MOSCOW

As US President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office on Jan. 20, global attention is focused on how he plans to fulfill one of his central campaign promises: ending the war in Ukraine.

Trump’s approach, according to reports, may involve making a bold and controversial offer to Russia – halting Ukraine’s NATO membership aspirations and allowing Russia to maintain control over certain Ukrainian territories. In return, he would seek Russia’s withdrawal from other contested regions.

This potential strategy has sparked significant debate among policymakers and analysts, raising crucial questions about the future of Ukraine and Russia’s geopolitical ambitions, and the broader balance of global security.

In an interview with Anadolu, Sergey Markov, director of the Moscow-based Russian Institute of Political Studies and a former adviser to President Vladimir Putin, outlined what he sees as Russia’s non-negotiable conditions for peace.

“First of all, there can be no question of Russian troops withdrawing from Russian territory,” Markov asserted.

“It is possible that Russian troops might pull back from parts of the Kharkiv, Sumy, and Mykolaiv regions, which they partially control, but withdrawing from Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, and Crimea is absolutely out of the question.”

Markov further stated that Ukraine would need to withdraw its forces from the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions – territories Russia claims but does not fully control.

However, he acknowledged that some aspects could be open to negotiation.

“From my perspective, this aspect could be open to negotiation, given President Putin’s principle of ‘taking into account the realities on the ground.’ In other words, troop positions would heavily influence any agreements,” he explained.

 Neutrality and demilitarization: Key Russian demands

A central pillar of Russia’s demands is the formal adoption of permanent neutrality by Ukraine – a position that has seen limited acceptance in the West.

“The West has signaled a willingness to impose a moratorium on Ukraine’s NATO membership, but this falls short of Russia’s expectations,” said Markov.

“Russia insists on enshrining neutrality in Ukraine’s Constitution and formalizing it through agreements with key international players. This approach mirrors the ‘Austrian model,’ under which Austria declared neutrality following World War II.”

Another key demand involves the demilitarization of Ukraine.

Markov elaborated that this would include strict limits on the number and types of military forces and weapons Ukraine can maintain, along with restrictions on how close these could be deployed to Russia’s borders.

“For instance, if multiple-launch rocket systems have a range of 50 kilometers (31 miles), they must be stationed at least 60 kilometers from the border. Similarly, missiles with a 200-kilometer range should be positioned no closer than 250 kilometers from the border,” he said.

To enforce these measures, Markov emphasized the need for international monitoring, including inspections involving Russian military officials.

“This principle of demilitarization might also extend to NATO nations’ commitment to refrain from supplying weapons to Ukraine, while equipment already delivered may even need to be withdrawn,” he further stated.

However, Markov admitted that this demand is likely to face strong resistance:

“While the West is somewhat receptive to neutrality and recognizing certain territories as part of Russia, it remains utterly unprepared to meet demands for demilitarization. The prospect of NATO ceasing all arms supplies to Ukraine is particularly contentious.”

Non-military demands: ‘Denazification’ and language rights

Beyond military concerns, Russia is poised to make significant non-military demands.

A cornerstone of these is what Russia terms “denazification,” which Markov explained would involve dismantling what Russia perceives as Ukraine’s glorification of historical figures who collaborated with Nazi Germany.

“For instance, the dominant figure in modern Ukrainian identity, Stepan Bandera, who Russia views as the foremost fascist in Ukrainian history, must cease being celebrated. This would require rewriting textbooks, dismantling all monuments to Bandera, renaming streets bearing his name, and honoring alternative historical figures instead,” he said.

Markov further claimed that Russia views Ukraine’s current government as a “terrorist regime” allegedly installed by the US and sustained through repression and anti-Russian sentiment. He asserted that denazification would require dismantling this system.

He also highlighted the need to disband and outlaw military units that “openly display Nazi symbols and adhere to extremist ideologies.”

“All neo-Nazi groups must be disarmed, disbanded, and outlawed,” Markov said, singling out Andrei Beletsky, founder of the Azov Battalion, as a figure who, along with others, must be prosecuted for alleged war crimes.

Another significant demand involves restoring the rights of the Russian language in Ukraine.

“Russian should be recognized as a second official language, with provisions for Russian-language education and media,” said Markov.

Additionally, Markov criticized Ukraine’s treatment of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, saying that the government has banned it, seized church property, and imprisoned clergy.

He accused Ukraine of promoting the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, which he said Russia views as a “pseudo-church created by intelligence agencies, akin to an ‘Orthodox ISIS.’”

Markov also anticipates Russia will push for what he termed “soft democratization” in Ukraine, including lifting bans on political parties and media outlets.

“Russia wants political groups that support friendly relations with Moscow to operate freely, and this issue will likely be on the negotiation table,” he added.

 International demands: Lifting sanctions and NATO rollback

Markov emphasized that Russia’s demands extend beyond Ukraine to international players, with the lifting of sanctions being a key requirement.

“While it’s unlikely that these demands will be fully met, some elements, such as the ban on aviation communications and other restrictive measures, must be reversed,” he said.

Russia may also revive demands initially presented by Putin in 2021, known as the “ultimatum to NATO,” which include rolling back NATO’s military presence to pre-1991 levels and halting the deployment of medium-range missiles near Russia’s borders.

Moscow may also insist on the withdrawal of NATO military contingents deployed near its borders after 2014, or more definitively, the ones deployed after 2022, he added.

“This also includes a prohibition on the deployment of medium-range missiles at distances capable of targeting Russian territory,” Markov explained.

Trump’s role and legal hurdles

Despite Trump’s promises to swiftly end the conflict, many doubt his ability to deliver.

Russian analyst and columnist Andrei Sitov expressed skepticism about Trump’s capacity to fulfill his campaign vows: “I doubt that Trump will have enough inspiration and resources to implement all he promised during the election campaign, including the promise to end the conflict in Ukraine ‘in one day.’”

Sitov noted that Trump likely views the prolonged conflict as a failure of the previous administration, rather than a challenge to his personal capabilities.

On the legal complexities of any future peace treaty, Markov argued that the agreement must be signed by Ukraine’s “legitimate authorities,” but Russia does not recognize President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as such.

“This is not because Putin dislikes Zelenskyy personally. It’s a legal issue – if Zelenskyy is not the legitimate head of state, any agreement he signs could be nullified by Ukraine’s Constitutional Court,” Markov explained.

Zelenskyy was elected for a five-year term in March 2019 that ended last year, but Ukraine has yet to hold new elections because of the ongoing war.

Earlier this month, Zelenskyy reiterated in a televised interview that Ukraine will not hold elections under martial law – imposed since February 2022 – even if Moscow insists on it as a condition for talks.

In such a scenario, Markov suggested that the treaty should either be signed by the head of Ukraine’s parliament or be validated by a Constitutional Court ruling affirming Zelenskyy’s legitimacy.

“Russia does not demand Zelenskyy’s resignation. This is not about personal preferences but ensuring the agreement’s legal durability,” he said.

Moscow will also seek international legal recognition of its “newly integrated territories,” said Markov.

Acknowledging that full Western recognition is unlikely, he asserted that Moscow wants a practical agreement that could affirm the de-facto status of these regions.

“This would include provisions ensuring that Western countries refrain from imposing political or administrative penalties on citizens of the Russian Federation residing in these areas, particularly Crimea and Sevastopol,” Markov explained.