Russia and Ukraine hold fast to their demands ahead of a planned Putin-Trump summit

The maximalist demands reflect Putin’s determination to reach the goals he set when he launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 10 August 2025
Follow

Russia and Ukraine hold fast to their demands ahead of a planned Putin-Trump summit

  • The maximalist demands reflect Putin’s determination to reach the goals he set when he launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022

The threats, pressure and ultimatums have come and gone, but Russian President Vladimir Putin has maintained Moscow’s uncompromising demands in the war in Ukraine, raising fears he could use a planned summit with US President Donald Trump in Alaska to coerce Kyiv into accepting an unfavorable deal.
The maximalist demands reflect Putin’s determination to reach the goals he set when he launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022.
Putin sees a possible meeting with Trump as a chance to negotiate a broad deal that would not only cement Russia’s territorial gains but also keep Ukraine from joining NATO and hosting any Western troops, allowing Moscow to gradually pull the country back into its orbit.
The Kremlin leader believes time is on his side as the exhausted and outgunned Ukrainian forces are struggling to stem Russian advances in many sectors of the over 1,000-kilometer (over 600-mile) front line while swarms of Russian missiles and drones batter Ukrainian cities.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky also has stood firm in his positions, agreeing to a ceasefire proposed by Trump while reaffirming the country’s refusal to abandon seeking NATO membership and rejecting acknowledgment of Russia’s annexation of any of its regions.
A look at Russian and Ukrainian visions of a peace deal and how a Putin-Trump summit could evolve:
Russia’s position
In a memorandum presented at talks in Istanbul in June, Russia offered Ukraine two options for establishing a 30-day ceasefire. One demanded Ukraine withdraw its forces from Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson — the four regions Moscow illegally annexed in September 2022 but never fully captured.
As an alternate condition for a ceasefire, Russia made a “package proposal” for Ukraine to halt mobilization efforts, freeze Western arms deliveries and ban any third-country forces on its soil. Moscow also suggested Ukraine end martial law and hold elections, after which the countries could sign a comprehensive peace treaty.
Once there’s a truce, Moscow wants a deal to include the “international legal recognition” of its annexations of Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula in 2014 and the four regions in 2022.
Russia says a peace treaty should have Ukraine declare its neutral status between Russia and the West, abandon its bid to join NATO, limit the size of its armed forces and recognize Russian as an official language on par with Ukrainian -– conditions reflecting Putin’s earliest goals.
It also demands Ukraine ban the “glorification and propaganda of Nazism and neo-Nazism” and dissolve nationalist groups. Since the war began, Putin has falsely alleged that neo-Nazi groups were shaping Ukrainian politics under Zelensky, who is Jewish. They were fiercely dismissed by Kyiv and its Western allies.
In Russia’s view, a comprehensive peace treaty should see both countries lift all sanctions and restrictions, abandon any claims to compensation for wartime damage, resume trade and communications, and reestablish diplomatic ties.
Asked Thursday whether Moscow has signaled any willingness to compromise to make a meeting with Trump possible, Putin’s foreign affairs adviser Yuri Ushakov responded that there haven’t been any shifts in the Russian position.
Ukraine’s position
The memorandum that Ukraine presented to Moscow in Istanbul emphasized the need for a full and unconditional 30-day ceasefire to set stage for peace negotiations.
It reaffirmed Ukraine’s consistent rejection of Russian demands for neutral status as an attack on its sovereignty, declaring it is free to choose its alliances and adding that its NATO membership will depend on consensus with the alliance.
It emphasized Kyiv’s rejection of any restrictions on the size and other parameters of its armed forces, as well as curbs on the presence of foreign troops on its soil.
Ukraine’s memorandum also opposed recognizing any Russian territorial gains, while describing the current line of contact as a starting point in negotiations.
The document noted the need for international security guarantees to ensure the implementation of peace agreements and prevent further aggression.
Kyiv’s peace proposal also demanded the return of all deported and illegally displaced children and a total prisoner exchange.
It held the door open to gradual lifting of some of the sanctions against Russia if it abides by the agreement.
Trump’s positions
Trump has often spoken admiringly of Putin and even echoed his talking points on the war. He had a harsh confrontation with Zelensky in the Oval Office on Feb. 28, but later warmed his tone. As Putin resisted a ceasefire and continued his aerial bombardments, Trump showed exasperation with the Kremlin leader, threatening Moscow with new sanctions.
Although Trump expressed disappointment with Putin, his agreement to meet him without Zelensky at the table raised worries in Ukraine and its European allies, who fear it could allow the Russian to get Trump on his side and strong-arm Ukraine into concessions.
Trump said without giving details that “there’ll be some swapping of territories, to the betterment of both” Russia and Ukraine as part of any peace deal that he will discuss with Putin when they meet Friday.
Putin repeatedly warned Ukraine will face tougher conditions for peace if it doesn’t accept Moscow’s demands as Russian troops forge into other regions to build what he described as a “buffer zone.” Some observers suggested Russia could trade those recent gains for the territories of the four annexed by Moscow still under Ukrainian control.
“That is potentially a situation that gives Putin a tremendous amount of leeway as long as he can use that leverage to force the Ukrainians into a deal that they may not like and to sideline the Europeans effectively,” Sam Greene of King’s College London said. “The question is, will Trump sign up to that and will he actually have the leverage to force the Ukrainians and the Europeans to accept it?”
Putin could accept a temporary truce to win Trump’s sympathy as he seeks to achieve broader goals, Greene said.
“He could accept a ceasefire so long as it’s one that leaves him in control, in which there’s no real deterrence against renewed aggression somewhere down the line,” he said. “He understands that his only route to getting there runs via Trump.”
In a possible indication he thinks a ceasefire or peace deal could be close, Putin called the leaders of China, India, South Africa and several ex-Soviet nations in an apparent effort to inform these allies about prospective agreements.
Tatiana Stanovaya of the Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Center argued Putin wouldn’t budge on his goals.
“However these conditions are worded, they amount to the same demand: Ukraine stops resisting, the West halts arms supplies, and Kyiv accepts Russia’s terms, which effectively amount to a de facto capitulation,” she posted on X. “The Russian side can frame this in a dozen different ways, creating the impression that Moscow is open to concessions and serious negotiation. It has been doing so for some time, but the core position remains unchanged: Russia wants Kyiv to surrender.”
She predicted Putin might agree to meet Zelensky but noted the Kremlin leader would only accept such a meeting “if there is a prearranged agenda and predetermined outcomes, which remains difficult to imagine.”
“The likely scenario is that this peace effort will fail once again,” she said. “This would be a negative outcome for Ukraine, but it would not deliver Ukraine to Putin on a plate either, at least not in the way he wants it. The conflict, alternating between open warfare and periods of simmering tension, appears likely to persist for the foreseeable future.”


