As President Trump calls for a deal to end the war in Ukraine, the possibility of a negotiated settlement between Russia and Ukraine is gaining attention. After a lengthy conversation between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, and with talks expected this week between U.S. and Russian officials in Saudi Arabia, expectations are rising that the nearly three-year conflict could come to a close.
But what might a peace deal actually look like? Who would be involved in the talks? And what compromises could both sides make?
The New York Times has been covering the potential for a peace agreement since the early days of the war in 2022 when direct talks between Ukraine and Russia initially failed to produce results. Here’s a closer look at how negotiations might unfold.
The Challenge: Concessions and Tough Bargains
Ukraine currently faces limited options for reversing Russia’s territorial gains, which means any agreement is likely to involve painful concessions. This raises concerns that Trump’s proposed deal might reward Putin for his aggression. However, Putin may also have reasons to negotiate. Russia’s economy is struggling under the weight of war-related spending, and the military is suffering heavy casualties. Additionally, a deal could pave the way for easing Western sanctions on Russia.
While some believe a deal is possible, the road to peace would be complicated. There is skepticism that Putin will negotiate in good faith, and Ukraine, along with its European allies, fears that Trump could bypass them in his talks with Russia.
Who’s Involved?
The Biden administration has pushed for negotiations that involve Ukraine’s participation, aiming to isolate Russia diplomatically. However, Trump’s approach shifted in mid-February, when he discussed Ukraine with Putin and then indicated that he would “inform” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky about the conversation. This has led to Ukraine’s exclusion from a major diplomatic meeting between Trump’s aides and their Russian counterparts in Saudi Arabia.
Despite this, European countries may also be sidelined, despite providing over $140 billion in aid to Ukraine—more than the U.S. has contributed. Qatar, the UAE, and Turkey have already acted as mediators on issues such as prisoner exchanges and Black Sea navigation.
Trump has also hinted at meeting Putin in Saudi Arabia soon, raising the stakes of these discussions.
Territory: A Possible Frozen Conflict
Ukraine has repeatedly said it will not accept any change to its borders. Russia, however, not only controls around 20% of Ukraine’s territory but also claims regions it has not fully seized.
One possible solution could involve freezing the conflict: Russia would keep the land it has already captured, while halting further military action. Ukraine and the West wouldn’t formally recognize Russia’s annexations, but territorial disputes could be deferred to be addressed peacefully in the future, perhaps in 10 to 15 years, as Ukrainian negotiators proposed for Crimea during 2022 peace talks.
A potential complication arises with the Kursk region of Russia, which Ukraine currently holds around 200 square miles of. Russia has rejected the idea of Ukraine using this territory as a bargaining chip, but if talks begin before Russia has fully expelled Ukrainian forces, Ukraine could trade withdrawal from Kursk for Russian concessions.
NATO and the EU: The Security Dilemma
Ukraine seeks NATO membership as a key means of ensuring its security, but Russia views Ukraine’s potential NATO membership as a direct threat. Trump has indicated that he would likely side with Russia on this issue.
One potential compromise could involve leaving open the possibility for Ukraine to join the European Union while excluding NATO membership. During the failed 2022 peace talks, Russian negotiators agreed to wording that would allow Ukraine’s EU membership without full NATO accession.
Security Guarantees: Finding the Balance
Without NATO membership, President Zelensky has proposed deploying 200,000 foreign peacekeepers to safeguard a cease-fire. However, analysts suggest that such a large force is unlikely. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has suggested that the UK could commit a smaller number of troops.
Russia, on the other hand, seeks its own security guarantees to ensure that Ukraine doesn’t attempt to rebuild its military and recapture occupied territories. This could include limiting Ukraine’s military size and banning foreign troops from the country.
A possible compromise could involve a small international peacekeeping force of 7,500 troops, with countries acceptable to both sides contributing. A proposed agreement would allow for limited military cooperation, such as joint exercises, and ban missiles with a range exceeding 155 miles.
Ceasefire Mechanics: The Devil is in the Details
For any ceasefire to last, it will need clear and enforceable mechanics. Former Swiss diplomat Thomas Greminger, who has worked on monitoring ceasefires, points to three key issues:
- Defining the “line of contact” between Russian and Ukrainian-controlled areas.
- Establishing a “disengagement zone” to prevent accidental escalations.
- Creating mechanisms to hold both sides accountable for any ceasefire violations.
The technical language of these agreements will be critical in determining the success of a lasting peace.
NATO and Russian Demands: The Bigger Picture
Beyond Ukraine, Putin’s demands may extend to NATO’s presence in Eastern Europe. In his pre-invasion ultimatum, Putin called for NATO to cease its eastward expansion and to withdraw from parts of Europe. This broader security concern could be a significant factor in the negotiations, with American allies fearing that any retreat from NATO would expose countries like Poland and the Baltic states to future Russian aggression. Trump, however, may be more open to a deal that reduces U.S. military presence abroad.
These demands add layers of complexity to the already intricate negotiation process, with multiple levels of negotiation likely to emerge: U.S.-Russia, Russia-Ukraine, and Russia-Europe.
Trump and Putin’s Broader Goals
In past talks, Russia has sought to diminish Ukraine’s identity, pushing for the official use of the Russian language and the banning of symbols associated with Ukrainian independence. These issues could resurface in future negotiations.
Putin may also leverage the Ukraine settlement to gain other concessions from Trump, such as sanctions relief. Experts believe that Putin’s desire for a long-term relationship with the U.S. could provide him with significant motivation to compromise.
Negotiations on Ukraine will undoubtedly be a complicated, multi-level process, with no shortcuts to a resolution.