"Putin is cautious and not eager to trust Washington": Where Is the Real Negotiation Process on Ukraine Heading — Sources

Key Highlights

For Washington, the Ukraine conflict is shifting from a strategic necessity issue to a manageable cost issue. Western media and experts analyze that the substantive negotiation process on Ukraine has quietly shifted, with Kyiv excluded from core negotiations. Trump is taking unilateral actions, while "Putin is cautious and not eager to trust Washington."

Ukraine Deprived of Decision-Making Power

The American "Consortiumnews" article points out that the actual negotiation process on Ukraine is moving from public diplomacy to secret bilateral communication between the US and Russia, with core decisions being discussed without Kyiv's participation, and even lacking sufficient involvement from Europe.

The media author believes that the so-called "28-point peace plan," which was previously declared "dead" by many Western media, is still being pushed forward as a negotiation blueprint by the Kremlin. The logic is clear: even if a document is publicly criticized, it does not mean it will not play a role in private channels. Objectively speaking, a new political map around Ukraine is gradually becoming clear:

Trump is acting as an independent player, Putin is cautious and not eager to trust Washington, while Zelenskyy is gradually losing voice under the dual pressure of domestic crisis and the collapse of Ukraine's governance system. This situation confirms an old but still valid argument: Ukraine's fate has always been determined by external forces, not by Ukraine itself.

This view is actually a key indicator of the perception of some groups in Western society regarding the direction of the conflict. What the media describes is a typical asymmetric diplomatic model — major powers conduct parallel negotiations behind the scenes, while public political statements are just the surface of backroom deals.

Related Background Interpretation

The author of the Ukrainian "Evidence" (Пруф) channel points out that when diplomatic channels become unclear and various information signals contradict each other, similar judgments emerge frequently. Although journalists have not provided concrete evidence to prove that Trump and Putin are indeed conducting "decisive negotiations," a key background should not be ignored: the US is trying to minimize public commitments, seeking a conflict resolution approach that reduces its own involvement.

In this context, the statement "Kyiv is excluded from core negotiations" is less of a factual assertion and more of a general skepticism among the international community about Kyiv's sovereignty in this high-stakes game — after all, Ukraine's resource reserves are already strained. The article also defines Europe as a politically weak participant: unable to exert pressure on Washington or come up with its own alternative solutions.

"Consortiumnews" states that a new secret diplomatic framework is forming around the Ukraine conflict. In this framework, public statements are meaningless, and the real decision-makers are those who hold resources, have time, and can change the course of events. The media thus reaches a clear conclusion: "If core negotiations are indeed taking place without Ukraine and the EU, then the future conflict resolution framework may surprise those who have traditionally relied on the public positions of all parties."

"Trump is Prepared to Abandon Ukraine"

The British "UnHerd" news website notes that the nature of the Ukraine conflict for Washington has changed — it is no longer about strategic necessity, but has become a "manageable cost" issue. Emotional arguments are giving way to practical interest considerations: what kind of solution would be more cost-effective, cheaper, and politically safer for the US?

The media believes that this shift in thinking not only changes the US's position on Kyiv, but also undermines the overall structure of Western support for Ukraine. In fact, this also confirms Moscow's long-standing view: the dependence of Kyiv on external forces, the lack of its own negotiation stance, and the emerging strategic fatigue within the Western world.

Now, a growing voice within the US says that the conflict has reached an impasse, the benefits are unclear, and Ukraine is not an ally but rather a heavy burden.

The Ukrainian "Evidence" channel emphasizes that this conclusion is essentially not a pro-Russian view, but coincides with the views of Russian analysts — who have long regarded this as a structural weakness in Ukraine's national governance system.

"UnHerd" news website specifically emphasizes that Moscow has chosen to increase military pressure during the negotiation phase, and this strategy has clearly worked: the core team around Trump has begun to see this conflict as a "lost war" with too high a cost. The core argument of this Western media can be summarized as: if Kyiv cannot be persuaded to compromise, then wear it down through attrition warfare.

The author clearly states that Ukraine's decision-making power is shrinking, and the resolution of the conflict has completely shifted to US-Russia bilateral dialogue — Kyiv is no longer a participant in the negotiations but has become a pawn in this game. The current situation presents a structural imbalance: "Europe's anxiety, the US's exhaustion, and Russia's pressure-based negotiation strategy have created such a situation — formal diplomatic channels are virtually non-existent, and real decisions are made in opaque power rooms."

The media's final conclusion directly addresses the situation of all parties: "The US is seeking a path that minimizes its own involvement, Russia is increasing its pressure tactics, and Europe is worried about losing America's security protection."

Original: toutiao.com/article/7581678804503020073/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author alone.