The U.S. isn’t interested in open-ended funding for Ukraine amid ongoing peace talks to end the war between Russia and Ukraine, according to the White House. 

President Donald Trump, who ruled out sending U.S. troops on the ground to support Ukraine, is very ‘sensitive to the needs of the American taxpayer,’ according to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. 

‘He made it very clear that we’re not going to continue writing blank checks to fund a war very far away, which is why he came up with a very creative solution to have NATO purchase American weaponry, because it is the best in the world, and then to backfill the needs of the Ukrainian army and the Ukrainian people in their military,’ Leavitt told reporters Tuesday. 

‘So that’s the solution the president has come up with. We’ll continue to see that forward,’ Leavitt said. ‘As for any additional sales, I’ll have to refer you to the Department of Defense.’ 

Congress has passed several pieces of legislation to support Ukraine, totaling at least $175 billion in spending to aid it since February 2022, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

Meanwhile, Trump approved a deal in July allowing European allies to purchase U.S. weapons, like Patriot missile defense systems, for Ukraine. 

The Trump administration’s defense budget proposal did not allocate any funding to purchase weapons for Ukraine, nor did the House defense appropriations bill passed in July. Even so, the Senate’s version of the measure that the upper chamber is slated to consider later in 2025 includes $800 million toward the program.

Leavitt’s comments echo ones made by Vice President JD Vance, who said Aug. 10 following meetings with European officials in the U.K. that he communicated to European leaders that the U.S. is ‘done with the funding of the Ukraine war business,’ and that European allies must take one greater responsibility in ending the conflict.

‘What we said to Europeans is simply, first of all, this is in your neck of the woods, this is in your back door,’ Vance said in an interview with Fox News. ‘You guys have got to step up and take a bigger role in this thing, and if you care so much about this conflict you should be willing to play a more direct and a more substantial way in funding this war yourself.’ 

On Monday, Trump met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and other European leaders at the White House, where they discussed various security measures to prevent Russian aggression against Ukraine again. However, Trump said Tuesday that sending U.S. troops to Ukraine to beef up security in the region was off the table. 

‘The president has definitively stated, U.S. boots will not be on the ground in Ukraine, but we can certainly help in the coordination and perhaps provide other means of security guarantees to our European allies,’ Leavitt said. ‘The president understands security guarantees are crucially important to ensure a lasting peace, and he has directed his national security team to coordinate with our friends in Europe, and also to continue to cooperate and discuss these matters with Ukraine and Russia as well.’ 

After Monday’s White House meetings between President Donald Trump, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders, the question remains: is Russian President Vladimir Putin prepared to sit down face-to-face with the Ukrainian leader — and on what terms?

Trump said he had personally called Putin to begin arranging a meeting. The Kremlin, by contrast, offered a more ambiguous response, acknowledging the idea had surfaced but refusing to confirm whether Moscow would accept.

For Putin, any such encounter would carry more weight as theater than diplomacy. ‘Putin would not like to meet Zelensky because he does not even recognize Ukrainian sovereignty,’ Ivana Stradner, Russia expert at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Fox News Digital. ‘The only way that he can be in the room with Zelensky is if Trump facilitates, because Putin wants to show that Russia is equal to the United States… We are giving him that pleasure to feed his population about so-called Russian greatness.’

Ambassador Kurt Volker, who served as U.S. envoy to Ukraine in the first Trump administration, agreed that the Kremlin is unlikely to budge without concessions. ‘Putin is unlikely to accept such a meeting if his pre-conditions are not met,’ he said.

Those conditions are formidable. The Kremlin has already rejected NATO-style security guarantees for Ukraine, while Zelenskyy and European leaders have ruled out surrendering territory. Stradner warned that Putin’s strategy is to test the West’s resolve. ‘Eventually, Putin would challenge Western soldiers on the ground,’ Stradner said. ‘I doubt, as things are today, that any of the Western nations, except maybe the Baltic States or Poland, would be willing to send their kids to die for Ukraine. And Putin knows this.’

The Russian leader, she added, has been emboldened by weak Western responses in the past. She pointed to the 2023 clashes in Kosovo, when ethnic Serbians attacked NATO peacekeepers, injuring 90. ‘What did NATO do? Nothing,’ Stradner said. ‘That was round one. And round two is on the horizon.’

Volker, however, struck a more pragmatic tone. He noted that while Putin may posture at the negotiating table, Russia is grappling with battlefield supply line disruptions and a faltering economy. ‘The real issue will be what happens to Russian supply lines, increasingly targeted by Ukraine, and the Russian economy, which is faltering,’ Volker said. ‘I still expect Putin to go along with a ceasefire in place by the end of the year.’

