75% of Ukrainians Oppose Donbas Withdrawal

A recent survey conducted by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) has revealed that a significant majority of Ukrainians reject any “peace plan” that includes concessions such as the withdrawal of troops from Donbas, limits on the size of Ukraine’s armed forces, or the absence of concrete security guarantees. According to the survey, conducted between 26 November and 13 December, 75% of respondents considered the Russian-proposed plan “completely unacceptable,” consistent with results from September 2025. Only 17% of Ukrainians expressed readiness to accept Russia’s version of a peace agreement.

The survey presented respondents with two hypothetical peace plans, one attributed to Europe and Ukraine and the other to Russia, without revealing the source of each plan. This approach aimed to measure reactions to the content itself rather than to the source. KIIS noted that the survey was conducted via telephone interviews with 547 respondents aged 18 and over, all residing in territory controlled by the Ukrainian government. The survey did not include residents of temporarily occupied territories, although some internally displaced persons were included, nor did it account for citizens who left Ukraine after 24 February 2022. The statistical margin of error was calculated at 5.6% for indicators near 50%, 4.8% for indicators near 25%, 3.4% for indicators near 10%, and 2.5% for indicators near 5%, although wartime conditions could introduce additional systematic bias. Nonetheless, sociologists assert that the results are broadly representative of public sentiment.

In contrast to the overwhelmingly negative response to the Russian plan, 72% of Ukrainians expressed conditional support for a peace plan proposed jointly by Europe and Ukraine, though KIIS noted that this approval was mostly cautious rather than enthusiastic. Only 14% rejected this European-Ukrainian plan outright.

The provisional plan framed as a European-Ukrainian initiative included several key provisions: Ukraine would receive reliable security guarantees from Europe and the United States, encompassing sustained military and financial support in sufficient amounts, along with the closure of Ukrainian airspace to Russian attacks. The current front line would be frozen, with Russia retaining control over occupied territories, but without formal international recognition of these annexations. Ukraine would continue on a path toward EU accession, while sanctions on Russia would remain in place until a sustainable peace is achieved and the risk of renewed Russian aggression is eliminated.

The hypothetical Russian plan, by contrast, contained far-reaching concessions unfavorable to Ukraine. It called for the immediate lifting of all Western sanctions against Russia and the establishment of Russian as an official language within Ukraine. The plan required Ukraine to significantly reduce its armed forces and weapons, permanently renounce NATO membership, and limit Western military aid. It also stipulated that Russia would define the security guarantees for Ukraine and serve as a guarantor itself. Under the Russian plan, Ukrainian troops would withdraw from parts of Donetsk Oblast, including key cities such as Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, and Ukraine would officially recognize Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk oblasts as Russian territory, relinquishing them permanently. Additionally, Russia would retain control over occupied areas of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts.

The survey’s findings highlight a pronounced gap between public opinion in Ukraine and Russian strategic objectives. While the European-Ukrainian plan enjoys cautious approval, the Russian plan is broadly rejected, reflecting the population’s strong reluctance to compromise territorial integrity or national security.

The KIIS survey underscores the depth of Ukrainian public opinion in shaping future diplomatic negotiations and policy responses. While the formal statistical margins of error remain modest, the challenges posed by wartime conditions suggest that social and political dynamics may influence attitudes further. Still, the high degree of consistency in opposition to Russian proposals signals that any peace initiative that fails to secure territorial integrity, strong security guarantees, and continued international support is likely to encounter overwhelming public resistance.

In sum, the survey illustrates a dual dynamic: cautious openness to proposals developed jointly with Europe and firm rejection of Moscow’s demands. This sentiment reflects both the population’s wariness of compromise under pressure and the desire to maintain Ukraine’s sovereignty, international partnerships, and ongoing defense readiness. As KIIS researchers noted, even amid conflict, Ukrainian public opinion offers a reliable lens for assessing the political feasibility of prospective peace plans and their alignment with national priorities.