US President Donald Trump has ditched his call for a ceasefire in Ukraine, backing instead Russian President Vladimir Putin’s push for a permanent peace agreement. That has not stopped some European leaders from pushing for a temporary truce first, even though the US president has seemingly decided one is not necessary.

It’s not that Kyiv and its allies don’t want peace. But they understand that the kind of deal sought by Russia can’t happen unless the most basic principle underpinning the global order – that a country cannot get what it wants by force – is thrown under the bus.

And Kyiv’s European allies are not willing to risk that, not least because they could well become the next target of Russia’s aggression.

Speaking to the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and several European leaders in the Oval Office on Monday, Trump adopted some of Moscow’s talking points, questioning whether a ceasefire was “necessary” if a broader peace deal could be achieved.

But international law experts and analysts say that any deal that would force Ukraine to give up its land to stop the killing of its people by Russia would be completely illegal under the UN Charter, a key international agreement which most countries signed up to after the horrors of the Second World War.

While often thought of as essentially the same thing, there is a big difference between a peace deal and a ceasefire in the eyes of international law.

During a ceasefire, warring parties agree to stop fighting with each side keeping hold of the territory under its military control. But the understanding is that the pause is temporary – usually to provide a window to negotiate, deliver humanitarian help or evacuate civilians.

Kyiv and its European allies suggested that a ceasefire might be a precursor for a meeting between Zelensky and Putin, followed by a trilateral meeting between Trump, Zelensky, and Putin.