Finland and Norway leaders call Putin after consulting Zelenskyy

Why it matters

The call gave European leaders direct access to Moscow outside the US-led negotiating channel and was coordinated with Kyiv. It also exposed a major European divide over whether talking directly to Putin can help end the war. Because it preceded the Abu Dhabi talks, the European initiative may affect the agenda and broader negotiating dynamics around ceasefire measures, security guarantees and confidence-building steps.

What happened

After meeting Zelenskyy and US envoy Steve Witkoff in Oslo on 20 October, Finland’s Alexander Stubb and Norway’s Jonas Gahr Støre continued discussions that had been under way for several months. The leaders consulted Zelenskyy, agreed on topics with Kyiv and obtained his support for the initiative without first seeking approval from every European partner. On 27 October, they spoke with Putin for approximately 90 minutes in a structured call, with each side presenting prepared statements in turn without interruption. They conveyed Ukraine’s position on future negotiations and later briefed Zelenskyy on the conversation.

Stubb and Støre said the call was a continuation of the Oslo meeting and aimed to strengthen Europe’s voice in peace negotiations. Støre said Putin’s willingness to take the call indicated at least some readiness to negotiate, but maintained that he saw no genuine openness to an agreement and believed Putin was not seeking peace. He also did not expect a major breakthrough at the Abu Dhabi talks on 10–11 November, describing the event as an intermediate stage toward a subsequent step.

How Ukrainian sources describe it

Ukrainian reporting emphasizes that the Scandinavian leaders coordinated with Zelenskyy, secured Kyiv’s approval, agreed on talking points and conveyed Ukraine’s position directly to Putin. The initiative is presented as an effort to counterbalance a US-led negotiating channel and protect Ukraine’s interests alongside those of European partners. Ukrainian coverage also highlights the disagreement between Estonia’s Kristen Mihal, who opposes engaging or mediating with Putin, and the Finnish and Norwegian leaders who support direct European contact with Moscow.

How international sources describe it

International coverage centers on the deeper European split over direct engagement with Moscow and on the unresolved question of who should represent Europe in future negotiations. It also presents Abu Dhabi as an intermediate step, with possible discussion of a Black Sea ceasefire to enable grain transport, protection of energy infrastructure, freezing the front line, a prisoner exchange and security guarantees.

Where reporting differs

European officials disagreed over whether Putin delivered a historical lecture about Slavic peoples during the call, and Støre did not confirm that account. Some officials suggested that such a characterization was a Russian interpretation intended to belittle Europeans. European governments also disagreed over who should represent Europe in future Ukraine negotiations and whether direct engagement with Putin contributes to establishing peace.

Background

Stubb and Støre secretly discussed the idea of a joint call to Putin for several months. Their initiative followed the 20 October meeting in Oslo with Zelenskyy and Witkoff, which they described as returning the peace process to the right path. After Donald Trump returned to the White House in early 2025, he resumed direct contact with Putin and stopped US financial assistance to Kyiv. The reported 2025 war between the United States and Iran slowed the Ukraine peace process, while subsequent US diplomacy moved under Trump’s administration’s influence. In this context, the Scandinavian leaders wanted to ensure that Moscow heard European positions directly rather than only from Washington.