Is peace returning to Ukraine? The Trump-Putin factor and challenges ahead – Firstpost

A potential turning point in the Ukraine conflict appears to be emerging, with US President Donald Trump taking a strong diplomatic lead in seeking a peaceful resolution through talks. Trump has been engaging with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to find a way to end the conflict, which is now entering its fourth year. Both Putin and Zelenskyy have responded favourably.

Although Trump’s actions indicate a move towards easing tensions, the path forward remains complex, uncertain, and marked by geopolitical realignments.

The timing and conditions for resolving the Ukraine war are currently more favourable than ever. This peace initiative gains further significance with the US shifting its diplomatic stance on a war it once ignited and funded. Trump has stated, “Millions of people have died in a war that wouldn’t have happened if I were President, but it did happen, so it has to end. We can’t lose any more lives!”

Even if the US takes the lead in investing in Ukraine’s post-war recovery, Trump’s business acumen will likely ensure that the US benefits significantly—gaining access to rare minerals, possibly at Ukraine’s expense.

The scales tilt in Russia’s favour

The war is at a critical stage, with Ukraine in an increasingly vulnerable position and its future looking bleak. President Putin has achieved most of the strategic objectives he set at the outset of the Special Military Operation against Ukraine.

The prospect of Ukraine joining NATO has been effectively buried, both by the US and NATO. Much of Ukraine’s Russian-speaking territory is already under Russian control, with most of it likely to be ceded. Sanctions have failed to weaken either the Russian economy or its military. Meanwhile, Europe’s economy has deteriorated due to the boycott of Russian energy and the destruction of Nord Stream.

At the same time, the China-Russia-Iran alliance is strengthening, while the Trans-Atlantic alliance appears shaken. The Russian army has modernised, becoming battle-hardened and experienced, demonstrating both self-reliance and self-sufficiency. Russia has gained significant geopolitical weight, allowing it to assert influence on global affairs, emerging stronger than before the war.

Key terms of proposed peace deal

Following these discussions, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth outlined three core conditions that Trump agreed to with Putin:

• No NATO membership for Ukraine – Ukraine would formally abandon its pursuit of NATO membership, a longstanding point of contention between Moscow and Kyiv.

• Pre-2014 borders remain unattainable – The idea of Ukraine reclaiming its pre-2014 borders was deemed an illusionary goal and unrealistic.

• No NATO-led peace mission in Ukraine – NATO forces would not be involved in stabilising Ukraine, signalling a shift in US priorities towards domestic security concerns.

These terms have triggered significant alarm in Kyiv and across European capitals. Critics argue that they heavily favour Moscow, aligning closely with Putin’s strategic objectives. Furthermore, the absence of NATO backing could leave Ukraine vulnerable to future Russian aggression.

Zelenskyy’s counterstrategy: Economic incentives and territorial swaps

Kyiv maintains that Ukraine’s “independence, territorial integrity, and sovereignty” cannot be subject to compromise. Ukraine is calling for strong security guarantees from Washington as part of any deal with Russia. Meanwhile, reports suggest a potential agreement involving Kyiv’s rare earth minerals in exchange for continued US military aid.

Zelenskyy has proposed economic incentives for American companies, offering lucrative reconstruction deals in Ukraine. He highlighted the country’s vast mineral reserves as a key attraction, arguing that American investment in these resources would be mutually beneficial. “Valuable natural resources where we can offer our partners possibilities that didn’t exist before to invest in them. For us, it will create jobs; for American companies, it will create profits,” Zelenskyy told The Guardian.

Beyond economic partnerships, Zelenskyy has also introduced a controversial territorial swap proposal. He suggested that Ukraine might offer Russia the Kursk region, which it has controlled since its surprise incursion into Russian territory last August, in exchange for the return of Russian-occupied Ukrainian territories. While this proposal appears to be an attempt at brokering a compromise, it remains unclear whether such a deal would be acceptable to either Moscow or Kyiv’s allies.

Challenges ahead: Key obstacles to peace

Despite apparent momentum towards negotiations, multiple challenges stand in the way of securing a lasting peace deal.

European Concerns and Security Guarantees: European nations have expressed unease over the negotiations, fearing they are skewed in Russia’s favour while sidelining European security concerns. Many worry that an agreement without NATO assurances could leave Ukraine vulnerable to future Russian aggression, reminiscent of the 2014 annexation of Crimea or the 2022 invasion.

Russian Intent: A Tactical Pause or a Lasting Peace? Considering Moscow’s lack of complete dominance over all the Ukrainian territories it purports to control, there is unease that Putin may exploit a provisional peace pact to entrench power before launching fresh assaults.

Trump’s Unpredictable Approach and Shifts in US Foreign Policy: Donald Trump’s foreign policy has always been a bit of a wild card. While he appears genuinely invested in brokering a peace deal, his broader pivot away from European affairs in favour of domestic security has left some allies wondering how dedicated he truly is to NATO and Ukraine in the long run. The US seems less and less eager to take the lead on European security, and this could create more instability in the region.

The Political and Military Situation Within Ukraine: Domestically, any peace agreement that involves giving up land would likely face some serious backlash from both Ukraine’s military and those with strong nationalist views. Several Ukrainians feel that defending their country’s independence is simply not up for negotiation. If Zelenskyy were to agree to a compromise that’s seen beneficial to Russia, he could face some major opposition at home. This could potentially weaken his political standing and even put his presidency at risk.

China’s Role in Peace Negotiations: The war has pushed Russia closer to China and Iran—an alliance that does not serve US interests. China has reportedly offered to host a summit between Russian and Ukrainian leaders to advance peace efforts. However, concerns persist that Beijing may push for terms aligning with its broader geopolitical objectives, including reducing Western influence in Eastern Europe, making it a questionable peace broker.

Conclusion: A tricky road ahead

Trump’s negotiations with Putin and Zelenskyy mark a significant shift in US policy, but whether they will lead to a lasting peace remains uncertain. The key proposal—that Ukraine would not join NATO—has raised concerns about the future stability and security of Eastern Europe.

Zelenskyy faces a delicate balancing act: securing a peace agreement that does not compromise Ukraine’s sovereignty while maintaining US support at a time when Washington’s priorities are shifting away from European conflicts. His economic incentives and territorial swap proposal reflect a pragmatic approach, but whether they will be enough to keep Trump engaged remains an open question. At the same time, he cannot ignore domestic nationalist sentiments, which could complicate any compromise.

Russia, while eager to end the war on its own terms, remains a source of unease for Europe, given uncertainties about its long-term intentions. Meanwhile, the upcoming peace talks in Saudi Arabia are highly anticipated, but the path to a lasting resolution remains complex and uncertain.

The author is former Director General, Mechanised Forces. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.