Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is looking to the Middle East for inspiration as he prepares for a pivotal meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump, hoping that recent diplomatic momentum in that region could help bring an end to Ukraine’s protracted conflict with Russia. On October 16, 2025, just a day before his scheduled talks with Trump, Zelensky took to the Telegram messaging app to share his hopes with the world—and to send a clear message to both allies and adversaries.
“We have a meeting planned with President Trump tomorrow and we are counting on the impulse to curb terror and war which worked in the Middle East to help end Russia's war against Ukraine,” Zelensky wrote, as reported by Reuters. His words, brimming with cautious optimism, reflect a broader strategy: harnessing the apparent successes of recent Middle East diplomacy as a template for resolving Ukraine’s own more than three-and-a-half-year-old war.
The timing of Zelensky’s statement is no accident. The Middle East, long a region synonymous with intractable conflict, has recently seen a series of agreements and negotiations that, at least for now, have brought a measure of calm and renewed dialogue. For Zelensky, these developments are more than just distant headlines—they offer a potential roadmap for Ukraine’s own struggle.
According to AFP, the Ukrainian leader’s message was as much about signaling resolve as it was about seeking support. “The language of strength and justice is sure to work with respect to Russia as well,” Zelensky declared. It’s a phrase that speaks both to his belief in the power of principled diplomacy and to his understanding of the realities of international politics, where muscle and moral clarity often go hand in hand.
But if Zelensky was hoping to draw a direct parallel between the Middle East and Ukraine, he stopped just short of doing so when it came to President Trump’s own diplomatic moves. Notably, Zelensky did not refer directly to Trump’s agreement, made in a telephone conversation on October 16, to hold new talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Still, the subtext was hard to miss.
Instead, Zelensky pointed to a new dynamic at play. “Upon hearing of Tomahawks, Moscow is in a hurry to renew dialogue,” he said, referencing Trump’s suggestion that he might provide Kyiv with Tomahawk missiles—a move that would significantly bolster Ukraine’s military capabilities. The implication? That the mere possibility of advanced U.S. weaponry entering the conflict had prompted a shift in Moscow’s posture, nudging the Kremlin back toward the negotiating table.
This is not just speculation. For months, Ukraine has faced relentless attacks on its energy infrastructure—strikes that have left millions without power and cost the country dearly. In response, Zelensky has been working hard to secure more robust air defense systems and other advanced weaponry from Western allies. As Reuters reported, he was meeting with representatives of defense companies, “manufacturers of powerful weapons that can definitely strengthen our defenses,” including those specializing in air defense systems designed to protect critical infrastructure.
“We are meeting with manufacturers of powerful weapons that can definitely strengthen our defenses,” Zelensky said, making it clear that Ukraine’s search for security is both urgent and ongoing. The focus on air defense is particularly pressing, given the repeated drone and missile attacks on Ukrainian cities and power plants over the past year—a campaign that has tested the resilience of Ukraine’s military and civilian population alike.
The backdrop to all this is, of course, the war itself. More than three and a half years after Russia’s full-scale invasion, the conflict has settled into a brutal, grinding stalemate. Front lines have shifted only marginally in recent months, but the human and economic toll continues to mount. For many Ukrainians, the prospect of a negotiated peace—however distant—offers a glimmer of hope amidst the hardship.
Yet the road to peace is anything but straightforward. While Zelensky’s invocation of the Middle East peace process is meant to inspire, it also serves as a reminder of how difficult such negotiations can be. The recent agreements in the Middle East were the product of intense diplomacy, mutual concessions, and, perhaps most importantly, a shared recognition that endless conflict benefits no one. Whether similar conditions exist in the case of Ukraine and Russia remains an open question.
For President Trump, the upcoming meeting with Zelensky presents both an opportunity and a challenge. On the one hand, the chance to play a decisive role in ending a major European conflict could burnish his credentials as a dealmaker and statesman. On the other, any move to provide Ukraine with advanced weaponry—especially something as potent as Tomahawk missiles—risks further escalating tensions with Moscow.
It’s a delicate balancing act, and one that will require deft diplomacy. Trump’s willingness to engage in new talks with Putin, as reported by Reuters, suggests a preference for negotiation over confrontation. But as Zelensky’s comments make clear, Ukraine is counting on more than just words; it wants concrete commitments, both in terms of security guarantees and military support.
There’s also a broader international dimension to consider. The war in Ukraine has become a flashpoint for global politics, drawing in not just the United States and Russia, but also the European Union, NATO, and a host of other actors. The outcome of the Zelensky-Trump meeting could have ripple effects far beyond Kyiv and Moscow, influencing everything from transatlantic relations to the future of international arms control.
For now, much remains uncertain. Will the “language of strength and justice” really persuade Russia to change course? Can the lessons of the Middle East be applied to the very different realities of Eastern Europe? And perhaps most importantly, will the upcoming talks yield anything more than another round of diplomatic posturing?
What is clear is that President Zelensky is not waiting for events to unfold on their own. By reaching out to international partners, engaging with defense manufacturers, and invoking the example of the Middle East, he is doing everything in his power to keep Ukraine’s cause at the forefront of the global agenda. As the world watches and waits, the stakes—for Ukraine, for Europe, and for the international order—could hardly be higher.
The next chapter in Ukraine’s search for peace may depend as much on the lessons of distant regions as on the hard realities of its own battlefield. For Zelensky, the promise of diplomacy, backed by strength, remains a beacon of hope in an otherwise uncertain landscape.
