Russian President Vladimir Putin’s latest remarks in Kyrgyzstan signal an unusually blunt negotiating posture: Moscow will halt its nearly four-year war only if Ukrainian forces withdraw from all territories Russia claims as its own—territory Kyiv insists remains sovereign and non-negotiable.

The statement underscores a widening gap between battlefield realities, domestic political constraints, and the frantic U.S. effort to secure a cease-fire before the conflict escalates further.

Putin framed the offer as a straightforward choice: a voluntary Ukrainian withdrawal or a forced one. His confidence reflects the momentum of Russian forces, which have tightened their grip across multiple fronts in Donetsk, Vovchansk and Siversk, and are advancing toward the strategic hub of Guliaipole.

Moscow claims to have encircled Ukrainian formations in Pokrovsk and Myrnograd, though Kyiv disputes any such encirclement. What is clear, however, is that Ukrainian troops—short on ammunition, manpower and air defense—are fighting under conditions that Western officials increasingly describe as unsustainable.

The timing of Putin’s remarks is not accidental. Washington has launched an accelerated diplomatic push built around a revised peace framework, now reduced to roughly 20 points after strong resistance from Kyiv and European allies.

Earlier U.S. drafts proposed Ukrainian withdrawal from parts of Donetsk and implicit recognition of Russia’s hold over Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk—ideas that provoked immediate backlash.

Even the softened version faces political headwinds in Kyiv, where President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is under pressure to reject any territorial concessions while simultaneously confronting doubts about his own constitutional mandate.

Putin hinted that the latest U.S. proposal could serve as a “basis for future agreements,” but his caveat—that signing anything with Zelenskyy is “almost impossible” due to questions over his legitimacy—introduces a destabilizing complication.

By casting doubt on the Ukrainian leader’s authority, the Kremlin appears to be maneuvering for leverage, perhaps anticipating a fractured or weakened Ukrainian negotiating position.

Meanwhile, U.S. negotiator Steve Witkoff is expected in Moscow next week to continue discussions, and Army Secretary Dan Driscoll will arrive in Kyiv for consultations with Ukrainian officials.

This parallel diplomacy reflects Washington’s attempt to maintain pressure on both sides even as the situation on the ground deteriorates.

According to data compiled by the Institute for the Study of War, Russia has captured roughly 467 square kilometers per month in 2025—an acceleration from the previous year and a trend that strengthens Moscow’s bargaining power.

As Putin put it, “There is little that can be done about it,” a message clearly intended for both Ukrainian leaders and Western capitals debating how much more support to provide.

The war has already reshaped the European security order, displaced millions, and cost hundreds of thousands of lives. Putin’s latest remarks suggest he believes time—and momentum—is now firmly on his side.

What remains unclear is whether Washington’s evolving peace plan can bridge the distance between battlefield realities and political red lines, or whether the conflict is entering a new, more dangerous phase driven by exhaustion, necessity, and geopolitical expediency.

The newly revealed phone call between U.S. presidential envoy Steve Witkoff and a senior Kremlin aide sheds rare light on how the Trump administration’s emerging Ukraine peace initiative was seeded — and how, even before formal negotiations began, Washington and Moscow were quietly shaping the diplomatic terrain.

According to a recording obtained by Bloomberg, Witkoff spoke for several minutes on Oct. 14 with Yuri Ushakov, President Vladimir Putin’s top foreign policy adviser.

The call came at a moment when Trump was publicly celebrating his success in brokering the Gaza hostage agreement and privately expressing frustration with Putin’s refusal to end the war in Ukraine.

During the conversation, Witkoff encouraged Ushakov to seize the political momentum created by the Gaza deal and replicate its structure in Ukraine.

He suggested that Putin reach out directly to Trump ahead of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s White House visit later that week, framing the Russian leader as a cooperative partner.

Witkoff also floated the idea of a “20-point” plan for Ukraine modeled on the Gaza negotiation framework.

The Kremlin appeared receptive. Ushakov asked whether a call between Putin and Trump would be useful and signaled he would convey Witkoff’s guidance. Two days later, the two presidents spoke for more than two hours in a call requested by Moscow.

Both sides characterized the discussion as highly productive, and Trump later announced plans for an in-person summit in Budapest.

The phone call also offers a glimpse into what would later become the Trump administration’s 28-point peace proposal — a document U.S. officials have urged Ukraine to accept as the basis for a ceasefire.

The plan, as reported, would require Kyiv to withdraw from portions of the Donbas that Russia has failed to take militarily, transforming the area into a demilitarized buffer zone effectively recognized as Russian. Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk would receive de facto recognition under the deal, while other front lines would be frozen.

Subsequent conversations among senior Kremlin officials — also reviewed by Bloomberg — show Russian strategists debating how forcefully to press their demands.

Ushakov argued that Moscow should “ask for the maximum,” warning that any ambiguity could allow Washington to reshape the terms and claim premature agreement.

His colleague Kirill Dmitriev suggested that even if the U.S. rejected Russia’s full draft, it would likely adopt a version close enough to meet Moscow’s core objectives.

The Trump administration has publicly defended Witkoff’s role, with the president describing the envoy’s approach as “standard negotiation.” But the disclosures underline a sensitive dynamic: U.S. envoys exploring peace terms with Kremlin officials even as Ukrainian negotiators faced heavy pressure from Washington to accept a compromise they long opposed.

U.S. officials have denied cutting off support, but Ukrainian officials say they were warned intelligence assistance could be reconsidered if Kyiv refused to engage with the outlines of the plan.

After high-level talks in Geneva and further consultations with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Kyiv secured adjustments and a slower timeline for negotiations.

For Moscow, the leaked exchanges demonstrate a broader strategy: publicly signaling openness to a U.S.-drafted deal while privately pushing for maximal territorial concessions.

For Washington, they reveal the administration’s confidence in direct personal diplomacy and its belief that Putin can be persuaded — or pressured — into a settlement acceptable to the White House.

Whether this emerging framework ultimately forms the basis of a ceasefire remains uncertain. But the Witkoff–Ushakov call clarifies one thing: the peace plan taking shape in late 2024 was not born in formal talks, but in a quiet exchange between two presidential confidants who each believed they could steer the other’s leader toward an endgame.

Lavrov Declares Europe ‘Finished’ in Ukraine Peace Efforts as U.S. Takes Lead.

Russia’s top diplomat accused Europe on Tuesday of wasting years of diplomatic opportunities to prevent the current crisis in Ukraine, dismissing any future role for Germany or France in peace efforts and signaling Moscow’s growing preference for alternative mediators.

“You had your chances,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, claiming Berlin and Paris “squandered” the framework laid out in the 2014 and 2015 Minsk accords.

Those agreements, brokered by Germany and France, were meant to grant autonomy to the eastern Donbas region and avert further escalation. Russia later occupied and illegally annexed the territory.

Lavrov said the countries he now considers credible mediators are Belarus, Turkey and Hungary — not the European powers that helped negotiate earlier deals.

He also offered rare praise for the United States, arguing that Washington, “unlike London, Brussels, Paris and Berlin,” is actively attempting to find a diplomatic exit to the war.

Lavrov’s remarks came as Washington signaled that a breakthrough may be near. U.S. officials told CBS News that Ukraine has agreed to the “core terms” of a draft peace deal put forward by the Trump administration, though “minor details” remain unresolved.

Rustem Umerov, Ukraine’s national security adviser, said negotiators had reached a “common understanding” in talks with U.S. and European officials and that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy could travel to Washington before the end of November to finalize an agreement.

Multiple U.S. officials confirmed that Army Secretary Dan Driscoll is in Abu Dhabi for indirect talks with Russian representatives, shuttling between rooms in what they described as an intensive round of negotiations. A Ukrainian delegation is also present in the UAE and is coordinating with American officials.

The U.S.-led effort follows high-level weekend talks in Geneva involving Secretary of State Marco Rubio, presidential envoy Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, and European diplomats.

Negotiators are working off a revised version of a 28-point proposal that includes several contentious provisions — among them, requiring Ukraine to relinquish all of Donetsk, including areas not currently occupied by Russia, and halting Ukraine’s bid to join NATO. Zelenskyy has repeatedly rejected such terms.

A second document circulated among negotiators outlines potential long-term U.S. security guarantees for Ukraine modeled on NATO’s Article 5, according to Ukrainian officials.

The White House said in a statement that Washington and Kyiv have drafted “an updated and refined peace framework,” while noting that further work is needed. Rubio described the discussions as “very meaningful,” though he signaled that Trump’s Thanksgiving deadline is flexible.

