Since the war in Ukraine began, Türkiye has positioned itself as a mediator between the two sides. This is the natural continuity of Türkiye’s policy of striking a balance between its role in the Western Alliance, all the while developing strategic ties with non-Western partners such as Russia. The most recent round of mediation by Türkiye was held in Istanbul in May and June 2025 in two instances, where Russian and Ukrainian sides met for the first time since 2022.

The first meeting on 16 May came amidst U.S. President Donald Trump’s visit to the Middle East,[1] where he toured Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Despite speculation that Trump himself would join the meetings alongside President Vladimir Putin and President Volodymyr Zelensky, this did not materialize. Mid-ranking officials from Russia and Ukraine participated in the meetings, which, though falling short of a comprehensive ceasefire, resulted in a substantial agreement on prisoner exchange.

The latest meeting between the sides took place on the 2^nd of June in Istanbul’s Çırağan Palace,[2] chaired by the Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, Director of National Intelligence (MİT) İbrahim Kalın and Chief of General Staff Metin Gürak. These talks are expected to lay the groundwork for a comprehensive ceasefire, with the sides exchanging their positions in the form of memorandums. While prospects for a breakthrough once again remain slim, the regularity of meetings offers some hope for progress.

Türkiye has succeeded in bringing both parties to meet in Istanbul and is now gearing up to spearhead a breakthrough in peace talks. At this critical stage of peace talks, Türkiye is positioning itself to become the primary interlocutor between the warring sides. While scores of other mediation efforts have taken place, Türkiye’s bid for mediation remains one of the most significant and viable. While the Russian and Ukrainian sides have essentially ended all direct communication, the Istanbul Process offers an exit route from the conflict.

Türkiye’s primary goal in this sense appears to be a high-level summit, bringing together Presidents Erdoğan, Trump, Putin and Zelensky to mark an end to the conflict. Indeed, as a member of the NATO alliance enjoying cordial ties with Russia, Türkiye sits in a somewhat unique position. Türkiye’s decision to maintain a close rapport with Russia now appears to be paying off as global trends and particularly shifting American rationale over Ukraine favor a ceasefire. This article explores Türkiye’s ties to Russia, Ukraine, and the United States in conjunction with the mediation process.

Türkiye and Russia

Türkiye and Russia’s relationship has proliferated over the last decade. While Türkiye has always approached Russia with the aim of balancing its relations with the Western world, the last several years saw ties expand into strategic sectors. In 2019, Türkiye began receiving parts of the S-400 missile systems from Russia. This marked the most significant purchase of high-grade military assets from Moscow, tilting the strategic level of ties into previously untested territory. Türkiye’s decision to opt for Russian-made defense systems is indicative of a wider shift in the country’s strategic decision-making and is the result of several factors.

A key factor is that Türkiye faced major obstacles in procuring Western defense goods, particularly as the situation in Syria deteriorated, necessitating Ankara to invest in alternative routes for aerial defense capabilities. With the U.S. and other Western weapons providers reluctant to sell such systems to Türkiye, the S-400 systems appeared as a suitable alternative. While the systems have generated much controversy via Türkiye’s position in the Western alliance and have triggered the implementation of the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) on Türkiye, their sale remains a strategic binding force between Ankara and Moscow.

During this period, Türkiye and Russia also developed a close rapport over Syria, establishing regular coordination between militaries. Syria became the vector of Turco-Russian strategic ties, showcasing how two countries traditionally on opposing sides of the geopolitical divide can cooperate to the benefit of both parties. These geopolitical factors were of course meshed with strong trade and economic links. Russia remains one of Türkiye’s most significant trading partners, with Russian energy imports key for Türkiye. Türkiye, in turn, supplies the Russian economy with a plethora of consumer goods, an indicator that has become more and more significant with the advent of Western sanctions.

Against this backdrop, Türkiye was naturally reluctant to follow its NATO allies in sanctioning Russia for its continued war in Ukraine. Türkiye’s position has been that this approach would not yield results and that dialogue with Russia must be maintained, both for the sake of exiting the conflict and due to Türkiye’s unique priorities and interests. At the inception of the conflict in Ukraine, Türkiye’s security policy in Syria was highly tied to Russia. This was a major factor impacting Türkiye’s decision to break with the NATO alliance. With the ouster of the Assad regime in Syria, this factor has shifted, as Türkiye has emerged as one of the primary players in Syria. Now, Türkiye looks to enjoy some leverage over Russia, potentially tying it to the Istanbul Process.

