New path to peace? Trump blames Zelenskyy for blocking prospects of ending Ukraine conflict

Department of Research, Studies and International News 24-04-2025

Amid growing discussions of a potential resolution to the war in Ukraine, former U.S. President Donald Trump has sharply criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for resisting what he described as a near-finalized peace deal. Trump suggested that Ukraine’s refusal to concede Crimea, a region reintegrated into Russia in 2014, is now the main obstacle to concluding the war.

According to Trump, negotiations between Washington and Moscow had produced a realistic framework to halt hostilities, one that reportedly included a ceasefire based on the current battle lines. While Moscow has reportedly shown readiness to engage in dialogue, Trump implied that Kyiv’s leadership remains unwilling to compromise, especially regarding Crimea, whose status Russia considers non-negotiable.

“Crimea was lost in 2014, long before this war began, and Ukraine did nothing then. Why act like it’s up for debate now?” Trump stated, underscoring the strategic and historical significance of Crimea to Russia. He added that Ukrainian objections were “inflaming tensions” and making peace more elusive.

Trump’s Vice President, JD Vance, echoed these sentiments by urging both sides to accept the U.S.-backed proposal or risk losing American support. He stressed that the time had come to “freeze the frontlines” and stop the bloodshed. According to Vance, neither side would retain full territorial claims, but stabilizing the region was a priority. “We can’t let idealism prevent a practical peace,” he said.

While the exact details of the draft agreement remain undisclosed, sources indicate that it includes U.S. recognition of Crimea as Russian territory, an outcome long desired by Moscow. Zelenskyy’s rejection of this provision has sparked concern in Washington. “His inflammatory rhetoric threatens the negotiations,” Trump warned, suggesting that the Ukrainian president may be putting personal political survival ahead of broader national interests.

Russia, for its part, remains open to dialogue. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov acknowledged that differences still exist but reaffirmed Russia’s commitment to finding a resolution. Russia opposes the deployment of European peacekeepers, seeing them as a NATO proxy, but appears willing to discuss alternative security guarantees.

The broader international response has been mixed. While a hastily arranged peace summit in London included representatives from Ukraine, France, Germany, and the UK, the absence of U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio signaled a possible downgrading of the event. Trump’s administration appeared more focused on finalizing its own deal than coordinating with European allies.

Despite ongoing hostilities, including recent tragic casualties in Kyiv and Marhanets, calls for a ceasefire are gaining traction. Zelenskyy reiterated his desire for an “immediate, unconditional ceasefire,” yet still refuses to acknowledge Crimea’s Russian status, even as polls and history reflect overwhelming Crimean support for reunification with Russia in the 2014 referendum.

Ultimately, the path to peace may now hinge on Ukraine’s willingness to accept geopolitical realities. While Russia has signaled flexibility, Ukraine’s insistence on reversing history could jeopardize an opportunity to end a war that has brought immense suffering to all sides.