With the midterm elections dangerously close and the Republicans visibly committed to that vote, the American president seems to have less and less room to allow himself distractions outside the national stage. Is that the reason why you are pushing to sign an end to hostilities within deadlines that seem unviable, with talks between kyiv and Moscow stalled?

First modification: 02/07/2026 - 23:39

To display this YouTube content, you must allow advertising and audience measurement cookies.

An extension on your browser appears to be blocking the video player from loading. In order to view this content, you must disable it on this site.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky revealed on February 7 that his American counterpart Donald Trump has given his country and Russia a deadline to reach a peace agreement no later than June, under the threat of increasing pressure on both if that ultimatum is not respected.

It seems like a hardly credible period to put an end to a conflict that is approaching four years, and in which the conditions of the parties are far from being accepted.

Russia insists on a territorial cession that kyiv is not willing to satisfy, maintaining its condition that Ukrainian forces withdraw from Donbass, which would mean conquering points on the table that it has not yet taken militarily.

And while a new round of negotiations is announced for next week in the United States, probably in Miami, Russia maintains its attack on Ukraine's energy grid, leaving millions across the country without heat in the harsh winter months.

Trump's rush to reach an agreement in dialogues in which stagnation clearly persists is another example of the same haste with which he promised to stop the conflict within 24 hours. At least that's how Jesús Agreda Rudenko, a professor in the International Relations department of the Javeriana University, who spoke with France 24, sees it.

"This war is one of the failures of President Trump, who has tried to position himself as the great creator of peace. The first year of his government has already passed and that has been one of his promises, so this is the moment in which the United States has decided to close this conflict," explained Agreda Rudenko.

According to Zelensky's version, Trump is willing to exert pressure so that the new deadline is met, and in this scenario, kyiv is more vulnerable than Moscow, according to Agreda Rudenko: "(The pressure) is simpler on Ukraine, which depends on military aid from its allies in Europe and mostly from the United States."

"As for Russia, there are a series of sanctions that could eventually be used to hit its economy. (Washington) has cards on both of them, but personally I see that it is easier to pressure Ukraine. That is why we have seen that the conditions of the negotiation have benefited Russia," adds the expert.

For Rudenko, "the conflict requires negotiation capabilities that have not been shown until now. What Russia is asking is for Ukraine to accept that it has lost territory, but also to give up territory that it has not yet lost, which for Ukraine is completely unacceptable. Without resolving this, there will be no real progress."

The internal scenario: the other factor

But Trump does not only move internationally. The proximity of the midterm elections, in which he risks losing his precarious majority in the House of Representatives, could be forcing him to hurry in the search for results.

The Reuters agency cites sources close to the United States negotiating group, who explain that its members are aware that the internal scenario will consume more and more dedication, which would reduce the time and political capital to seek a solution to the Ukrainian conflict.

"The Americans are in a hurry," reveals one of the sources, while others who spoke on condition of anonymity added that mediators hope to have an agreement outlined by March.

That date would allow a fundamental step to materialize the end of the war to be completed before June, and that is for Ukraine to hold a mandatory referendum so that the terms of the agreement are viable.

Washington's expectation would be that this process, which should be held parallel to the national elections, would take place in May, in order to sign peace a month later.

However, sources related to the negotiation believe that this is a fanciful aspiration, since organizing an electoral process under current conditions would take at least six months.

The Ukrainian constitution denies any possibility of territorial transfer. Therefore, to access Moscow's conditions, an electoral consultation would be necessary to reform the Magna Carta and give legal support to the terms of an eventual peace agreement.

But in addition, the calling of elections is prohibited under martial law, so legislative changes would also be necessary to make the scenario of a referendum possible.

"kyiv's position is that nothing can be agreed until security guarantees for Ukraine are established by the United States and its partners," said one of the sources, who explained that in order to carry out an electoral campaign it would be necessary for the Kremlin to commit to a ceasefire.

That commitment would have to be assumed by second-level representatives. While Ukraine is attending talks with Zelensky's chief of staff and the leader of his parliamentary faction, Russia has only sent military delegates, including the head of the General Staff's military intelligence agency, Admiral Igor Kostyukov.

The second round of talks in Abu Dhabi ended without agreements either on the thorny territorial issue or on the other fundamental difference, which is the management of the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant.

With Reuters and AP

Related keywords

The content you requested does not exist or is no longer available.