Putin-Trump talks: Can a fragile trust lead to a Ukraine ceasefire?

As world leaders prepare for a series of high-stakes talks between US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, the possibility of a ceasefire in the ongoing Ukraine war seems to inch closer. While these talks may provide the first real glimmer of hope for an end to the conflict, the path to peace remains riddled with obstacles. The distrust among the key players—Trump’s unpredictability, Putin’s ruthless approach, Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s unyielding stance, and the broader international forces at play—suggests that the road ahead is far from smooth.

At the heart of this unfolding diplomatic puzzle lies a persistent trust deficit that makes any negotiation fraught with risk. Trust is fundamental in any ceasefire negotiation, but in the case of this war, it is severely lacking. Putin’s military aggression in Ukraine has left a trail of destruction, and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy, having withstood months of warfare, is understandably sceptical about Russia’s true intentions.

Ukraine has suffered immeasurably, and Zelenskyy has publicly stated on numerous occasions that peace will come only when Russia fully withdraws its forces. Yet for the Russian leader, any peace settlement must preserve the territorial gains in eastern Ukraine and secure his vision for the future of the Donbas region.

Putin’s primary objective has been to maintain Russian control over parts of the Donbas and secure his dominance in the Black Sea. Despite repeated claims of success, Russia’s military efforts in Ukraine have faltered, and it is far from achieving a decisive military victory. Nevertheless, Putin has framed the war as one of existential importance for Russia, demanding that Ukraine and the West accept Russia’s position on the ground. His obsession with Donbas stems not only from its strategic value but also from its symbolic importance as part of the broader Russian narrative of reclaiming lost territory. For Putin, any concession on this front would be seen as a major humiliation.

While Russia’s military failures in Ukraine are evident, the Russian leadership perceives itself as being close to victory. Moscow has claimed that the battle for the Donbas is essentially won and that the conflict is now entering a more manageable phase. But this could, in many ways, be a strategic illusion.

The reality is that Russia’s military position is somewhat untenable, marked by logistical failures, Ukrainian resistance, and the growing resilience of international sanctions. However, Putin’s narrative, carefully crafted and reinforced by state media, continues to present an image of near-victory. This narrative, however misleading, fuels Russian domestic support for the war and provides a foundation upon which Putin can build his arguments during peace talks.

President Zelenskyy, on the other hand, has become a symbol of Ukrainian resistance, but his insistence on no compromise has complicated the possibility of a negotiated settlement. Zelenskyy’s uncompromising approach is understandable, given the immense sacrifice Ukraine has made throughout the war. His political survival depends, to a large extent, on maintaining this stance, as any sign of concession could be perceived as weakness by both the Ukrainian population and the broader international community.

Zelenskyy’s obstinacy is fuelled by the belief that Ukraine can drive Russia out entirely, especially with continued Western support in terms of both military and financial aid. However, this optimism could be counterproductive. While Ukraine’s forces are undeniably formidable, it’s unlikely they can achieve a total military victory. The reality is that Russia will not simply roll over and surrender, particularly when its core interests are at stake. A more balanced, pragmatic approach could be necessary, but it’s clear that Zelenskyy is under immense pressure not to appear as though he is capitulating to Russia’s demands.

Compounding this is the unpredictability of Trump, whose political career has been marked by a series of impulsive decisions and a highly unconventional approach to diplomacy. While Trump’s relationship with Putin is often viewed through the lens of personal admiration, his last tenure as president was characterized by a jarring lack of consistency, particularly regarding foreign policy. Whether or not Trump will be able to strike a meaningful deal with Putin in this new political climate is unclear.

Trump’s involvement in the talks could bring some unique advantages to the table, given his tendency to break diplomatic norms and adopt a more direct, transactional style of negotiation. However, his history of unpredictability makes it difficult to determine whether he would act as an honest broker or unwittingly undermine Ukraine’s position. Trump’s ability to balance the conflicting interests of both Russia and Ukraine will be a crucial test. He must walk a fine line—acting as a mediator while ensuring that Ukraine’s sovereignty is respected and that Putin does not seize an opportunity to further destabilize the region.

From a broader geopolitical perspective, Europe’s stamina is also an important factor in the ceasefire talks. The European Union has remained steadfast in its support for Ukraine, imposing sanctions on Russia and providing both military and economic assistance. But Europe’s resolve is increasingly being tested. The war has put immense pressure on the EU, especially with rising energy prices and the economic fallout from sanctions. While European leaders have been vocal in their support of Ukraine, there is growing concern about how long they can maintain this level of commitment. Extended conflict without a clear resolution will strain European unity, and Putin is acutely aware of this.

Moreover, Russia’s obsession with controlling parts of the Black Sea is not just about military strategy—it’s about access to vital trade routes and maintaining its influence over energy markets. For Putin, the Black Sea represents a geopolitical lifeline. Securing territorial control over the region would not only bolster Russia’s position in the region but also limit Ukraine’s ability to export its goods to the wider world. The strategic importance of this area cannot be overstated, and it will remain a major sticking point in peace talks.

The international community’s role is equally critical. The West’s commitment to Ukraine must remain strong if any meaningful ceasefire is to be achieved. However, Western powers must be prepared to confront the reality that the war may not have a simple military resolution. A political solution, though fraught with complexity, might be the only way to secure a lasting peace.

In the coming weeks, as Trump and Putin meet, all eyes will be on these talks. The possibility of a ceasefire is tantalising, but it’s important to acknowledge that the conditions for peace are still far from ideal. Trust remains a scarce commodity, and the motivations driving the key players are deeply entrenched.

Yet, for all its challenges, the war cannot continue indefinitely. The West and the international community at large must support efforts to navigate this turbulent environment toward a peaceful resolution. Whether these talks will be the beginning of the end or simply another false dawn remains to be seen. But it is clear that the stakes have never been higher, and the potential for a breakthrough, however fragile, is one worth pursuing.

The writer is a member of the National Disaster Management Authority. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.