Lead
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz told reporters that Ukraine has delivered a revised peace-plan proposal to US President Donald Trump, including suggested territorial compromises Kyiv might consider. The disclosure came amid intense diplomacy this week in which European leaders sought to ensure Ukrainian consent for any deal. Merz said Europeans made clear to Trump that questions of territory must be answered by Ukraine’s president and people. The development adds urgency to talks among Kyiv, European capitals and Washington over guarantees and the terms of a settlement.
Key takeaways
- Germany’s chancellor said Kyiv submitted an updated draft peace plan to President Trump that includes proposals about territorial concessions.
- European leaders — Merz, France’s Emmanuel Macron and UK PM Keir Starmer — told Trump that Ukraine’s views must be central to any settlement.
- Russia demands Ukraine withdraw from the parts of Luhansk and Donetsk it occupies; Kyiv rejects full withdrawal on legal and security grounds.
- President Volodymyr Zelensky says Ukraine cannot cede territory under Ukrainian law or moral grounds; he is seeking security guarantees to make any settlement durable.
- Zelensky’s presidential term runs to May 2024; elections have been suspended since martial law after Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022.
- European and Ukrainian officials want US involvement as a security guarantor, amid fears Moscow may not honor verbal commitments.
- Russia’s foreign minister framed recent Kremlin talks with US envoys as resolving prior misunderstandings and proposed legal non-aggression guarantees.
Background
Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine and its Western partners have sought ways to end active hostilities while preserving Kyiv’s sovereignty. European leaders in recent weeks have worked directly with Ukrainian authorities to draft an updated peace proposal intended to balance Kyiv’s security demands and the political realities of negotiated outcomes. Washington’s role has become pivotal because US engagement could underpin binding guarantees or deter renewed aggression.
Russia has repeatedly made territorial demands, pressing for Ukrainian withdrawal from occupied parts of the eastern Luhansk and Donetsk regions. Kyiv has consistently rejected conceding territory, citing constitutional, legal and security constraints and the risk that any territorial loss would leave Ukraine vulnerable to future incursions. That opposition shapes the red lines around which European and American diplomacy now revolves.
Main event
Merz said in a joint briefing with Nato-affiliated leaders that Kyiv’s latest draft, which was shown to President Trump, contains possible territorial compromises but that final decisions rest with Ukraine’s leadership and populace. He described a recent phone call with Trump as constructive and stressed that Europeans must have their interests heard. Trump confirmed discussions about Ukraine but said he had not decided whether to attend an upcoming European meeting on the matter.
European capitals fear that because parts of Trump’s negotiating team have previously engaged closely with Moscow, the US could be inclined toward solutions that reflect Russian priorities. Merz and others warned that forcing a settlement without Ukrainian buy-in would likely be rejected by a population that has endured four years of fighting, suffering and displacement. Leaders underscored the need for guarantees that make any ceasefire durable and verifiable.
Moscow, by contrast, has maintained a guarded public posture while framing recent contacts with US envoys as productive. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov praised Trump’s mediation efforts and said recent meetings had cleared up misunderstandings since last summer’s US-Russia summit. Lavrov also dismissed the idea of foreign troops as security guarantees inside Ukraine, instead offering legal assurances purportedly meant to restrain aggression against NATO or EU members.
Analysis & implications
The presentation of a Ukrainian-drafted proposal to the US signals a shift from multilateral deliberation to focused trilateral bargaining in which Washington’s stance will be decisive. If the US pushes a settlement that leans toward Moscow’s demands without clear Ukrainian consent, European partners worry about legitimacy and possible domestic backlash in Kyiv. That dynamic complicates transatlantic coordination at a moment when unity is crucial to deter further Russian coercion.
Territorial concessions are the most fraught element because they implicate legal, moral and strategic questions: ceding land could violate Ukraine’s constitution and international norms while also creating potential staging grounds for renewed aggression. Kyiv’s insistence on binding external guarantees — including possible security assurances or monitoring mechanisms — reflects a lack of trust in verbal promises from Moscow, given prior violations of ceasefires and truce accords.
Economically and politically, a premature or imposed settlement could undercut Ukraine’s post-war recovery and democratic transitions. If elections are to resume — Zelensky has said he could hold polls if robust guarantees are provided — the security environment during and after voting would have to be credible to both domestic voters and international observers. Failure to secure that credibility risks delegitimizing any political outcomes tied to a rushed peace process.
Comparison & data
| Position | Ukraine | Russia | Western allies |
|---|---|---|---|
| Territorial demands | Refuse full withdrawal from occupied parts of Luhansk/Donetsk | Require Ukrainian withdrawal from occupied parts | Seek negotiated outcome respecting Kyiv’s sovereignty |
| Security guarantees | Demand robust, external guarantees | Offer legal assurances, reject foreign troops | Propose US/EU-backed guarantees and monitoring |
The table summarizes stated positions: Russia presses for control of occupied zones in eastern Ukraine, Kyiv refuses unilateral concessions and asks for enforceable security guarantees, while Western allies emphasize negotiation that preserves Ukrainian agency and deterrent guarantees. These stances frame the technical and political negotiations currently underway.
Reactions & quotes
Officials and analysts reacted quickly to Merz’s announcement, emphasizing Ukrainian primacy in accepting any deal and the risk of imposed settlements.
“This is a question that must be answered primarily by the Ukrainian president and the Ukrainian people,” Merz said, stressing Kyiv’s central role in any territorial decision.
Friedrich Merz, German Chancellor
European leaders said they told Trump that allied interests must be heard alongside US initiatives, reflecting concern that any outcome lacking European input would be incomplete. Analysts caution that Washington’s prior contacts with Moscow raise questions about balance in negotiations.
“We don’t want to be wasting time,” Trump said, noting discussions with European leaders but leaving open whether he would attend an upcoming meeting in Europe.
Donald Trump, US President
Kyiv has reiterated its legal and moral objections to ceding territory: Zelensky has argued that Ukraine has no legal or moral right to surrender land and is seeking guarantees that would allow elections and a durable peace. Russian officials characterized recent diplomacy as constructive and said they could provide legal non-aggression guarantees, while rejecting foreign troop deployments as a security guarantee for Kyiv.
Unconfirmed
- Whether the specific text of the Ukrainian draft shown to Trump contains precise territorial lines has not been published or independently verified.
- Reports suggesting the US will force a Russian-preferred settlement remain unproven; no binding US proposal has been publicly released.
- Claims that Moscow will provide legally enforceable guarantees accepted by Kyiv and its allies are not confirmed and lack publicly available legal texts.
Bottom line
European leaders say Ukraine has given the US a revised peace proposal that touches on territorial issues, but they insist any agreement must be acceptable to Kyiv and its people. The core dilemma is trust: Ukraine and Europe require enforceable guarantees to prevent renewed aggression, while Russia’s prior treaty violations make such assurances difficult to accept at face value.
The coming weeks will test transatlantic coordination. If Washington, European capitals and Kyiv align on a transparent package of guarantees and monitoring, a negotiated pause could be feasible; if not, pressure for a hastily brokered deal risks political backlash in Ukraine and may leave the underlying security problem unresolved.
Sources
- BBC News (media) — original reporting on Merz’s comments and recent diplomatic contacts.