Ukraine peace talks to resume next week: Ceasefire window and strategic maneuvers under U.S. leadership.

On January 31, U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff met with Russian President’s Special Envoy for Economic Affairs Kirill Dmitriev in Miami, Florida. This closed-door meeting, described by Witkoff as productive and constructive, took place ahead of the scheduled new round of Russia-Ukraine-U.S. trilateral talks in Abu Dhabi on February 1. On the same day, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated that Kyiv is preparing for possible peace negotiations next week, although the originally planned Sunday talks might be adjusted in location or timing due to tensions in U.S.-Iran relations. Meanwhile, a limited air strike pause against Kyiv, personally proposed by U.S. President Donald Trump and verbally agreed upon by Putin, has been in effect since January 29 and is tentatively set to last until February 1. This series of intensive diplomatic engagements and temporary tactical pauses occurs against the backdrop of Ukraine enduring a severe winter with temperatures below minus 20 degrees Celsius and heavily damaged energy infrastructure, opening a delicate and uncertain diplomatic window for the nearly four-year-long conflict.

The core deadlock at the negotiation table: territory and the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.

From Abu Dhabi to Miami, all diplomatic engagements inevitably revolve around two fundamental obstacles: the territorial status of the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine, and control over Europe's largest nuclear power plant—the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant. U.S. envoy Wittkoff acknowledged after the talks that the territorial issue remains the sole unresolved key topic in the current negotiations. Moscow's demand is clear: Ukraine must recognize Russia's sovereignty over the entire territory of Donetsk Oblast, including approximately 5,000 square kilometers of land still under Ukrainian military control. This area accounts for about 20% of the oblast's territory and has been a primary objective of Russian military efforts since last summer's offensive, yet remains not fully captured.

Zelensky's stance is equally resolute. At a press conference on January 30, he explicitly ruled out the possibility of ceding territory: Ukraine will not accept any restrictions on its sovereignty. He proposed that any solution regarding the Donbas region must be fair, meaning Ukraine controls the territory it currently holds in practice. This statement excludes the possibility of legally or de facto recognizing the current Russian occupation. According to Zelensky, the compromise proposed by the United States involves establishing some form of free economic zone in the disputed territory, but this does not address the core conflict over sovereignty.

The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant is another high-risk issue. Located in southeastern Ukraine and occupied by Russian forces since March 2022, the safety situation of this nuclear plant continues to deteriorate. On January 30, 12 countries, including Germany, warned at a special meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna that Russia’s ongoing attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure have pushed the risk of a nuclear accident to the brink of reality. The vulnerability of the power grid directly threatens the electricity supply to safety facilities such as the cooling systems of the nuclear plant. In negotiations, who will control this nuclear plant and how to ensure its safe operation have become security challenges intertwined with territorial issues. Russia clearly views it as an important strategic asset and a bargaining chip, while Ukraine and its Western allies see it as a global security risk that cannot be compromised.

Tactical Pause and Strategic Shift: The Logical Evolution of the Winter Offensive

From 07:00 on January 29 (Kyiv time), the Russian military appears to have halted air strikes on the energy infrastructure in Kyiv and the Kyiv region. This change stems from a personal intervention by U.S. President Trump. On January 29, Trump claimed that he personally requested Putin to suspend attacks on cities like Kyiv for one week, citing Ukraine's extreme cold weather. Kremlin spokesperson Peskov later confirmed that Putin agreed to this request but specified the suspension period as lasting until February 1, aiming to create favorable conditions for negotiations.

The Ukrainian response has been a cautious and pragmatic reciprocal measure. In his video address on the evening of January 30, Zelenskyy stated: "If Russia does not attack our energy facilities, we will not attack theirs." He also emphasized that this is not a formal ceasefire agreement, but rather an opportunity. Data shows that since the suspension took effect, Russian attacks on Ukrainian energy facilities have significantly decreased. Both Ukrainian Presidential Advisor Viktoriia Strahova and Commander of the Kraken Special Forces, Konstantin Nemichev, confirmed receiving information regarding the Russian military's orders prohibiting strikes on energy infrastructure in Kyiv and across Ukraine.

However, the attacks did not cease but shifted their targets. Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister Yuliia Sviridenko noted that within 24 hours from January 30 to 31, Russian forces launched at least 7 attacks on Ukraine's railway infrastructure. President Zelensky also confirmed that Russian forces have shifted their focus to targeting Ukraine's logistics and hub stations, including striking a dedicated power generation vehicle of Ukrainian Railways in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast. This shift reveals an adjustment in Russia's weaponization of winter strategy: after months of attacks on the energy system have caused severe damage, they are now aiming to paralyze Ukraine's military logistics and civilian supply transportation networks, particularly amid the intense fighting on the eastern front (such as around Avdiivka in Donetsk Oblast), to weaken the Ukrainian military's reinforcement and supply capabilities.

Meanwhile, Ukraine's air defense capabilities are facing severe challenges. President Zelensky revealed that due to delays in European allies' payments to the United States for Ukraine's Resilience loan weapons procurement plan, the scheduled delivery of Patriot air defense missiles did not arrive on time. This resulted in gaps in Ukraine's air defense system during Russia's large-scale airstrike on Kyiv earlier this month. The Ukrainian Air Force reported that on the night of January 30 to 31, Russia launched 111 attack drones and 1 Iskander ballistic missile, with Ukraine claiming to have intercepted 80 of the drones. Analysts point out that while Ukraine's air defense pressure may have been partially alleviated in the context of Russia's shifting attack targets, the overall issue of depleting air defense ammunition reserves remains unresolved.

U.S. Diplomatic Shuttle and the Role of the Trump Administration

The United States has played an unprecedented proactive mediator role in this round of diplomatic efforts, with its actions characterized by a dual-track approach. One track involves high-level direct communication between Trump and his inner circle. The phone call with Putin on January 29 was initiated and announced by Trump himself, showcasing his personal diplomatic style. Subsequently, the U.S.-Russia special envoy meeting held in Miami on January 31 featured a U.S. delegation including Special Envoy Vitkov, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and Trump’s son-in-law and senior advisor Jared Kushner. This team, composed of the president’s confidants, economic officials, and special envoys, suggests that the negotiations may extend beyond a mere military ceasefire to encompass broader issues such as post-war economic arrangements or potential adjustments to sanctions.

Another track is the formal tripartite talks framework led by the State Council. The Russia-Ukraine-U.S. tripartite talks originally scheduled for January 23-24 in Abu Dhabi were the first known face-to-face direct negotiations among representatives of the three parties since the full-scale invasion in February 2022. Although U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that Vitkov and Kushner would not attend the follow-up talks originally set for February 1, the U.S. side still committed to sending a delegation. This arrangement may be intended to separate Trump's private diplomacy from U.S. government diplomacy, maintaining both the flexibility of high-level communication channels and the continuity of formal negotiation processes.

However, U.S. diplomatic efforts also face internal and external challenges. The external challenge lies in the tension between the U.S. and Iran potentially disrupting the Ukraine issue. Zelensky has repeatedly mentioned that the talks originally scheduled for February 1 might change in timing or location due to developments between the United States and Iran. This refers to the situation after the suppression of protests in Iran in early January, where the Trump administration continuously threatened military action against Iran and pressured it to return to the nuclear agreement. The internal challenge is that the peace plan promoted by the Trump administration must balance nearly irreconcilable demands from all parties. Vitkov described the talks as constructive, but both Rubio and Kremlin foreign policy advisor Yury Ushakov denied that only territorial issues remain. Ushakov emphasized that many other issues are still on the agenda, including possible security guarantees that the West might provide to Ukraine. This indicates that the negotiations are still in the early stages, far from a breakthrough moment.

The harsh reality of winter and the fragility of diplomatic opportunities.

All diplomatic activities unfold against the backdrop of an exceptionally severe winter in Ukraine. Weather forecasts indicate that starting from February 1, temperatures in Ukraine's capital, Kyiv, will plummet to minus 26 degrees Celsius, with some areas experiencing nighttime lows of minus 30 degrees. Following months of targeted attacks on energy infrastructure, Ukraine's power grid has become extremely fragile. On January 31, a technical failure disrupted the transmission line connecting Ukraine and Moldova, triggering a chain of protective reactions and leading to large-scale power outages in Kyiv, Zhytomyr, Kharkiv, and Moldova's capital, Chișinău. The Kyiv metro temporarily suspended operations due to insufficient voltage, with emergency services evacuating 500 stranded passengers. Nearly 378 high-rise residential buildings in the city remain without heating.

This humanitarian crisis creates an urgency for diplomacy and also limits the effectiveness of any tactical pauses. For the residents of Kyiv, brief pauses in attacks are unlikely to bring fundamental improvement. Konstantin (surname not provided), a 61-year-old retiree, told Reuters: "I trust neither Putin nor Trump. I believe even if he complies now, he will stockpile missiles and then resume the attacks." This widespread sense of distrust means that any temporary arrangement lacking solid guarantees will struggle to win public support or lay the groundwork for a long-term political solution.

From a military analysis perspective, Russia's agreement to a limited pause may also have tactical considerations. When analyzing the wreckage of the January 24 attack, Ukrainian military intelligence discovered a component of a KH-101 cruise missile with a production serial number indicating it was manufactured in 2026. Some analysts believe this may suggest that the Russian military's stockpile of long-range precision-guided munitions has been significantly depleted, forcing them to restrict usage and even deploy test batch products that have not yet been officially commissioned. The pause in attacks could provide the Russian military with breathing room to replenish ammunition and adjust the tempo of strikes. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius expressed skepticism about this round of diplomatic efforts, accusing Putin of bombing Ukraine in an unprecedented manner during the Abu Dhabi talks and stating that he sees no signs of Russia genuinely desiring peace.

The significance of the negotiations that may resume next week lies not in reaching a comprehensive agreement immediately, but in maintaining a dialogue channel that has just opened under the pressure of a harsh winter and a humanitarian crisis. This channel is extremely fragile and could be disrupted by a fierce battle on the front lines, a severe attack, or other variables in major power relations. Nevertheless, for the first time since the Istanbul talks in the spring of 2022, Russia and Ukraine have engaged in synchronized diplomatic contact, strongly mediated by the United States and accompanied by specific tactical adjustments. This in itself has become a new variable in this protracted war of attrition. All parties are testing each other's bottom lines and sincerity, searching for a ladder toward possible, more difficult compromises, even though this ladder remains shrouded in thick fog for now.