U.S. President Donald Trump has stated that he and Russian President Vladimir Putin intend to take significant steps towards ending the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war.
However, Trump has not disclosed what these measures might entail and has refused to confirm whether he has engaged in direct discussions with Putin. Despite this lack of clarity, Trump asserted that efforts to work with Russia towards resolving the conflict are already underway.
Trump’s Representative Weighs In
Keith Kellogg, Trump’s designated representative for addressing the Russia-Ukraine war, has suggested that the conflict could be resolved within months rather than years.
Kellogg initially planned a diplomatic tour to gather international perspectives on the issue but has yet to embark on this journey.
Notably, he has indicated that diplomatic pressure would not be limited to Russia alone but could also be exerted on Ukraine. While he claims that Trump has a concrete plan to end the war, no details of this plan have been made public.
A Cycle of Statements Without Action
Since Trump assumed office, this is not the first time he has made such declarations regarding Ukraine. His repeated assertions about willingness to meet with Putin and his commitment to ending the war have yet to materialise into concrete steps. The Kremlin, for its part, maintains that no direct contact between Trump and Putin has taken place.
Russian officials acknowledge the possibility of a meeting but insist they have received no official signals from Washington. Moscow’s stance reflects a belief that the U.S. severed high-level ties following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, and therefore, the U.S. should take the first step in resuming dialogue.
This political deadlock highlights the difficulty both leaders face in initiating a meeting. Trump, known for his displays of dominance in public encounters with world leaders, appears to be waiting for Putin to request a meeting.
Similarly, Putin seems to be expecting a diplomatic gesture from Washington before making any overtures. This mutual hesitation has resulted in a diplomatic standoff, with neither side wanting to appear as the one seeking dialogue first.
The Role of Diplomacy and Kellogg’s Stalled Mission
A major question remains: why has Kellogg not proceeded with his planned diplomatic tour? Given his role, visiting key European capitals such as Brussels, London, Paris, and Kyiv would provide crucial insights into how stakeholders view the conflict.
A trip to Beijing could also be significant, given China’s position as a geopolitical player in Russian affairs. However, it appears that the White House may prefer Kellogg to visit both Kyiv and Moscow—something that remains unlikely as the Kremlin has shown no interest in hosting such a visit. This impasse may explain why his mission has yet to materialise.
Pressure on Ukraine Raises Concerns
One of the more contentious aspects of Trump’s approach is the suggestion that pressure will be applied not only to Russia but also to Ukraine.
Secretary of State Mark Rubio, who has been shaping Trump’s foreign policy narrative, has echoed this stance.
The implication that Kyiv could face U.S. pressure raises concerns about equating the aggressor with the victim. Given Ukraine’s heavy reliance on U.S. military and financial support, any shift in American policy could significantly impact its ability to resist Russian aggression.
While pressuring Kyiv may be an easier diplomatic move for Washington, as Ukraine is dependent on U.S. assistance, it does not align with Trump’s principle of achieving “peace through strength.”
Instead, critics argue that it represents peace through weakness—applying pressure to a vulnerable ally rather than confronting the primary aggressor. A true demonstration of strength, they argue, would involve exerting meaningful leverage over Russia or even China.
The Broader Geopolitical Implications
Trump’s first weeks in office have already revealed a pattern of seeking the easiest political victories rather than taking on more challenging foreign policy objectives. His approach thus far suggests a prioritisation of pressure on Ukraine over any tangible efforts to influence Moscow’s behaviour.
This situation poses challenges not only for Ukraine but also for Europe, which must assess how U.S.-Russia relations will evolve and what impact this will have on the war.
Additionally, Washington’s handling of this crisis could redefine its own global position—whether it continues to be seen as a superpower asserting strength or as a nation resorting to coercion against its weaker allies instead of its rivals.
For now, the lack of a clearly defined strategy from Trump’s administration leaves significant uncertainty regarding the future of the Russia-Ukraine war and U.S. foreign policy in Eastern Europe.
Image source: file photo, rferl.org
Read also:
Lavrov’s Comments Highlight Russia’s Unchanged Stance on Ukraine
