The recent demands from the Kremlin for Ukraine to surrender territory in the Donetsk region in exchange for a ceasefire could significantly bolster Russia’s military positioning, according to the Institute for the Study of War (ISW). This report surfaces ahead of a scheduled summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, where discussions may revolve around territorial concessions. ISW warns that yielding strategically important areas within the Donetsk region could compel Ukraine to relinquish crucial defensive lines, particularly the “fortress belt,” which has served as a bulwark against Russian advances since 2014.
The “fortress belt” consists of several key cities and towns situated along the vital H-20 Kostyantynivka-Slovyansk highway, spanning over 30 miles. This fortified area has effectively hindered Russian territorial ambitions for years. Trump has indicated that peace talks could include “swapping of territories,” an idea that Ukrainian President Volodyr Zelensky has consistently refuted, citing constitutional barriers. However, the ISW emphasizes that such territorial concessions could greatly impact Ukraine’s military strategy.
Kremlin officials’ demands include not only the cession of Crimea but also the entirety of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, which constitute the Donbas region. Reports suggest these demands could involve a freeze on other frontline areas along with the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from territories Moscow has sought but failed to seize. If Ukraine complies, it would effectively cede control of fortified positions it has built up over the past decade, thus providing Russia with an advantageous military footing.
The potential relinquishment of Ukrainian-held territories in Donetsk could allow Moscow to scale back more complicated military operations that previously resulted in heavy losses. Currently, Russian forces struggle to encircle Ukraine’s defensive positions. By gaining control over these regions, Moscow would be positioned to launch renewed offensives from a strategically advantageous line, pressing Ukraine to construct new defenses in areas with less favorable terrain.
The ISW expresses skepticism about the sincerity of any future ceasefire negotiations, positing that Russian forces are likely to breach any agreements unless they are accompanied by thorough monitoring mechanisms and security guarantees for Ukraine. The military and diplomatic implications of the upcoming summit are thus heightened, as both nations grapple with the ramifications of potential concessions. Observers note that a temporary ceasefire should not be misconstrued as a pathway to lasting peace, particularly given Putin’s ultimate goal of exerting political influence over Ukraine.
As the date of the summit approaches, Zelensky has reiterated Ukraine’s unwillingness to cede territory under any circumstances. This steadfast position adds an air of tension and uncertainty regarding the potential outcomes of the talks between Trump and Putin. The global community watches closely, recognizing that any concessions may not only impact the immediate conflict but also reshape the geopolitical landscape in Eastern Europe.
