Peace talks for the conflict in Ukraine are a central issue for the European Union, which is concerned about promoting its values of sovereignty, democracy and international cooperation.
However, the current proposals risk not guaranteeing a fair and stable solution, considering the situation on the ground and the political dynamics.

Let us analyse the main reasons, considering the developments of the recent meeting in Berlin on 15-16 December 2025, which showed the European commitment but also the still persisting challenges.

Berlin meeting: European progress, but with limits

The Berlin meeting, organised by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, involved European leaders, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and US representatives such as Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff.

Security guarantees for Ukraine were discussed, including a US-backed European multinational force, a ceasefire monitoring mechanism, and the maintenance of an 800,000-strong Ukrainian army.
Zelensky spoke of ‘concrete progress’, with 90% of the issues addressed (from which, significantly, territorial issues were excluded), and indicated the need to present proposals to Russia soon.
Despite this, there was no agreement on territorial concessions, and Putin refused to compromise.

The meeting emphasised European unity, with Ursula von der Leyen underlining the steps forward through EU-Ukraine-US cooperation, but it remains clear that lasting peace requires stronger measures in line with European interests.

The Donbas is not completely under Russian control, and the Ukrainian parts are well defended

The Donbas remains a divided area: Russia controls a substantial part of it, but key areas are still in Ukrainian hands and well protected. Ukrainian forces have regained ground near Pokrovsk, and surrendering these positions would expose Ukraine to greater risks.
The EU supports this defence through aid, recognising that a peace that does not take these balances into account may not be fair.

Lack of guarantees against a new Russian attack

The EU emphasises the need for security guarantees similar to NATO’s Article 5 to prevent future aggression. A multinational force and monitoring was discussed in Berlin, but without binding mechanisms, the risk of a re-attack remains. Putin’s positions confirm the difficulty of reaching a stable agreement.

The Russian economy is too dependent on war for easy reconversion

The Russian economy is war-oriented, with resources accounting for a large part of GDP.
EU sanctions aim to counter this, but a sudden peace could create instability in Russia, which reduces the incentive to achieve it.
An economic transition is necessary for a lasting solution, as many Russians nowadays survive precisely because of the war economy.

Zelensky would risk himself if he gave up territory

Zelensky cannot cede territory without violating the Ukrainian constitution, which would expose him to legal risks such asimpeachment. In Berlin, he insisted on a dignified peace in line with EU support for Ukrainian sovereignty. He knows that any territorial compromise with Russia could split and polarise Ukrainian society.

Ukraine defends itself well in Kupiansk and Pokrovsk

Thanks to European aid, Ukraine is holding out: in Kupiansk it controls 90% of the city, where it has isolated Russian troops; in Pokrovsk it has repelled attacks and regained ground. These results indicate that negotiations that ignore this strength would not be fair.

Trump seeks Nobel, but the majority of Republicans are pro-Ukraine

Trump aspires to the Nobel Prize, but his ideas contrast with US bipartisan support for Ukraine. In Berlin, transatlantic collaboration was evident, but an imposed peace may lack solid foundations.

In conclusion, from a pro-European perspective, negotiations must reflect shared values such as solidarity.
The Berlin meeting is a step forward, but without fully resolving guarantees, territories and economic aspects, agreements risk being unstable. Europe must play a key role for a just and lasting peace.