The White House has tried to box Putin in, with press secretary Karoline Leavitt insisting Tuesday that ‘he has’ agreed to the meeting. ‘Both leaders have expressed a willingness to sit down with each other,’ she said. Still, analysts caution that Moscow’s word is far from binding.

Russia’s foreign minister signaled that a summit was not impossible, but hedged that ‘any contacts involving top officials should be prepared very carefully.’ He also reiterated longstanding Kremlin demands that Kyiv roll back laws Moscow claims limit the rights of Russian speakers.

Maria Snegovaya, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said a meeting would mark a shift but not a breakthrough. ‘So far there’s no clarity, at least in the public space, that the Kremlin is serious about meeting,’ she told Fox News Digital. ‘Even if it still would not necessarily get us closer to an actual agreement, it would signal some willingness toward not trying to avoid provoking or annoying President Trump.’

Snegovaya added that Putin’s calculus is rooted in caution. ‘For over 25 years of his rule, Putin generally avoids attacking a stronger side. He usually goes after the weaker party… Georgia, Syria, Chechnya. I think he would be cautious about going after the will of the European allies, especially if a strong retaliation is promised.’

Putin’s ‘fear’ of Trump may be the last lifeline to end the war, according to Stradner. 

‘He does not trust Europe, he does not respect Europe. When it comes to the US, he despises the United States, but he fears Trump, because Trump is an unpredictable leader, and that’s that’s a nightmare for Putin.’

House GOP allies of President Donald Trump are nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize amid his ongoing efforts to stop the war between Russia and Ukraine.

Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., is spearheading a letter to the Nobel Committee on Tuesday alongside Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind. 

Their nomination hails Trump as a peacemaker on several fronts, the most recent being his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin and subsequent meeting with European leaders, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

‘We respectfully submit this nomination of President Donald J. Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, in recognition of his concrete contributions to international fraternity, his leadership in reducing conflict and the risk of war, and his commitment to fostering dialogue as a path toward reconciliation,’ Ogles and Stutzman wrote. 

‘His decisive leadership in securing landmark diplomatic agreements, de-escalating global conflicts, and actively pursuing peaceful resolutions to some of the world’s most entrenched disputes has led and continues to lead to a more peaceful world.’

Trump met with Putin in Alaska on Friday, the first time the Russian Federation leader spoke face-to-face with a U.S. president since the pair previously sat down together during Trump’s first term. Both sides described the meeting in positive terms.

It was followed by an extraordinary gathering at the White House on Monday with Zelenskyy and other leaders, where Trump pledged Ukraine would have ‘a lot of help’ for security, while specifying that Europe would be Kyiv’s ‘first line of defense.’

Trump said on Truth Social later that he spoke with Putin at the conclusion of that meeting and ‘began arrangements for a meeting, at a location to be determined, between President Putin and President Zelenskyy.’

House Republicans’ nominating letter noted Trump’s move in ‘hosting a high-stakes summit with President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on August 15, 2025, focused on establishing a path towards a Ukraine ceasefire, prisoner exchanges, humanitarian corridors, and future security arrangements—a significant step in reopening direct, constructive dialogue.’

It also lauded him for ‘hosting a meeting with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and numerous other European leaders on August 18, 2025, to discuss security guarantees for Ukraine and facilitating a discussion between Presidents Zelenskyy and Putin to bring about a just and lasting peace in the region.’

Russia invaded Ukraine in a bid to take over the ex-Soviet territory-turned-sovereign state in February 2022. 

Both countries have been locked in a bloody war that has taken thousands of lives, including heavy civilian casualties in Ukraine from Russia’s attacks on non-military targets.

Trump has argued multiple times that Moscow would not have invaded if he were president at the time.

Putin, along similar but not identical lines, said Friday that he believed there would have been no war if Trump was president at the time.

In addition to dealing with his efforts to resolve the Eastern European conflict, Ogles and Stutzman’s letter also lauded Trump for brokering a historic peace agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan, ‘engaging directly with regional leaders on the Gaza conflict,’ along with peace agreements struck during his first term, such as the Abraham Accords.

‘Because of President Trump’s leadership, more people are alive today, and there are fewer wars in the world than before,’ Ogles told Fox News Digital.

‘He is a champion of America First statesmanship, proving that strength and prudence—not globalism—are the keys to lasting U.S. foreign policy. No other world leader can claim to have halted wars and begun resolving centuries-old disputes.’

