Correspondence, London
The President of , , wrapped up a day of high-level talks in with the leaders of Europe’s three main Western military powers, as concerns grow on the continent about pressure from Washington on Kiev to accept a peace deal with Moscow.
The Downing Street meeting brought together President Zelensky and the leaders of what has been described as the “Coalition of the Willing”: British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron and the German Chancellor.
Meanwhile, European leaders are increasingly concerned that recent US proposals risk conceding too much to the Kremlin.
The three leaders appear to have agreed to step up work on long-term security guarantees for Kiev—though, as has been the case for several weeks, no concrete plans have yet emerged.
Tension over US Peace Promotion
The talks came against a backdrop of growing friction with Washington.
On Sunday, former President Donald Trump claimed that .
US negotiators have held parallel talks with both Ukrainian and Russian officials in recent weeks, including meetings in Miami and Moscow.
European leaders have been cautious but clearly sceptical. Ahead of the meeting in London, Chancellor Mertz was briefly caught on camera remarking that he was “skeptical about certain details” in the documents being circulated by the US side, but did not specify which provisions were of concern.
Officials privately argue that Washington’s plan leans heavily toward terms favorable to Russia—terms unlikely to be accepted by Kiev.
President Macron, meanwhile, set out one of the clearest European positions, – and argued that Europe still “holds some of the cards” in any negotiations.
Key Issues in Negotiations
Speaking to BIMA, Leonid Litra, Visiting Research Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said he sees the meeting in London as part of a wider effort by Europe to maintain strategic coherence.
“I believe this was a normal coordination meeting ahead of another round of negotiations. The “E3″ countries – UK, France and Germany – are at the core of European efforts to help Ukraine achieve a just and lasting peace,” explained Litra.
“The meeting focused on how to move the negotiations forward while maintaining Ukraine’s sovereignty and securing guarantees from the US and perhaps the EU.”
Litra noted that critical issues remain unresolved between Moscow and Kiev and that the meeting in London is likely aimed at improving coordination ahead of the next diplomatic phase.
But he also warned that the biggest obstacle lies in Washington’s approach:
“The biggest problem is that the US puts more pressure on the victim country than the aggressor. President Trump is pressuring Ukraine to make concessions instead of pressuring Russia. That’s the biggest problem.”
According to Litra, the American plan contains several problematic elements:
1. Territorial Concessions
Russia demands the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from the Donbas region.
“President Zelensky will not be able to do it. It would violate the Constitution and there is no reason for Ukraine to give up territory it still controls.”
2. Neutrality of Ukraine
Moscow wants Kiev to opt out of future NATO membership.
“This argument cannot stand. Russia started the war in 2014 when Ukraine was still a neutral state.”
3. Restrictions on the Armed Forces of Ukraine
The US plan reportedly includes provisions that limit Ukraine’s military capabilities.
“This is a matter of sovereignty. You can’t say that Ukraine will remain sovereign but it can’t decide about its army, NATO and many other things. This is not sovereignty—it is enforced doctrine.”
4. Implicit Warranties of Security
The US insists that Ukraine will receive Article 5-like protections, but the details remain unclear.
“If you agree a plan without clear steps to prevent another war, then the deal doesn’t work.”
Zelensky Emphasizes Europe-US Unity
Speaking before his trip to Brussels, Zelensky stressed that cohesion between Ukraine, Europe and the United States remains irreplaceable.
“The unity between Europe and Ukraine, and also between Ukraine and the United States, is something we cannot manage without it,” he said. “We have some important decisions to make.”
Prime Minister Starmer echoed these views, reiterating key principles: any settlement must start from Ukraine’s interests, include a ceasefire and be “fair and lasting”. The UK, he said, was committed to supporting Kiev both “in the conflict and in the negotiations”.
Europe’s Role Under Review
With Zelensky scheduled to meet with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen later today, questions remain about Europe’s ability to influence the peace process – and whether it is being sidelined.
Some analysts argue that the Trump administration sees Europe’s involvement as an obstacle to a quick fix.
In this view, Washington seeks to “move on” from the war in Ukraine, improve relations with Moscow, and is willing to do so even at significant cost to Kiev.
But European officials insist their continued involvement is vital to prevent Kiev from being pushed into a settlement that could undermine its long-term security.
Basic Thorns
Despite the diplomatic movement, there is little sign that the key obstacles to a peace deal have changed.
Russia continues to claim the entire Donbas region and already controls over 70% of Donetsk province.
Ukraine refuses to cede the remaining territories.
Another critical issue is the nature of Ukraine’s post-conflict insurance arrangements.
Kiev argues that “security guarantees” alone are insufficient. Instead, Ukraine wants a strong military capability supported by the West.
NATO membership remains a long-term goal of Kiev, but both the US and Germany have effectively ruled out that possibility for now.
Moscow has also made it clear that it will not accept foreign forces, even under UN auspices, on Ukrainian soil.
These entrenched positions leave the peace talks largely symbolic, serving the purpose of political support for Zelensky despite no sign of immediate progress.
Debate on Frozen Russian Assets
A further unresolved question concerns whether Europe should liberalize.
About €200 billion in Russian state and central bank funds have been frozen since the full-scale invasion in February 2022.
So far, European states have only agreed to transfer the interest generated by these deposits.
Some governments, notably Belgium, are reluctant to seize the principal sum, citing fears of legal challenges and the risk of setting a precedent that could discourage foreign investment. Others argue that Kiev urgently needs the money to support the war and stabilize the economy.
Ukrainian experts say access to the full amount could cover critical budget gaps for up to two years. The debate has intensified amid concerns that the US, frustrated by Kiev’s reluctance to accept the current peace terms, may cut back on support – a possibility that would force Europe to shoulder a greater burden of military and financial support for Ukraine.
Uncertain Future
For now, European leaders seem determined to show both Washington and Moscow that Ukraine is not isolated. But with fundamental disagreements remaining unresolved over territorial sovereignty, security arrangements and long-term Western support, the talks in London highlight the widening gap between American assertiveness and European attention.
As Zelensky arrives in Brussels for another round of diplomacy, the tough question remains: Can Europe forge a coherent strategy to support Ukraine while dealing with the shifting priorities of its strongest ally?
