In one, the president of the United States, Donald Trumpput pressure on his Ukrainian counterpart, to consider ceding swaths of territory in order to reach a ceasefire with Russia. One of the areas of most interest is Donbas, and you know why.
In fact, after the meeting, Russia will keep part or all of the conquered territories. “He’s going to keep things. He has fought and seized property. The only country that gains territory and then leaves is us, as happened with Bush,” he indicated in relation to the Iraq war.
He also publicly called for a ceasefire, supported by Zelensky. A source close to the conversation That the US leader presented that proposal during the meeting after Zelensky stated that he would not voluntarily cede any territory to Moscow. “The meeting ended with (Trump’s) decision to reach an ‘agreement where we are, on the demarcation line'”accurate.
A position that the American leader reiterated on Sunday from Air Force One: “We believe that what they (Russia and Ukraine) should do is simply stop at the lines where they meet, the battle lines. The rest are very difficult to negotiate if you tell them: ‘You take this, we take that.'”
When asked if he had suggested to Zelensky that Ukraine should hand over all to Russia, Trump denied it. “Let it be divided as it is. It is already divided. I think 78% of the territory is already occupied by Russia”Trump responded to a question from a Reuters journalist. “Leave it like this for now. You can negotiate something later.“, he stated.
White House sources confirmed that Trump was referring largely to the lands of Donbas, a vast region of eastern Ukraine that includes the territories of Donetsk y Luhanskwhere Russian forces have consolidated positions since 2022.
Rejection in kyiv
The proposal was received with discomfort on Zelensky’s partwho rejected the idea of giving up any part of Ukrainian territory. “We will not abandon Donbas. We can’t do it. Everyone forgets the first thing: our territories are illegally occupied. For Russians, Donbas is a springboard for future new offensive“the Ukrainian president declared in August, in response to previous speculation about a possible ceasefire.
“If we withdraw from Donbas of our own free will or if we are pressured, we will lead to a third war. Because? was, without a doubt, a springboard for an offensive in the south of our State. “Donbas was, without a doubt, a springboard for not taking care of Ukrainian citizens, not using their own, not carrying out any mobilization and converting the separatists into the Russian army,” he warned.
According to Ukrainian officials consulted by local media, Trump’s suggestion contradicts his position last monthwhen the American president assured that kyiv was “in a position to fight and win all of Ukraine in its original form”.
Washington’s apparent rectification has generated confusion among European allieswho fear that any territorial concessions would set a dangerous precedent and reward the Kremlin’s military aggression. Instead, for some analysts in Washington, Trump’s new approach reflects a pragmatic calculation in the face of a war that has stalled and threatens to drag on indefinitely.
The strategic value of Donbas
The Donbas, a name derived from the Donés River and the word “basin” (in reference to its vast coal area), is the industrial heart of Ukrainewith an extension of about 52,000 square kilometerssimilar to the size of Croatia. It is home to coal mines, steel mills, metallurgical plants and strategic ports, including Mariupol, on the coast of the Sea of Azov.
During the Soviet era, Donbas was considered the economic engine of industrializationessential for the development of the Soviet Union. But after the 1991 collapse, the region fell into a prolonged economic and demographic declinemarked by disinvestment and the obsolescence of its infrastructure.
The area also has a political and symbolic weight. Was bastion of the Party of Regions and birthplace of former president Viktor Yanukovychoverthrown in 2014 after the Maidan protests. His flight to Russia sparked a pro-Russian insurgency, supported by Moscow, which gave rise to the self-proclaimed “people’s republics” of Donetsk and Luhansk.
For the Kremlin, control of Donbas remains a . The region is part of what Vladimir Putin calls “Nomurossia” Nueva Russiaa concept that dates back to the 18th century and evokes imperial expansion towards the Black Sea and the Balkans.
The Belt of Strength
Since 2022, Russian forces have consolidated positions in much of Donbas. After a three-month siege, Sievierodonetsk was taken shortly after, and in 2023 Russian troops after one of the bloodiest battles of the conflict.
In response, the Ukrainian command built a “belt of strength”a defensive line of about 50 kilometers linking the cities of Slovyansk, Kramatorsk and Kostyantynivka, reinforced with trenches, anti-tank obstacles, bunkers and minefields.
“The demands on Ukraine to hand over the remaining part of the Donetsk region are unrealistic from the point of view of the future defense capabilities of Ukraine“he explained Kirill Martynoveditor-in-chief of the Russian newspaper in exile Novaya Gazeta Europein statements to Current Time.
“Putin has been trying to conquer the Donetsk region for 11 years. And giving him the fortified areas that remain under Ukrainian control is, in reality, a route to Kharkiv and Dnieper. And, in general, a path towards a new war in which Putin will have an even easier time winning“he added, in line with what Zelensky warned.
The Kremlin’s vision
The Donbas also has deep historical and cultural significance for Moscow. For centuries, the region has been viewed by Russian nationalists as a natural extension of the East Slavic world. Putin, influenced by ideologues like Alexander Duginhas promoted the idea of a ‘Russkiy Mir’ (Russian World), which seeks to culturally and politically integrate the Russian-speaking communities of the post-Soviet space.
Before 2014, Russian was widely spoken in Donbas, although ethnic Ukrainians remained in the majority. Despite Moscow’s attempts to justify its invasion as supposed “protection” of that minority, previous referendums demonstrated a broad support for Ukrainian sovereignty.