Essentially, the continued building of trust between Ankara and Moscow is the reason why Türkiye has emerged as a desirable potential mediator. Russia is willing to entertain mediation by Türkiye despite its status in NATO and key role as an indispensable U.S. ally. This inadvertently acts as a double-edged sword. Türkiye’s position in NATO makes it a particularly compelling candidate for mediation yet could also push Russia to seek out alternative forums of mediation. To that end, various states in the Arab Gulf, including the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, have also positioned themselves as mediators, enjoying cordial ties to both Moscow and Washington.

Ultimately, Türkiye-Russia ties have grown exponentially in the last decade. While Türkiye sought closer ties to Russia amidst a period of estrangement with the West, those ties have lasted the test of time. Türkiye’s position within the Western Alliance is once again at the forefront, owing to close ties between the offices of President Erdoğan and President Trump and the European Union’s (EU) goals to redesign a common European security architecture. Despite the shifting geopolitical landscape, Türkiye-Russia ties are close and are continually marked by strategic decision-making. This ensures that Russia views Türkiye as a credible mediator moving forward and adds to the viability of the Istanbul Process.

Türkiye’s investment in ties with Russia has moved beyond simple transactionalism. The relationship is also no longer a hedging mechanism for Türkiye to utilize in ties with the U.S. and EU. Rather, Türkiye-Russia ties have evolved, allowing Türkiye to influence the course of a major global conflict. Türkiye and Russia continue to cooperate on the various regional hotspots, from the Caucasus to the Maghreb and the wider Middle East. This extensive approach lends credence to Türkiye’s mediation efforts and confirms Russia’s cooperation.

Türkiye and Ukraine

Türkiye’s unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) made their international debut in the conflict in Ukraine, attracting significant global interest as part of the Ukrainian military’s defense strategy against Russian aggression. The deployment of Türkiye’s indigenous UAVs, particularly the Bayraktar TB-2, has demonstrated their operational effectiveness and given Ukraine a tangible edge on the battlefield. These UAVs have been heralded as game-changing tools during the conflict,[3]  reinforcing Türkiye’s reputation as a reliable defense partner. Since their introduction, Türkiye-Ukraine ties have steadily grown, with both Kyiv and Ankara considering one another as pivotal allies in the broader geopolitical context.

President Erdoğan has on several occasions publicly supported Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO,[4] underscoring Türkiye’s commitment to the principles of collective security. Furthermore, Erdoğan has been a vocal advocate for Ukraine’s territorial integrity, consistently opposing Russia’s annexation of Crimea and other violations of Ukrainian sovereignty. Regular high-level visits between officials have taken place since the war began in 2022, emphasizing the mutual determination to deepen bilateral ties. Most recently, President Zelensky made a notable visit to Ankara one day prior to the commencement of deliberations between Russian and Ukrainian delegations. This high-profile visit not only reiterated the strategic partnership between the two nations but also highlighted Türkiye’s role as a diplomatic bridge in resolving the conflict.

Türkiye is one of Ukraine’s primary defense suppliers, providing critical military resources as the conflict nears its fourth year. This defense cooperation manifests in several forms: Türkiye’s Baykar company,[5] which produces the TB-2 UAV, is nearing completion on a Ukrainian production facility. This plant is scheduled to become fully operational by August 2025 and represents a landmark in the deepening defense collaboration between the two countries. The establishment of this facility is a powerful testament to the shared commitment of Kyiv and Ankara to long-term partnership in the field of security and military technology. The sale and co-production of UAVs are complemented by other Turkish defense offerings as well. For instance, the United States, recognizing Türkiye’s role in bolstering Ukraine’s defense capabilities, has awarded several contracts to Turkish defense manufacturers to arm the Ukrainian military with explosives, munitions, and other essential supplies.[6]

This burgeoning Türkiye-Ukraine defense partnership extends beyond mere transactional exchanges, marking a strategic alignment characterized by trust, shared goals, and mutual interests. Türkiye’s ability to serve as a mediator in the conflict is further bolstered by these ties, as its actions demonstrate a clear understanding of Kyiv’s needs and priorities. The relationship also showcases Türkiye’s broader geopolitical approach—leveraging its position as a NATO member to provide substantial support to Ukraine, while maintaining a frank and open diplomatic channel with Russia.

