Hours earlier than assembly Russia’s chief Vladimir Putin in Alaska, Donald Trump stated he sought after to peer a ceasefire in Ukraine and was once “not going to be happy” if it wasn’t agreed nowadays. America president seems to have left Alaska without a such settlement in position.
“We didn’t get there”, Trump informed journalists, earlier than later vaguely saying that he and Putin had “made great progress”. Trump is most likely to go back to the speculation of attractive Putin within the coming weeks and months, with the Russian chief jokingly suggesting their subsequent assembly might be held in Moscow.
Securing territorial concessions from Ukraine has lengthy been one in all Moscow’s preconditions for any negotiations on a peace deal. Putin is most likely having a bet that insisting on those concessions, whilst conserving Ukraine below sustained army power, performs to his benefit.
Public fatigue over the battle is rising in Ukraine, and Putin might be hoping {that a} weary inhabitants would possibly in the end see this sort of deal as applicable or even sexy. Russia introduced a barrage of clean assaults towards Ukrainian towns in a single day, involving greater than 300 drones and 30 missiles.
Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky, who was once excluded from the Alaska summit, has maintained that Kyiv is not going to conform to territorial concessions. This sort of transfer can be unlawful below Ukraine’s charter, which calls for a national referendum to approve adjustments to the rustic’s territorial borders.
The idea at the back of a land-for-ceasefire deal is that it could strengthen Ukrainian and Eu safety. Trump sees it as step one in bringing Putin to the negotiation desk for a broader peace deal, in addition to unlocking alternatives for reconstruction. In fact, this sort of deal would do little to decrease the longer-term Russian risk.
Moscow’s efforts to shore up and modernise its defence features and neo-imperial ambitions would stay intact. Its hybrid assaults on Europe would additionally proceed, and Ukraine’s capability to protected significant reconstruction can be weakened.
Russia recently occupies nearly one-fifth of Ukraine’s land.
Institute for the Learn about of Warfare
Whether or not or no longer Russia ever opts for an immediate army strike on a Eu Nato member state, it has no wish to do so that you could weaken the continent. Its hybrid operations, which prolong way past the battlefield, are greater than enough to erode Eu resilience over the years.
Russia’s disinformation campaigns and sabotage of infrastructure, together with railways in Poland and Germany and undersea cables within the Gulf of Finland and Baltic Sea, are neatly documented. Its strategic goals have interested in deterring motion on Ukraine and sowing confrontation between its allies, in addition to making an attempt to undermine democratic values within the west.
Europe is below power on more than one fronts: assembly new defence spending goals of five% of GDP whilst financial expansion is slowing, decreasing the dependence of its provide chains on China and managing demographic demanding situations.
Those vulnerabilities make it liable to disinformation and feature deepened divisions alongside political and socioeconomic fault traces – all of which Moscow has time and again exploited. A land-for-ceasefire deal would no longer deal with those threats.
For Ukraine, the chance of this sort of deal is apparent. Russia would possibly pause large-scale bodily war in Ukraine below a deal, however it could nearly no doubt proceed destabilising the rustic from inside.
Having by no means been punished for violating previous agreements to recognize Ukraine’s territorial integrity, akin to when it annexed Crimea in 2014, Moscow would have little incentive to honour new ones. The federal government in Kyiv, and Ukrainian society extra extensively, would see any accompanying safety promises as fragile at very best and brief at worst.
The outcome would most certainly be a deepening of Ukraine’s vulnerabilities. Some Ukrainians would possibly improve doubling down on militarisation and funding in defence applied sciences. Others, shedding religion in nationwide safety and reconstruction, may just disengage or depart the rustic. Both means, within the absence of nationwide solidarity, reconstruction would turn out to be way more tough.
Making reconstruction more difficult
Ukraine’s reconstruction might be pricey, to the music of US$524 billion (£387 billion) consistent with the Global Financial institution. It’ll additionally require managing a internet of interconnected safety, monetary, social and political dangers.
Those come with displacement and financial demanding situations attributable to the battle, in addition to the wish to protected capital flows throughout other areas. It’ll additionally wish to proceed addressing governance and corruption demanding situations.
An everlasting territorial concession would make addressing those dangers much more tough. This sort of deal is more likely to break up public opinion in Ukraine, with the ones closely concerned within the battle effort asking: “What exactly have we been fighting for?”
Recriminations would nearly no doubt practice throughout the following presidential and parliamentary elections, deepening divisions and undermining Ukraine’s skill to pursue the systemic way wanted for reconstruction.
Ongoing safety considerations in border areas, specifically close to Russia, can be more likely to steered additional inhabitants flight. And the way lots of the over 5 million Ukrainians recently residing out of the country would go back to lend a hand reconstruct the rustic below those stipulations is a ways from positive.
Rescuers paintings on the web site of a Russian strike on a nine-storey residential construction in Kyiv, Ukraine, in July 2025.
Sergey Dolzhenko / EPA
Financing reconstruction would even be more difficult. Public budget from donors and global establishments have helped maintain emergency power and delivery infrastructure upkeep within the brief time period and can proceed to play a task. However personal funding might be crucial shifting ahead.
Buyers might be taking a look no longer most effective at Ukraine’s geopolitical possibility profile, but in addition its political steadiness and social brotherly love. Few traders can be prepared to dedicate capital in a rustic that can not ensure a strong safety and political atmosphere. Taken in combination, those components would make large-scale reconstruction in Ukraine just about inconceivable.
Past elementary problems with responsibility and simply peace, a land-for-ceasefire deal can be merely a nasty cut price. It’ll nearly no doubt sow deeper, extra intractable issues for Ukraine, Europe and the west.
It will undermine safety, stall reconstruction and hand Moscow each time and a strategic benefit to return again more potent towards a Ukraine that can be ill-prepared to reply. Trump would do neatly to keep away from committing Ukraine to such an association in additional talks with Putin over the approaching months.
