US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner traveled from Moscow to Kyiv over the weekend for talks with Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky, but three former US ambassadors to Ukraine said the meetings have yet to show that Moscow is ready to shift its position.
On Monday, according to Radio Liberty, US ex-ambassadors to Ukraine said that despite the renewed diplomatic activity, there is still little evidence that Moscow is ready to make a settlement.
Witkoff and Kushner met Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow before traveling to Kyiv to meet President Volodymyr Zelensky. Witkoff described the discussions as constructive and said the US had heard “new ideas” from Moscow, while Kushner referred to a broader “peace package.”
Zelensky called his talks with the US envoys “very substantial” and said Ukraine was ready to move toward trilateral negotiations involving Kyiv, Washington, and Moscow. National security advisers from Britain, France, and Germany also joined part of the Kyiv discussions.
The former ambassadors welcomed the renewed diplomatic effort but cautioned that increased activity should not be mistaken for actual progress.
William Taylor, who served twice as US ambassador to Ukraine, said the central obstacle remains Moscow rather than Kyiv or Washington. He said he had seen nothing to indicate that Putin had abandoned his maximalist demands.
John Herbst, a former US ambassador under President George W. Bush, called the current effort one of the most substantial US diplomatic initiatives in months, but said it remains unclear whether there is anything genuinely new behind it.
Geoffrey Pyatt, who served as US ambassador to Ukraine from 2013-16, likewise welcomed the renewed engagement while saying the fundamental issue is whether Russia is prepared to de-escalate.
What are Russia’s “new ideas”?
Witkoff’s claim that Moscow presented “new ideas” is one of the most closely watched elements of the weekend’s diplomacy. Neither he nor Kushner has publicly explained what those ideas involve.
For Taylor, the key test would be concrete military steps by Russia, including a cease-fire along the current front line, an end to long-range strikes and attacks on energy infrastructure, and arrangements covering shipping.
Without such measures, the language of new proposals could simply amount to a repackaging of Moscow’s existing demands.
The former ambassadors also stressed that previous suggestions of Russian willingness to compromise have often failed to produce concrete results, making the details of the latest talks particularly important.
A senior US administration official told Radio Liberty that Washington remains optimistic about another round of negotiations involving Russia and Ukraine.
The administration will assess the envoys’ meetings before deciding on the next steps, while the coming weeks could be used to develop a more detailed roadmap. The UN General Assembly could also provide an opportunity to continue the discussions.
Territory and security guarantees
Any potential peace deal would have to address two major unresolved issues: territory and Ukraine’s future security.
Russia continues to demand Ukrainian territorial concessions which Kyiv rejects, while Ukraine maintains that Russian-occupied territories remain sovereign Ukrainian land.
Taylor suggested that one possible approach could be to acknowledge Russia’s de facto control of roughly 19% of Ukraine without legally recognizing Russian sovereignty over those territories. Such an arrangement would effectively freeze the territorial dispute rather than resolve it.
However, Taylor said there is no indication that Putin is prepared to accept such a framework.
Herbst argued that Russia’s objectives go beyond territory, saying the Kremlin also seeks significant influence over Ukraine’s political direction – ambitions that would conflict with a settlement based on Ukrainian sovereignty and independence.
The two sides would also need to agree on security guarantees. Taylor said a credible arrangement could include European troops in Ukraine, supported by the US with air power, intelligence, and other capabilities. He also pointed to Ukraine’s eventual EU membership and, potentially, NATO membership as longer-term elements of its security.
For Kyiv, a cease-fire without credible deterrence could simply provide a pause before another Russian attack. At the same time, Moscow is likely to oppose Western security commitments that could strengthen Ukraine’s ability to defend itself.
Europe’s role grows
The participation of British, French, and German security advisers in the Kyiv talks signaled a greater European role in the diplomatic process.
Witkoff said their presence showed that cooperation would be critical to reaching a settlement. Taylor argued that European involvement is particularly important because European countries would likely play a major role in any security arrangement for Ukraine and remain among Kyiv’s biggest sources of financial and military support.
For now, however, European governments appear to be involved mainly in consultations rather than formal negotiations. Their role could expand depending on what Washington proposes and what Moscow is willing to accept.
The talks are also unfolding while fighting continues, creating an important test of the claimed diplomatic momentum. A failure by Russia and Ukraine to maintain even limited restraint during negotiations would make a broader cease-fire more difficult to achieve.
No clear signal from Moscow yet
Ukraine has already indicated that it is ready for another trilateral meeting with Russia and the US. Zelensky said Kyiv would do everything possible to make such talks happen.
But there is still no clear public indication that Putin has agreed to meet with Zelensky and the US president.
For Taylor, that is the immediate benchmark: Washington needs a clear “yes” from Putin that Moscow is prepared to enter such negotiations.
Herbst said the next few days will show whether concrete details from the Moscow and Kyiv meetings emerge and how the three sides respond to them.
Pyatt welcomed the renewed US diplomatic effort but said the fundamental obstacle remains Putin’s willingness to de-escalate and his understanding of what Ukrainians want for their country’s future.