Türkiye-Ukraine ties exhibit robust levels of trust, cohesion, and strategic coordination, establishing Ankara as a reputable and credible mediator in Kyiv’s eyes. This relationship not only enhances Türkiye’s standing in international diplomacy but also adds significant weight to its ongoing efforts to facilitate a peaceful resolution to the conflict. As the war continues to unfold, Türkiye’s role in shaping the trajectory of both military and diplomatic developments related to Ukraine remains undeniable. 

Western Positions

U.S. President Trump’s ascendancy to the White House has significantly shifted the Western discourse on Ukraine, introducing notable complexities. The prolonged conflict, coupled with the perceived economic and political costs of aiding the Kyiv government, has emboldened certain political actors in the West to openly question the sustainability of continued military support to Ukraine. These discussions have not only permeated public opinion but also surrounded the U.S. president, influencing his decision-making processes. Trump’s controversial decision to tie continued military support to a mineral deal granting the U.S. preferential access to Ukrainian resource depots exemplifies the pressures at play.[7] This approach has sparked debates about the long-term commitments of Western allies to Ukraine and raised alarm over the strategic implications of such policies.

Meanwhile, Europe is grappling with its own set of security challenges. The possibility of diminished reliance on U.S. support has pushed European nations to reassess their roles and priorities in maintaining regional stability. As a result, Ukraine’s precedence in the broader European agenda appears to be waning, with some governments focusing on internal defense mechanisms and economic resilience instead. This shift has underscored the need for alternative solutions to the conflict, lending further urgency to the pursuit of peace and stability in the region.

These evolving dynamics align with Türkiye’s bid for mediation, as changing American and European positions on the conflict seem to resonate with the principles of the Istanbul Process. Türkiye’s role as a mediator is gaining traction among its Western allies, who recognize its unique position in balancing relations with both Russia and Ukraine. While President Trump ultimately did not participate in the Istanbul talks, there has been a visible increase in positive discourse from Western capitals regarding Turkish-led initiatives. This growing support reflects an acknowledgment of Türkiye’s capability to navigate the intricacies of the conflict and bridge diplomatic divides.

Türkiye’s commitment to the mediation process is exemplified by its multifaceted approach to diplomatic engagement. In a single week, Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan undertook a whirlwind of high-level engagements, traveling to Moscow and Kyiv to hold discussions with key stakeholders. This extensive diplomatic effort highlights Türkiye’s determination to foster dialogue and collaboration across multiple fronts, reinforcing its position as a credible and proactive mediator. By maintaining open channels with all parties involved, Türkiye is working tirelessly to facilitate a breakthrough in the conflict.

As Western nations reassess their strategies and priorities, Türkiye’s leadership in the Istanbul Process remains pivotal. Its ability to coordinate between conflicting interests and promote constructive dialogue underscores the importance of its role in shaping the trajectory of this complex geopolitical crisis. The evolving dynamics of the conflict, combined with Türkiye’s proactive efforts, offer a glimmer of hope for a diplomatic breakthrough that could ultimately bring an end to the prolonged suffering and instability in the region.

Prospects for a Breakthrough

Geopolitical shifts, Türkiye’s desire to see the mediation reach fruition, and the urgency to end the conflict after three years of ravaging war are all factors supporting a breakthrough via the Istanbul Process. Türkiye has consistently demonstrated its commitment to this endeavor, leveraging its growing position as a mediator with access to all major stakeholders of the conflict. This alignment, however, currently appears insufficient due to limited political will at the executive level from Ukrainian, Russian, and American leaders. While Türkiye’s diplomatic efforts have been lauded internationally, generating mass media interest and prestige, the lack of tangible progress highlights the complex nature of mediation in a conflict marked by entrenched positions and geopolitical rivalries.

