Russian President Vladimir Putin proposes a summit next month with U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping to negotiate an end to the four-year-old war in Ukraine — and Kyiv is not on the guest list for the talks about its own future. It is a deal that, as reported, would favour Moscow. Reuters reported the development on October 18 and 19, citing a Wall Street Journal report published Sunday based on people familiar with the discussions.
That framing matters, and it is worth stating plainly at the start: this is a proposal, not a confirmed summit. According to Reuters, the Journal reported that the idea has been discussed, that the Kremlin has confirmed discussions are taking place, and that a senior U.S. official said Trump has not agreed to it. No date has been set beyond a suggested venue and window, no agenda has been agreed, and — in the format as reported by Reuters and the Wall Street Journal — Ukraine itself is not one of the three parties at the table.
What was proposed, and when it was proposed
Citing a former Russian intelligence officer briefed on the matter, the Wall Street Journal said Putin's suggestion came during an October 9 telephone call with Trump, Reuters reported. According to Reuters, that same call also yielded a deal for the United States to buy Russian diesel and facilitate its sale on the global market. In other words, if the Journal's account is right, the summit idea did not arrive in isolation. It arrived in a conversation that was already producing a concrete economic agreement between Washington and Moscow.
The Kremlin suggested holding the trilateral dialogue on the sidelines of the upcoming Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, known as APEC, on November 18-19 in Shenzhen, according to people familiar with the discussions cited by Reuters and the Wall Street Journal. APEC side meetings are a familiar piece of diplomatic machinery: leaders are already in the same city, already surrounded by their delegations, and a sideline meeting can be arranged without the ceremony — or the public commitment — of a standalone summit. That is part of why the venue matters. A proposal attached to APEC can be tested quietly, and it can also be allowed to fade quietly if the other parties do not take it up.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed to the Wall Street Journal that discussions were taking place. Reuters quoted Peskov telling the Journal: “There is no clear understanding yet regarding the meeting itself or its potential agenda, although all three parties acknowledge the hypothetical possibility of such a meeting taking place.” Read that sentence carefully. It confirms conversations. It does not confirm a meeting, a format, or an agenda — and Peskov's own word for the meeting, as quoted by Reuters via the Journal, is “hypothetical.”
On the American side, the picture is the same: interest, perhaps, but no agreement. A senior U.S. official told the Wall Street Journal that Trump had not agreed to such a summit, but could be receptive to the idea, Reuters reported. According to Reuters, the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment, the Kremlin could not be reached outside regular business hours, and the Russian and Chinese embassies in Washington did not immediately reply to requests for comment. China's public position, in the reporting so far, is silence — which is itself one of the things to watch in the coming days.
A warming Washington-Moscow track, in plain view
The proposal lands after a week in which the U.S.-Russia relationship visibly warmed. Trump signed an order on Friday waiving key sanctions on Moscow, a move covered in our nightly news wrap-up for October 19, whose third item covers the sanctions waiver. Reuters reported that the October 9 call behind the summit proposal also produced the Russian diesel deal. Taken together — a sanctions waiver, a diesel agreement, and now, according to the Wall Street Journal as reported by Reuters, a proposed three-way summit — the sequence describes a negotiating track between Washington and Moscow that is moving faster than the public diplomacy around Ukraine has suggested.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has responded with open criticism. Zelenskyy warned that the diesel deal and the sanctions waiver would embolden Putin, hurt Ukraine, and prolong the war, and he said waiving sanctions “will hurt Ukraine,” according to overnight coverage of his remarks. That is not a diplomatic footnote. It is the leader of the country being discussed saying, in public, that the direction of travel will extend the fighting rather than end it.
Overnight reporting also added context from Washington, and it cut in more than one direction. According to that overnight reporting, Trump defended his Russia decision on Sunday on Truth Social and wrote that Zelenskyy “doesn't want to end this war.” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Sunday that “no sanctions have been lifted” and that only the diesel embargo was lifted, according to the same overnight reporting. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking in Uzbekistan, denied that Washington had paused intelligence sharing with Ukraine, according to overnight reporting. Those statements do not resolve the basic tension in the story. American officials are describing a narrower set of moves than critics are describing, while Kyiv is describing consequences that go well beyond a single embargo.
What it means: Ukraine's future, discussed without Ukraine
The most important fact in this story may be the guest list. As Reuters reported the Wall Street Journal's account, the proposed format is Putin, Trump, and Xi. Ukraine is not part of that format as reported. A negotiation about ending a war in Ukraine, structured without Ukraine at the table, raises an obvious question that no statement so far has answered: who, in that room, is speaking for Kyiv's terms — its territory, its security, and its future — and what happens to an agreement that the country most affected did not help shape?
China's presence at the table matters for a separate reason. Beijing has long positioned itself as a potential broker in the Ukraine conflict while maintaining close ties with Moscow. Putting Xi in the room would formalise that role in a way no previous format has. According to Reuters, the Journal's reporting describes a deal that would favour Moscow — and a three-way format in Shenzhen, on China's home ground during APEC, would give Beijing both visibility and leverage in any outcome. Whether China wants that role on these terms is unknown; as Reuters reported, the Chinese embassy in Washington did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
None of this means a summit will happen. Proposals floated through briefings and newspaper reports are often trial balloons — a way to test reaction in Washington, Beijing, Kyiv, and European capitals before anyone commits. Peskov's careful wording, as quoted by Reuters via the Wall Street Journal, leaves the Kremlin room to retreat. The senior U.S. official's wording to the Journal, as reported by Reuters, leaves Trump room either way: not agreed, but possibly receptive. What would change the story from a floated idea to a real diplomatic event is confirmation — a White House statement that Trump will attend, a Chinese statement that Xi will take part, or a formal APEC sideline schedule that includes the meeting.
Until then, the honest summary is the one the sources themselves support. Reuters reported a Wall Street Journal report: Putin has proposed, the Kremlin has confirmed discussions, Trump has not agreed, China has not commented, and Zelenskyy has warned that the moves surrounding the proposal will prolong the war his country is still fighting. For broader context on how aid and funding decisions are reshaping conditions on the ground, see our coverage of the World Food Programme's aid cuts, and for another government under pressure this weekend, our report on events in France.
What to watch next is straightforward: any White House confirmation or denial on the record, any response from Beijing, any formal word from Kyiv beyond Zelenskyy's criticism, and whether the November 18-19 APEC dates in Shenzhen start appearing in official schedules. If any of those things happen, this stops being a proposal and becomes a summit. Right now, according to Reuters and the Wall Street Journal, it is not one yet.
