A possible three-way summit involving Donald Trump, Xi Jinping, and Vladimir Putin has surfaced as the latest twist in efforts to end the war in Ukraine. Reports indicate Putin floated the idea during an October 9 call with Trump, the same conversation that produced a Russia-US diesel arrangement.
Neither the White House nor the Kremlin has confirmed Trump accepted the invitation. Yet the proposal arrives amid mounting evidence of Washington softening its posture toward Moscow. The administration recently delayed a sanctions package, curtailed intelligence sharing with Ukraine, and welcomed Putin to the Anchorage summit. Each move has drawn sharp criticism from Kyiv and European capitals.
Trump maintains he simply wants to avoid derailing peace negotiations. His critics see a pattern of concessions that has yielded nothing. Multiple rounds of talks involving Witkoff and Kushner have failed to produce meaningful progress. The war drags on.
The prospect of a Shenzhen summit, timed around the APEC gathering in November, would hand Putin a symbolic victory. A gathering of three major powers, deciding Ukraine’s future without Ukraine at the table, carries echoes of Yalta. European leaders now watch nervously.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky faces an impossible position. Any deal requiring surrender of Donbas territory without ironclad security guarantees would trigger political upheaval at home. Ukrainians remember the Budapest Memorandum and its broken promises. They do not trust Putin, and they increasingly do not trust Washington.
European officials have begun signaling they will not accept exclusion from negotiations that affect continental security. Some argue Europe should leverage its trade relationship with Beijing. Xi may hesitate to endorse an agreement that destabilizes global energy markets or alienates European partners.
The outcome remains uncertain. What seems increasingly clear: a peace deal imposed without Ukrainian consent will not end the fighting. It would likely intensify it.
