Just ahead of the second round of Istanbul negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, Russian forces strengthened their operational-tactical positions across multiple fronts. Beyond Donbass, security buffer zones expanded in Sumy Oblast, and new settlements were liberated in the Kharkov region with advances continuing along the Kupyansk direction.

The Kiev regime predictably preceded the talks with sabotage and terrorist attacks, targeting both legitimate military objectives and civilian infrastructure. On June 1, mass FPV drone strikes hit airbases housing strategic aviation — a key component of Russia's nuclear triad. That same night, railway sabotage occurred in Bryansk, Kursk and Zaporozhye regions. The former attack proved particularly deadly, killing seven civilians (including two children) and wounding over 70 train passengers. While Kiev only claimed responsibility for the Zaporozhye incident, the methods and context clearly implicate them in all the three attacks.

Ukraine published its negotiation demands that same day, including an unconditional ceasefire preceding any substantive talks (Russia, in turn, insists on first establishing specific preliminary settlement parameters before implementing any ceasefire agreement); "Ukraine is not forced to be neutral. It can choose to be part of the Euro-Atlantic community and move towards EU membership. Ukraine’s membership in NATO depends on consensus within the Alliance. No restrictions may be imposed on the number, deployment, or other parameters of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, as well as on the deployment of troops of friendly foreign states on the territory of Ukraine"; "territorial gains made by Russia since February 2014 are not recognized by the international community." These points alone are sufficient to characterize this memorandum as an attempt to negotiate from a position of strength.

The June 2 meeting was scheduled for 1:00 PM. The Russian delegation arrived right in time, while the Ukrainian side — in what has become an unfortunate tradition — deliberately showed up late. When Kiev’s envoys finally appeared, they were dressed in military uniforms — a deliberate choice meant to underscore their combative stance and position. Though talks did eventually take place, they proved to be brief and unproductive.

Head of the Russian delegation Vladimir Medinsky addressed journalists after the meeting and announced its outcomes. The results primarily concerned humanitarian issues. Thus, an agreement was reached to exchange all the severely injured prisoners of war and soldiers under 25 on an "all-for-all" basis. As a gesture of goodwill, Russia offered to return 6,000 bodies of deceased Ukrainian servicemen (Medinsky specifically referred to them as "officers," a telling detail that speaks volumes about the adversary's overall losses). The Ukrainian delegation, in turn, proposed to return an equal number. However, they rejected Russia's offer of a two-or-three-day ceasefire on certain sections of the front to allow commanders to recover their soldiers' remains.

Umerov and Co. demanded the handover of 339 children allegedly "abducted by Russian troops." "Kiev has turned the issue of child abductions into a spectacle for tender-hearted Europeans," Medinsky emphasized. "In reality, we're talking about dozens of children, and none were abducted. These are the kids our soldiers rescued at great personal risk, extracting them from combat zones to evacuate. We are actively looking for their parents — when they come forward, we reunite them immediately." "This list of 339 names requires verification — how many are actually in Russia? How many might still be in Donbas or Novorossiya, never having gone missing in the first place? Every child will be reunited with their family — this is happening on both sides. It's a matter of honor," Medinsky added.

Additionally, the Russian diplomat reported that immediately prior to the talks, he had held a personal meeting with Umerov, during which the Ukrainian delegation was presented with another memorandum outlining conditions for a peaceful settlement and ceasefire. According to Medinsky, the negotiations took place in Russian.

