The Black Sea Grain Initiative Documents of 22 July 2022: What the Istanbul Texts Actually Said

Why It Matters

The Black Sea Grain Initiative of 22 July 2022 was the only wartime arrangement in the Russia–Ukraine war in which both belligerents accepted a verified, jointly staffed shipping mechanism. Reading the Istanbul texts closely shows what each party actually committed to, and why the arrangement could function while it lasted and fail when its parallel track stalled. The documents are a case study in how a legally modest, technically specific agreement can move more than 33 million tons of food.

Background

The problem the texts addressed

Following Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, commercial shipping from Ukraine's Black Sea ports largely stopped. Ukraine was a major exporter of wheat, maize and sunflower oil, and the UN and food-security agencies warned of price shocks in import-dependent countries. Mines in Ukrainian waters, the presence of Russian naval forces and the risk of attack on ports all kept merchant ships away.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres proposed a package in spring 2022 linking Ukrainian grain exports with facilitation of Russian food and fertilizer exports. Türkiye offered a venue and a guarantor role. Technical talks among Turkish, Russian, Ukrainian and UN delegations took place in Istanbul in July 2022.

What was signed on 22 July 2022

The ceremony took place at Dolmabahçe Palace in Istanbul with President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Secretary-General Guterres present. Two instruments were concluded:

Instrument	Parties	Core content
Initiative on the Safe Transportation of Grain and Foodstuffs from Ukrainian Ports (the Black Sea Grain Initiative)	Türkiye and the UN, each with Russia and with Ukraine (separate signatures, not one joint signature page)	Safe passage for commercial vessels from Odesa, Chornomorsk and Pivdennyi (Yuzhny); JCC in Istanbul; inspection and monitoring procedures; initial 120-day term, renewable
Memorandum of Understanding between the Russian Federation and the UN Secretariat	Russia and the UN	UN undertaking to help remove obstacles to Russian food and fertilizer exports to world markets, including through engagement with private operators and relevant states

The structure matters legally. Russia and Ukraine did not sign a bilateral document with each other, which allowed each to say it had made no agreement with the other. Both instead committed to the Initiative through Türkiye and the UN. For a method of reading such instruments, see How to Read an International Treaty: Ratification, Reservations and Pacta Sunt Servanda.

The operating provisions

The Initiative text, as publicly released by the UN, set out a compact set of arrangements:

• Covered cargo: grain, foodstuffs and fertilizers, including ammonia, from the three named Ukrainian ports.
• Joint Coordination Centre: a body in Istanbul with senior representatives of Russia, Ukraine, Türkiye and the UN, charged with agreeing detailed procedures and coordinating the operation. It began work in the days after signing.
• Shipping route: vessels moved along a designated corridor in the Black Sea, with Ukrainian pilots guiding ships through Ukrainian waters, and with all parties undertaking not to attack commercial vessels or port facilities involved.
• Inspection: outbound and inbound vessels were inspected by JCC teams, to confirm that outbound ships carried only agreed cargo and that inbound ships were not carrying weapons. Inspections generally took place in Turkish waters near Istanbul.
• Duration: an initial 120 days, with extension unless a party objected.

The first ship under the arrangement, the Razoni, left Odesa on 1 August 2022. The text was extended in November 2022, in March 2023 (with Russia stating it agreed to only 60 days), and in May 2023, before Russia declined to extend on 17 July 2023.

Results

The UN and Turkish officials reported that the corridor delivered more than 33 million tons of grain and other foodstuffs over roughly a year, with over a thousand voyages. Wheat, maize and sunflower products went to a wide range of destinations, including cargoes chartered by the World Food Programme for humanitarian operations. For the diplomacy behind the deal, see Interstate Journal: Black Sea Grain Initiative: How Türkiye Helped Broker the Deal.

Key Players & Positions

Ukraine

Kyiv, through its Ministry of Infrastructure and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, treated the corridor as essential to its economy and to global food supply. Ukrainian officials argued that Russia violated the spirit of the arrangement by striking the port of Odesa within a day of signing on 23 July 2022, and that Moscow used inspection delays and the extension cycle as leverage. After Russia's withdrawal, Ukraine announced its own temporary corridor along the western Black Sea coast in August 2023, which Ankara did not administer and which operated outside the Istanbul framework.

Russia

Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Kremlin argued that the Initiative was one half of a package and that the second half, the Russia–UN memorandum, was not being implemented. Moscow's listed grievances included the disconnection of the Russian Agricultural Bank (Rosselkhozbank) from the SWIFT messaging system, restrictions on shipping, insurance and port access for Russian cargoes, spare parts for agricultural machinery, and the dormant Togliatti–Odesa ammonia pipeline. Russia also argued that much of the grain went to wealthier economies rather than the poorest countries. Russia said on 17 July 2023 that it would return to the arrangement if its conditions were met. Russian officials said the Odesa strike of 23 July 2022 targeted military infrastructure.

