If Russia and Ukraine make peace, Turkey can help sustain it
As President Trump fulfills his campaign promise to engage Russia on the Ukraine war, Turkey is quietly exploring its potential role in a post-conflict scenario, including overseeing a possible cease-fire.
In a nutshell
- President Trump is committed to ending the Ukraine conflict through direct engagement with Russia
- If a cease-fire is achieved, it could be supported by a monitoring mission
- Turkey will support such a mission but not engage in peace enforcement
- For comprehensive insights, tune into our AI-powered podcast here
Russia’s aggression against Ukraine will soon pass its three-year mark. Given the general stalemate on the front lines and the irreconcilable nature of the warring sides’ objectives, the likelihood of reaching a negotiated peace agreement soon is remote.
Russia’s military campaign and pursuit of Ukraine’s complete capitulation continue unabated. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s resolve to defend itself remains strong, as it takes the fight to Russian territory when it can. However, the possibility of a halt in hostilities in the coming months is becoming less unrealistic with the change of guard in Washington and President Donald Trump’s ambition to forge a deal between Kyiv and Moscow. Turkey, among others, will watch the situation closely, hoping for a breakthrough.
President Trump’s approach and ambitions for a peace deal
During his re-election campaign, Mr. Trump loosely vowed to stop the war within 24 hours, a timeline he later extended to several months. Meanwhile, his special envoy for Russia and Ukraine, Lt. General Keith Kellogg, who last year co-authored a plan to end the hostilities, more recently spoke of achieving peace in 100 days. The path to a potential deal brokered by Trump remains dynamic, with around 25 proposals having emerged so far. The timelines for these proposals are continuously shifting, and various unconfirmed details about a Trump plan have been circulating in the media since the start of the year.
The incoherent messaging from President Trump’s administration has only added to the confusion. Initially, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth declared that Ukraine’s prospective NATO membership was unrealistic. However, after facing significant backlash – some even calling his comments a rookie mistake – he chose to retract his remarks by stating that everything is still on the table. Commenting on his discussions with the U.S. Vice President at the Munich Security Conference over the weekend, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky noted that Washington currently lacks a peace plan, emphasizing that achieving one is impossible without Ukraine. This absence of a concrete strategy was indirectly acknowledged by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who stated in a TV interview that, at this moment, all that exists is a conversation between Mr. Trump and President Vladimir Putin, during which both leaders expressed a mutual desire to resolve the conflict, rather than any specific process.
It will ultimately be up to President Trump to decide which plan he will present to Moscow and Kyiv, and until then, clarity regarding the exact formula for peace and its timelines will be lacking. However, one thing is clear: Mr. Trump wants to make headlines by swiftly ending the conflict. After all, he is a self-declared dealmaker, and what greater achievement could there be than resolving the worst conflict in Europe since World War II? This ambition has arguably become even more important for President Trump after the ceasefire in Gaza, reached just days before his inauguration and during his predecessor, Joe Biden’s tenure, igniting a competition at the time over who deserves the credit.
In addition to the personal satisfaction President Trump would derive from ending the conflict in Ukraine, American geopolitical interests would also be well-served. Bringing this conflict to a close would allow the U.S. to shift its focus away from a significant distraction and concentrate on its primary geopolitical concern: the rising challenge posed by China. This is an issue that the U.S. security establishment prioritizes and one that President Trump is equally determined to focus on. This overlap in the impulses of the U.S. government and Mr. Trump’s motivation increases the likelihood of a strong and determined push from Washington to end the war in Ukraine.
Turkey’s role and its hopes for a resolution to the conflict
A cessation of hostilities in Ukraine would diminish the risk of the conflict spilling over into the Black Sea basin and provide Turkey with some much-needed respite from its related security concerns on its northern frontier. A ceasefire would also be welcome news for the country’s security establishment, which is busy dealing with a host of other challenges from various fronts, the latest of which relates to developments in Syria after the fall of the Assad regime.
Turkey has been walking a fine line on the Ukraine war. Ankara has been unequivocal in its support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty and has been providing essential military equipment, including Bayraktar drones, for defensive and offensive operations, even when its European allies were balking at the idea of selling weapons to Ukraine. At the same time, Turkey maintains strong economic ties with Russia, enabling Moscow to gain crucial access to global trade and markets. It has also kept its airspace open for Russia, acting as a critical outlet. Ankara has facilitated negotiations, restricted naval traffic in the Black Sea, and urged allies to avoid actions that could widen the conflict.
Turkey’s efforts have essentially been aimed at containing the war and de-escalating tensions to achieve a swift resolution. Given its positive standing in Kyiv and Moscow, and its ambition to facilitate dialogue, Turkey is well-positioned to leverage its diplomatic channels as new peace proposals emerge.
In the spring of 2022, it was through shuttle diplomacy in Turkey that Russia and Ukraine came closest to reaching a resolution to the war, guided by a set of proposals outlined in what is now known as the Istanbul Communique. During his annual foreign policy assessment with the press on January 10, 2025, Turkey’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan stated that the hostilities should have ended long ago, adding that many of the peace proposals currently discussed by the Trump team mirror ideas from the Istanbul draft. According to Mr. Fidan, the path forward is mostly clear, and success depends on the willingness of the warring parties. And this is where President Trump hopes to make a difference by being bullish.
