As US President Donald Trump held separate discussions with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, a senior Kremlin official offered rare public praise for Washington’s efforts to bring the Russia-Ukraine war to an end. Kirill Dmitriev, President Putin’s special envoy for investment and international economic cooperation, said global opinion appeared to be leaning in favour of Trump’s approach to resolving the conflict, following the American leader’s recent diplomatic engagements linked to the peace process.
Dmitriev made the remarks shortly after Trump held a phone call with Putin and later met Zelenskyy at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida. In a post shared early Monday, he said the international community appreciated what he described as Trump’s proactive role in pushing for peace. His comments stood out as an unusually positive assessment from a senior Russian official regarding US involvement in the conflict.
Trump had announced his conversation with Putin on social media, noting that it took place shortly before his meeting with the Ukrainian president. The meeting with Zelenskyy, which was open to the press, focused on efforts to narrow differences and move closer to a negotiated settlement. Both leaders later indicated that progress had been made, although several key issues remained unresolved.
Speaking after the talks, Trump said negotiations were advancing and suggested that the two sides were nearing an agreement. He described the process as being “very close,” though he acknowledged that certain complex matters would require more time. Zelenskyy echoed the cautious optimism, saying that discussions on security guarantees had advanced, though full clarity was yet to be achieved.
One of the central sticking points remains the future of eastern Ukraine, particularly the Donbas region. Trump confirmed that the issue had not yet been resolved, calling it one of the most difficult aspects of the negotiations. Zelenskyy has resisted proposals that would require Ukraine to withdraw fully from the region, a long-standing demand from Moscow. While Trump suggested that compromises were being explored, he acknowledged that no final agreement had been reached.
Trump also addressed questions about Russia’s intentions, especially in light of continued military activity. Asked whether recent Russian strikes indicated a lack of seriousness about peace, he dismissed that view, saying he believed Putin was genuinely interested in ending the conflict. He added that Ukraine, too, had carried out significant military actions, implying that both sides were operating under intense pressure.
The discussions took place against the backdrop of intensified fighting, with Russia launching large-scale missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities, including Kyiv, in recent days. The strikes damaged energy infrastructure and heightened concerns about civilian suffering as winter conditions worsened.
Territorial control remains the core issue dividing the two sides. Russia claims sovereignty over Crimea and large parts of eastern and southern Ukraine, including areas in Donbas, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson. Moscow insists that any peace agreement must involve Ukraine relinquishing claims to these territories and abandoning its aspirations to join NATO. Kyiv, however, has firmly rejected these conditions, proposing instead that current frontlines be frozen while negotiations continue.
US officials have reportedly explored compromise frameworks, including proposals involving shared administration of critical infrastructure such as the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and the creation of special economic arrangements in contested regions. However, these ideas remain tentative, and significant gaps persist between the positions of Moscow and Kyiv.
Despite these challenges, the recent round of diplomacy has injected cautious optimism into a conflict that has dragged on for nearly four years. With Trump positioning himself as a central mediator and both sides engaging in dialogue, the coming weeks are expected to be crucial in determining whether the war can move toward a negotiated settlement or remain locked in prolonged confrontation.