Stutzman, calling Trump ‘the president of peace,’ added, ‘There is no one on the planet more deserving of this year’s Nobel Prize and multiple world leaders have recognized that.’

One Senate Republican has crafted a blueprint for how conservatives can take on Democrats in the courts and win.

Before he was in Washington, D.C., Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo. served as Missouri’s attorney general during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. And during that time, he filed lawsuit after lawsuit challenging the Biden administration, Dr. Anthony Fauci and even going so far as to sue China.

And more often than not, be it through uncovering discrepancies during the discovery process or winning multibillion-dollar settlements, Schmitt was mostly successful in challenging Democratic ‘lawfare.’

‘The fact of the matter is, what our fights were, were about restoring individual liberty and pulling back the expanse of government,’ Schmitt told Fox News Digital in an interview. ‘What the Left is trying to do now with their lawfare machine was, number one, they’re trying to put their opponents in jail, but then also to defend the expanse of government, to defend the administrative state. And I think if we have the right arguments, we can win.’

Schmitt detailed how to secure those winning arguments through his own experiences in his latest book ‘The Last Line of Defense: How to Beat the Left in Court.’

He described the book as ‘a field manual from the front lines of the battles that were fought against the left-wing law machine.’ Indeed, Schmitt outlined a guide for attorneys general across the country to take on challenges at all levels, from local to federal.

‘Our playbook really is… really in response to what their playbook was, to create a manufactured emergency, a real or manufactured emergency, to aggregate power, to exercise it in ways that never were imagined to other folks who disagree and silence dissent,’ Schmitt said. ‘That’s what they were really trying to do.’

In some cases, he went beyond the country’s borders and sued a foreign country, as Schmitt did to China. He argued in the book that the Chinese Communist Party had withheld information on the COVID-19 virus, and was actively hoarding high-quality personal protective equipment (PPE) while producing and selling lower-quality PPE for the rest of the world. That case resulted in an eventual $24 billion judgment earlier this year.

From there, Schmitt challenged former President Joe Biden’s student loan debt cancellation plan by focusing his case on a local student loan servicing company, a plan that was ultimately blocked by the Supreme Court just months into Schmitt’s first year as a lawmaker in 2023.

Through it all, the pandemic was the ‘inflection point,’ Schmitt said, and his biggest target became Fauci.

He got an opportunity to depose Fauci, who served as the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and medical advisor to Biden, as part of his lawsuit taking on censorship and suppression by social media platforms like Facebook.

‘He wanted to silence anybody who talked about it being a lab leak,’ Schmitt said. ‘Which, of course, we know is that’s exactly what it was now. It wasn’t some bat mating with a penguin, you know, this was actually in the Wuhan Institute of Virology is where this thing came from.’

Schmitt, who is a fan of both Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and the late Justice Antonin Scalia — particularly Scalia’s usage of originalism, or interpreting the Constitution as it was written rather than as a living document — noted in the book that there has been a ‘complete shift’ in the courts.

In particular, conservative-leaning justices have the majority on the Supreme Court, and courts across the country are being filled, albeit slowly, with President Donald Trump’s picks.

When asked if he was at all concerned about partisan politicking coming to the bench, Schmitt countered that courts are returning to a legal system that had been ‘disrupted by the progressive era, beginning with Woodrow Wilson and the rise of the administrative state, FDR, who threatened to pack the court.’

‘The Constitution means exactly what it says, nothing more, nothing less, just like our laws,’ he said. ‘They mean what they say, nothing more, nothing less.’ 

‘I don’t want a judge to necessarily agree with my politics,’ he continued. ‘I just want a judge to adhere to the Constitution.’

Secretary of State Marco Rubio applauded President Donald Trump for the progress he has made towards peace when it comes to the war in Ukraine, while he accused the former Biden administration of doing nothing to change the circumstances of the war.

Rubio appeared on Fox News’ ‘Jesse Waters Prime Time’ Monday evening after the day-long talks between U.S. and European officials that included Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. During the appearance, he praised Trump as ‘the only leader in the world’ who has proven he can broker a peace deal between Zelenskyy’s Ukraine and Vladimir Putin’s Russia, adding that the Monday talks were ‘unprecedented.’   

‘After three years of deadlock, and no talks, and no change in circumstances, this is the first time where there seems to be some movement,’ the secretary said. ‘This has been going on for three-and-a-half years. A lot of people have died, a lot of territories exchanged back-and-forth, so it’s not an easy thing to unwind, but nothing was happening on this war. Literally, the only option we were given under the previous administration was continue to fund Ukraine for however much they need, for however long it takes.’