The stakes remain high as the conflict continues to exacerbate human suffering and destabilize the region. Indeed, just hours before the latest round of talks, Russia and Ukraine entered another spiral of violence that involved a Ukrainian surprise drone attack, which many termed a “game changer” for global military strategy.[8] Türkiye’s proactive approach, coupled with its ability to navigate diplomatic complexities, offers some hope for a diplomatic breakthrough. Yet, achieving peace will demand sustained efforts, more clandestine talks, and unwavering commitment from all parties involved. The evolving dynamics of the conflict present an opportunity for Türkiye not only to champion peace but also redefine its role on the global stage as a nation capable of fostering reconciliation. A summit bringing together Presidents Putin, Trump and Zelensky would achieve that very goal.

Conclusion

As the war in Ukraine continues to unfold, Türkiye has distinguished itself as a pivotal mediator, utilizing its unique position and strong ties with both Russia and Ukraine. The Istanbul Process has become a cornerstone of Türkiye’s efforts to emerge as a diplomatic powerhouse. This initiative highlights the pressing need to end a conflict that has not only devastated countless lives but has also destabilized the entire region, posing broader security and humanitarian challenges.

Türkiye’s diplomatic initiatives have been both ambitious and multifaceted. By maintaining open channels with all parties involved, including Russia, Ukraine, and Western allies, Türkiye sits at an advantageous place. The proactive approach of Turkish officials, such as Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan’s intensive diplomatic engagements, exemplifies the depth and determination of these efforts. These high-level discussions, which span from Moscow to Kyiv, showcase Türkiye’s ability to engage with key stakeholders and reinforce its role as a credible and proactive mediator.

However, despite Türkiye’s successes in positioning itself as a facilitator of peace, the journey toward a comprehensive resolution remains fraught with complexities. The lack of sufficient political will among executive leaders in Russia, Ukraine, and the United States has proven to be a significant obstacle. While Türkiye’s initiatives have earned international recognition, raising its diplomatic prestige and fostering mass global public interest, the entrenched nature of the conflict presents formidable barriers to any real progress at this stage. The challenge lies not only in bridging the divides between the two parties but also in addressing the broader geopolitical rivalries that perpetuate the stalemate. Any comprehensive settlement on Ukraine, for example, will likely need to resolve the question of Kyiv’s potential NATO membership or provide complementary security assurances. Such a complex question is far too elaborate for Türkiye to tackle singlehandedly.

In addition to these barriers, the evolving dynamics of Western positions have also influenced the conflict’s trajectory. As Donald Trump’s presidency shifted the Western discourse on Ukraine, questions about the sustainability of continued military support have surfaced. Europe, too, is grappling with its own challenges, as diminished reliance on U.S. support has prompted nations to reassess their priorities, often at the expense of Ukraine’s immediate needs. These shifts have underscored the growing urgency for alternative solutions, placing even greater emphasis on Türkiye’s leadership in the Istanbul Process.

Looking ahead, Türkiye’s role in this initiative remains essential. Its ability to balance relationships with conflicting parties while championing constructive dialogue positions it as a uniquely capable mediator. Achieving peace, however, will demand more than just Türkiye’s efforts. It will require sustained commitment from all parties involved. The stakes are immense, as the conflict continues to threaten international security.

The Istanbul Process offers a viable route to exit the crisis. Türkiye’s consistent advocacy for dialogue has already brokered prisoner exchanges and has brought the sides together after more than three years of stalemate. As the Istanbul Process evolves, it holds the potential to not only address the immediate crisis in Ukraine but also to establish a precedent for conflict resolution in an increasingly uncertain global landscape.

Ultimately, Türkiye’s leadership in this initiative signals more than just a desire to resolve the Ukraine conflict—it reflects its aspiration to redefine its role on the global stage. As a nation uniquely positioned between NATO and Russia, Türkiye’s proactive efforts could pave the way for a diplomatic breakthrough. A potential future summit bringing together Presidents Putin, Trump, and Zelensky represents an opportunity to solidify these efforts, offering a transformative step toward ending the conflict. In this capacity, Türkiye’s mediation looks to retain its significance.