A bold claim opens this piece: the world’s time is being wasted, according to Ukraine, as new talks in Moscow between the United States and Russia fail to move toward a concrete breakthrough. The Ukrainian foreign minister, Andrii Sybiha, accused Vladimir Putin of wasting global time and warned that if bloodshed continues and if Putin again disrespects international opinion, there must be consequences.
Yet Sybiha also reported that the U.S. delegation described the talks as having positive significance for the peace process and invited Ukrainian officials to continue discussions in the United States soon.
On the sidelines, President Trump’s special envoy Steve Biegun and Jared Kushner spent nearly five hours with Putin at the Kremlin. The White House said they updated Trump on a thorough, productive meeting the following day. The talks came after several days of U.S. meetings with Ukrainian and European leaders, amid concerns that any deal might tilt too far toward Moscow’s demands.
So far, the Kremlin talks have produced little progress in aligning Moscow’s and Kyiv’s positions. Yuri Ushakov, a senior Russian policy adviser, suggested there was no workable compromise yet on ending the war. He said some U.S. proposals looked broadly acceptable and warrant further discussion, while others drew outright criticism from Moscow’s leadership.
Two major sticking points remain: the fate of Ukrainian territory seized by Russia and the security guarantees Ukraine seeks. Kyiv and its European partners argue that even with a peace accord, Ukraine’s NATO membership is the strongest deterrent against future aggression. Russia strongly opposes NATO expansion, and former President Trump has also signaled reluctance to admit Kyiv.
The Kremlin described NATO membership as a key issue addressed in Moscow on Wednesday. Ushakov implied that recent battlefield gains have strengthened Moscow’s negotiating position by influencing foreign partners’ views on potential peace terms.
Ahead of the U.S. visit, Putin appeared in military fatigues at a Russian command post, depicted as receiving updates from commanders about advances in Pokrovsk and other nearby towns. While fighting in Pokrovsk continues and Russian control remains partial, officials argue that the messaging of military progress is resonating in Washington.
Across the east, Russian forces have made incremental advances and appear to have stepped up operations recently. Estimates from the Institute for the Study of War, summarized by AFP, indicate Russia had gained roughly 701 square kilometers (about 270 square miles) in November, placing control at around 19.3% of Ukrainian territory.
Putin signaled willingness to meet with the Americans as often as needed, even as relations between Moscow and Washington appear to soften. Meanwhile, Moscow’s broader relationship with Europe is growing more strained. Putin accused Europe of obstructing dialogue with the U.S., rejecting Moscow’s terms, and undermining the peace process. In Moscow, he told a recent forum that although he does not seek conflict with Europe, he is prepared for war.
UK officials dismissed Putin’s rhetoric as further Kremlin theatrics, noting that it does not reflect a sincere commitment to peace. NATO foreign ministers met in Brussels, where the alliance stressed the importance of keeping Ukraine strong in any peace process. Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg emphasized that Ukraine must be in a position to sustain its resistance while negotiations continue.
In parallel, Europe is pursuing energy independence from Moscow. European Union nations have reached an agreement to end reliance on Russian gas by 2027, aiming to ban long-term gas contracts with Russia by September 2027 and long-term LNG contracts by January 2027. EU leadership framed this as a turning point toward greater energy security and resilience for Europe, insisting that no more market manipulation by Moscow will be tolerated.
The European Commission also proposed raising €90 billion to finance Ukraine’s military and basic services during ongoing hostilities. The plan contemplates funding through either Belgium’s approval of a reparations loan backed by frozen Russian assets held in Brussels or through international borrowing. Ukraine’s Prime Minister, Yulia Svyrydenko, welcomed the plan as meeting two-thirds of Kyiv’s financing needs for the next two years. Belgium has raised concerns about legal consequences and potential repercussions from Moscow, while the European Central Bank has reservations about acting as a backstop for a reparations loan. The loan size is smaller than an initial €140 billion figure, and German officials voiced cautious support while acknowledging Belgium’s concerns.
These developments illustrate a complex mix of war dynamics, diplomatic maneuvering, and strategic energy realignments shaping expectations for peace negotiations. The looming question remains: will any agreement endure once skeptical capitals weigh in, and what will it take for both sides to commit to a durable and verifiable settlement?
