Global & US Headlines
Miami Peace Talks Conclude as Kremlin Dismisses Revised 20-Point Ukraine Plan
Three days of U.S.–brokered negotiations in Miami (19-21 Dec 2025) ended with a slimmed-down 20-point cease-fire blueprint, but Moscow immediately signaled the new European-Ukrainian amendments are ‘unacceptable,’ dashing hopes for a holiday breakthrough.
Focusing Facts
- The original 28-point U.S. proposal was pared to 20 points during the Miami sessions attended by U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, Ukraine’s Rustem Umerov, and Russia’s Kirill Dmitriev.
- Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov told reporters on 21 Dec that ‘most of the proposals will certainly not be acceptable to us,’ and no tri-lateral meeting is being prepared.
- On the same day, Kyiv accused Russian forces of abducting ~50 civilians from Hrabovske, Sumy region, underscoring continued hostilities despite the talks.
Context
Great-power “peace workshops” far from the front have precedent: the 1973 Paris Peace Accords for Vietnam formally ended U.S. involvement but did not stop the fighting, and the 1995 Dayton talks for Bosnia imposed an externally written map that still freezes politics today. The Miami round reflects two longer arcs: (1) Washington’s habit of drafting security compacts that outlive administrations—here, Trump’s team seeks a deal that cements U.S. leverage while limiting NATO exposure; (2) Moscow’s century-old tactic, from Brest-Litovsk in 1918 to Minsk II in 2015, of using negotiations to lock in battlefield gains. Whether this moment matters a century from now hinges on one question: does the 20-point outline morph into a durable security regime or dissolve like earlier cease-fire texts? If it fails, the precedent will reinforce a growing 21st-century pattern—protracted conflicts where great-power mediation produces paper agreements, not peace, while civilian harm and economic disruption (e.g., grain corridor through Odesa) grind on.
Perspectives
Mainstream Western news outlets
BBC, Bloomberg-syndicated U.S. papers — The Florida negotiations were “productive and constructive,” signalling cautious diplomatic momentum even as Russian attacks continue and no concrete breakthrough is in sight. By stressing the talks’ productivity and the U.S. role, these outlets may accentuate Washington’s peacemaker image and underplay how little actually changed on the ground.
Ukrainian advocacy media
Euromaidan Press — Moscow is merely using the Miami meetings to stall while pursuing maximalist war aims, so Western partners must not be fooled by Russia’s talk of peace. The outlet’s mission to sustain Western military aid encourages a portrayal of any diplomacy as Russian deception, minimising concessions Kyiv might eventually need to make.
Kremlin-sympathetic security/energy websites
GlobalSecurity.org, OilPrice.com — European and Ukrainian amendments are obstructing a U.S.–drafted plan that Russia is ready to accept, suggesting Moscow is the side genuinely committed to peace. Echoing Kremlin talking points about ‘liberated Donbas’ and blaming Kyiv shifts responsibility away from Russia’s aggression and frames concessions to Moscow as reasonable.