Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said after a phone call with President Trump on Sunday that the two will meet this week on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York.
Why it matters: The meeting comes as the White House works to broker an agreement between Russia and Ukraine to take reciprocal steps to deescalate and resume negotiations — and as fighting between the two sides has intensified in recent days.
Zelensky's chief negotiator and the head of Ukraine's Foreign Intelligence Service, Rustem Umerov, told Axios he's been working with White House envoys in recent days to organize the meeting, which is expected to happen Tuesday.
Driving the news: The meeting will take place several days after Trump signed a Russia sanctions bill and approved the biggest arms deal between the U.S. and Ukraine since assuming office — two steps Ukraine has been pushing for months.
What he's saying: "An important conversation, and we got through a lot. We agreed to meet in New York, and this meeting could change a lot. There is diplomatic momentum," Zelensky wrote on X.
Zelensky said Ukraine is ready "to take really serious steps" to reach a deescalation deal with Russia.
Behind the scenes: A source familiar with the call said Trump repeatedly asked Zelensky to stop attacking Russian oil refineries. The strikes are driving up global diesel prices.
"The word diesel came up many times during the call," the source said.
The intrigue: Earlier this week the Kyiv Independentreported that the Ukrainian government was "growing increasingly frustrated" with White House envoy Steve Witkoff.
The story came out several days after Witkoff and Trump adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner visited Kyiv for the first time since the war began.
Umerov told Axios the story was false.
"I believe that the work of American negotiators should be assessed by people who are directly involved in the negotiation process and work closely with Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner," he said.
He added that he's been working with Witkoff and Kushner on a daily basis over the last year. "Our main focus is on finding solutions for ending the war and gaining security guarantees and prosperity to Ukrainian people," he added.
Umerov said the negotiations are under close public and media scrutiny and therefore "it comes with criticism."
"Nevertheless, we need to stay focused. Steve has done a great job with us. We do not waste time and stay focused on finding solutions," he said.
State of play: Umerov said significant progress has been made in the talks. "In particular, the number of stumbling blocks reduced from dozens to essentially one or two key issues that remain subject to negotiations," he said.
"The trend is positive. The U.S. is super focused on the issue of stopping the war in Ukraine. The U.S. understands the situation on the battlefield, and signals to everyone that this terrible war should end," Umerov said.
Yes, but: Hostilities between Russia and Ukraine have escalated in recent days, with both sides conducting more long-range attacks.
On Sunday, Ukraine launched a missile attack on Moscow and hit an oil refinery. Russia has been launching missiles at Kyiv and other major cities almost every day in recent weeks.
While Russia has signaled willingness to consider steps to deescalate ahead of winter — and a resumption of trilateral talks with the U.S. and Ukraine — there has been little progress towards an actual deal.
Facts Only
* Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky called President Trump on Sunday.
* The two are scheduled to meet this week on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York.
* Rustem Umerov, chief negotiator and head of Ukraine's Foreign Intelligence Service, is organizing the meeting with White House envoys.
* The meeting is expected to occur on Tuesday.
* Trump signed a Russia sanctions bill and approved the largest arms deal between the U.S. and Ukraine since assuming office.
* Zelensky stated that an important conversation occurred and that this meeting could significantly change the situation, noting diplomatic momentum.
* Zelensky indicated Ukraine is ready to take serious steps toward a deescalation deal with Russia.
* A source indicated Trump repeatedly asked Zelensky to stop attacking Russian oil refineries.
* Hostilities have escalated recently, including missile attacks on Moscow and oil refineries by Ukraine on Sunday.
Executive Summary
Full Take
The narrative centers on the strategic use of high-level diplomatic engagement as a mechanism for managing acute conflict escalation. The movement toward a meeting in New York, juxtaposed with recent military actions—specifically strikes against Russian assets—suggests an attempt to inject momentum into a stalled negotiation process. The shift in focus from negotiating specific territorial or security issues to broader deescalation signals a potential prioritization of immediate crisis management over protracted strategic concessions.
A significant pattern emerges in the framing around the negotiations: the emphasis on "diplomatic momentum" and the reported reduction in stumbling blocks reflects a calculated attempt by negotiators to present progress, even when underlying military realities suggest continued kinetic conflict. This mirrors historical patterns where public signaling is used not necessarily as an end-state mechanism but as a tool for controlling the tempo of confrontation. The context involving the internal friction between Ukrainian negotiators and White House envoys suggests that external diplomatic maneuvers are layered over pre-existing domestic tensions, raising questions about which actors control the narrative flow.
The source material also reveals a tension between official statements emphasizing progress ("significant progress has been made") and underlying realities where hostilities are actively escalating. This divergence implies that public diplomatic positioning is often decoupled from on-the-ground military progress. The implication for agency is whether these high-level discussions effectively translate into tangible security guarantees, or if they serve primarily to manage international perception while the physical conflict continues to intensify. What inputs—beyond high-level communication—truly determine the feasibility of a deescalation deal, and who bears the cost of this managed uncertainty?