Russia’s Demand for Ukrainian Territory Could Shift the Battlefield Advantage, Experts Warn
As the world watches closely, the Kremlin’s insistence that Ukraine cede parts of the Donetsk region to Russia in exchange for a ceasefire is raising serious alarms among military analysts. The Institute for the Study of War (ISW), a respected think tank based in Washington, D.C., warns that such a concession could hand Moscow a major strategic upper hand in the ongoing conflict.
This tense backdrop sets the stage for a highly anticipated summit scheduled for August 15 in Alaska, where U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin are expected to discuss possible ways to dial down the fighting. But reports suggest that one of the deal points on the table could be Ukraine giving up some of the very territory it’s been fiercely defending — a move Ukrainian leaders have outright rejected.
The Strategic Heart of Donetsk: The “Fortress Belt”
To understand the stakes, you’ve got to know about Ukraine’s main defensive stronghold in Donetsk, known as the “fortress belt.” This line isn’t just any stretch of land — it’s a series of four key cities and smaller towns that stretch over 30 miles along the H-20 Kostyantynivka-Slovyansk highway. Since 2014, this belt has effectively blocked Russian advances and has become a symbol of Ukrainian resistance in the region.
Here’s the kicker: giving up control of this fortress belt means abandoning Ukraine’s primary defensive line in the Donetsk region — something military experts say would be a game changer on the battlefield. The ISW stresses that the loss of this line wouldn’t just be a minor setback; it would allow Russian forces to push much deeper with fewer obstacles.
What’s Being Proposed?
According to Bloomberg and sources cited by the ISW, Kremlin officials want more than just a ceasefire — they want a freeze of the front lines that would hand Crimea and all of the Donbas region’s Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts to Russia. That would mean Kyiv pulling back its troops from some areas they currently control, handing Russia what it has long sought but never fully captured.
In military terms, this would be huge. It means Russia would gain control over the heavily fortified defensive line that Ukraine has been building up for over a decade. But there’s a twist: the ISW points out that this isn’t just about territory. If Russia gets this foothold without a lasting peace deal, it can regroup and launch fresh attacks under much more favorable conditions.
The Cost of War: Why Russia Wants This Deal Now
Russian forces tried to encircle the fortress belt last year but failed. That operation, experts say, would have taken years and cost them dearly in terms of personnel and equipment. By pushing Ukraine to surrender this area through diplomatic pressure instead, Moscow could skip all that bloody slogging and simply set its troops up at the border of Donetsk, which is far easier to attack.
From Ukraine’s perspective, this is a nightmare scenario. They’d have to fall back and start fortifying new defensive lines further away, along the Kharkiv and Dnipropetrovsk borders. The problem? That terrain doesn’t lend itself well to defense, making it harder for Ukraine to hold off future Russian advances.
Can We Trust Moscow to Keep a Ceasefire?
History doesn’t inspire confidence. The ISW warns that any ceasefire without strict monitoring and security guarantees for Ukraine is likely to be violated by Russia. Without strong enforcement, Moscow’s forces are expected to renew military aggression as soon as they see an opportunity.
This looming reality adds pressure on the upcoming Trump-Putin summit. The negotiations aren’t just about territorial swaps; they could define the diplomatic and military landscape for months or even years.
Inside the Kremlin’s Mindset
Experts following Russian politics say there’s another layer to all this. Analysts Farida Rustamova and Margarita Liutova, writing for the Substack Faridaily, report from their Moscow contacts that Putin isn’t willing to pause the war unless he can present it as a win to the Russian people. Territorial gains, even if limited, are critical for his political narrative.
In this context, any peace deal that looks like a concession without clear victories for Russia would be politically risky for Putin at home.
What the West Is Thinking
John Herbst, senior director at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center, shared some insights with Newsweek. He suggests that territorial concessions to Russia might be the first step, or “front-loaded,” but that the harder parts of a peace agreement are still to come. This includes discussions around the U.S. and NATO’s support for Ukraine through arms deliveries and the potential deployment of European peacekeepers.
Herbst is cautious, emphasizing that a temporary ceasefire shouldn’t be mistaken for a permanent peace. Putin’s long-term goal remains political control over Ukraine, something that a quick deal won’t resolve.
Voices from the Institute for the Study of War
On Friday, the ISW issued a stark warning: surrendering the rest of Donetsk Oblast as a prerequisite for a ceasefire — without a binding peace settlement — would set Russia up to renew its attacks on better terms. The loss of the fortress belt would force Ukraine into a weaker defensive posture with no guarantee that the conflict wouldn’t flare up again.
The ISW’s assessment underscores the high stakes not just for the battlefield but for the diplomatic table as well.
What’s Ukraine Saying?
President Volodymyr Zelensky has been clear and consistent: Ukraine will not give up its land. His stance remains firm even as diplomatic pressure mounts ahead of the Alaska summit. On Saturday, Zelensky reiterated this position, signaling that Kyiv isn’t interested in territorial trade-offs to secure a ceasefire.
This stance reflects the political and emotional reality for many Ukrainians who see ceding land as betrayal — especially of areas their forces and civilians have fought to protect.
What Could Happen Next?
As August 15 draws near, all eyes are on the Alaska meeting between Trump and Putin. Will there be a breakthrough or more of the same tough negotiations? While a ceasefire could bring a temporary pause in fighting, experts caution that without a comprehensive peace deal, the risks remain high.
For Ukraine, the price of conceding territory isn’t just about land—it’s about losing the strategic advantage that has held back Russian advances for years. For Russia, securing territory without more bloodshed could be a political win. But the ultimate question is whether such a deal would lead to lasting peace or just buy time for the conflict to erupt again down the road.
Quick Takeaways:
-
Fortress Belt: The critical Ukrainian defensive line in Donetsk, spanning over 30 miles, blocking Russian advances since 2014.
-
Kremlin Demand: Russia wants Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk oblasts, plus a frozen frontline, in exchange for a ceasefire.
-
Battlefield Impact: Losing this line could force Ukraine to fall back to less defensible borders, making future fighting harder.
-
Diplomatic Stakes: The Trump-Putin summit could set the course for either peace or renewed conflict.
-
Ceasefire Skepticism: Experts warn Russia will likely violate any ceasefire without strict monitoring.
-
Ukraine’s Position: Zelensky firmly opposes giving up any territory.
-
Political Angle: Putin needs a win he can sell domestically to justify a pause in fighting.
Login