American officials say the talks are taking place against a stark battlefield backdrop. Russia is pressing deeper into the eastern Donetsk region, and U.S. analysts believe Moscow is likely to take the strategic hub of Pokrovsk — a key Ukrainian logistics center — if current military trends continue.

One U.S. official told CBS News that Putin appears confident he will control the region “one way or another,” whether through negotiations or force.

Lavrov, meanwhile, emphasized that Russia will wait for the United States to communicate the results of its consultations with Ukraine and European allies, insisting that Moscow will not publicly discuss details until a formal agreement emerges.

Russia has not yet commented on the proposed terms being negotiated in Abu Dhabi, leaving open how far the Kremlin is willing to go — or whether the diplomatic momentum reported by U.S. officials will translate into a durable ceasefire after nearly four years of war.

Sweden’s military is seeking long-range strike capabilities that would allow it to hit targets deep inside Russia, arguing that only such systems can deter Moscow as Europe faces its most volatile security environment in decades.

In a report delivered to the government this week, the Swedish Armed Forces urged the acquisition of cruise missiles with ranges of up to 2,000 kilometers — more than enough to reach well beyond Moscow and deep into Russian military infrastructure.

Defense Minister Pål Jonson said the recommendation reflects lessons drawn from the war in Ukraine, where Russia has relied heavily on long-range missiles, ballistic systems and drones to pressure Kyiv from afar.

“The experience from the war in Ukraine indicates that Russia is vigorously developing its long-range capabilities,” Jonson told Reuters. “We must build a stronger deterrent against that threat.”

The distance between Stockholm and Moscow is roughly 1,000 kilometers — meaning a 2,000-kilometer weapon system would give Sweden the ability to strike far beyond Russia’s western military districts if ever required.

Sweden’s air force has already ordered the Swedish-German Taurus cruise missile, which has an estimated range of 500 kilometers and can be equipped on the JAS 39 Gripen. But Jonson suggested that the government may pursue additional platforms as part of a broader shift toward deeper strike capability.

The military’s report also warns that Russia is expected to expand its overall force capacity within the next five years, despite battlefield losses in Ukraine. To counter that trend, the Swedish Armed Forces recommended significant investments in air and missile defense, enhanced intelligence collection, and expansion of Sweden’s drone and satellite reconnaissance programs.

The proposal reflects Sweden’s new strategic posture as the country prepares to integrate fully into NATO. Long-range strike capabilities, currently limited to a handful of alliance members, would mark a major evolution in Sweden’s defense doctrine — one aimed at both deterring future aggression and reinforcing the alliance’s northern flank.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy both indicated Friday that they were willing to discuss President Donald Trump’s new 28-point peace proposal, but each cast doubt on its viability as the White House pushes for a framework before Thanksgiving.

Zelenskyy, addressing Ukrainians in a somber national speech, warned that Kyiv may soon be forced to confront a painful choice between preserving “dignity” and protecting its relationship with its most important ally — a reference widely interpreted as the United States.

He said the coming week would be “very difficult,” cautioning that Ukraine would not accept any settlement that amounted to surrender.

“We did not betray Ukraine then; we will not do it now,” he said, recalling the earliest days of the war.

Trump’s proposal — drafted with input from both U.S. officials and a close ally of Putin — includes concessions long sought by Moscow and previously rejected by Kyiv. A draft obtained by ABC News calls for Ukraine to cede additional territory in the Donbas region and cut its military forces by more than half.

The plan would provide U.S. security guarantees similar to NATO’s, allowing the United States and its allies to respond militarily to future Russian aggression.

Putin, speaking during a televised session of Russia’s national security council, said Moscow views the plan as a potential “basis” for a final settlement and is prepared to negotiate. He described the proposal as an updated version of ideas previously discussed during a summer summit with Trump in Alaska.

Despite Russia’s positive tone, Putin blamed Ukraine for a lack of progress, claiming the United States had “not yet secured the agreement of the Ukrainian side.”

“Apparently, Ukraine and its European allies are still under the illusion that they can inflict a strategic defeat on Russia on the battlefield,” he said. If Kyiv refuses negotiations, he warned, Russia will continue to pursue its aims by force.

Zelenskyy rejected that framing, saying Putin would try to portray Ukraine as the obstacle to peace. He emphasized that Kyiv would engage constructively with Washington, including in a call Friday with Vice President JD Vance, but would not accept “unjust demands.”

“We’re working to make the path forward dignified and truly effective for achieving a lasting peace,” his office said.

The plan’s rollout comes as Ukraine faces significant challenges — recent battlefield losses, mounting pressure from corruption scandals in Kyiv, and growing debate in Washington over U.S. aid.

With Trump urging rapid progress, both Moscow and Kyiv now find themselves navigating a proposal that could reshape the war — or collapse under the weight of its own political risks.

Trump Peace Blueprint Stuns Kyiv Backers With Proposal for New Territorial Concessions to Russia.

A newly surfaced 28-point peace proposal attributed to President Donald Trump’s administration has jolted Kyiv’s supporters in Washington, raising concerns that the plan would tilt heavily in Moscow’s favor and sideline Ukraine from key negotiations.

According to reporting by Axios and the Financial Times, the draft framework—developed by Trump’s lead negotiator, Steve Witkoff, in consultation with Russian sovereign wealth fund chief Kirill Dmitriev—proposes that Ukraine relinquish additional territory in the eastern Donbas region and significantly reduce the size of its military.

Several members of Congress with close ties to Kyiv said they learned of the plan only through media reports.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of Trump’s top allies and a longtime advocate for Ukraine, told an audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on Wednesday that he had not been briefed on the proposal. “I don’t know what this 28-point plan is,” he said. “But any credible plan must include strong U.S. security guarantees and measures to limit Putin’s ability to finance his war.”

Under the reported terms, Ukraine would forfeit its remaining foothold in Donbas—roughly 12 percent of the territory that remains under Kyiv’s control behind heavily fortified lines—and accept new restrictions on its armed forces, including cutting troop levels by half. The plan would also limit Ukraine’s access to Western weapons, especially long-range systems capable of striking targets inside Russia.

The Financial Times reported that the framework bars foreign troops from operating on Ukrainian soil, effectively ruling out an international peacekeeping force or deeper military partnerships with European states.

Lawmakers from both parties voiced unease. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said he had not been given details. Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), a retiring Republican who has supported military aid to Ukraine, compared the reported terms to the 1938 Munich agreement, warning that any move perceived as pressuring Kyiv to concede territory would embolden Moscow.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said it had received no formal communication from Washington. Ukrainian officials, who were reportedly given only limited visibility into the talks, have not publicly commented.

The emerging outline highlights a sharp divide between Trump’s pursuit of a rapid diplomatic settlement and the position held by many in Congress and among NATO allies, who insist that any peace arrangement must be shaped with Ukraine—not imposed upon it.

EU Tightens Visa Restrictions on Russian Travelers as Security Fears Rise.

The European Union has introduced its toughest travel restrictions on Russian citizens since the start of the Ukraine war, citing a surge in sabotage attempts, drone incursions, and broader security risks tied to Moscow’s sprawling shadow operations across Europe.

Under the new rules announced Friday, Russian nationals will no longer be eligible for multiple-entry Schengen visas, a privilege that previously allowed millions to travel freely across Europe’s borderless zone.

Instead, they must apply for a new visa for every single trip, giving EU governments what officials call “close and frequent scrutiny” of each individual traveler.

The shift marks a major escalation in Europe’s approach to Russian mobility—one that falls short of a total travel ban but represents a profound tightening of the bloc’s internal security posture.

“Travelling to the EU is a privilege, not a given”

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, a leading voice on Russia policy, framed the move as a necessary response to an increasingly aggressive Kremlin abroad.

“We now face unprecedented drone disruptions and sabotage on our soil,” Kallas said. “Travelling to and freely moving within the EU is a privilege, not a given.”

European officials point to a string of incidents—rail sabotage in Germany, arson attempts near military installations in the Baltics, and suspected Russian-linked drone activity across the Nordics—as the backdrop for the tightening. Intelligence agencies warn that Russia has broadened its toolbox since 2022, using tourists, business travelers and “nontraditional actors” to move people, money and equipment into the EU.

Exceptions for dissidents and families

The new rules carve out exemptions for Russians considered “without doubt” trustworthy:

• Dissidents fleeing persecution

• Independent journalists

• Human rights defenders

• Close family members of Russians already legally residing in the EU

• Family members of EU citizens living in Russia

EU officials stress that these categories are essential for maintaining lifelines to civil society figures targeted by the Kremlin.

