Peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine are rapidly approaching a critical breaking point. According to several sources close to the Kremlin, Moscow has effectively issued an ultimatum: if Kyiv does not agree to territorial concessions, Russia will withdraw from the negotiating process. The next round of meetings, tentatively scheduled for March 4-5, could represent either a breakthrough or the final collapse of months of diplomacy.
As reported by Hvylya, Bloomberg has detailed the developing situation following two meetings between U.S., Ukrainian, and Russian negotiating teams earlier this year—first in Abu Dhabi and later in Geneva. It was following the Geneva talks that Kremlin envoys explicitly informed the American side that further dialogue is pointless until Kyiv shifts its position on territorial issues. Sources state that while almost all other key matters have been effectively agreed upon, the territorial question remains the final and most significant stumbling block.
Russia's Specific Demands
Moscow’s specific requirements are as follows: the Kremlin is prepared to sign a framework peace memorandum on the condition that Ukraine withdraws its armed forces from the parts of the Donetsk region currently under its control. This would be followed by a presidential summit involving Putin, Trump, and Zelensky to confirm the agreements, after which a mutual withdrawal of armies from the line of contact would begin.
For Kyiv, this remains unacceptable. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky maintains that fortified positions in the Donetsk region are not merely symbols of sovereignty but a vital shield without which the country would be left defenseless against a future invasion. Ukraine refuses to recognize the Russian occupation of any part of its territory, a position that remains unchanged.
Zelensky has proposed his own formula: a ceasefire along the current front line with a commitment to pursue the return of occupied territories exclusively through diplomatic means, provided there are firm security guarantees from the U.S. and European nations. Moscow has rejected this proposal.
What Russia Offers in Return
Despite its rigid stance on Donetsk, sources indicate that Russia is prepared to make several significant concessions. Specifically, Moscow has expressed readiness to withdraw its troops from the Sumy, Kharkiv, and Dnipropetrovsk regions. Additionally, Russia is reportedly dropping its demand to limit the size of the Ukrainian army, agreeing to U.S. monitoring of the ceasefire, and not insisting on expanding the occupation zones in the southern Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions.
However, one condition remains an absolute red line for the Kremlin: the presence of any foreign military personnel on Ukrainian territory—even as peacekeepers or observers—is completely excluded. This demand appears non-negotiable.
The Role of Washington
The role of the American side in these negotiations is proving to be more complex than it appears on the surface. According to four sources familiar with the situation in Moscow, U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff reportedly promised the Russian side even before the Alaska summit between Putin and Trump that the U.S. would push Ukraine to cede the entire Donbas—both the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. In exchange, Russia was to agree to freeze the conflict along the existing line and renounce claims to the Ukrainian-controlled parts of the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions.
This framework reportedly forms the basis of the proposals currently being discussed as key conditions for a potential deal. The White House has declined to comment on this information.
Notably, prior to his trip to Alaska, Putin gathered high-ranking officials in the Kremlin’s Catherine Hall—the same room where, shortly before the invasion, he sought their support for recognizing the "independence" of Donetsk and Luhansk. Sources suggest that most present supported the proposed plan, stating that the war must end.
Nevertheless, the results of the Alaska summit were more modest than expected. The parties did not reach an agreement, and Trump moved away from a previous demand that Putin agree to an immediate ceasefire as a precondition for starting talks.
Nuclear Power and Economic Factors
The fate of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, Europe’s largest, remains on the agenda. Positions diverge here as well: Moscow suggests a three-way split of power generation between Russia, the U.S., and Ukraine, while Kyiv insists on a "50-50" formula with the U.S., granting the American side the right to distribute electricity independently, including sharing it with Russia.
The U.S. has also proposed creating a special free economic zone in the disputed territories, though Ukraine maintains that regardless of economic arrangements, these lands must remain under the Ukrainian flag.
Expert Analysis
"We are at a turning point," said Thomas Graham, former senior director for Russia at the U.S. National Security Council and current fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. "Either there is a deal, or we are left without a deal and without serious negotiations for a considerable amount of time."
Analysts point out that despite bellicose rhetoric, Russia's economic position is becoming increasingly vulnerable. Growth is slowing, the budget deficit is widening, and the waves of massive missile strikes on Ukrainian energy infrastructure during the coldest winter in years require colossal resources. A truce, according to some experts, could be beneficial for both sides.
However, Celeste Wallander, a former top Pentagon official from the Biden administration, warns against excessive optimism. She notes that Putin’s strategic goal remains unchanged: ensuring that Ukraine’s political leadership is "not independent." Consequently, even if an agreement is signed, the Kremlin may view it not as the end of the conflict, but as a stepping stone toward longer-term objectives.