One of the most concrete outcomes of recent negotiations between Ukrainian and Russian delegations in Istanbul has been Moscow’s presentation of a so-called “memorandum” to the Ukrainian side — a document that President Vladimir Putin had reportedly promised to deliver during his last conversation with U.S. President Donald Trump.
According to sources, this document purports to outline Russia’s conditions for a ceasefire and eventual peace. However, the proposals amount not to a roadmap for peace, but rather a comprehensive list of demands which, if accepted, would amount to Ukrainian capitulation and recognition of key Russian war aims.
From the outset, the memorandum’s first clause calls for international legal recognition of the Russian Federation’s sovereignty over the Ukrainian regions of Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson. It further demands the full withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from these areas — territories currently contested or under partial occupation. The document also calls for global recognition of these regions as Russian, framing the war’s resolution not merely as a bilateral agreement, but one contingent on the international community endorsing Russia’s territorial claims.
This opening demand essentially precludes further meaningful negotiation, as it contradicts both international law and Ukraine’s constitution, which defines its territorial integrity as inviolable.
The second and third sections of the memorandum demand Ukraine’s permanent neutrality, prohibiting any future membership in military alliances such as NATO or bilateral security agreements with third countries. Ukraine would also be obliged to maintain a non-nuclear status and refrain from developing any weapons systems perceived as capable of defending against external aggression.
Further provisions stipulate drastic reductions in Ukraine’s military capability, including fixed limits on the number of armed forces personnel and the disbandment of what Moscow refers to as “nationalist formations” within Ukraine’s Armed Forces and National Guard.
Language and cultural demands are also prominent. The memorandum calls for the Russian language to receive official status throughout Ukraine and insists on guarantees for the rights and freedoms of Russian-speaking citizens. Similar demands were advanced by pro-Russian political actors in Ukraine as early as 2004.
In parallel, the memorandum seeks a ban on what it terms the “promotion of Nazism and neo-Nazism” — rhetoric often used by the Kremlin to delegitimise Ukrainian nationalism — alongside the prohibition of nationalist parties and organisations, a designation to be determined unilaterally by the Russian side.
Economic provisions include the lifting of all sanctions between Ukraine and Russia, restoration of diplomatic and economic relations, and resumption of Russian gas transit via Ukrainian territory — a priority for Moscow following Ukraine’s gradual disengagement from such arrangements in recent years.
In terms of accountability for the war, the document demands that Ukraine relinquish any claims for reparations or restitution for war-related destruction and lift all restrictions against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate — again reinforcing the cultural and ideological elements of Russian policy.
The second half of the memorandum concerns proposed mechanisms for a ceasefire. While U.S. President Donald Trump had publicly called for an unconditional ceasefire, his position appears to have shifted following conversations with Putin. The Russian proposal links any ceasefire to Ukrainian military withdrawal not only from occupied territories but also from unspecified distances within Ukrainian territory, effectively creating a demilitarised buffer zone under Russian terms.
The memorandum further demands Ukraine halt mobilisation, disband certain military units, and prevent any foreign military assistance or deployments on its territory. Ukraine would also be required to guarantee it will not undertake any subversive activities against Russia.
A bilateral monitoring and control centre for the ceasefire would be established, and Russia demands a general amnesty for those it considers “political prisoners,” while also requiring Ukraine to lift martial law. Perhaps most controversially, the document calls for Ukraine to hold presidential and parliamentary elections within 100 days of ending martial law — a direct intrusion into Ukrainian domestic affairs.
The final clauses state that even after signature, the agreement would not be considered in force until approved by the United Nations Security Council — where Russia holds veto power — and later ratified by Ukraine’s parliament. The Russian State Duma, the memorandum implies, would delay or avoid ratification to retain political leverage.
The Ukrainian side, along with Western observers, views the document not as a genuine peace proposal but as a political tool intended to deflect international pressure from Moscow and obstruct Western unity on further sanctions. U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have both previously dismissed Russia’s demands as unworkable and “maximalist,” with Rubio specifically highlighting that the proposals include territorial claims over areas not currently under Russian control.
Analysts suggest that Putin’s aim is not to reach a negotiated settlement, but to use the appearance of a peace process to reduce the likelihood of new sanctions and buy time for future military operations. The offer also appears designed to enable political manoeuvring in the United States by complicating President Trump’s foreign policy posture ahead of further international summits.
In essence, the memorandum is widely seen not as a pathway to peace, but as a blueprint for Ukrainian surrender — and one that would leave Kyiv without sovereignty, military defence capabilities, or reliable international partnerships.
Read also:
Ukrainian Security Service Strikes 4 Russian Airbases, Damages 40 Strategic Bombers
