Demilitarization of Ukraine and Ukraine not in NATO could have been a bargaining point but Trump gave it as a gift to Putin. Though I highly doubt Putin would have accepted anything less than that after all the lives lost.
The only bargain left is of size of land. The deal could be Donbass and Kherson east of Dnieper river given under Russian control and the region of Kursk occupied by Ukraine and Kharkhiv occupied by Russia exchanged.
Regarding the use of natural resources in Ukraine territory post war, Zelensky could get a better deal if he talked straight to Putin but there's very low chances of it.
It seems that Ukraine may become the first country in history that lost a war that will pay reparations not to the winner, but to an ally.The only bargain left is of size of land. The deal could be Donbass and Kherson east of Dnieper river given under Russian control and the region of Kursk occupied by Ukraine and Kharkhiv occupied by Russia exchanged.
Regarding the use of natural resources in Ukraine territory post war, Zelensky could get a better deal if he talked straight to Putin but there's very low chances of it.
Lost? This has not finished yet but Ukraine still there, there is viable country called Ukraine, most of its territory intact... there is still the same government, they have an even stronger military, Sweeden  Finland are now NATO, Ruzzia has lost around 800.000 people and 10.000 tanks...., interest rates are at 21%, inflation is rampant... who is still considering the Ruzzian army as "the second in the world" after not even being able to take a country 1/10th of the size....a Ruzzian win you say?? Well, I hope many many more "wins" will follow this one.
Look at your own argument and you will see who is the only winner. To make it more clear: the one getting paid is the winner.
For the 10th time in this thread I am going to repeat this:"There is a winner of this war, but it is not Ruzzia, it is not Ukraine and it is not Europe".
I wonder why the russian pidors badecker and his colleagues in dead dikhead prigozhin troll farms are not banned on this forum. What surrender? What talks with putin? Only complete destruction of russia as a state will bring some guarantees of peace in europe. Any other scenarios are deadly danger to everyone bordering russian state of evil and long-term existential threat to whole of europe.
I personally consider them for the humour section of the forum. I do not think anyone takes them seriously.
The buzz in Europe and Ukraine is that Trump is holding talks directly with Putin and then "informing" the rest. The problem with Trump is that he tends to be convinced by the last person he speaks with.
However people should make no mistake on this: his own leadership and the stance of the US in the world is at stake. If he cannot get a good deal for Europe and Ukraine, there is no reason for Europe to keep being and ally. For example, if China invades Taiwan, the US may not be able to press the allies into siding if he mistreats everyone.
Apart, a bad deal will forever be linked with Trumps name. He will be the scorn of History for centuries.
I think that some people in his team are actually able to see second level consequences, but I am not sure he will listen.
Now, there are two options for Trump:
a) You keep gas and mineral deposits, but you need to push Ruzzia back.
b) You give Ruzzia part of the gas and mineral deposits, but then you cannot have them.
Also...
a) You tell Europe to deploy forces in Ukraine, but then Ukraine will have to cover the costs or...
b) You give security guarantees (e.g. NATO) and then you can have beneficial deals in Ukraine.
If you try both, Ukraine will eventually break the deal - what is the point of paying for no protection? I can already tell you that Europe is already thinking along this line if the deal is not good enough.
It's finished. Ukraine can't take beck the Black Sea Corridor. And with Zelensky not the real president, they don't have anybody to sign treaties for them.
