He growing skepticism on the progress of Ukrainian troops on the battlefield against Russia and uncertainty about continued US support, are leading kyiv’s European allies to consider scenarios never accepted until now.
For example, in private the possibility of peace talks with Moscowwhich include concessions of Ukrainian territory to those of This change in position is influenced, of course, by Trump’s recent election victorywho has promised to quickly end the conflict, although without specifying how. He has only indicated that he could support an agreement that preserve some of the areas occupied by Russiaalthough kyiv has always refused to lose territory and sovereignty.
According to statements by European and NATO diplomats cited by the Portuguese portal , The prospect of discussions that include territorial concessions is gaining strength, something that was before taboo. These diplomats prefer to avoid the term “territories for peace”referring instead to these concessions as “territories for security of Ukraine”. A euphemism.
Gerard Araud, former French ambassador to the United States, affirms that the majority of those involved “have already reached this conclusion,” despite the difficulties of expressing it publicly, since it would be, he says, “a way to reward aggression”. Another Western diplomat, who preferred to remain anonymous, stressed that this perspective “no longer marginal” and that a resolution of the conflict must involve concessions on both sidesalthough it is not known exactly what the parameters of a possible agreement would be.
The situation on the ground is one of the main factors driving this change. Since the Russian troops control about a fifth of Ukraineincluding the Donbas region and Crimea, stabilizing the current front line or defining a demarcation line would imply a significant transfer of territory. Camille Grand, former undersecretary of NATO and current member of the European Council on Foreign Relations, admitted that “negotiations may come sooner than expected” and that a negotiated solution will likely include concessions.
“Negotiations may come sooner than expected”
Camille Grand, exsubsecretariat of NATO
Trump’s election has raised questions among European leaders about the position that the new North American Administration will adopt. According to Camille Grand, “There is a big doubt about how the Trump team will deal with this situation”. There is growing concern that the United States can pressure Ukraine to accept an unfavorable agreement, cutting off financial and military aid. In response, European leaders have stepped up military support for Ukraine so that it will have greater bargaining power if talks begin.
In an effort to strengthen this position, French President Emmanuel Macron stated during a conference together with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, that continued support for Ukraine is essential to achieve a fair negotiation: “The only way to negotiate is support the ukrainian army for as long as possible. “as necessary,” Macron said. And he reiterated: “when the time comes, nothing should be decided about Ukraine without Ukrainians, nor about Europe without Europeans“.
Macron, who recently had a 25-minute phone call with Trump, emphasized that Any deal must include significant concessions from Russia. This conversation took place ahead of a meeting of European leaders in Budapest, where they discussed ways to ensure continued financial and military support for Ukraine, even in the face of a possible cut in US aid.
Contingency plans and fears of setbacks
An EU diplomat revealed to the same North American newspaper that the possibility of a negotiated solution is gaining groundalthough discreetly. The approach, however, does not imply an explicit acceptance of the loss of strategic territories such as Donbasa topic considered too sensitive for public statements. To avoid a possible drastic change in US policy, several European countries They are increasing their defense budget and channeling additional resources to Ukraine, preparing for a possible cut in American support.
After Trump’s victory, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken . The priority of the current administration is to ensure that maximum military assistance reaches kyiv before the transition to the new administration, which will likely adopt a less interventionist stance.
So far, a resolution seems far off. Russia maintains strict demands, insisting that any deal include Ukraine’s complete neutrality. Russian President Putin stated that “Without Ukraine’s neutrality, it is difficult to imagine good-neighborly relations with Russia”. Additionally, Moscow wants Ukraine to return all territory in the Kursk region, where Ukrainian forces carried out raids over the summer.
The experience with the Minsk ceasefire agreements in 2014 and 2015 has left a lasting impression on Ukrainians, who fear that a “land for peace” agreement will only give Russia time to rearm. Ukrainian presidential advisor Mykhailo Podolyak was forceful in stating that pressuring Ukraine to negotiate under unfavorable conditions would amount to force her to “abandon her resistance”.
Despite external pressure, the official position of the Ukrainian Government remains firm: all Russian troops must withdraw from Ukrainian territory. According to a survey by the kyiv International Institute of Sociology, published this week, 58% of Ukrainians believe the country should not give up territory “under any circumstances”. However, 32% of those surveyed were open to giving up some areas to reach a peace agreement, three times more than at the beginning of the invasion.
While the consensus on a military solution continues to fragmentEuropean leaders are divided over what security guarantees could be offered to Ukraine. So far, countries such as the United States and Germany have rejected Ukraine’s request to join NATO.a critical point that Moscow uses to justify the war.
Among the ideas discussed are send European forces into the field or provide more weapons as deterrent measuresbut Russia considers these solutions unlikely to be viable. Some countries, including the United Kingdom and Eastern European nations, advocate the possibility of “boots on the ground” as a way to ensure Ukraine’s security in the event that an agreement is reached.
In reality, Eastern European countries, such as Poland and the Baltic nations, von the possibility of territorial concessions with great trepidation, fearing that Russia will feel emboldened to threaten NATO borders. Viktor Orban, the Hungarian leader known for his closeness to Moscow, has been the only one to publicly suggest the idea of a “land for peace” agreement.
A senior NATO official explained to The Washington Post Previously, any mention of concessions was “practically heresy,” but now the idea is beginning to generate less resistance. Despite this, the ultimate goal of many European allies remains that any deal is not seen as a victory for Putin.
“This is one of the most important points of any agreement made”highlighted the same official. “Under no circumstances can it be seen as a victory for Russia.”
