DIPLOMACY
High-Stakes Diplomacy: Sochi Summit Tackles Grain Agreement, Ukraine Peace and Syria Normalization

The Sochi Summit, set to take place on September 4th, is poised to address a range of critical issues, with the Grain Agreement, potential Russia-Ukraine peace negotiations, and the Syria dossier taking center stage in the discussions. These prominent agenda items raise several pressing questions: Can the existing grain agreement be sustained? Are conditions conducive for peace talks between Russia and Ukraine? What role will Turkey play in these negotiations, and what lies ahead for Ankara-Damascus normalization? Eminent figures, E. Lieutenant General İsmail Hakkı Pekin and Prof. Dr. Hasan Ünal, have provided insightful analysis on these matters for Harici.
At the heart of this summit lies the Grain Corridor agreement, which ended with Russia’s withdrawal. Prior to President Erdoğan’s meeting with President Putin, the foreign ministers of both nations convened. During their joint press statement, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov conveyed Russia’s stance on the Black Sea Grain Initiative agreement:
* Russia is open to returning to the grain agreement once its conditions in the package agreement with the United Nations (UN) are met.
* Russia has plans to send one million tons of grain to Turkey for processing, with financial support from Qatar, destined for countries facing urgent grain needs.
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan also shared pertinent information:
*The UN, with Turkey’s collaboration, is preparing a new set of grain agreement proposals.
*To ensure the uninterrupted export of Russian grain and fertilizer, Russia’s demands must be met.
* The grain agreement holds immense significance for global food security and the stability of the Black Sea region.
Retired Lieutenant General İsmail Hakkı Pekin, former head of the Intelligence Department of the General Staff, anticipates a reevaluation of last year’s grain corridor agreement. However, he believes Russia may propose shipping grain to Turkey for redistribution to countries in urgent need, casting doubt on Russia’s return to the existing grain deal. His rationale is rooted in the Western embargo on Russian fertilizer and grain exports, which, if extended again, might erode Russia’s incentive to maintain the current agreement.
International Relations Expert Prof. Dr. Hasan Ünal offered insights into Turkey’s proposal and Russia’s reluctance to embrace it. While Turkey and the UN seek a grain agreement resembling last year’s model, unresolved issues with the UN’s commitment to Russia’s agricultural bank and the lack of insurance coverage for ships transporting Russian grain contribute to Russia’s skepticism. This situation mirrors past Western promises, reminiscent of assurances given in the 1990s concerning NATO’s expansion eastward, which were ultimately unfulfilled. Consequently, Russia may insist on delivering grain grants to nations in dire need.
Ünal noted that Russia’s alternative grain deal proposal encompasses a limited quantity designated as grants for African countries facing acute shortages. Russia’s intention is to fulfill commitments made at the summit with African nations.
However, the more crucial issue revolves around the transportation of Russian and Ukrainian grain to global markets. Ünal underscored the complexities involved:
“Ukraine transports some grain to Eastern Europe via land routes, but objections from other nations due to the lower cost of Ukrainian grain complicate matters. Last year, 60-70% of Ukrainian grain transited the Black Sea corridor, with ships inspected in the Straits to prevent weapon smuggling, a concession Turkey made despite the Montreux Convention granting sole authority to search ships in the Straits. However, this corridor closed following Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian ships and unfulfilled promises to Russia.”
Recently, a civilian cargo ship made the first voyage from Ukraine to Turkey since the grain deal’s collapse, but this experimental shipment raises concerns about ship contents and safety. Turkey deems this route risky and opposes it, potentially raising the specter of conflict with NATO countries.
İsmail Hakkı Pekin cautioned about the dangers posed by such experimental shipments, highlighting the potential for naval confrontations at sea.
In response to the United States’ proposal to increase grain shipments via the Danube River, Ünal pointed out the difficulties in implementing this solution, such as grain transportation logistics, potential Russian interference, and increased costs.
The U.S.’s motivation for such proposals may involve maintaining existing sanctions against Russia. More than thirty million tons of grain were shipped through the Black Sea last year, making alternative routes impractical.
Ünal warned that the U.S. might seek NATO naval involvement in the Black Sea to enforce its goals, a move that could escalate tensions.
When asked about potential alternative solutions if promises to Russia remain unfulfilled, Ünal suggested that Turkey could purchase Russian grain and resell it, possibly including Ukrainian grain. This arrangement would serve Turkey’s grain industry needs and enable it to access global markets, aligning with Western interests despite their reluctance to see Russian grain sold.
