A Ukrainian delegation met with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Ankara on July 23, 2025, ahead of a third round of peace talks with Russia. Andriy Yermak, head of the Presidential Office, expressed gratitude for Turkey's ongoing support for Ukraine during the conflict with Russia. The delegation, led by National Security and Defense Council Secretary Rustem Umerov, planned to proceed to Istanbul for negotiations scheduled to begin later that evening.

The talks aimed to facilitate a face-to-face meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin. While Zelensky has shown willingness to meet, Putin has not agreed to attend in person. Key issues on the agenda included further exchanges of prisoners and demands for an immediate ceasefire.

Russian state media reported that their delegation had already arrived in Istanbul for the discussions at Ciragan Palace. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov indicated that Putin's aide would lead the Russian side and reiterated Moscow's firm stance regarding its war objectives.

Previous rounds of talks had not resulted in significant progress towards ending hostilities but did lead to agreements on prisoner exchanges. The upcoming negotiations were seen as crucial in seeking a resolution to ongoing tensions between Ukraine and Russia.

Original article

Here is an analysis of the article's value to the reader:

Actionable Information: The article does not provide any immediate actions for readers to take. It informs about a future event, the peace talks, but does not offer any steps or plans for individuals to follow or participate in.

Educational Depth: It offers some educational value by explaining the context and significance of the upcoming peace talks. It provides a historical perspective by referring to previous rounds of talks and their outcomes, as well as the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia. However, it does not delve deeply into the causes or systems that led to the war, nor does it offer a comprehensive analysis of the potential outcomes and their implications.

Personal Relevance: The topic of the article is highly relevant to people's lives, especially those directly affected by the conflict. It has significant implications for global politics, security, and the lives of millions of people in Ukraine and Russia. Even for those not directly impacted, the outcome of these talks could influence future geopolitical dynamics and international relations, which can affect various aspects of daily life.

Public Service Function: While the article does not provide official warnings or emergency contacts, it serves a public service by keeping readers informed about a critical international event. It updates the public on the ongoing efforts to resolve the conflict and the potential for a face-to-face meeting between the leaders of Ukraine and Russia, which could be a significant development in the peace process.

Practicality of Advice: As the article primarily reports on a future event, it does not offer practical advice or steps. However, it does provide some insight into the potential outcomes and the key issues on the agenda, which could be useful for those interested in understanding the peace process and its potential impact.

Long-Term Impact: The article discusses a process that could have long-term implications for the region and the world. A successful peace agreement could lead to a more stable and secure future for Ukraine and Russia, with potential benefits for global security and economic relations. However, the article does not speculate on these long-term outcomes or their potential impact.

Emotional/Psychological Impact: The article may evoke emotions such as hope for a peaceful resolution or frustration at the lack of progress so far. It provides an update on a critical process, which could be reassuring to some, especially those directly affected by the conflict. However, it does not offer any psychological tools or strategies to help readers process their emotions or cope with the ongoing situation.

Clickbait or Ad-Driven Words: The article does not use sensational or exaggerated language. It presents the information in a straightforward manner, focusing on the facts and the potential significance of the event.

In summary, while the article does not provide actionable steps or in-depth educational content, it serves an important role in keeping the public informed about a critical international event. It has personal relevance and long-term implications, and while it may not offer immediate solutions, it provides an update on a process that could significantly impact the future.

It is clear that the described situation, with its focus on international negotiations and the ongoing conflict, has the potential to severely disrupt the natural order and moral bonds within families and local communities.

The very nature of war and the pursuit of peace through such high-level talks removes the immediate responsibility of protection and care from the hands of families and places it in the domain of distant authorities and their representatives. This shift in responsibility can lead to a breakdown of trust and a sense of disempowerment within communities, as the fate of their kin and their land is decided by those who are not directly affected by the consequences.

The absence of a clear, unified front between the Ukrainian and Russian leaders, with one willing to meet face-to-face and the other refusing, further exacerbates this issue. It sends a message of division and a lack of unity, which can easily translate into confusion and conflict within families and local groups. The elders, who are meant to guide and offer wisdom, may find themselves in a position of uncertainty, unable to provide clear direction due to the complex and ever-changing nature of the conflict.

