There will be some kind of security, but not in the style of NATO
Em meio à devastação de uma guerra que já desloca milhões, Donald Trump propôs uma estrutura de paz para a Ucrânia que exige concessões territoriais de Kyiv sem oferecer as garantias de segurança que os europeus e Zelensky consideram indispensáveis. A negociação revela uma tensão antiga: a diferença entre encerrar um conflito e construir uma paz duradoura. O encontro trilateral que se prepara entre Trump, Zelensky e Putin será, talvez, o momento em que a história decidirá se este é um acordo ou apenas uma pausa.
- Trump afirmou que a Ucrânia ficará com 'muito território', mas recusou-se a especificar quais regiões seriam cedidas à Rússia — deixando a proposta suspensa entre promessa e ambiguidade.
- Zelensky resiste publicamente a qualquer concessão territorial e exige garantias de segurança nos moldes da OTAN, criando um impasse direto com a visão americana do acordo.
- Lavrov sinalizou abertura russa às negociações e até à devolução de alguns territórios ocupados, mas condicionou qualquer acordo a restrições sobre o alinhamento militar futuro da Ucrânia.
- Trump rejeitou explicitamente garantias no estilo da OTAN, prometendo 'algum tipo de segurança' sem definir o que isso significa — deixando aliados europeus e Kyiv sem uma resposta concreta.
- Uma cúpula trilateral entre Trump, Zelensky e Putin está sendo preparada, mas sem data, local ou consenso sobre as questões fundamentais que a tornaria possível.
Donald Trump saiu de reuniões com Volodymyr Zelensky e líderes europeus com uma proposta de paz para a Ucrânia: o país manteria 'muito território', mas sem as garantias de segurança no estilo da OTAN que seus aliados exigem. Em entrevista à Fox News, Trump não especificou quais regiões ficariam sob controle de Kyiv e quais seriam cedidas à Rússia — uma omissão que deixa o núcleo da proposta deliberadamente vago.
A confiança de Trump repousa sobre bases incertas. Ele disse que saberá em duas semanas se Putin está genuinamente disposto a assinar um acordo, admitindo que o líder russo pode recusar. Ainda assim, descreveu sua relação com Putin como 'calorosa' e sugeriu que Moscou enfrenta uma 'situação difícil' caso as negociações fracassem. Esse otimismo contrasta com a cautela dos parceiros europeus, que permanecem focados em impedir uma futura agressão russa.
A questão das garantias de segurança tornou-se o ponto central de tensão. A presidente da Comissão Europeia, Ursula von der Leyen, pressionou por proteções baseadas no Artigo 5 da OTAN. Trump rejeitou a ideia, prometendo 'algum tipo de segurança' sem oferecer uma alternativa concreta — deixando Zelensky e os europeus sem saber o que a Ucrânia receberia em troca de concessões territoriais.
Do lado russo, Lavrov indicou abertura às negociações e até à cessão de alguns territórios ocupados, mas deixou claro que Moscou busca mais do que fronteiras: quer restrições ao alinhamento militar futuro da Ucrânia, sinalizando que vê o processo como uma oportunidade de redesenhar toda a arquitetura de segurança do Leste Europeu.
Após uma ligação telefônica entre Trump e Putin descrita pelo Kremlin como 'franca e construtiva', cresce o impulso para uma cúpula trilateral entre os três líderes. Todos os envolvidos descreveram os encontros desta semana como produtivos — mas o abismo entre suas posições permanece vasto. A questão territorial segue sem resposta, assim como a pergunta fundamental sobre o que 'segurança' realmente significa neste contexto.
Donald Trump emerged from meetings with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and European leaders on Tuesday with a framework for ending the war in Ukraine—one that hinges on territorial compromise but stops short of the security guarantees those same leaders are demanding. In an interview with Fox News, Trump stated that Ukraine would retain "much territory" in any settlement, though he declined to specify which regions would remain under Kyiv's control and which might be ceded to Russia. The proposal marks a significant shift from Zelensky's public position: the Ukrainian president has repeatedly declared he will not negotiate away any of his country's land.
