At a gilded resort in Palm Beach, Florida, Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy have stepped into one of the most consequential meetings of the Ukraine war. Behind the ornate doors of Mar-a-Lago, cameras captured the two leaders shaking hands and exchanging brief remarks before journalists were quickly escorted out. What happens in those rooms could redraw the map of Eastern Europe, reshape US influence abroad, and decide how – or whether – the bloodiest conflict on the continent since the 1940s finally begins to wind down.
The meeting comes just hours after Trump held a lengthy phone call with Vladimir Putin, which he described as “good and very productive.” The call, initiated by Trump, reportedly lasted over an hour. Russian officials later said both leaders rejected the idea of an EU- and Ukraine-backed temporary ceasefire, claiming such a pause would only drag out the war. Instead, Moscow signalled it expects Kyiv to make what it called “courageous, responsible political decisions” on the contested Donbas region, a phrase that for many Ukrainians sounds uncomfortably close to pressure for territorial concessions.
As Zelenskyy arrived at Mar-a-Lago, Trump told reporters he believed Putin is “serious about peace this time” and claimed that both presidents – of Russia and Ukraine – want a deal. Trump went further, saying he thinks the talks are in their “final stages” and that a “quick” end to the war is possible. He also said he would call Putin back after finishing his talks with Zelenskyy, effectively positioning himself as the central broker between Kyiv and Moscow, with Europe watching nervously from the sidelines.
On the Ukrainian side, the core of the discussions is a 20-point peace proposal that Zelenskyy says is about 90% complete. At the heart of that plan is a demand for NATO-style security guarantees for Ukraine – commitments that would function similarly to the alliance’s Article 5, where an attack on one is treated as an attack on all. Zelenskyy’s team wants those guarantees strong enough to deter any future Russian offensive and to allow Ukraine to keep its armed forces at their current strength of roughly 800,000 troops. For Kyiv, anything weaker risks turning the country into a permanently vulnerable buffer zone between Russia and the West.
The plan also reaches deep into Ukraine’s long-term political and economic future. Zelenskyy is asking for a firm, dated commitment on Ukraine’s membership in the European Union, not just vague promises of a “European perspective.” On the economic side, the proposal includes around $800 billion in reconstruction aid to rebuild shattered cities, critical infrastructure, energy systems and industry. Parallel talks on a US-Ukraine free trade agreement would be accelerated, signalling that Kyiv wants to lock in Western economic integration as tightly as its security arrangements.
The most explosive issue – territory – is where the proposal becomes both ambitious and controversial. Under the latest draft, fighting in the Donetsk region would be frozen along current battle lines. Ukrainian and Russian forces would withdraw to create a demilitarised buffer zone policed by international forces. In theory, such a zone would stop the daily shelling and stabilize the front, but it also risks cementing a new de facto border if negotiations over the final status drag on. For many Ukrainians, the idea of “freezing” the conflict feels like a dangerous halfway house between war and genuine peace.
Another striking element of Zelenskyy’s proposal is the future of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the largest in Europe and currently occupied by Russian forces. Kyiv is said to be floating a deal in which Ukraine would share control of the plant with the United States. Ukraine would keep half of the energy output, while the US could allocate the other half as it sees fit, potentially using it to stabilise regional energy markets or support European allies. This unusual arrangement underlines how central energy security has become in the geopolitics of the war.
Despite Trump’s confident tone, big gaps remain. Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, has publicly branded the European Union the “main obstacle to peace,” accusing it of preparing for a prolonged confrontation with Moscow. He warned that any European peacekeeping troops in Ukraine would be treated as “legitimate targets” by Russian forces, a threat clearly aimed at deterring deeper EU involvement on the ground. Yet European leaders are still deeply embedded in the diplomatic process. The Mar-a-Lago summit is due to be followed by a joint call with key European leaders, underlining that whatever deal emerges cannot realistically bypass Europe.
In Europe, reactions to the Florida meeting have been cautious but hopeful. Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk, publicly wished Zelenskyy “good luck” as talks began, a reminder that Ukraine’s fate is tied directly to the security of its neighbours. In London, UK prime minister Keir Starmer reportedly spoke to Zelenskyy before the summit, reiterating Britain’s “unwavering support” for Ukraine and calling for a “just and lasting peace” rather than a rushed settlement on Moscow’s terms. Both leaders signalled they welcomed continued diplomatic efforts, while carefully avoiding endorsing any specific concessions.
Inside the Mar-a-Lago dining room, Trump has assembled a team that signals how seriously he wants to be seen taking this on. Among those present, according to reports from the room, are secretary of state Marco Rubio, defence secretary Pete Hegseth, White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, chairman of the joint chiefs General Dan Caine, Jared Kushner, peace envoy Steve Witkoff and deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller. For critics, this lineup raises questions about how much professional diplomatic experience is driving the process; for supporters, it showcases Trump’s inner circle gearing up for a signature foreign policy moment.
For Zelenskyy, the stakes could hardly be higher. He has repeatedly stressed that any peace plan must not reward Russian aggression or leave Ukraine permanently exposed to a renewed attack. At the same time, after years of brutal fighting and mounting casualties, he knows his own public is desperate for a path out of the war that doesn’t feel like surrender. That tension runs through every clause of the 20-point plan: strong security guarantees, massive reconstruction funds, and closer ties to the West in exchange for freezing – but not formally recognising – Russia’s gains on the ground.
Trump, meanwhile, is casting himself as the dealmaker who can succeed where others have failed, arguing that “we’ve got to make a deal” and insisting there is “nothing more important” than ending the war. Yet his history of shifting between sympathising with Ukraine and echoing some of Putin’s broad demands leaves plenty of scepticism in Kyiv and across Europe. Supporters of Ukraine worry that under pressure to deliver a “win,” Trump could push Zelenskyy toward compromises that weaken Ukraine’s long-term security or legitimise Russian control over occupied territories.
As the talks stretch into the evening and the leaders prepare to dial in European counterparts, the world is left waiting to see whether Mar-a-Lago will be remembered as the place where the Ukraine war began to end – or as another stage for grand promises that never quite translate into peace. The answers will lie not in the photo ops, but in the fine print of any eventual deal: the guarantees, the borders, the money and, above all, whether Ukrainians themselves feel it secures the future they have fought so hard to defend.
0 Comments