Putin issued the latest ceasefire conditions after a regular conversation with Putin, pushing the negotiating impasse in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict to a new focus.
Russia made a rare concession and was willing to withdraw from some areas in exchange for Ukraine's transfer of sovereignty over Donetsk Oblast.
But will Ukraine catch this "olive branch"?
The gate is the gate.
On October 16, 2025, Putin took two and a half hours to throw Trump the most "soft" ceasefire plan since the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine: Ukraine withdrew from Donetsk, Russia withdrew its troops from Zaporozhye and parts of Helsinki.
As soon as the news came out, political leaders from various countries expressed their views. Some believed that this might be a ray of light for cooling down the Russia-Ukraine conflict; others were skeptical and worried that there was a more complex political game hidden behind it.
Putin made "concessions" this time.
At the Alaska meeting in August this year, the Russian side also bited the two states of Donetsk and Lugansk, now suddenly shrinking to just one state, and also promised to withdraw parts of the other two states, a wave of operations that left many experts in international affairs untouched.
But if you go deeper, you will find that this is not a concession, and it is clearly an accurate calculation of exchanging secondary interests for the core lifeline.
Donetsk is the gateway to Ukraine.
The Red Army Village at its westernmost end is the transportation hub of the entire eastern Ukraine. Four railways and two highways meet here. Sixty percent of the ammunition and food on the Ukrainian front line rely on this line to transport.
Starting in the summer of 2024, the Russian army will concentrate 110,000 troops on the Red Army village, fighting for a whole year without taking it down.
It's not that the Russian army's combat effectiveness is not good, but that the Ukrainian army has been building a fortress here for more than ten years. The underground fortifications can withstand heavy bombs, and every fire point can form a cross cover, turning this place into a "meat grinder."
As long as Donetsk is controlled, the Russian army can go straight west into the plains, and big cities such as Kharkiv and Dnipror will be safe and can even directly threaten Kiev.
Looking at Russia’s Zaporozhye and Helmsons, they are very important on the surface.
Zaporizhzhia has the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, and its power supply covers several countries in eastern Ukraine and Eastern Europe; Kherson controls Crimea's fresh water supply. Without the water source here, Crimea's agriculture and people's livelihood would be affected.
But in reality, the Russian troops only withdrew part of the area, surrounding the nuclear power plant and the water hub of Helsinki, and remained firmly in their hands.
In July 2025, the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant was temporarily shut down due to the war. Electricity prices in Eastern European countries soared by 50% that day. The European Union held an emergency three-hour meeting to discuss countermeasures. It can be seen that even if the Russian army withdraws part of it, it can still choke Europe's energy neck.
What is more realistic is that without Donetsk, Ukraine's economy will completely collapse.
Let the land = subjugate the country?
Before the war broke out, Donetsk's steel, coal and machinery manufacturing were the backbone of Ukraine's exports, accounting for 40% of total exports.
Although the war has been going on for three years, factories in the Donetsk controlled area are still producing intermittently, relying on the black market to transport steel out, barely maintaining part of their foreign exchange earnings.
If this place is completely lost, Ukraine's foreign exchange reserves will not last for half a year, and it will not even have the money to buy weapons by then, let alone protect people's livelihood.
A report released by the United Nations in October showed that Donetsk’s food production has dropped by 60 percent from before the war, and that at least 1.2 million refugees will have to rely on international aid to survive if the industrial pillar is lost.
For Zelensky personally, concessions are tantamount to political suicide.
At the 2024 elections in Ukraine, he could rely on the promise of "infinitely" and now, if repentant, the ruling party would soon lose a majority of seats in parliament and could even trigger the collapse of the government.
Moreover, once he relents on the Donetsk issue, Russia is likely to push its luck next time, and it will ask Luhansk next time, and it may be Kharkiv next time, which will never end.
The attitude of the United States is much more complicated.
The "small abacus" of the United States and Europe
The White House is now divided into two factions, one of which is led by the defence minister’s “pragmatists” who think it’s a good opportunity to end the war.
After all, from 2022 to now, the United States has given Ukraine $75 billion in aid, equivalent to $2,200 per US taxpayer, and domestic opposition is growing.
And the report of the U.S. Department of Defense shows that many ammunition stocks are already below the "safe line", and Ukraine will have to affect the U.S. military's own combat readiness.
This is also the reason why Trump explicitly said not to provide tactical axis missiles, not want to give them, is really a bit unable to get out.
The other group is "hawks" and feels that this is Russia's delaying tactic.
They took the example of the Alaska meeting in 2025, when the Russians also said they wanted to “freeze the front” and turned their head to add troops to Donetsk.
More importantly, if the United States supports the ceding of territory by Ukraine, it will shake its alliance system.
Dozens of Eastern European members of NATO, all relied on the promise of the United States of "inviolability of sovereignty" to join, if Ukraine this "buffer zone" is lost, Poland, Romania these countries will panic, then the United States will have to send more troops to Eastern Europe, instead of increasing the burden.
Trump's own calculations are also well-planned. He wanted to win the Nobel Peace Prize. He wanted to gain political achievements by mediating the war, but also did not want to be blamed for "betraying allies." So he kicked the ball to Zelensky. He wanted Ukraine to nod its own head.
Europe is more embarrassing than the United States.
The mouth shouted to support Ukraine at the end, but the actual action was honest.
The EU has pledged €50 billion in military aid to Ukraine, delivering only 45% by October 2025, the remainder being either delayed or charged with eliminated weapons.
It’s not that Europe doesn’t want to give, it really doesn’t have anything to give.
The EU countries produce 800,000 shells each year, while Ukraine consumes 150,000 each month, and the gap depends on the United States.
In fact, the essence of this conflict is no longer a territorial issue, but a game of security and order.
Russia is worried that NATO's eastward expansion to Ukraine will be like someone setting up a cannon at his doorstep; Ukraine wants to gain security by joining NATO while safeguarding national sovereignty; the United States and Europe must not only safeguard the principle of "inviolability of sovereignty," but also do not want to completely break out with Russia.
This contradiction between multiple demands cannot be resolved through one negotiation.
Putin's "two for one" concession seems to release sincerity, but in fact it is still a disguised erosion of Ukraine's territorial sovereignty.
Naturally, Zelensky would find it difficult to agree. After all, Ukraine has always regarded safeguarding the territorial integrity of the country as its core demand.
The true dawn of peace is not in the code of the game of great powers, but in respect for territorial sovereignty, which is the deepest revelation left to the world by the conflict in Ukraine.
Edited by: Alone