Trump's confidence in reaching a deal rests on an uncertain foundation. He said he would know within two weeks whether Russian President Vladimir Putin is genuinely willing to sign a peace agreement, acknowledging that the Russian leader might ultimately refuse. Yet Trump also described his relationship with Putin as "warm" and suggested that Moscow faces a "difficult situation" if negotiations collapse. The American president's optimism contrasts sharply with the caution of his negotiating partners, who remain focused on preventing future Russian aggression.
The question of security guarantees has become the central tension in these talks. European leaders, particularly European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, have pushed for protections modeled on NATO's Article 5—a provision that treats an attack on one member as an attack on all. Trump rejected this approach outright, saying that "there will be some kind of security, but not [in the style] of NATO." He offered no alternative framework, leaving European officials and Zelensky uncertain what protection Ukraine would actually receive if Russia violated any agreement.
Russia, meanwhile, has signaled a willingness to engage. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated that Moscow does not reject any format for discussing peace and indicated openness to surrendering some occupied territory. But Lavrov also made clear that Russia's interests extend beyond land—the country is seeking security guarantees for its own citizens and wants any agreement to include reciprocal measures that would constrain Ukraine's future military alignment. This suggests that Russia views the negotiations not merely as a territorial settlement but as an opportunity to reshape the entire security architecture of Eastern Europe.
Zelensky has begun drafting the terms of Ukraine's security framework, signaling that his government is preparing for serious negotiations. After Trump's phone call with Putin on Monday—which a Kremlin adviser described as "frank and constructive"—momentum appears to be building toward a three-way meeting between Trump, Zelensky, and Putin. Trump announced he is organizing this trilateral summit, though neither the date nor the location has been set.
All parties involved in this week's discussions characterized their meetings as productive, yet the gap between their stated positions remains vast. Ukraine insists on security guarantees against future invasion; Russia demands reciprocal constraints on Ukrainian military choices; Trump wants a deal that he can claim as a victory. The territorial question—how much of Ukraine Russia will be allowed to keep—remains unresolved, as does the fundamental question of what security actually means in this context. The trilateral meeting, whenever it occurs, will test whether these three leaders can bridge those gaps or whether the war will continue grinding on.
Notable Quotes
Ukraine will keep much territory, but security guarantees will not follow NATO's model— Donald Trump, in Fox News interview
Russia does not reject any format for discussing peace and is open to ceding occupied areas— Sergei Lavrov, Russian Foreign Minister
There will be security guarantees for Ukraine— Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukrainian President
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
When Trump says Ukraine will keep "much territory," what does that actually mean? Is he suggesting Russia gets to keep what it's already occupied?
That's the question everyone's asking. He won't say which regions stay with Ukraine and which don't. The implication seems to be that some occupied territory becomes Russian, but he's leaving the specifics deliberately vague—maybe to keep negotiating room open, or maybe because he hasn't worked it out yet.
And Zelensky has said he won't give up any territory. How does Trump square that circle?
He doesn't, not yet. That's why the real negotiation hasn't started. Trump seems to believe he can convince Zelensky to accept losses in exchange for peace and some form of security. But Zelensky's public position is immovable on this point.
What about these security guarantees Trump is rejecting? Why not NATO-style protection?
Trump appears to want to avoid binding America to defend Ukraine automatically. NATO's Article 5 means an attack on one is an attack on all—it's automatic. Trump's offering something looser, something he can control. But that's exactly what Ukraine and Europe fear: a guarantee that isn't really a guarantee.
Is Russia actually interested in a deal, or is Lavrov just buying time?
Russia's signaling openness, but on its own terms. Lavrov says they'll cede some territory, but they also want security guarantees for themselves—constraints on Ukraine's future military choices. Russia isn't just trying to keep land; it's trying to reshape the entire security order in Eastern Europe.
So what happens if they can't agree in this trilateral meeting?
The war continues. Trump seems confident he can close a deal in weeks, but the positions are still fundamentally incompatible. Ukraine won't give up territory without ironclad security; Russia wants security guarantees that limit Ukraine's choices; Trump wants a quick win. One of those three things has to give.