Trump at a crossroads: Will US abandon Ukraine peace negotiations?

Takeaways

• How and why did the US activate negotiations with Russia, Ukraine, and Europe?

• What three options for action regarding the Russian-Ukrainian war are on Trump’s table?

• Under what conditions could Trump withdraw from the negotiation process?

Activation of negotiations

This week, there were almost no public contacts between Washington and Moscow, but it is obvious that the States activated unofficial channels. US President Donald Trump stated that he expects a decision from Russia on ending the war in Ukraine already this week.

In turn, US Vice President JD Vance stated on Friday that the States are optimistic.
"Even in the last 24 hours, we believe we have some interesting things we can report," he said before a meeting with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.

However, neither American leader specified details. And as practice from the agreements in Saudi Arabia has shown, the details here are crucial.

The key diplomatic event of the week took place on April 17 in Paris, where Ukrainian, American, and European officials held a series of meetings.
French President Emmanuel Macron held separate talks with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Trump’s special envoy on Russia, John Sullivan. Rubio also held a phone call with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

According to Bloomberg, the US has proposed easing sanctions against Russia, which requires direct involvement from Europe, as most of Russia’s frozen assets are located there. Other components of the US plan include freezing the conflict along the current line of contact and addressing Ukraine’s NATO membership status.

However, the chances that the EU will agree to ease sanctions are currently minimal.

According to Andriy Yermak, the Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, a new negotiation format has been established, which is expected to be highly effective. First, the Ukrainian delegation met with representatives of the Coalition of the Willing, then with high-ranking American officials, and finally – there was a joint meeting of all participants.

In addition, for the first time, representatives from Ukraine, the US, and Europe managed to sit at the same table, as earlier the Americans had directly stated that they did not view Europeans as participants in the negotiations.

After the meeting, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the US would stop attempts to act as a mediator within a few days if there are no clear signs that an agreement can be reached.

Later, Trump confirmed that the US could indeed exit the process.

"If for some reason one of the parties creates serious obstacles, we will simply say: 'You are fools, you are terrible people' – and withdraw from everything. But, hopefully, it won’t come to that," said the US President.

At the same time, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that the Kremlin currently does not have "clear contours" of an agreement with the US regarding a truce with Ukraine, but "fairly intense work" is being done in this direction.
In turn, Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vasily Nebenzya, stated that a ceasefire is currently "unrealistic".

Russian strikes and divisions within Trump’s team

Against the background of negotiations, Russia continued terrorist strikes on the territory of Ukraine. One of the bloodiest was the attack on the center of the city of Sumy on Palm Sunday, March 13. The reaction of the American leadership to it was different. Trump’s special representative on Ukraine Keith Kellogg called the strike one that “crosses any line of decency.” Marco Rubio expressed his “deepest condolences” to the victims of the strike.

But Donald Trump himself called it a “terrible mistake.” When asked by journalists what exactly he meant by the word “mistake,” the American leader did not clarify.

In addition, the US did not support the G7 statement condemning the Russian strike on Sumy. According to Bloomberg sources, the Trump administration informed allies that it could not sign the statement condemning the attack, as it was “working to preserve space for peace negotiations.” After all, meetings between the White House and the Kremlin are ongoing.

According to sources of The Wall Street Journal, a group within Trump’s circle, which includes Rubio and Kellogg, recommended that the US president show greater caution in relations with Putin. In particular, to take a tougher stance on Moscow’s demands for territorial concessions from Kyiv. However, Trump still sides with his ally Witkoff, who holds an openly pro-Russian position.

Emmanuel Macron, Steven Witkoff, and Marco Rubio at the meeting in Paris (photo: Getty Images)

For his part, Witkoff, commenting on recent negotiations with Putin, called them “compelling” and stated that they discussed steps that could end the war in Ukraine, as well as create new business opportunities.

The key to a general agreement, as Witkoff explained, revolves around the "five territories" of Ukraine – referring to occupied Crimea and four partially occupied regions in the South and East of Ukraine. At the same time, later Witkoff repeated banal Russian propaganda theses about “Ukraine’s treatment of Russian-speaking regions.”

Progress of the mineral deal between Ukraine and the USA

This week, negotiations on the long-stalled mineral resources deal have made significant progress. On April 17, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy Yuliia Svyrydenko, along with US Secretary of Finance Scott Bessent, signed a Memorandum of Intent between the US government and the Ukrainian government regarding the establishment of a Reconstruction Investment Fund.

The memorandum provides clear timelines for further negotiations. Next week, from April 21, the Prime Minister of Ukraine, Denys Shmyhal, will visit the United States for this purpose. And by April 26, negotiations on the text of the agreement itself, according to the memorandum, must be completed, with its signing to follow as soon as possible.

