Trump’s Ukraine policy shift sparks talks with Russia, raising hopes for peace but leaving key questions on territory, sanctions, and NATO security guarantees.
Image Source: Getty
The United States President Donald J Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin's 90-minute phone call confirmed the shift in the US policy on Ukraine. It eased Russia's initial scepticism about Trump's ability to address its demands in the European security architecture. When Trump took office in 2017, he aimed to reset relations with Russia, but the US policy remained unchanged on Ukraine. Moreover, sanctions were imposed on Russia, and Washington withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, further widening the rift with Moscow. However, in their recent telephone conversation, both leaders agreed to tackle the root cause of the conflict and announced immediate negotiations. Since then, the discourse around the war has shifted, raising expectations of ending hostilities as the conflict enters its third year. Yet, achieving lasting peace in Ukraine remains highly complex. With Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky walking out of a potential critical mineral agreement with Washington, the road to negotiations on how this war will end will be difficult to ascertain, particularly on territorial division, sanctions relief for Moscow, and security guarantees for Ukraine.
Sanctions were imposed on Russia, and Washington withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, further widening the rift with Moscow.
On 18 February 2025, an American delegation met with a Russian delegation in Riyadh. The US team included Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Advisor Michael Waltz, and Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff. a The Russian delegation comprised Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, Kirill Dimitriev, and Presidential Aide for Foreign Policy, Yuri Ushakov, in Riyadh. The meeting aimed to find common ground and establish parameters for further negotiations. They decided to appoint representatives who would hold regular consultations on ending the conflict. Both sides emphasised repairing the US-Russia relations by expediting the appointment of ambassadors in Washington and Moscow. They also discussed resolving staffing issues in diplomatic missions, which had been understaffed due to deteriorating ties. Further discussions focused on restoring economic ties, including energy and space cooperation. The underlying rationale is that normalcy in diplomatic relations could pave the way for better communication. Additionally, given the conflicting territorial claims, uncertainty about the conflict resolution, and concerns over the growing Russia-China partnership, restoring diplomatic ties appeared to be the simplest and most effective strategy, offering mutual benefits.
The talks in Riyadh did not mention the post-war status of the territories. Before the June 2024 Swiss Peace Summit, Putin demanded Ukraine's withdrawal from Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia for a ceasefire, which Kyiv rejected.. Since then, Russia's position has remained unchanged, with estimates showing that it controls 19 percent of Ukrainian territory. Presently, Russia claims to hold 75 percent of Donetsk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia and 99 percent of Lugansk.
However, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's stance has shifted. While earlier, Ukraine demanded the withdrawal of Russian forces, including from Crimea, it is now willing to freeze the conflict along current lines if the West provides security guarantees. However, the presence of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) peacekeepers in Ukraine is unacceptable to Moscow.
It is interesting to note that freezing the frontline and setting up a demarcation line, like in the case of South Korea, would not be militarily favourable for Russia, as it would benefit the retreating force to regroup. It will also be logistically challenging to engineer a ceasefire across a nearly 1,000-kilometre line, as it would require around 83,000 troops to secure the demilitarised zone. The question of who would provide and fund such a peacekeeping force further complicates arriving at any potential agreement.
The talks in Riyadh made it clear that sanction relief was contingent on Russia and Ukraine reaching a deal.
Sanctions relief is another major sticking point. The talks in Riyadh made it clear that sanction relief was contingent on Russia and Ukraine reaching a deal. Since 2014, more than 21,000 sanctions have been imposed on Moscow, including 6,000 from the US. While Moscow is eager to see them lifted, it understands the complexity of rolling back sanctions. In the case of the US, lifting sanctions on Russia will require congressional approval, which might be complicated considering that the Republican Party has a narrow majority in the House of Representatives, where divisions on Ukraine policy persist.
Although the Trump administration has softened its rhetoric on sanctions, the European Union (EU) has moved in the opposite direction. Recently, the EU enacted the 16th round of sanctions targeting Russian aluminium and restrained Russian oil shipments below the US$60 price cap. Even if diplomatic ties between Moscow and Washington improve, Europe's reluctance to ease sanctions complicates the situation. Without significant compromises, economic pressure on Russia will persist, reinforcing a scenario in which peace talks will drag on with no immediate resolution. Thus, considering the complexity of the agreement on Ukraine, three scenarios are likely:
| Possible scenarios | Description | Key outcomes | Response of actors |
| Talks collapse | If the US and Ukraine renegotiate the critical minerals agreement and European countries commit to increasing military spending, the US stance on Ukraine could change, resulting in the talks collapsing as it would cross Moscow’s redline. | -Ukraine and European countries will have greater agency in articulating their demands, backed by Washington -More emphasis will be laid on security guarantees for Ukraine, including talks of peacekeepers from European countries | -Russia continues its war in Ukraine -European countries and the US will play a continued role in aiding Ukraine -Tougher sanctions will be imposed upon Russia -Russia’s relations with the US weaken |
| Russia gets what it intended for | If the rift between Zelensky and Trump widens, Ukraine’s mediating authority will weaken. Russia will have the upper hand, and the war will end on Russia’s terms | -Ukraine will likely remain a neutral state. -NATO membership would be completely off the table. -Increasing pressure from the US and Russia for wartime elections in Ukraine -US-Russia relations Improve. -US role in the European security matrix reduces. | -Moscow will call for wartime elections. -US backing for Ukraine will completely reverse. -European countries increase their defence expenditures to support Ukraine independently. -EU and Russia relations will be further strained. |
| Neither side is happy, but a cold peace persists | The negotiations would not yield outcomes that wholly favour either side. Both sides would have to make concessions, and talks do not yield a solid agreement, but a general ceasefire may persist. | -Deadlock in negotiations, no likely agreement on territories or security guarantees -Partial sanctions relief possible for Russia, and the presence of non-Western peacekeepers likely -The root cause of the conflict remains unaddressed | -Russia will not be satisfied, as it will impact its battlefield tempo. -Ukraine would not be satisfied as it would have to demilitarise without security guarantees from the West. -EU-Ukraine political-economic relations will improve. -It is unlikely that the US and EU will vehemently oppose this scenario. |
Thus, given the complexities surrounding territories, security guarantees, and sanctions relief, reaching an agreement without making concessions would be difficult. This makes the third scenario the most plausible, where there would be a general ceasefire with a fragile peace. However, even reaching this reality would take a considerable amount of time. Further, regardless of the outcome of the war, the new rapprochement between Russia and the US raises questions about the role Washington will play in reconfiguring the European security matrix and how Russia's partnerships with anti-Western countries, which were cultivated and forged during the war, will evolve.
Rajoli Siddharth Jayaprakash is a Research Assistant with the Strategic Studies Programme at the Observer Research Foundation
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Rajoli Siddharth Jayaprakash is a Junior Fellow with the ORF Strategic Studies programme, focusing on Russia’s foreign policy and economy, and India-Russia relations. Siddharth is a ...
Read More +
PREV
