
A flawed peace deal would not end the war in Ukraine
Today, we mark three years of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. For three years, the Ukrainian people have demonstrated remarkable resilience, foiling Russian plans to conquer Kyiv and forcing its army to retreat from Kharkiv and Kherson.
Ukrainians continue to resist against the onslaught of the Russian army, but the war has inevitably entered a grinding phase in which every territorial gain comes at an enormous cost, testing Ukraine's endurance and the West's willingness to maintain support.
At this critical stage, a new administration in the United States has signalled a dramatic shift in its policy on Ukraine, demanding that a swift peace agreement be reached. Last week, US and Russian officials met in Saudi Arabia for direct negotiations without Ukraine at the table. This meeting and the rhetoric coming from Washington have raised fears that President Donald Trump's administration is laying the groundwork for broader concessions in the name of de-escalation with Russia.
For Ukraine, the fundamental issue is not whether diplomacy should be pursued – any war eventually ends at the negotiating table – but what terms those negotiations will involve. If the priority is simply to stop the fighting as quickly as possible, there is a risk of Ukraine being pressured into accepting a settlement that does not address its long-term security concerns and that temporarily freezes the war rather than putting an end to it.
Recent history provides a clear warning against such flawed 'peacemaking'. In February 2014, Russia invaded Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula and occupied it; two months later, its troops along with local pro-Russia forces launched an operation in eastern Ukraine's Donbas region, taking control of some territory. In August, Kyiv was forced into negotiations brokered by France and Germany that aimed to put a stop to the fighting under unfavourable terms.
What came to be known as the Minsk I agreement, signed in September of that year, lasted no more than six months. In January 2015, forces loyal to Moscow and regular Russian army units renewed their attacks on Ukraine to force it into more concessions. In February 2015, what came to be known as the Minsk II agreement was negotiated and signed, stipulating that Kyiv had to recognise the 'special status' of two regions in the Donbas in effect occupied by Russia.
The Minsk agreements ultimately failed to secure a durable peace. Structured to freeze the conflict rather than resolve it, they allowed Russia to consolidate control over the occupied territories while keeping Ukraine politically and militarily constrained. Moscow never adhered to its commitments, using the diplomatic process to buy time, regroup and prepare for further aggression.
The failed Minsk agreements serve as a cautionary tale: Settlements that ignore Ukraine's security realities and societal expectations do not lead to lasting peace but merely postpone the next conflict.
Any settlement must reflect the will of the people who have endured this war for three years. Polls conducted in Ukraine show clearly what the Ukrainians want.
War fatigue is real, as illustrated by a poll conducted by Gallup in November, in which 52 percent of respondents said they supported negotiations. However, when it comes to any territorial concessions, only 27 percent said Ukraine should consider such a step. A clear majority of Ukrainians reject giving up any land as part of a peace agreement.
These figures highlight an inescapable political reality: There is no broad support in Ukraine for a peace agreement that legitimises Russian territorial gains. Any Ukrainian leadership attempting to negotiate such terms would face enormous public pressure. And even if an agreement were reached at the diplomatic level, attempts to implement it would be met with fierce resistance domestically.
That is why US and other Western policymakers advocating for an expedited resolution cannot ignore the will of the Ukrainian people. If they do want a peace deal to hold, they should consider continuing support for the Ukrainian army. Ukraine's ability to negotiate from a position of strength depends on continued military success and a unified stance from its allies.
In making decisions on their Ukraine policy, Western countries should not fall for Russia's flawed narrative. Moscow has been trying to create the illusion of strength while concealing its growing vulnerabilities.
Russian officials have insisted the Russian economy is stable despite sanctions, their military operations are sustainable and time is on their side. At the Riyadh talks, Russian representatives reportedly suggested that businesses in Moscow are thriving, restaurants are full and only Western economies are suffering from prolonged engagement in Ukraine.
The message was clear: Russia can fight for as long as it takes while the West faces diminishing returns. This framing has led some in the West to conclude that a quick peace deal – one based on Ukrainian concessions – may be the most pragmatic way forward.
But it is not. Appeasing Russia would only increase its appetite for more aggression.
The way to guarantee peace in Ukraine is by setting up a robust post-war security framework. Whether through NATO integration, bilateral defence agreements or a structured European-led security framework, Ukraine needs concrete security commitments. If these are absent in any peace settlement, the risk of renewed conflict would remain high.
