American President Donald Trump has moved away from his Thanksgiving target date for a Ukrainian accord, despite his desire to be portrayed as the peace architect.
This serves as a major indicator that the forthcoming resolution of his peace efforts—currently taking the form of a meeting in Moscow between his representative, Steve Witkoff, and the Kremlin—is unlikely to suddenly deliver an agreement to halt the Russian aggression.
The disagreements separating Kyiv and Moscow remain stark, their justifications for inflexibility deeply entrenched in notions of sacrifice, apprehension, and bloodshed. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s reluctance to embrace any proposition that fails to grant him dominion over Ukraine’s entire eastern Donetsk region is expected to persist in the immediate future.
The latest American proposition purportedly omits that crucial concession found in the plan circulated last week, a concession neither Kyiv nor its European partners deem strategically or politically sound. Considering the decade-old history of this conflict—Russia’s three incursions into Ukrainian territory, interspersed with years of negotiations and prevarication—doubts regarding Moscow’s sincerity are understandable.
This recurring, cyclical inability to fully grasp the vast distance between the two combatant parties—articulated across two distinct negotiation tracks—is fundamentally the reason progress always seems imminent yet perpetually out of reach. Negotiating one understanding with Ukraine and a separate one with Russia, then optimistically expecting convergence, creates the tempting mirage of forward movement, but practically leads nowhere. The obstacles remain firmly in place.
A significant portion of the suggested agreement comprises speculative, theoretical notions concerning future defense pacts, financial arrangements, or limitations. However, much like elements in preceding memoranda, these details might transform into something more tangible, or vanish entirely, in the months following any treaty ratification.
Ukraine will probably not require an armed force of 600,000, the ceiling suggested in the draft agreement, should its true aim be tranquility. Alignment with NATO may become a less pressing concern, and less feasible during peacetime, as Ukraine faces the necessity of demobilization and confronting the economic devastation of a post-conflict economy, and the resulting toll on its military cohesion.
Will Russia be readmitted to the G8? It might aspire to this, but the prospect of Putin engaging in a summit handshake with leaders of European nations that still harbor antagonism toward him appears remote. Who will finance Ukraine’s rebuilding? Anyone familiar with the intricate opacity of business dealings in Russia and Ukraine will recognize that this will not be straightforward or transparent, regardless of the structure devised. These facets of any agreement necessitate attention, but are susceptible to change upon initial contact with real-world application.
The single most critical element is whether any settlement genuinely halts the fighting. And Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky is poised once more to confront a dire choice. He must weigh the merit of prospective security assurances, formalized by the United States and Europe, against the tangible and unavoidable detriment that relinquishing Donetsk would inflict upon his own, and Ukraine’s, political and military standing. It represents a poor bargain if an agreement is reached. Conversely, there is no choice at all if, in the long run, Moscow, as in the past, disregards the accord.
A member of the Ukrainian Armed Forces scans the skies for Russian military drones near the frontline community of Kostiantynivka in the Donetsk region of Ukraine on Thursday.
A member of the Ukrainian Armed Forces scans the skies for Russian military drones near the frontline community of Kostiantynivka in the Donetsk region of Ukraine on Thursday. Reuters
However, the immediate outlook offers no positive developments. A multitude of issues currently beset Zelensky’s administration. President Donald Trump’s deadline has overshadowed a corruption controversy that resurfaced Friday with reports that investigators executed a search warrant at the residence of his chief of staff and lead negotiator, Andriy Yermak.
Ukraine’s military is facing a personnel deficit. Financial backing from Kyiv’s European partners is uncertain for the coming year, despite the European Union recently expressing confidence in its ability to cover any shortfall. Furthermore, on the fighting fronts, three separate challenges are materializing: Russia is advancing rapidly in Zaporizhzhia, methodically but steadily in Pokrovsk, Donetsk region, and pushing ahead in Kupiansk, further north. Ukraine lacks the necessary troop numbers to manage so many concurrent threats.
The remaining territory of Donetsk under Kyiv’s jurisdiction is also vulnerable this winter. The significant military center of Kramatorsk is already subject to strikes from Russian short-range drones, as Moscow’s troops are close enough to launch them. Kyiv is not in a position to reclaim territory from Russia anytime soon. The strategic assessment for Kyiv and its partners is not when they can reverse the war’s momentum, but rather, can they compel the Russians to falter first?
A serviceman with the Ukrainian Armed Forces observes the heavens for Russian combat drones, in proximity to the frontline settlement of Kostiantynivka in the Donetsk region of Ukraine, on Thursday.
A serviceman with the Ukrainian Armed Forces observes the heavens for Russian combat drones, in proximity to the frontline settlement of Kostiantynivka in the Donetsk region of Ukraine, on Thursday. Reuters
The unspoken hope held by Kyiv and its allies, perhaps a faint one, is that Ukraine can push Russia’s brutal disregard for manpower losses and its singular economic focus on the war to breaking point, causing it to collapse. Predicting the proximity to societal breakdown in closed systems like Russia is impossible. The Wagner group’s uprising in 2023 seemed improbable until Yevgeny Prigozhin’s forces were en route to Moscow over a tumultuous 72-hour period. Ukraine’s difficulties are more visible, and they are severe.
The ensuing struggle for Zelensky is fraught with peril. Russia possesses greater resources and is achieving tangible gains territorially. Ukraine’s fight is existential—it does not possess Moscow’s luxury of unilaterally deciding it has endured enough and ceasing the offensive. Yet, the cumulative effect of the last ten months of sluggish diplomatic confusion and abrupt changes has brought an unthinkable agreement closer to realization.
A man passes by a damaged structure in Kramatorsk, situated within Ukraine’s industrial Donbas, on Wednesday.
A man passes by a damaged structure in Kramatorsk, situated within Ukraine’s industrial Donbas, on Wednesday. Anatolii Stepanov/Reuters
The notion of Ukraine ceding territory to Moscow in exchange for peace was openly dismissed by Kyiv and Europe earlier this year, and consistently so throughout the Biden administration. It has now surfaced in the initial iteration of Trump’s 28-point peace framework. While absent from the circulated European counter-proposal, it evidently remains on Putin’s maximalist agenda.
A predictable cycle is now set to resume. Trump’s specialized envoy, Witkoff, will likely be informed again during his Moscow visit that Putin will not concede his requirement that Ukraine surrender Donetsk for the sake of peace. Witkoff will relay this information to Trump. Zelensky will face renewed pressure, and yet another deadline, akin to the Thanksgiving one, may be established.
About the Author