The talks, while aimed at resolving the conflict, also highlight a potential hypocrisy. The focus on prisoner exchanges and an immediate ceasefire, while noble, does not address the underlying issues that have driven families apart and caused the loss of life. Without a genuine effort to understand and address these root causes, the peace achieved may be temporary, and the cycle of conflict and its destructive impact on families and communities may continue.

To restore trust and rebuild the moral fabric, those involved must recognize their duty to the people they represent. This includes not only negotiating an end to the violence but also ensuring that the agreements made truly benefit the families and communities affected. Restitution and reparations, if necessary, should be made directly to those who have suffered, allowing for a personal apology and a chance to rebuild relationships.

If this behavior, where the fate of families is decided by distant powers and where the responsibility for peace is shifted away from local communities, spreads unchecked, it will lead to a society where kinship bonds are weakened, where the care of the vulnerable is neglected, and where the land and its resources are exploited without regard for future generations. The result will be a fragmented society, lacking the unity and strength that comes from shared duty and responsibility.

The real consequence is a world where families are divided, where children grow up without the guidance and protection of their elders, and where the land, the true source of life and continuity, is forgotten and abused. It is a future where the balance of life is threatened, and the survival of the people and their unique cultures is at risk.

This critique serves as a reminder that the strength of a society lies in the strength of its families and communities, and that true peace and prosperity can only be achieved when the moral bonds that unite people are upheld and respected.

"The talks aimed to facilitate a face-to-face meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin. While Zelensky has shown willingness to meet, Putin has not agreed to attend in person."

This sentence shows a bias towards Zelensky by implying that he is more willing to engage in peace talks. It creates a narrative where Putin is portrayed as less cooperative and more resistant to direct negotiations. The use of "willingness" and "not agreed" highlights this contrast, favoring Zelensky's position.

The text evokes a range of emotions, primarily centered around the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia and the anticipation surrounding the upcoming peace talks.

Gratitude is expressed by Andriy Yermak, the head of the Ukrainian Presidential Office, for Turkey's support during the conflict. This emotion is conveyed through the use of the word "gratitude" and is a sincere expression of appreciation, reflecting the Ukrainian delegation's recognition of Turkey's role in aiding their cause. It serves to build a positive image of Turkey's involvement and foster a sense of goodwill.

Hopefulness is another emotion that permeates the text, particularly regarding the potential for a face-to-face meeting between the Ukrainian and Russian presidents. The willingness of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to meet is a sign of optimism and a desire for a peaceful resolution. This emotion is intended to inspire a sense of possibility and encourage readers to believe that a diplomatic solution might be within reach.

Concern and anxiety are also present, especially regarding Russian President Vladimir Putin's reluctance to attend the talks in person. The absence of a direct meeting between the two leaders could be seen as a potential obstacle to progress, and this concern is likely to be shared by readers, who may worry about the impact this could have on the negotiations.

The text also conveys a sense of urgency and importance through the mention of key issues on the agenda, such as prisoner exchanges and an immediate ceasefire. The use of words like "immediate" and "crucial" emphasizes the need for swift action and highlights the severity of the situation. This emotional appeal is designed to capture the reader's attention and emphasize the gravity of the ongoing tensions.

The writer employs a range of persuasive techniques to evoke these emotions. For instance, the use of the phrase "ongoing tensions" is a subtle way to emphasize the duration and intensity of the conflict, which can evoke a sense of empathy and concern for the people affected. The repetition of the word "peace" throughout the text, especially in relation to the talks, is a powerful tool to reinforce the idea that a peaceful resolution is both desirable and possible.

Additionally, the writer provides a humanizing touch by mentioning the names and roles of key individuals involved, such as Andriy Yermak and Rustem Umerov. This personalizes the story and can help readers connect with the emotions expressed, as they may feel a greater sense of investment in the outcome of the talks when they are aware of the individuals driving the process.

In summary, the text skillfully weaves together emotions of gratitude, hope, concern, and urgency to guide the reader's reaction and shape their perspective on the upcoming peace talks. By evoking these emotions, the writer aims to create a sense of investment in the outcome, inspire action or support for a peaceful resolution, and ultimately, persuade readers of the importance and potential impact of these diplomatic efforts.