Will Ukraine be pressured to cede land and cut its army for peace with Russia?

Efforts to end the war between Russia and Ukraine seem to be culminating as Washington suggests a growing push for a structured peace proposal that could require Kyiv to accept territorial losses and tighten its military posture.

Allied governments in Europe, already wary of any settlement, reacted sharply to reports that the United States has conveyed a draft outline to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy with far-reaching concessions.

Meanwhile, Russia continues to press its military advantage while holding firm to its longstanding demands and Europe is dealing with the implications of a US diplomatic initiative that it did not help shape.

What we know about the US peace framework

According to individuals with direct knowledge of recent diplomatic exchanges, the US administration has communicated to Zelenskyy that Washington wants Ukraine to consider a peace framework drafted by American officials.

The plan reportedly contains provisions requiring Kyiv to accept the loss of certain territories and reduce aspects of its military force structure.

These sources, who spoke anonymously to Reuters due to the sensitivity of the discussions, say the United States wants Ukraine to endorse the core ideas.

More from Explainers

Ukraine strikes Russian targets using US ATACMS missiles in first public acknowledgment Ukraine begins mass production of domestic interceptor drones as Russian attacks intensify

The proposal arrives at a difficult moment for Kyiv. On the front lines, Ukrainian units are facing renewed Russian advances in several areas of the east. Moscow currently controls nearly one-fifth of Ukraine, and its troops have continued to push forward gradually.

At the same time, Ukraine’s internal political environment is under strain as a corruption scandal led parliament to dismiss both the energy minister and the justice minister.

US officials have not publicly confirmed the details of the proposed plan. The White House avoided comment when approached, while a notable set of public remarks by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio offered the clearest indication that Washington is evaluating potential pathways to a negotiated end to the war.

Editor’s Picks

1

Why Vladimir Putin is openly challenging Nato 2

How Russia-Ukraine war is Europe’s battle for relevance

Rubio wrote on X that the United States “will continue to develop a list of potential ideas for ending this war based on input from both sides of this conflict.”

He added that “Ending a complex and deadly war such as the one in Ukraine requires an extensive exchange of serious and realistic ideas. And achieving a durable peace will require both sides to agree to difficult but necessary concessions.”

The US outreach reportedly involves discussions with Russia, though Ukraine was not involved in designing the draft peace structure.

A senior Ukrainian official told Reuters that Kyiv had only received “signals” about the US ideas and that the proposal reflected conversations Washington had held with Moscow.

How Zelenskyy has reacted

Zelenskyy, who travelled to Turkey to meet President Tayyip Erdogan as the US signals surfaced, chose not to comment directly on the reported American framework.

Instead, he used his public statements to stress the importance of US engagement in pushing toward a resolution.

Writing on Telegram, Zelenskyy said “the main thing for stopping the bloodshed and achieving lasting peace is that we work in coordination with all our partners and that American leadership remains effective, strong,” a statement that highlights Ukraine’s reliance on sustained US political, military, and diplomatic support.

He also stated that only the United States and President Donald Trump “have sufficient strength for the war to finally come to an end.”

Turkey, which maintains ties with both Moscow and Kyiv and previously hosted negotiations early in the war, again positioned itself as a potential mediator.

Erdogan, according to Zelenskyy, proposed several formats for discussions, and Ukraine welcomed Ankara’s readiness to provide a venue for talks.

Despite this diplomatic activity, the situation on the ground remains dangerous. Russian forces struck Ukrainian cities overnight, killing 25 people in one of the deadliest attacks in months.

Ukraine’s bond markets also reacted sharply to reports of escalating US involvement in peace discussions, with Wednesday’s news prompting the largest rally in Ukrainian government debt prices in months.

How Europe has reacted

EU foreign ministers meeting in Brussels avoided commenting directly on the details of the US proposal — partly because the full text has not been made public — but they left little doubt about their opposition to any agreement that forces Ukraine to accept severe military or territorial restrictions.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said that “Ukrainians want peace - a just peace that respects everyone’s sovereignty, a durable peace that can’t be called into question by future aggression,” before concluding, “But peace cannot be a capitulation.”

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski raised similar concerns, stating that Ukraine should not face conditions that undermine its ability to defend itself, especially given that Kyiv is the victim of the invasion.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas also stressed that any agreement must have the support of Ukraine and of Europe, implicitly signalling that a deal shaped primarily by Washington and Moscow would be unacceptable to the European bloc.

Multiple European diplomats speaking privately indicated that the alleged requirement for Ukraine to reduce its military forces appeared strikingly similar to demands Russia has made repeatedly over the years.

One diplomat described the reported military cuts as inconsistent with Ukraine’s security needs. Another suggested that the US plan could represent an attempt to pressure Kyiv into a corner at a moment when its bargaining position is weaker.

European resistance matters significantly because the EU remains one of Kyiv’s largest and most reliable sources of economic support.

Endorsement from Washington alone would be insufficient to form the basis of a sustainable long-term security arrangement for Ukraine.

How Moscow has reacted

On the Russian side, there has been no indication that Moscow is prepared to adjust its core conditions for ending the conflict.

President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly demanded that Ukraine renounce its efforts to join Nato and withdraw all troops from the four regions that Russia claims as its own.

These positions have not softened despite Ukraine’s deteriorating military situation or the recent US diplomatic moves.

Russian forces, holding around 19 per cent of Ukrainian territory, continue to push forward methodically, even as they sustain losses.

Their strategy has involved steady ground advances paired with repeated missile and drone strikes on critical Ukrainian energy infrastructure — operations that have grown more intense as winter approaches.

Despite Turkey’s efforts to revive dialogue, there have been no direct discussions between Ukrainian and Russian negotiators since a brief meeting in Istanbul in July.

The Kremlin noted that Russian representatives were not participating in the new round of talks in Ankara involving Zelenskyy and Erdogan, though Putin indicated he is open to conversations with Turkey and the United States about the outcomes of those discussions.

Why a security guarantee for Ukraine is temporary at best

According to Axios, which cited a US official with direct knowledge of the initiative, the proposed arrangement would involve a trade-off: territorial concessions in return for a security structure designed to deter future Russian aggression.

European diplomats, however, have questioned whether the United States would be able — or willing — to uphold such guarantees over the long run, particularly in the face of domestic political shifts in Washington.

Ukrainian officials have historically rejected the idea of trading territory for security pledges, arguing that such commitments have failed in the past.

The prospect of formally accepting Russian-controlled regions as part of a peace settlement also raises difficult political questions for Zelenskyy at home.

Public opinion in Ukraine has remained strongly opposed to territorial concessions, and any move toward that direction could generate significant backlash.

What next in the US’ Ukraine peace plan

A US delegation headed by Army Secretary Dan Driscoll has arrived in Kyiv for what American officials describe as a fact-gathering mission.

US Army Chief of Staff General Randy George is also part of the group. They are scheduled to meet Zelenskyy on Thursday to discuss the situation on the ground and assess Ukraine’s military needs.

The visit suggests that Washington is still evaluating Ukraine’s military position, which may influence its diplomatic calculations.

Nearly four years into the conflict, Ukraine faces battlefield challenges as well as internal political strain, while Russia shows no inclination to shift its stance.

At the same time, Europe is deeply sceptical of any settlement that mandates concessions seen as incompatible with Ukraine’s sovereignty.

For Kyiv, the immediate priority remains survival and defence as winter looms.

Also Watch:

With inputs from agencies