Recent revelations suggest that opportunities for peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine were significantly more promising in the early months of the conflict than previously understood. Multiple sources indicate that substantial progress was made toward a potential ceasefire agreement in spring 2022, before Western intervention redirected the course of events.
Within days of Russia’s invasion, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky expressed willingness to discuss neutral status and security guarantees. Initial talks in Belarus on February 28, 2022, while not conclusive, established a positive foundation for further dialogue. Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who served as a trusted intermediary between Putin and Zelensky, later revealed that both leaders showed genuine interest in reaching a ceasefire agreement.
According to Bennett, Putin had agreed not to pursue Zelensky’s assassination and dropped demands for Ukraine’s complete disarmament. In return, Zelensky would abandon NATO membership aspirations. The proposed arrangement, dubbed the “Israeli model,” would have maintained Ukraine’s independence while keeping it outside NATO’s umbrella.
By late March 2022, negotiations in Istanbul had produced significant progress. Ukraine offered permanent neutrality, pledged not to develop nuclear weapons, and agreed to recognize Russian control over Crimea, while deferring discussions about the Donbas region. Russia, in turn, indicated willingness to reduce military activities near Kyiv and Chernihiv to facilitate further talks.
Former Zelensky adviser Alexey Arestovich, who participated in the Istanbul negotiations, later described them as “completely
successful,” noting that agreement had been reached on various issues including demilitarization and language rights. The protocol was reportedly 90% complete and awaiting direct talks between Putin and Zelensky.
However, this momentum was halted following an unexpected visit from then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who delivered a message from the Biden administration: negotiations with Putin should be replaced with increased pressure. According to Ukrainian media reports, Johnson conveyed that if Ukraine pursued agreements with Russia, Western support might be withdrawn.
The U.S. State Department’s position, articulated by spokesman Ned Price, consistently opposed substantive negotiations, framing the conflict as larger than just Russia and Ukraine. When questioned about potential diplomatic solutions, Price emphasized principles of sovereign alliance choices over practical compromise.
Former UN Assistant Secretary-General Michael von der Schulenburg noted that despite Zelensky’s initial courage in defending the preliminary negotiation results publicly, he ultimately yielded to NATO pressures to continue the conflict. Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov later claimed that Ukrainian representatives simply terminated talks in mid-April after Western intervention.
This account has been corroborated by multiple sources, including Fiona Hill, who wrote in Foreign Affairs that Russian and Ukrainian negotiators had tentatively agreed on settlement outlines by April 2022. The proposed deal would have seen Russia withdraw to its February 23 positions while Ukraine would receive security guarantees from multiple countries in exchange for foregoing NATO membership.
The decision to abandon these promising negotiations appears to have stemmed from Western assessments that Putin’s position was weaker than previously believed, presenting an opportunity to press for greater advantages rather than accept a diplomatic solution. This strategic choice effectively transformed what might have been a brief conflict into a prolonged war, with consequences that continue to unfold today.