“The stronger our defense, the more we achieve in diplomacy”: Zelenskyy signals no territorial concessions after Geneva talks

On 27 November, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy addressed Ukrainians with what amounted to a strategic restatement of his country's negotiating position. Speaking on the eve of renewed talks with American representatives, he drew a direct line between Ukraine's military resistance and its diplomatic leverage.

"Right now, our defense of positions, our resistance on the frontline, and our joint work with partners to secure better diplomatic standing are equally important," he said. "The stronger we are in our defense on the frontline, the more we can achieve in diplomacy."

The message was unmistakable: Ukraine's red lines on territorial sovereignty remain intact. This despite a week that saw intense American pressure, a major domestic corruption scandal, and continued Russian advances in Donetsk Oblast.

Negotiations continue—on Ukraine's terms?

Zelenskyy confirmed that Ukrainian and American delegations would continue working together "at the end of the week" to translate the Geneva framework into concrete steps toward peace and security guarantees. He announced personal involvement in upcoming negotiations, stating that "next week, there will be important negotiations not only for our delegation, but also for me personally."

The president framed Russia's territorial demands not as a legitimate negotiating position but as an instrument of subjugation. Moscow, he argued, already controls more undeveloped territory than it can manage—the pursuit of Ukrainian land is about power, not geography.

Chief of Staff Andriy Yermak reinforced this position in an exclusive interview with The Atlantic the same day, declaring that Zelenskyy will not sign any document ceding territory and that Ukraine's constitution prohibits such concessions. He specified that Kyiv is prepared to discuss only demarcation of the current line of contact—not recognition of Russian territorial claims.

What Geneva actually produced

The talks that unfolded over the past week produced what both American and Ukrainian officials called an "updated and refined peace framework"—a 19-point revision of the controversial 28-point plan that had drawn fierce criticism from Kyiv and European capitals alike.

The original Trump administration proposal, reportedly drafted with significant Russian input, demanded that Ukraine recognize Russian "de facto" control over occupied territories, cap its military at 600,000 troops, and constitutionally bar itself from NATO membership. Ukrainian officials called it tantamount to capitulation.

After weekend talks in Geneva involving Secretary of State Marco Rubio, special envoy Steve Witkoff, and Ukraine's delegation, provisions demanding amnesty for war crimes and strict military caps were reportedly removed. Rustem Umerov, Secretary of Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council, stated that delegations had "reached a common understanding on the core terms."

But the crucial point—territorial sovereignty—was explicitly set aside for the presidents to resolve.

Moscow's response: The original plan or nothing

Russia sent clear signals throughout the week. Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov dismissed the European counterproposal as "completely unconstructive" on 24 November. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned that any agreement must reflect the "spirit and letter" of the Alaska summit between Putin and Trump.

At a security summit in Kyrgyzstan on 27 November, Putin offered a cautiously positive assessment of the American proposal as a "basis for future agreements"—but only in its original form. He made clear that if Ukraine refuses to withdraw from territories Russia claims, Moscow will pursue its objectives militarily.

The pattern is consistent: Moscow embraces the original 28-point framework while rejecting any revision that accommodates Ukrainian or European concerns.

The pressure that didn't break Kyiv

Several European ambassadors questioned both the substance of the proposed deal and the way the United States had conducted talks with Russia without keeping allies informed. US Chargé d'Affaires Julie Davis told diplomats that while terms were "punishing" for Ukraine, it had no choice but to accept them or face worse conditions in future. "The deal does not get better from here, it gets worse," she said.

This pressure coincided with Ukraine's deepest corruption crisis since 2022, with investigators pursuing charges against officials allegedly linked to a $100 million embezzlement scheme. Multiple sources suggested Washington saw an opportunity to push a weakened Zelenskyy toward concessions he might otherwise resist.

Yet Zelenskyy's 27 November address suggests those calculations were wrong. Rather than signaling flexibility, Ukraine's president doubled down on the connection between military resistance and diplomatic outcomes.

What comes next

Zelenskyy closed his address with a statement of resolve: "Ukraine will stand firm. It always will."

The coming days will test that resolve. Witkoff is heading to Moscow. Driscoll will return to meet Ukrainian officials. Zelenskyy has announced personal involvement in negotiations. All of this unfolds against continued Russian advances in the east and Ukrainian strikes deep into Russian territory.

What seems clear is that despite the pressure of recent weeks, Ukraine has returned to its familiar position: no territorial concessions, no recognition of Russian occupation, and a firm belief that military strength—not capitulation—is the path to a durable peace.