The coming months will be critical as Washington reassesses its role in Ukraine. While much is unknown, one reality is clear: Ukraine's fight is not only about reclaiming lost territory but also about ensuring that its sovereignty is no longer in question. Whether Western policy continues to align with that goal or shifts towards a more transactional approach will shape the next phase of the war.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Qatar Tribune
2 hours ago
- Qatar Tribune
Iran threatens to strike US bases if conflict erupts over nuclear programme
TehrancTypeface:> Iran's defence minister has said his country would target US military bases in the region if conflict breaks out with the United States, as President Donald Trump said he was losing confidence that a nuclear deal would be agreed. Washington and Tehran have held five rounds of talks since April as Trump seeks an agreement that would place constraints on Iran's uranium enrichment. He has threatened to attack Iran if no deal can be agreed. Trump said that he was growing less confident that a nuclear deal would be reached, in comments in a podcast released on Wednesday. 'I don't know,' the US leader told the podcast Pod Force One on Monday, when asked whether he thought he could strike a deal with Iran. 'I'm less confident now than I would have been a couple of months ago. Something happened to them, but I am much less confident of a deal being made,' he said. (Agencies)


Qatar Tribune
2 hours ago
- Qatar Tribune
Curfew in LA as protests against Trump's immigration crackdown continue
Los ANGELEScColor:> A nighttime curfew was in force in Los Angeles as local officials sought to get a handle on protests that United States President Donald Trump claimed were an invasion by a 'foreign enemy'. 'I have declared a local emergency and issued a curfew for central Los Angeles to stop the vandalism, to stop the looting,' Mayor Karen Bass told reporters on Tuesday. One square mile (2.5 square kilometres) of the city's more than 500-square-mile area will be out of bounds until 6am (13:00 GMT) for everyone apart from residents, journalists and emergency services, she added. Overnight on Monday, 23 businesses were looted, police said, adding that more than 500 people had been arrested in recent days. 'What you are witnessing in California is a full-blown assault on peace, on public order, and national sovereignty,' Trump told troops at Fort Bragg, a military base in North Carolina. 'This anarchy will not stand. We will not allow an American city to be invaded and conquered by a foreign enemy.' (Agencies)


Qatar Tribune
2 hours ago
- Qatar Tribune
Gaza situation a humanitarian catastrophe: Dr Khulaifi
QNA Oslo Minister of State at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs HE Dr Mohammed bin Abdulaziz bin Saleh Al Khulaifi participated as a speaker in the Oslo Forum's first high-level session held under the title 'A different future for the Middle East,' as part of this year's edition of the annual peace forum that takes place in the Norwegian capital, Oslo. In his remarks at the session, Dr Khulaifi said that the Middle East is undergoing rapid changes that require regional actors not only to manage crises but also to play an active role in shaping the future of collective security. He pointed out that the retreat of certain global power centres and the erosion of some multilateral frameworks compel countries in the region to take the initiative and work together to safeguard regional security and achieve lasting stability. He described the situation in Gaza as a humanitarian catastrophe, noting that the deliberate targeting of infrastructure and the widespread suffering of civilians violate international law and necessitate serious international action that goes beyond statements to concrete practical steps. Dr Khulaifi highlighted Qatar's role in supporting political and humanitarian efforts in Gaza and several other countries in the Middle East, stressing that dialogue and peaceful resolution of disputes remain the most effective path to achieving just and lasting peace. He affirmed that shifting from crisis management to solution-building requires activating joint regional action and developing new mechanisms that reflect the region's realities. On the sidelines of the forum on Wednesday, the Minister of State at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs held separate meetings with Minister of Foreign Affairs of Norway Espen Barth Eide, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates of Syria Asaad Al Shibani, Minister of International Development of Norway Asmund Aukrust, State Secretary at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Norway Andreas Kravik, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Turkiye Burhanettin Duran, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iran Dr Majid Takht-Ravanchi, and Commissioner for Human Rights in the Ukrainian Parliament Dmytro Lubinets. During the meetings, the parties reviewed bilateral cooperation and ways to support and enhance it, in addition to discussing a number of regional and international issues.