Putin Agrees to Limited Ceasefire After Trump Call, Doubts Persist Over Long-Term Trust
A tentative agreement has been reached between Russia and Ukraine, brokered by former U.S. President Donald Trump, for a limited ceasefire focused on halting attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. However, significant concerns remain about the durability of the agreement and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s genuine commitment to a lasting peace. The 30-day cessation of attacks on energy infrastructure, secured after a 90-minute phone conversation between Trump and Putin, does not extend protections to troops on the front lines or to Ukrainian civilians enduring ongoing Russian aerial bombardments.
Trump, who characterized the conversation as "very good" and "productive" in a social media post, claimed to have secured an immediate ceasefire on all energy and infrastructure, envisioning it as a stepping stone towards a complete ceasefire and an end to the conflict. He expressed hope that this process would be successful "for the sake of humanity."
Despite Trump’s optimistic assessment, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy painted a starkly different picture. In a statement posted on social media, Zelenskyy asserted that "Putin effectively rejected the proposal for a full ceasefire." He called on the international community to reject any attempts by Putin to prolong the war, highlighting Russia’s continued attacks on Ukrainian civilians. He cited a recent instance where a Russian-fired Shahed drone struck a hospital in Ukraine’s Sumy region.
Zelenskyy outlined a series of steps the Western world could take to counter Putin, including sanctions against Russia, assistance to Ukraine, strengthening allies in the free world, and working towards security guarantees. He emphasized that "only a real cessation of strikes on civilian infrastructure by Russia, as proof of its willingness to end this war, can bring peace closer."
The agreement’s limitations, particularly the absence of protections for civilians from aerial attacks, raise doubts about its potential to serve as a foundation for meaningful negotiations. While the Trump administration maintains that a ceasefire is a prerequisite for true negotiations, it remains unclear how those negotiations will proceed without a comprehensive truce.
Neither the State Department nor the White House has clarified why Trump believes Putin genuinely desires peace, especially given Trump’s previous accusations that Zelenskyy was not serious about negotiating security guarantees for Ukraine. Officials from NATO and the EU have also remained silent following the call between Trump and Putin.
According to media reports, Ukraine agreed to a ceasefire last week after discussions with U.S. representatives, who then planned to present the agreement to the Russians. While details of Ukraine’s concessions remain scarce, Zelenskyy indicated that the U.S. had advocated for a full ceasefire across the front lines, in the air, and on the Black Sea – a broader scope than what Trump seemingly achieved in his discussions with Putin.
Zelenskyy also mentioned discussions regarding the release of prisoners of war and detainees, as well as the return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred to Russia. While the Kremlin announced a prisoner swap with Ukraine, there was no mention of the thousands of Ukrainian children Kyiv claims have been abducted and funneled through adoption schemes in Russia.
Beyond the immediate ceasefire, numerous critical issues remain unresolved between Ukraine and Russia, including Ukraine’s potential NATO membership, the presence of peacekeeping troops in Ukraine, Western arms supplies, the status of Russian-occupied lands, Ukraine’s future security, and Russia’s ongoing aerial campaigns over civilian populations. These complex challenges underscore the significant hurdles that must be overcome to achieve a lasting peace.
Experts have expressed skepticism about Putin’s intentions. Dan Hoffman, former CIA Moscow Station Chief, cautioned against trusting Putin, arguing that he is focused on ensuring Ukraine cannot deter future Russian attacks. Hoffman emphasized the need for caution, warning against a scenario where Washington desires a ceasefire more than Moscow. He stressed that Putin’s strategic objective remains to weaken Ukraine.
Hoffman further advised the Trump administration to define success based on U.S. national security interests, cautioning against a "bad deal." He suggested allowing negotiations to proceed but emphasized the importance of prioritizing U.S. interests.
The limited nature of the current ceasefire, coupled with persistent doubts about Putin’s commitment to a genuine peace, underscores the fragility of the situation. While the agreement to halt attacks on energy infrastructure is a welcome step, it is crucial to recognize that it represents only a small fraction of the issues that must be addressed to resolve the conflict and ensure a secure future for Ukraine. The success of any future negotiations will depend on a clear understanding of Putin’s true objectives and a steadfast commitment to upholding U.S. national security interests.
