U.S. Officials to Confront Russia on Ceasefire, Nuclear Ambitions in Saudi Arabia Meeting
High-ranking U.S. officials are set to engage with a Russian delegation in Saudi Arabia this Sunday, a meeting fraught with tension and uncertainty as the Trump administration aims to solidify a fragile ceasefire and address escalating concerns over Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, particularly its nuclear power plants. The talks come on the heels of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recent agreement to temporarily halt strikes on Ukrainian energy infrastructure, a move that includes the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Station, Europe’s largest nuclear facility.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz will lead the U.S. delegation in Jeddah, where they will push for a more comprehensive ceasefire encompassing the Black Sea. This objective is particularly critical given Russia’s history of reneging on similar agreements.
The backdrop to these negotiations is complex and colored by past failures. In 2022, Turkey and the United Nations brokered the Black Sea Grain Initiative, designed to ensure the safe passage of Ukrainian agricultural exports and stabilize global food prices. However, Russia unilaterally withdrew from the agreement in 2023, raising serious doubts about its reliability as a negotiating partner.
Security experts remain skeptical of Putin’s commitment to any long-term ceasefire, given his track record and perceived strategic objectives in Ukraine. The current pause in strikes, while welcome, is viewed by many as a temporary measure, potentially aimed at buying time or gaining leverage in negotiations.
Beyond the immediate ceasefire, a potentially explosive issue on the agenda is the future of Ukraine’s nuclear power. While President Trump’s earlier interest in a mineral deal with Ukraine appears to have waned, he has reportedly shifted his focus to a new, ambitious venture: securing U.S. ownership of Kyiv’s electrical supply and nuclear power plants.
Rubio and Waltz, in a joint statement released after a phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, argued that American ownership of these plants would provide the best possible protection for Ukraine’s critical energy infrastructure. This proposal, however, is likely to face fierce resistance from Moscow.
The implications of such a deal are far-reaching. Rebekah Koffler, a former DIA intelligence officer and author of "Putin’s Playbook," believes that Putin will vehemently oppose U.S. control of Ukraine’s nuclear assets. She suggests that he would likely attempt to sabotage any agreement that grants the U.S. such significant influence over Ukraine’s energy sector.
Koffler further contends that Zelenskyy himself may be hesitant to cede control of these vital assets, even to the U.S. While he might consider allowing U.S. control of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, currently under Russian occupation, it’s highly unlikely that Russia would relinquish its grip on the facility voluntarily. Any attempt to forcibly reclaim the plant would likely result in intense and prolonged fighting.
The timing of Trump’s interest in acquiring Ukraine’s energy infrastructure remains somewhat unclear, but it seems connected to his belief that American presence and investment within Ukraine would offer greater protection against Russian aggression. This argument, however, has been subject to debate, as American companies have continued to operate in Ukraine throughout the conflict. The differing viewpoints on this issue reportedly contributed to a heated exchange between Trump and Zelenskyy last month.
Koffler argues that Putin could perceive a U.S. takeover of Kyiv’s nuclear power plants as a veiled attempt to provide security guarantees to Ukraine and exert control over its nuclear capabilities, which Russia fears could be militarized. This perception, she believes, would be seen as a direct threat to Russia’s security interests.
The potential impact of U.S. ownership of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure on the broader negotiations remains uncertain. Dan Hoffman, former CIA Moscow station chief, is not convinced that it will significantly improve the prospects for a lasting peace. He emphasizes the importance of tangible agreements, highlighting the fact that the existing ceasefire on energy infrastructure has already been violated.
Hoffman points to a recent drone strike on a railway power system in the Dnipropetrovsk region, which caused civilian power outages, as evidence of Russia’s unreliability. He suggests that the issue of U.S. ownership is simply another point of contention in a complex negotiation.
He anticipates that Putin will likely use the prospect of allowing U.S. involvement in Ukraine’s energy sector as leverage to extract concessions from the U.S. on other issues. Hoffman believes that Putin’s ultimate objective remains the destabilization and subjugation of Ukraine.
"He wants Ukraine. He wants to topple the government. That’s his objective," Hoffman stated. "Whatever deals he agrees to in the short term, what he really wants to do is destroy Ukraine’s ability to deter Russia in the future and to give Russia maximum advantage."
Hoffman argues that Putin is currently attempting to achieve through negotiation what he has been unable to achieve on the battlefield. Ultimately, the key to achieving any meaningful ceasefire, according to Hoffman, lies in determining whether Putin genuinely desires an end to the war. He expresses skepticism on this point, questioning whether Putin has any real incentive to halt the conflict.
Hoffman concludes by suggesting that history indicates the war in Ukraine is likely to end only through military means, with one side achieving a decisive victory or both sides becoming incapable of continuing the fight. The upcoming negotiations in Saudi Arabia, therefore, represent a critical test of whether diplomacy can offer a viable alternative to continued bloodshed and destruction.