The blueprint for peace
Many pieces need to fall into place for peace to become a reality. The first task will be to find an acceptable framework that both Kyiv and Moscow are willing to agree on. If this is accomplished at President Trump’s behest, and the ceasefire serves as a preliminary step toward a broader peace agreement to be finalized later, a crucial challenge will arise: how to guarantee and sustain, or at the very least, effectively monitor the initial truce.
The U.S. has asked European decision-makers specific questions about their readiness to support a security arrangement for Ukraine and what their expectations from such a framework would be. France and the United Kingdom were previously reported to be holding secret discussions about the deployment of peacekeeping troops to Ukraine following a potential ceasefire. After news of Mr. Trump’s phone call with Mr. Putin – made without consulting either Ukraine or his European allies – a French-led initiative swiftly gathered European leaders and officials in Paris this week.
The primary focus of this meeting was to discuss the situation in Ukraine and explore Europe’s role in working toward a peace agreement. The UK expressed its willingness to contribute troops to a European-led postwar peacekeeping force prior to the meeting, which, according to French President Emmanuel Macron, concluded without any consensus on the issue. Mr. Macron also noted that nothing could be ruled out. Germany’s leader, Olaf Scholz, who is approaching elections this weekend as the underdog, deemed the discussion premature and inappropriate in the absence of a concrete plan approved by Ukraine, reflecting the diverse sentiments across the continent.
Some regard the idea of a European enforcement of peace in Ukraine to be a problematic yet unavoidable decision that must be made to deter Russia and prevent a more brutal outcome in the future. Others contend that deploying European peacekeepers in Ukraine requires careful consideration from Washington and other NATO members. They warn that any direct confrontation with Russia could have broader repercussions, potentially placing significant pressure on the U.S. and the NATO alliance to intervene. Ankara concurs with the latter viewpoint and is wary about sleepwalking into such an eventuality.
Any peace deal in Ukraine will be complex and likely involve various elements aimed at ensuring its sustainability. One such element might be a more neutral presence than a peacekeeping force, taking the form of an observer mission specifically focused on strengthening the ceasefire. During his first meeting with the Ukraine defense contact group in Brussels, U.S. Defense Secretary Hegseth emphasized the importance of having international oversight along the line of contact.
A monitoring function of this kind would not assume an active combat role and, therefore, would not seek to hinder a potential Russian offensive. Consequently, it would not be sufficient on its own to deter Russia and ensure the longevity of a peace deal. However, as part of a more complex framework that could separately include enforcement duties, it would provide a valuable layer that encourages both sides to comply with the ceasefire. Most importantly, it would avoid the previously mentioned risks of inadvertently sliding into conflict for its participants, making it a more appealing option for concerned third parties, including Turkey, to offer support.
Read more on the Russia-Ukraine war
- The implications of a ceasefire in Ukraine for European security
- Eyewitness to war: Assessing Ukraine’s counteroffensive
- Turkey’s role in the European defense pillar
Some inspiration can be drawn from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s (OSCE) former special monitoring mission to Ukraine. That mission, mandated by the OSCE Permanent Council, operated with the support of both Kyiv and Moscow as a civilian presence from March 2014 until March 2022. If a similar idea to monitor peace were to resurface – involving contributions from various volunteer nations – Russia would probably prefer a mandate from the United Nations Security Council, which would provide it not only political control of the mission but also the involvement of a like-minded actor like China to counterbalance Western influences.
Scenarios
Turkey would strongly support a ceasefire and is prepared to play a significant role in implementing it through an observer mission, provided this mission does not involve peace enforcement duties. This configuration would align with Turkey’s desire to preserve an unconfrontational posture vis-a-vis Russia and, at the same time, preclude the risk of inadvertently being drawn into a direct military conflict with its northern neighbor and historical nemesis. Consequently, if a ceasefire is established in Ukraine, two possible scenarios may emerge regarding Turkey’s involvement in any potential international deployment.
Unlikely: Turkey takes on a peace enforcement role in a ceasefire
If the ceasefire is accompanied by a military deployment from several Western nations, based solely on Ukraine’s consent and aimed explicitly at repelling a potential future incursion by Russia – in other words, in a peace enforcement role – the chances of Turkey participating in such an endeavor are out of the question.
In such a scenario, Turkey will uphold its longstanding political support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. It will continue to enhance its bilateral relations and defense industry cooperation with Kyiv and support the ceasefire but will refrain from contributing forces to the international presence.
Likely: Turkey to offer leadership and resources for ceasefire monitoring
If Russia and Ukraine agree on a mechanism to monitor and enforce their ceasefire, and some form of international presence is required, Turkey will offer its services. As a nation that has maintained a relatively positive relationship with both sides throughout the conflict, Turkey could be persuaded to lead such an internationally sanctioned initiative and would provide the necessary capabilities.
Ankara would also view this as an opportunity to showcase its vital contributions to the European security architecture and attempt to leverage this perception in its relations with the EU and the U.S.
Contact us today for tailored geopolitical insights and industry-specific advisory services.
Sign up for our newsletter
Receive insights from our experts every week in your inbox.
