US-Ukraine peace talks downgraded amid Rubio cancellation and territorial tensions

US-Ukraine peace efforts hit snag as proposals on Crimea, NATO membership and sanctions divide allies.

Ukrainian service members from the 25th Sicheslav Airborne Brigade fire a BM-21 Grad multiple rocket launcher toward Russian forces near the frontline town of Pokrovsk, in Donetsk region, Ukraine, on April 19, 2025. Photo by Anatolii Stepanov/Reuters

By Anna Fadiah and Hayu Andini

Peace efforts between the United States, Ukraine, and Europe faced a significant hurdle on Wednesday following the abrupt cancellation of U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s planned visit to London. The absence of the top diplomat prompted the cancellation of a broader meeting with foreign ministers from Ukraine, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany—casting fresh doubt on the unity of Western allies and the feasibility of brokering a negotiated end to Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine.

The latest attempt to push forward US Ukraine peace talks came after President Donald Trump signaled impatience with the lack of progress, saying earlier this week that the U.S. might walk away from negotiations if no deal is reached soon. The downgraded format of Wednesday’s meetings has sparked concern in Kyiv and European capitals, where officials fear Washington may be pressuring Ukraine to make concessions that could solidify Russian gains.

Focused negotiations amid canceled diplomatic events

Despite the cancellation of high-level ministerial meetings, officials described the ongoing US Ukraine peace talks as “substantive.” The British government confirmed that technical-level discussions proceeded with participation from European, Ukrainian, and U.S. representatives, all seeking a framework to end the three-year conflict.

“We remain absolutely committed to securing a just and lasting peace in Ukraine and these talks today are an important part of that,” a spokesperson for British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said, while playing down the implications of Rubio’s no-show.

Inside the room, the focus remained on determining what compromises—if any—Ukraine could make in the face of a set of controversial proposals first raised by Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff in Paris last week.

US proposals seen as favoring Moscow’s demands

According to three diplomats briefed on the content of the talks, the U.S. proposals leaned heavily toward appeasing Russian interests. These included language that would recognize Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea, the lifting of some U.S. sanctions, and formal rejection of Ukraine’s future NATO membership—positions that are unacceptable to both Kyiv and several European governments.

One European diplomat characterized the proposals as asking Ukraine to make more sacrifices than Russia, reigniting fears that Washington may be retreating from its earlier steadfast support for Ukrainian sovereignty.

The stark divergence in perspectives became clearer as Ukraine circulated a position paper to its European allies, insisting there would be no talks on territorial matters until a “full and unconditional ceasefire” is implemented. A source familiar with the paper said this Ukrainian stance may not align with what U.S. negotiators had tentatively agreed to with Moscow.

“Say yes or watch us walk away”

US Vice President JD Vance added pressure during a trip to India, where he said he remained “optimistic” that the various sides could reach an agreement, but added a stark warning.

“We’ve issued a very explicit proposal to both the Russians and the Ukrainians, and it’s time for them to either say yes or for the United States to walk away from this process,” Vance said. He added that a resolution would require both sides to cede control of some territory, proposing territorial swaps as part of the deal.

Such rhetoric was met with immediate resistance in Kyiv. Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko reaffirmed her country’s position that Russia must return Crimea and other occupied territories, declaring on X, “Ukraine is ready to negotiate – but not to surrender.”

“A full ceasefire – on land, in the air, and at sea – is the necessary first step,” she said. “If Russia opts for a limited pause, Ukraine will respond in kind. Our people will not accept a frozen conflict disguised as peace.”

Behind the scenes: London and Paris talks unravel

Wednesday’s meeting had initially been set to follow up on a Paris gathering last week, where Witkoff presented the outlines of a deal to European and Ukrainian officials. His absence from the London meeting and the last-minute cancellation of Rubio’s trip reinforced the perception of mounting disarray.

Sources say Rubio, before canceling, had briefed his British counterpart David Lammy, and discussions between other officials—including British defense minister John Healey and U.S. Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg—continued at lower levels.

Still, the optics of the canceled ministerial gathering and the lack of a unified Western front have raised eyebrows. “The talks are drifting,” one diplomat said. “Each party is positioning itself, but there is no convergence yet.”

Sticking points: Crimea, NATO, and EU sanctions

Key disagreements remain unresolved. Ukraine refuses to cede Crimea or formally abandon its ambitions to join NATO. Meanwhile, the U.S. proposal calls for recognizing Russia’s current control of approximately 20% of Ukrainian territory, including Donetsk, Luhansk, and parts of southern Ukraine.

Russia, in turn, is demanding the lifting of European Union sanctions as a precondition for concluding peace talks—an idea European diplomats say is a nonstarter. “The sanctions are leverage,” one EU official said. “They’re not being lifted before an agreement, and certainly not without substantial Russian concessions.”

Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant and the future of Ukraine’s security

Among the more complex elements under discussion is the fate of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, located in Russian-occupied Ukraine. Washington has floated the idea of establishing a neutral zone around the facility. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said earlier this week that he would support working with the United States to restart operations at the plant, provided security conditions were met.

Other parts of the American proposal include future security guarantees for Ukraine, potentially involving a European peacekeeping force. However, Washington is reportedly not pushing Moscow’s demand for full Ukrainian demilitarization—a point of divergence with Russian goals.

Next steps: Parallel diplomacy and high-stakes meetings

As diplomatic efforts continue in Europe, the White House confirmed that Steve Witkoff will travel to Russia this week to meet directly with President Vladimir Putin. While this track runs parallel to the London meetings, it highlights the Biden administration’s two-pronged approach—working with allies while directly engaging Moscow.

Still, with peace talks downgraded and unity among Ukraine’s supporters increasingly strained, the road to ending the war appears longer and more uncertain than ever.

As one senior European official put it, “Without a clear and unified position from the West, we risk pushing Ukraine into a corner while emboldening Russia. The stakes couldn’t be higher.”