The U.S. and Ukraine push resolutions at the UN General Assembly and Security Council to end the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict.

The United Nations is preparing to vote on two major resolutions addressing the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. The first resolution, drafted by Ukraine and backed by the European Union, focuses on de-escalation, cessation of hostilities, and a peaceful end to the war. The U.S.-drafted resolution also calls for peace but does not directly mention Russia’s full-scale invasion.

The Ukrainian resolution emphasizes the devastating and long-term impacts of the war, urging Russia to withdraw from Ukraine’s internationally recognized borders. It also stresses the importance of implementing previous UN resolutions that have called for a full Russian withdrawal. Although General Assembly resolutions are non-binding, they carry significant moral weight globally.

The U.S. resolution, crafted in conjunction with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, aims to affirm the need for swift peace and for the UN’s role in facilitating it. It has garnered substantial backing and is set to be voted on in both the General Assembly and the Security Council, where it is expected to pass with sufficient support.

This voting process occurs as French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer are scheduled for talks in Washington to discuss the war, emphasizing Ukraine’s sovereignty as essential to any peace efforts. European leaders, including European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, also continue to show unwavering support for Ukraine.

The resolutions come as global pressure mounts to resolve the crisis, with leaders from various nations warning against weakness in the face of Russian aggression.

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy expresses willingness to step down for peace but firmly rejects proposed U.S. minerals deal.

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy shocked many on Sunday by stating he was willing to step down if it meant peace for his war-torn country, even offering to exchange his resignation for Ukraine’s NATO membership. During a press conference, he emphasized his commitment to peace while asserting that his decision would be conditional on the benefit to Ukraine.

Zelenskyy responded to a question about leaving his post, saying, “If (it means) peace for Ukraine, if you really need me to leave my post, I am ready.” His readiness to step aside was framed within a potential deal for NATO membership. The announcement comes amid growing criticism from U.S. President Donald Trump, who has pushed for elections in Ukraine and questioned Zelenskyy’s legitimacy, despite Ukrainian laws banning elections during martial law.

While Trump criticized Zelenskyy as a “dictator,” Ukraine’s president defended his popularity, noting a 63% approval rating and calling Trump’s claims of a 4% approval rating “dangerous misinformation.”

Zelenskyy also rejected a U.S. proposal that would see Ukraine hand over 50% of its critical minerals, including uranium, lithium, and graphite, in exchange for military aid. He firmly opposed any arrangement that would put future generations of Ukrainians in debt, stating, “I will not sign what 10 generations of Ukrainians will be repaying.” The proposal, which would have required Ukraine to pay $500 billion in raw materials, has sparked a fierce debate over fairness and future financial obligations.

Despite rejecting the U.S. offer, Zelenskyy confirmed ongoing discussions about a deal that would secure Ukraine’s security. His team, led by chief of staff Andriy Yermak, is in talks with U.S. officials to develop Ukrainian mineral resources under more favorable terms.

This clash over resources highlights the ongoing tensions between the two leaders, with Zelenskyy prioritizing Ukraine’s sovereignty and future economic stability while navigating complex international negotiations during the ongoing war with Russia.

Official figures show U.S. spending on Ukraine is far lower than Trump’s exaggerated claims.

Donald Trump’s $350 billion claim about U.S. spending on Ukraine is a wild exaggeration that contradicts official Pentagon and oversight reports. According to the interagency oversight group tracking Ukraine aid, the actual total is around $183 billion.

Even within this figure, the Pentagon confirms that only $65.9 billion has been spent on direct military aid to Kyiv. Another $58 billion has been reinvested in the U.S. defense industry—funding domestic production of weapons and military equipment, which benefits American jobs and industry.

Meanwhile, Trump’s assertion that Europe is lagging behind the U.S. in total aid is also misleading. The Kiel Institute for the World Economy reports that European nations have allocated approximately $140 billion, meaning Europe has actually contributed more than the U.S. in total aid.

The political intent behind Trump’s claim is clear: he is reinforcing his argument that the U.S. is overburdened while Europe reaps the benefits. But the numbers tell a different story—the U.S. is not carrying a disproportionate financial burden, and much of its spending circulates back into American military production.

Trump’s habit of inflating figures—whether about military spending, election results, or economic policies—has been a recurring theme throughout his career. This time, it’s aimed at fueling skepticism about ongoing U.S. support for Ukraine while justifying a potential shift in policy under his administration.

As Trump gears up for another presidential run, expect more of these misleading claims to shape the debate over U.S. foreign policy. But when it comes to Ukraine, the numbers simply don’t back him up.

Trump’s Envoys and Putin’s Aides Begin Negotiations—Without Ukraine at the Table

The Saudi meetings between U.S. and Russian officials signal a potential shift in global power dynamics, as Trump’s envoys sit down with Putin’s inner circle—without Ukraine at the table. The message is clear: decisions about Ukraine are being made behind closed doors.

While Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Sergey Lavrov discuss “bilateral relations,” the real issue is Ukraine—and European leaders are panicking. Macron’s emergency Paris summit reflects growing European anxiety over being sidelined. Britain and Sweden are considering peacekeepers, while Germany hesitates, wary of direct military entanglement.

Trump, a master of power politics, appears to be negotiating from a position of leverage, knowing that Putin wants relief from Western sanctions. But Zelenskyy’s absence from these talks raises serious concerns—Ukraine’s fate may be sealed without its input.

If these talks set the stage for a larger Trump-Putin deal, the question remains: What is Ukraine being asked to sacrifice? Security guarantees? NATO membership? Territory? Europe fears a repeat of history—where major powers decide the fate of a smaller nation without its consent.

