In brief
Trump revealed he had held phone talks about the Ukraine settlement and plans to keep the dialogue going into Saturday, November 7. He said Russia is committed to resolving the conflict and that progress is being made, citing meetings with Russian and Ukrainian officials. The former president also met a Russian envoy but declined to disclose details, raising questions about the nature and scope of the proposed deal.
Former President Donald Trump announced on a Washington briefing that he had held telephone conversations about Ukraine’s settlement and intends to continue the dialogue into Saturday, Nov. 7, according to a report by Russian state news outlet TASS. Trump said he had “phone calls today” and will be “having some tomorrow,” though he did not name the officials he spoke with.
At the same briefing, Trump reiterated that he believes Russia is committed to resolving the conflict. He referenced Russian President Vladimir Putin’s remarks from the Valdai Discussion Club and stressed that both Russia and Ukraine appear “eager for a settlement” for the first time, according to TASS.
Adding to the narrative of progress, the former U.S. president told reporters that talks with Russia and Ukraine are “working well” and that the administration is making “a lot of progress.” Those remarks were captured in the November 7 TASS article titled *Trump sees significant progress in resolving Ukrainian conflict*.
In a separate but related development, the Jerusalem Post reported that Trump had met with Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev, saying he would not disclose the contents of the discussion. Dmitriev, who is a senior official at Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, is the ambassador to the U.N. Diplomatic records confirm his prominence within Russian foreign policy circles. Trump also indicated that a deal could emerge soon to end the war, again according to the Jerusalem Post.
The combination of these statements raises several open questions. First, who exactly did Trump speak with during the phone calls, and what proposals were advanced? Second, what were the substantive points discussed with Dmitriev, the senior Russian envoy, and how does that influence the broader diplomatic landscape? And finally, how the former U.S. president’s comments align with or diverge from the current U.S. administration’s policy toward Ukraine and Russia remains unclear.
Some analysts argue that Trump’s focus on “big, beautiful” deals could reflect a shift toward engagement over sanctions. Yet the lack of detail fuels skepticism about the feasibility of a rapid settlement. Others see the comments as a continuation of Trump’s long‑standing preference for back‑channel diplomacy, an approach that has been used on several other international fronts.
Scholars studying U.S. foreign policy note that Trump’s repeated emphasis on progress and dialogue contrasts with the hard line adopted by the current administration against Russia. They suggest that any negotiations he champions would need to navigate the interests of multiple stakeholders, including NATO allies, Ukraine’s own government, and Russia’s war‑oriented political factions.
While no official Russian or Ukrainian statements confirm the specifics, the timing of Trump’s remarks—coinciding with his meeting with Dmitriev and statements about a forthcoming deal—suggests that negotiations may be underway behind closed doors. The Trump administration’s past has shown that such meetings can unlock new avenues for compromise, albeit sometimes at a cost to other policy goals.
For observers, the key next steps will include monitoring any official releases from Russian or Ukrainian officials, and tracking whether the former president’s promises translate into concrete agreements. As the U.S. and Europe consider potential shifts in sanctions or diplomatic engagement, the evolving situation in Ukraine remains one of the most volatile international crossroads of late.
Meanwhile, Trump’s brief comments underscore how the former President’s presence in the political sphere may continue to influence discussions on the Ukraine war, either by offering a fresh channel for negotiation or by adding uncertainty to an already complex diplomatic puzzle.
