Witkoff to Meet Zelensky and European Leaders in Berlin as Trump-Backed Ukraine Peace Plan Sparks Diplomatic Tensions
A high-stakes diplomatic gathering is set to unfold in Berlin this weekend, as U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff prepares to sit down with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and top European leaders to negotiate the contours of a U.S.-proposed peace plan for Ukraine. According to multiple reports citing informed sources, French President Emmanuel Macron, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz will all be present, an unusually unified front from Europe’s major powers, now facing intense pressure from Washington to bring Kyiv to the negotiating table.
The urgency of the meeting follows a reportedly tense phone call on Wednesday between U.S. President Donald Trump and the three European leaders, when Trump reportedly insisted that Macron, Starmer, and Merz use their leverage to pressure Zelensky into accepting a settlement framework that would require Ukraine to cede territories and significantly downsize its military capabilities. The proposal, insiders say, is not merely a ceasefire blueprint but a strategic recalibration of the European security order, one that aligns more closely with realist power politics than with the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity that have underpinned Western rhetoric since Russia’s 2022 SMO.
This push did not emerge in a vacuum. Just days earlier, Russian President Vladimir Putin hosted Witkoff and former senior White House advisor Jared Kushner in the Kremlin, a meeting that has raised eyebrows across Kyiv and Brussels. According to Kremlin statements, the U.S. representatives presented a 27-point peace proposal initially drafted in full, but now segmented into four distinct components for phased negotiation. Putin noted that this fragmentation appeared designed to extract incremental Russian buy-in while avoiding a comprehensive reckoning with core issues like Crimea or the status of Donbass.
For Zelensky, the Berlin meeting represents a perilous juncture. On one side stands a U.S. peace plan that demands territorial compromise, a nonstarter for a nation that has sacrificed over a million soldiers and civilians defending its right to exist within internationally recognized borders. On the other looms the risk of abandonment if he resists: Trump has repeatedly signaled that his potential return to the White House would mean an abrupt cutoff of military aid unless Ukraine “makes a deal.”
European leaders find themselves caught in the middle. Macron, long an advocate for “strategic autonomy,” now faces pressure to align with a U.S. vision that could undermine the EU’s own stance on Russian aggression. Starmer, must balance his party’s anti-war sentiments with Britain’s historic role as Kyiv’s staunchest European backer. And Merz, representing a Germany still reckoning with its post-Merkel security shift, must navigate public opposition to any outcome that rewards Russian conquest.
What makes this moment especially fraught is the timing. European governments in flux, the Ukraine war is being recast not as a moral imperative but as a transactional liability to be resolved before broader strategic priorities—particularly U.S.-China competition—demand Washington’s full attention. The proposed settlement, therefore, may be less about peace and more about clearing the deck.
Witkoff’s role is pivotal. A real estate investor with deep ties to Trump and Kushner, he lacks the formal credentials of a career diplomat, but that may be precisely why he was chosen. In an era where trust in institutions is low and backchannel deals carry more weight than public declarations, figures like Witkoff operate in the gray zone where outcomes are shaped away from cameras and parliamentary oversight.
As the delegations gather in Berlin, the world watches to see whether Ukraine’s sovereignty will be negotiated as a principle or bartered as a bargaining chip. The stakes extend far beyond the Donbas: they concern the future of alliance cohesion, the credibility of Western commitments, and whether great-power diplomacy will once again dictate the fate of smaller nations without their genuine consent.
One truth is becoming undeniable—peace, in this new dispensation, may not mean justice. And for millions of Ukrainians, that distinction could determine whether they ever return home.
