After the meeting between the Ukrainian and U.S. presidents, debate is still swirling over where potential talks with Vladimir Putin could be held, with the Russian leader insisting on Moscow. Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said Ukraine considers it fair for any bilateral meeting to take place in neutral Europe or in Turkey — a NATO member and “part of Europe.” At the same time, he noted that using Hungary as a negotiation venue is “difficult” right now, given Viktor Orbán’s stance against supporting Ukraine.
Which countries are being considered?
Immediately after the Trump–Zelenskyy talks, French President Emmanuel Macron signaled that the next meeting should take place in Europe. In an interview with French TV channel LCI, he suggested Switzerland, specifically Geneva. Switzerland’s foreign minister, Ignazio Cassis, went further, saying Bern was even prepared to grant Putin immunity so he would not be arrested under the International Criminal Court warrant in The Hague, calling it “a 100% achievable goal.”
“Europeans probably see Switzerland as a venue that wouldn’t negatively impact such negotiations. But the chances of the meeting actually taking place there are likely well below 50%,” said Swiss diplomat Thomas Greminger, head of the Geneva Centre for Security Policy.
The Swiss newspaper Neue Zürcher Zeitung points out that Russia has consistently expressed hostility toward Switzerland in recent years. For example, the Russian Embassy in Switzerland told the paper that, after adopting “anti-Russian punitive measures” in line with the EU and the U.S., Switzerland can no longer be seen by Moscow as “neutral and impartial.”
“At this stage, the idea of holding a summit in Geneva is probably little more than a European dream. The ‘coalition of the willing’ seems to favour Switzerland mainly because they believe they can exert more influence there than, say, in Turkey or an Arab state. Ukraine would likely be open to Geneva as well,” writes Neue Zürcher Zeitung.
Austria’s Foreign Ministry has also signalled support for granting Putin immunity if talks were to take place there. Chancellor Christian Stocker noted that “Vienna has a long tradition as a venue for dialogue” and offers “excellent conditions” thanks to the international organisations based in the city — foremost among them the OSCE, Die Presse reports. Crucially, Austria is not part of any military alliance under its constitution and is therefore outside NATO — a factor that could be significant for Russia.
During a videoconference of the “coalition of the willing,” Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni suggested Rome as a potential venue. Middle Eastern locations are also being considered, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar.
On August 12, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan told Zelenskyy in a phone call that Turkey was also ready to host a leaders’ summit. “The creation of working groups in the military, humanitarian, and political spheres will pave the way for a high-level meeting,” Erdoğan said. Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko had even beaten him to the offer with a similar proposal.
Meanwhile, the most heated debate has focused on the possibility of Hungary as the venue, as reported by The Washington Post and Politico. According to Hungary’s foreign minister, Budapest has twice offered to host peace talks between Russia and Ukraine — and that offer remains on the table.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk pushed back on the idea. “Budapest? Not everyone may remember this, but in 1994 Ukraine already got assurances of territorial integrity from the US, Russia and the UK. In Budapest. Maybe I’m superstitious, but this time I would try to find another place,” he wrote on X.
Tusk’s comment drew a mocking response from Balázs Orbán, head of the Hungarian prime minister’s political cabinet. “Donald Tusk seems upset that he wasn’t invited to the talks in Washington. In his disappointment, he attacks a country with which Poland has a long-standing friendship — on the very day we Hungarians celebrate the founding of our state. What would his Polish ancestors have thought of such behavior?” Orbán asked.
Why does where the talks are held matter?
One of the key considerations for negotiations at this level is security. The U.S. Secret Service, responsible for the president’s safety, for example, routinely inspects multiple potential sites before deciding on a location — partly to make any potential attacks harder to plan.
The choice of venue carries weight beyond security, because it can influence the tone and direction of the talks. “The content is more important than the venue. But the venue signals where the path is heading. That’s why European states want the summit to take place in Europe. It would highlight the European dimension of a possible solution,” said Margarete Klein of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, as quoted by Die Zeit.
The venue can also serve as a strategic tool to constrain one side: hosting the talks under the banner of the UN or the EU would immediately put Russia at a disadvantage. At the same time, no concrete details about the summit have been released, and it remains uncertain whether the meeting will actually happen in the coming weeks.
The Russian side says Putin is willing to meet Zelensky only if all issues requiring discussion at the highest level “are thoroughly worked out” and “experts and ministers prepare the necessary recommendations.”
Earlier, diplomat and former Ukrainian foreign minister (2007–2009), now head of the Centre for Russian Studies, Volodymyr Ohryzko, told The Ukrainian Week that numerous questions remain around a potential bilateral meeting.
“Putin has declared Zelensky illegitimate; in Russia, he’s labelled ‘spawn of hell,’ the embodiment of a fascist regime, and tagged with all the other insults they attach to him. “Now imagine explaining to what I call Russia’s mindless mob how the ‘great’ Putin, who only yesterday was speaking with the ‘great’ Trump and supposedly determining the fate of the world, is now stooping to engage with the ‘Kyiv junta,’ the ‘Kyiv regime,’ and its illegitimate leader,” Ohryzko said.
For now, the question of where potential negotiations between Ukraine and Russia could take place remains unresolved. While several venues are being considered, the final choice will hinge not only on diplomatic traditions but also on the political will of the parties involved. In the end, it will be the combination of geopolitical realities, international pressure, and the evolving dynamics of the war that determines where and when a genuine conversation about peace can actually begin.
