Unity on Display, Divisions Beneath

HALLANDALE BEACH, Florida – The optics pointed toward progress. The underlying reality pointed elsewhere.

After three days of intense, closed-door diplomacy in South Florida, President Donald Trump’s push to broker an end to Russia’s war in Ukraine left negotiators largely where they began: aligned on process, divided on outcomes, and confronting a Kremlin that appears more interested in reshaping the West than ending the war.

The Miami meetings – part of a months-long Trump administration effort that also included talks with Ukrainian and European officials in Berlin earlier this week – wrapped up without a breakthrough.

Publicly, US and Ukrainian officials emphasized progress and unity. Privately, people familiar with the discussions acknowledged the talks underscored just how far apart Moscow remains – and how deliberately Russia is working to widen gaps between Washington and its European allies.

“This was about demonstrating alignment, not sealing a deal,” said one person familiar with the discussions. “Russia’s red lines didn’t move an inch.”

Unity on paper

On Sunday, US special envoy Steve Witkoff and Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council Secretary Rustem Umerov issued identical readouts describing the talks as “productive and constructive.”

Released simultaneously on social media, the statements stressed shared priorities and careful sequencing – not substantive concessions.

According to the readout, negotiators focused on four areas: further development of a US-drafted 20-point peace plan; alignment on a multilateral security-guarantee framework; alignment on a US security-guarantee framework for Ukraine; and continued work on an economic and prosperity plan for Ukraine’s recovery.

“Peace must be not only a cessation of hostilities, but also a dignified foundation for a stable future,” Witkoff noted.

Umerov echoed that message, saying Ukraine remained “fully committed to achieving a just and sustainable peace” and was counting on “further progress and practical results.”

The meetings brought together US, Ukrainian and European national security officials – a format Washington sees as essential to avoiding fractures among allies as negotiations intensify.

Witkoff described Sunday’s sessions as focused on a “shared strategic approach between Ukraine, the United States and Europe.”

But that unity, officials acknowledged, did not extend to Moscow.

Moscow’s parallel campaign

While US and Ukrainian officials worked to project cohesion, Russian representatives used the Miami talks for a different objective: driving a wedge between Washington and Europe.

According to multiple people briefed on the discussions, Moscow was displeased by the Berlin meetings earlier in the week, where US, Ukrainian and European officials made progress aligning on security guarantees for Kyiv.

Russian officials privately complained that Europe was hardening US positions rather than facilitating compromise.

They also made that case loudly and publicly.

Kirill Dmitriev, President Vladimir Putin’s investment envoy who met with Witkoff and Trump adviser Jared Kushner over the weekend, spent much of Sunday attacking European leaders and Western media on social media.

In a series of posts, Dmitriev accused “globalist media” of undermining Trump’s peace plan and claimed EU politicians were pushing Europe toward war with Russia to cover up domestic failures and profit from arms sales.

“It was a messaging operation hiding in plain sight,” said a European diplomat. “The goal was to tell Washington: Europe is the obstacle.”

The US-Ukraine readout made no mention of Witkoff’s Russian meetings, focusing instead on coordination with Ukraine and Europe. That omission, however, proved temporary.

In a separate social media post hours later, Witkoff publicly acknowledged the meetings with Russian Special Envoy Kirill Dmitriev, striking a notably different tone.

He said Russia “remains fully committed to achieving peace in Ukraine” and “highly values the efforts and support of the United States to resolve the Ukrainian conflict and re-establish global security.”

The conciliatory language stood in sharp contrast to Moscow’s official posture: it was the Kremlin that quickly dismissed talk of trilateral negotiations among Russia, Ukraine and the US after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Washington had floated the idea.

“At present, no one has seriously discussed this initiative,” Putin’s foreign affairs adviser Yuri Ushakov said Sunday morning.

Speaking to Kyiv Post later that day, a senior European diplomat summed it up bluntly: “Russia is negotiating like a country that believes time is on its side.”

Pressure building in Washington

Trump has made ending the war a central foreign-policy priority, arguing that prolonged fighting fuels bloodshed and risks escalation.

But the lack of movement from Moscow is intensifying pressure on the administration to determine how long diplomacy can continue without additional leverage.

Sen. Lindsey Graham said Sunday that Putin may simply be stringing negotiators along.

“We keep engaging Russia, trying to lure Putin to the peace table, and he rebuffs all of our efforts,” Graham said on NBC’s Meet the Press.

If Putin rejects the current proposal, Graham urged the administration to escalate pressure – including seizing ships carrying sanctioned Russian oil, imposing secondary tariffs on countries purchasing that oil and designating Russia a state sponsor of terrorism.

“If Putin says no, we need to dramatically change the game,” Graham said.

Inside the administration, officials argue diplomacy remains the best option. Speaking at Turning Point USA’s AmericaFest on Sunday, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard accused “warmongers in the Deep State” and allied media of trying to undermine Trump’s peace push and pull the US into a broader conflict.

Critics view that rhetoric as isolationist, particularly after the administration suspended new military aid to Ukraine upon taking office in January.

Supporters counter that Trump is attempting to force an end to a war that previous strategies failed to stop.

Europe hedges

European leaders, meanwhile, are preparing for a prolonged standoff.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer spoke with Trump on Sunday afternoon, emphasizing efforts by a “coalition of the willing” to support any eventual peace deal.

“The Prime Minister updated on work by the Coalition of the Willing to support any peace deal and ensure a just and lasting end to the hostilities,” Downing Street said in a statement.

France welcomed signs that Putin might be open to talks with President Emmanuel Macron, framing dialogue as useful once prospects for a ceasefire become clearer.

At the same time, EU leaders agreed Friday to mobilize $105 billion (€90 billion) over two years for Ukraine’s military and economic needs – underscoring Europe’s expectation that the conflict may not end soon, even as Washington presses for a deal.

“Europe is planning for endurance,” said one senior Western official, adding, “The US is pushing for resolution. That tension is now baked into the process.”

No illusion of a deal

The Miami talks advanced frameworks, timelines and coordination. They did not alter the fundamentals.

Ukraine remains unwilling to cede territory. Europe insists on durable security guarantees.

And Russia, by all available signals, sees more advantage in exploiting Western divisions than in compromising at the table.

“These talks weren’t a failure,” said a Western official involved in the process. “But they were a reality check.”

As negotiators depart Miami and prepare for the next round, Trump’s diplomacy faces a narrowing choice: find new ways to pressure Moscow – or accept that in Putin’s war, time itself may be the Kremlin’s most powerful negotiating tool.