United Nations

The UN Secretariat stated that the Initiative and the memorandum were separate instruments, that sanctions regimes imposed by the US, EU and others contained exemptions for food and fertilizer, and that it had worked to reassure banks, insurers and shippers. Guterres sent Moscow proposals in 2023, including on a Rosselkhozbank subsidiary, and publicly expressed regret when Russia ended participation. UN data on the JCC's website tracked every voyage and the destination of each cargo.

Türkiye's Legal Stance

According to the Turkish Presidency and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Türkiye acted as co-architect, host and guarantor of the arrangement, not as a party to the war. The stance rests on the following points:

• Host and co-architect, not belligerent. Ankara states, through the Presidency and the Directorate of Communications, that it hosted the talks, the signing and the JCC, and that the Turkish Ministry of National Defence (MSB) provided logistics, security and inspection support. The legal premise is that Türkiye is not a party to the armed conflict and can therefore serve as a neutral venue and facilitator.
• Montreux obligations continued in parallel. The Turkish Foreign Ministry's position is that the Initiative did not modify the 1936 Montreux Convention. Türkiye invoked Article 19 on 28 February 2022, closing the Straits to warships of belligerent states, and maintained that closure impartially. Montreux Article 4 preserves the passage of merchant vessels in wartime when Türkiye is not a belligerent, which is the regime the grain ships relied on in transit. See Territorial Brief: Montreux Article 19 Explained for the closure itself.
• Consent-based design. Because Russia and Ukraine each agreed through Türkiye and the UN rather than to a peace settlement, Ankara describes the Initiative as a humanitarian and technical arrangement that does not prejudge territorial or sovereignty questions. Its legal force derived from the signatories' consent and from their reciprocal commitments, as with other arrangements of this type.
• Continued diplomacy after the lapse. President Erdoğan and the Foreign Ministry stated after July 2023 that Türkiye regretted Russia's decision and would work with the UN and both parties to revive the corridor and to support wider peace efforts. For Türkiye's wider mediation record, see The Political Anatomy: Türkiye as Mediator and Crossroads Review.

This section states Ankara's position as an explicit editorial perspective. The factual chronology above is drawn from UN and public records and can be checked against them; our method is set out in Editorial Principles.

Source Comparison

The same agreement is framed differently depending on the source. The table summarizes the main differences, based on each side's own public statements.

Question	UN and Western media framing	Russian official framing	Ukrainian official framing	Turkish primary sources
What was signed	A food-security package with two linked tracks	Two packages; the Russian track was the counterpart to Ukrainian exports	A shipping corridor imposed by Russian blockade	Humanitarian and technical arrangement hosted by Türkiye
Role of the memorandum	Separate but politically linked	Essential condition of continued participation	Russian pretext for leverage	A UN-Russia track that Türkiye supported diplomatically
Why it ended	Russia declined to extend on 17 July 2023	Conditions on Russian exports were unmet	Russia chose to weaponize food supply	Regret; call for the parties to return
Who benefited	Developing and developed importers; WFP cargoes	Mainly wealthier states, in Moscow's view	Ukraine and global markets	Global food security and price stability
Legal character	Voluntary arrangement among consenting parties	Reciprocal commitments, conditional	Humanitarian corridor	Consent-based; Montreux unaffected

Where the sources diverge, the primary texts are the best check: the Initiative's operative paragraphs are public on the UN's site, as is the memorandum's wording. Readers should compare claims about implementation with the JCC's published voyage data and with each government's official statements rather than rely on summaries. The broader documentary approach is explained on About The Treaty Line, and a comparable document-chain method for another subject appears in The Documentary Chain of Türkiye's Maritime Claims.

Key Terms & Related Guides

• Joint Coordination Centre (JCC): the Istanbul body with Russian, Ukrainian, Turkish and UN representatives that coordinated inspections and vessel movements.
• Memorandum of Understanding (MoU): a political-level instrument; the Russia–UN MoU set out UN facilitation efforts rather than binding trade guarantees.
• Montreux Convention (1936): the treaty governing passage through the Turkish Straits; Article 19 restricts belligerent warships in wartime, while merchant passage continues under its other provisions.
• Dolmabahçe Palace: the Istanbul venue of the 22 July 2022 signing.
• Related reading: The Treaty Line home, How to Read an International Treaty, Editorial Principles, and Bloc Politics on Montreux.

Perspective Note: The Treaty Line presents Türkiye's legal and strategic perspective as an explicit editorial position, and identifies it as such throughout. Claims are anchored in primary sources such as treaty texts, UN documents, Ottoman and Turkish archives, and official statements, which are cited so readers can verify them independently.