War in Ukraine

Three years of the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine: what would peace look like from the Ukrainian perspective?

Three years ago, when Russia invaded Ukraine, a deep sense of fear and helplessness spread throughout Ukraine and Europe. It seemed almost inconceivable that in the 21st century a state could be capable of such a brutal and groundless invasion of its neighboring country – an act that would throw all the principles of the European peace order overboard. Three years later, the war continues, and now the US, Ukraine's most important ally, is also causing further confusion with its controversial negotiating strategy and misleading statements about Ukraine that resemble Russian propaganda. What is the way forward for Ukraine? How, from a Ukrainian perspective, can a sustainable peace be achieved, and what are the hopes of the Ukrainian people, who have now been exposed to Russian aggression for 11 years?

When Donald Trump, who had promised during his election campaign to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours, was re-elected, opinions in Ukraine were divided. Some thought that he would reduce the support for Ukraine and thus the chances of a Ukrainian victory. Others had a faint hope that the war would end thanks to Trump – the self-proclaimed ‘deal maker’ could possibly negotiate an acceptable deal with Russia for Ukraine, and thus stop the daily terror by Russia and the deaths of thousands of Ukrainians. However, the latest statements by Trump on Ukraine and the insults directed at Ukrainian President Volodymyr Selenskyy suggest that the unpredictable US president is not interested in negotiating a good deal for Ukraine. He wants to negotiate with Russia over the heads of the Ukrainians and establish a new world order in which the stronger divide the world among themselves. It has gone so far that the US administration presented the Ukrainian leadership with a previously unannounced treaty according to which Ukraine was to cede 50% of its mineral resources to the US in return for further military support. Neocolonialism à la Trump, while his vice president JD Vance lectured the Europeans on their own values at the Munich Security Conference.

Why Volodymyr Zelenskyy is the legitimate president and why no elections are taking place in Ukraine

While representatives of the US and Russia are meeting in Saudi Arabia for talks – without involving Ukraine – Trump continues to spread falsehoods about Ukraine that resemble fake news and are strongly reminiscent of Russian television propaganda broadcasts. He claims that Zelenskyy is no longer the legitimate president, that only 4 percent of Ukrainians support him and that elections are needed in Ukraine. However, a quick fact check refutes all these false statements.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy's poll numbers have indeed deteriorated compared to February 2022, when they still reached an impressive 90 percent. Nevertheless, the latest poll from February 2025 shows that 57% of Ukrainians surveyed still have confidence in the president. Many heads of state around the world can only dream of such high approval ratings – in some cases, comparable results have been achieved for decades through manipulated elections, such as those of Vladimir Putin himself and his loyal ally in the war against Ukraine, Alexander Lukashenko.

While it is likely that the actual election result for Zelenskyy will differ from these approval ratings, several polls show that the Ukrainian president continues to enjoy the trust of the population.

The question of his legitimacy has been haunting Russian propaganda channels for some time. The Ukrainian constitution is clear on this point: the current president exercises his office until the inauguration of his successor (Constitution of Ukraine, Chapter V, Article 108). The election of a new president is not possible in wartime – martial law prohibits the holding of any elections, be they presidential, parliamentary or local. Anyone who experiences the daily and nightly attacks by Russia can confirm that martial law is being applied in Ukraine for good reason. Ukraine is at war, and martial law is being applied with the parliament's approval. A comprehensive change in the law would be necessary to hold elections in Ukraine. And even then, it would be noted that holding elections according to democratic standards in a war would be virtually impossible.

Almost 7 million Ukrainians are refugees abroad, the majority of whom are not registered at the Ukrainian consulates. There are also significant difficulties in registering the 3.7 million internally displaced persons and assigning them to the respective polling stations. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers fighting at the front could only participate in the elections to a limited extent. The security of people at the polling stations would not be guaranteed – Russia is known for its perfidious attacks on civilian infrastructure. In the areas close to the front, no polling stations can be set up at all due to the total destruction of the cities by Russia.

It is to be expected that Russian propaganda would label such an election as illegitimate and continue to spread its narrative. There is widespread agreement in Ukraine that no elections should be held before the end of the war and martial law. For example, 63% of citizens surveyed are opposed to any elections being held until the end of the war. Political forces – including all opposition factions – have already agreed in 2023 to refrain from calling for new elections in order to avoid unnecessarily dividing society.

