Any peace settlement would have to keep Kyiv at the table, not on the sidelines
As Ukraine's war enters its fourth year, a quiet but consequential realignment is underway among the powers who shape its fate. Britain's Prime Minister Starmer has pledged ironclad support for Kyiv ahead of talks with Washington, insisting that any peace must be made with Ukraine, not merely about it. Sanctions are tightening even as summits are being planned, and the distance between diplomatic ambition and battlefield reality grows harder to ignore.
- Britain is moving to anchor Ukraine's voice in peace negotiations before Washington and Moscow can define the terms without Kyiv.
- The UK's largest sanctions package since the war began signals that economic pressure on Russia will intensify even as diplomatic doors crack open.
- A Trump-Putin summit is taking shape, with Russian officials confirming preparations for a direct meeting that could extend far beyond Ukraine itself.
- Zelenskyy is resisting American demands for mineral rights deals that offer economic concessions but no security guarantees — a line he is not yet willing to cross.
- On the ground, Russian forces continue to advance in Luhansk, and the map is shifting while diplomats debate the terms of a peace that has not yet arrived.
On the 1,096th day of the war in Ukraine, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer called Volodymyr Zelenskyy to deliver a pointed message: the UK stands with Ukraine, and any peace settlement must keep Kyiv at the table. Zelenskyy welcomed the call, praising British leadership and noting that the two governments had coordinated their diplomatic positions. The timing was deliberate — Starmer was preparing to meet Donald Trump, and London wanted Washington to understand that Ukraine's interests could not be sidelined in whatever deal the Americans might pursue.
Words were to be backed by action. Foreign Secretary David Lammy announced that Britain would unveil its largest sanctions package against Russia since the war's opening weeks, framing it as a moment to "turn the screws on Putin's Russia." Even as diplomatic channels widened, the economic vice on Moscow was being tightened rather than loosened. Starmer also spoke with EU chief Ursula von der Leyen about securing a just and lasting peace.
The diplomatic machinery was accelerating elsewhere too. Russian officials confirmed that a second meeting between American and Russian representatives was being planned, and that preparations for a direct Trump-Putin summit were underway — one potentially broad enough to encompass issues well beyond Ukraine. At the United Nations, Secretary of State Marco Rubio was pushing a US-drafted resolution on Ukraine that, notably, made no mention of Russian-occupied territories, putting Washington at odds with both Kyiv and Brussels.
Beneath the diplomacy lay a harder question: what would Ukraine actually receive in exchange for peace? Trump had demanded preferential American access to Ukraine's critical minerals as compensation for military aid. Zelenskyy was not ready to accept — the terms lacked security guarantees and struck him as punishing rather than protective. The White House urged him to stop complaining and sign. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reframed the proposal in the Financial Times as a mutual economic partnership, but the underlying structure — Ukrainian resource revenues flowing into a fund with American governance rights — remained contested.
Meanwhile, Russia claimed new territorial gains in Luhansk, and the battlefield arithmetic continued to move in Moscow's favor. As leaders negotiated in distant capitals, the map of Ukraine kept shifting — and the urgency of reaching any agreement before it shifted further grew harder to dismiss.
On Saturday, as the war in Ukraine entered its 1,096th day, Britain's prime minister signaled where his government would stand in the diplomatic scramble that now seemed inevitable. Keir Starmer called Volodymyr Zelenskyy to deliver a message: the UK would back Ukraine with what he called "ironclad support," and any peace settlement with Russia would have to keep Kyiv at the negotiating table, not on the sidelines.
Zelenskyy welcomed the call. In his evening address, he praised Britain for demonstrating "leadership" on the war and noted that the two leaders had "coordinated our positions and our diplomacy." The Ukrainian president said he appreciated that London remained "committed to maintaining leadership in protecting life and just normalcy." The timing mattered. Starmer was preparing to meet with Donald Trump in the coming days, and the message to Washington was clear: any deal the American president struck would need to account for Ukraine's interests, not just American ones.