Moscow lashes out

The Kremlin, already furious at the EU’s sweeping sanctions regime, responded with characteristic sarcasm.

Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova mocked the move as self-sabotage:

“Why does Western Europe need creditworthy tourists when there are illegal migrants living on benefits and Ukrainian draft dodgers?”

Moscow has long accused European governments of “Russophobia,” while EU officials say the tightening is a matter of basic national security.

A steep decline in Russian travel

Before the Ukraine invasion, Russians were among the most frequent Schengen travelers, receiving more than 4 million visas in 2019. By 2023, that number had collapsed to around 500,000 following the EU’s suspension of its visa facilitation agreement and a clear directive to “deprioritize” Russian applications.

The new rules go further—but still stop short of the Baltic countries’ long-standing calls for a full visa ban on Russian citizens.

Serbian loophole under pressure

The EU also issued a pointed warning to Serbia, a candidate for EU membership, over its practice of granting fast-track citizenship to Russians. The Commission said the policy “poses potential security risks,” since Serbian passport holders can move far more easily across Europe.

A policy shaped by war — and what comes next

Across the continent, governments admit the measures are aimed at Russian espionage networks, not ordinary travelers.

But the political messaging is unmistakable: full restoration of pre-war mobility is impossible while Europe faces Russia’s drone strikes, proxy operations, and cyberattacks.

For now, the EU’s strategy is incremental pressure, steadily shrinking the space in which Russia can operate — while keeping doors open for those fleeing President Vladimir Putin’s tightening domestic repression.

Senior North Korean and Russian military officials have held fresh talks in Pyongyang, underscoring the two countries’ accelerating defense cooperation as Moscow’s war in Ukraine enters its fourth year and both regimes deepen their alignment against the West.

North Korea’s state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reported Friday that the discussions, led by Pak Yong Il, vice director of the Korean People’s Army’s General Political Bureau, and Viktor Goremykin, Russia’s deputy defense minister, focused on “expanding military cooperation” under what it called the “deepened bilateral relations” fostered by Kim Jong Un and Vladimir Putin.

The talks took place Wednesday in Pyongyang and were followed by a separate meeting Thursday between Goremykin and North Korean Defense Minister No Kwang Chol, according to KCNA.

While the report offered no details on agreements, analysts say the meetings mark another step in the two nations’ emerging strategic partnership — one that has rapidly evolved from symbolic solidarity into a tangible military alliance.

The timing of the talks is notable. Earlier this week, South Korea’s National Intelligence Service (NIS) told lawmakers in a closed-door briefing that it had detected signs of recruitment and training in North Korea, possibly linked to further troop deployments to Russia.

The NIS estimates that around 15,000 North Korean personnel — including soldiers, engineers, and deminers — have been dispatched to support Russia since late last year, alongside shipments of artillery shells and ballistic missiles.

Seoul believes that an additional 5,000 military construction workers began moving to Russia in phases this fall, reportedly to help rebuild infrastructure in the Kursk region, where Russian forces have faced repeated Ukrainian drone and missile strikes.

When asked about the reports, South Korea’s Unification Ministry spokesperson Chang Yoon-jeong said Friday that Seoul was “closely monitoring the situation” but would refrain from “speculative assessments” about troop deployments.

The growing defense collaboration between Pyongyang and Moscow follows a high-profile summit between Kim and Putin in Vladivostok last year, during which the two leaders discussed arms transfers, technology exchange, and joint industrial projects.

U.S. and allied officials have since accused North Korea of supplying munitions and short-range ballistic missiles to aid Russia’s battlefield campaign in Ukraine, while Russia has reportedly provided Pyongyang with food aid, oil supplies, and advanced military technology.

The deepening partnership is fueling concerns in Washington, Seoul, and Tokyo that the two authoritarian states — both heavily sanctioned and internationally isolated — are forming a new axis of resistance to Western power.

During his visit to South Korea earlier this week, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth praised Seoul’s plans to increase defense spending and warned that “Pyongyang’s cooperation with Moscow represents one of the most dangerous military convergences in the world today.”

For Kim Jong Un, the alliance with Russia has broken years of diplomatic isolation and provided new leverage against the United States. For Putin, it offers badly needed ammunition and manpower for a protracted war — at a time when Western sanctions and battlefield losses are tightening the Kremlin’s options.