How do Ukrainians envision a peace agreement with Russia?

Donald Trump has already ignored the principle of peace negotiations that is essential for Ukraine – he is negotiating about Ukraine without involving Ukraine. It is imperative that Ukraine and its representatives sit at the negotiating table, because the future of their country is at stake. Excluding Ukraine only serves to reinforce imperialist claims on the country by Russia, as does US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's statement that Ukraine's NATO membership is out of the question.

Ultimately, it is up to Ukraine to decide which military alliance it wishes to join, just as the Baltic states once did despite protests and threats from Russia. The former Soviet republics freed themselves from Soviet occupation in 1991 and have since been able to determine their own geopolitical orientation. However, Russia denies them this self-determination, and statements like Hegseth's further reinforce this narrative. NATO accession is enshrined in the Ukrainian constitution, and 75% of the population support it.

Another of Hegseth's statements is also met with great disapproval in Ukraine: he describes a return to the 2014 borders as ‘unrealistic’. The Ukrainian leadership is pursuing the clear goal of even returning to the 1991 borders – this includes regaining control of Crimea. More than 80% of the Ukrainians surveyed reject any territorial concessions to Russia. At the same time, a growing number of respondents signal a willingness to enter into negotiations with Russia – but without giving in to Russian demands.

A central point of negotiation is the repatriation of all war and political prisoners, as well as the almost 20,000 Ukrainian children who have been abducted. Russia has abducted both children and adults and has been operating torture prisons in the occupied territories since 2014. The conditions under which Ukrainian prisoners of war are being held are inhumane. Therefore, their return must be the top priority in the negotiations – an issue on which no American negotiator has yet commented.

Russia's war crimes and destruction in Ukraine must not go unpunished. The special tribunal for Russia initiated by Ukraine and the EU must start work as soon as possible to hold those responsible to account. Russia should pay for the war damage – if it does not do so voluntarily, the EU must finally use the frozen Russian assets in full for the reconstruction of Ukraine.

Clear security guarantees – to prevent Russia from attacking again

Clear security guarantees are at the heart of a sustainable peace for Ukraine that would prevent further Russian aggression – and that is precisely what the people of Ukraine want. They have already learned the painful lesson that Russia does not take peace agreements seriously: the storming of Debaltseve was enough to put an end to the Minsk Agreement after just three days. Experiences with Minsk II and the Budapest Memorandum have made it clear that Russia does not keep its promises and that the commitments of Russian leader Putin are worth nothing. Since 2014, Russia has been waging a war in Ukraine that escalated into a full-scale invasion in 2022. The world – and Europe in particular – has had plenty of time to prepare for the threat on NATO's eastern flank and take appropriate action. Instead, after the annexation of Crimea, ‘business as usual’ continued: only mild sanctions were imposed, and gigantic infrastructure projects such as the Nord Stream 2 pipeline were pushed ahead, to the great indignation of Germany's eastern neighbors.

European and German politicians have failed to recognise and contain the growing threat from Russia in time and thus bear some of the blame for the Russian invasion. Therefore, Europe must now finally take responsibility for ending the war and securing a lasting peace. It cannot hope that Donald Trump will change his mind at short notice and save Ukraine and Europe. Europe must offer Ukraine reliable security guarantees – for example, through comprehensive military support and its own peacekeeping presence. At the same time, the sanctions should be maintained in order to deprive the Russian economy of the capacity for further military build-up.

No one should count on the regime in Russia collapsing and everything falling into place again. The Russian war is not only based on Vladimir Putin and his megalomania, but above all on an imperialism deeply rooted in Russian society. The majority of Russians support this war and would also be willing to justify military action against other neighboring countries – such as Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Moldova and Georgia, as they already proved in 2008.

Russia failed to take the opportunity in the 1990s to critically examine its own history. Instead, new generations are growing up with an imperialist world view in which the Ukrainians are regarded as a dependent little brother who, out of defiance, turns away from the powerful big brother and should be punished for it. However, no other society can take on the task of coming to terms with history for Russia.

We, on the other hand, have the opportunity to put Russia in its place, to stand up strongly together for our values – including militarily – and to finally accept Ukraine as an equal member of our community of values. We need to value Ukrainian sovereignty, the lives of Ukrainians and Ukrainian cities and villages just as much as we value German, French or Spanish ones, and be prepared to defend them. Otherwise we will be the next victims of Russian aggression.