Follow us on social

Trump oval office

Trump is squeezing himself with his own Russia deadline

His initial instincts for talking were right; he shouldn’t let frustration or the need for a quick ‘win’ to cloud his judgement here

Analysis | Europe

It’s a time for choosing in the Russia-Ukraine war.

President Donald Trump’s decision to considerably shorten his 50-day deadline for Russia to agree to an unconditional ceasefire with Ukraine reflects his mounting frustration with what has proven to be a difficult peace process.

The President acknowledged on Monday this move is unlikely to shift Russia's position. “If you know what the answer is going to be, why wait?” he said.

As the White House ponders next steps, it’s worth reflecting on the geopolitical moment President Trump finds himself in. It was only eight months ago that any talk of a viable diplomatic settlement was traduced by the previous administration as a naive, shortsighted capitulation to autocracy.

The Trump administration deserves no shortage of credit for lifting the three-year blockade on dialogue with Russia, a grave mistake by Western leaders that has exacerbated the diplomatic logjam Ukraine is now in.

Direct high-level channels between Russia and the U.S. were restored almost immediately upon Trump’s assumption of the presidency. Months of dialogue between Trump and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, as well as the relentless diplomatic efforts of special envoy Steve Witkoff, have de-escalated bilateral U.S.-Russia tensions and generated a clearer, even if ungenerous, picture of Russia’s framework for a peace settlement.

Most importantly, President Trump has conclusively refuted the strategic bankruptcy and political nihilism of the “as long as it takes” mantra that has colored the Western approach to Ukraine under the previous administration. There is now widespread agreement, spearheaded by the White House, that the war must end through substantive diplomacy.

But the administration is now faced with a dilemma that, if left unresolved, threatens to undo the real diplomatic progress that has been made since January. This is a bilateral conflict between Russia and Ukraine, but there is also a level on which it is a confrontation between Russia and the West that is unfolding on Ukrainian soil. Both of these prongs must be addressed as part of any sustainable settlement.

Prioritizing the former and largely ignoring the latter by treating this war as a narrow deconfliction/delimitation problem is a recipe for failure.

To be sure, Trump is fully justified in taking the view that this crisis was compounded and badly mishandled by actors he has nothing to do with, including, as it were, some of the loudest promoters of the false Russiagate narratives that derailed his first term and left a malign imprint on U.S. national security discourse.

Many of these same actors are now urging Trump to abandon the sound judgement behind his pledge to keep America out of endless military entanglements and to instead adopt a lightly repackaged version of the failed Biden-era policies that he rightly denounced.

This crisis was foisted on Trump by forces outside his control, but it is nevertheless his to resolve, and the choices made by the White House in coming weeks will augur fateful results not just for the Ukraine peace process but for the administration’s ability to deliver on its larger foreign policy vision. There cannot be a sustainable reprioritization of U.S. resources away from Europe to the Indo-Pacific while this war roils on, nor if it ends with a volatile Europe teetering on the brink of direct confrontation with Russia.

There is no “walking away” from this, except in the purely tactical sense of leveraging U.S. aid to smooth the way to a viable peace deal. Nor is it technically possible or the slightest bit desirable to revert to the Biden-era malaise of aiding Ukraine from one aid package to the next with no endgame in sight. U.S. security assistance and sanctions can impose costs on Russia in a way that prolongs the conflict, but these tools were never enough to put Ukraine on the winning side of what has been a grinding attrition war against a vastly larger enemy.

It should be recognized as part of any diplomatic point of departure that Russia will never agree to an unconditional 30-day ceasefire. Imposing deadlines in service of this goal, regardless of length, does nothing to assuage the underlying logic that Russia will never surrender its principal source of leverage – namely, its military advantage and escalation dominance over Ukraine – without substantial concessions from Kyiv and the West. There is little the U.S. can offer, in terms of affecting the bilateral military dynamics between Russia and Ukraine, that Russia cannot take by force if the war continues into 2026.

The only way out is through sustained, creative diplomacy that takes into account the full scope of challenges and opportunities in U.S.-Russia relations. The stakes extend well beyond Ukraine; President Trump has a window to not just put an end to the carnage and tragedy wrought by this war, but to do so while advancing American strategic interests in a way not seen since Richard Nixon’s opening to China. But to seize this opportunity, the White House must treat the Ukraine war as the complex, multilayered problem that it is.