Rubio pointed out that finally, under a new administration, people are ‘actually talking about pathways toward ending [the war in Ukraine].’ 

‘It’s going to take a little bit more work, and a little bit more time, but we are making progress,’ Rubio argued. ‘It’s not me saying it, that is virtually every leader there [on Monday] said that.’

Rubio said that prior to Trump, the fighting in Ukraine was nothing more than a ‘stalemated war of death and destruction.’ He also complained that under Biden there was no plan other than to continue giving weapons to Ukraine. 

‘That’s the other dynamic that’s changed – we’re no longer giving Ukraine weapons, we’re no longer giving Ukraine money, we are now selling them weapons and European countries are paying for it through NATO. They are using NATO to buy the weapons and transferring them to Ukraine,’ Rubio pointed out. ‘That’s another big change from the way this war was approached under the Biden administration.’

Following the Monday peace talks in D.C., reports surfaced that Putin had agreed to a future meeting with Zelenskyy, followed by a trilateral meeting involving the United States.

For Rubio, just the fact that the two countries are open to talking to each other is a win and a big change from the previous administration.   

‘I’m not saying they are going to leave that room with a peace deal, but I think the fact that people are now talking to each other – this wasn’t happening for three-and-a-half years,’ Rubio told host Waters, adding that Trump has ‘made it a priority’ to bring about peace in Ukraine.

The secretary also cited six previous peace agreements that he said Trump has brokered, which Rubio said proves Trump’s commitment to peace and fewer wars.

‘President Trump is the only leader in the world – acknowledged by all the Europeans – the only leader in the world that can talk to both [Putin and Zelenskyy] and bring them both to a meeting,’ Rubio said Monday evening. ‘We should be proud that we have a president who has made peace a priority in his administration.’

A conservative think tank that played a key role in shaping President Donald Trump’s ‘one big, beautiful bill’ is circulating a new roadmap of recommendations for Republicans’ second act.

The Economic Policy Innovation Center, which styles itself as ‘EPIC For America,’ has been circulating a new memo with key congressional GOP figures in recent days, a source familiar with the group’s plans told Fox News Digital.

The memo, which was obtained by Fox News Digital, advises lawmakers to broadly push for further Medicaid and regulatory reforms, crack down on federal dollars for government pensions and student loans, and use fiscal policy to extend conservative goals on abortion and transgender treatment.

Passing Trump’s massive agenda bill despite razor-thin majorities in the House and Senate was a major victory for Republican leaders. EPIC, which hails the bill as a success, argues that continued reforms are needed for meaningful fiscal reform.

‘Unfortunately, even with the victories for the American people in the OBBB, our work is far from done. We must rebuild an economy that truly works for every American, while protecting the nation’s financial foundation to ensure lasting resilience,’ the memo said.

‘The federal government is rapidly running out of fiscal space. Maintaining sufficient fiscal space is critical in order to respond appropriately to a crisis. Without space between the fiscal limit and the current level of debt, elected officials will not have room to maneuver in the event of war, a natural disaster, or a recession.’

On Medicaid, the memo advises further cuts to the cost-sharing burden on the federal government – known as the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) – for ‘large, wealthy states’ as well as Washington, D.C.

FMAP refers to the rate at which the federal government matches state Medicaid payments, which is currently 50%.

The memo calls to ‘end the special Medicaid subsidy FMAP treatment’ for D.C., whose minimum is 70%.

Republicans’ first budget reconciliation bill reduced certain FMAP expansions permitted under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), including for emergency care for states that provide Medicaid coverage to illegal immigrants.

In turn, EPIC advises lawmakers to enhance personal and employer-based healthcare, like Individual Coverage Health Reimbursement Arrangements (ICHRAs) and Health Savings Accounts (HSAs).

Medicaid cuts were one of the largest sticking points during talks for the initial bill and will likely be just as politically fraught for Republicans in the second round. Meanwhile, Democrats have been using those reforms as a political cudgel, accusing the GOP of trying to take healthcare from millions of Americans. 

But conservatives have viewed Medicaid as fraught with waste, fraud, and abuse – insisting their reforms better protect the program for vulnerable people who truly need it.

The memo also advises congressional Republicans to use the budget reconciliation process to ‘reform federal bureaucrat compensation and retirement’ and ‘eliminate public sector student loan forgiveness,’ among other goals.

On the social conservative policy front, EPIC appears to view an extension of the ban on taxpayer funds to abortion providers as critical to a second reconciliation bill.

