After more than three years of war, the prospects for peace in Ukraine remain dim. There is no clear and credible path even to a ceasefire, let alone to the establishment of a lasting and sustainable peace, the portal “Conversation” assesses, adding that the reason is that the positions of Russia and Ukraine on an acceptable outcome have not changed. Putin still insists on the complete annexation of four entire Ukrainian regions, as well as on the retention of Crimea. On the other hand, Zelensky has repeatedly ruled out the possibility of territorial concessions, and in this position he has strong support among Ukrainians.
American, Ukrainian and European officials tried to revive peace talks in London yesterday, after the cancellation of a trip by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised questions about how much progress has actually been made.
Rubio's absence from the meetings in London led to the cancellation of a major meeting of the foreign ministers of Ukraine, Britain, France and Germany, which further highlighted the differences in positions between Washington and Kiev, as well as its European allies, on how to end Russia's war against Ukraine.
The development comes days after US President Donald Trump warned that Washington could withdraw if progress is not made soon on a deal. Trump yesterday criticized Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky for his statement that Ukraine would not recognize Russia’s occupation of Crimea, calling it inflammatory and making it more difficult to reach a peace agreement with Russia. “This statement is very damaging to peace talks with Russia,” Trump wrote on the Truth Social network. He added that Crimea was lost many years ago “and is no longer a topic of conversation.”
The focus of the talks in London on Wednesday was on trying to determine what Kiev would accept, after Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff outlined proposals at a similar meeting in Paris last week. Three diplomats told Reuters that the proposals likely required more concessions from Ukraine than from Russia.
Witkoff's proposals, which multiple British agency sources said included recognition of Russia's annexation of Crimea, the beginning of the lifting of US sanctions on Russia, and the exclusion of Ukraine from NATO membership, were unacceptable to Ukraine and other European countries.
Vitkoff's proposals, which sources claim include, among other things, recognition of Russia's annexation of Crimea, the beginning of the lifting of US sanctions on Russia, and the exclusion of Ukraine from NATO membership, were unacceptable to Ukraine and other European countries.
US Vice President J.D. Vance said during a visit to India that he was “optimistic” and believed that “the Europeans, the Russians and the Ukrainians will ultimately be able to get this thing done.” But he also issued a clear ultimatum. “We have presented both the Russians and the Ukrainians with a very clear proposal, and it is time for them to either say ‘yes’ or for the United States to withdraw from this process.” “That means both the Ukrainians and the Russians will have to give up some of the territory they currently hold. There will have to be a territory swap.”
The cancellation of Rubio's visit, according to Reuters, further emphasized the difficulty of closing the gap between the conflicting parties.
A source close to the talks said the cancellation came after Ukraine prepared a document for European partners on Tuesday, stating that there would be no talks on territorial issues until there was a "complete and unconditional ceasefire."
Even if the numerous challenges that make it difficult to reach a ceasefire agreement could be overcome, a much deeper problem would remain: none of the key actors in the conflict appear to have a plan for an agreement that would be acceptable to both Kiev and Moscow, says "Conversation".
Previous proposals, such as the joint initiative by China and Brazil from May last year, were largely focused on a ceasefire as a springboard for negotiations on a real peace agreement.
These and other initiatives were largely imprecise about what a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine would actually entail, but Ukraine and its Western allies nevertheless firmly rejected them as biased in favor of Russia. Given that a ceasefire would simply “freeze” the front lines and very likely make them permanent, with or without a subsequent peace agreement, such a stance was not unreasonable, the portal points out.
Kiev also rejected some of Steve Witkoff's proposals, which Marco Rubio said were met with an encouraging reception in Paris.
Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Sviridenko said Kiev would not recognize Russian sovereignty over Crimea, the Ukrainian peninsula that Russia annexed in 2014. “Ukraine is ready for negotiations, but not for capitulation,” Sviridenko wrote on the X network. “A complete ceasefire, on land, in the air and at sea, is a necessary first step. If Russia decides on a limited pause, Ukraine will respond in kind. Our people will not accept a frozen conflict disguised as peace.”
Besides the Crimea issue, other key obstacles remain. According to the sources, the US proposals include accepting the reality that Russia controls the remaining 20% of Ukrainian territory. Russia is insisting that EU sanctions be lifted before the negotiations are concluded, which Europe is firmly opposed to, diplomats say.
Some of Washington's proposals are also likely to face disapproval in Moscow. Two diplomats told Reuters that the United States is not pushing for Russia's demand that Ukraine be demilitarized, nor is it opposed to a European military presence as part of future security guarantees for Ukraine.
Witkoff will meet with President Vladimir Putin in Russia this week, the White House said.
At this point, the Russian president has very little incentive to agree to anything less than his maximum demands and to stop a war he believes he can still win on the battlefield, especially given Trump's unwillingness to put any serious pressure on Moscow.
It seems increasingly likely that Trump will simply abandon his efforts to end the fighting in Ukraine. From the Russian perspective, that would be preferable to a ceasefire that would freeze the conflict but not lead to a peace agreement that reflects Moscow's demands, "Conversation" points out.
The Kremlin is likely thinking that even if the 2026 US congressional elections weaken Trump’s grip on power, there will still be two years left to conquer additional Ukrainian territory. If Washington then tries again to broker a ceasefire, Moscow could demand that all those additional conquests be recognized as the “price” Ukraine must pay for peace.
Even if Trump doesn't give up on negotiations now, and if Witkoff eventually manages to broker some kind of deal, it's more likely to resemble a ceasefire than a true peace agreement.
It is becoming increasingly clear to the West that a peace agreement is almost impossible on terms that would satisfy all parties. To the extent that there are joint efforts at all by Ukraine, the US and the European “coalition of the willing”, they are entirely focused on a functional ceasefire.
However, an exclusive focus on a ceasefire will not necessarily make achieving peace more likely.
Moreover, given Russia's history of violating the Minsk ceasefire agreements of September 2014 and February 2015, pinning all hopes on a ceasefire agreement could be devastating for Ukraine and its allies.
Bonus video:
