Donald Trump, since his second-term inauguration, had consistently expressed his ambition to finalize a deal that would bring an end to the fighting in Ukraine in a single day. However, over four months into his presidency, the prospect of achieving that goal appears as distant as ever.
In recent developments, Russia proposed renewed peace negotiations with Ukraine in Istanbul, yet both countries remain firmly entrenched in positions concerning territorial disputes and sovereignty. This rigidity has rendered significant progress in the peace talks unlikely.
Trump, frustrated with the slow pace of negotiations, has hinted that he may consider withdrawing from the discussions altogether if Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin do not quickly reach an agreement. His administration’s role in these negotiations has been described by Seth Jones, the president of the defense and security department at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), as “relatively weak.” Jones warns that abandoning the talks could fundamentally alter the balance of power in the ongoing war in favor of Russia, given the crucial role the U.S. has played through intelligence support which European nations may struggle to replicate.
Samuel Charap, distinguished chair in Russia and Eurasia policy at the RAND research institute, suggests that if Trump’s reluctance to engage more deeply in the negotiation process means passing on responsibility to working-level officials, it might not pose a severe issue. However, if it involves withdrawing military assistance and intelligence support from Kyiv, it could lead to critical problems.
Casualty estimates from a U.S. assessment released in April reflected the ongoing toll of the fighting, indicating that around 790,000 Russian soldiers had been killed or wounded since the invasion of Ukraine began on February 24, 2022. In comparison, Zelenskyy reported that the total number of Ukrainian military casualties exceeded 400,000. Despite these losses, according to Jones, Russia’s strategic preference remains to secure a victory on the battlefield rather than engaging in genuine peace negotiations that could compromise their objectives.
Even before his second term commenced, Trump signaled a shift from the Biden administration’s robust support for Ukraine during the campaign trail. In a pre-election podcast, Trump blamed Zelenskyy for allowing the war to begin, claiming, “He should never have let that war start. The war’s a loser,” and he accused President Joe Biden of instigating the conflict.
Examining the trajectory of the Trump administration’s efforts toward peace, it began with ambitious phone calls made just weeks after his inauguration. After separate discussions with Putin and Zelenskyy, Trump announced plans for a meeting between the two leaders in Saudi Arabia, expressing optimism about achieving peace.
“I think we’re on the way to getting peace,” Trump stated, highlighting that both Putin and Zelenskyy desired an end to the violence. However, instead of a high-profile meeting between Trump and Putin, Secretary of State Marco Rubio met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov shortly thereafter. This initiative, seemingly excluding Ukraine from direct talks, marked a significant departure from the Biden administration’s approach.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also suggested that Ukraine might have to concede some territory occupied by Russia, including Crimea, which had been annexed in 2014. The retaking of Crimea has remained a vital strategic goal for Ukraine since the onset of the conflict.
Initially, Zelenskyy rejected a proposal by the White House that would grant the U.S. access to Ukraine’s key mineral reserves as compensation for prior military aid and a means to secure future assistance. However, he ultimately agreed to terms and traveled to Washington for a high-profile meeting on February 28, where tensions escalated when Trump and Vice President Vance publicly criticized him for what they perceived as a lack of gratitude for American support.
During this meeting, as discussions turned toward peace negotiations, Trump bluntly remarked, “You don’t have the cards right now. With us, you start having the cards.” Remaining composed, Zelenskyy responded, “I’m not playing cards. I’m very serious, Mr. President.”
Following the meeting, Trump took to his social media platform to express his assessment of Zelenskyy’s readiness for peace, stating, “I have determined that President Zelenskyy is not ready for Peace if America is involved, because he feels our involvement gives him a big advantage in negotiations.” He further accused Zelenskyy of disrespecting the U.S. in the Oval Office and suggested he could return when he was ready for peace.
Not long after Zelenskyy’s visit, the Trump administration announced a suspension of essential aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine, a decision that posed risks to Kyiv’s defense capabilities and could potentially hand Russian forces an advantage. Ukraine, amidst intensified fighting, proposed a limited 30-day ceasefire contingent on a reciprocal agreement from Russia. Although Putin did not accept a broader truce, he agreed to halt strikes on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure temporarily.
During high-level discussions in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, U.S. officials pledged to resume aid and intelligence support to Ukraine, describing the engagement as an “important step toward restoring durable peace for Ukraine.” In subsequent talks in Riyadh between U.S. and Russian representatives, Moscow agreed to a ceasefire in the Black Sea aimed at securing safe navigation and preventing the military use of commercial vessels. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov reminded that many aspects of a ceasefire remained to be addressed.
Charap acknowledges that the Trump administration’s dealings contributed positively to securing ceasefires related to critical infrastructure and Black Sea navigation. He suggested that, even if complicated negotiations lay ahead, the push for discussion instigated by the U.S. had yielded some results.
In April, a temporary truce was announced by Russia over Easter, which Ukraine accepted. Zelenskyy, expressing caution, stated on Telegram, “If a full ceasefire truly takes hold, Ukraine proposes extending it beyond Easter Day on April 20.” Yet soon after, both parties accused one another of violating the truce.
Soon after, the U.S. proposed a controversial peace plan outlining a freeze of the frontlines and recognizing Russian control over various territories taken throughout the conflict. Under this proposal, Ukraine would forgo its aim of NATO membership, which had long been a point of contention. Ultimately, both Russia and Ukraine dismissed the plan; Ryabkov, a Russian foreign policy adviser, stated they could not accept it without revisions, while Zelenskyy firmly maintained Ukraine would never recognize Russian control over Crimea.
Trump reacted on Truth Social, criticizing Zelenskyy for his “inflammatory statements,” which, he argued, could prolong the conflict. He openly expressed frustration toward Russia for continuing its airstrikes on Kyiv, remarking, “I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing. Vladimir, STOP! 5000 soldiers a week are dying,” and urging for a conclusive peace deal.
A significant moment materialized on May 16 when Russian and Ukrainian officials convened in Istanbul for their first direct talks since the invasion. This meeting, facilitated by Turkey, resulted in a prisoner exchange but little tangible progress beyond that.
As the Kremlin sought follow-up negotiations on the issuance of new proposals for peace, the fighting on the ground continued without interruption. On May 25, Russian forces launched a significant drone and missile strike on Ukraine, marking one of the most intense attacks since the start of the war.
Ahead of the renewed talks in Istanbul, Zelenskyy emphasized his concerns about Russia’s commitments, claiming they engaged in “yet another deception” by failing to present their peace settlement proposal prior to the meeting.
The complex negotiations highlight ongoing challenges, with possible paths toward peace requiring difficult concessions from Ukraine—most of which Zelenskyy remains steadfastly opposed. According to Jones, Ukraine could agree to not pursue NATO membership and refrain from efforts to reclaim territory currently under Russian control, but such steps are yet to be considered seriously by Kyiv.
image source from：https://www.npr.org/2025/06/02/nx-s1-5414522/ukraine-peace-talks-russia-trump-putin-istanbul
