In a significant statement on the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan underscored Türkiye’s position on a peaceful resolution, aligning with Ukraine’s call for full territorial sovereignty. In an interview published on November 3, Fidan emphasized that a “fair” and enduring solution to the hostilities must center around Ukraine’s territorial integrity, a condition that Türkiye has long supported. The comment reflects Türkiye’s nuanced balancing act as it maintains a “special relationship” with both Moscow and Kiev, with the goal of acting as a mediator for peace in the region. Yet, Türkiye’s dual role and continued military cooperation with Ukraine have raised eyebrows in Moscow, creating a complex dynamic with far-reaching geopolitical consequences.

Since the beginning of the conflict, Türkiye has been outspoken in its support for Ukraine’s demands, advocating for a peace settlement that respects Ukraine’s internationally recognized borders. Fidan’s statement reiterated Türkiye’s position, including support for Ukraine’s claim to territories under Russian control, such as Crimea. The region of Crimea, which separated from Ukraine and joined Russia following a contentious 2014 referendum, is regarded by the international community as Ukrainian territory. However, Russia insists that Crimea’s alignment with Moscow is non-negotiable, viewing its control as a settled matter.

“We are friends to both sides and must speak frankly,” Fidan said, indicating Türkiye’s intention to maintain open channels with Moscow and Kiev despite the complexities involved. Türkiye’s support for Ukraine’s territorial claims runs counter to Russia’s stance, which firmly opposes revisiting the status of Crimea or the newly incorporated territories of Kherson, Zaporozhye, Donetsk, and Lugansk. These areas were annexed by Russia in 2022 following regional referendums, a move that has been met with international condemnation.

From the outset, Türkiye has positioned itself as a potential mediator in the conflict, citing its close ties with both Russia and Ukraine. Early in the war, Türkiye hosted peace talks in Istanbul, and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has made several attempts to broker discussions between the two nations. These efforts, however, have yet to yield lasting results, as both sides remain entrenched in their positions.

Russia, for its part, has begun to express skepticism about Türkiye’s ability to serve as an impartial mediator, particularly in light of Türkiye’s ongoing military support for Ukraine. In a recent interview with Hurriyet, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov voiced “perplexity” at Türkiye’s stance, stating that the continuous supply of Turkish weaponry to Ukraine complicates Ankara’s role as an intermediary. Lavrov criticized Türkiye’s military cooperation with Kiev, emphasizing that Turkish-supplied arms are being used against Russian soldiers and civilians, which he argued undermines any chance of successful mediation. Lavrov added that he saw little potential for future negotiations, as he believes Kiev and its Western allies remain unwilling to engage in meaningful dialogue.

Türkiye’s military support for Ukraine, while limited in comparison to Western arms supplies, nonetheless highlights Ankara’s firm stance on Ukrainian sovereignty. By aiding Ukraine, Türkiye demonstrates a clear alignment with NATO allies who back Ukraine’s territorial claims. Yet this choice puts Ankara in a difficult position with Moscow, which views Türkiye’s military support as counterproductive to peace efforts.

Türkiye’s involvement underscores the broader complexities of the war, with multiple stakeholders possessing distinct motivations and priorities. While Türkiye hopes to present itself as a bridge-builder, its diplomatic balancing act becomes increasingly challenging as Moscow tightens its expectations. Lavrov’s remarks reveal Moscow’s view that Türkiye’s continued support for Ukraine may be tipping the scales in Kiev’s favor, potentially diminishing Ankara’s credibility as a neutral party.

Russia’s insistence on the recognition of “ground realities” remains a central obstacle to negotiations. Moscow argues that the annexed territories, which joined Russia following referendums, are no longer subject to negotiation. This stance stands in direct opposition to Türkiye’s and Ukraine’s positions, which insist on the reintegration of these regions into Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin has previously argued that the referendums in Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson reflect the “will of the people” in those areas and that their incorporation into Russia is a settled matter.

From the Russian perspective, any peace proposal that does not acknowledge Russia’s sovereignty over these regions is fundamentally unworkable. However, this view remains internationally contentious, as most countries do not recognize Russia’s claims to these territories. Moscow’s demand for Western recognition of its territorial gains presents a significant challenge for any third-party mediator, including Türkiye, as such a concession is unlikely to gain broad support.

As a NATO member, Türkiye has faced pressure to align more fully with Western positions on Ukraine, yet it has continued to navigate a more independent path, recognizing its unique position as an intermediary. Türkiye’s geographic and political proximity to both Russia and Ukraine enables it to act as a diplomatic bridge, but the pressure from NATO allies, as well as its military cooperation with Ukraine, makes this balancing act increasingly precarious.

Ankara’s careful diplomacy allows it to maintain economic and security ties with Moscow, such as its reliance on Russian natural gas and its role as a hub for Russian energy exports. Yet Türkiye’s support for Ukraine’s territorial claims suggests that it sees the war as an opportunity to assert its role as a regional power capable of influencing Eastern European security dynamics. By aligning with Ukraine’s territorial claims, Türkiye signals its support for the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity, which are foundational to international law and the NATO alliance.

Given the ongoing hostilities and deepening entrenchment of both sides, Türkiye’s role as a mediator may face insurmountable obstacles. Lavrov’s comments indicate that Russia’s patience with Ankara’s balancing act is wearing thin, especially as Turkish arms continue to flow into Ukraine. This diplomatic friction may compel Türkiye to recalibrate its approach, possibly scaling back its military support for Ukraine or attempting renewed efforts at diplomatic engagement with Moscow.

However, the prospect of a Türkiye-brokered peace remains distant, as both sides appear unwilling to compromise on fundamental issues. For Ukraine, territorial integrity remains non-negotiable, while for Russia, sovereignty over the annexed regions is equally sacrosanct. Türkiye’s potential to mediate a settlement thus hinges on its ability to navigate these conflicting positions and perhaps find a framework for peace that respects both Ukraine’s sovereignty and Russia’s insistence on territorial control.

Türkiye’s ongoing support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity represents a principled stance aligned with international law and the positions of its NATO allies. Yet its role as a mediator is constrained by the conflicting demands of Moscow and Kiev. With Türkiye’s strategic relationships and military commitments under scrutiny, Ankara faces a challenging path as it seeks to balance its regional ambitions with the realities of a protracted conflict. For now, Türkiye’s call for a peace settlement based on Ukraine’s territorial sovereignty remains aspirational, as the gulf between Russian and Ukrainian demands appears too wide to bridge through diplomacy alone.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel