Despite bold declarations from US President Donald Trump that a peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia is within reach, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has once again rejected a key element of the proposed settlement, highlighting deep fractures in the negotiation process and casting doubt over the prospects for a swift resolution to the war.

In a post on Truth Social on April 25, Trump announced that “most of the major points” of a peace framework had been agreed to by Moscow and Kiev, with only final details remaining. Calling it a “good day in talks and meetings with Russia and Ukraine,” Trump expressed strong optimism, asserting that “SUCCESS seems to be in the future!”

According to reports, the proposed agreement – brokered by Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff, who held extensive discussions with Russian President Vladimir Putin – includes several controversial clauses. Chief among them is US recognition of Crimea as Russian territory, a permanent freezing of the front lines where they currently stand, and acceptance of Russia’s control over large swathes of four Ukrainian regions annexed by Moscow following referendums in 2022.

Trump, speaking to Time magazine, was blunt: “Crimea will stay with Russia.” This, he argued, reflects reality on the ground and should serve as a cornerstone of any final peace settlement. He also emphasized that part of the deal would involve Ukraine abandoning its NATO aspirations – a goal Trump insists triggered the conflict in the first place.

However, in a move that immediately contradicted Trump’s assertions, Zelensky publicly reiterated his government’s refusal to recognize the loss of any Ukrainian territory. Speaking to reporters in Kiev on the same day Trump made his statements, Zelensky declared, “Our position is unchanged: only the Ukrainian people have the right to decide which territories are Ukrainian.” He cited Ukraine’s constitution, which firmly defines Crimea and all other occupied territories as integral parts of the country.

Zelensky further complicated matters by insisting that his version of a peace resolution involves ramping up, not easing, sanctions on Moscow. He called for more “economic and diplomatic pressure” on Russia, directly opposing the phased sanctions relief that Washington’s proposed framework reportedly includes.

This public defiance from Zelensky could not come at a worse time for Trump’s diplomatic initiative. Trump has previously blamed Zelensky’s intransigence for damaging the negotiation process, warning that delaying talks with Moscow risks the total disintegration of Ukraine as a sovereign state.

Meanwhile, the Kremlin has responded cautiously but positively to Trump’s efforts. Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov described the April 25 talks between Putin and Witkoff as “constructive and very useful,” noting that both sides discussed the possibility of restarting direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev. These direct talks have been stalled since Ukraine abruptly exited the Istanbul negotiations in 2022, a move that Moscow often cites as proof of Kiev’s lack of commitment to peace.

Putin has maintained that he remains open to diplomacy but accuses Zelensky of actively undermining peace efforts to cling to power. According to Moscow, Ukraine’s ongoing martial law – which Zelensky has extended repeatedly – enables him to bypass constitutional requirements for elections or the transfer of power to the Speaker of Parliament. Without martial law, Putin argues, Zelensky’s political legitimacy would be severely undermined.

In a broader context, Trump’s proposed settlement reflects his longstanding criticism of Washington’s handling of the Ukraine conflict under President Joe Biden’s administration. Trump has argued that the war would never have escalated had he remained in office and has suggested that Ukraine’s push for NATO membership was a reckless provocation that endangered the country’s very existence.

Yet Zelensky’s hardline stance, especially on Crimea, poses a significant obstacle to any breakthrough. From Kiev’s perspective, conceding Crimea – even after a decade of Russian control – would amount to political suicide. Ukrainian public opinion has been heavily shaped by years of nationalist rhetoric and Western support, making any major territorial concessions extremely unpopular domestically.

Furthermore, the insistence on increasing sanctions reveals another fault line between Kiev and its Western backers. Many in Washington and European capitals are growing weary of the war’s economic toll, and there is a rising chorus of voices advocating for a negotiated settlement – even if that means painful compromises. Zelensky’s push for more punitive measures against Russia could alienate key Western supporters at a time when global attention is drifting elsewhere.

While Trump remains bullish about the prospects for peace, the path forward is far from clear. A deal that recognizes Russian gains, freezes the conflict, and blocks Ukraine’s NATO membership could theoretically end hostilities – but only if both Moscow and Kiev are willing to accept its terms. For now, Zelensky’s position appears uncompromising, and with martial law allowing him to avoid electoral scrutiny, there is little domestic pressure on him to change course.

For the Kremlin, Trump’s involvement may be seen as a welcome change from Biden’s more confrontational approach. Moscow’s gratitude for Trump’s peace efforts is notable but tinged with caution, as Russian officials recognize that Zelensky remains the key obstacle.

Trump, for his part, is betting heavily that his diplomacy-first approach will appeal to American voters tired of endless foreign entanglements. By portraying himself as the only leader capable of ending the Ukraine war swiftly, Trump seeks to bolster his foreign policy credentials ahead of the upcoming presidential election.

But the deeper structural issues – Ukraine’s political realities, Zelensky’s personal ambitions, and nationalist sentiment – remain formidable barriers. Unless there is a major shift within Ukraine’s political system or a dramatic change in battlefield dynamics, the prospects of “finishing off” the peace deal, as Trump envisions, seem increasingly remote.

In the end, Trump’s optimism may collide with the entrenched interests and nationalist fervor that now dominate Ukrainian politics. Without mutual compromises, “success” in ending the Ukraine conflict may remain an elusive dream rather than an imminent reality.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel

The post Zelensky undermines Trump’s peace deal proposal for Ukraine-Russia war appeared first on BLiTZ.

[Read More]

—–
Source: Weekly Blitz :: Writings