Last year, former President Donald Trump made a bold claim, promising to end the Ukraine War in just 24 hours. Fast forward to last week, and his stance evolved, suggesting that a resolution would require a face-to-face meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. This week, the narrative shifted once more. Following a two-hour phone conversation with Putin, Trump indicated that any peace deal would need to be negotiated directly between Russia and Ukraine, possibly with assistance from the Pope.
Despite the complexities of the situation, Trump expressed a sense of optimism regarding the potential for peace. He took to social media, claiming that both combatants would "immediately" initiate negotiations aimed at achieving a ceasefire and ultimately ending the war. However, this optimistic outlook contrasts sharply with the sentiments expressed by the Kremlin. Putin stated that Russia is prepared to collaborate with Ukraine to draft a memorandum concerning a potential peace agreement. Yet, discussions surrounding memorandums do not provide the solid foundation necessary for establishing lasting peace.
Trump's assertion that Russia and Ukraine would "immediately" commence ceasefire talks raises questions about the sincerity and feasibility of these discussions. Following the Trump-Putin call, there were reports of triumph from the Russian side, suggesting that the dialogue could represent a significant victory for Moscow. However, Putin reiterated that any meaningful resolution must address the underlying causes of the conflict, which Russia has previously attributed to Ukraine's aspirations for closer ties with Europe.
Trump's recent comments about the Ukraine conflict may signal a potential shift in the US's approach to diplomatic negotiations. He conveyed a sense of resignation, stating, "Big egos involved, but I think something's going to happen. And if it doesn't, I'll just back away, and they'll have to keep going." Such a stance raises critical questions: if the US were to withdraw from the negotiating table, would it also cease its military and intelligence support for Ukraine? This prospect could greatly benefit Russia, which possesses more resources compared to a Ukraine that may find itself devoid of American backing.
The possibility of the US distancing itself from the negotiations has prompted concern from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. He emphasized the importance of US involvement, stating, "It's crucial for all of us that the United States does not distance itself from the talks and the pursuit of peace." This sentiment underscores the delicate balance of international relations, especially as the war in Ukraine continues to unfold.
Despite the mixed messages, it appears that Ukraine and Russia are poised to continue some form of dialogue, which is a positive development after nearly three years of conflict. However, the effectiveness of these talks remains uncertain, especially if the Russian delegation is no more substantial than the low-level representatives who attended recent meetings in Istanbul. Trump has hinted at the possibility of reduced sanctions on Russia, along with new trade deals and economic investments, as incentives for a peace agreement. However, discussions surrounding potential negative consequences, such as additional sanctions on Russian banking and energy exports, were noticeably absent.
Last month, Trump warned that he would not tolerate any attempts by Putin to prolong negotiations without genuine progress, asserting that Russia should refrain from targeting civilian areas. Nevertheless, in a worrying development, Russia recently launched its largest drone strike of the war on Ukrainian cities. The outcome of Monday's call between the two leaders suggests that a ceasefire or peace deal remains a distant goal, with many challenges still ahead.
