Follow us on social

google cta
Diplomacy Watch Donald Trump Putin Zelensky

Diplomacy Watch: Rubio recommits to NATO as peace talks flounder

Trump says he's 'pissed off' with Putin's slow deal making

Reporting | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

The NATO foreign affairs ministers’ meeting began in Brussels on Thursday amid frosty U.S.-EU relations, brought upon largely by the Trump administration’s recalculus toward a negotiated political solution for the Ukraine war.

At the meeting, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio reiterated the Trump administration’s commitment to NATO — assuming its members bolster their defense spending, a talking point repeatedly pressed by the Trump team.

“The United States President Trump's made clear he supports NATO, we're going to remain in NATO,” Rubio explained to reporters in Brussels. “The only way NATO can get stronger and more viable is if our partners, the nation states that comprise this important alliance, have more capability.”

“A full-scale ground war in the heart of Europe is a reminder that hard power is still necessary as a deterrent,” Rubio explained, referencing the three-year-old Ukraine conflict. He hopes to leave the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting with a commitment from allies to spend 5% of GDP on defense.

En route to the meeting, NATO head Mark Rutte likewise emphasized Europe’s recent commitment to upped defense spending. “It's my assumption that what we need to spend, the Canadians and Europeans together, will be north of 3%,” he said.

Meanwhile, Russian President Vladimir Putin has sent investment envoy and top negotiator Kirill Dmitriev to Washington to meet U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff.

Dmitriev said on social media that the meeting was meant to facilitate a U.S.-Russia dialogue “completely destroyed under the Biden administration.”

The visit comes amid what appears to be snags in Trump’s efforts to get both sides to the negotiating table.

"We take the models and solutions proposed by the Americans very seriously, but we can't accept it all in its current form," Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told Russian magazine "International Affairs" in an interview released on Tuesday.

"As far as we can see, there is no place in them today for our main demand, namely to solve the problems related to the root causes of this conflict. It is completely absent, and that must be overcome,” Ryabkov explained.

Trump, meanwhile, had also rejected Russia’s recent suggestion that a third party take control of Ukraine as part of a negotiated end to the war. Namely, the Russians want the United Nations and other countries to facilitate a transitional administration in Ukraine, which would include overseeing elections.

Moscow’s suggestion comes in tandem with its repeated allegations that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, whose term expired in May 2024, is no longer Ukraine’s legitimate leader.

Trump administration officials had initially hoped for a Ukraine peace keeping deal in upcoming months. Now, due in part to statements like Ryabkov’s, they’re recalculating their efforts for a longer diplomatic road ahead.

“The White House has extensively engaged Russia on the central items of a peace deal, including NATO membership for Ukraine and questions regarding territorial claims, but it has so far proven difficult to arrive at anything approaching a consensus on these issues between the war’s four main stakeholders: Ukraine, Russia, Europe, and the U.S.,” Mark Episkopos, a research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft’s Eurasia Program, told RS.

“The problem is that Moscow will not agree to a complete ceasefire without a roadmap for settling these issues on terms it considers favorable, and the West lacks the coercive leverage necessary to get it to significantly dial back its demands. Breaking this diplomatic logjam requires working toward a shared set of viable aims with Kyiv and European leaders, and engaging Russia on a wider diplomatic front with the goal of inducing Moscow to soften its baseline conditions for war termination in Ukraine.”

This is unwelcome news for the American president, who, on Sunday, had said he was “pissed off” at Putin for slow deal making progress. Indeed, Trump threatened Russia with additional tariffs.

"If Russia and I are unable to make a deal on stopping the bloodshed in Ukraine, and if I think it was Russia’s fault...I am going to put secondary tariffs on oil, on all oil coming out of Russia,” Trump threatened.

Some Europeans, meanwhile, are throwing more money — and troops — at the equation. Berlin pledged a further €130 million ($140 million) in stabilization funding and humanitarian aid for Ukraine on Tuesday.

"We will make it clear to the American side that we should not engage with Putin's stalling tactics," outgoing German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said in a statement about her Tuesday trip to Kyiv. "It is Putin who is playing for time, does not want peace and continues his illegal war of aggression.”

During her trip to Kyiv, Baerbock said Russia should accept a Ukraine ceasefire without conditions.

And on Tuesday, Berlin, which will be sending up to 5,000 soldiers to Russia-bordering Lithuania, launched its first permanent troop deployment since World War II. "We have a clear mission. We have to ensure the protection, freedom and security of our Lithuanian allies here on NATO's eastern flank,” German Brigadier General Christoph Huber said in a statement.

In other Ukraine War news this week:

According to Al Jazeera, Finland has left the Ottawa convention banning antipersonnel landmines. It follows fellow Ukraine allies and Russia neighbors Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, who did so last month, citing the perceived Russian threat. "Withdrawing from the Ottawa Convention will give us the possibility to prepare for the changes in the security environment in a more versatile way," Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo explained the decision at a press conference.

Ukrainian incursions continue into Russia’s Belgorod region. A Finland-based military analyst told Newsweek, however, that while Ukrainian forces have advanced to several villages in the area, they’re unlikely to threaten critical Russian infrastructure or the city of Belgorod itself.

According to CNN, Russia’s ongoing conscription drive, the largest in years, has heralded about 160,000 new troops between the ages of 18 and 30.

From State Department Press Briefing on March 31

The latest State Department briefing addressed recent Ukraine war negotiation hiccups. “There was an idea from Russia about a temporary administration that was not appreciated by the president,” State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said, citing Russia’s recent proposal for a third party to control Ukraine. “Ukraine is – well, I don’t think I need to remind everyone, but it’s a good reminder – is a constitutional democracy. Governance in Ukraine is determined by its constitution and the Ukrainian people.”

Despite the hurdle, Bruce emphasized the Trump administration’s push for a negotiated political solution in Ukraine. “We are committed to the diplomacy necessary to achieve a full ceasefire and to bring the parties to the negotiating table for a final and lasting settlement,” she said. “President Trump has made clear that Russia and Ukraine need to move to a full ceasefire now. None of that has changed.”


Top Photo Credit: Diplomacy Watch (Khody Akhavi)
google cta
Reporting | QiOSK
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.