Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told Fox News anchor Bret Baier during a taped Special Report interview on February 28, 2025, that while most Ukrainians want peace, withdrawing from the Donbas would be unacceptable. His words were straightforward: peace is the goal, but ceding sovereign Ukrainian soil is off the table for Kyiv. That hard line should give pause to any American who thinks peace can be bought cheaply at the expense of sovereignty.
Zelensky also made clear why he’s in Washington and why he’s asking for security guarantees from powerful allies, thanking the American people and President Trump for support while pushing for firm protections for his country. He framed aid not as charity but as an investment in European and Western security, warning that without guarantees Putin will keep pushing. It’s a reasonable plea from a leader defending his nation, but it does not absolve Ukraine from making the stakes clear to those footing the bill.
Conservatives should note the uncomfortable contradiction here: a demand for peace coupled with a refusal to consider territorial compromise means the conflict is likely to continue unless Russia is decisively defeated or willingly withdraws. Zelensky’s insistence that Ukraine won’t return to frozen Minsk-style deals or accept de facto Russian control underlines that Kyiv wants a different outcome than placation. That reality should temper any naive calls in the U.S. for an immediate freeze to hostilities without a strategy to secure lasting victory.
Meanwhile, Moscow continues to rightfully press its own maximalist demands—saying Ukraine must withdraw from Donbas to reach a deal—proof that Russia is still trying to rewrite borders by force and that “peace” as defined by Putin would mean surrender. Washington must not let Russian talking points reframe the narrative into mutual compromise when it was Russia that invaded and annexed territory. American taxpayers and lawmakers should remember who started this war and what true justice entails before any concession-minded diplomats get carried away.
Reports from the recent round of diplomacy show U.S. and European leaders discussing long-term security guarantees for Kyiv, with talk of multiyear commitments and even foreign contingents on Ukrainian soil to deter further Russian aggression. If the United States is going to support Ukraine, that support must be strategic and verifiable, not open-ended blank checks that leave American interests and resources unprotected. Policymakers in Washington should demand clear objectives, timelines, and accountability for every dollar and piece of hardware sent overseas.
Zelensky’s slogan—peace without surrender—resonates with Americans who value freedom and self-determination, but it also forces a hard question: are U.S. leaders willing to back that principle with the necessary commitment, or will they trade it away for the illusion of immediate calm? Ukrainians have repeatedly said they won’t accept Donbas as Russian, and their leaders insist any territorial decisions belong to the Ukrainian people, not foreign negotiators. That is the right and patriotic stance; it’s up to our elected representatives to recognize the moral and strategic clarity it demands.
Patriotic Americans should hold their leaders accountable: stand with Ukraine’s right to territorial integrity, insist on realistic security guarantees, and refuse to be browbeaten into cheap deals that reward aggression. If the U.S. truly values freedom, we will support a peace that preserves it, not a settlement that hands land to a brutal autocrat. The February 28, 2025, interview was a reminder that peace and weakness are not the same thing, and our response must reflect that truth.
