|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has revealed that the United States raised the possibility of Ukraine withdrawing its troops from the eastern Donbas region in exchange for NATO membership, introducing a new and sensitive issue into ongoing efforts to negotiate an end to the war with Russia.
Zelensky disclosed the development on Saturday, November 14, 2026, while discussing recent diplomatic engagements with American representatives and other international partners.
According to the Ukrainian leader, US negotiators asked whether Ukraine would be prepared to withdraw its forces from the parts of Donbas still under Ukrainian control if the country were admitted into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
The question represents a significant development in negotiations over the future of Ukraine’s eastern territories, which have remained central to the conflict since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022.
Zelensky said the American side had raised the possibility for the first time during discussions about a potential settlement.
However, he maintained that Ukraine would not simply surrender its territory and insisted that any proposal involving security guarantees, military support and economic recovery would require careful consideration.
The disclosure comes as Washington continues diplomatic efforts involving Kyiv and Moscow, with territorial control, NATO membership and long-term European security remaining among the most difficult issues to resolve.
Zelensky Rejects the Idea of Giving Up Ukrainian Territory
Despite acknowledging that the American negotiators had raised the question, Zelensky made it clear that Ukraine’s position on territorial sovereignty had not changed.
He has repeatedly insisted that Ukraine will not voluntarily surrender its land to Russia, arguing that territorial concessions would reward military aggression and create further security risks for the country.
The Ukrainian president said his government would not recognise territories occupied by Russia as legally belonging to Moscow, even if a future agreement involved changes to military positions or security arrangements.
His comments are particularly important because the Donbas region has been one of the principal objectives of Russia’s military campaign.
Donbas, located in eastern Ukraine, comprises the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. The area has experienced conflict since 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea and fighting began between Ukrainian forces and Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine.
Russia subsequently claimed to have annexed Donetsk and Luhansk, alongside Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, in September 2022. Ukraine and most of the international community have rejected those claims.
Moscow has continued demanding control over the entire Donbas region, including areas that remain under Ukrainian administration.
For Kyiv, withdrawing from these territories would involve more than changing the position of its armed forces. It would also create questions about the safety of residents, the country’s territorial integrity and the possibility of another Russian military offensive.
Zelensky therefore faces a difficult diplomatic situation. Ukraine needs reliable international security arrangements to prevent another invasion, but any agreement that requires territorial concessions could generate serious political opposition at home.
The president’s latest comments suggest that Washington is exploring whether NATO membership could become part of a broader arrangement addressing the territorial dispute.
However, no final agreement has been reached, and the American question should not be interpreted as an established policy decision by NATO or a completed peace proposal.
Ukraine Wants Strong Security Guarantees Before Considering Any Agreement
Beyond the question of NATO membership, Zelensky explained that Ukraine was discussing a comprehensive security package with its international partners.
He said any arrangement must provide concrete guarantees capable of protecting the country against renewed Russian aggression.
The proposed security framework would include commitments from NATO and the European Union, continued military assistance, financial support for Ukraine’s armed forces and funding for post-war reconstruction.
The Ukrainian president stressed that security guarantees must be practical rather than general political promises.
He wants Ukraine to maintain a strong military with an appropriate number of personnel, sufficient weapons and predictable financial support over an agreed period.
This is important because Ukraine’s security concerns would not automatically disappear if a ceasefire or peace agreement were signed.
The country would still need the capacity to defend its territory and respond if Russia violated any future agreement.
Zelensky also discussed a proposed Prosperity Plan, which would provide financial support for rebuilding Ukraine after years of war.
The reconstruction programme would require clearly identified funding sources and long-term commitments from international partners.
Since the invasion began, Ukraine has experienced extensive damage to residential buildings, energy infrastructure, transport networks, industrial facilities and public services.
Rebuilding these assets will require substantial financial resources, international investment and technical assistance.
The Ukrainian government therefore wants any peace arrangement to address both immediate security concerns and the country’s long-term economic recovery.
According to Zelensky, if the United States confirms a specific proposal alongside other NATO partners, he would present the terms to Ukrainians and seek their opinion.
He said he did not have the right to make such a significant decision entirely at his own discretion.
His comments indicate that public acceptance would be an important consideration in any potential agreement involving the future of Donbas.
However, he also stressed that the details of the proposed arrangement were not yet available.
Could Ukraine Hold a Referendum on Territorial Concessions?
Zelensky’s statement has renewed questions about whether Ukrainians could eventually be asked to vote on a peace agreement involving the withdrawal of troops from Donbas.
The president said that if the United States and other NATO members confirmed a concrete security package, he would seek the opinion of Ukrainian society.
This does not mean that a referendum has already been scheduled or that Ukraine has agreed to surrender territory.
Rather, Zelensky indicated that he would not make the decision independently if such a proposal became a serious option during negotiations.
A public consultation or referendum could become politically significant because territorial concessions remain among the most sensitive issues in Ukrainian society.
Millions of Ukrainians have been affected by the war through displacement, family separation, military service, destruction of property and loss of lives.
Any proposal requiring the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from territory still under Kyiv’s control would therefore need to address the concerns of affected communities.
There would also be constitutional and legal questions surrounding any arrangement involving the country’s borders.
Ukraine’s constitution protects the country’s territorial integrity, and decisions concerning territorial changes involve specific constitutional procedures.