The first bill was viewed as a victory for pro-life advocates in its ban on Medicaid funds for large healthcare providers that perform abortions, which would affect Planned Parenthood and other similar organizations. But that ban is only effective for a year.

In a section titled ‘Protect Life and American Values,’ EPIC urges lawmakers to ‘extend the prohibition of taxpayer funding for big abortion providers’ as well as block Medicaid funds for gender transition care.

It also calls on lawmakers to ‘invest in election security’ and ‘impose an excise tax on higher education institutions that allow males to participate in women’s sports.’

EPIC was founded by Paul Winfree, who served as director of budget policy during the first Trump administration.

The group also has close ties to Capitol Hill, which it flexed during talks for Trump’s first agenda bill by both recommending policy initiatives and tailoring its advice through the various steps of the budget reconciliation process.

Budget reconciliation, which can be used three times during a given congressional term, allows the party in power to enact broad fiscal policy changes while sidelining the opposition – in this case, Democrats – by lowering the Senate’s threshold for passage from 60 votes to 51.

Brittany Madni, EPIC executive vice president and a former congressional aide, confirmed the memo’s veracity to Fox News Digital. She said the group would use the same ‘playbook’ it did during the first reconciliation process.

She said EPIC is looking to offer ‘an initial suggestion to lawmakers on what to target, and is readying to work with Republicans through the various steps of the process as details change and evolve.’

‘Mandatory spending reform is an essential target for actual fiscal change in order to stave off a debt spiral. This is why a second reconciliation bill building on the wins in the OBBB is important,’ Madni said.

Two sources told Fox News Digital that the group’s efforts so far have included a staff-level briefing with the Republican Study Committee (RSC), a 189-member-strong House GOP group that serves as its own de facto think tank for the Republican conference.

Many of the aforementioned proposals were discussed at that meeting, Fox News Digital was told, with EPIC being invited to speak as part of the RSC’s new initiative to workshop a second reconciliation bill.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has already publicly stated his goal of passing further reconciliation bills. But what a second bill would look like is still unclear.

Democratic Rep. Sarah McBride of Delaware, who identifies as a transgender woman, accused President Donald Trump of waging an attack against ‘American democracy.’

‘This president is taking notes from his favorite dictator. Let’s be clear: a president with popular policies wouldn’t need to illegally gerrymander districts, ban voting machines, or abolish vote-by-mail,’ a Monday night post on the lawmaker’s @Rep_McBride X account declared. ‘This is an all-out assault not just on free and fair elections—but on American democracy itself.’ 

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment early on Tuesday morning.

Trump, who has been aiming to help bring an end to the Russia-Ukraine war, met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and multiple other European figures in Washington, D.C., on Monday after meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday.

During an interview with Fox News Channel’s Sean Hannity on Friday after meeting with Putin, Trump said of the foreign leader, ‘Vladimir Putin, smart guy, said you can’t have an honest… election with mail-in voting.’

Trump declared in a Truth Social post on Monday that he will ‘lead a movement to’ eliminate voting machines and mail-in balloting from U.S. elections.

‘WE WILL BEGIN THIS EFFORT … by signing an EXECUTIVE ORDER to help bring HONESTY to the 2026 Midterm Elections,’ he declared in part of the lengthy post.

‘ELECTIONS CAN NEVER BE HONEST WITH MAIL IN BALLOTS/VOTING, and everybody, IN PARTICULAR THE DEMOCRATS, KNOWS THIS. I, AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, WILL FIGHT LIKE HELL TO BRING HONESTY AND INTEGRITY BACK TO OUR ELECTIONS. THE MAIL-IN BALLOT HOAX, USING VOTING MACHINES THAT ARE A COMPLETE AND TOTAL DISASTER, MUST END, NOW!!!’ the president exclaimed in another portion of the post.

After meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska last week, President Donald Trump touted that he had a ‘very good meeting’ with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and other European leaders at the White House on Monday.

Trump, who has voiced he would like to put an end to mass bloodshed in Eastern Europe, called the multilateral meetings on Monday ‘a very good, early step for a War that has been going on for almost four years.’

In a Truth Social post after the discussions, Trump wrote, ‘I had a very good meeting with distinguished guests,’ and that ‘everyone is very happy about the possibility of PEACE for Russia/Ukraine.’

Here are the top five takeaways from the president’s ‘big day’ with European leaders.

1. Smiles all around

Monday’s summit marked a dramatic and noticeable shift from Trump and Vice President JD Vance’s now-infamous Oval Office meeting with Zelenskyy in February.

During that meeting, the leaders were caught on camera getting into a heated argument over several topics, including Zelenskyy allegedly not being sufficiently grateful for U.S. support.

