Trump's "personal yes," the "Prosperity Deal," and negotiations: what is being decided in Davos for Ukraine
Kyiv • UNN
At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Ukraine plans to sign security guarantee agreements with the United States and an $800 billion economic recovery deal. President Zelenskyy expects the documents to be approved, despite Donald Trump's ambiguous position.
On Monday, January 19, the 56th World Economic Forum began in Davos, Switzerland, and will last until January 23. According to experts, for Ukraine, this year's forum is somewhat more than a platform that will determine the foreign economic vector for the current year. Davos-2026 is currently not so much about economics as it is about war and security. This is a kind of diplomatic battlefield where official Kyiv, the United States, and allied countries will once again try to stop hostilities in Ukraine. UNN found out what Ukraine can expect from this year's global economic forum.
It should be noted that the leader of the state, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has already expressed his hopes for Davos-2026. He is confident that it is at the forum that the country will be able to take the first step towards ending the war.
"We are currently working on two documents. The team went to the United States of America to finalize some materials related to security guarantees. If this is accepted by the American side, then signing will be possible during Davos," Zelenskyy said on January 16 during a press conference.
Security guarantees for Ukraine: what Trump's political game in Davos could end with
This refers to ensuring reliable international security guarantees for Ukraine. Official Kyiv has already completed work on the draft bilateral agreement with the United States on security guarantees and seeks to sign it at the highest level.
As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy noted, the Ukrainian side has actually prepared the document and is awaiting "Donald Trump's personal 'yes'" (i.e., political approval from the US president). Davos was chosen as the platform where they plan to involve Trump in a joint meeting with Zelenskyy and the leaders of allied countries – Germany, France, Italy, Great Britain, Canada, as well as the leadership of the European Commission.
However, Donald Trump's own position remains an uncertain variable. Despite the efforts of Zelenskyy's team to secure White House support, the White House leader has recently been publicly critical of Kyiv.
Thus, in an interview with Reuters, he stated that, in his opinion, Russian President Vladimir Putin "is ready to conclude a peace agreement," while Ukraine "is less ready." When asked why peace talks have not yet yielded results, Trump answered with one word – "Zelenskyy," hinting at the alleged fault of the Ukrainian side.
These statements caused an immediate reaction from official Moscow: the Kremlin agreed with Trump's rhetoric, directly calling Zelenskyy the main obstacle to peace.
Official Kyiv, in turn, has repeatedly emphasized: the reason for the protracted war is Russia's aggressive ambitions. As Zelenskyy stated, Moscow's desire to destroy Ukraine proves that it needs not agreements, but continued aggression. Therefore, the Ukrainian authorities insist that the path to real peace lies not through hasty agreements with the aggressor, but through strengthening Ukraine's defense and international support.
Against the background of the above, after Davos, Ukraine may face several new scenario forks:
- signing a framework agreement on guarantees, if the US leader agrees to create favorable and safe conditions for Ukraine;
- Washington shifts the main responsibility for ending the war in Ukraine to its European allies. At the same time, the United States distances itself from the problem;
- The United States avoids any obligations regarding hostilities in Ukraine, and official Kyiv finds itself in a "gray zone" after a possible truce.
Umerov: Ukraine and the US will continue negotiations in Davos18.01.26, 21:20 • 7004 views
Economic "recovery and prosperity" of Ukraine and Davos-2026: what document is planned to be signed
Ukraine expects that after the World Economic Forum in Davos, it will be able to "sign a key document concerning the economic recovery and long-term prosperity of Ukraine." This is reported by the Financial Times, citing sources familiar with the negotiations.
According to the publication, this refers to a large-scale agreement on the country's reconstruction worth about $800 billion. It is expected that this document will be signed in Davos, on the sidelines of the economic summit, where global financial and investment initiatives are traditionally discussed.
The logic of official Kyiv is to encourage the United States to actively support by offering a mutually beneficial partnership.
According to Ukraine's Ambassador to the United States, Olga Stefanishyna, work on this agreement is ongoing separately from preparations for signing the security agreement. The diplomat did not disclose more details about the document.
Meanwhile, The Telegraph, citing its own sources in political and diplomatic circles, writes that it was European allies who proposed concluding this agreement in Davos as a neutral platform, and it is expected that the document will be signed personally by Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy. The document may cover long-term US investments in the reconstruction of destroyed infrastructure, access of American companies to Ukrainian natural resources and development projects.
