I began writing this text while Kyiv was once again under rocket and drone fire. At that moment, I was in one of the Ukrainian capital’s bomb shelters. This simple fact eloquently shows which of the two scenarios—Donald Trump’s or Vladimir Putin’s—is being carried out in reality.
According to Trump’s vision, there must first be an unconditional cease-fire, after which peace talks should begin. According to Putin’s vision, negotiations can and must take place amid active hostilities—in fact, the fighting itself should serve as pressure on Ukraine. Unfortunately, today it is Putin’s scenario that is prevailing.
This became obvious after the recent phone conversation between Trump and Putin. Following the call, Donald Trump informed Volodymyr Zelensky and European Union leaders that he had agreed with Putin to prepare a so-called memorandum—a document in which Moscow would lay out its conditions for the possibility of a cease-fire on the Russian-Ukrainian front.
This comes despite the fact that Trump had previously insisted on an unconditional cease-fire. Yet after speaking with Putin, he seems to have lost any interest in his own initiatives
I have no doubt whatsoever that the Kremlin is indeed drafting such a memorandum. Moscow is adept at composing documents—especially those that are deliberately unacceptable to the other side. But that does not matter to Putin: he does not need Ukraine to sign anything. What he needs is for Ukraine to refuse—because that allows him to maintain the appearance of dialogue before Trump while continuing military operations.
For the Russian president, there is no genuine goal of ending the fire. His real aim is to remove the United States from the conflict as a party exerting pressure on the Kremlin and to turn American mediation into a mere imitation. In this sense, Putin is playing against Trump—and so far he is winning, simply because Trump is giving him the opportunity.
During their visit to Kyiv on 10 May, European leaders agreed on a package of sanctions that was to take effect on 12 May if Russia did not agree to a cease-fire. But Putin substituted the truce with a proposal for talks in Istanbul. This is precisely the proposal that Trump advised the Ukrainian delegation to accept.
When the negotiations in Istanbul produced no results, Trump declared that only he himself could determine the fate of the war in dialogue with Putin. Ultimately, he not only failed to insist on a truce but also refused to implement the sanctions agreed upon by the Europeans. Why should Putin not be winning if Trump is not opposing him?
After the conversation with Trump, Putin did not become a supporter of peace agreements—predictably, he intensified attacks on Ukrainian cities. According to media reports, the Kremlin is preparing a new offensive as early as next month, this time targeting the Kharkiv, Dnipro, and Sumy regions. The goal is to advance, entrench, and then put forward new “peace initiatives.” This is the classic salami tactic: incremental annexation under the guise of diplomacy. And it is precisely this tactic that interests Putin far more than any negotiations.
Of course, Putin can—if not be stopped—then once again be isolated and subjected to increased sanctions pressure. But only on one condition: that the American president acknowledges that the Russian president does not seek peace, and that without firm pressure from the United States he will not take a single step toward a settlement.
So far, there is no such acknowledgment. For now, Trump is willing to listen to Putin and believe in memoranda. And Ukrainians must wait for these memoranda under sirens, in bomb shelters, knowing that each new “proposal” is not diplomacy but another call to capitulation.
About Author:
