Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

Trump: "There's a good chance" of a deal during meeting with Zelensky — what it means for Ukraine's security

On the eve of the meeting at Mar-a-Lago (December 28), Donald Trump expressed optimism about resolving the war. This is not just rhetoric: that wording shifts the negotiation dynamics and places the task on Kyiv of turning words into concrete guarantees.

Oleg Bazylewicz

By Oleg Bazylewicz

December 27, 2025 · 2 min read

Trump: "There's a good chance" of a deal during meeting with Zelensky — what it means for Ukraine's security

On the statement and its source

In a conversation with the New York Post, US President Donald Trump said he believes there are "good chances" of reaching a peace agreement during a meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky at Mar-a-Lago on December 28. He also said he has settled eight conflicts and called this war "the most complicated." These words matter not only as an individual assessment — they shape the expectations of the parties and the international community.

"Well, I think we have a good chance. I think they want to do it now, and I think Russia wants to do it too. But whenever one side wants it, the other one doesn't."

— Donald Trump, President of the United States (comment to the New York Post)

Why this matters for Ukraine

The "I decide" frame is a key element of the statement. When the leader of one of the key countries says that the fate of a plan "depends only on him," it changes the balance of power: the negotiation process can become more personalized rather than collegial. For Ukraine, this means the need to more clearly articulate its red lines and prepare legally binding guarantees, rather than rely on verbal agreements.

What consequences could follow

The likely effects of such a statement can be summarized in several practical conclusions:

1) Diplomatic pressure on Kyiv: if an agreement begins to be framed as a "personal initiative," the risk will increase that external actors will try to accelerate compromises on Ukrainian terms.

2) Role of partners: the EU, NATO and other allies of Ukraine will become more important as guarantors of mechanisms for monitoring and enforcing any agreements.

3) Domestic mobilization: Ukraine needs to strengthen communication with citizens and parliament so that any treaty has legitimacy and is backed by legal guarantees.

What experts advise

Diplomats and analysts emphasize: optimism is useful but not sufficient. Clear provisions are needed on borders, security and mechanisms for monitoring implementation. Without this, the risk that the "agreement" will turn into a declaration remains high.

Conclusion

Trump's statement forces not only Kyiv but also its partners to act more quickly. The key question is whether words will be turned into a structure of guarantees that will protect Ukraine's interests. The answer depends on how firmly the Ukrainian side can lock in its conditions in written mechanisms and secure international support for their implementation.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026