Turning to the Russia-Ukraine peace talks, the joint statement from Fidan and Lavrov indicated Turkey’s willingness to facilitate or mediate negotiations when conditions permit. While Turkey advocates for lasting peace and regional stability, Russia finds Ukrainian President Zelensky’s peace proposal unacceptable.
The Erdoğan-Putin meeting is expected to broach the topic, with the possibility of both sides exploring the terms for peace. Potential conditions may include Ukraine ceding Crimea in exchange for a federalized Ukrainian state, incorporating Donetsk and Lugansk as constituent republics, and dismantling neo-Nazi elements.
Ünal noted that peace based on these terms is plausible but contingent on convincing the U.S. and the UK, currently in election cycles. President Biden’s need for a successful war narrative may deter peace talks. However, if President Trump is reelected, the possibility of peace negotiations may emerge, necessitating Turkey’s mediation.
Ünal emphasized that Turkey’s balanced approach has fostered trust among the involved parties.
Pekin echoed concerns about the U.S. elections and posited that peace talks may remain a distant possibility.
The potential for normalization between Turkey and Syria is another pivotal issue at the Sochi Summit. Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov confirmed discussions on the subject with Fidan but provided no details.
Prof. Dr. Hasan Ünal expressed optimism about the prospects of Ankara-Damascus normalization, citing Syria’s elevated negotiating position. Moscow may advocate for Turkey’s gradual withdrawal from Syrian territory, potentially involving the return of refugees and collaborative efforts against the PKK/YPG, akin to the Adana Memorandum’s revival. Turkey may need to recognize organizations designated as terrorists by Syria, accommodating them within the Adana Memorandum framework. Recognizing the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) might also be part of the normalization process to create states unafraid of Western pressure.
Retired intelligence chief İsmail Hakkı Pekin, however, cautioned that Syria’s internal turmoil might overshadow normalization efforts. The situation in Syria is fluid, with potential flashpoints, such as U.S. pressure on Assad to grant autonomy to certain regions, including Suwayda and Daraa, exacerbating instability. Turkey may need to secure its interests through collaboration with Assad, navigating the delicate balance between U.S. opposition and its own security concerns.
The Sochi Summit promises to address critical international issues, from grain agreements to peace talks and regional normalization. The summit’s outcomes will depend on diplomatic finesse, geopolitical dynamics, and the evolving global landscape.
DIPLOMACY
US proposes controversial ‘colonial’-style agreement to Ukraine

The US is pushing to control all future major infrastructure and mining investments in Ukraine, veto the role of Kyiv’s other allies, and undermine its goal of European Union membership.
According to a draft document obtained by Bloomberg, the Donald Trump administration is demanding the “right of first refusal” on investments in all infrastructure and natural resource projects under a revised partnership agreement with Ukraine.
If accepted, the partnership agreement would give the US enormous power to control investments in projects in Ukraine such as highways and railways, ports, mines, oil and natural gas, and the extraction of critical minerals.
The agreement would give the US first claim on profits transferred to a special reconstruction investment fund controlled by Washington.
The most crucial point of the document is that the US considers the “material and financial benefits” it has provided to Ukraine since the beginning of the war as a contribution to this fund.
In effect, this means the Trump administration would force Ukraine to pay the cost of all US military and economic support provided since the start of the war before Kyiv receives any income from the partnership fund.
According to the draft document, the US International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) will control the investment fund by nominating three of the five board members and holding a “golden share” giving it special voting rights to block certain decisions. Ukraine will appoint the other two members and will be prevented from interfering in the fund’s daily management.
The Kyiv government will be required to deposit 50% of the earnings from all new natural resource and infrastructure projects into the fund. The draft states that the US will be entitled to all profits until its investment is recouped, plus a 4% annual return.
Ukraine will be obliged to submit all projects to the fund for review “at the earliest possible time,” and the DFC will gain board membership or oversight rights in all funded programs.
Kyiv will also be prohibited from offering rejected projects to other parties on “materially better” terms for at least one year.
Furthermore, according to the draft, the US government will have the right to purchase Ukraine’s metals, minerals, and oil and gas on commercial terms before other parties, regardless of whether the fund finances the project.
The agreement, which has no time limit, also prohibits Kyiv from selling critical minerals to countries that are “strategic rivals” of the US.
The US presented a revised agreement to officials in Kyiv last weekend after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s plans to sign an earlier deal fell through following a tense discussion with Trump in the Oval Office last month.
