Donald Trump reportedly urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to travel to Moscow for direct talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin during their meeting at the UN General Assembly. Zelensky rejected Moscow as a venue, while the Kremlin says it would guarantee his security. The disagreement exposes a central problem in renewed peace efforts: the parties remain divided not only over the terms of a settlement, but over where and how negotiations should begin.
INR Report: Based on reporting by RT, citing Bloomberg.
Trump Puts Moscow on the Table
US President Donald Trump reportedly suggested that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky travel to Moscow for direct negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
According to RT's account of Bloomberg's reporting, Trump raised the proposal during his meeting with Zelensky on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York this week. Bloomberg reportedly attributed the account to people familiar with the conversation.
Those sources said Zelensky rejected the proposal and was upset by it.
The reported exchange comes as Washington renews efforts to establish a negotiating path between Moscow and Kiev. Trump representatives Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner have travelled to both capitals this month as part of that diplomatic push. Separate reporting indicates the administration has also been discussing an energy ceasefire, reopening the Black Sea grain corridor and possible trilateral talks involving the United States, Russia and Ukraine. :chatgpt-content-reference{index="0"}
Zelensky's Blunt Response
The disagreement over Moscow became public when reporters questioned Zelensky outside the United Nations about whether he would travel to the Russian capital.
Zelensky responded that he would go "on a f*ing missile."
The Kyiv Independent independently reported the exchange, describing it as Zelensky rejecting Putin's challenge to come to Moscow and noting that the Ukrainian president has instead advocated a meeting in a neutral location. :chatgpt-content-reference{index="1"}
The response illustrates how politically and strategically difficult a Moscow meeting would be for Kiev. Russia is the country Ukraine is fighting, and accepting Moscow as the venue would carry significant security and political symbolism.
Moscow, however, argues that the invitation remains open.
Kremlin Offers Security Guarantees
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said this week that Putin's position on a meeting had not changed.
According to multiple reports, Peskov said Zelensky could travel to Moscow if he genuinely wanted negotiations and that Russia would provide security guarantees for such a visit. :chatgpt-content-reference{index="2"}
That does not resolve the broader dispute.
Ukraine has suggested neutral venues for direct talks, while Moscow continues to present the Russian capital as an acceptable location. The disagreement over geography therefore reflects the deeper absence of trust between the two governments.
The Ceasefire Dispute
The diplomatic manoeuvring is occurring alongside a separate argument over whether fighting should stop before substantive negotiations begin.
Ukraine and its supporters have called for an immediate ceasefire as the basis for negotiations.
Russia has resisted an unconditional pause. Moscow argues that stopping military operations without resolving the underlying political and security issues would allow Ukraine to regroup and rearm.
Those positions produce two very different negotiating sequences.
Kiev's approach is broadly: stop the fighting, then negotiate.
Moscow's position is broadly: negotiate the conditions for ending the conflict, then establish a durable cessation of hostilities.
Neither formulation, by itself, establishes whether the resulting agreement would be acceptable to the other side.
Washington Searches for an Opening
Trump's reported Moscow suggestion should therefore be viewed within a wider American attempt to restart direct diplomacy.
Axios reported this week that Washington is pursuing several near-term measures, including reciprocal restrictions on attacks against energy infrastructure, reopening Black Sea grain movements and trilateral negotiations potentially involving Trump, Putin and Zelensky. :chatgpt-content-reference{index="3"}
Zelensky has publicly indicated that Ukraine could accept an energy ceasefire if Russia reciprocates. :chatgpt-content-reference{index="4"}
That creates at least one potential area for limited agreement even while the fundamental territorial and security questions remain unresolved.
The significance of Trump's reported suggestion may therefore be less about Moscow itself than the principle behind it: Washington appears to be trying to move negotiations from diplomacy conducted through intermediaries towards direct discussions involving the leaders.
Whether Moscow is an acceptable venue is another matter entirely.
The Territorial Question Remains
The central obstacles to a settlement have not disappeared.
Russia continues to demand Ukrainian neutrality and abandonment of NATO membership, alongside territorial arrangements reflecting Russian control of Crimea and areas of Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson.
Ukraine rejects Russian sovereignty over the occupied territories and has maintained its right to determine its own security relationships.
These are not procedural disagreements. They concern territory, sovereignty and Ukraine's future security architecture.
A Putin-Zelensky meeting could therefore create a negotiating channel without resolving any of the issues that have prevented a settlement so far.
Does This Affect New Zealand?
Yes. For New Zealand, the significance lies less in whether Zelensky eventually travels to Moscow than in whether the renewed American diplomatic effort produces a credible pathway towards reducing or ending the conflict.
New Zealand has imposed sanctions on Russia and provided military training, humanitarian assistance and other support to Ukraine. Any negotiated settlement would therefore affect the foreign-policy environment in which Wellington has operated since Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022.
There are also economic implications.
The war has contributed to disruption in global energy, agricultural commodity and fertiliser markets. New Zealand is geographically distant from the battlefield but remains exposed to those international prices through fuel, shipping, farming inputs and trade.
A durable settlement could reduce some geopolitical risk. A temporary ceasefire followed by renewed fighting could produce a very different outcome.
For New Zealand, the important distinction is therefore between a pause in the war and a settlement of the war.
Trump's reported proposal demonstrates that Washington is continuing to search for direct diplomatic channels. Whether those efforts progress will depend not simply on getting Putin and Zelensky into the same room, but on whether Moscow and Kiev can narrow the substantial differences over territory, security guarantees, NATO and the conditions under which fighting would actually stop.
Independent reporting. Original context. Credited sources.
Source
RT, 25 September 2026: Trump tells Zelensky to meet Putin in Moscow – Bloomberg
Additional context: Axios - Zelensky: U.S. pushing energy ceasefire, trilateral talks with Russia
Additional context: Kyiv Independent - Zelensky vows to come to Moscow for Putin talks 'on a missile'