For a long time, Kyiv found itself stuck in a cycle of peace talks with Moscow, negotiations they never truly expected to succeed. Despite their doubts, Ukraine participated in numerous meetings with American and Russian officials, driven by President Trump’s desire for a diplomatic resolution. Yet, these discussions consistently failed to produce any meaningful outcomes.
However, as President Trump’s patience wears thin with Moscow’s unwavering refusal to compromise or even agree to a cease-fire, Kyiv senses a crucial opportunity. Ukraine is now advocating for a clear shift in strategy: fewer diplomatic discussions and a greater supply of advanced weaponry. Their aim is to enable deeper strikes within Russia and impose harsher sanctions, believing these measures will compel Moscow to seriously negotiate an end to the conflict.
This Tuesday marks the start of a multi-day visit to Washington by a high-ranking Ukrainian delegation. Their agenda is to finalize agreements for purchasing American weapons capable of striking far into Russian territory and fortifying Ukraine’s air defenses. Following this, President Volodymyr Zelensky himself is expected at the White House on Friday, potentially to seal these deals. He has been a vocal proponent of acquiring American Tomahawk cruise missiles, which would significantly enhance Ukraine’s long-range strike capabilities.
On Sunday, while aboard Air Force One, Mr. Trump suggested he might leverage the threat of providing these potent Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine as a way to pressure Russian President Vladimir V. Putin into ending hostilities. “I might say, ‘Look, if this war is not going to get settled, I’m going to send them Tomahawks,’” Mr. Trump stated.
Despite the enthusiasm, many experts remain skeptical that Tomahawk missiles would fundamentally alter the conflict. These missiles are typically deployed from naval vessels, which Ukraine’s military largely lacks. Furthermore, the U.S. possesses a finite number of ground-based launchers. Russian President Putin has publicly expressed that he doesn’t anticipate Washington providing these missiles to Ukraine, while simultaneously cautioning against such an escalatory move.
Nevertheless, observers note that the Trump administration’s readiness to even discuss the provision and deployment of such advanced weaponry represents a significant departure from the previous Biden administration’s firm refusal, signaling a new direction in Washington’s strategy to conclude the war.
Sergiy Solodkyy, director of the Kyiv-based New Europe Center think tank, commented that ‘diplomatic efforts and peace negotiations dominated public discussions for an extended period, and Ukraine’s attempts to shift this narrative often met with a lack of understanding from its allies, particularly Washington.’ He added, ‘Now, it appears we are finally speaking the same language.’
Ukraine believes that by conducting strikes on economic targets like oil facilities and military production sites within Russia, they can significantly increase the cost of the war for Moscow. This pressure, Kyiv hopes, will ultimately force Russia to seek a genuine settlement. President Trump has endorsed this aggressive stance, encouraging Ukraine earlier this summer to ‘play offensive’ instead of solely focusing on defense.
Over the weekend, Mr. Trump and Mr. Zelensky engaged in consecutive phone calls, which the Ukrainian president characterized as “very productive” for advancing weapon acquisition efforts. When questioned on Monday about a potential meeting with Mr. Zelensky on Friday, Mr. Trump responded, ‘I think so, yeah.’
According to Mr. Zelensky, the Ukrainian delegation in Washington is slated to negotiate the procurement of air defense systems and a range of missile technologies, alongside the highly sought-after Tomahawks. He revealed earlier that Ukraine had compiled a list of desired U.S. weapons, intended for purchase with European funding, totaling approximately $90 billion.
Furthermore, the delegation plans to explore agreements for selling Ukrainian-manufactured drones to the U.S. and initiating collaborative drone production ventures.
Kyiv’s strategic focus on forging direct deals with Washington highlights its adaptation to Mr. Trump’s transactional approach. While the Biden administration provided substantial financial aid to Ukraine, the Trump administration has prioritized profitable ventures through investments and arms sales. Mr. Zelensky, in turn, has adopted this business-oriented rhetoric, labeling the proposed purchase of air defenses and missiles a ‘mega deal.’
The Ukrainian delegation is led by Prime Minister Yuliia Svyrydenko, who brings previous experience in negotiations with the Trump administration. Earlier this spring, she successfully brokered a significant agreement granting the U.S. preferential access to Ukraine’s valuable mineral resources.
Analysts suggest that Washington’s pivot from traditional peace talks to Kyiv’s preferred confrontational strategy is primarily a reaction to Moscow’s consistent refusal to negotiate, coupled with an escalation of lethal attacks. President Trump, who once lauded Mr. Putin, noticeably altered his stance this summer, remarking that the Russian leader ‘talks nice and then he bombs everybody in the evening.’
This strategic change also highlights Ukraine’s deliberate efforts to present itself to Mr. Trump as the more rational and willing partner for negotiations. In recent months, as Mr. Trump pushed for peace, Kyiv readily agreed to his terms. These included a cease-fire, which Ukraine had previously resisted due to fears that Russia would use such a pause to regroup for further assaults. Ukraine also assented to Mr. Trump’s proposal for a trilateral meeting involving Mr. Zelensky, Mr. Putin, and himself.
The underlying objective was to demonstrate Ukraine’s genuine commitment to finding a resolution, in stark contrast to Russia’s unwillingness. True to form, Moscow rejected both the implementation of a cease-fire and attendance at the proposed trilateral summit.
Oleksandr Kraeiv, who leads the North America Program at the Ukrainian Prism research institute, stated, ‘Supporting Ukraine could yield much faster and superior results for Trump compared to backing someone who is neither prepared nor inclined to negotiate.’
Furthermore, analysts suggest that Kyiv aimed to counter Mr. Trump’s perception that Russia, despite its slow progress, held an undeniable advantage on the battlefield and was destined to win the war. Moscow had leveraged this narrative of inevitability to pressure Kyiv into accepting a peace deal that would involve ceding territory. Initially, Mr. Trump appeared to endorse the idea of Ukraine relinquishing land to end the conflict.
During an Oval Office meeting in August, Mr. Zelensky effectively highlighted Russia’s limited territorial gains by referencing a battlefield map prepared by White House staff. Sergiy Kyslytsya, Ukraine’s first deputy foreign minister, who was present, noted this key moment.
Mr. Zelensky underscored that a significant portion of the Ukrainian land currently under Russian control had actually been occupied prior to Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, specifically after Moscow illegally annexed Crimea and instigated an insurgency in eastern Ukraine. He pointed out that over the preceding 1,000 days of the conflict, Russia’s additional territorial gains amounted to less than one percent of Ukraine’s total landmass.
Mr. Kyslytsya observed that both Mr. Trump and his advisors paid close attention. Significantly, the American president did not reintroduce his previous suggestions that Kyiv might need to cede territory to achieve a peace settlement during that meeting.
It’s uncertain whether Mr. Zelensky’s presentation directly influenced Mr. Trump’s perspective on the war. However, in a surprising turn last month, Mr. Trump declared on social media that Ukraine, bolstered by European support, was ‘in a position to fight and WIN all of Ukraine back in its original form.’”
Although Ukrainian officials have long conceded that a full recapture of all occupied territories through military force alone is unlikely, Mr. Trump’s statement significantly strengthened their calls for increased armament. Kyiv maintains that, despite ongoing discussions about Western security guarantees, only a substantial military enhancement can truly compel Russia to halt its aggression and prevent future invasions.
A day after Mr. Trump’s unexpected declaration, Mr. Zelensky addressed the United Nations General Assembly, stating, “There are no security guarantees except friends and weapons.” He emphasized, “If a nation wants peace, it still has to work on weapons. It’s sick, but that’s the reality. Not international law, not cooperation — weapons decide who survives.”