The European trio proposes conditions for ending the Ukraine conflict.
Zelenskyy says freezing the current frontline is the fastest path to peace for Ukraine.
Russia claims that if Ukraine withdraws from Donbas, hostilities could cease within one day.
Why is the deadlock stuck in Donbas?
An article published by Russia's Vedomosti on June 8.
After a meeting in London, leaders of the UK, France, and Germany issued a joint statement, with Volodymyr Zelenskyy also attending the talks.
The document states that the "European trio" nations' leaders "support proposals for direct dialogue between Ukraine and Russia—actively involving the United States and other European countries—with the aim of achieving a ceasefire and facilitating further negotiations."
According to TASS, in the statement, the three European powers outlined a series of conditions for Ukraine’s long-term peace.
The three nation leaders oppose any territorial changes to Ukraine by force and insist on providing legally binding guarantees for the Kyiv government, including the possible deployment of foreign military forces from so-called "volunteer alliance" countries.
At the same time, they firmly oppose unfreezing Russia’s sovereign assets before the end of the conflict and prior to what they consider full compensation by Russia for all damages inflicted on Ukraine.
The statement emphasizes that any future agreement must include European security assurances, and all matters involving the EU and NATO must be coordinated with the EU, its member states, and NATO allies.
Russian presidential spokesperson Peskov stated that if Ukrainian forces withdraw from Donbas, combat operations with Ukraine could stop within one day.
Zelenskyy pointed out that freezing the frontlines at current positions and halting hostile actions might be the fastest route to peace for Ukraine.
Evidently, both the international community and Russia and Ukraine alike have strong intentions for a ceasefire.
Yet the core issue causing the deadlock lies in Donbas—the region primarily comprising Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts in eastern Ukraine, traditionally referring to the industrial area centered on the Donets coal basin, covering an area of approximately 60,000 square kilometers.
The deep-rooted reasons why Russia seeks full control of Donbas while Ukraine resolutely refuses:
Core motivations behind Russia’s pursuit of full control over Donbas:
1. Creating a strategic buffer zone.
Donbas borders Russia’s southwestern frontier. Fully controlling this region would block NATO military forces from directly advancing toward Russian territory along eastern Ukraine, alleviating the pressure brought by NATO’s eastward expansion; meanwhile, it serves as a vital land corridor connecting mainland Russia and Crimea, strengthening Russia’s land-based supply and control capabilities over Crimea, and reinforcing its defensive posture in the Black Sea region.
2. Historical, ethnic, and domestic legal entanglement.
Donbas has long been developed as a core industrial base for Russia. The local population has a high proportion of Russian speakers, and culturally, it maintains close ties with Russia. The Kremlin views its inclusion into Ukraine during the Soviet era as a historical anomaly, and believes there is broad popular support among locals for closer ties with Russia.
Following referendums in 2022, Donetsk and Luhansk were formally incorporated into Russia’s constitutional map—abandoning them would thus violate the constitution, leaving no room for political retreat.
3. Outstanding economic and defense-industrial value.
Donbas is Ukraine’s—and indeed Eastern Europe’s—top-tier heavy industrial hub, with coal reserves exceeding 60 billion tons, and a fully developed chain of industries including metallurgy, machinery, chemicals, and defense manufacturing.
4. Closure of political objectives in the conflict.
Russia regards the status of Donbas as one of the core goals of its special military operation. Failure to secure full control would be perceived as a strategic defeat, making it difficult to justify the war domestically and undermining its broader ambition to reshape the security landscape of Eastern Europe.
Key reasons why Ukraine refuses to relinquish Donbas:
1. Rigid constraints of international law and national constitution.
Under the UN Charter and modern international law, Ukraine holds undisputed sovereignty over Donbas (the borders were confirmed by Ukraine and Russia upon the dissolution of the Soviet Union). Ukraine’s Constitution explicitly states that territorial integrity cannot be altered; neither the president nor the government has the authority to unilaterally cede territory.
2. National economy cannot afford to lose it.
Donbas is Ukraine’s “industrial heart,” contributing significantly to the country’s coal, steel, and electricity production before the war—it remains the cornerstone of Ukraine’s heavy industry exports and employment.
3. Critical defensive strategic barrier.
Located in the highland urban belt of eastern Ukraine, Donbas has been fortified by Ukrainian forces over years, forming a deep defensive structure essential for blocking Russian advances into the heartland of Ukraine.
4. Symbolic significance for national sovereignty and ethnic identity.
Since the 2014 Crimean crisis, Donbas has become the symbolic frontline where Ukraine defends its territorial integrity.
If Ukraine were to abandon Donbas, it would set a dangerous precedent, completely eroding Ukraine’s sovereignty discourse in great-power competition. The narrative justifying wartime sacrifices would collapse, weakening national unity and triggering further risks of territorial fragmentation.
The fundamental irreconcilable contradiction between both sides:
Both positions are deeply anchored: Russia’s stance is tied to its domestic constitution and geopolitical security narrative; Ukraine’s position rests on international law, sovereignty, and the very foundation of national survival—leaving no room for compromise on the core issue of territorial boundaries.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1867384538826759/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.