Table of Contents
The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has sparked complex negotiations aimed at achieving peace. Central to these discussions is the contentious issue of territory, which poses a significant obstacle to reaching an agreement. Both President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine and President Vladimir Putin of Russia have underscored the importance of this matter, indicating a need for clarity and compromise.
Following a recent escalation in the conflict, peace talks resumed on November 19. Reports indicated that the United States and Russia were collaboratively developing a new framework to address the war. However, initial drafts of the proposal included 28 points, which critics described as a mere wishlist reflecting the Kremlin’s demands. Despite these tensions, both parties are exploring the possibility of a truce, albeit under differing conditions.
Negotiation obstacles and shifting positions
The chaotic nature of the negotiations has been exemplified by public leaks and the frequent movement of delegations across various continents. Zelensky and his European allies have sought to refine the 28-point plan, yet no concrete updated proposal has been disclosed, leaving the territorial questions unresolved. Putin has consistently pressed for Ukraine to withdraw its military presence from the Donbas region, which is under Ukrainian control, a demand that Zelensky has firmly rejected.
U.S. influence on negotiations
The role of the United States, particularly under the Trump administration, has added another layer of complexity to the discussions. As Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, engaged with Putin, they were unable to broker any significant compromises, with territory remaining a central focus of contention. Kremlin spokesperson Yuri Ushakov confirmed that the territorial issue continues to be a major sticking point for Russia, highlighting the challenges both sides face in finding common ground.
In earlier stages of the negotiations, both Russia and Ukraine adopted positions aimed at persuading the U.S. that the other side was the primary obstacle to peace. However, the latest discussions suggest a potential convergence in their peace terms, likely influenced by military developments, economic factors, and domestic political pressures.
Key points in the territorial debate
Within the leaked proposal, the term territories is notably highlighted as point 21. While Putin has shown commitment to maintaining control over the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, which constitute the Donbas, he has not definitively ruled out aspirations for the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions. These areas were formally annexed by Russia in September, yet Putin continues to insist on Ukraine’s withdrawal from any occupied territories.
Prospects for a compromise
There are indications that Moscow may be contemplating a compromise aligned with the U.S. plan. Following a meeting between Trump and Putin, Russian officials have moderated their demands for the complete transfer of all contested regions. Witkoff’s remarks suggested a willingness to negotiate over just the Donetsk region and possibly consider land swaps, omitting Kherson and Zaporizhzhia from immediate discussions.
However, the specific terms surrounding the territories remain contentious, particularly concerning the creation of a demilitarized buffer zone and international recognition of these regions as Russian territory. A Russian official acknowledged that Moscow’s firm stance includes three non-negotiable pillars: the Donbas territory, limits on Ukraine’s military capabilities, and recognition from the U.S. and Europe.
Strategic implications of the conflict
As the conflict has progressed, the strategic significance of the territories in question has changed. The areas in the Donbas that remain under Ukrainian control, particularly around Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, have diminished military value compared to those occupied by Russia. The 28-point plan envisions a scenario where Russia relinquishes control over certain regions outside of Crimea, yet any potential exchange of occupied territories might not yield a substantial military advantage for Russia.
Moreover, the devastation wrought by the conflict has severely impacted the region’s economy and infrastructure, underscoring the dire humanitarian conditions faced by its inhabitants. The ongoing struggle for control over resources, such as the Severskiy Donetsk-Donbas canal, further complicates the situation, as it serves as a critical water source for several cities.
Following a recent escalation in the conflict, peace talks resumed on November 19. Reports indicated that the United States and Russia were collaboratively developing a new framework to address the war. However, initial drafts of the proposal included 28 points, which critics described as a mere wishlist reflecting the Kremlin’s demands. Despite these tensions, both parties are exploring the possibility of a truce, albeit under differing conditions.0