The White House said last week that the administration has moved beyond the previously negotiated agreement covering critical minerals in Ukraine.
Negotiations between the two sides are ongoing, and the final draft may include revisions to the terms. A person familiar with the matter told Bloomberg that Ukraine would respond to the US document with its own changes this week.
Speaking to reporters in Paris on Thursday, where he traveled to attend a summit with European leaders, Zelenskyy said the full agreement proposed by the US requires “detailed study” and that the terms are constantly changing during negotiations.
While it is too early to say an agreement has been reached, he said, “We support cooperation with the US, we do not want to send a single signal that could cause the US to stop helping Ukraine.”
In response to a request for comment, a US Treasury Department spokesperson stated that the US remains committed to the swift finalization of the agreement and securing a lasting peace for Ukraine.
National Security Council spokesperson James Hewitt said, “The minerals agreement offers Ukraine the opportunity to establish a lasting economic relationship with the US, which is the foundation for long-term security and peace. This agreement will strengthen relations between the two countries and benefit both sides.”
Ukraine gained EU candidate status in 2022 and is set to begin accession talks for full membership, which could take years to complete. This situation is likely to become more complicated if the US gains effective control over investment decisions covering large areas of the Ukrainian economy.
Ukraine had previously stated that an agreement with the US should not conflict with its association agreement with the EU. It had also previously rejected the US demand that Washington’s past support for Ukraine be included as a contribution to the joint fund.
DIPLOMACY
EU to continue funding Türkiye despite İmamoğlu concerns, Politico reports

Protests following the detention and arrest of Istanbul Metropolitan Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu seem to have put Europe in a difficult position.
In an assessment published in Politico titled “EU faces a billion-euro dilemma in Türkiye crisis,” politicians and officials cited say that regardless of what happens on the streets of Istanbul, Ankara is too important an ally to alienate.
The report states, “The European Union will continue to transfer billions of euros to Türkiye despite President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s extensive crackdowns on political opponents.”
Recalling that European officials warned their southern neighbor to “uphold democratic values” following Ekrem İmamoğlu’s arrest, Politico writes, “But Türkiye’s strategic importance means the bloc will likely look the other way. Erdoğan knows this too.”
Dimitar Bechev, a lecturer at Oxford University, says, “Whatever the Turkish leader does, the EU will have to follow suit.”
Two European officials, speaking to Politico on condition of anonymity, said that Türkiye’s EU candidate status requires it to protect democratic values and that Brussels would respond to violations. Although one of them stated, “We are following the developing situation in Türkiye with great concern” and “Recent developments contradict the logic of EU membership,” they also acknowledge that given Türkiye’s importance in migration, trade, energy, and defense matters, any reaction from the EU is unlikely to disrupt relations between Brussels and Ankara.
Pointing out that although Türkiye’s EU membership negotiations have stalled over the past decade, the country still receives billions of euros in accession funds, Politico notes, “Ankara has also received about 9 billion euros in aid to host refugees from the Middle East and is in line to receive large sums to support European defense industries.”
Highlighting that Türkiye, which has become a major hub for oil and gas exports, has a trade flow with the EU exceeding 200 billion euros annually, the publication writes, “Türkiye has also played a key role in controlling access to the Black Sea and enforcing sanctions against Moscow since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Recently, its potential significant contribution to a possible peacekeeping mission in Ukraine has been discussed.”
Bechev says, “The status quo before İmamoğlu’s arrest was comfortable for the EU because there was enough democracy,” and suggests that recent developments are not dire enough to change this.
According to the “Readiness 2030” plan presented by EU leaders last week, Türkiye, as an EU candidate country, has the potential to access 800 billion euros worth of joint procurements from funds designed to increase the bloc’s defense spending.
However, Greece and Cyprus, both long in conflict with Türkiye, are pushing for restrictions. Diplomats speaking to Politico said they intend to enact a clause requiring the defense move to occur “without prejudice to the specific character of the security and defense policy of certain Member States.”
Arguing that Athens and Nicosia, which were in the process of normalizing relations with Ankara before the recent crisis, now have to perform a “delicate balancing act,” Politico quotes a senior Greek official admitting that “even Athens cannot go too far.”
The Greek official involved says, “Of course, we will support a firm stance condemning the current developments in Türkiye, but without being provocative. The defense industry remains a major gap for Europe, which paves the way for this policy of trade-offs that we see happening.”
