Ukraine’s ex-PM Warns Against ‘Sham’ Trump-Putin Diplomacy

Yatsenyuk warned that Ukraine could become the price of a great-power agreement if Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and Xi Jinping negotiated its future without Ukrainian representatives. He said Ukraine’s future and Europe’s security must not be decided by leaders who exclude those directly affected.

His sharpest warning was that Putin wants to “partition Europe.” Yatsenyuk called a three-leader summit without Ukraine “a sham talk.” He argued that Moscow might use negotiations not to settle the war, but to gain time while continuing its broader pressure.

The danger is both political and strategic. Ukraine could face decisions imposed from outside, while European security arrangements could be reshaped without European participation. Yatsenyuk urged Kyiv to preserve American support, since intelligence, Patriot missiles, and other equipment remain crucial to Ukraine’s defence.

In this war, a great-power deal means an arrangement negotiated by the United States, Russia, and China about Ukraine’s future, while Ukraine itself is left out. Yatsenyuk rejects that approach because the country facing the invasion would have no direct say over its territory, security, or political future.

“Sham diplomacy” means negotiations that appear serious but do not genuinely protect the interests of the people affected. Yatsenyuk said Moscow had signalled willingness to resume talks with Ukrainian representatives, yet he accused the Kremlin of using diplomacy to buy time. That makes the process look less like a settlement and more like a tactical pause.

The issue matters because negotiations can change security arrangements as well as battlefield conditions. Yatsenyuk argued that Ukraine and Europe must participate directly. Without them, an agreement could weaken Ukraine’s position and leave Europe’s security exposed to decisions made elsewhere.

Yatsenyuk compared a possible Ukraine deal with the 1938 Munich Agreement and the 1945 Yalta Conference because both are remembered as major-power bargains connected with Europe’s political order. His comparison warns that powerful states might again decide the fate of others without their full participation.

The mechanism of his warning is exclusion. If Trump, Putin, and Xi negotiated Ukraine’s future alone, Ukraine could be treated as an object of diplomacy rather than a participant. Yatsenyuk linked that danger to Putin’s alleged goal of partitioning Europe and said Ukraine’s future could not be negotiated without those directly affected.

The comparison therefore expresses fear of repetition, not a claim that the situations are identical. It suggests that a deal made over Ukraine’s head could produce lasting consequences for borders and security. Yatsenyuk’s preferred alternative is continued Ukrainian and European involvement in any settlement.

The reported gap is severe. Yatsenyuk estimated that Russia could fire 70 to 120 ballistic missiles each month. He said Ukraine needs at least 120 interceptors monthly to protect its cities, yet currently has “practically zero” in its stockpiles.

Using those figures, Ukraine could face 70 to 120 incoming ballistic missiles while lacking the interceptors needed to counter them. Against the stated requirement of 120 interceptors, the immediate shortfall is effectively about 120 missiles’ worth of defensive capacity. The article does not provide a precise operational inventory.

The figures describe a monthly pressure point rather than a guaranteed attack total. Still, they show why Yatsenyuk called the threat immediate as winter approaches. Zelenskyy has appealed to European allies for 300 Patriot interceptor missiles, while American intelligence and other equipment remain important to Ukraine’s defence.

If Russian strikes intensify while Ukraine lacks interceptors, Ukrainian cities could become more exposed to ballistic-missile attacks. Yatsenyuk specifically warned that Russia was increasing strikes on energy infrastructure ahead of winter and said Ukraine needed interceptors to protect its cities.

Damage to energy infrastructure could disrupt electricity and make winter conditions harder for civilians. The article does not give a precise forecast of outages or heating losses, but attacks on energy facilities could reduce the services people rely on during the cold season. Limited air defence would make it harder to stop incoming missiles before they hit.

The immediate reality is a serious supply problem. Yatsenyuk estimated 70 to 120 Russian ballistic missiles could be launched monthly, against Ukraine’s need for at least 120 interceptors and practically zero in stockpiles. Zelenskyy has asked Europe for 300 Patriot missiles to strengthen protection.

Patriot interceptor missiles provide a direct defensive tool against incoming threats. In general, air-defence interceptors attempt to destroy or disable missiles before they reach cities or infrastructure. Yatsenyuk said Ukraine needed at least 120 interceptors each month and that its stockpiles were practically empty.

American intelligence supports defence by providing information that can help identify threats and guide responses. The article does not describe specific intelligence operations, but Yatsenyuk grouped American intelligence with Patriot missiles and other equipment as crucial to Ukraine’s defence. European funds have also been used to purchase equipment.

This support matters more as Russia intensifies attacks on energy infrastructure before winter. Zelenskyy has appealed to European allies for 300 Patriot interceptor missiles. Despite criticising Washington’s Russia policy, Yatsenyuk urged Kyiv to preserve bipartisan American support, saying, “We need Americans in, but not out.”

National sovereignty means that a country has authority over its territory, government, laws, and political choices. It also carries a basic principle of self-determination: decisions about a country’s borders and future should involve that country, rather than being imposed by outside powers.

Applied here, sovereignty explains Yatsenyuk’s objection to Trump, Putin, and Xi negotiating Ukraine’s future without Ukraine. A deal made over Ukraine’s head could decide matters that directly affect its territory, security, and government. That is why he said neither Ukraine’s future nor Europe’s security could be negotiated without those directly affected.

Sovereignty does not prevent countries from negotiating, receiving help, or making agreements. It means the country concerned must have a meaningful role in decisions about its own future. In the article, Yatsenyuk connects that principle to preserving Ukraine’s defence and ensuring that Europe is not reshaped by a bargain made elsewhere.