The current U.S.–Russia negotiations represent the most sustained diplomatic engagement on the Ukraine war since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022. 

But the talks remain exploratory, focused on testing a U.S.-drafted framework rather than producing binding commitments. 

Meetings that began in mid-December in Moscow have now shifted to Miami, Florida, underscoring Washington’s central convening role and the absence of direct Russia–Ukraine talks.  

U.S. officials have conducted separate sessions with Russian representatives and with a Ukrainian-European delegation between December 19 and December 21, extending into December 22. 

Participants on all sides have described the exchanges as “constructive” and “productive,” language that signals engagement without implying convergence. 

No trilateral format involving the United States, Russia, and Ukraine is planned in the near term, and U.S. officials have emphasized that Russia must address Ukrainian security concerns before broader talks advance.  

“Constructive, But Not Improved”

At the center of the discussions is a U.S.-proposed peace framework initially described as a 28-point plan, later refined to 19 points. 

According to the reports, the document addresses territorial control, NATO expansion, ceasefire mechanics, sanctions relief, and postwar security guarantees. 

Russian officials acknowledged that “some points” were acceptable, while others drew criticism, with the Kremlin arguing that revisions proposed by Ukraine and European partners did “not improve” prospects for agreement.

Territory remains the principal obstacle. 

Russia continues to seek recognition of its control over Crimea and occupied areas of eastern and southern Ukraine, while Kyiv insists on the restoration of its 1991 borders. 

No compromise has been reached on this issue, and Russian officials have suggested that recent battlefield gains strengthen Moscow’s negotiating position.  

Incremental Diplomacy, No Timetable

Beyond territorial questions, the talks cover Ukraine’s future security alignment, including proposals to delay NATO membership for 10–20 years in exchange for alternative guarantees. 

Sanctions relief and access to roughly $300 billion in frozen Russian assets have also been raised, though European governments remain cautious about linking asset releases to any settlement. 

Ceasefire concepts—ranging from immediate halts to phased withdrawals monitored internationally—have been discussed without agreement.  

The process is intentionally low-profile. 

No deadlines, summit meetings, or ceasefire dates have been announced, and officials on both sides have framed the talks as preparatory rather than decisive. 

While the negotiations mark a notable diplomatic push under the incoming U.S. administration, skepticism persists among Ukrainian and European officials, who view the process as fragile amid continued fighting and intensified strikes. 

For now, the talks remain a test of limits rather than a path to resolution.