ISW reports on Putin's attempts to persuade Trump to make concessions beneficial to Russia

The report reminded that Trump announced negotiations with Putin on Tuesday, March 18, and wants to see if (he and Putin) can end the war. The American leader added that he and Putin will talk about land, power plants, and the distribution of certain assets.

The Institute also reminded that on March 11, the US and Ukraine agreed to a proposal for a 30-day ceasefire, which depends on Russia's approval and simultaneous implementation of this plan.

The proposal stated that Ukraine and the US intended to form their negotiation teams and immediately begin talks to achieve a lasting peace. At the same time, the parties separated the temporary ceasefire from future negotiations on a final peace settlement.

However, on March 13, Putin rejected the proposal for a temporary ceasefire and stated that the cessation of hostilities must be such that it leads to long-term peace and addresses the root causes of the war.

"Putin thus rejected one of the main principles of the US-Ukrainian proposal — that the temporary ceasefire precedes formal negotiations to end the war," noted the ISW.

According to analysts, the proposal by Ukraine and the US for a temporary ceasefire stated that the parties would discuss issues such as the return of prisoners of war, detained civilians, and forcibly deported Ukrainian children, emphasizing that this would require future negotiations with Russia. At the same time, the Institute for the Study of War noted that the ceasefire proposal did not mention negotiations with Russia regarding Ukrainian territory, energy infrastructure, or assets.

The report also reminded that on March 13, Putin suggested calling Trump to discuss issues related to the ceasefire proposal and Ukraine's ability to mobilize forces and receive military assistance from partners and allies - issues that were not included in the Ukraine-US proposal for a temporary ceasefire.

Thus, the ISW believes that Putin is attempting to alter the sequence of negotiations to force Trump into making preliminary concessions on issues not part of the Ukraine-US ceasefire proposal, but central to Russia's military objectives.

"The acceptance of these Russian demands in the context of negotiations for an immediate ceasefire would cede valuable US and Ukrainian leverage during future negotiations to secure a lasting peace in Ukraine," the Institute for the Study of War concluded.

Kremlin's strategic position has not changed

The ISW emphasized that Russia has not abandoned its intent to destroy Ukraine's sovereignty, as evidenced by several key points:

Firstly, the Kremlin demands that negotiations include the establishment of Ukraine's neutral status and NATO's renouncement of any future membership for the country. Russia's veto on these issues would equate to denying Ukraine the ability to make sovereign choices regarding its alliances and security mechanisms as an independent state.

Secondly, the Kremlin continues to reject the prospect of European peacekeepers entering Ukraine, referring to them as NATO contingents, which contradicts the positions of both the US and Ukraine. Moscow asserts that any negotiations concerning future international peacekeeping missions in Ukraine should only occur after a final peace agreement is reached to end the war, and only if both parties agree that international support is necessary for the implementation of the agreement. Russia seems to be trying to dictate the timing and sequence of negotiations, demanding that final peace talks precede any discussions on peacekeeping missions in post-war Ukraine.

At the same time, Russia firmly rejects any European involvement in peacekeeping missions after the war, in contrast to the positions of the US and Ukraine. This is even though substantial European participation is seen as crucial for any peace settlement that would establish lasting peace in Ukraine.

Thirdly, official Kyiv stresses that a strong Ukrainian military, supported by security guarantees, remains the key component for sustaining peace in Ukraine and deterring future Russian aggression. Any peace agreement should not include restrictions on weapons production or military capacity, and Ukraine should continue to work on building a self-sufficient defense industry to deter further Russian aggression.

Moreover, Kyiv does not intend to compromise its territorial integrity and sovereignty and will never recognize Russian control over the occupied Ukrainian territories. The ISW believes that discussions on the permanent status of these occupied territories should be a necessary part of negotiations to finally end the war.

Agreement on a temporary ceasefire

Last week, negotiations took place in Saudi Arabia between Ukrainian and US delegations. The American side proposed a complete ceasefire for 30 days along the entire front line. The Ukrainian delegation agreed to the idea, but only on the condition that Russian invaders also cease hostilities.

However, the Kremlin did not support the idea of a temporary ceasefire. Putin has not yet given final approval for a ceasefire and hinted that Ukraine might use these 30 days to strengthen its Armed Forces.

On Monday, March 17, US President Donald Trump expressed confidence that Russia would agree to a temporary ceasefire with Ukraine.