With Zelenskyy scrambling to secure American and European support, the next few weeks could determine the future of the war—and the balance of power in Europe. If Ukraine is locked out of these discussions, its sovereignty may be the first casualty of these negotiations.

Trump officials head to Saudi Arabia for Russia-Ukraine peace talks, leaving Kyiv blindsided and NATO allies sidelined.

The Trump administration is taking its most decisive step yet in reshaping the Russia-Ukraine war—without Ukraine at the table. As top U.S. officials head to Saudi Arabia for peace talks with Russian and Ukrainian negotiators, Kyiv finds itself blindsided, not informed and not attending. The move signals a radical shift in U.S. diplomacy, one that could force a settlement on Ukraine with Moscow in the driver’s seat.

National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff will lead the negotiations in Riyadh. Trump has hinted at a direct meeting with Vladimir Putin, marking the first high-level engagement between the U.S. and Russia over Ukraine since the war began. But Ukraine’s absence is a glaring red flag—and European allies are furious.

At the Munich Security Conference, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz warned that any peace without Ukraine’s full participation is unacceptable. Meanwhile, NATO leaders fear this could be a repeat of history, where Russia pauses the war, rearms, and strikes again. European officials feel abandoned as Washington’s unilateral approach sidelines NATO allies.

The Trump administration’s real game may be about resources, not just war. Reports indicate that U.S. officials floated a deal to Zelenskyy—hand over part of Ukraine’s rare earth minerals in exchange for continued American military aid. If true, this raises alarming questions: Is Washington selling out Ukraine’s sovereignty for strategic minerals?

Zelenskyy has made his stance clear: Putin cannot be trusted. But Trump is rewriting the rules, using Saudi Arabia as a backchannel while NATO watches from the sidelines. With Kyiv left in the dark, the question isn’t just whether a deal is coming—it’s whether Ukraine will have a say in its own future at all.

Ukraine’s leader pushes for a unified European military, warning that the continent can no longer rely on the U.S. amid rising Russian threats.

President Zelenskyy calls for an “Armed Forces of Europe,” arguing that Europe must defend itself without relying on the U.S. as war with Russia drags on.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy just threw down the gauntlet to European leaders—demanding the creation of an independent European military force as doubts grow over U.S. support and Russia’s aggression intensifies. At the Munich Security Conference, Zelenskyy delivered a stark warning: Europe can no longer depend on Washington for protection.

Trump’s backchannel talks with Putin have fueled Kyiv’s fears that Ukraine could be sidelined in a deal that favors Moscow. With U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth openly dismissing the possibility of Ukraine regaining its pre-2014 borders, Zelenskyy sees the writing on the wall—Europe must take its own security into its hands.

His call for a European military alliance—potentially a “NATO alternative” for Ukraine—marks a historic shift. He questioned U.S. commitment, stating: “Does America need Europe? As a market, yes. As an ally—I don’t know.”

If Zelenskyy’s European Army vision gains traction, it could reshape the continent’s defense strategy for decades. But if Europe hesitates, Ukraine may be forced into a compromise that emboldens Moscow—a nightmare scenario for Kyiv and beyond.

Trump’s covert talks with Putin threaten Ukraine’s survival. A backroom deal could redraw battle lines, leaving Kyiv stranded and Europe scrambling.

Ukraine is on the edge of betrayal. Trump’s secret talks with Moscow signal a deal that could cripple Kyiv’s war effort. NATO membership? Gone. Pre-2014 borders? Abandoned. In return, the U.S. demands 50% control of Ukraine’s rare earth minerals—turning this war into a resource grab.

Meanwhile, Russia advances, pounding Ukraine’s defenses as Trump’s administration scrambles for an exit strategy. 5,000 Ukrainian troops lost in days, while Putin assembles a high-level team for direct U.S. negotiations.

Zelenskyy is furious, warning that “no decisions about Ukraine without Ukraine”, but Washington seems to have already made its choice. If this deal goes through, Russia wins land, the U.S. secures wealth, and Ukraine is left to fight alone.

Ukraine refuses any U.S.-Russia deal over war negotiations, insisting Kyiv must be at the table.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has outright rejected the idea of a U.S.-Russia agreement determining Ukraine’s future, insisting that any negotiations to end Moscow’s war must include Kyiv as an equal partner. His statement comes after U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed in a phone call to push for immediate talks, with Trump considering a summit in Saudi Arabia to solidify a deal.

Munich Security Conference: Allies Seek Trump’s Clarity on Ukraine, NATO, and Global Crises

Zelenskyy made it clear that Ukraine would not be sidelined in discussions that determine its fate. “We, as an independent country, simply will not be able to accept any agreements without us,” he declared ahead of his meeting with U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the Munich Security Conference.

Trump, eager to secure a swift resolution, has suggested that continued U.S. aid to Ukraine could come with conditions—including access to Ukraine’s rare earth minerals in exchange for American military support. However, Zelenskyy remains firm that no peace talks should proceed without strong security guarantees for Ukraine and its NATO aspirations, despite Trump’s reluctance to back Kyiv’s membership in the alliance.

Meanwhile, Russia views the Trump-Putin call as a victory, signaling a shift in U.S. diplomacy. Kremlin officials have lauded Trump’s direct engagement, while Ukraine warns that trusting Putin’s so-called “readiness” to negotiate is a mistake.

As pressure mounts for a deal, the battle lines in diplomacy are being drawn—Ukraine refuses to be a pawn, and Trump’s next move will define America’s role in shaping the war’s endgame.