Kathrine Frich
High-level diplomacy around Ukraine is accelerating as 2025 draws to a close.
But a growing chorus of critics argues the latest push risks blurring the line between aggressor and victim.
The warning follows a fresh round of talks involving the United States, Ukraine and Russia.
Criticism after meeting
Donald Trump has been accused of pursuing “profoundly naive” diplomacy after his latest meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Florida.
Yuriy Boyechko, CEO and founder of the aid group Hope for Ukraine, said Trump’s approach could legitimize Vladimir Putin’s actions and push Kyiv toward damaging concessions.
The meeting at Mar-a-Lago was billed as an effort to advance a deal to end Russia’s nearly four-year invasion.
Boyechko said the sequencing of Trump’s contacts was troubling after the U.S. president described a “good and very productive” call with Putin shortly before seeing Zelensky, and planned another call afterwards.
“This treats Putin as a co-partner whose approval is needed, signalling to Kyiv that peace will come on Moscow’s terms, not international law,” Boyechko said.
Putin ‘generous’ claim
Concerns intensified after comments Trump made publicly about Putin’s intentions.
Boyechko said Trump’s portrayal of the Russian leader as wanting to end the war and being “very generous” about Ukraine’s future echoed Kremlin narratives.
Boyechko dismissed the idea that Russia would support Ukraine’s recovery as unrealistic.
“The idea that Putin who is the architect of Europe’s largest land grab since World War II, now seeks to benevolently rebuild Ukraine is absurd,” he said.
He pointed to recent Russian attacks, saying Ukraine had faced hundreds of drones and missiles in strikes that disrupted electricity in freezing conditions.
Pressure on Kyiv
Trump has repeatedly pushed for a swift agreement, suggesting Ukraine risks losing more territory if the war drags on.
Boyechko warned that such framing could pressure Kyiv into accepting unfavorable terms, particularly over the Donbas region.
He argued that this dynamic rewards aggression and weakens the security guarantees Ukraine says it needs.
He said the approach risks burdening Kyiv with concessions while allowing Moscow to keep what it has gained.
Boyechko said real mediation must recognize Russia’s war aims rather than treat Putin as a sincere negotiating partner.
Optimism and gaps
Both leaders have publicly signaled optimism.
Trump said the process was “a lot closer, maybe very close,” while Zelensky described the talks as “great” and suggested security guarantees were nearing agreement.
Key points still remain unresolved, including Donbas and how any ceasefire would be structured.
Boyechko said that without clear Russian concessions, the diplomacy risks becoming what he views as appeasement.
“A process premised on Putin as sincere partner is doomed,” he said. “It ignores his imperial goals, letting Moscow dictate terms and entrench gains.”
Sources: Daily Express, Hope for Ukraine