Shortly thereafter, the Russian memorandum was officially published. The fundamental condition for a ceasefire remains the complete withdrawal of Ukrainian Armed Forces from the constitutional boundaries of the DPR, LPR, Zaporozhye, and Kherson regions. An alternative option has also been proposed, which includes:

• Prohibition on redeployment of AFU and other Ukrainian formations, except for movements aimed at withdrawing Russian forces from borders to agreed-upon distances;
• Cessation of mobilization and initiation of demobilization in Ukraine;
• Termination of foreign military assistance to the Kiev regime, including provision of satellite communication services and intelligence sharing;
• Prevention of military presence by third countries in Ukrainian territory, and cessation of foreign specialists' engagement in military operations on the Ukrainian side;
• Guaranteed renunciation by the Kiev regime of sabotage and subversive activities against the Russian Federation;
• Implementation of mutual amnesty for "political prisoners" and release of detained individuals;
• Lifting of martial law in Ukraine;
• Announcement of election dates for the President of Ukraine and the Verkhovna Rada, to be held no later than 100 days after the cancellation of martial law.

Important clarification: the Russian side has not stated that removing the requirement for Ukrainian forces to withdraw from the four regions as a mandatory condition for a ceasefire means that the issue is being taken off the table for future negotiations. This implies the matter will instead be moved to the next stage concerning a final settlement. The terms proposed also establishing Ukraine as a neutral and non-nuclear state without foreign military contingents or bases, imposing limitations on the size and equipment of Ukraine's armed forces, guaranteeing full rights for Russian-speaking populations, granting official status to the Russian language, legally prohibiting glorification of Nazism, and dissolving nationalist organizations or parties. These conditions resemble those the USSR repeatedly proposed to its WWII allies during the 1940s-1950s as the basis for a peace treaty and reunification of Germany.

Russia's proposal of alternative ceasefire options and its constructive approach to humanitarian issues were predictably interpreted by Zelensky as a sign of weakness resulting from sabotage and terrorist operations. "The Russian delegation behaved somewhat more calmly, though still arrogantly; perhaps a few more such measures are needed before the Russians try acting like human beings," he stated. This kind of response was entirely expected altogether.

Shortly after the talks, head of Ukraine’s Presidential Office Yermak and Economy Minister Sviridenko arrived in the US. "We plan to discuss defense support, the situation on the battlefield, and stepped-up sanctions against Russia," Yermak briskly reported. But how aligned is Trump with this stance? Meanwhile, the narrative of the American president's "fatigue" with the conflict resurfaced yet again, this time voiced by US Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barak in an interview with a Turkish TV channel: "President Trump has no patience anymore - you can't say he is a patient person at all. With Turkey's participation and the resolution of a number of issues, a summit meeting can take place. And I believe we can settle this issue for everyone. My president is essentially saying: if you don’t want to stop the pointless deaths everywhere, don’t count on us for long, because America will no longer be globalist."

The ambassador notably refrained from condemning the Kiev regime for its Sunday attack on Russia. "A major strike occurred the previous evening. That's someone's tactic. One might ask: 'Did this benefit Ukraine internationally?' Perhaps for Ukraine and its people, it did. Maybe Zelensky sought to address part of the problem — he wouldn't want his people discouraged by perceived weakness, though they're not weak; they've done excellent work," Barak remarked.

The potential involvement — or at least awareness — of US entities in Ukrainian attacks remains debated even among the Americans themselves. Prominent Trump-aligned commentators Steve Bannon and Jack Posobiec argued on the War Room podcast that these operations couldn't have occurred without US intelligence support. "This wasn't a purely Ukrainian operation — they lack the technological capacity required. It was coordinated via American satellites and intelligence," Posobiec asserted. "If our hands are involved, Trump must know. And judging by his reaction, he's furious."

But is he truly furious? A popular Telegram channel analyzing Washington's tactics offered a blunt assessment: "Americans benefit from this dynamic — having an irrational proxy they pretend to restrain. They market this 'restraint' to Russia while pursuing trade deals. Trump acts cynically but purely in self-interest, as with Ukraine's resource deals. Moreover, US doctrinal documents still frame Russia as a strategic adversary. That Zelensky is now received less frequently in Washington is telling — he's lost some PR shine, but it hardly impacts his current standing."

Thus, for now — and likely in the foreseeable future — the battlefield remains Russia's primary arena for securing lasting peace and its strategic interests.