Britain was preparing to back words with action. David Lammy, the foreign secretary, announced that London would unveil a major sanctions package against Russia on Monday—the largest since the war's opening weeks. "It is time to turn the screws on Putin's Russia," Lammy said. The move signaled that even as diplomatic channels opened, the economic pressure on Moscow would intensify rather than ease.
Meanwhile, the diplomatic machinery was accelerating on multiple fronts. Starmer also spoke with Ursula von der Leyen, the EU's chief executive, about securing "a just and enduring peace in Ukraine." In Moscow, Russian deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov told state media that a second meeting between Russian and American representatives was being planned for the next two weeks. More significantly, Ryabkov said preparations were underway for a direct summit between Trump and Putin—one that could range beyond Ukraine to encompass broader global issues. Putin himself weighed in on Sunday, posting a video in which he declared that meeting the needs of troops fighting in Ukraine and strengthening Russia's armed forces remained the country's "key strategic priorities."
The diplomatic jockeying extended to the United Nations. Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, was pushing UN members to approve an American-drafted resolution on Ukraine ahead of the war's third-anniversary commemoration on Monday. But the resolution, according to diplomats, conspicuously omitted any reference to territory Russia had occupied. The move put Washington at odds with both Ukraine and the European Union, who had spent the previous month negotiating their own draft text on the conflict.
Underlying these diplomatic maneuvers was a harder question: what would Ukraine actually get in return for peace? Trump had demanded that Kyiv provide the United States with preferential access to its critical minerals as compensation for American military aid. Zelenskyy, according to a Ukrainian source speaking to AFP, was "not ready" to accept such terms. The proposals lacked security guarantees for Ukraine and struck him as too harsh. The White House national security adviser had reportedly told Zelenskyy to "tone down" his complaints and simply sign the deal. Scott Bessent, the US treasury secretary, tried to reframe the arrangement in an opinion piece for the Financial Times, arguing that an economic partnership would benefit both countries. Under the American proposal, revenue Ukraine's government received from natural resources, infrastructure, and other assets would flow into a reconstruction fund, with the US retaining economic and governance rights over future investments.
On the ground, the war continued its grinding eastward momentum. Russia claimed its forces had captured the village of Novolyubivka in the Luhansk region, part of the territory Moscow had illegally annexed in 2022. The Ukrainian army still controlled a handful of towns in the region, but the territorial arithmetic was moving in Russia's favor. As the diplomatic conversations intensified in capitals across Europe and North America, the question hanging over all of it was whether any agreement could be reached before the map changed further.
Citações Notáveis
We have coordinated our positions and our diplomacy. We appreciate that the UK is committed to maintaining leadership in protecting life and just normalcy.— Volodymyr Zelenskyy, in his evening address
It is time to turn the screws on Putin's Russia.— David Lammy, UK foreign secretary
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why does Starmer's call matter right now? Isn't every leader already committed to Ukraine?
Because he's saying it publicly, to Trump, before Trump meets Putin. It's a signal that the UK won't let Ukraine get traded away in a backroom deal.
And the sanctions package—is that leverage or theater?
Both. Lammy's timing is deliberate. You announce the biggest sanctions since the war started just as peace talks are supposed to begin. It tells Putin: we're not softening.
What about this minerals deal Trump wants? Why is Zelenskyy resisting?
Because it looks like he's mortgaging Ukraine's future to pay for its present. If the US controls governance rights over reconstruction funds, they control Ukraine's rebuilding. That's not aid. That's a lien.
Is there any scenario where Zelenskyy accepts it?
Only if the security guarantees are ironclad—and right now they're not. He's watched what happened to countries that gave up leverage. He won't repeat it.
So peace talks are coming, but nobody actually agrees on what peace looks like?
Exactly. Starmer wants Ukraine at the table. Trump wants a deal. Putin wants territory. Zelenskyy wants security. Those aren't the same thing.