Peace Talks or Territorial Amnesia? Why Ukraine Must Demand Russia Withdraw From Its Own “New Borders”

As discussions resurface about potential territorial compromises in eastern Ukraine, a dangerous framing is quietly taking hold. Public debate has become fixated on whether Ukraine should withdraw its forces from parts of Donetsk Oblast to create some kind of “buffer,” “special,” or “economic” zone in the name of peace.

But amid this speculation, one fundamental question has almost disappeared from the agenda:

Why is no one discussing the withdrawal of Russian forces from territories Russia has unlawfully declared its own?

If “peace negotiations” are to have any meaning, Ukraine cannot allow the status of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson oblasts to be pushed outside the formal agenda — especially in talks reportedly involving intermediaries such as Vitkov and Kushnir.

Any proposed framework — whether “20 points,” “28 points,” or another diplomatic format — must include a clear demand: the removal of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson oblasts from the constitutional territory of the Russian Federation. Ultimately, this principle applies to all occupied Ukrainian territories: the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson oblasts.

But diplomacy often begins incrementally. If progress must start somewhere, it could begin with Zaporizhzhia and Kherson.

The Kremlin continues to invoke the phrase “sustainable peace” while simultaneously using it as justification to avoid ceasefire discussions. Yet sustainable peace cannot exist without clarity on borders. Without defined and internationally recognized territorial status, any ceasefire risks becoming a frozen conflict — or worse, a prelude to renewed aggression.

If Ukrainian forces were to withdraw from parts of Donetsk in pursuit of peace, what would prevent Russia from solidifying control over Zaporizhzhia and Kherson under its self-declared “constitutional territory”? Would Moscow truly accept what it calls the “occupation of historically Russian lands” for the sake of compromise?

Or is the expectation that Ukraine alone must make concessions while Russia makes none?

If peace negotiations are serious, they must include symmetrical territorial questions. Let intermediaries explain to the Kremlin why genuine de-escalation requires a reciprocal “gesture of goodwill” — beginning with reversing Russia’s annexation claims over occupied Ukrainian regions.

Because without that, talk of sustainable peace is not diplomacy.

It is territorial amnesia.

Vladislav Olenchenko