Meeting in Switzerland. Meeting in the United Arab Emirates. Possible visit of the President of Ukraine to the United States.
But despite the recent flurry of diplomacy aimed at ending the war in Ukraine, with officials touting promising progress in off-the-record press conferences, it’s hard to tell whether a deal is actually close to the finish line. The core demands of both sides remain the same.
The Trump administration is working hard to reach a landmark agreement, but Russian President Vladimir Putin and his delegation have shown no desire to end the years-long conflict with a compromise.
Now, U.S. officials have told reporters in a closed group that Ukraine has agreed to the peace plan, even though Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said “there is still a lot of work ahead.” I don’t know if this is attractive to Russia.
This comes after Ukrainian and European officials last week strongly opposed a 28-point peace plan drafted by the United States, apparently with strong input from Russia, and then revised the 28-point peace plan to which they had been blindsided.
What we know from the first round of draft agreements is that the Kremlin is still pursuing its extremist goals of demilitarizing Ukraine, barring it from joining NATO, and formally claiming some of its territory. Ukraine still wants a viable path to NATO membership and wants to avoid ceding territory. The country and its European allies have been publicly adamant that peace does not mean surrender to Russia.
Is there room for negotiation between those firm red lines?
Diplomacy appeared to be at an impasse until a new 28-point draft was widely leaked last week. Afterwards, the White House went on record as saying it was the result of a month of work that included input from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, President Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff, and input from both Russians and Ukrainians, following a flurry of criticism that it appeared to be a “wish list” for Russia.
This week, after intense negotiations with Ukraine and its European allies, the draft was reportedly overhauled and reduced to just 19 points, with some provisions deemed unacceptable by Kiev removed.
Ukraine’s First Deputy Foreign Minister Sergiy Kislysha told the Financial Times that some of the most controversial proposals, including issues related to territory and NATO, were completely dropped for President Trump and President Zelensky to discuss later.
The exact wording of the latest draft is unclear.
Russia wants full and formal control of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts in eastern Ukraine. It would mean Ukraine giving up heavily fortified areas of Donetsk, which it still controls and is considered important for its defense.
Ukraine has repeatedly denied giving up land not controlled by Russia. However, Kiev has previously entertained the idea that a temporary ceasefire could take place along current front lines, which could effectively strengthen Russia’s occupation of areas it actually controls.
The U.S. proposal, seen by CNN, suggests the entire “fortress zone” in eastern Ukraine could become a demilitarized zone, an area that Russia de facto controls but would agree to keep Russian troops out. As CNN previously wrote, it is difficult to understand how President Zelensky could agree to it after years of conflict, but in theory it could present one area of potential diplomatic move.
The details will be important, especially when it comes to what Russia will control in fact and in reality, and what it will control in accordance with international law.
European allies reiterated that Ukraine’s borders cannot be changed by force.
Ukraine also remains firmly committed to its demands for reliable security and its desire to join NATO.
But Putin’s other major red line remains open to Ukraine’s NATO membership. The Russian government wants Kiev to have a troop cap, enshrine in its constitution that it will not join the Transatlantic Military Alliance and that it will not have NATO troops within its borders.
The original version of the peace plan drafted by the United States called for limits on further expansion of NATO, but this was later overridden by a European counterproposal. It is unclear what the latest proposal includes.
Room for adjustment on these points may come in the form of what credible non-NATO security for Ukraine might look like. The original U.S. plan proposed “credible security” for Ukraine and outlined specific scenarios that would result in a coordinated U.S. security response.
It remains to be seen whether Ukraine will be willing to agree to any guarantees modeled on NATO Article 5, even if it means that it cannot formally join the alliance for some time.
Safety guarantees are reportedly detailed in a separate ancillary agreement.
Admiral James Stavridis, former Supreme Allied Commander for NATO, speculated on CNN that “by keeping them out of NATO command, you could sort of make the ‘no-NATO force’ thing more sophisticated.”
“A scenario is also conceivable in which Ukraine could bilaterally host contingents from Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the Nordic countries under their national flag, so they could form a kind of tripwire,” he said, adding that while that might allay Ukrainian concerns, it could conversely provoke Russian opposition.
The Trump administration renewed this latest diplomatic push after successfully negotiating a ceasefire in Gaza. But virtually nothing has changed in the Kremlin’s position since President Trump’s last major foreign policy move, when he welcomed Putin to Alaska.
No deal was reached in Anchorage, and President Trump later scrapped plans for a second summit in Hungary. U.S. officials told CNN at the time that they believed Putin’s position on ending the war had not changed significantly.
What has changed is Russia’s gradual expansion of influence on the battlefield in Ukraine. The conflict became a war of attrition, with Russia’s larger military at an advantage.
“They clearly think they’re going to be in a position to dictate the terms with Ukraine, not just negotiate,” John Ruff, director of foreign policy at the Center for a New Eurasian Strategy think tank, told CNN. “It’s hard to find other concessions that they would really be prepared for.”
Lau said he felt “pessimistic” about the prospects for peace in the near term, but added of the Kremlin’s current diplomatic calculations: “I think the question for President Putin is… whether he wants to pass up the opportunity to get from President Trump’s aid, because at some point President Trump will get tired of dealing with this issue and will no longer focus on it.”
What has changed for Ukraine is that pressure has mounted on Zelensky’s government following a corruption scandal centered on alleged kickbacks from contractors and others working to protect Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. The scandal ousted two ministers from Zelenskiy’s government and implicated a former business associate. Still, he remains widely popular among Ukrainians, although his poll numbers are not as high as they were in the early months of the war.
The White House sought to project optimism, saying “some sensitive” details required further consultation. But by late Tuesday, ratings had become more subdued in Europe.
“It is very wrong to say that we now have a version that Ukraine will accept,” a Ukrainian source with direct knowledge of the talks told CNN. Ukraine’s State Security Secretary Rustem Umerov offered similarly moderate remarks, saying only that the delegation had “reached a common understanding.”
Even if a breakthrough does occur, there is still a chance that it will be amputated at the knee by an unfavorable Russian reaction.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Tuesday that any revised plan must reflect the “spirit and letter” of the Alaska summit earlier this year. This is an early sign that Russia is not in favor of linguistic compromises.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov kept his message brief, saying he had not received any official information about the revised plan and had “nothing to report” about the talks between the U.S. and Russian delegations in Abu Dhabi.
Many analysts remain skeptical that a deal will be reached given the lack of common interests.
“Wars usually end when both sides are exhausted and have more to gain by ending the fighting than by continuing to fight. Both sides are tired, especially the Ukrainians, but not tired enough to accept such terms. This is an act that could lead to Zelenskiy being ousted by popular outcry,” Greg Mills, a senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), wrote of the 28-point draft.
Umerov added that Ukraine looks forward to organizing Zelensky’s visit to the United States to “complete the final stages and conclude an agreement with President Trump.”
In short, more meetings.
