President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has firmly rejected a central component of the latest U.S.-backed peace proposal—one that would require Ukraine to withdraw forces from parts of the Donbas region and accept a new territorial arrangement that Kyiv argues is incompatible with Ukrainian law, sovereignty, and national identity.
The negotiations, now entering their most sensitive phase since early 2024, come as Washington steps up pressure on Kyiv to finalize a peace deal that could end more than three years of war. But Zelenskyy has drawn a clear line: Ukraine will not cede land, legally or morally, to Russia.
Zelenskyy’s Position: No Legal, Constitutional, or Moral Basis to Surrender Territory
At a recent briefing, Zelenskyy stated unequivocally that Ukraine has “no legal right under Ukrainian law, our constitution, or international law. And we have no moral right, either,” to hand over sovereign territory.
He reinforced that territory itself is the reason Ukrainians are fighting—to defend land, sovereignty, and national identity. Any peace agreement that would redraw borders, he stressed, cannot be approved solely by the executive branch.
Referendum as a Requirement
Zelenskyy reiterated that any proposal involving territorial concessions must ultimately be submitted to the people of Ukraine.
“Only the Ukrainian people can decide such a question,” he has said previously, referencing a nationwide referendum or elections as the legitimate mechanism. Under Ukrainian law and political norms, no president has the authority to cede land without direct democratic consent.
The U.S. Proposal: A New ‘Free Economic Zone’ in the Donbas
The current U.S. draft centers on creating a buffer zone in the Donbas—an area where Ukrainian troops would withdraw and Russian troops would be prohibited from advancing. Washington has reportedly described the area as a “free economic zone.” Russian officials, however, have referred to it as a “demilitarized zone.”
Key Elements of the Proposal
| Feature | Ukrainian Position (Zelenskyy) | Russian Position (Reported) |
|---|---|---|
| Withdrawal | Strategic Ukraine withdraws troops from parts of Donetsk it currently controls. |
Hardline Russia does not pull back; it simply pledges not to advance. |
| Status of Zone | Economic U.S. calls it a “free economic zone” with undefined governance. |
Military Russia calls it a “demilitarized zone.” |
| Governance | Security Kyiv questions how the zone will be policed and who ensures security. |
Claim Moscow claims “the whole of Donbas belongs to Russia.” |
Zelenskyy criticized the proposal for lacking clarity on the fundamentals: governance, security guarantees, verification, and enforcement mechanisms.
A Critical Question: Who Controls the Zone?
Zelenskyy asked directly:
“What will hold back these other troops, the Russians? Or what will stop them disguising themselves as civilians and taking over this free economic zone?”
This reflects Kyiv’s deep distrust of any arrangement that relies on Russian compliance without robust international oversight—especially given Russia’s repeated use of hybrid tactics, “little green men,” and non-uniformed forces in prior conflicts.
Negotiations Narrowed but Still Stalled
Officials familiar with the process say the original U.S.-drafted peace framework contained 28 points. European and Ukrainian input pushed revisions that narrowed it to a 20-point plan, now under review in Kyiv.
Why the Revision Matters
Early criticism from European diplomats and Ukrainian lawmakers described the initial draft as “overly favorable to Moscow.” The revised framework attempts to rebalance key elements, but according to Kyiv, the core problem remains untouched—territorial concessions.
U.S. Pressure Mounts as Trump Pushes for a Deal
U.S. President Donald Trump has intensified pressure on Zelenskyy in recent weeks. Trump has personally urged him to accept the draft, even publicly criticizing Zelenskyy for allegedly not reading the entire document thoroughly.
Biden Administration officials (in transition roles in 2025) and Congressional leaders have also stressed the urgency of concluding a peace agreement to stabilize global markets, limit further military expenditure, and reduce the risk of conflict escalation.
But Zelenskyy has made it clear: Ukraine will not sign a deal that hands Moscow a victory it could not achieve on the battlefield.
Additional Sticking Points Beyond Donbas
While Donbas remains the primary barrier, several other critical issues remain unresolved:
1. Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant
The Russian-occupied nuclear facility—Europe’s largest—remains one of the most sensitive flashpoints.
Kyiv insists that the site must return to full Ukrainian control with IAEA oversight.
Moscow has refused to discuss any arrangement that undermines its occupation.
2. Security Guarantees From the West
Ukraine is demanding a separate and detailed security treaty with Western partners.
This request references the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, in which Ukraine gave up its nuclear arsenal in exchange for security assurances that failed when Russia invaded Crimea and later launched its full-scale invasion.
Kyiv now requires binding commitments, potentially involving:
- long-term military aid
- air defense guarantees
- joint production of weapons systems
- security enforcement mechanisms
3. Long-Term Status of Russian-Annexed Territories
Russia continues to insist that “the whole of Donbas belongs to Russia,” including areas not currently controlled by its forces.
Ukraine maintains that all internationally recognized territory must be restored.
Why Zelenskyy’s Position Is Unlikely to Change
Despite U.S. pressure, several factors make Zelenskyy’s rejection unlikely to soften:
-
Ukrainian law prohibits ceding territory without public approval.
-
Political suicide: No Ukrainian leader can survive agreeing to de facto partition.
-
Military morale: Troops would see territorial concessions as invalidating sacrifices.
-
Public opinion: Polls show overwhelming opposition to giving up land.
-
Precedent risk: Conceding land could invite future Russian aggression.
Zelenskyy’s stance reflects both legal obligation and political reality.
Conclusion: A Peace Deal Remains Distant
While negotiations continue and the revised framework is on the table, the fundamental issue—territorial concessions remains an immovable obstacle.
Ukraine is willing to negotiate, revise proposals, and coordinate with Western partners. But surrendering sovereign land remains non-negotiable.
As Zelenskyy puts it, the war began because Russia sought to seize Ukraine’s territory.
Ending the war by rewarding that aggression, he argues, would undermine not just Ukraine’s sovereignty, but global security norms.
For now, the diplomatic path remains open, but progress is limited. Without a breakthrough on territorial integrity, a peace agreement remains unlikely.
0 Comments