More than three years into Russia's invasion of Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin continues to uphold rigid and maximalist demands for any potential peace agreement. Recently, Putin expressed support in principle for a proposed 30-day ceasefire initiated by the United States, which Ukraine has accepted. However, he raised concerns about the feasibility of implementing such a ceasefire, particularly regarding verification along a lengthy front line. This tactical approach may allow Russia to engage in prolonged negotiations without outright rejecting the offer.
During his statement, Putin implied that the ceasefire could provide Ukraine with an opportunity to regroup and rearm. He hinted at imposing additional conditions for this pause, including a halt to Western military supplies and a ban on further mobilization. This indicates that Russia's demands remain far removed from what Ukraine or its allies would consider acceptable.
Currently, Russia occupies approximately one-fifth of Ukraine, and it has made it clear that it intends to retain this territory. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stated, “Crimea, Sevastopol, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, Luhansk — these are regions of Russia. They are written into the constitution. This is a given fact.” Notably, Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, despite international recognition of its status as part of Ukraine. Furthermore, the illegal annexation of the other territories occurred in 2022.
In June, Putin indicated that Russia would cease hostilities if Ukraine surrendered control of four southeastern regions that Russian forces partially occupy and renounced its NATO membership aspirations. Additionally, Putin seeks recognition of Russia’s territorial gains as legitimate. In contrast, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has consistently emphasized that Ukraine will not surrender its sovereign territory. Recently, however, he has shifted focus toward securing guarantees for Ukraine's safety rather than insisting on the immediate return of lost lands.
Putin's justification for Russia's aggressive actions in Ukraine has often cited the potential expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Membership in NATO, which requires member states to defend one another if attacked, is a non-negotiable issue for Putin. Conversely, Zelensky views Ukraine's eventual NATO membership as a crucial security guarantee for his nation.
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently remarked that NATO membership for Ukraine is not a “realistic outcome,” acknowledging the challenging realities on the ground. While NATO has expanded its presence with countries like Sweden and Finland seeking membership, the commitment of the U.S. to the alliance has faced scrutiny, particularly in light of Trump's presidency.
In his 2024 state of the nation address, Putin warned against the deployment of NATO forces in Ukraine, threatening retaliatory measures against the West in case of an attack on Russia. He stated, “All this really threatens a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons and the destruction of civilization,” highlighting the high stakes of the ongoing conflict.
Throughout the conflict, Russia has portrayed itself as engaged in an existential struggle against the so-called “collective West” due to NATO's support for Ukraine. The Kremlin has firmly rejected the idea of foreign peacekeepers in Ukraine, which European nations have suggested as a possible security guarantee. Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova reiterated that Russia would not tolerate foreign involvement in the conflict, warning that such actions would provoke a strong response from Moscow.
European leaders, including British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron, have proposed sending troops to Ukraine following the cessation of hostilities. However, Russia has categorically stated that it will not accept peacekeeping forces from NATO countries under any circumstances.
Amid the ongoing war, Russia has sought renewed diplomatic engagement with the United States to address issues beyond the conflict in Ukraine. Talks held in Istanbul on February 27 focused on the status of diplomatic missions, which have been significantly impacted by expulsions and staffing restrictions. Russia has demanded the return of six diplomatic compounds that it claims were illegally seized by the U.S. between 2016 and 2018.
The U.S., in turn, has raised concerns over access to banking services and the need for stable staffing levels at its embassy in Moscow. The recent discussions led to both sides identifying initial steps to stabilize their diplomatic operations.
The sanctions imposed by the Biden administration in response to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 have severely weakened the Russian economy and hampered its military capabilities. Former President Trump has indicated a willingness to discuss easing sanctions as part of a potential peace agreement. While the Kremlin publicly denounces all sanctions as illegal, analysts suggest that Moscow would privately welcome any relief, as it could disrupt Western unity in imposing economic restrictions.
Russia is particularly interested in lifting restrictions regarding transnational payments and the sale of gas and oil, especially recent sanctions on its oil tanker fleet. One of the critical challenges for Russia has been the freezing of over $300 billion in central bank assets held in the West. The European Union has proposed using the interest generated from these frozen assets to support Ukraine, a strategy that Putin has condemned as “theft.”
In recent discussions, Russia has also pushed for the resumption of direct flights to the United States, a move that would signify a significant easing of sanctions. However, the U.S. State Department did not address this issue in its official statement regarding the talks.
