Ukrainian officials have maintained that they will not cede territory occupied by Russia in any peace settlement. However, as Ukraine considers an accelerated timetable for negotiations following the election of President-elect Donald J. Trump, the focus has shifted towards obtaining security guarantees rather than solely determining the cease-fire line.
With Ukrainian forces losing ground in the east, two senior officials indicated that the defense of Ukraine’s interests in potential talks would depend more on assurances for a lasting cease-fire than on territorial boundaries, which are likely to be influenced by ongoing fighting. Roman Kostenko, chairman of the Ukrainian Parliament’s Defense and Intelligence Committee, emphasized that “talks should be based on guarantees.”
A senior Ukrainian official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, stated that while the territorial question is significant, the primary concern is security guarantees. Ukraine's borders are defined by its 1991 declaration of independence, and despite Russia's control of approximately 20 percent of Ukrainian territory, Kyiv will not formally renounce its claims over these areas.
President Volodymyr Zelensky has previously noted that any cease-fire discussions would not lead to international recognition of the occupied territories as belonging to Russia. Skepticism regarding Russia's commitment to a settlement remains high in Ukraine, given past experiences with cease-fires in 2014 and 2015 that failed to prevent further conflict.
Ukrainian officials are pursuing NATO membership as a security guarantee against potential Russian aggression. While Western officials have expressed support for Ukraine's NATO aspirations, they have not indicated a desire for an expedited process. Additionally, Kyiv has sought a robust supply of conventional weapons from the West to deter renewed hostilities.
Security guarantees are expected to be a contentious issue in any peace negotiations. Previous talks in 2022 faltered over Russia's refusal to accept a binding agreement that would ensure defense support for Ukraine from other countries in the event of future attacks.
Russia has consistently opposed Ukraine's NATO membership, viewing it as a deal breaker for any cease-fire agreement, while also signaling its intention to retain control over captured Ukrainian territory. Following Trump's election, discussions regarding a potential settlement have intensified, marking a departure from the Biden administration's stance that Ukraine should dictate the terms and timing of negotiations.
President Putin has attempted to frame Ukraine as the obstructive party in peace talks, while Ukrainian and Western officials perceive his demands as requiring capitulation. An immediate concern for any cease-fire is Ukraine's occupation of parts of Kursk, Russia, which Kyiv views as a bargaining chip, while Moscow sees Ukraine's withdrawal as a prerequisite for negotiations.
Some Russian lawmakers have suggested that if Ukraine withdraws from Kursk, a cease-fire could be established by spring. However, hard-liners in Moscow believe that territorial disputes will complicate any potential agreement. Ukrainian officials are also focused on ensuring that any cease-fire line does not hinder the country's economic recovery post-war.
Within Trump's circle, there are varying opinions on Ukraine, with some aligning with Kremlin perspectives while others advocate for increased military support. Trump has previously urged Zelensky to negotiate and indicated that he could facilitate a resolution to the conflict.
Zelensky has been seeking support from the U.S. and European nations for a “peace through strength” strategy to bolster Ukraine's military position before negotiations. Various proposals for peace, including those from China, Brazil, and Turkey, have emerged, but Ukraine's own plan, known as the Peace Formula, outlines ten demands, including full withdrawal and reparations.
Despite a growing willingness among Ukrainians to consider territorial concessions for peace, securing a favorable settlement while facing Russian advances poses significant challenges. Experts suggest that the party in a stronger position will dictate the terms of any agreement.