The question of Ukraine’s postwar orientation must be at the core of any roadmap to a ceasefire and durable peace. Here, the starting point for negotiations should be guarantees that Ukraine will not join NATO and that no NATO troops will be stationed on Ukrainian soil, in exchange for Moscow’s reaffirmation that it has no objection to Ukraine’s pursuit of European Union membership.

The Trump administration should outline concrete steps to restore U.S.-Russia commercial ties and reintegrate Russia into Western-led financial institutions as part of a package deal premised on Russia’s willingness to soften its territorial claims. The White House should likewise make clear that a negotiated settlement in Ukraine would generate the goodwill and confidence-building mechanisms necessary for constructive dialogue on arms control and NATO’s force posture in Eastern Europe, both questions of acute concern to the Kremlin.

Creative solutions will have to be developed to address Ukraine’s postwar security needs in a way that doesn’t feed into future escalatory spirals between Russia and its neighbors; my proposal for an off-site stockpiles aims to accomplish just that.

In short, the key to a successful negotiating posture on Ukraine is to refocus the talks away from immediate deconfliction to underlying strategic issues that both Moscow and Washington have vested interests in addressing. This can only be accomplished by accepting and consistently acting on the reality that the main sources of American leverage are to be found off the battlefield. No one said this would be easy, but the costs of inaction – both for Ukraine and U.S. global interests – are far higher.

Peace through strength has always meant more than maintaining military readiness, important as that is. The true measure of strength is being able to tap all the tools at your disposal in pursuit of concrete national interests, and nowhere is this sense of hard-nosed pragmatism more urgently required than the Ukraine crisis. President Trump’s instincts as a dealmaker have gotten him this far – now is the time to bring it home.


Top photo credit: President Donald Trump signs two executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC on Thursday, January 30, 2025. The first order formally commissioned Christopher Rocheleau as deputy administrator of the FAA. The second ordered an immediate assessment of aviation safety. Photo by Bonnie Cash/Pool/Sipa USA
Analysis | Europe
These Israeli-backed gangs could wreck the Gaza ceasefire
Ashraf al-Mansi walks in front of members of his Popular Army militia. The group, previously known as the Counter-Terrorism Service, has worked with the Israeli military and is considered by many in Gaza to be a criminal gang. (Via the Facebook page of Yasser Abu Shabab)

These Israeli-backed gangs could wreck the Gaza ceasefire

Middle East

Frightening images have emerged from Gaza in the week since a fragile ceasefire took hold between Israel and Hamas. In one widely circulated video, seven blindfolded men kneel in line with militants arrayed behind them. Gunshots ring out in unison, and the row of men collapse in a heap as dozens of spectators look on.

The gruesome scenes appear to be part of a Hamas effort to reestablish control over Gaza through a crackdown on gangs and criminal groups that it says have proliferated during the past two years of war and chaos. In the minds of Israel and its backers, the killings reveal Hamas’ true colors — and represent a preview of what the group may do if it’s allowed to maintain some degree of power.

keep readingShow less
Trump Zelensky
Top image credit: U.S. President Donald Trump meets with Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy over lunch in the Cabinet Room at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., October 17, 2025. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

Finally, Trump takes a sensible turn on Ukraine

Europe

Claims that President Trump bullied President Zelensky and urged him to withdraw from the whole of the Donbas at their latest meeting in Washington will doubtless cause the usual furore in the Western media and commentariat, but they cannot be substantiated and are a distraction from the really important issue concerning U.S. and NATO strategy, which is whether the alliance should continue support to Ukraine at existing levels or seek radically to escalate.

Here, President Trump made the right decision by pulling back from his previous suggestion that the U.S. might provide Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine — presumably as a result of his recent telephone discussion with President Putin.

keep readingShow less
Nord Stream pipeline
Top image credit: A Ukrainian diver, Volodymyr Z., who is wanted by Germany over his alleged involvement in the 2022 explosions that damaged the Nord Stream pipeline and severely disrupted Russian gas supplies to Europe, walks escorted by Polish Police at the district court in Warsaw, Poland, October 1, 2025. REUTERS/Kacper Pempel

What is Poland hiding besides the Ukrainian Nord Steam suspect?

Europe

It wasn’t that long ago that the mysterious attack on the Nord Stream pipelines was a massive outrage across the Western world.

With Russia the presumed culprit, European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen vowed the “strongest possible response,” while a top adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky declared it “a terrorist attack planned by Russia and an act of aggression towards the EU.”

keep readingShow less

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.