Peru Congress to debate impeachment of interim president

Updated 6 sec ago
Follow

Peru Congress to debate impeachment of interim president

LIMA: Peru’s Congress is set to consider Tuesday whether to impeach interim president Jose Jeri, the country’s seventh head of state in 10 years, accused of the irregular hiring of several women in his government.
A motion to oust Jeri, 39, received the backing of dozens of lawmakers on claims of influence peddling, the latest of a series of impeachment bids against him.
The session, set for 10:00 am local time (1500 GMT), is expected to last several hours.
Jeri, in office since October, took over from unpopular leader Dina Boluarte who was ousted by lawmakers amid protests against corruption and a wave of violence linked to organized crime.
Prosecutors said Friday they were opening an investigation into “whether the head of state exercised undue influence” in the government appointments of nine women on his watch.
On Sunday, Jeri told Peruvian TV: “I have not committed any crime.”
Jeri, a onetime leader of Congress himself, was appointed to serve out the remainder of Boluarte’s term, which runs until July, when a new president will take over following elections on April 12.
He is constitutionally barred from seeking election in April.
The alleged improper appointments were revealed by investigative TV program Cuarto Poder, which said five women were given jobs in the president’s office and the environment ministry after visiting with Jeri.
Prosecutors spoke of a total of nine women.
Jeri is also under investigation for alleged “illegal sponsorship of interests” following a secret meeting with a Chinese businessman with commercial ties with the government.

- Institutional crisis -

The speed with which the censure process is being handled has been attributed by some political observers as linked to the upcoming presidential election, which has over 30 candidates tossing their hat into the ring, a record.
The candidate from the right-wing Popular Renewal party, Rafael Lopez Aliaga, who currently leads in polls, has been among the most vocal for Jeri’s ouster.
If successfully impeached, Jeri would cease to exercise his functions and be replaced by the head of parliament as interim president.
But first a new parliamentary president would have to be elected, as the incumbent is acting in an interim capacity.
“It will be difficult to find a replacement with political legitimacy in the current Congress, with evidence of mediocrity and strong suspicion of widespread corruption,” political analyst Augusto Alvarez told AFP.
Peru is experiencing a prolonged political crisis, which has seen it burn through six presidents since 2016, several of them impeached or under investigation for wrongdoing.
It is also gripped by a wave of extortion that has claimed dozens of lives, particularly of bus drivers — some shot at the wheel if their companies refuse to pay protection money.
In two years, the number of extortion cases reported in Peru jumped more than tenfold — from 2,396 to over 25,000 in 2025.