I largely agree with @DimaKlenchin that Putin is indicating that he will not accept the terms of a ceasefire as have been recently discussed. He is continuing to demand control of the four oblasts (regions) "enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation." The ground situation is that only in Luhansk is Russia close to fully controlling the territory:
Donetsk - 70%
Zaporizhzhia - 74%
Kherson - ~75%
Luhansk - 99%
The city of Kherson is currently controlled by Ukraine but has dropped from a pre-invasion population to 280,000 to ~60,000 with frequent shelling and drone attacks.
The city of Zaporizhzhia is currently under Ukrainian control and has a population of ~700,000.
So if I understand Putin correctly, he expects Zelensky and Ukraine to give these cities and remaining territory of the listed oblasts, demilitarize, not have a significant contingent of international troops patrolling a deconfliction zone, and hope that Russia lives up to its word and doesn't attack in the future. That would be the same Russia that promised it wasn't going to attack right up to February 24th, 2022. This is a clear non-starter. To capitulate in this manner would not be accepted by the Ukrainian parliament or any likely successor to Zelensky.
The 1% of Luhansk cold probably be bargained away. The current lines could also probably be accepted for essentially a permanent ceasefire that does not require Ukraine to formalize that the territories have been permanently lost (face saving). I can see this as a possibility if it is accompanied by a credible international force to patrol a DMZ, and if Ukraine is allowed to make alliances and build a robust defensive military. Whether or how much of the ~$300 billion in frozen Russian assets could be negotiated as reparations should be a legitimate topic, but is unlikely to be approved unless Russia was facing an imminent and convincing threat of being militarily routed. That is not the case. It is also not the case that Russia is making quick progress gaining territory in Ukraine. Drone warfare has radically changed the nature of warfare where neither side has conventional air superiority.
One point that may be changing Trump's thinking is the recent New York Times Siena Poll which showed the approval for how Trump is handling the war between Russia and Ukraine at 35%. This is his second lowest category, with only the case involving Kilmar Diego Garcia scoring lower. It is correct that this is just one poll and one point in time, but it is a signal. Today Trump expressed that Putin may not want peace and has also talked about increasing sanctions on Russia.
Files
Why might you be wrong?
I could be wrong if Trump makes it clear to Putin that if he doesn't accept a temporary ceasefire now, the US is going to substantially increase military support for Ukraine and help facilitate a coalition of the willing to enforce a no-fly zone from Kyiv westward. In such a case Russia's chances for gaining more territory would become minimal. I don't believe this scenario is going to happen and am not sure if Congress would back it if Trump pushed for it.
Why do you think you're right?
I largely agree with @DimaKlenchin that Putin is indicating that he will not accept the terms of a ceasefire as have been recently discussed. He is continuing to demand control of the four oblasts (regions) "enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation." The ground situation is that only in Luhansk is Russia close to fully controlling the territory:
Donetsk - 70%
Zaporizhzhia - 74%
Kherson - ~75%
Luhansk - 99%
The city of Kherson is currently controlled by Ukraine but has dropped from a pre-invasion population to 280,000 to ~60,000 with frequent shelling and drone attacks.
The city of Zaporizhzhia is currently under Ukrainian control and has a population of ~700,000.
So if I understand Putin correctly, he expects Zelensky and Ukraine to give these cities and remaining territory of the listed oblasts, demilitarize, not have a significant contingent of international troops patrolling a deconfliction zone, and hope that Russia lives up to its word and doesn't attack in the future. That would be the same Russia that promised it wasn't going to attack right up to February 24th, 2022. This is a clear non-starter. To capitulate in this manner would not be accepted by the Ukrainian parliament or any likely successor to Zelensky.
The 1% of Luhansk cold probably be bargained away. The current lines could also probably be accepted for essentially a permanent ceasefire that does not require Ukraine to formalize that the territories have been permanently lost (face saving). I can see this as a possibility if it is accompanied by a credible international force to patrol a DMZ, and if Ukraine is allowed to make alliances and build a robust defensive military. Whether or how much of the ~$300 billion in frozen Russian assets could be negotiated as reparations should be a legitimate topic, but is unlikely to be approved unless Russia was facing an imminent and convincing threat of being militarily routed. That is not the case. It is also not the case that Russia is making quick progress gaining territory in Ukraine. Drone warfare has radically changed the nature of warfare where neither side has conventional air superiority.
One point that may be changing Trump's thinking is the recent New York Times Siena Poll which showed the approval for how Trump is handling the war between Russia and Ukraine at 35%. This is his second lowest category, with only the case involving Kilmar Diego Garcia scoring lower. It is correct that this is just one poll and one point in time, but it is a signal. Today Trump expressed that Putin may not want peace and has also talked about increasing sanctions on Russia.
Why might you be wrong?
I could be wrong if Trump makes it clear to Putin that if he doesn't accept a temporary ceasefire now, the US is going to substantially increase military support for Ukraine and help facilitate a coalition of the willing to enforce a no-fly zone from Kyiv westward. In such a case Russia's chances for gaining more territory would become minimal. I don't believe this scenario is going to happen and am not sure if Congress would back it if Trump pushed for it.