Follow us on social

google cta
Trump and Putin on phone

US-Russia talks: The rubber finally hits the road

A partial ceasefire on energy and infrastructure attacks is a preliminary way to cut the Gordian knot

Europe
google cta
google cta

If the diplomatic overtures of the past several months were seen by some as opaque, then today’s phone call between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin cannot be taken as anything but proof positive that the rubber has hit the road on serious, substantive U.S.-Russia negotiations over a Ukraine peace deal.

The White House has been pushing for an all-encompassing ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine as the first step on the long road to a durable settlement. There is an obvious military rationale for doing so: the major battlefield indicators favor Russia, which is slowly overpowering Ukraine in a war of attrition and has just effectively ended the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ (AFU) high-stakes incursion into the Kursk region.

An immediate cessation of hostilities would thus prevent Ukraine’s bargaining position from further deteriorating as talks unfold. But, and precisely for this reason, Putin seeks to shape the terms of a ceasefire in Russia’s favor with stipulations that the agreement must include "the complete cessation of foreign military assistance and provision of intelligence information to Kyiv.”

The partial ceasefire on energy and infrastructure attacks, apparently agreed to by both the Russian and American sides, is a preliminary way to cut the Gordian knot as talks over a full ceasefire proceed in coming days and weeks. The energy-infrastructure truce represents substantial progress, negotiated under what is militarily a difficult situation for Ukraine, in slowly shifting from war onto a de-escalatory trajectory.

Not unimportantly, it is also a source of real succor for Ukraine’s civilian population over three years into what has been the most destructive war on the European continent since 1945.

It should not be lost on anyone that this undeniably positive momentum has been made possible by the White House’s ability — as recommend in a brief authored by me and my colleagues George Beebe and Anatol Lieven — to avoid the trap of treating this as a narrow deconfliction problem and instead demonstrating a willingness to engage Russia in a broader bilateral diplomatic track.

The Trump-Putin discussion extended far beyond Ukraine, touching on a wide spectrum of issues including cooperation in the Middle East, opportunities for economic normalization, nuclear arms control, and even a U.S.-Russia hockey series. This strategy of extending the negotiating table is not only a critical source of confidence-building to ensure compliance with any potential peace deal but gives Washington the leverage needed to mellow some of Russia’s maximalist conditions for ending the war.

Where do we go from here? Much will depend on the coming diplomatic tit-for-tat, but two things can be ascertained at the outset. It is of course crucial to maintain Ukrainian and European buy-in over the course of this process, itself no small task which will require sustained coordination with all the relevant stakeholders.

Secondly, whilst a full ceasefire remains a worthy short-term objective, the overall priority should be to engage Russia in frank, pragmatic dialogue on what the outlines of a final peace settlement can look like. Indeed, Moscow is unlikely to accept the former without a workable roadmap to the latter.


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

Top photo credit: Donald Trump (White House photo) and Vladimir Putin (Office of the Russian Federation President)
google cta
Europe
Gaza tent city
Top photo credit: Palestinian Mohammed Abu Halima, 43, sits in front of his tent with his children in a camp for displaced Palestinians in Gaza City, Gaza, on December 11, 2025. Matrix Images / Mohammed Qita

Four major dynamics in Gaza War that will impact 2026

Middle East

Just ahead of the New Year, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is set to visit President Donald Trump in Florida today, no doubt with a wish list for 2026. Already there have been reports that he will ask Trump to help attack Iran’s nuclear program, again.

Meanwhile, despite the media narrative, the war in Gaza is not over, and more specifically, it has not ended in a clear victory for Netanyahu’s IDF forces. Nor has the New Year brought solace to the Palestinians — at least 71,000 have been killed since October 2023. But there have been a number of important dynamics and developments in 2025 that will affect not only Netanyahu’s “asks” but the future of security in Israel and the region.

keep readingShow less
Sokoto Nigeria
Top photo credit: Map of Nigeria (Shutterstock/Juan Alejandro Bernal)

Trump's Christmas Day strikes on Nigeria beg question: Why Sokoto?

Africa

For the first time since President Trump publicly excoriated Nigeria’s government for allegedly condoning a Christian genocide, Washington made good on its threat of military action on Christmas Day when U.S. forces conducted airstrikes against two alleged major positions of the Islamic State (IS-Sahel) in northwestern Sokoto state.

According to several sources familiar with the operation, the airstrike involved at least 16 GPS-guided munitions launched from the Navy destroyer, USS Paul Ignatius, stationed in the Gulf of Guinea. Debris from unexpended munition consistent with Tomahawk cruise missile components have been recovered in the village of Jabo, Sokoto state, as well nearly 600 miles away in Offa in Kwara state.

keep readingShow less
What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?
Top image credit: Voodison328 via shutterstock.com

What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?

Global Crises

Earlier this month in Geneva, delegates to the Antipersonnel Mine Ban Treaty’s 22nd Meeting of States Parties confronted the most severe crisis in the convention’s nearly three-decade history. That crisis was driven by an unprecedented convergence of coordinated withdrawals by five European states and Ukraine’s attempt to “suspend” its treaty obligations amid an ongoing armed conflict.

What unfolded was not only a test of the resilience of one of the world’s most successful humanitarian disarmament treaties, but also a critical moment for the broader system of international norms designed to protect civilians during and after war. Against a background of heightened tensions resulting from the war in Ukraine and unusual divisions among the traditional convention champions, the countries involved made decisions that will have long-term implications.

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.