President-elect Donald Trump may propose a large buffer zone between Russia and Ukraine in a bid to quickly bring an end to the ongoing war, according to sources close to the incoming administration.
The proposed 800-mile demilitarized zone would be patrolled by British and European forces, with no American troops involved, according to three Trump aides familiar with the plan. This solution would effectively freeze the current borders, allowing Russia to retain its territorial gains in Ukraine. Additionally, Ukraine would reportedly agree not to pursue NATO membership for 20 years as part of the arrangement.
The plan also includes U.S. arms support for Ukraine to discourage future Russian aggression, while European allies would take on full responsibility for staffing and funding the buffer zone. “We can provide training and other support, but the barrel of the gun is going to be European,” a Trump adviser reportedly told The Wall Street Journal. The adviser emphasized that American personnel and financial support would be off the table: “We are not sending American men and women to uphold peace in Ukraine. And we are not paying for it. Get the Poles, Germans, British and French to do it.”
That proposal in some respects echoes comments made by Vice President-elect JD Vance during a September interview, when he suggested a final agreement between Ukraine and Russia could involve a demilitarized zone “heavily fortified so the Russians don’t invade again.” Russia, Vance continued, would get to keep the land it has taken and be assured of Ukraine’s neutrality.
“It doesn’t join NATO, it doesn’t join some of these sort of allied institutions,” he said on “The Shawn Ryan Show,” a podcast.
Earlier this year, Keith Kellogg and Fred Fleitz, who both served in Trump’s first White House, presented Trump with a blueprint that includes withholding weapons from Ukraine until Kyiv agrees to peace talks with Russia. Ukraine could still try to regain lost territory, but would have to do so through diplomatic negotiations.
Which of these strategies Trump will pursue—in whole, in part, or at all—is unclear. But any gambit to start Ukraine-Russia peace talks, let alone complete an agreement, faces many pitfalls.
Despite the support of European powers such as Britain, France and Germany, who have pledged to assist Ukraine for the foreseeable future, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has expressed strong opposition to conceding any Ukrainian territory to Russia. Zelensky recently condemned such concessions as “unacceptable” for Ukraine and “suicidal for Europe.”
In a notable development, Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk reportedly joined a recent call between Trump and Zelensky. On the same day, Zelensky tweeted about his conversation with Trump, congratulating him on his electoral win and reiterating the importance of “ongoing dialogue and cooperation.” He further stated that “strong and unwavering U.S. leadership is vital for the world and for a just peace.”
Musk’s Starlink technology has played a significant role in Ukraine’s defense efforts since Russia’s invasion in 2022, enabling real-time communication for Ukrainian forces in areas disrupted by conflict. However, some U.S. officials have voiced concerns about Musk’s diplomatic interactions with international adversaries, including Russia. According to CNN, the intelligence community is cautious about probing Musk’s ties further due to his U.S. citizenship.
READ NEXT: Trump’s Huge Ultimatum: Resignations Required By Noon On Inauguration Day
Awesome!! It would work.
Stupid, stupid, stupid idea. Who would ever expect that a peaceful nation would choose to give up territory to an aggressor under these circumstances. It’s a cowardly approach that will not be accepted by any reasonable communist bordering country. If DJT decides to withhold weaponry to Ukraine, he should be prepared to suffer the consequences in the court of public opinion. I am a Trump supporter, but this is an ignorant response.
Any true intent of ending Obama’s NATO-Expansion -War in Ukraine would be good.
President Trump should give special attention to the suggestions Mr. Musk had made:
Musk has, before, presented necessities for achieving peace in Ukraine, and they involve it Multi-Nationality!
There is not just a “Ukrainian People” but about 1/3 Russians, and some Poles, Hungarians, Slovaks, Rumanians plus some thousand Greeks and Roma!
The conflict only broke out when the Bandera follower Yatsenyuk tried to enforce the fascist “ONE PEOPLE” doctrine and only allowed ONE LANGUAGE. Zelensky has added ONE CULTURE and ONE CHURCH!
Musk saw this background and -after the deep-cutting 8 years of civil war- the necessity to let each of these nations VOTE AND DECIDE THEIR FUTURE:
Luhansk and Donetsk and Krym already did that, after the mass slaughter of opposition demonstrations by Ukrainian Nationalists, in 2014
– and Musk only seemed to suggest these REFERENDA to be carried out again before international witnesses (although, the Krym one was already under the views of Gallup, paid for by Washington).
Musk laid out, correctly, that Ukraine was not a ‘Nation’ based on One People but an artificial state based on a history of several foreign occupations and netting several other nations AND THEIR LAND!
The REFERENDA would, therefore, be decided by the PEOPLES about their and their Land’s belonging.
WHICH IS IN FULL ACCORDANCE – WITH HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL LAW!
This would indeed mean that Ukraine would “lose” DonBass and Krym – which were actually “Donations” to the new Ukraine state – and against their populations’ will!
It should be brought to general attention here that other “Donations” to Ukraine in the West are beyond such restoration, a the Polish ans Jewish inhabitants were either killed or expelled!
THIS WAS ALSO A MAJOR FEAR OF THE RUSSIAN POPULATIONS IN DONBASS AND KRYM, AFTER MAIDAN AND THE FASCIST DECREES OF ONE LANGUAGE ETC BY THE 2014 REGIME.
MR. MUSK’S PROPOSAL WOULD SEEM THE MOST LAWFUL AND HUMANITY RESPECTING SOLUTION WE HAVE SEEN SO FAR.
President Trump seems to move in a similar direction, such as to recognize the fear of the people in DonBass and Kry which pushed them, after several massacres, into independence.
He does, however, not recognize these populations ‘RIGHT’ to leave a hostile and violent state – WHICH IS A HUMAN RIGHT!
His suggestion of a EUROPEAN PEACEKEEPING TROOPE also seems utterly unacceptable to those populations, as those countries are considered KIEV i.e. ENEMY ALLIES!
AND THESE COUNTRIES ARE THEMSELVES NATO, i.e. WAR INVOLVED STATES! THEY CANNOT BE RECOGNIZED AS PEACEKEEPERS, AS THE ARE ANYTHING BUT NEUTRAL!
IT WOULD MEAN SUCCESS FOR OBAMA’S ORIGINAL PLANS: PUTTING NATO UP TO – BUT EVEN INTO RUSSIA’S BORDERS,
FOR: WHERE WOULD WE FIND THISE 800 MILES, about 1400km: These NATO troops in 400 miles of UKraine would be welcome – but not in 400 miles of Russia!
If any PEACEKEEPERS would be placed in any “demilitarized zine” THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE FROM NEUTRAL NATIONS!
(Unfortunately, Sweden and Finland have given up that status and cannot be trusted any more in this area!)
I AM SURE, SUCH SECURITY WOULD BE WELCOME, IN RUSSIA, TOO. AFTER ALL, RUSSIA ONLY SENT TROOPS AFTER 14,000 ETHNIC RUSSIANS HAD BEEN KILLED BY UKRAINE!
BUT THE MAIN PROBLEM IS THE MULTINATIONALITY OF UKRAINE _ AND FROM HENCE, THE NEED FOR SAFETY AND IDENTITY OF ALL THE NATIONS WILLINGLY OR NOT RESIDING WITHIN ITS BORDERS.
Victory
I would only support returning to the original Ukraine borders. If they want a DMZ zone, base it on those borders.
This sounds like some good creative thinking.