Land swaps with Russia are not only unpopular in Ukraine. They're also illegal
That's why President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has categorically rejected any deal with Moscow that could involve ceding land after U.S. President Donald Trump suggested such a concession would be beneficial to both sides, ahead of his meeting Friday with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska.
Zelenskyy said over the weekend that Kyiv 'will not give Russia any awards for what it has done,' and that 'Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier.' The remarks came after Trump said a peace deal would involve swapping of Ukrainian territories by both sides 'to the betterment of both.'
For Zelenskyy, such a deal would be disaster for his presidency and spark public outcry after more than three years of bloodshed and sacrifice by Ukrainians. Moreover, he doesn't have the authority to sign off on it, because changing Ukraine's 1991 borders runs counter to the country's constitution.
For now, freezing the front line appears to be an outcome the Ukrainian people are willing to accept.
A look at the challenges such proposals entail:
Russia occupies about a fifth of Ukraine
Russia occupies about a fifth of Ukraine, from the country's northeast to the Crimean Peninsula, which was annexed illegally in 2014.
The front line is vast and cuts across six regions — the active front stretches for at least 1,000 kilometers (680 miles) — but if measured from along the border with Russia, it reaches as far as 2,300 kilometers (1,430 miles).
Russia controls almost all of the Luhansk region and almost two-thirds of Donetsk region, which together comprise the Donbas, as the strategic industrial heartland of Ukraine is called. Russia has long coveted the area and illegally annexed it in the first year of the full-scale invasion, even though it didn't control much of it at the time.
Russia also partially controls more than half of the Kherson region, which is critical to maintain logistical flows of supplies coming in from the land corridor in neighboring Crimea, and also parts of the Zaporizhzhia region, where the Kremlin seized Europe's largest nuclear power plant.
Russian forces also hold pockets of territory in Kharkiv and Sumy regions in northeastern Ukraine, far less strategically valuable for Moscow. Russian troops are gaining a foothold in the Dnipropetrovsk region. These could be what Moscow is willing to exchange for land it deems more important in Donetsk, where the Russian army has concentrated most of its effort.
'There'll be some land swapping going on. I know that through Russia and through conversations with everybody. To the good, for the good of Ukraine. Good stuff, not bad stuff. Also, some bad stuff for both,' Trump said Monday.
Ukrainian forces are still active in the Kursk region inside Russia, but they barely hold any territory there, making it not as potent a bargaining chip as Kyiv's leaders had probably hoped when they launched the daring incursion across the border last year. Swapping Ukrainian controlled territory in Russia, however minuscule, will likely be the only palatable option for Kyiv in any land swapping scenario.
Conceding land risks another invasion
Surrendering territory would see those unwilling to live under Russian rule to pack up and leave. Many civilians have endured so much suffering and bloodshed since pro-Moscow forces began battling the Ukrainian military in the east in 2014 and since the full-scale invasion in 2022.
From a military standpoint, abandoning the Donetsk region in particular would vastly improve Russia's ability to invade Ukraine again, according to the Washington-based think tank Institute for the Study of War.
Bowing to such a demand would force Ukraine to abandon its 'fortress belt,' the main defensive line in Donetsk since 2014, 'with no guarantee that fighting will not resume,' the institute said in a recent report.
The regional defensive line has prevented Russia's efforts to seize the region and continues to impede Russia's efforts to take the rest of the area, ISW said.
Ukraine's constitution poses a major challenge to any deal involving a land swap because it requires a nationwide referendum to approve changes to the country's territorial borders, said Ihor Reiterovych, a politics professor in the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv.
'Changes in territorial integrity can be done only by the decision of the people — not the president, the cabinet of ministers or the parliament can change it,' he said. 'In the constitution it is written that only by referendum can changes to Ukraine's territory be conducted.'
If during negotiations Zelenskyy agrees to swap territory with Russia, 'in the same minute he will be a criminal because he would be abandoning the main law that governs Ukraine,' Reiterovych said.
Trump said he was 'a little bothered' by Zelenskyy's assertion over the weekend that he needed constitutional approval to cede to Russia the territory that it captured in its unprovoked invasion.