Even Cypriot MEP Michalis Hadjipantela, calling for “targeted sanctions” by stating “Effective pressure from the EU is essential,” also said that “sanctions should be targeted and linked to progress on the above issues to prevent further alienation of the country.”
DIPLOMACY
Fidan and Rubio discuss Syria, Gaza, and defense in US meeting

Minister of Foreign Affairs Hakan Fidan and his accompanying delegation began a two-day visit to the US.
During the visit, Fidan met with US Senator Marco Rubio. According to a statement attributed to US State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce, the two discussed cooperation on key issues in security and trade.
Rubio requested Turkey’s support for peace in Ukraine and the South Caucasus, while appreciating Ankara’s leadership in the “Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS.”
According to the spokesperson, the American senator reiterated the need for close cooperation to support a “stable, unified, and peaceful Syria,” stating they do not want Syria to be “either a base for international terrorism or a pathway for Iran’s destabilizing activities.”
Rubio also highlighted recent progress in bilateral trade and encouraged an even greater economic partnership moving forward.
Finally, the Senator expressed concerns regarding the recent arrest of Ekrem Imamoglu in Turkey and the subsequent protests.
Turkey has not made an official statement: AA reported based on ‘foreign ministry sources’
According to Turkish Foreign Ministry sources cited by AA, Fidan and Rubio emphasized the “importance of engaging with the Syrian government” during their meeting on Tuesday.
The sources stated, “Both sides emphasized the importance of engaging with the Syrian government and expressed their determination regarding the stabilization of Syria and the fight against terrorism.”
According to the sources speaking to AA, Fidan and Rubio discussed a range of regional and bilateral issues, including the need for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, deemed essential for “regional peace.”
The sources also mentioned that the issues discussed in the phone call between President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and US President Donald Trump on March 16 were followed up on during the meeting.
The two sides also discussed preparations for upcoming presidential-level visits and expressed their determination to remove obstacles to defense cooperation.
The report added, “Both sides clearly expressed their political will to remove obstacles to cooperation in the defense industry. Technical meetings will be held to resolve existing issues.”
The two sides also discussed efforts to achieve a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, with Turkey expressing support for recent US efforts in this direction.
The talks also covered the ongoing peace process between Azerbaijan and Armenia and the importance of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s stability for the entire Balkan region.
Is Hamas on the table?
Meanwhile, Trump, during a White House meeting with a group of US Ambassadors confirmed by the Senate, referred to Turkey and Erdogan as a “good country, a good leader.”
The new US Ambassador to Ankara, Thomas Barack, was also present at the meeting. Barack, known as a close friend of Trump and a real estate magnate, thanked the President for appointing him to Turkey, “one of the ancient civilizations.”
In an article penned by Murat Yetkin in Yetkin Report, it is alleged that Trump might engage in bargaining over Hamas and Gaza in exchange for steps such as lifting CAATSA sanctions against Turkey.
Yetkin relays that CHP leader Ozgur Ozel, in a statement on March 18, referred to the Trump-Erdogan phone call, criticizing the lack of mention of Gaza and Israel, and accused Erdogan of “selling out the Palestinian cause for Trump.”
Recalling that Trump’s special representative Steve Witkoff told Tucker Carlson in an interview that they expect “good news” from Turkey, Yetkin underscores that Witkoff also stated elsewhere in the interview, “A terrorist organization cannot run Gaza; this is unacceptable for Israel. But their disarmament is possible. Then they can stay for a while longer and even get involved in politics.”
Yetkin asks, “Is Trump supporting Erdogan because of a plan to disarm the PKK and Hamas together?” while also noting that the Secretary of the PLO Executive Committee, Hussein al-Sheikh, met with Foreign Minister Fidan in Ankara on March 19, before Fidan flew to the US.
-
EUROPE4 days ago
F-35 debate intensifies across Germany and Europe
-
EUROPE1 week ago
Europe plans for US absence in NATO with 5-10 year strategy
-
ASIA2 weeks ago
China’s AsiaInfo expands with DeepSeek-powered AI
-
EUROPE1 week ago
French defense industry gears up for war amid EU strategic autonomy push
-
AMERICA1 week ago
Trump’s tariffs drive Nvidia to invest heavily in US manufacturing
-
DIPLOMACY5 days ago
Trump’s proposed fees on Chinese ships threaten US maritime industry
-
DIPLOMACY2 weeks ago
US, Britain, and Türkiye excluded from EU armament fund
-
ASIA1 week ago
India shelves $23 billion plan to rival China’s factories