Full Analysis Summary
U.S. role in Donbas diplomacy
Western and regional media have reported a contentious U.S. role in recent diplomacy over Ukraine’s Donbas, with some accounts saying Washington linked increased peacetime arms supplies to Kyiv to territorial concessions.
Букви summarises a Financial Times report that the U.S. was prepared to increase arms supplies to Ukraine in peacetime only if Kyiv withdrew forces from some areas it controls.
Kyiv officials pushed back on the report and the White House denied the claim, with Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly saying Washington is not pressuring Ukraine to cede territory.
CNN notes Russian officials invoking an 'Anchorage Formula' in describing recent talks and ties the idea to earlier summit references.
CNN also stresses that the original Anchorage meeting produced "no concrete agreements or 'formula'" and quotes former U.S. President Trump saying "there's no deal until there's a deal."
Coverage Differences
Narrative emphasis / sourcing
Букви (Other) foregrounds the Financial Times report that frames U.S. readiness to boost arms as conditional on Ukrainian withdrawals and stresses Kyiv’s denials and the White House rejection of that account. CNN (Western Mainstream) focuses on how Russian officials are invoking an 'Anchorage Formula' and underlines that the original Anchorage summit "produced no concrete agreements or 'formula,'" pointing out Trump's later comment. Букви also reports that Kremlin and Reuters descriptions suggest the formula would give Russia control of all Donbas, whereas CNN emphasises the lack of any formal Anchorage agreement and the evolution of rhetoric. Where Букви reports FT and Reuters claims, it also includes denials from U.S. and Kyiv sources; CNN stresses the historical ambiguity of any 'Anchorage' understanding.
Anchorage Formula debate
Different sources attach different significance to the so-called 'Anchorage Formula' and to what, if anything, was agreed or implied.
Букви reports Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov emphasising that the territorial question in the undisclosed 'Anchorage Formula' is very important to Russia.
It cites Reuters' reporting that the formula would give Russia control of all Donbas and freeze the rest of the front line.
CNN notes that Russian officials have been invoking an 'Anchorage Formula' in remarks about the Abu Dhabi talks but stresses the original Anchorage summit produced no binding outcome.
Both accounts indicate that the term is being used in diplomacy and rhetoric even as its contents remain disputed.
Coverage Differences
Tone and severity
Букви (Other) relays Kremlin and Reuters descriptions that stress major territorial transfers—reporting that the formula "would give Russia control of all Donbas"—which frames the formula as materially consequential. CNN (Western Mainstream) is more cautious, emphasising that Anchorage "produced no concrete agreements or 'formula'" and framing current invocations as rhetorical or interpretive, noting officials are "invoking an 'Anchorage Formula'" rather than documenting a clear pact. Thus Букви highlights reported Russian stakes while CNN highlights ambiguity about any formal Anchorage understanding.
Abu Dhabi talks update
Both accounts present U.S.-mediated talks in Abu Dhabi and subsequent diplomacy as active but unsettled.
The Ukrainian outlet Букви says trilateral talks in Abu Dhabi on Jan. 23–24 reportedly covered key issues, including Donbas, and that another round is set for Feb. 1.
It quotes President Zelensky saying Kyiv’s territorial position has not changed while signaling readiness to compromise and that bilateral U.S. security guarantees are ready to be signed.
CNN frames the dialogue in the context of Russian officials referencing Anchorage to justify territorial expectations, and it notes the shaky provenance of any Anchorage understandings.
Both pieces indicate negotiations are ongoing and hinge on mutual willingness to make concessions and on how any guarantees would protect Ukrainian sovereignty.
Coverage Differences
Narrative focus
Букви (Other) emphasises concrete diplomatic steps and Kyiv’s public posture — citing dates for talks, Zelensky’s statements about territorial positions and readiness to sign security guarantees. CNN (Western Mainstream) places the discussion in a broader rhetorical context, tracking how Russian officials invoke historical Anchorage rhetoric and reminding readers that Anchorage produced no formal formula. Букви is more detailed about immediate negotiating steps and Ukrainian statements; CNN is more focused on the historical origins and ambiguity of the 'Anchorage' reference.
Contested Anchorage narratives
Analysis across the pieces underscores uncertainty and competing narratives.
Букви relays the Financial Times allegation of U.S. conditionality and includes denials from Kyiv and the White House.
Reuters and Kremlin statements discuss what the Anchorage wording might mean.
Analysts warn that progress depends on mutual willingness to make concessions and clarity on safeguarding Ukrainian sovereignty.
CNN stresses the rhetorical revival of Anchorage references by Russian officials and warns the original summit had no durable outcome.
Taken together, the sources present a contested picture in which claims of U.S. pressure to cede Donbas are reported and denied.
The substantive meaning of the "Anchorage Formula" is disputed, and negotiations continue amid high stakes for territorial sovereignty.
Coverage Differences
Contradiction and ambiguity
Букви (Other) reports a direct FT claim that could be read as alleging U.S. pressure for territorial withdrawal in exchange for arms, but it also reports the White House denial — creating an explicit contradiction between the FT report (as relayed) and U.S. statements. CNN (Western Mainstream) instead emphasises the lack of a concrete Anchorage agreement and frames current references as rhetorical, highlighting ambiguity rather than asserting a single decisive narrative. The sources thus differ in whether they foreground an allegation of conditionality (Букви/FT report) or foreground the historical lack of an Anchorage 'formula' and the contested character of present claims (CNN).