Ukraine negotiation in Washington

The President Volodimier Zelanski returned to the White House on Monday to meet US President Donald Trump to meet the fresh conversation with the aim of ending the war in Ukraine.

Several European leaders also re -formulated the schemes to fly to Washington to attend the meeting, a few days after Trump met Russia’s President Vladimir Putin for a summit in Alaska, which failed to result in ceasefire.

Despite Trump’s optimistic words and some more lukewarm assessment from his European colleagues, there was no concrete commitment to the security guarantee or concrete steps towards the peace deal until Monday evening.

Here are the major takeaairs from the talks.

One of the much awaited objectives of Trump is to organize a three-way meeting with Zelansky and Putin.

Prior to his conversation with European leaders on Monday, he said that it would now be “when, no” such a meeting.

After the summit, Trump said that he had called Putin to start a bilateral dialogue between the Russian leader and the Zelanceci to start a “system”.

Trump said that after a bilateral between Putin and Zelancesi, at the location to be determined, there would be a tripartite where the US President would join both.

An advisor to Putin later said that Trump and Putin spoke on the phone for 40 minutes on Monday.

Before European leaders sat with Trump in the East Room at the White House, a hot mike commented between American leader and French President Emmanuel Macron.

“I think he wants to make a deal. I think he wants to make a deal for me. You understand it? As crazy seems,” Trump appeared to refer to Putin, told Macron.

It remains to be seen how straightforward it would be to bring two such bitter enemies face to face on the conversation table for the first time after Russia’s entire attack started in February 2022.

For months, Zelansky is insisting on meeting Putin, although there is no indication that Ukrainian leaders thought that they could bring closer to ending such bilateral conflicts.

Instead, it was probably a way to prove its argument that Russia is not serious about pursuing peace, as he said that Putin was not interested in agreeing to such a meeting.

The Russian President has earlier stated that he considers Zelansky as “illegitimate” as there has been no election in Ukraine since the onset of the war between martial law.

The Kremlin has repeatedly rejected the idea of a Putin-Jalensky bilateral.

Two weeks ago, Moscow argued that Russian and Ukrainian presidents had no reason to find “after proper distance” between the posts of the two countries.

In a non -Bayan shared by Kremlin’s associate Yuri Usakov on Monday night, Moscow stated that it is considered “meaningful” from Russian and Ukrainian delegations from Russian and Ukrainian representatives to “detect the possibility of raising representatives”.

It is worth noting that the language of the Kremlin is much more unclear than Trump, and there is no suggestion that Putin herself can prepare to attend a bilateral meeting with Zelanceci – as much as Trump seems to be with the intention of bringing them together.

Even if such a meeting came about, it is also a question of what it can achieve when Russian and Ukrainian war demands to end.

In his comment with European leaders on Monday, the Trump seemed to dismiss the need for any ceasefire before the negotiation to end the war.

In the past, it has been a major demand for Ukraine, which clarified that it ends the fight as a condition for further interaction with Russia and finally, for a long -term disposal.

A ceasefire can also be modestly easier to agree with a complete peace deal, with several months of conversation, during which Russia’s attack on Ukraine will probably continue.

On Monday, Trump said six wars claim that they have helped stay since January – including Rwanda and Democratic Republic of Congo, Thailand -Kambodia and India -Pakistan conflict – first ended without any formal outline.

“I don’t know that it is necessary,” he said.

European leaders appeared to push back on this suggestion, which led to the strongest denial of German Chancellor Frederick Mars.

“I can’t imagine that the next meeting would be without a ceasefire,” Mars said. “So, let’s work on it and let’s try to put pressure on Russia.”

As things stand, it is not clear whether the government in Kiev is equally firm in its faith that a ceasefire is an essential step towards meaningful dialogue with Moscow.

When asked to speak, Zelancesi did not repeat his previous call for the ceasefire.

One of the questions mounted by Zelansky was what he needed from America to guarantee his country’s security. Was this soldier, intelligence, tool?

In a moment that expressed the feeling of urgency, which he tried to suppress a lot during the press conference, Zelancesi leaned to her chair and said, strongly: “Everything.”

“We need a strong Ukrainian army,” he said. “It is about weapons, people, training missions and intelligence.”

Trump did not give us military shoes on the ground.

But when he was asked by reporters whether American security guarantee for Ukraine could include any US Army in the country, Trump did not rule it.

He said that Europe was “the first line of defense”, but “we would join it.”

“We will give them good security,” the President said at one point.

This is the most deciding Trump, which is ever on the issue of security guarantee, which is usually seen as paramount for any deal with Russia.

On Monday, the US President said that during the last week’s United Summit, Putin admitted that there would be a security guarantee for Ukraine as part of any peace deal.

But the lack of expansion about these guarantee may be related to both Kiev and Europe, and the leaders of the closed doors will not try to influence Trump behind the leaders of the US should be more than just symbolic.

The continuous flow of weapons in Ukraine will be welcomed; A promise of American shoes on the ground will be even more resulting.

At this stage from Trump, at this stage, it can be difficult to achieve such commitment.

Deploying American troops on Ukrainian soil would mean the risk of direct confrontation with Russia.

This will also form a major direct intervention by a President, which has proud of its ability to separate the US from foreign conflicts.

Given his fierce final visit to the Oval Office in February, the Ukrainian President went to his American hosts in a long length for congenital and attraction – including a swing of six “thank you” within the first few minutes of the meeting.

The last time he was at the White House, Zelancesi was rebuked by JD Vance for lack of gratitude for American support for Ukraine during the war.

Another point of controversy – Zelanceci’s dress – also surfaced in the February meeting.

This time, Zelansky was wearing clothes in a dark suit instead of his traditional military dress, and was well prepared with a joke when his organization was asked by the same reporter who criticized him for not wearing a suit in the oval office last time.

The reporter told him that he looked “luxurious”, Zelansky shot back that the journalist was the last wearing “the same suit”, who was removing laughter from reporters, Trump and other officials in the room.

“As you see, I changed,” he said.

Zelancesi demanded a family relationship during the meeting, handing over a letter from Ukrainian First Lady Olena Zelanceca, which we were given to the first female Melania Trump.

“This is not for you – [it’s] To his wife, “he told Trump.

Other European leaders similarly decided to dial flattery before their multilateral meeting with Trump, who praise him for his work to bring him around the table.

NATO chief Mark Rute said, “I really want to thank you for your leadership.”

Italian PM Giorgia Meloni said that while there was no indication that Russia wanted to move towards peace “something changed for Trump” thanks.

Despite the hot tone, Europeans made a concrete effort to explain that they too are in contact with any future Russian aggression.

French President Emmanuel Macron told fellow leaders: “When we talk about security guarantee, we are also talking about the security of the European continent.”