Ukraine’s diplomatic crossroads: Between summits, sanctions, sticking points

In the span of just ten days, Ukraine has found itself at the epicenter of some of the most intense diplomatic maneuvering since Russia’s full-scale invasion more than three years ago. As The New York Times writes in its analisis, back-to-back summits involving US President Donald Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and a group of European leaders generated both headlines and fleeting optimism. Yet, beneath the photo opportunities and bold statements lies a stark reality: the war grinds on with no cease-fire in sight, while major political, military, and humanitarian sticking points remain unresolved.

Diplomacy without breakthroughs

The article underscores that neither the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska nor Zelenskyy’s subsequent meeting with Trump and European leaders in Washington produced a peace deal or even tangible momentum toward one. While Zelenskyy has repeatedly called for a direct meeting with Putin, framing it as the only realistic path to ending the war, Moscow continues to stonewall. 

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s comments on NBC’s Meet the Press, emphasising that no summit is planned and that even agreeing on an agenda would be difficult, illustrate just how entrenched positions remain.

On the US side, Trump has delegated the drafting of security guarantees for Ukraine to Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Yet this remains hypothetical at best, as the fighting rages and neither side appears willing to concede on core demands. What emerges is a picture of summitry as performance: the meetings highlight US leadership and Russia’s willingness to engage, but little substance is moving the conflict toward resolution.

Limits of pressure on Russia

Trump has tried to wield his trademark blend of threats and personal diplomacy. Earlier this summer, he gave Russia an ultimatum of “10 to 12 days” to end the war or face new sanctions, only to let the deadline pass without consequence. He has since floated the idea of “massive sanctions,” but his praise of Putin — even showing reporters a photograph the Russian leader sent him as a token of “honor and respect” — undermines the threat.

The United States has already imposed sweeping sanctions on Russian individuals and companies since 2022. Yet these have failed to cripple Russia’s war economy or halt its trade flows, especially with key partners like China and India.

Indeed, India has bluntly stated it will continue buying Russian oil, even if Washington imposes steep tariffs on its exports. The NYT highlights a crucial dilemma: sanctioning Russia more heavily could push global financial instability onto allies and emerging markets, raising questions about how far the US is truly willing to go.

While diplomats talk, soldiers continue to fight. Russia has managed to recapture its own Kursk Province and is pressing hard in the Donbas, particularly around Pokrovsk in Donetsk region. Ukraine, meanwhile, has managed to hold its fortress cities, which remain both strategically significant and politically symbolic for Kyiv.

The NYT stresses how the war has evolved into a grinding stalemate. Over the past year, little Ukrainian territory has changed hands, though Russia appears to hold the initiative. The growing dominance of drones — both for reconnaissance and strikes — has made troop movements riskier and deadlier, entrenching static front lines. Meanwhile, Moscow’s continued aerial bombardments of Ukrainian towns and cities reinforce the humanitarian toll of the war.

Even if both sides were to resume negotiations, the hurdles remain formidable, the article points out. Putin insists Ukraine cede all of Donbas, while Zelenskyy refuses to surrender territory that Kyiv has defended for years. NATO membership seen by Ukraine as the ultimate security guarantee remains a distant prospect.

Western powers such as France, Britain, and Estonia have floated the idea of deploying troops in a postwar Ukraine, while Trump has vaguely promised US involvement short of ground forces.

By contrast, Moscow wants the United Nations Security Council, where it holds veto power, to oversee any guarantees. This proposal is unsurprisingly unacceptable to Kyiv, which views Russian involvement in security arrangements as a direct threat to sovereignty.

Beyond territory and security, Ukraine is also demanding the return of some 20,000 children abducted and deported to Russia. The International Criminal Court’s arrest warrant for Putin over these abductions underscores the moral and legal gravity of the issue. Any peace deal that ignores such war crimes risks being politically untenable for Kyiv and its Western supporters.

For now, the battlefield, not the negotiating table, appears to dictate the pace of events, leaving Ukrainians caught in a grinding conflict with no clear exit on the horizon.

By Sabina Mammadli