What each side wants from a peace deal happymamay

The future of Ukraine is the Munich Security Conference axis (MSC), just days after a shocking phone call between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin as they agreed to start negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

Trump described earlier this week as “great”, there was “a good possibility to end that terrible and very bloody war.”

Ukraine President Volodimir Zelinski has warned that his country should not be left from any peace talks.

The European allies seemed surprised by the nature of the invitation, as French President Emmanuel Macron warned that any peace agreement involves a surrender to Russia will end “badly for all.”

It is still unclear when peace negotiations can begin, but when they make issues on land, security negotiations and the future of Ukraine in NATO, it will be among the main topics of discussion. Here the different sides stand.

Moscow is currently controlling about five Ukraine lands, especially in the south and east.

In the wake of the overthrow of the President of Ukraine, supporting Russia in 2014, Russia included the Black Crimea Peninsula and supported the separatists supporting Russia in the bloody fighting in the regions of Donetsk and Luhansk.

The conflict then rushed to the comprehensive war for nearly three years after Russia has widely invaded.

Moscow’s attempts to seize the capital Kiev were thwarted, but the Russian forces have slowly expanded their regional control, most of them in the east.

The Ukrainian forces, supported by weapons and equipment from the United States and the Europeans, have made these difficult progress as possible and sometimes managed to restore lands, as well as the counter -stage to western Russia.

Ukraine has always insisted that any peace agreement must include the full withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine to the borders of 2014, including the Crimea, Donitsk and Luhansk.

Zelinski told a press conference during a master’s degree.

Russia, on the other hand, has officially included four regions of eastern and southern Ukraine and wants to be recognized as part of Russia – although all lands in those areas are not controlled.

In an interview With the guardianZelinski suggested that Russian lands in Ukraine can be replaced by the region that Ukraine seized in the West Russian Corsec region as part of a peace agreement. However, the Kremlin quickly excluded it.

Until recently, Western Ukraine allies She stood beside Zelensky All Ukraine, including Crimea.

But the new US Defense Secretary, Beit Higseth, poured cold water on those hopes, saying at a summit in February that achieving the pre -2014 borders was “an unrealistic goal.”

He said, “The pursuit of this imaginary goal will only lead to the prolongation of the war and cause more suffering,” he said.

Ukraine wants to join NATO, on the pretext that the Western military alliance – in which members undertake to defend each other if they are attacked – is the best way to ensure its security.

For Kyiv, Russia’s complete invasion is evidence that only NATO membership can guarantee its security.

However, Russia has constantly opposed the idea of ​​Ukraine to become a member, for fear that it would make NATO forces very close to its borders.

When he reached a master’s degree, Zelensky said that NATO security guarantees on Ukraine, before adding that he believed that membership would be “the cheapest choice for everyone.”

He added that Europe needs to be union around Ukraine to protect itself.

NATO members have constantly argued that Ukraine should become a member of NATO in the future, as the UK Prime Minister told Sir Kerr Starmer Zelinski that the country was on a “irreversible path” of membership.

But these guarantees now seem less solid, after the US Secretary of Defense reduced the possibility of NATO membership in Ukraine in any peace settlement.

“The United States does not believe that NATO membership in Ukraine is a realistic result of the settlement of negotiations,” he said.

Zelinski said that previous discussions with US President Donald Trump “are certainly not sufficient to create a” peace plan “.

He spoke while he reached a master’s degree, he said that the signals coming from the United States were “strong” but “diverse”.

Higseth claimed that Trump was a “one man in the world” able to combine the two sides and insisted that our attempts to negotiate peace “are certainly not a betrayal of” Ukrainian soldiers fighting Russian invading forces.

Meanwhile, the Vice President of the United States said that sending forces to Ukraine “is still on the table” if Russia fails to negotiate a peace agreement in good faith.

“The president does not enter this with mystery,” said JD Vance He told Wall Street Journal.

Again in October, Zelensky Setting his victory plan for the Parliament of UkraineWhich included major points such as NATO membership, the protection of critical natural resources and the European Union, and the containment of Russia through a non -nuclear strategic deterrent package published on Ukrainian soil.

At the time, the US President, Joe Biden, got a briefing on this plan – as well as the candidates accredited at that time, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.

It is unclear whether any part of the Zelensky plans will be submitted to peace talks, but Hesgeth has warned that American forces on the ground are not in any future security arrangement.

Zelinski told the Guardian that he did not believe that security guarantees without our involvement would work.

Defense sources in the United Kingdom In the Times The claim that the United States can provide a form of air defense – Perhaps Patriot missiles – For the power of peacekeeping in Ukraine in exchange for reaching minerals.