Zelensky has nothing until I approve it. So we'll see what he brings.
Zelensky presents a 20-point peace plan developed through US-Ukraine negotiations, though Russia has not endorsed it and the proposal involves potential territorial concessions. A massive Russian attack on Kyiv with 500 drones and 40 missiles killed two and left hundreds of thousands without power, occurring just before the Trump-Zelensky meeting.
- 20-point peace plan developed through US-Ukraine negotiations, not endorsed by Russia
- Russian attack on Kyiv: 500 drones and 40 missiles, 2 killed, hundreds of thousands without power
- First Trump-Zelensky meeting since October; scheduled for 1 p.m. at Mar-a-Lago on December 28
- Plan proposes freezing conflict at current lines with demilitarized zones; Ukraine retains 20% of Donetsk
- Canada pledged $1.82 billion in reconstruction assistance; EU leaders confirmed support
Ukrainian President Zelensky meets Trump in Florida to secure approval for a 20-point peace proposal to end the Russia conflict, following a major Russian missile and drone attack on Kyiv.
Volodimir Zelensky arrived in Florida on Sunday, December 28, carrying a twenty-point peace proposal that had taken weeks of intense negotiation between Washington and Kyiv to assemble. He was scheduled to meet Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago at one o'clock in the afternoon, hoping to secure the American president's blessing for a plan that might finally end nearly four years of war with Russia. The timing was grim: just hours before the meeting, Russian forces had unleashed five hundred drones and forty missiles against Kyiv, killing two people, wounding dozens more, and plunging hundreds of thousands of residents into darkness as winter cold settled over the capital.
The plan Zelensky was bringing represented the most explicit acknowledgment yet from Ukraine that territorial concessions might be necessary to achieve peace. It proposed freezing the conflict along current front lines and establishing demilitarized zones—a framework that would likely require Ukrainian forces to withdraw from parts of the east. But it stopped short of Moscow's primary demand: Ukraine would retain control of twenty percent of the Donetsk region in the east, the territory Russia most coveted. Moscow had not endorsed the proposal. Neither, as of Friday, had Trump, who told Politico bluntly: "Zelensky has nothing until I approve it. So we'll see what he brings."
Zelensky had stopped in Halifax the day before, where he told reporters he expected the Florida conversation to be "very constructive." He framed the latest Russian bombardment as evidence that Putin did not want peace, that the attack was Moscow's response to Ukrainian peace efforts. "The attack is, once again, Russia's answer to our efforts for peace," he said. "It really showed that Putin does not want peace, and we do want peace." European leaders—Ursula von der Leyen and António Costa from the EU, along with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz—had gathered by teleconference to affirm their "full support" for the peace initiative and pledge that the bloc would maintain pressure on the Kremlin to accept a deal. Russia's foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, countered in an interview to the Tass agency that the European Union had become "the main obstacle to peace."
Trump had made ending the wars in Ukraine and Gaza the centerpiece of his second term, styling himself the "president of peace." But the Ukrainian conflict had proven far more intractable than he anticipated, and he had made little effort to hide his frustration with both sides for refusing to agree to a ceasefire. The war had devastated large swaths of eastern and southern Ukraine since Putin ordered the invasion in February 2022, killing tens of thousands.
Security guarantees emerged as a central concern for Zelensky heading into the meeting. He emphasized in Halifax that such guarantees would need to come simultaneously with any end to fighting. "Security guarantees must be simultaneous with the end of the war, because we need to have confidence that Russia will not resume aggression," he said. "We need solid security guarantees. We will discuss this and discuss the conditions." Ukraine was also pressing for increased Western military and financial support—particularly drones—to strengthen its negotiating position and prepare for potential renewed conflict.
Canada had already signaled its commitment, with Prime Minister Mark Carney announcing 2.5 billion Canadian dollars (roughly 1.82 billion US dollars) in new economic assistance for Ukrainian reconstruction. The scale of the Russian attack that preceded Zelensky's journey underscored the stakes. The bombardment on the night of Friday into Saturday had targeted Kyiv's infrastructure with precision, leaving the capital's residents without electricity and heat as temperatures dropped. Hundreds of thousands were affected. The attack appeared designed to demonstrate Russian resolve just as Zelensky prepared to negotiate away territory.
This was the first face-to-face meeting between the two presidents since October, when Trump had refused Zelensky's request for long-range Tomahawk missiles. What emerged from Mar-a-Lago would shape not only Ukraine's immediate future but also Trump's claim to be a peacemaker—and whether the war that had consumed nearly four years would finally move toward resolution or deepen further into stalemate.
Notable Quotes
The attack is, once again, Russia's answer to our efforts for peace. It really showed that Putin does not want peace, and we do want peace.— Volodimir Zelensky, in Halifax
Security guarantees must be simultaneous with the end of the war, because we need to have confidence that Russia will not resume aggression.— Volodimir Zelensky
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does Trump's approval matter so much if the plan is already negotiated between Washington and Kyiv?
Because Trump controls the resources and the diplomatic weight. Without his backing, the proposal has no enforcement mechanism, no guarantee of American military or financial support, and no leverage to pressure Russia. Zelensky needs Trump to believe in the plan enough to stake his presidency on it.
The Russians haven't endorsed this plan. So what's the point of Zelensky bringing it to Trump if Moscow will likely reject it anyway?
It's about creating a credible offer that the West can point to—proof that Ukraine tried. If Russia refuses, it shifts the narrative. It also gives Trump something to work with diplomatically. He wants to be seen as the peacemaker, and a rejected Ukrainian proposal makes Russia look intransigent.
The timing of that Russian attack—five hundred drones and forty missiles—seems deliberately provocative. Was it meant to undermine the negotiations?
Almost certainly. It's a message from Putin: we're still strong, we're still fighting, and we won't be pressured into accepting terms we don't like. It also tests Trump's resolve. If he flinches at Russian aggression, it signals weakness in negotiations.
Zelensky is offering territorial concessions. Isn't that a massive shift for Ukraine?
It is. But after nearly four years of war, with tens of thousands dead and cities destroyed, the calculus changes. Zelensky is essentially saying: we can't win militarily, so let's freeze the conflict and rebuild. The question is whether Trump will use that concession to pressure Russia or simply accept it as the final settlement.
What does "security guarantees" actually mean in this context?
It means Ukraine wants binding commitments—likely from NATO members or the US directly—that if Russia attacks again, there will be immediate military response. Without that, any ceasefire is just a pause before the next invasion. Zelensky is saying: I'll give up territory, but I need insurance that you won't come back for the rest.
Trump said Zelensky "has nothing until I approve it." That's a strange way to frame a negotiation between allies.
It reveals the power dynamic. Trump sees himself as the arbiter, not a partner. He's signaling that he controls the outcome, that Zelensky's leverage is limited, and that Trump will decide what's acceptable. It's transactional rather than alliance-based.