On Monday, all the tension seemed to have disappeared. Both Trump and Zelenskyy were all smiles throughout the day, and the Ukrainian leader received a warm welcome from Trump’s Cabinet, including Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Both Zelenskyy and European leaders appeared more at ease with Trump throughout the day and took an optimistic tone. After the meetings, European Union President Ursula von der Leyen posted on X, ‘We are here, as allies and friends, for peace in Ukraine and in Europe. This is an important moment, as we continue to work on strong security guarantees for Ukraine and a lasting and durable peace.’

2. Wardrobe upgrade

Another marked shift from February was Zelenskyy breaking from his trademark jumpsuit attire to wear a suit, something he even joked with the press about while sitting in the Oval Office with Trump.

Zelenskyy, who has been criticized for wearing casual attire to meetings with world leaders, wore all-black attire, including a button-down shirt and jacket. 

‘First of all… President Zelenskyy, you look fabulous in that suit,’ a reporter told Zelenskyy after he sat down with Trump in the Oval Office. 

‘You look good,’ the reporter said before Trump added, ‘I said the same thing.’ 

At another point during the Zelenskyy-Trump bilateral press meeting, the Ukrainian president ribbed a reporter for wearing the same suit he had in February.

‘You’re in the same suit. You see, I changed, you’re not,’ Zelenskyy quipped as both he and Trump burst into laughter.

3. Ceasefire not needed

On a more substantive note, Trump doubled down on his position that a ceasefire is ‘not needed’ to broker a permanent peace between Ukraine and Russia. He cited his recent successes in negotiating peace agreements between other countries across the globe.

‘I don’t think you need ceasefire. You know, if you look at the six deals that I settled this year, they were all at war,’ Trump said during his press conference with Zelenskyy.

‘I didn’t do any ceasefires,’ he went on, adding, ‘And I know that it might be good to have, but I can also understand strategically why, you know, one country or the other wouldn’t want it.’ 

In a rare tense moment during the day, Trump clashed with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz over the need for a ceasefire.

Speaking with Trump and other leaders gathered around a large conference table in the White House, Merz said, ‘To be honest, we all would like to see a ceasefire at the latest from the next meeting on,’ adding, ‘I can’t imagine that the next meeting would take place without a ceasefire. So, let’s work on that.’

He urged the leaders, ‘Let’s try to put pressure on Russia, because the credibility of this effort, these efforts we are undertaking today are depending on, at least, a ceasefire from the beginning of the serious negotiations from the next step on. So, I would like to emphasize this aspect and would like to see a ceasefire from the next meeting, which should be a trilateral meeting wherever it takes place.’

In response, Trump shot back that he is determined ‘to go directly to a peace agreement’ without a ceasefire, saying, ‘Well, we’re going to let the president [Zelenskyy] go over and talk to the president [Putin], and we’ll see how that works out.’

4. United European front

In addition to Zelenskyy, seven major European leaders were present at the White House on Monday, a rare occurrence signaling a united European front and something Trump called an ‘honor’ for the U.S.

This follows Zelenskyy doubling down on Sunday that Ukraine will not agree to cede Crimea or any of its territory to Russia as part of a peace deal.  

‘Since the territorial issue is so important, it should be discussed only by the leaders of Ukraine and Russia at the trilateral [talks with] Ukraine, United States, Russia,’ Zelenskyy said.

Trump said that though the U.S. would be involved with providing Ukraine with security guarantees after the war’s end, he said going forward, Europe must take much of that ‘burden.’

‘I think that the European nations are going to take a lot of the burden,’ Trump said. ‘We’re going to help them, and we’re going to make it very secure. We also need to discuss the possible exchanges of territory, taking into consideration the current line of contact. That means the war zone, the war line center. Pretty obvious. Very sad, actually, to look at them and negotiating positions.’

Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron said Europe is aware that it will shoulder much of the weight of responsibility tied to various security guarantees — and acknowledged it is necessary in order to preserve each respective country’s safety. 

‘In order to have such a long-standing peace for Ukraine and for the whole continent, we do need the security guarantees,’ Macron said. ‘And the first one is clearly a credible Ukrainian army. For the years and decades to come. And the second one is our own commitments. All of us… You can be sure that the Europeans are very lucid about the fact that they have their fair share in the security guarantees for Ukraine, but their own security is clearly at stake in this situation.’

5. Putin on the line

Trump shared that he called Putin after the meetings and that there is already movement on the next step, that is, scheduling a meeting between Zelenskyy and the Russian president. After that meeting, Trump said there would then be a trilateral meeting between Zelenskyy, Putin and himself.