An important point noted in the memorandum is that the USA respects Ukraine's intention to avoid conflicts between the provisions of the future agreement and its obligations regarding European integration. However, the memorandum does not indicate the amount of aid the United States has provided to Ukraine since 2022. Also, predictably, there are no mentions of any security guarantees for Ukraine.

The details of the agreement remain undisclosed, but according to Bloomberg, the Trump administration has lowered the estimate of aid that the United States has provided to Kyiv since the beginning of Russia's full-scale invasion from $300 billion to approximately $100 billion. However, the US still considers the agreement an opportunity to reimburse expenditures in Ukraine through profits from the fund, the size of which remains unknown.

Ukraine wants to buy Patriot systems from the USA

On April 14, President Zelenskyy stated that Ukraine is ready to bye new Patriot systems from the United States or receive licenses for their production. According to him, Ukraine is prepared to invest $15 billion in the purchase of 10 systems, which would be capable of protecting the country's largest cities. He also reported that some European partners expressed willingness to help financially with this purchase.

Trump responded to this proposal with an actual accusation of Ukraine in the war. "Oh, I don’t know. He’s always looking to purchase missiles, you know. He’s against... Listen, when you start a war, you know that you can win the war, right? You don’t start a war against somebody that’s 20 times your size and then hope that people give you some missiles," said Trump.

Zelenskyy commented on the response of his counterpart as follows: “He (Trump – ed.) told me that America will work on this. For now, besides this, I don’t have any other information.”

Such a US position is likely meant not to create additional points of tension in the dialogue with Russia.

Trump at a crossroads

Previously, RBC-Ukraine wrote that with the approach of Easter, Trump has indeed become more active on the Ukrainian track, attempting to find a way out of the deadlock in which the negotiations have become stuck.

And now the American president is at a crossroads with several options for further action.

The first option is to try again to pressure Ukraine with already tested methods, such as halting military aid and intelligence sharing. Despite all its absurdity, this option is possible in the case that the concept that Russians have planted in Steve Witkoff’s ears wins in the White House. That it’s only about the "five regions," and as soon as Ukrainians leave from there – the problem will be solved.

The second option is finally to realize that ending the war requires primarily influencing Russia, as it is the main obstacle to peace. However, here two sub-options arise, since action can be taken with either the stick or the carrot. American media present both options as possible. Thus, according to Axios, the end of April is that conditional deadline which Washington has set for Moscow. And if the Kremlin does not meet Trump’s demands regarding real peace, then Russia may face new sanctions (since, as is long known, Putin does not respond to verbal threats).

However, according to Bloomberg, the US, on the contrary, is trying to entice the Russians with the prospect of easing sanctions in the event of a ceasefire, and it is this approach that the Americans offered the Europeans during the talks in Paris. Another possible bonus for the aggressor country, which Bloomberg also reports – is the possibility of the Americans recognizing Russian sovereignty over the occupied Crimea.

Finally, the third option – the actual withdrawal of the United States from any negotiations, which Trump already speaks about openly. Of course, this very withdrawal can look different, for example, with a halt in production of already contracted weapons for Ukraine, or without such a halt.

But in any case, from a reputational point of view, Trump’s self-removal from the Russian-Ukrainian war would be a serious blow to him, even considering his “Teflon” image.

The American president is a recognized master of juggling public attention and creating news hooks out of nothing. And he will likely attempt to convince his voters that the war in Ukraine is not in their best interests. Instead, it's worth focusing, for instance, on the fight against migrants, tariffs, or the occupation of Greenland, which at least is closer than Ukraine.

However, numerous opponents of Trump, primarily among the Democrats, will not miss the opportunity to remind him of the most failed of all his foreign policy promises – ending the war in Ukraine. And they will especially actively remind him as the midterm elections to Congress approach next November.

All the more so because, in the event of Trump’s self-removal, the Russian-Ukrainian war will not end. Rather, the opposite is true – the occupiers, having received a free hand, will try to attack with double the strength. Which, in turn, will not go unnoticed by top American media.

So, in any case, Trump will need to find – or appoint – someone to blame for his failure. Not for nothing, in yesterday’s speech, he said that “one of the sides” will create obstacles to peace. Who exactly will become such a culprit may become clearer next week after the next round of negotiations in London. If, of course, his statements about the US withdrawal from the process are not just a usual game to raise the stakes.

When writing this material, messages from Bloomberg, Axios, The Wall Street Journal, and public statements from American and Ukrainian officials were used.