there’s a lot of noise and not a lot of light. Having trouble understanding what’s happening? You’re not alone.
Yet some key themes are evident in the latest theatrics from Istanbul on May 16, and this provides the framework for a European response. That’s because the major European powers do fully understand what’s happening and what’s needed — Putin is playing games because he does not want peace; President Trump is displaying exceptional tolerance for this in the hope that a deal can be done; and the only options are for Europe to dither, or press ahead alone with extra sanctions and more arms for the Kyiv government.
Senior Europeans are already hinting at this. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the bloc is preparing new sanctions, while on May 15, Germany’s Defense Minister Boris Pistorious said that Putin was attempting to mislead the US administration and that Europe had a Plan B. “We cannot publicly talk about Plan B and C before it is clear what has happened to Plan A,” he said.
Plan A, while constantly changing, now seems to be a summit between Trump and Putin, even as the US agreed to a renewed joint demand with Ukraine and the major European powers for a 30-day ceasefire in Istanbul.
Putin is hardly likely to agree. His forces are already massing for a summer offensive in Ukraine and anyway, he seems close to achieving a meeting with the US President, which has been long sought by the Kremlin. The prize is to demonstrate that Russia is a peer power to the US, and to have its war of aggression discussed without the victim present.
“I’ll meet with Putin as soon as we can arrange it,” Trump said, and suggested a timeframe of two to three weeks.
“Nothing is gonna happen until Putin and I get together,” Trump had earlier told reporters aboard Air Force One. “He wasn’t gonna go if I wasn’t there. And I don’t believe anything will happen, whether you like it or not, until he and I get together.”
It was easy to forget amid the diplomatic exchanges that it was Putin who called for the Istanbul talks and he who then refused to attend. His aim then (and now) was to head off further joint sanctions that the Europeans and the US were poised to impose.
The Russian side in Istanbul was headed by Vladimir Medinsky, the same official who led the Kremlin’s delegation to talks in the same city in 2022. This underlined the Kremlin’s hardline position that any talks with Ukraine must pick up where they left off three years ago, and which foundered on Kremlin demands that Ukraine declare its neutrality, demilitarization, and constitutional reform. Kyiv rejected these as capitulation.
What now? It’s an open question whether the US administration is open to an increase in the pressure on Putin. As Ruth Deyermond, a Russia security specialist at King’s College London, says: “Whatever Europe does, it’s going to have to do it without the US because however much time they’ve spent trying to persuade the White House, and despite signaling from Kellogg and Graham, it remains very unlikely that the Trump administration will agree to punish Russia.”
Whether or not that’s right — and the US administration has shown signs of a hardening position on Rusia — it is clearly true that Putin is dragging his feet in the hope that he can change facts on the ground. Germany’s hawkish new Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that Volodymyr Zelenskyy had turned up in Istanbul (as Trump demanded) but that Putin had not. The Ukrainian leader’s approach was a “huge gesture,” Merz said, and underscored that Putin’s absence made him “the only one in the wrong.”
The EU has now concluded negotiations on its 17th sanctions package against Russia. The decision is expected to be finalized by EU foreign ministers on May 20 in Brussels. Von der Leyen said the EU would “keep the pressure high,” while Merz confirmed the package would be adopted, and that additional measures could follow if Moscow continues to reject a ceasefire.
This inconsistency in the carrot vs. stick approach is more harmful than helpful, signaling both the lack of strategy and disunity of the Western allies. For European governments, the Istanbul talks confirmed what many already suspected. The Kremlin continues to pursue victory, not compromise. Ukraine remains under daily assault.
Europe has taken baby steps by recognizing the Russian threat to the entire continent. Large sums of money are being earmarked for improved defenses and a more streamlined and efficient arms industry. The pretense that the Kremlin would be satisfied with victory in Ukraine is ending.
The question facing Europe now is whether to wait for the US or to follow its own security needs. The real first step in taking responsibility for the continent’s future is not spending extra money, it is taking difficult and grown-up decisions without waiting for the US or anyone else.
As European states, including the UK and Turkey, meet in Tirana today (May 16), they have a fine opportunity to demonstrate a new commitment to their own security.
Elena Davlikanova is a Democracy Fellow with the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA.) Her work is focused on Ukraine and Russia’s domestic issues and their effects on global peace. She is an experienced researcher, who in 2022 conducted the studies ‘The Work of the Ukrainian Parliament in Wartime’ and ‘The War of Narratives: The Image of Ukraine in Media.’
Europe’s Edge is CEPA’s online journal covering critical topics on the foreign policy docket across Europe and North America. All opinions expressed on Europe’s Edge are those of the author alone and may not represent those of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis. CEPA maintains a strict intellectual independence policy across all its projects and publications.
War Without End
Russia’s Shadow Warfare
CEPA Forum 2025
Explore CEPA’s flagship event.