‘At the conclusion of the meetings, I called President Putin, and began the arrangements for a meeting, at a location to be determined, between President Putin and President Zelenskyy. After that meeting takes place, we will have a Trilat, which would be the two Presidents, plus myself,’ wrote Trump.

In another post, Trump called the summit ‘a big day at the White House.’

‘We have never had so many European Leaders here at one time. A great honor for America!!!’ he wrote. ‘Lets see what the results will be???’ 

Fox News Digital’s Diana Stancy, Emma Colton and Amanda Macias contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump described his White House negotiations with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders as ‘a very good, early step’ toward ending the nearly four-year-old Russia-Ukraine war, announcing that he has already spoken with Russian President Vladimir Putin about arranging a direct meeting with Zelenskyy.

Trump said the group of world leaders held discussions on security guarantees for Ukraine, with commitments coming primarily from European nations ‘in coordination with the United States’ in a statement on Truth Social after the meetings.

‘Everyone is very happy about the possibility of PEACE for Russia/Ukraine,’ Trump said, adding that Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and special envoy Steve Witkoff are now leading follow-up talks with Moscow and Kyiv.

Zelenskyy signaled he too was ready to meet directly with Putin. 

A Kremlin readout of the Trump-Putin call confirmed the pair ‘discussed the idea of raising the level of direct Russian-Ukrainian negotiations,’ but did not say whether Putin had agreed. 

Trump outlines next steps

Trump revealed that following the Oval Office meetings he phoned Putin to begin making ‘arrangements for a meeting, at a location to be determined, between President Putin and President Zelenskyy.’ If that takes place, he said, the next stage would be a ‘Trilat’ — a trilateral meeting involving himself, Putin, and Zelenskyy.

Zelenskyy said he would be open to a meeting with Trump and Putin or a meeting with just Putin next. 

‘We confirmed that we are ready for a trilateral meeting,’ the Ukrainian president told reporters after the meeting. ‘And if Russia proposed to the President of the United States bilateral, and then we will see the result of the bilateral, then it can be trilateral. So I said, always, Ukraine will never stop on the way to peace, and we are ready for any kind of format but on the level of leaders.’

While Trump has previously cast himself as a mediator rather than a dealmaker, the suggestion that Putin is open to meeting face-to-face with Zelenskyy marked the biggest breakthrough in peace negotiations yet. ‘Again, this was a very good, early step for a war that has been going on for almost four years,’ he said.

Security guarantees under discussion

The idea of ‘security guarantees’ has long been central to Ukraine’s demands. According to Trump, these would be provided primarily by European states, coordinated with Washington. Ahead of the meetings, Trump had not ruled out U.S. military involvement in the guarantees, but he has since stressed that Europe will bear the primary burden of defending Ukraine.

Trump also reiterated his view that U.S. support should come through arms sales rather than aid packages. ‘We’re not giving anything. We’re selling weapons,’ he said earlier this week. Ukraine has reportedly floated a proposal to buy as much as $100 billion in U.S.-made weapons with European financing, according to the Financial Times. 

Land swaps may be on the table 

During the meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy were pictured viewing a map outlining the front lines of the war and the Ukrainian territory currently occupied by Russia, about 20% of the country. Trump may have used the map to discuss with Zelenskyy which regions he could realistically part with in order to obtain peace. 

According to a source familiar with Zelenskyy’s visit planning, clarity on U.S. and European security guarantees could help the Ukrainian leader make the case domestically for any territorial concessions — a likely core element of talks with Russia. The question of which areas Ukraine could ‘let go’ and which it must retain remains deeply sensitive in Kyiv, where public opinion has hardened after years of fighting and heavy civilian losses.

Russia’s categorical rejection

Moscow strongly opposed the concept of NATO-style guarantees. The Russian foreign ministry released a statement during the White House talks warning that any arrangement involving NATO countries could trigger ‘uncontrolled escalation’ with ‘unpredictable consequences,’ according to state media outlet RIA. That categorical rejection underscores the difficulty of bridging the gap between Ukraine’s security needs and Russia’s demands.

European leaders weigh in

German Chancellor Merz stressed that no meaningful talks could occur without at least a temporary ceasefire.

‘I can’t imagine that the next meeting would take place without a ceasefire,’ Merz said. ‘So let’s work on that and put pressure on Russia, because the credibility of these efforts depends on at least a ceasefire.’

Fox News’ Jacqui Heinrich contributed to this report. 

