Peace is no longer negotiated around victory, but around how much instability the system can still absorb.
Kyiv, December 28, 2025.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed that Ukraine is preparing for direct discussions with U.S. President Donald Trump focused on two issues that remain structurally unresolved after nearly four years of war: the status of Ukrainian territories under Russian occupation and the scope of security guarantees required to prevent renewed aggression. The announcement reflects a controlled shift from battlefield management toward political containment, without signaling acceptance of territorial loss.
On the territorial dimension, Kyiv continues to define sovereignty as non negotiable. Ukrainian authorities reject any formula that legitimizes occupation, while acknowledging that ceasefire frameworks may involve phased timelines, temporary administrative mechanisms, or internationally supervised arrangements. The strategic objective is to halt large scale hostilities without consolidating a frozen conflict that would normalize long term vulnerability and erode state legitimacy.
Security guarantees constitute the decisive axis of the talks. Ukraine is demanding commitments that extend beyond declarative support and episodic military assistance. While NATO membership remains the long term strategic horizon, the immediate priority is a credible deterrence architecture, potentially anchored in U.S. backed guarantees and reinforced by allied participation. From Kyiv’s perspective, territorial sequencing without enforceable protection would amount to postponement, not peace.
Trump’s role introduces a transactional tempo into the process. His preference for accelerated outcomes contrasts with the alliance centered approach favored by European partners, raising concerns over durability, enforcement, and continuity. Guarantees operating outside formal NATO structures remain politically flexible but strategically fragile, dependent on leadership will rather than institutional obligation.
Russia remains absent from these exchanges, maintaining military pressure while monitoring diplomatic signals. The exclusion is deliberate, allowing Washington and Kyiv to explore parameters without granting Moscow immediate leverage. Any framework that emerges, however, will ultimately be tested against Russia’s willingness to respect constraints shaped in its absence.
What is taking shape is not a peace agreement, but a recalibration of limits. Territory defines legitimacy. Security guarantees define survival. Between them lies the unresolved challenge of ending a war without rewarding coercion or institutionalizing strategic exposure.
Detrás de cada dato, hay una intención. Detrás de cada silencio, una estructura.