President Trump is amping up pressure on Ukraine to accept a U.S.-brokered peace plan that would require the embattled country to give up territory to Russia, according to reports. But experts say that ceding Ukrainian territory to Vladimir Putin’s regime is unlikely to result in a durable peace.

During an interview Monday, Trump remarked that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky “is going to have to get on the ball and start accepting things” in the wake of Kyiv’s continued battlefield losses. Reports indicate that Russia’s army captured 270 square miles of Ukrainian territory in November alone. Since the beginning of the year, Moscow has captured over 2,000 square miles, with almost 20% of Ukraine currently under Russian control.

Still, Zelensky held firm on Monday that he would not give up Ukrainian territory as part of a peace agreement. He further stated that the U.S. would need to provide a strong security guarantee that would be “legally binding, voted through the U.S. Congress.” A U.S. official told The Wall Street Journal that along with the question of ceding territory, other major sticking points of a potential peace plan include whether or not Ukraine could join NATO and how frozen Russian assets in Western Europe could be used for aid to rebuilding Ukraine’s infrastructure.

On Tuesday, Zelensky announced that he would present a revised 20-point peace plan to the U.S. for consideration. The plan emerged after Zelensky met with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in London, who all pushed for U.S. security guarantees.

As for Russia, the Kremlin has stated that the only peace plan that would be acceptable would be one that included Ukraine handing over its entire Donbas region, a 2,500-square-mile area along its eastern-most region. However, Kyiv still controls a key part of the region that includes the cities of Sloviansk and Kramatorsk, which make up a heavily fortified area known as the “Fortress Belt” that serves as a military stronghold that Kyiv has spent years developing. Despite almost four years of fighting, Moscow has been unable to capture the area.

Experts like Lt. Colonel (Ret.) Bob Maginnis, who serves as Family Research Council’s senior fellow for National Security, say that a peace plan involving Ukraine giving up large swaths of territory to Russia is unlikely to last.

“President Trump is clearly increasing pressure on President Zelensky to accept a negotiated settlement that would involve Ukraine surrendering territory to Russia,” he told The Washington Stand. “While I understand the desire to stop the bloodshed, this approach risks rewarding aggression and redefining borders by force. History shows that land concessions made under coercion rarely produce lasting peace. They may pause the fighting, but they do not resolve the underlying ambitions driving the war.”

“I do not believe that Ukraine giving up territory is the only pathway to a peace agreement,” Maginnis continued. “A durable peace must be built on deterrence, not surrender. Any settlement that trades sovereign land for temporary quiet risks becoming nothing more than a strategic pause before the next wave of aggression. A lasting solution must address Russia’s long-term objectives and ensure that Ukraine’s independence is truly secure, not merely postponed.”

Maginnis concluded by contending that even if Ukraine is eventually forced to cede territory in order to reach a peace deal, the U.S. must strongly back it with security guarantees in order for there to be any chance of an enduring peace in eastern Europe.

“Ukraine’s demand for clear, binding U.S. security guarantees is entirely reasonable,” he argued. “Ukraine has already learned — at great cost — what vague assurances are worth. If Kyiv is ever expected to accept painful compromises, it must be backed by ironclad commitments that deter future attacks. Without enforceable security guarantees, any peace deal becomes little more than a fragile promise resting on the goodwill of an aggressor that has repeatedly broken its word.”