I’m with President Trump: ‘There’s no deal until there’s a deal.’

And now that he has changed his stance and is openly siding with Vladimir Putin, despite vehement objections from Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who visited the White House yesterday, a deal seems rather elusive.

Putin’s interest in peace is underscored by his continued bombardment of Ukraine, the country he illegally invaded, with the latest round killing 10 people. Which is to say the Kremlin dictator has no conceivable interest in peace, except on his maximalist terms.

Look, I’m rooting for Trump. If he can somehow square the circle of this brutal and bloody war, and bring things to an end, he will deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. And Hillary said she’d nominate him.

But the negative reviews of the Alaska sitdown has rankled Trump and prompted him to lash out at Fake News on Truth Social:

‘If we had the Summit elsewhere, the Democrat run and controlled media would have said what a terrible thing THAT was. These people are sick!’

Okay, he doesn’t like the press. Except we now know, thanks to his in-flight comments to Fox’s Bret Baier, that he enjoys the sparring, likening it to a golf game. The reporters are all trying to get him to make a mistake. If he makes no breaking news, he wins. If he does say something that’s breaking news, he didn’t put the ball in the hole and they’ve got him. 

I watched Sunday morning as Zelenskyy and top European officials said only Russia can end the war and that Ukraine would not be surrendering the Donbas region, home to more than 200,000 people.  

As Gen. Wesley Clark told me on ‘Media Buzz,’ once you get past the Donbas region, it’s a ‘straight shot’ to Kyiv, so the brave Ukrainians, who have held off the far bigger Russian war machine, would be defenseless. 

It’s mildly encouraging that media reports say Putin has accepted the need for security forces to protect Ukraine, meaning the Europeans – and the U.S. – would send troops for a peacekeeping unit.

When special envoy Steve Witkoff, who was in the room during the Putin session, was asked about Trump’s change of position, I thought he’d deny it, but he didn’t. That confirms the stories are true, and certainly complicates matters.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said over the weekend that Trump ‘said himself that a ceasefire was his absolute most important and highest priority. So, it was a joint demand, which isn’t happening now. We would have indeed hoped for a cease-fire first. The Russian side was obviously unwilling to do that.’

So what exactly is Putin giving up? Nothing, as far as I can see. Every day without a cease-fire is another day that the indicted war criminal gets to cement his battlefield gains.

And, under these circumstances, Trump expects Ukraine’s president to join in a trilateral meeting with him and Putin? 

Responding to Fox’s Peter Doocy, Trump said: ‘I think if everything works out well today, we’ll have a trilat and I think there will be a reasonable chance of ending the war when we do that.’ 

Zelenskyy, who repeatedly praised Trump–he wasn’t going to make the same mistake twice after getting kicked out of the White House following his meltdown back in February–reminded reporters that ‘we live under, each day, attacks. You know, that today have been a lot of attacks and a lot of wounded people. And the child was dead, small one, one year and half.

‘So we need to stop this war, to stop Russia. And we need to support American and European partners that will do our best, for this. So, and I think we show that we are strong people and we supported the idea of the united system of personnel, President Trump to stop this war, to make a diplomatic way of finishing this war. And we are ready for trilateral as presidents.’

Now that stunned me. He’s willing to sit down with Putin and Trump after insisting on a cease-fire first – which was also the president’s position until he flipped and abandoned it after the sitdown with the indicted war criminal?

So what was the mood afterward?

‘I’m optimistic that collectively we can reach an agreement that would deter any future aggression against Ukraine,’ Trump said. He added, ‘I have a feeling you and President Putin are going to work something out.’

Zelenskyy ‘praised the constructive specific meeting,’ adding: ‘There is a lot of people in prison. So we need them back and guarantees which will work for the years. We spoke about it and I showed president a lot of details on the battlefield, on the map.’ 

But will Putin, who views Zelenskyy as an illegitimate leader, attend?

All the chatter about the red carpet and other atmospherics is meaningless. Yes, Zelenskyy wore a suit, albeit a military-style one.

We should all be rooting for Trump. Even if he falls short, and the war drags on, it can only end with a negotiated settlement.

At one point, Trump broke away from the session and called Putin, rather than waiting till afterwards.

Trump posted that this was ‘a very good early step,’ and early may be the operative word. The war could certainly drag on. But it can’t end on the battlefield. We wouldn’t have gotten this far without Trump’s unique preference for leader-to-leader talks, even though he’s now openly siding with Vladimir Putin. Sometimes that produces results and sometimes it doesn’t, as with Kim Jong-un. But it’s given him – and us – a shot.