“President Trump remains deeply committed to the peace process in Ukraine,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Monday, adding that she had no information about any upcoming phone calls with Russian President Vladimir Putin or Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
The assurance came just days after rare trilateral negotiations between representatives of the United States, Ukraine and Russia in Abu Dhabi — talks that U.S. officials described as “constructive.”
In a conflict that had been in a diplomatic freeze for months, the mere fact that face-to-face trilateral talks were taking place was enough to generate cautious optimism.
Zelensky himself pointed to progress, suggesting that diplomatic stagnation may finally be broken.
But behind the hopeful headlines lies growing skepticism.
In an interview with the Kyiv Post, former US ambassador to Ukraine John Herbst presented a more cool and factual assessment of the situation.
“There are literally no public signs that Russia is willing to compromise,” says Herbst, now senior director at the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center.
He notes that while Zelensky “has accepted every proposal Trump has presented since March,” Russia “has not agreed to any of these proposals.”
For Herbst, the meeting in Abu Dhabi was less of a breakthrough than anything else a tactical move by the Kremlin.
The article continues below the video
“I interpret their willingness to enter into these talks as a tactical decision by Putin to avoid irritating Trump,” he says, noting that for months Moscow had completely rejected bilateral or trilateral formats.
Herbst suggests that Putin's goal it is not peace, but appearances. “He tries to seem reasonable, even when he's not,” he adds.
Testing red lines
When officials talk vaguely about “testing border flexibility,” Herbst believes the real problem is territory — specifically the western part of Donbas.
— Is it possible to conclude an agreement without Ukraine handing over the territory it failed to conquer? — he asks rhetorically, describing what he thinks Moscow is investigating.
He suspects that the pressure is mainly directed at Kyiv. “If they pressed only one side… it would be the Ukrainian side,” Herbst says, adding that Ukraine's silence suggests that talks are difficult.
Bombs during conversations: a message, not a coincidence
The timing of Russia's attacks on Kiev — which began while negotiators were talking in Abu Dhabi — was not coincidental, Herbst argues.
“Putin has been doing this for months,” he notes. – We can talk… If you do not agree to my terms of surrender, I will bombard you with a hail of bombs – he says. And that's the point.
He adds that this message also goes directly to Washington: Russia will escalate its actions and the United States will do nothing.
Trilateral talks between the United States, Russia and Ukraine in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, January 23, 2026.UAE Presidential Court /HANDOUT HANDOUT / PAP
Still, Herbst gives Trump credit for one moment of real pressure: the sanctions imposed on Rosneft and Lukoil last October.
— If one side is an obstacle, he applies pressure. And he actually put serious pressure on the Kremlin, notes the former ambassador.
He said whether Trump is willing to do it again could determine whether the talks survive.
Putin still believes he can win
Despite reports that another round of talks is scheduled for the coming weekend, Herbst doesn't expect much from them.
“I didn't expect much from these talks and I still don't expect much,” he admits. He adds that the talks “now have even less momentum than a week ago.”
His diagnosis is uncompromising: Putin still believes he can win. “He wants political control over Ukraine… he thinks he's making progress… and he doesn't want to say no to Trump outright because he's afraid of upsetting him,” he says.
The only solution, Herbst emphasizes, is to apply pressure. “The only way… to negotiate a lasting peace is to make it very unpleasant for Putin to continue the war,” he adds.
Tactical smokescreen
Amid concerns that Washington and Moscow could sideline European allies, Herbst sees a more complex reality.
“The Kremlin is clearly trying to sideline Europe,” he says. However, he adds that Europeans “they deal with Trump skillfully” and they managed to maintain real influence.
He notes that Putin was surprised both by Europe's persistence and Zelensky's continued ability to influence Trump's thinking.
The math is simple, even if diplomacy isn't: Putin still thinks he can win. Until the cost of war becomes more “unpleasant” than the cost of the agreement, the meeting in Abu Dhabi they are just a tactical smokescreen.
Washington may be ready for the finale, but Moscow is still rewriting the script – one missile strike after another.
For now, the White House says Trump remains committed — even without phone calls, summits or public ultimatums. But the contrast between the upbeat messages and Herbst's somber assessment underscores the main point of contention: diplomacy may change, but war cannot.
In Washington they call it progress. In Kiev they are still counting bullet holes.
And in Moscow, Herbst suspects, the talks are just another front in a war that Vladimir Putin has no intention of ending.
I’m Ashley Davis as an editor, I’m committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity and accuracy in every piece we publish. My work is driven by curiosity, a passion for truth, and a belief that journalism plays a crucial role in shaping public discourse. I strive to tell stories that not only inform but also inspire action and conversation.
