President Donald Trump said Tuesday that Ukraine and Russia are “making progress” toward a potential peace agreement, but he acknowledged the dispute remains one of the harder conflicts to resolve. Trump spoke to reporters aboard Air Force One as his administration described continued diplomatic activity aimed at ending more than two years of fighting in Europe following Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022.
Trump said U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff would soon travel to Moscow and suggested the trip could include his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. He also said the administration’s earlier 28-point framework is being revised and that many items have been narrowed or settled. The comments were made publicly and discussed in briefings, according to a Fox News report.
The remarks matter because they signal a new phase of U.S.-led diplomacy with direct engagement involving Moscow and raise questions about how security guarantees for Ukraine would be structured and how lawmakers will respond to any deal. Congressional leaders and foreign policy officials have pressed for details about enforcement, monitoring and the role of NATO and European partners in any arrangement. Readers can follow ongoing developments in our Conflict Coverage.
Background
The administration presented a 28-point framework to Capitol Hill last week outlining possible elements of a settlement. That outline, described by the White House as a starting point, prompted immediate scrutiny from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle who said the document required further detail on verification, timelines and security guarantees.
Trump said the initial framework was more of a concept than a finished plan and that negotiators are working through those points. He said the list has been reduced in some places to about 22 items and that negotiators have resolved some issues to date. Officials have not publicly released all draft language, and lawmakers have sought classified briefings to review sensitive material.
Details From Officials and Records
According to the president, the next phase will include direct engagement by U.S. envoys in Moscow, a step he framed as necessary to nail down security arrangements and other guarantees for Ukraine. Trump said European partners would play a large role in crafting and holding those guarantees against future aggression.
- Envoy trip: Trump said Steve Witkoff will soon be in Moscow, and that Kushner may accompany him; the White House has not yet provided a public schedule or formal release for the visit.
- Framework revisions: The administration described the original 28 points as a starting map that negotiators are trimming and addressing item by item, with the goal of producing clearer language on enforcement and verification.
- Security guarantees: The president said allies in Europe and NATO would be central to providing assurances intended to prevent future aggression, but European governments have not publicly endorsed any final package.
Trump also invoked his prior record of helping settle foreign conflicts and said he had expected easier progress because of his relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, while acknowledging deep animosities and the war’s human cost make the current situation complex. U.S. officials have repeatedly emphasized that any agreement must preserve Ukraine’s sovereign rights and be acceptable to its government.
Reactions and Next Steps
Some lawmakers criticized the initial framework, saying it resembled a list of concessions that could reward Russian aggression. Republican and Democratic members raised concerns during briefings about whether the administration has secured sufficient, enforceable guarantees to protect Ukrainian sovereignty and deter future attacks.
Congressional oversight is likely to focus on what, if any, commitments the administration makes before obtaining legislative approval for changes to U.S. policy or security assistance. Lawmakers could seek formal votes, conditions on aid, or increased transparency through briefings and documentation before endorsing a deal that affects American strategic interests and alliance commitments.
The White House has not set a public deadline for concluding talks. The president said he would know the deal is done when negotiators reach an agreement and suggested there is urgency because of continued casualties on the battlefield. European governments, which Trump said are central to providing security assurances, have emphasized that any settlement must preserve Ukraine’s territorial integrity, a position reflected in public statements from NATO leaders and EU officials.
Practical obstacles remain: verification mechanisms, the disposition of forces and weapons, the status of territory captured since 2022, sanctions relief, and the role of international institutions for monitoring compliance. Each of those elements carries political and legal implications for Ukraine, Russia, European allies and the United States.
Analysis
The administration’s push to move from a conceptual framework to focused negotiations raises core governance and security questions. Negotiators must balance speed against the risk of making concessions that could undermine Ukraine’s sovereignty or U.S. credibility with allies. That balancing act will draw scrutiny from Congress, where oversight and the power of the purse are central to U.S. foreign policy checks and balances.
Key tradeoffs include how to structure enforceable security guarantees, what territory or political conditions might be negotiable, and how to secure buy-in from European partners and skeptical members of Congress. Rapid progress could reduce battlefield suffering and civilian casualties, but a deal perceived as one-sided risks political blowback and could complicate long-term deterrence across the region.
Oversight questions are likely to surface as the administration refines the framework and sends envoys abroad. Lawmakers will press for clarity on what has been agreed in principle, how guarantees will be monitored and enforced, and what role the United States will play in implementation versus regional partners. The coming weeks will test whether diplomacy can convert high-level concepts into durable terms that address both security and political realities on the ground while maintaining accountability to the American public and elected representatives.
