AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File Small powers have little chance of prevailing in war without suppor from great powers.
In September 1938 Czechoslovakia had one of the “most formidable military forces in Central Europe.” It could have resisted the Nazis for some time. But the Czechs did not have British or French support; indeed, they were excluded from the British and French negotiations with Hitler. So when the Munich agreement codified both countries’ acceptance of German dictator Adolf Hitler’s demands, Czech president Eduard Benes essentially had to capitulate. Within a year, Hitler had seized all of Czechoslovakia.
Five months ago, when Israel and the U.S. launched a major attack against Iran at the same time, Israel was already at war with Hezbollah, Iran’s leading proxy. Washington and Tehran have now negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding,whose first article calls for a ceasefire in Lebanon, effectively restraining Jerusalem from retaliating against Hezbollah missile attacks.
In addition, the memo provides for the U.S. to end its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, to permit Iran to sell its oil immediately and gain access to its frozen assets, thereby generating revenue that Tehran can divert to Hezbollah and its other proxies.
Israel has not been part of the negotiation. Without American support — indeed in the face of American pressure — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will have no option but to abide by the terms of the memorandum or else risk the loss of both Washington’s military assistance and its support in the United Nations Security Council.
Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky may soon find himself caught in a similar vise as Benes and Netanyahu.
To be sure, Ukraine is now holding its own against Russia’s invading forces. In the last week three separate Ukrainian missile and drone attacks have hit targets in St. Petersburg and Moscow, including a Moscow oil refinery. Russia has had to pull back air defense systems from the Ukrainian front to reinforce its defense of Moscow. Zelensky has also announced that the Trump administration will let Ukraine produce Patriot missile systems under license, thereby significantly enhancing Ukraine’s air defenses. Finally, Crimea is increasingly isolated and could fall to Ukraine, perhaps in less than two years.
Russian President Vladimir Putin may therefore conclude that the only way he can preserve whatever territorial gains his forces have achieved in the five-year war is by sidestepping a negotiation with Zelensky and instead reaching out to the American mediators who have failed to engage him so far.
Putin could propose a ceasefire in place, similar to the one Iran and the U.S. have imposed on Israel. This would enable him to retain Crimea and parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts that his forces have occupied.
But even if Zelensky finds himself excluded from direct U.S.-Russian negotiations, he could adopt a posture different from that of Netanyahu. The Israeli leader simply chose to continue bombing Lebanon as U.S.-Iran talks proceeded, thereby angering President Trump, who told him to “stop blowing up buildings.” At no point did Netanyahu even attempt to fashion a proposal that might win Trump’s support.
In contrast to the Israelis’ stonewalling, which clearly has failed, Zelensky could offer Trump a compromise scheme to influence Washington-Moscow negotiations. One such proposal would allow Ukraine to remain intact while ceding a significant degree of regional autonomy to those territories that Russia currently occupies, thus allowing Putin to save face.
Zelensky could propose a model based on the United Kingdom’s devolution arrangement. Beginning in the late 1990s, the British Parliament granted Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland legislative assemblies, with numerous powers over agriculture, education, environment, health and social care, housing and some linguistic and cultural autonomy. Zelensky could offer something similar for territories that Russia restores to Ukraine. He could further propose that these territories, especially Crimea, maintain a special trade relationship with Russia, like the one Northern Ireland has with Ireland and the EU.
No doubt the Russian leader will initially reject Zelensky’s proposal. But Putin might find himself compelled to reverse course if he sees more territory, and especially Crimea, falling out of his grasp.
Since Ukraine increasingly is obtaining the upper hand in the fighting, Zelensky cannot not be ignored, even if the Trump administration continues to negotiate directly with Moscow. Whether or not the Ukrainian president chooses to offer a proposal to bring the fighting to an end while reversing Russia’s territorial gains, it is essential that he not restrict himself to protesting from the sidelines, as Eduard Benes did in 1938 or Netanyahu has been doing today.
By actively influencing the negotiations, Zelensky can avoid losing the peace, even as he has successfully avoided losing the war.
Dov S. Zakheim is a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and vice chairman of the board for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He was undersecretary of Defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the Department of Defense from 2001 to 2004 and a deputy undersecretary of Defense from 1985 to 1987.
Add as preferred source on Google Tags Adolf Hitler Benjamin Netanyahu Hitler Vladimir Putin Volodymyr ZelenskyCopyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Comments: Link copiedMore Opinions - National Security News
See All
Opinions - National Security Carney’s ‘Maple MAGA’ moment sends the wrong message on defense by Andrew Latham, opinion contributor 3 hours ago Opinions - National Security / 3 hours ago 
