Trump, Europe and Zelenskyy: A Softer Tone, Hard Questions Ahead

The photographs from Washington tell their own story. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who has become almost inseparable from his military greens, turned up in a dark suit and tie. Donald Trump, who only months ago was publicly sparring with him, smiled, cracked jokes and leaned into the group pictures. Around them stood Europe’s heavyweights—Macron, Starmer, Merz, von der Leyen—each with a stake in how this war ends.

It was a different mood compared to February, when Trump and Zelenskyy sat stiffly across from each other and the air in the Oval Office felt frosty. This time there was warmth, almost a sense of family. The question, of course, is whether this change in tone will translate into anything concrete for Ukraine.

On the table were big issues: security guarantees for Kyiv, future deterrence against Moscow, and whether it is time to bring Russia into a serious conversation about peace. Trump stopped short of promising NATO membership for Ukraine, but spoke of a “framework” that would protect the country from further aggression. The Europeans were careful, echoing support but also insisting that no deal should come at the expense of Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

The most striking revelation was Trump’s call with Vladimir Putin. He floated the idea of a direct Zelenskyy–Putin meeting, possibly with himself as a third party. It is vintage Trump—dramatic, personal, risky. For Zelenskyy, such talks could be a lifeline or a trap. Much depends on whether these negotiations would be about real peace or simply about freezing the conflict with Russia holding on to land it seized.

For Europe, the meeting was also about taking ownership. Leaders have grown wary of being bystanders to decisions made in Washington. Their presence in such numbers was a reminder that Ukraine’s future is inseparable from Europe’s own security.

Still, beneath the smiles, the hard questions remain unanswered. What exactly are these “guarantees”? Would the United States or Europe put troops on the line, or are we talking about vague promises of support? Can peace talks happen without legitimising Russia’s occupation? And if the war ends with Ukraine losing ground, what message does that send to others watching—China above all?

Washington this week was not a breakthrough. It was a change of atmosphere, a pause in the hostility, a chance to reset the tone. That matters. But the war is still raging, and words alone will not shield Ukraine. The test will be whether this gathering can build something sturdier than photographs and headlines.