Ali Oğuz Diriöz from TOBB ETÜ University adirioz@etu.edu.tr

Dear Readers,

Europe is once again entering the Christmas season under the shadow of war. The conflict in Ukraine, ongoing since 2022, has not only reshaped realities on the battlefield but has also led to a marked hardening and stagnation in Europe’s political discourse and diplomatic reflexes. Yet Christmas, beyond being a symbol of peace, compassion, and reconciliation in the Christian world, has historically represented one of the rare periods during which hostilities could at least temporarily be suspended. The fundamental question facing Europe today is therefore clear: Can this symbolic yet meaningful period be transformed into an opportunity to halt hostilities between Russia and Ukraine, extend an humanitarian ceasefire, and perhaps initiate a more durable peace process?

Recent rhetoric emanating particularly from Germany and European Union institutions has fostered a strong perception that diplomatic options have been almost entirely exhausted. While a harsh and punitive discourse toward Russia has been adopted, military and financial support for Ukraine has increasingly become the near-exclusive policy instrument. Diplomacy, by contrast, is often portrayed as a secondary option—summarized as something that has been “tried and failed.” Yet not everything has been tried. Declaring that “there are no alternatives left” without returning to the negotiating table is premature.

The recent past offers the clearest evidence of this. In 2022, during the early months of the conflict, negotiations initiated in Türkiye at the level of foreign ministers produced tangible and meaningful outcomes despite the severity of the war. Chief among these was the grain corridor agreement, which proved vital for global food security. By enabling Ukrainian grain to reach global markets via the Black Sea, this mechanism helped prevent a deepening food crisis, particularly in fragile regions of Africa and the Middle East. During the same period, again through Türkiye’s mediation, large-scale and historically significant prisoner exchanges were carried out between Russia and Ukraine—sometimes with the involvement of the United States. These developments clearly demonstrated that diplomacy is not entirely ineffective, even under conditions of war.

Today, the calendar once again offers such a humanitarian and diplomatic window. Christmas Eve on 24 December, New Year’s Eve on 31 December, and Christmas celebrated on 7 January according to the Orthodox calendar in Russia together constitute a roughly two-week period that is both symbolically and practically significant. As observed in various conflict zones in the past, religious and cultural occasions can serve as starting points for at least temporary ceasefires. Even a short pause in hostilities allows civilians to breathe and creates space for renewed engagement between the parties.

At this juncture, Türkiye possesses not only a geopolitical but also a historical and symbolic advantage. Saint Nicholas—the Christian saint who inspired the fictional character known today as Santa Claus—originated from Demre, in present-day Antalya. Demre is also home to a street named after Andrey Karlov, the Russian Ambassador to Türkiye who was assassinated in Ankara in 2016. Karlov served during an exceptionally difficult period and firmly believed in dialogue and the transformative power of diplomacy. His memory constitutes a powerful symbol for renewed peace efforts today.

Within this framework, initiating diplomatic contacts in Demre or Antalya in Karlov’s memory would convey a strong symbolic and political message. Initial informal engagements at the level of experts and former diplomats could be followed by meetings among foreign ministers, and ultimately by a more comprehensive peace process involving heads of state. These proposals are not detached from realism. What was possible in 2022 can—and should—be attempted again today.

As Europe’s Claim to Being a Force for Peace Is Reassessed

While the European Union adopts a firm stance against Russia, its acquiescence to Greece and to the Greek Cypriot Administration—which will assume the EU Council Presidency in January 2026—and their joint actions with Israel that escalate tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean, increasingly undermines the Union’s identity as a “peaceful power.” Once awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for this very claim, the European Union now appears to be gradually drifting away from its role as an international actor capable of amplifying peace through positive spillover effects.

Neither international public opinion, nor Turkish public opinion, nor American public opinion—nor indeed that of many EU member states—will find credible the claim, led by Germany and Chancellor Merz, that “everything has been tried in the name of peace, there is nothing left to negotiate, and Ukraine must be supported unconditionally,” without a renewed diplomatic initiative even being attempted. Without a return to the negotiating table, such assertions lack persuasiveness.

It must therefore be reiterated that, from Türkiye’s perspective, abandoning either Russia or Ukraine is not an option. Türkiye continues to recognize Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereign rights. However, halting hostilities does not equate to relinquishing Ukraine’s sovereignty. On the contrary, giving diplomacy a chance to resolve disputes first and foremost stops the loss of life and prevents further tragedies.

At a time when the conflict is increasingly shifting toward the Black Sea arena, and when foreign actors’ dynamics—including drones—are targeting routes passing through Türkiye, it is only natural that Türkiye stands among the countries most eager to see the fighting end. Regional peace and stability are vital to Türkiye’s security as well as its economic and political interests. Accordingly, Türkiye’s calls for diplomacy rest not only on moral grounds but also on solid strategic foundations.

From a personal analytical standpoint, a possible framework for resolution could involve leaving Ukraine’s territorial integrity to the sovereign decision of the Ukrainian people, while establishing demilitarized zones in certain areas, postponing Ukraine’s NATO membership for the time being, and simultaneously accelerating the European Union accession processes of both Türkiye and Ukraine. Such an approach would place responsibility squarely on the European Union and compel it to assume genuine responsibility—beyond rhetorical commitments—for Europe’s security architecture.

Europe’s security cannot be ensured through short-sighted approaches that portray Türkiye as a threat, as attempted by the current administration of the Greek Cypriot side. Instead, deeper cooperation with Central and Eastern European countries that view Türkiye as a security partner will, in the long term, provide a far more solid foundation for lasting peace and stability along the Russia–Ukraine axis and across the Black Sea region.

The spirit of Christmas does not promise miracles; however, it encourages the parties to pause, reflect, step out from under the shadow of weapons, and find the courage to speak once again. It is hoped that this article will prompt all sides to give diplomacy at least one more chance and to move toward a more durable solution. Peace is difficult, demanding, and time-consuming—but without diplomacy, its success is simply unattainable.