Donald Trump, who has repeatedly emphasized his business mindset, may be favorably disposed to such proposals from the Ukrainian side. In fact, the White House administration is already demonstrating its readiness to link support for Ukraine with economic benefits for America. However, the question remains: will Washington limit itself only to financial and investment projects, avoiding direct security obligations? In other words, the recovery plan should not replace defense support, but only complement it.
By the way, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy also confirmed that the Ukrainian delegation worked in Washington before Davos on two interconnected packages – security and economic. If both documents are agreed upon, they can be solemnly signed during the forum or soon after.
Thus, in a positive scenario, the conclusion of the "Prosperity Agreement" will give impetus to economic revival and become a political signal of irreversible support for Ukraine from the West. Investing American capital in Ukrainian projects will create additional guarantees that Washington will be interested in stability and security on Ukrainian territory.
However, risks should also be taken into account: huge funds from donors will only come if there is transparency and reforms, as well as after the establishment of lasting peace. In addition, an excessive emphasis on the economy without parallel strengthening of defense capabilities may prove to be an insufficient deterrent for Russia.
Therefore, Kyiv's task is to convince partners that Ukraine's reconstruction and its security are inseparable components of a single plan. Davos provides an opportunity to present this vision to world leaders and enshrine it in concrete agreements.
Path to peace in Ukraine to be discussed in Davos: program19.01.26, 12:26 • 2508 views
Peace talks with Russia: why the dots may be dotted at the forum
Another important topic for Ukraine, which will be discussed in Davos, most likely not only behind the scenes, is peace talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
And here, a split has already occurred in the coalition of Ukraine's allies.
Some Western European leaders are increasingly vocal about the need to involve Moscow in dialogue. In particular, French President Emmanuel Macron said on January 6 that Paris is working to establish contacts with Putin "in the coming weeks."
And Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni supported this idea, proposing to appoint a special EU envoy for negotiations with the Kremlin.
This position was shared by the new German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who expressed hope for a gradual "rebalancing of EU relations with Russia."
These statements indicate that in leading European capitals, there is a demand for resuming dialogue with Moscow, even if a lasting peace has not yet been achieved.
At the same time, another camp of allies strongly opposes premature concessions to the Kremlin.
Great Britain openly opposed the idea of "early dialogue." British Foreign Minister Yvette Cooper emphasized on January 15 that she sees "no evidence that Putin really wants peace." According to her, until Moscow demonstrates a serious readiness to stop aggression, it is not the time to talk to it; instead, military aid to Ukraine and sanctions pressure should be increased.
The countries of Eastern Europe and the Baltic states hold a similar opinion: any negotiations for the sake of the process will only legitimize the seizure of Ukrainian territories and give the Kremlin a respite.
Thus, within the EU itself, a dividing line has emerged: some leaders consider it possible to sit down with Putin, while others consider it a dangerous deviation from the principled line.
The consequences of agreements between allies on the sidelines of Davos for Ukraine may be unoptimistic. If influential EU capitals begin to lean towards compromises with Putin, the risk of pressure on Kyiv to agree to unfavorable peace terms increases.
On the other hand, the tough stance of allies such as Britain, Poland, the Baltic states, and the Scandinavian countries gives Ukraine diplomatic leverage. Their message is clear: negotiations with the aggressor are possible only after a change in his behavior, and not at the cost of unilateral concessions.
That is why Davos-2026 for Ukraine is not so much an economic forum as a test of the stability of the Western coalition and Kyiv's ability to "sew" security and reconstruction into one package.
The key intrigue boils down to whether Donald Trump's pragmatism will turn into real security obligations, and not just investment promises for future contracts.
In parallel, Europe is entering a phase of internal discussion about the admissibility of dialogue with Moscow, and the outcome of this discussion will directly determine whether pressure on Ukraine for a compromise peace will increase, or, conversely, the line on forcing Russia to change its behavior will be strengthened.
In the end, Ukraine's main asset on the sidelines of Davos is its ability to impose a simple logic on its partners: investments work only where there are security guarantees, and peace is possible only where the aggressor is deprived of incentives to continue the war. If these two formulas are not fixed in concrete decisions and documents, Davos risks entering the modern history of Ukraine with loud statements, but weak real actions.