Global & US Headlines
Zelenskyy–Trump Mar-a-Lago Summit Narrows Ukraine Peace Plan to Final Two Territorial Points
Following their 29 Dec 2025 meeting in Florida, President Zelenskyy said Kyiv and Washington are 90 percent aligned on an 18-of-20-point draft deal with Moscow, leaving only the fate of occupied regions and security guarantees unresolved.
Focusing Facts
- Zelenskyy told Fox News on 30 Dec 2025 that 18 of 20 items in the draft accord were settled after the Mar-a-Lago talks.
- Trump offered a 15-year U.S. security guarantee; Zelenskyy publicly requested 30–50 years and foreign troops on Ukrainian soil.
- Zelenskyy reiterated that any withdrawal from Donetsk/Luhansk would require—and likely fail—a nationwide referendum under Ukrainian law.
Context
A major combatant announcing that a peace framework is 90 % complete evokes the 1995 Dayton shuttle diplomacy, where Bosnia’s war ended only after outside guarantors inked specifics on territory and policing. Yet, as with the 1994 Budapest Memorandum that Kyiv now deems worthless, the crux again is who will actually enforce post-war borders. Trump’s limited 15-year pledge and Lavrov’s threat to target EU troops expose the longer trend: great-power security promises have progressively shortened and grown more conditional since the Cold War’s close. In the century-scale view, this moment could either fix Ukraine inside a U.S.–led security perimeter—cementing the post-1991 order—or inaugurate a new norm where nuclear-armed states seize land and negotiate partial recognition. The talks matter because they test whether a middle-power, backed but not treaty-allied, can translate battlefield resilience into durable sovereignty without surrendering territory or sovereignty to spheres-of-influence politics.
Perspectives
Ukrainian national outlets
e.g., Українська правда, Interfax-Ukraine — They stress that most Ukrainians want peace but categorically oppose withdrawing troops or ceding Donbas and other occupied regions, portraying territorial integrity as the final red line in negotiations. Patriotic framing closely tracks President Zelenskyy’s messaging and may underplay the political or military pressures that could force Kyiv to compromise in order to sustain public morale and international backing.
U.S. conservative media
e.g., Fox News, The Daily Caller — Coverage presents a near-term peace as attainable largely thanks to Donald Trump’s mediation, while simultaneously spotlighting Ukrainian corruption scandals that could undermine continued U.S. aid. By amplifying Trump’s role and focusing on Kyiv’s graft, these outlets bolster a narrative favourable to the former president and his sceptical base, potentially minimizing Moscow’s intransigence and the human cost of Russian occupation.
European and international centrist outlets
e.g., Deutsche Welle, Economic Times/Syndicated New York Times, Sky News — They cast the peace process as stalled by Russia’s hard-line demands and the thorny question of long-term security guarantees for Ukraine, warning that major obstacles remain despite diplomatic fanfare. This lens, cautious and security-focused, can skew toward highlighting difficulties and doubting U.S. leadership—especially Trump’s—thus risking a tone of fatalism that may discount incremental diplomatic progress cited by negotiators.