%20(1).png)
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s expected meeting with U.S. President
Donald Trump in Florida on Sunday marks one of the most consequential
diplomatic moments since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine
nearly four years ago. As the war grinds on with no clear military resolution in
sight, both leaders are entering talks that could determine not only Ukraine’s
territorial future but also the broader balance of power between the United States,
Europe, and Russia.
Zelensky has confirmed that he will bring a newly developed 20-point peace plan
to the meeting, a framework Ukrainian officials describe as “90% ready.” The
proposal is the product of months of intense negotiations between Ukrainian and
U.S. officials and reflects Kyiv’s growing willingness to show flexibility—without
formally conceding sovereignty over occupied territory. At the heart of the talks
will be U.S. security guarantees, the idea of a demilitarized zone in eastern Ukraine,
and the future governance of strategically vital regions such as Donbas and the
Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.
President Trump, however, has signaled that any agreement ultimately depends on
his approval. In a blunt assessment ahead of the meeting, Trump said Zelensky
“doesn’t have anything until I approve it,” underscoring the reality that Washington
now holds enormous leverage over Ukraine’s diplomatic fate.
Trump Positions Himself as the Ultimate Power Broker
Trump’s comments reflect his broader approach to foreign policy: centralized,
transactional, and highly personalized. Rather than framing the peace process as a
multilateral effort led by NATO or European allies, Trump has increasingly
portrayed himself as the decisive arbiter capable of ending the war through direct
engagement with both Kyiv and Moscow.
“I think it’s going to go good with him,” Trump said of Zelensky, adding that he also
expects productive discussions with Russian President Vladimir Putin “soon, as
much as I want.” These remarks reinforce Trump’s belief that personal diplomacy—
rather than prolonged negotiations involving multiple actors—can unlock progress
where traditional approaches have failed.
At the same time, Trump has appeared impatient with what he sees as prolonged
bargaining. His lukewarm reaction to Zelensky’s latest proposal suggests that he is
not yet convinced Ukraine has gone far enough to make peace attractive to
Moscow, even as Russia has shown little willingness to soften its own maximalist
demands.
Inside Zelensky’s 20-Point Peace Plan
The revised 20-point peace plan represents a significant evolution from the earlier
28-point draft circulated in November. That initial framework was criticized by
Ukraine’s allies for leaning too heavily toward Russian interests, including
provisions that would have frozen the war along existing frontlines and limited
Ukraine’s military capacity.
The current plan is more balanced but still controversial. It calls for:
A freeze of the conflict along current frontlines in Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia,
and Kherson
The creation of demilitarized or “free economic” zones in parts of eastern Ukraine
Reciprocal troop withdrawals by Ukrainian and Russian forces
International involvement in security guarantees for Ukraine
A long-term roadmap for post-war reconstruction and economic recovery
Zelensky has emphasized that the plan is designed to demonstrate flexibility
without surrendering territory outright. Any changes to Ukraine’s borders, he has
reiterated, must be approved by the Ukrainian people through a referendum, as
required by the country’s constitution.
Critically, the proposal does not explicitly rule out NATO membership, a major
departure from earlier drafts. Instead, Ukraine is seeking security guarantees that
would “mirror” NATO’s Article 5 collective defense clause, even if formal
membership remains off the table.
U.S. Security Guarantees Take Center Stage
One of the most sensitive issues in Sunday’s meeting will be the nature of U.S.
security guarantees for Ukraine. Zelensky has made clear that without credible
assurances, any peace deal risks becoming a temporary pause rather than a
lasting settlement.
According to Ukrainian officials, three additional documents accompany the 20-
point plan. These include:
A U.S.-Ukrainian-European framework outlining security guarantees
A U.S.-Ukrainian document detailing America’s military role in responding to
renewed Russian aggression
A “Roadmap for Ukraine’s Prosperity” focused on reconstruction and economic
development
Together, these documents aim to reassure Kyiv that peace will not come at the
cost of long-term vulnerability. For Trump, however, such guarantees raise difficult
questions about America’s future military commitments and financial obligations
—issues that resonate strongly with his domestic political base.
Russia’s Unyielding Position
While Ukraine has adjusted its stance, Moscow has shown little sign of compromise.
The Kremlin continues to demand full Ukrainian withdrawal from Donetsk and
Luhansk, abandonment of NATO aspirations, demilitarization of Ukraine, and
international recognition of Russia’s annexation of occupied territories, including
Crimea.
Russian officials have repeatedly insisted that any peace settlement must address
what they describe as the “root causes” of the war—namely NATO expansion and
alleged discrimination against Russian speakers in Ukraine. These demands
remain fundamentally incompatible with both the 20-point plan and earlier
proposals.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed that Russian officials have reviewed
the latest U.S.-Ukrainian proposals, but Moscow has not issued a formal response.
Russian lawmakers and insiders have criticized the plan for failing to ban
Ukrainian NATO membership and for including provisions related to joint
management of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.
Military Reality and Economic Pressure
Trump has pointed out that Russia’s economy is under severe strain, describing it
as being in “very tough shape.” Western sanctions, high military casualties, and
long-term economic isolation have taken a toll, even as the Kremlin maintains a
defiant public posture.
On the battlefield, Ukrainian forces have achieved notable successes in recent
weeks, particularly near Kupyansk. Even Kremlin-affiliated military bloggers have
acknowledged that Russian positions in the area have deteriorated, contradicting
official claims of progress. These developments add urgency to diplomatic efforts,
as both sides weigh the costs of continued fighting.
Europe Watches From the Sidelines
Notably, Sunday’s meeting is expected to exclude European leaders, despite the
war’s profound implications for the continent. While European officials have
expressed cautious optimism about the current U.S.-Ukraine dynamic, they also
recognize the unpredictability of negotiations led by Trump.
“There is no low-risk scenario with Trump,” one NATO official reportedly said. Still,
European governments are hopeful that progress in Florida could stabilize the
situation and prevent further escalation.
In preparation for the meeting, Zelensky has coordinated closely with leaders from
NATO, Canada, Germany, Finland, Denmark, and Estonia, signaling that Ukraine
does not intend to sideline its allies—even if the talks themselves are bilateral.
Trump’s Broader Diplomatic Weekend
Zelensky will not be the only world leader meeting Trump this weekend. Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is also expected to visit, reportedly to brief
Trump on the growing threat from Iran. Trump has framed these visits as evidence
that global leaders once again “respect our country.”
The convergence of high-level diplomacy underscores Trump’s desire to project
strength and influence on the world stage. From Ukraine to the Middle East, the
president is positioning himself as a central figure capable of reshaping
international outcomes.
Can the Meeting Deliver Real Progress?
Despite cautious optimism, both sides have tempered expectations. Zelensky has
said he cannot guarantee a firm agreement will emerge but hopes to “finalize as
much as we can.” Trump, for his part, has signaled openness to dialogue without
committing to any specific outcome.
The fundamental challenge remains clear: Ukraine is offering compromise, the
United States is demanding results, and Russia has yet to demonstrate meaningful
flexibility. Whether Trump’s personal diplomacy can bridge this gap is an open
question.
What is certain is that Sunday’s meeting could set the tone for the next phase of
the war—or its potential end. As the clock ticks toward the New Year, the world will
be watching Florida closely, aware that decisions made behind closed doors could
redefine Europe’s security landscape for decades to come.
