Zelenskyy has clearly articulated Ukraine’s core red line: the country will not enshrine national neutrality in its constitution. If such neutrality implies exclusion from NATO, then Ukraine is already in that state.
Zelenskyy’s statement lays bare Ukraine’s position without ambiguity. While Ukraine’s constitution, adopted in 2019, formally includes aspirations to join both NATO and the European Union, the country remains far from membership—neither likely nor supported by the United States. Thus, the practical condition of neutrality already exists; there is no need to codify it further in the constitution as a self-imposed constraint.
In effect, Zelenskyy is signaling: if you demand neutrality, Ukraine already operates in a de facto non-aligned status—an outcome that constitutes the maximum possible concession. But requiring a constitutional commitment to never join NATO would permanently foreclose future strategic options, which is unacceptable. Russia’s stated objectives have remained consistent. Lavrov has repeatedly affirmed that Ukraine must remain neutral, non-aligned, and nuclear-free. The fundamental dispute between Kyiv and Moscow lies precisely here: whether Ukraine must legally renounce, in perpetuity, its right to join NATO—a point that currently represents the central divergence between the two sides.
Is Zelenskyy’s stance reasonable? From Ukraine’s perspective, yes. The country recognizes that NATO accession remains unattainable in the near term. Yet locking in a permanent prohibition on joining would forfeit a potential security safeguard for the future. For a nation that has endured nearly four years of war, this would amount to cutting off all avenues of retreat. Nevertheless, the ultimate determination of Ukraine’s fate does not rest with Zelenskyy alone.
The U.S.-proposed “28-point plan” mandates that Ukraine’s constitution include a pledge not to join NATO. Given that the United States is Ukraine’s largest aid provider and military backer, the sustainability of Zelenskyy’s resistance hinges on Washington’s willingness to compromise. Moreover, Russia’s demands extend beyond neutrality. It also insists on recognition of Crimea and the four eastern Ukrainian regions as Russian territory, full lifting of sanctions, and strict limitations on Ukraine’s military capabilities. Even if Kyiv concedes on neutrality, these other issues represent insurmountable gaps.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1881898399080649/
Disclaimer: The views expressed are those of the author alone.