The distinction between withdrawing military forces from an area and legally recognising that territory as belonging to another country would also be important.
Zelensky has consistently maintained that Ukraine would not legally recognise occupied territories as Russian, regardless of the outcome of negotiations.
For now, the Ukrainian government has not announced a referendum date, a formal voting process or an agreement to withdraw from Donbas.
US-Russia Talks Add Pressure to Ukraine Peace Negotiations
The latest disclosure follows a series of diplomatic engagements involving American officials, Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Ukrainian leadership.
Earlier in the week, US special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner travelled to Moscow for discussions with Putin.
The meeting focused on possible ways to end the war and address the major disagreements between Russia and Ukraine.
Putin has continued to insist on Russia’s territorial demands and rejected the idea of foreign peacekeeping troops being deployed in Ukraine.
His position has complicated efforts to develop a settlement acceptable to both sides.
Russia has maintained that Ukraine must address Moscow’s security demands and the territorial question as part of any agreement.
Ukraine, meanwhile, has insisted that it cannot accept a settlement that rewards Russia for occupying its territory or leaves the country exposed to another invasion.
Following their discussions with Putin, the American envoys continued diplomatic engagements with Zelensky and European representatives.
The US delegation subsequently met the Ukrainian president in Ireland on Thursday, November 12, 2026, to discuss the peace process.
The discussions were important because European countries have increasingly insisted that they must participate in decisions affecting the continent’s long-term security.
Jared Kushner indicated that the involvement of European partners would allow negotiators to address broader post-war security arrangements alongside the territorial dispute between Russia and Ukraine.
The development suggests that Washington is attempting to build a wider diplomatic framework rather than treating the conflict as a disagreement involving only Moscow and Kyiv.
European governments have a direct interest in the outcome because the war has affected continental security, defence spending, energy policy and relations between NATO members and Russia.
A statement issued by the European Union after a meeting involving Ukraine, the United States, NATO and European partners in Abu Dhabi on November 10 also emphasised the importance of sovereignty, territorial integrity and credible security guarantees.
The participants said any future arrangement should respect independent decision-making and provide Ukraine with meaningful protection. Consilium+1
Russia Maintains Its Territorial Demands
While Ukraine continues discussing possible security arrangements with Washington, Russia has shown little indication that it is prepared to abandon its territorial objectives.
Putin has repeatedly insisted that Moscow’s claims over the Donbas must be addressed in any peace settlement.
The Kremlin has also rejected proposals involving the deployment of foreign peacekeeping forces in Ukraine, raising further questions about how a future ceasefire would be monitored and enforced.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova also indicated that the territorial arrangement reportedly raised by Zelensky was not discussed during the recent Moscow talks involving Putin and the American envoys.
This suggests that the proposal remains part of wider diplomatic discussions rather than an agreement accepted by both sides.
Russia’s position presents a significant challenge for Washington because any arrangement involving Ukrainian withdrawal would require a response from Moscow.
Even if Ukraine accepted a security package involving NATO membership, the arrangement would have little practical value without an agreement addressing Russia’s military activities and the enforcement of a ceasefire.
The Kremlin’s continued territorial demands therefore remain one of the biggest obstacles to ending the war. pravda.com.ua+1
NATO Membership Remains Complicated
Ukraine’s potential membership of NATO is another major issue in the negotiations.
NATO is a military alliance built around collective defence. Under Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, an armed attack against one member is treated as an attack against all members.
This principle is central to Ukraine’s interest in joining the alliance because Kyiv wants guarantees that another Russian invasion would trigger a coordinated response from its international partners.
However, NATO membership requires the unanimous agreement of existing member countries.
This means that even if the United States supports Ukraine’s admission, other NATO members must also agree.
The alliance has maintained that Ukraine has a future within NATO, but membership has not been granted, and the timing remains uncertain.
The possibility of linking membership to a withdrawal from Donbas introduces another complication because it raises questions about the territorial and military circumstances under which Ukraine would join.
It also remains unclear whether Russia would accept such an arrangement or whether the Kremlin would continue demanding additional concessions.
The official position and membership requirements can be followed through the NATO website.
What Happens Next in the Ukraine War?
Zelensky’s disclosure has introduced another dimension into diplomatic efforts to end the war, but several important questions remain unanswered.
The United States has not announced a final agreement requiring Ukraine to withdraw from Donbas in exchange for NATO membership.
Ukraine has not accepted territorial concessions, and Russia has not indicated that it would abandon its demands.
The negotiations must also address the practical details of security guarantees, military support, reconstruction funding and the involvement of European countries.
For Zelensky, the challenge is finding an arrangement that protects Ukraine against future aggression without abandoning the country’s sovereignty.
For Washington, the challenge is developing a settlement that can attract support from Kyiv, Moscow and European allies.
For Russia, the territorial question remains central to its demands.
The coming diplomatic discussions will therefore be important in determining whether the latest proposal develops into a formal peace framework or remains another unsuccessful attempt to bridge the differences between the opposing sides.
For now, Zelensky’s message is that Ukraine is willing to discuss concrete security arrangements with its partners, but he will not independently approve a territorial settlement without considering the views of the Ukrainian people.
The war’s future remains uncertain as negotiations continue over one of Europe’s most consequential security crises.
