Trump Open to Trilateral Summit with Putin and Xi
President Donald Trump said Monday he is open to holding a trilateral summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping in China to discuss "denuclearization," calling such a meeting a "very positive thing for the world." The remarks, made to reporters at the White House, come after Putin reportedly proposed the three-way gathering during an Oct. 9 phone call with Trump, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Trump suggested the meeting could be held in China, where all three leaders are expected to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit next month in Shenzhen. "If they'd like to have it, I think it would be held in China," Trump said. The Kremlin confirmed on Oct. 19 that a possible three-way meeting had come up in discussions surrounding the APEC summit, though spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said there were no specific agreements on a meeting or its agenda.
Putin's Proposal Focused on Ukraine War
According to sources cited by the Journal, Putin raised the idea of a trilateral meeting in his Oct. 9 call with Trump, seeking to potentially broker an end to the war in Ukraine—now in its fifth year—without a Ukrainian representative at the table. A senior U.S. official told the Journal that Trump had not yet agreed to participate but might be receptive. The proposal would put three major powers at the table while excluding the country whose territory and future would be up for negotiation.
Context: A Diplomatic Push with High Stakes
The potential summit comes at a delicate moment in the Ukraine conflict and broader great-power relations. Trump has recently eased pressure on Moscow, agreeing to purchase Russian diesel and waiving key sanctions on Oct. 16—moves that have drawn criticism from Kyiv and some Western allies. The sanctions waiver, in particular, has sparked fury among allies amid soaring fuel prices, as reported in this article.
Ukraine Voices Strong Objections
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has sharply criticized the proposed format and the recent U.S. decisions. In an interview with Bloomberg, Zelensky accused Trump of trying to force Ukraine's surrender, saying, "I believe steps have been taken to convince Ukraine to capitulate." He added, "I am not saying that this is the goal our partners are pursuing. I don't want to think that our American partners believe the war against Russia could be ended sooner at Ukraine's expense. But that's how it looks."
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha argued that talks involving Ukraine, the U.S., and Russia could accelerate an end to the war, but substituting China for Ukraine would only encourage Putin to continue fighting. Peskov, however, acknowledged that Ukraine would have to participate in a final settlement, suggesting the trilateral format might be a preliminary step rather than a final negotiation.
Denuclearization as a Broader Goal
Trump framed the proposed summit around "denuclearization," a theme that could encompass arms control discussions among the three nuclear powers. While the White House has not detailed what denuclearization measures might be on the table, the inclusion of China and Russia—both major nuclear powers—signals a potential shift toward broader strategic stability talks. However, the immediate focus appears to be on Ukraine, with Putin seeking a diplomatic pathway that sidelines Kyiv.
The APEC summit in Shenzhen, scheduled for Nov. 18–19, is the likely backdrop for any meeting. The three leaders have not previously met outside of larger multi-leader gatherings, making a trilateral summit a notable first. Trump's willingness to entertain the idea marks a departure from the more confrontational posture the U.S. has sometimes taken toward both Moscow and Beijing.
Perspective: A New Diplomatic Configuration?
The proposed trilateral summit, if realized, would represent a significant reconfiguration of diplomatic efforts around the Ukraine war. By bringing China into the conversation, Putin appears to be betting that Beijing's influence over Moscow—and its leverage with Washington—could help broker a settlement favorable to Russia. For Trump, the meeting offers a chance to demonstrate his deal-making prowess on the world stage and to pursue a broader denuclearization agenda.
But the exclusion of Ukraine from the initial talks raises concerns about legitimacy and long-term viability. Zelensky's accusation that the U.S. is pressuring Ukraine to capitulate underscores the fragility of any agreement reached without Kyiv's direct participation. European allies, already unsettled by Trump's sanctions waiver and Russian diesel purchases, may view the summit with suspicion.
China's Role and Regional Dynamics
China has positioned itself as a potential mediator in the conflict, though it has maintained close ties with Russia. Hosting a trilateral summit would elevate Beijing's diplomatic profile and potentially give Xi leverage in shaping the post-war order. However, China has also sought to avoid direct entanglement in the war, and its willingness to pressure Putin remains uncertain.
The timing—just ahead of the APEC summit—suggests the meeting could be announced on the sidelines of the larger gathering, allowing for a lower-stakes rollout. Trump's comments indicate he is open to the idea but not yet committed, leaving room for the proposal to evolve or unravel.
What It Means for the War and Beyond
For now, the proposal remains preliminary. Peskov's acknowledgment that Ukraine would need to be involved in a final settlement leaves open the possibility that the trilateral meeting is intended as a precursor to broader talks. But the optics of three major powers discussing Ukraine's fate without Ukraine at the table are likely to inflame tensions and complicate any eventual peace process.
As the APEC summit approaches, all eyes will be on whether Trump, Putin, and Xi can agree on a meeting—and what such a meeting would ultimately achieve. The stakes are high: a breakthrough could reshape European security, while a misstep could deepen divisions and prolong the war.
This article was reported based on sources from TIME and Military.com, as well as additional context.
Comments