Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has underlined his position, loud and clear. His position on land for peace is uncompromising – he will never trade Ukrainian land in exchange for a cessation of Russia’s war. This announcement comes as Ukrainian and U.S. delegations ramp up their respective diplomatic to support Ukraine’s efforts. They’re in the middle of discussing the major issues that emerged during last month’s negotiations in Geneva.
Russian President Vladimir Putin had earlier referred to Zelenskyy as “illegitimate”—a sentiment that has thus far loomed over the peace negotiations. Even so, Zelenskyy has consistently kept his eyes set on how to create the conditions for peace while not wavering on strong security guarantees for Ukraine. The president has been collaborating closely with the White House to revise a leaked 28-point U.S.-Russia plan, which serves as a basis for future discussions.
Andriy Yermak, Zelenskyy’s chief of staff, further noted that the president should not be expected to sign away any territory. He stated, “As long as Zelenskyy is president, no one should count on us giving up territory. He will not sign away territory.” This uncompromising demand is an indicator of Ukraine’s resolve to defend its sovereignty against interference from outside forces.
The direct meetings now scheduled between Ukrainian and U.S. counterparts should be focused on solidifying and reinforcing what has been agreed to in Geneva. Amid widespread speculation about a push toward peace negotiations, Zelenskyy’s administration has been crystal clear about his intentions. Similarly, they would never support a resolution that undermined Ukraine’s territorial integrity or sovereignty.
Prominent human rights advocate Oleksandra Matviichuk expressed her support for Zelenskyy’s efforts to renegotiate the U.S.-Russia plan, highlighting the need for productive dialogue. She remarked, “We need a peace, but not a pause that provides a chance to retreat and regroup,” underscoring the urgency of finding a viable resolution without conceding to Russian demands.
Putin acknowledged the discussions in Geneva, stating, “In general, we agree that this can be the basis for future agreements,” while noting that further negotiations would be necessary on several points. His comments are a window into continued willingness to engage, though on far from Ukraine-friendly terms.
Against this backdrop, interest has grown in the ethical and political implications of carelessly barreling ahead with a proposed state-level reparative schemes. Bart De Wever, stressing that these actions would potentially do the opposite and hinder moves towards a permanent peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia. North’s concerned that this would make things worse.