'I mean, he's got approval to go into a war and kill everybody, but he needs approval to do a land swap?' Trump added. 'Because there'll be some land swapping going on. I know that through Russia and through conversations with everybody.'
Zelenskyy is still trying to regain the people's trust that was damaged when he reversed course on a law that would have diminished the independence of Ukraine's anti-corruption watchdogs. The move was a red line for those citizens who are protective of the country's institutions and are suspicious of certain members of Zelenskyy's inner circle.
Freezing the conflict seems a lesser evil for UkraineAnalysts like Reiterovych dismiss a land swap as a distraction. Freezing the conflict along the current front line is the only option Ukrainians are willing to accept, he said, citing recent polls.
This option would also buy time for both sides to consolidate manpower and build up their domestic weapons industries. Ukraine would require strong security guarantees from its Western partners to deter future Russian aggression, which Kyiv believes is inevitable.
Still, freezing the conflict will also be difficult for Ukrainians to accept.
Along with the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the partial occupation of Luhansk and Donetsk after that, it would require accepting that the Ukrainian military is not able to retake lost territories militarily. Kyiv accepted its inability to retake these territories but never formally recognized them as Russian. A similar scenario could unfold in the new regions taken by Russian forces.
It also is not a viable long-term solution.
'It is the lesser evil option for everyone and it will not provoke protests or rallies on the streets,' Reiterovych said.
—-
Associated Press journalist Volodymyr Yurchuk contributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ukraine needs long-term security guarantees, Taoiseach says
International borders must not be changed by force, the Taoiseach has said, ahead of a meeting between the presidents of the United States and Ukraine. Micheal Martin attended a virtual leaders' meeting of the so-called 'coalition of the willing' in support of Ukraine on Sunday. The call was convened by Sir Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. On Monday, Volodymyr Zelensky is meeting Donald Trump with several EU leaders, including Sir Keir, also travelling to Washington DC in a show of solidarity with the Ukrainian president. Mr Martin, who will not be in Washington, said he had assured Mr Zelensky on Sunday that Ireland will 'continue to steadfastly support Ukraine'. EU leaders have agreed that sanctions and wider economic measures 'will be reinforced' if Russia continues its military action. The Taoiseach also said that he believes Ukraine needs 'long-term security guarantees'. Speaking after Sunday's online conference, Mr Martin said: 'I welcomed the opportunity to join other European leaders today to discuss developments on ending the war in Ukraine. 'We had a very useful engagement with President Zelensky as he prepares to meet with President Trump tomorrow in Washington. 'I welcome the initiative by President Trump to seek the ending of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. Ireland, together with our European partners, continues to contribute to these efforts to achieve a just and lasting peace for Ukraine.' The meeting of European leaders follows the US president's summit with Russian leader Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. Mr Martin said it is 'essential that Ukraine is a full participant' in any discussions regarding its future. He said: 'I therefore welcome that President Zelensky will meet with President Trump in Washington tomorrow, together with other European leaders. Mr Martin said he stressed that international law and principles of independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity need to be respected for security in the region. 'It will be up to Ukraine to make decisions on its territory. International borders must not be changed by force. 'I fully agree that Ukraine needs strong, credible, long-term security guarantees. This will mean sustained support from Europe, the United States and other partners. 'Ireland stands ready to play our part. Earlier this year we committed to providing non-lethal military support to Ukraine and we will look to do more. 'At today's meeting, I also reiterated Ireland's readiness to contribute to any peacekeeping force that is in line with the UN Charter.' The Taoiseach said Ireland will also continue to support Ukraine's EU membership ambitions, adding that Russia 'cannot have a veto' on the matter. 'Our joint efforts for peace should be combined with firm and co-ordinated pressure on Russia to agree to a ceasefire and engage seriously with negotiations on a just and lasting peace. 'We agreed today that sanctions and wider economic measures will be reinforced if Russia does not stop the killing. 'The human dimension and accountability must also be at the centre of a just and lasting peace for Ukraine. 'Russia must urgently return Ukrainian children who they have abducted as well as prisoners of war and civilians being held unlawfully.'

Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Volodymyr Zelenskyy to press for ceasefire at Donald Trump meeting
Volodymyr Zelenskyy will ask Donald Trump to increase pressure on Russia for a ceasefire in the Ukraine war at a White House meeting on Sign in to access your portfolio


New York Post
11 minutes ago
- New York Post
Who's REALLY ‘destroying democracy' — after failing to win voters legitimately?
