On the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the United States joined China and others in refusing to endorse an important resolution entitled “Support for lasting peace in Ukraine”. The resolution should not have been contentious for any democratic country, as it called for “comprehensive, just and lasting peace; exchange of prisoners of war and return of civilians forcibly transferred, including children”. Yet the United States saw fit to abstain, joined in this by Hungary, which under Victor Orban has consistently supported Russia, and blocked efforts to help Ukraine defend itself.
The good news is that the resolution passed easily, with 107 votes in favour, 12 against and 51 abstaining. Prior to the vote, the US delegation had put forward a motion to remove any mention in the resolution of Ukraine’s territorial integrity and of the need for a just peace. The US argument would seem to have been that this was not ‘constructive’ while US-brokered ‘peace’ negotiations are continuing. The motion was rejected by 69 votes against to 11 in favour, with 62 abstentions.
This is not the first time that the USA has taken a noticeably different stance from its western allies since Donald Trump returned to the White House. On 25 February 2025, the US voted together with Russia, Belarus and North Korea against a European-drafted resolution condemning Moscow's actions and supporting Ukraine's territorial integrity. It then drafted and voted for a resolution at the UN Security Council which called for an end to the conflict but contained no criticism of Russia. The UK and France abstained after their attempts to change the wording were vetoed, with the fact that the resolution passed presumably meaning that it was supported by the USA, Russia and China.
At the beginning of March 2025, the Trump administration suspended delivery of all US military aid to Ukraine. Although a deal was later reached between the US and its allies, the US-produced military aid provided has been financed by other NATO countries, not the USA. Trump’s promise that the USA would include Patriot missiles in such a deal has also come to nothing, while the threats to impose “severe sanctions” against Russia unless it made peace within 50 days failed to turn into more than words.
It has been clear for a long time that Trump is eager to achieve a so-called ‘peace deal’ which will enable the US administration to do business with Russia. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been open in recent weeks about the pressure being laid on Ukraine to make ‘concessions’, with no such demands appearing to have been made on Russia. In fact, the ‘peace plan’ put forward in November 2025 was noted by many commentators to look suspiciously as though it had first been written in Russian and then rather clumsily translated into English.
Two of the demands are, or should be, totally unacceptable. Having been unable to seize Sloviansk and Kramatorsk in Donetsk oblast by force, Russia is demanding that Ukraine ‘hand them over’. It has not promised, in exchange, to withdraw from other territory seized in 2022, but, at most, to stop trying to advance further.
It is hard to understand why Trump appears eager to believe that Russia would hold to any such agreement, when Russian leader Vladimir Putin swore for months up to days before the full-scale invasion, that it was not preparing such a war of aggression. And when the Kremlin then pushed through a revised ‘constitution’ which claims that all parts of Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts, as well as Crimea, are ‘Russian’. Ukraine cannot afford such a luxury. ‘Handing over’ the remaining territory in Donetsk oblast would not only be a shocking betrayal to those remaining on that territory, as well as those who sacrificed their lives defending it, but would also make Russia’s next move to seize other Ukrainian territory significantly easier.
Pressure on Ukraine to somehow hold presidential elections in the very near future also seems written in Russian, with Moscow likely to use all dishonest means at its disposal to sway the outcome. It is all the more shocking that the Kremlin is successfully pushing such narrative given that Russia has a supposed ‘president’ who has been in power for over 25 years, and has blocked, imprisoned or murdered all political opponents. In contrast, Ukraine held presidential elections shortly after former President Victor Yanukovych fled to Moscow, and then again in 2019, with both recognized internationally as free and fair. It also has a Constitution which, understandably, prohibits the holding of any elections in conditions of war.
Russia has brought abductions, repression and terror to all parts of Ukraine which have fallen under its occupation. In May 2025, Freedom House published a damning first combined assessment of the situation in all Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine. The rating was not only massively lower than in free Ukraine, but significantly lower than in Russia itself and countries like North Korea and Turkmenistan. The situation has become even worse since then, with Ukrainians, including pensioners and teenagers abducted and sentenced to 15 years or more for donations to Ukraine’s Armed Forces and sentences of up to life imprisonment against Ukrainian prisoners of war.
On why Ukraine cannot ‘hand over’ its territory and abandon its citizens, see: 'Insane nonsense to hand Donbas over to Russia’. Sloviansk residents knew occupation and don’t want it again
