President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Photo / Getty Images
For European diplomats, officials and analysts, Vladimir Putin has done little to soften his long-standing war aims in Ukraine.
They say the Russian President wants nothing less than a Kremlin-friendly government in Kyiv, Ukraine blocked from joining Nato, and the size of its armed forces curtailed.
When Putin first discussed the parameters of a peace deal with Donald Trump in February 2025, demanding an election as the price for a ceasefire appeared a realistic way of toppling Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s Government.
But as the months have gone by, the United States President has slowly appeared to tilt his favour from Moscow to Kyiv.
The apparent change in direction in the White House has made it harder for Moscow to make these sorts of ultimatums.
Maintaining these demands cements Putin as the main barrier to Trump’s peace efforts.
Now, with the Russian and American leaders set for their first face-to-face meeting since 2019, Putin needs another way to sell his vision for removing Kyiv’s Western-facing government.
Could the key to sowing further chaos through a US-backed peace settlement lie in Ukraine’s own constitution?
Kyiv’s laws state that its president or parliament cannot legally cede territory without a nationwide referendum.
Practically, that would not currently be possible, given that Russia occupies around 20% of Ukraine.
And any attempt to act unilaterally and over-rule the constitution would foment unrest – not least among the soldiers who have fought so hard to defend their homeland for more than three years. Zelenskyy’s position would probably be untenable.
For this reason, when Washington and Moscow were exploring a deal that would bring about a ceasefire if Ukraine were to withdraw its troops from the Donbas regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, Zelenskyy was forced to speak out very loudly against it.
Militarily, the Ukrainian President would have got nothing in return, other than a halt to the fighting, while Russia would have been allowed to bypass some of Ukraine’s stiffest defences for free.
There was some talk of Russian forces being made to withdraw from the northern region of Sumy and neighbouring Kharkiv.
This strategy, according to Jaroslava Barbieri, a research fellow at Chatham House’s Ukraine Forum, was designed by Putin to position Zelenskyy as the main blockage to peace in Trump’s eyes.
“I’d say in demanding swathes of Ukrainian territory as part of a peace deal, Putin is aware the condition is unacceptable for most Ukrainians,” Barbieri said.
Rejecting the offer could “portray Ukraine’s position as unco-operative and ungrateful to Trump’s peace-brokering efforts,” she added.
Barbieri said: “It could drive a wedge between Trump and European allies, who have reiterated the importance of preserving Ukraine’s sovereignty.
“And ... potentially destabilise Ukrainian society by mobilising grievances among the minority who are willing to accept concessions to end the war.”
Polling by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology released in June found that just 38% of Ukrainians were willing to accept territorial losses “in order to achieve peace as soon as possible and preserve independence”.
In comparison, 52% said they were firmly against ceding land “even if this makes the war last longer”.
But Zelenskyy has accepted that some form of cession of territory will be necessary to end the war.
Without it, he’d be likely to lose support of the Americans, and eventually European allies would start to fade away.
There will be, Trump declared yesterday: “Some swapping, some changes to land.”
Sources have told the Telegraph that the Ukrainian President could be ready to stop fighting, freeze the front line, and hand over de facto control of territories occupied by Russian forces to Moscow as part of any settlement.
These include swathes of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and Crimea.
Trump added: “We’re going to try to get some of that territory back for Ukraine”.
The key to Zelenskyy managing the process and selling it back to his public will be in the language.
De jure recognition of Russia’s control would require a referendum, and would be likely to stoke tensions in the population, enough to hurt Zelenskyy at the ballot box of any future election.
Handing de facto control, which is not legally recognised, in acceptance of the temporary reality of the situation on the ground is more likely.
One possibility for this being discussed amongst war-watchers would be to replicate the Sino-British Joint Declaration signed between China and the United Kingdom to decide on Hong Kong’s future.
That deal saw Britain return sovereignty to Beijing in 1997, but under the condition that it would maintain Hong Kong’s special status for 50 years.
Could Ukraine and Russia agree to recognise that the Donbas regions are legally Ukrainian but managed as if they belonged to Moscow for a set period of time?
That would be likely to settle Zelenskyy’s referendum problem by kicking any real decision into the long grass. The bloodshed would stop and the line in the sand would be drawn – for now.
However, Moscow would use the time to sow anti-Ukrainian sentiment in the region, with the intention of making its eventual return almost impossible and unpalatable for Ukrainians, who have all lost a father, brother or friend in the war.
Whatever the proposal, it would appear that Putin has covertly edged closer to one of his war aims again by leaving Zelenskyy with a decision that will shape his future as president.
And he has put the spotlight back on Ukraine’s leader.
Trump cut through the public protestations yesterday.
The US President said: “I was a little bothered by the fact that Zelenskyy was saying: ‘Well, I have to get constitutional approval.’ I mean, he’s got approval to go into war and kill everybody, but he needs approval to do a land swap?”
The final representations will be made by Zelenskyy and other European leaders in a video call with Trump tomorrow.
Forty-eight hours later, Putin will arrive in Alaska.