'Destroying democracy' — the latest theme of the left — can be defined in many ways. How about attempting to destroy constitutional, ancient and hallowed institutions simply to suit short-term political gains? So, who in 2020, and now once again, has boasted about packing the 156-year-old, nine-justice Supreme Court? Who talks frequently about destroying the 187-year-old Senate filibuster — though only when they hold a Senate majority? Who wants to bring in an insolvent left-wing Puerto Rico and redefine the 235-year-old District of Columbia — by altering the Constitution — as two new states solely to obtain four additional liberal senators? Who is trying to destroy the constitutionally mandated 235-year Electoral College by circumventing it with the surrogate 'The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact?' Does destroying democracy also entail weaponizing federal bureaucracies, turning them into rogue partisan arms of a president? So who ordered the CIA to concoct bogus charges of 'collusion' to sabotage Donald Trump's 2016 campaign, the 2016-2017 transition, and the first 22 months of Trump's first term? Who prompted a cabal of '51 former intelligence officials' to lie to the American people on the eve of the last debate of the 2020 election that the FBI-authenticated Hunter Biden laptop was instead the work of a 'Russian intelligence operation?' Who ordered the FBI to connive and partner with social-media conglomerates to censor accurate news deemed unhelpful to the 2020 Biden campaign? Who pulled off the greatest presidential coup in history by using surrogates in the shadows to run the cognitively debilitated Biden presidency, then by fiat canceled his reelection effort and finally anointed as his replacement the new nominee Kamala Harris, who had never won a single primary delegate? Who ordered FBI SWAT teams to invade the home of a former president because of a classification dispute over 102 files out of some 13,000 stored there? Who tried to remove an ex-president and leader of his party from at least 25 state ballots to deprive millions of Americans of the opportunity to vote for or against him? Who coordinated four local, state and federal prosecutors to destroy a former and future president by charging him with fantasy crimes that were never before, and will never again be, lodged against anyone else? Who appointed a federal prosecutor to go after the ex-president, who arranged for a high-ranking Justice Department official to step down to join a New York prosecutor's efforts to destroy an ex-president, and who met in the White House with a Georgia county prosecutor seeking to destroy an ex-president — all on the same day — a mere 72 hours after Trump announced his 2024 reelection bid? Who but the current Democrats ever impeached a president twice? Has any party ever tried an ex-president in the Senate when he was out of office and a mere private citizen? When have there ever been two near-miss assassination attempts on a major party presidential candidate during a single presidential campaign? Who destroyed the southern border and broke federal law to allow in, without criminal or health background audits, some 10 million to 12 million illegal aliens? Who created 600 'sanctuary jurisdictions' for the sole purpose of nullifying federal immigration law, in the eerie spirit of the renegade old Confederacy? Who allowed tens of thousands of rioters, arsonists and violent protesters over four months in 2020 to destroy over $2 billion in property, kill some 35 people, injure 1,500 police officers and torch a federal courthouse, a police precinct and a historic church — all with de facto legal impunity? How do the purported destroyers of democracy find themselves winning 60% to 70% approval on most of the key issues of our times, while the supposed saviors of democracy are on the losing side of popular opinion? How does a president 'destroy democracy' by his party winning the White House by both the popular and Electoral College vote, winning majorities in both the Senate and House by popular votes and enjoying a 6-3 edge in the Supreme Court through judges appointed by popularly elected presidents? So what is behind these absurd charges? Three catalysts: One, the new anguished elitist Democratic Party alienated the middle classes through its Jacobin agenda and therefore lost the Congress, the presidency and the Supreme Court, and now has no federal political power. Two, the Democratic Party is polling at record lows and yet remains hellbent on alienating the traditional sources of its power — minorities, youth and Independents. Three, Democrats cannot find any issues that the people support, nor any leaders to convince the people to embrace them. So it is no surprise that the panicked Democrats bark at the shadows — given that they know their revolutionary, neo-socialist agenda is destroying them. And yet, like all addicts, they choose destruction over abandoning their self-destructive fixations. Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.