Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • US-Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Western Hemisphere
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Analysis
    • Research
    • Q&A
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Russia / Moscow talks expose the fantasy of a fair peace deal
Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Ukraine, Ukraine‑Russia

December 3, 2025

Moscow talks expose the fantasy of a fair peace deal

By Jennifer Kavanagh

Following a five-hour meeting in Moscow last night between Vladimir Putin, US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, there have still been no major breakthroughs to end Russia’s war in Ukraine.

This should come as no surprise, even if it is a disappointment to those whose hopes for peace were raised by the bullish optimism of Trump administration officials. It would be wrong, however, to call the latest round of talks a failure. It served an important purpose, shoving into the spotlight three unforgiving but fundamental realities that must inform future efforts to end the conflict.

Firstly, despite much positive spin, no progress has been made on finding workable solutions to address the war’s core issues: namely territory, security guarantees, and the capabilities and alignment of Ukraine’s future military. For its part, Kyiv has refused to cede the rest of Donetsk and continues to insist on security guarantees that exceed those the United States is willing to offer, or which Europe can provide. In addition, most now recognise that Nato membership for Ukraine is off the table, though the country’s leadership is loath to formally commit to this.

Russia’s position is equally unyielding, and Putin’s confidence has only grown after the controversial US 28-point peace plan caused a panic among Washington’s Nato allies. After Witkoff’s meeting with Putin, for instance, Kremlin foreign policy aide Yuri Ushakov indicated that proposed U.S. territorial compromises were unacceptable. The Russian President has similarly held fast to his demand that any settlement enforce a neutral Ukraine which cannot pose a military threat to Moscow.

Read at UnHerd

Author

Jennifer
Kavanagh

Senior Fellow & Director of Military Analysis

Defense Priorities

More on Eurasia

Op-edNuclear weapons, Europe and Eurasia, Russia

Russia Is Offering An Informal Nuclear Deal. Washington Should Take It.

By John Grover

February 25, 2026

Op-edNATO, Alliances, Ukraine‑Russia

Europe debates the bomb

By Daniel DePetris

February 19, 2026

Op-edUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Ukraine and Russia are both suffering as the war enters its fifth year

By Daniel DePetris

February 10, 2026

Op-edGrand strategy, Iran, Ukraine, Ukraine‑Russia, US‑Israel‑Iran

What happens when we give Europe first dibs on U.S. missiles for war

By Jennifer Kavanagh

February 9, 2026

Op-edNuclear weapons, Europe and Eurasia, Russia

Welcome to a Global Nuclear Arms Dilemma

By Daniel DePetris

February 6, 2026

In the mediaNuclear weapons, Russia

Russia warns of response to any U.S. weapons deployment in Greenland

Featuring Jennifer Kavanagh

February 5, 2026

Events on Russia

See All Events
virtualUkraine‑Russia, Air power, Diplomacy, Drones, Europe and Eurasia, Land power, Military analysis, Russia, Ukraine

Ukraine’s critical choice: Pursue peace or fight on

April 16, 2025
virtualChina, Alliances, Balance of power, Diplomacy, Grand strategy, Russia

China-Russia: Cooperation or a no-limits alliance?

April 3, 2025
virtualUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Trump and Ukraine: Prolonging or ending the war

December 13, 2024

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • Research
  • Experts
  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2026 Defense Priorities Foundation. All rights reserved.