Ukraine is ready to discuss the creation of a demilitarized zone in Donbas, but only on both sides of the front line. This was reported by the advisor to the President’s Office, Serhiy Leshchenko. On the same day, new findings from the American Institute for the Study of War (ISW) became known: the Kremlin is seeking economic concessions from Washington, refusing to take comparable steps to end the war. The two reports show how differently Kyiv and Moscow approach the upcoming negotiations.
Author: Victoria Katsman
What Ukraine is really ready to discuss
Leshchenko made clarifications on October 28, and on the morning of October 29, they were published by Ukrainian media. According to him, Kyiv has prepared in advance a demilitarization option for certain areas of the Donetsk region. The proposal provides for restrictions on the territory adjacent to the line of contact from both sides.
For the Israeli reader, it is necessary to explain the geography. Donbas is an industrial region in eastern Ukraine, including the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Part of these territories has been under the control of Russian-backed armed formations since 2014. After the full-scale Russian invasion in February 2022, the front line changed significantly.
Moscow announced the annexation of both regions in September 2022, although it did not fully control them. Ukraine and most countries in the world do not recognize these territorial claims.
A demilitarized zone means a territory with limited or prohibited military presence. But there is a significant difference between troop withdrawal and the transfer of sovereignty. Kyiv has not announced readiness to recognize Russian ownership of any areas of Donbas.
Leshchenko also confirmed Ukraine’s interest in separate agreements on stopping strikes on energy and ensuring security in the Black Sea. This is not a general ceasefire: fighting in other areas may continue.
Why the Kremlin discusses diesel with Trump
The American ISW in a report dated October 28 drew attention to disagreements among representatives of the Russian leadership regarding an agreement on the supply of diesel fuel to the USA, which Donald Trump announced on October 9.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on October 27 called the agreement purely commercial. According to him, the purchase of Russian fuel does not oblige Moscow to change its political position. A similar explanation was previously given by Dmitry Peskov.
However, the head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, Kirill Dmitriev, presented the development of economic relations with Washington as a factor contributing to a peaceful settlement.
ISW sees in these statements an attempt to gain economic advantages without concessions on Ukraine. This is an assessment of the analytical institute, not confirmation of the existence of a secret agreement between Trump and Putin.
For understanding the situation, the previous material of Nikk.Agency on the energy truce and Zelensky’s actions is also useful. Ukraine has already discussed mutual cessation of strikes on energy facilities, but such agreements require precise definition of prohibited targets.
What does NATO, Iran, and Israel have to do with it
Russian demands concern not only Ukrainian territories. In the ISW assessment, Moscow’s desire to return to NATO military presence restrictions, which Russia proposed back in December 2021, is mentioned.
NATO is the North Atlantic Alliance, uniting the USA, Canada, and European countries. Israel is not a member, although it cooperates with individual Alliance countries, primarily the USA.
Moscow sought restrictions on the deployment of NATO military forces in countries that joined after 1997. For Poland, Romania, and the Baltic states, this is a matter of their own security, not just Russia’s relations with Ukraine.
Nikk.Agency Israel News considers these negotiations also through Middle Eastern security. The ISW report of October 28 reports on the alleged transfer of Russian satellite intelligence data to the Houthis through Iranian advisors. Analysts rely, in particular, on information from the Associated Press about Russian satellite observations over Saudi facilities.
The satellite observations themselves do not yet prove the transfer of information for a specific attack. Nevertheless, the reports deserve attention in Israel, as the Houthis are part of an Iran-backed network of armed groups and have previously attacked Israel and international shipping.
The relations between Russia and Iran and their significance for the security of Israel and Ukraine have already become a separate topic of our publications. The Israeli side must consider not only Moscow’s public statements but also information about its military interaction with Tehran.
What is not yet agreed upon
Kyiv’s proposal does not contain a published scheme of the future demilitarized zone. It is unknown who will control its compliance, what the troop withdrawal distance will be, and what guarantees the residents will receive.
Russia has not publicly accepted Ukrainian conditions. Separate economic agreements between Moscow and Washington also do not mean that the parties have agreed on the parameters for ending the war.
For Israel, it is crucial to distinguish between the US-Russian trade agreement and a security agreement. The former can be concluded without changing Moscow’s military policy. The latter would require specific commitments, verification mechanisms, and consequences for violations. So far, such agreed conditions for Donbas have not been publicly presented.