Key points
- Trump, after hosting Zelensky and key European leaders at the White House, says prospects for Russia–Ukraine peace are “exciting,” with work underway for a Putin–Zelensky meeting “soon.”
- U.S. and European partners discussed a security guarantees framework for Ukraine; trilateral talks to follow a potential bilateral meeting.
- Zelensky backs unconditional, face-to-face talks with Putin, saying “time has come” to discuss concrete pathways to end the war.
- German Chancellor Friedrich Merz indicates a target window of roughly two weeks for a potential leaders’ meeting, though date and venue remain undecided.
- Trump thanks senior U.S. officials for backing the initiative; European leaders and NATO chief participated in the White House consultations.
Washington D.C.: Following a rare high-level huddle at the White House with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and top European leaders, U.S. President Donald Trump said the possibility of a Russia–Ukraine peace breakthrough “excites” him and confirmed that preparations are underway for a direct meeting between Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump added that after an initial leaders’ meeting, a trilateral format is planned in which he intends to take part alongside both presidents.
In remarks shared after the Oval Office talks, Trump said the U.S., in concert with several European allies, discussed a framework of security guarantees for Ukraine—a key pillar intended to underwrite any de-escalation or political process. He characterized the day’s diplomacy as an “important and positive first step” toward halting a war that has stretched to nearly four years, and publicly thanked Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff for supporting the push.
Zelensky’s stance: “No preconditions”
Zelensky struck a pragmatic tone, saying he favors a face-to-face meeting with Putin “without any conditions,” arguing the time has come for leaders to directly discuss concrete, workable pathways to end the war. He noted that Russia has indicated a sequencing of a bilateral leaders’ session followed by a trilateral meeting, and said Ukraine is ready to engage in any format that meaningfully advances peace. He cautioned, however, that Ukraine’s participation in a trilateral session would depend on how the initial bilateral encounter proceeds.
European and NATO participation
The White House meeting drew heavyweight attendance: French President Emmanuel Macron, Finland’s President Alexander Stubb, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. Their presence underscored both transatlantic alignment and the practical role Europe would play in any future security guarantees for Ukraine.
Timeline signals, but no venue yet
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz conveyed that Trump aims to bring Putin and Zelensky face to face within roughly the next two weeks. He cautioned, however, that the exact date and location are still being negotiated, and that the diplomatic choreography—including a trilateral phase—will hinge on the outcome of the first round.
What the potential process could look like
- Step 1: Leaders’ bilateral meeting (Putin–Zelensky), focused on immediate de-escalation measures, humanitarian corridors, and a framework for further talks.
- Step 2: Trilateral engagement (including Trump) to broaden political cover, outline security guarantees contours, and identify confidence-building steps.
- Step 3: Allied-enforced guarantees, potentially involving surveillance, training, reconstruction finance, and long-term deterrence measures backed by the U.S. and European partners.
Open questions to watch
- Exact architecture of “security guarantees”: Will it mirror bilateral pacts, a multilateral compact, or a NATO-adjacent arrangement with phased commitments?
- Sequencing of talks: Can the bilateral leaders’ meeting generate enough momentum and trust to justify a trilateral follow-on?
- Battlefield dynamics: Will there be verifiable de-escalation steps (e.g., ceasefire lines, monitoring) that can lock in progress from talks?
- Sanctions and reconstruction: How could sanctions relief, energy transit, and reconstruction funding be timed against compliance benchmarks?
