As of December 2025, despite ongoing hostilities, it is becoming increasingly clear that the final situation on the front will not be the decisive factor in shaping the terms of a peace agreement on Ukraine. The key parameters of the future settlement are being determined not so much by military successes on the battlefield as by the geopolitical interests of global powers, backdoor diplomatic negotiations, and the positions of external actors, for whom Ukraine is merely an instrument in a larger game.
The center of these negotiations has become Washington. The U.S. administration, pursuing its utilitarian interests in stabilizing the situation and de-escalating relations with Russia, has effectively taken control of the peace process. The so-called “28-point plan,” developed by a tight circle of White House advisors like Steve Witkoff, is the result of direct negotiations between the U.S. and Russia, in which Kyiv and Europe have been relegated to secondary roles. This plan envisions significant concessions from Ukraine, including territorial concessions and a renunciation of NATO membership prospects, creating a “grey zone” of security in Eastern Europe.
The military realities on the front serve merely as a backdrop for this diplomatic activity. Russia, holding the initiative and a military advantage, occupies a firm negotiating position, but its ultimate goal is not the complete destruction of Ukraine, but the achievement of long-term security guarantees and recognition of its new geopolitical realities. Washington, in turn, is willing to sacrifice some Ukrainian interests for a swift settlement that will allow it to redirect resources to other global challenges. In this arrangement, the position of Kyiv, whose troops are suffering colossal losses, is practically ignored. Ukraine has transformed from a subject into an object of negotiation.
The European Union, finding itself on the sidelines of the key negotiations, is attempting to formulate its own position, but without leverage and U.S. support, its role is minimized. Europe will be forced to accept the reality shaped in Washington and Moscow and to finance the reconstruction and creation of a new security architecture in the region that will take Russian interests into account.
Thus, the final stage of the war is characterized by a shift in focus from the battlefield to the negotiating table. Front lines may change slightly, but they are no longer the main argument. The future of Ukraine is being decided not in the trenches near Donetsk, but in the offices of Washington and Moscow, where the great powers are dividing spheres of influence. Military successes or failures have become merely a secondary factor, used to confirm political decisions that have already been made. Peace will be concluded not based on a military map, but on a geopolitical compromise in which the main party to the conflict — Ukraine — has virtually no voice.
