Trump-Putin ceasefire talks: Is the Russian president only buying time?

Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed to a proposal by United States President Donald Trump for Russia and Ukraine to stop attacking each other’s energy infrastructure for 30 days, according to statements by both the White House and the Kremlin.

Yet within hours of a Trump-Putin phone call about a US ceasefire proposal, Russia was reportedly attacking Ukrainian energy facilities again, leading Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy to accuse Putin of effectively rejecting the terms.

The deal falls short of an unconditional 30-day ceasefire proposed by US and Ukrainian officials earlier this month.

In fact, Trump’s latest phone call with Putin seemingly didn’t amount to any substantive changes, except for an apparently short-lived Russian agreement to refrain from targeting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure — a concession that might actually benefit Russia.

More from Explainers

'No care for nationhood': Why Ukraine doesn't trust Russia in ceasefire talks, security expert explains Trump-Putin phone call shows Russian president ‘playing’ POTUS, sensing his desperation for a deal

The winter, when Ukraine is most vulnerable to Russian attacks on its energy infrastructure, is almost done. Russia’s dependence on energy exports to support its war effort, however, remains constant, and any Ukrainian attacks on Russian energy facilities will be framed as a breach by Russian authorities.

Russia exploiting Trump’s desire for peace at any cost will probably be an ongoing trend.

Given the earlier proposal was highly vague, this leads to one conclusion. Russia is playing for time to maximise its negotiating position.

What is Trump’s goal?

The US is playing an important role in peace negotiations. Under former president Joe Biden, this was due to the fact that the US provided Ukraine with arms and moral support.

Like most aspects of American policy, however, Trump dramatically pivoted, even attacking Zelenskyy in an infamous White House meeting in February. Now Trump is seeking a ceasefire, no matter what form it takes, to build a reputation as a statesman and distract Americans from domestic policy issues.

Editor’s Picks

1

Trump, Putin agree on 30-day ceasefire in Ukraine, broader talks to begin

This development places Zelenskyy in a political bind. The US in the past provided most of the military aid to Ukraine and the relationship between the Ukrainian leader and Trump is acrimonious.

As such, even if Zelenskyy doesn’t agree with American ceasefire proposals, he must give the appearance of agreement or risk permanently alienating the mercurial Trump. Putin, in the meantime, will exploit any Ukrainian-American tensions.

What’s the current situation?

The first year of the current phase of the Ukraine-Russia war was marked by mobility as both Russia and Ukraine made considerable advances and counteroffensives.

Since the start of 2023, however, the conflict is increasingly defined as a war of attrition and a stalemate.

Many analysts argue that such a war favours Russia. Wars of attrition are defined by slow, grinding advances whereby large casualties are a necessary byproduct for success. Given Russia’s material and personnel advantages, it can afford to suffer higher casualties.

For the past several months, Russian forces have been making slow, steady advances against Ukrainian positions. Russia has suffered significant casualties in these advances, and they may not be sustainable over the long term.

Putin is gambling that Ukraine’s and the international community’s will to fight will be broken by the time this is an issue. Trump’s push for a ceasefire at any cost suggests Putin may have a point.

Any immediate ceasefire agreement between Russia and Ukraine would leave Ukraine occupying Russian soil in the Kursk region, which Russia cannot accept.

What is Russia’s goal?

Ukraine’s 2024 incursion into the Kursk region provided the country and its people with a necessary respite from the war of attrition. Ukrainian forces, attacking an under-defended and unprepared part of the Russian front line, made significant advances into Russia.

Ukraine’s ability to maintain territory around Kursk has also proven to be an embarrassment for Putin and the Russian establishment.

Putin recently said Russian forces encircled Ukrainian forces in the salient, although Ukraine denies it. Regardless of the statement’s validity, it speaks to the importance both parties attach to the battle.

How far has Russia come?

This issue highlights a particular problem for the Russian leadership. Russia has done its utmost to frame its so-called “special military operation” in Ukraine as a success. An example is Russia’s formal annexation of four Ukrainian areas in 2022, despite not actually possessing the territory at the time.

Any perception of the invasion of Ukraine as a failure is a non-starter for a Russian government concerned about its domestic standing.

Ukraine possessing Russian territory, however, leads to questions in Russia about the war’s success. Ukraine, in exchange for relinquishing any Russian territory it seized during the war, would undoubtedly seek the return of Ukrainian territory.

Russia has not even achieved its minimal goals of seizing the four Ukrainian regions it’s officially annexed. Therefore, it’s unlikely Putin would ever agree to the exchange of the territory it has actually already seized in exchange for the Kursk salient.

Putin is following the Russian playbook of negotiating from strength. So long as Ukraine maintains Kursk, Russia will not negotiate in good faith.

While Kursk is the most prominent area of Russia’s concern, there are other conditions that will become important in the future as Putin seeks to improve Russia’s negotiating position.

It’s a lesson that Trump will soon learn, despite any and all efforts he or his administration make to frame things positively.

James Horncastle, Assistant Professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations, Simon Fraser University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.