The Kremlin, at least publicly, has altered its strategy. On Friday, January 24, Putin stated that he is open to negotiations "regarding the Ukrainian issue, but there are matters that require special attention." TSN reports. This was conveyed by Kontrakty.UA.
This is a fundamentally different rhetoric. Previously, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov claimed that Moscow was not satisfied with Trump's proposals regarding Ukraine. Also on Friday, January 24, his deputy Sergey Ryabkov said that the war cannot be concluded in 100 days without a realistic position from the U.S. Another deputy of Lavrov, Alexander Grushko, added that Ukraine's refusal to join NATO is one of the key elements for resolution.
The Kremlin's statements about being ready to talk came immediately after Trump's threats. Initially, the U.S. President urged Putin to "come to an agreement now and stop this senseless war, as it will only get worse." Then, during a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump stated that lowering global oil prices would help end the war. In an interview with Fox News last week, Trump also mentioned that President "Zelensky is not an angel" and should not have allowed this war to start (Trump had made similar comments during his campaign – Ed.), but he also reiterated all his threats against Russia, including the possibility of imposing even more sanctions.
However, the devil is always in the details. Trump continuously insists that he wants to meet with Putin as soon as possible to strike a deal that can only happen if Ukraine receives solid security guarantees to prevent Russia from attacking again. According to Volodymyr Zelensky, these guarantees should come from both the U.S. and Europe. The most effective security guarantee for Ukraine is NATO membership – collective security and defense. But does Trump share this view? He has already criticized his predecessor Biden's statements that Ukraine should join NATO.
What does Trump's actual plan for resolving the war entail? Does it even exist, and does it include Ukraine's future NATO membership? TSN.ua investigated.
Carrot and Stick: What Trump Has in Mind
While American media jokingly note that Trump has not ended the war in 24 hours (as he repeatedly promised during his campaign – Ed.), it seems that his team is seriously considering how to force Russia to comply. When asked in Davos about when the war would end, Trump replied that this is a question for Putin, as, according to him, Ukraine is ready to negotiate. For Ukraine, this is a positive signal, as many feared that immediately after his inauguration, Trump would halt military assistance to Kyiv.
It cannot be said that this is not happening. Although President Zelensky stated that military assistance from the U.S. has not been halted, there is a directive from the State Department regarding the "suspension of operations" for international assistance for 90 days, based on an executive order from Trump, until its alignment with the goals of the 47th President's policies is analyzed. Ukrainian journalists working in Washington reported that this "freezing" of assistance impacts crucial non-military programs, including those from USAID. For instance, it finances prosthetics for Ukrainian military personnel, school support, and medical aid.
Although Politico and Reuters, referencing relevant documents, reported that the State Department's directive "seems to pertain to funding military assistance to Ukraine," it does not affect Israel and Egypt, but noted that "the document leaves room for interpretation and includes some exceptions." Later, Financial Times reported that American diplomats approached Secretary of State Marco Rubio requesting to exclude USAID programs related to Ukraine from the 90-day "freeze" on international assistance. And, as the publication notes, "positive signals are coming from Washington." No mention of military assistance is made. There have been no official comments from the White House or the State Department yet. So, we hope that this ban on foreign funding will not affect military assistance to Ukraine, as President Zelensky stated.
Moreover, it is worth reminding that Trump, through Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, has already blocked the provision of weapons to Ukraine from September 2023 to April 2024, when Congress could not pass another aid package for Kyiv worth $61 billion. This led to significant delays in the supply of arms to the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the Russian advance on the front, which only weakens Ukraine's and Trump's negotiating positions. After all, if Ukraine had received all the necessary weapons on time a year ago, perhaps such enemy advances would not be happening now.
This was partly explained by the Biden Administration's reluctance to breach the mythical escalation threshold, beyond which, according to Trump's predecessors, Russia might resort to nuclear weapons. The new Administration has a chance to rectify this by demonstrating its slogan "peace through strength" in action. This is partially confirmed. While Trump's special representative for Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg, sets a new deadline for ending the war in 100 days, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio (during Senate hearings before his confirmation – Ed.) allows for the possibility of easing sanctions against Russia to reach an agreement, Trump is trying to negotiate with Saudi Arabia to lower global oil prices.
Trump's first phone call in office was with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. He humorously commented, "The first foreign visit (of an American president – Ed.) traditionally takes place in Britain. But I made it last time (in 2017) to Saudi Arabia because they agreed to buy our products for $450 billion." Later, Trump added that now he would make his first foreign visit to Riyadh if it invests not the promised $600 billion over the next four years, but $1 trillion.
"I am also going to ask Saudi Arabia and OPEC (the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, where Russia is an observer but has significant influence – Ed.) to lower oil prices. Honestly, I am surprised they did not do that before the elections (the U.S. presidential election on November 5 – Ed.). If the price had fallen, the Russian-Ukrainian war would have ended immediately. Right now, the price is high enough for this war to continue. We need to lower oil prices to end this war. This should have been done a long time ago," Trump stated in Davos.
Ukraine in NATO: How to Convince Trump
Trump's threat to collapse global oil prices was echoed by Keith Kellogg in an interview with Fox News. According to him, the current oil price is approximately $78, and Russia is earning billions of dollars from its sale (in December-January, the U.S. and G7 imposed a price cap of $60 on Russian oil – Ed.).
"What if we lowered this price to $45 per barrel, which is generally the breakeven point? That's what he (Trump – Ed.) said when he spoke to people in Davos," said Keith Kellogg.
TSN.ua has long noted that effective sanctions against Russia's oil and gas sector could knock the financial cushion out from under Putin. Revenues from oil and gas sales make up more than half of the Russian budget. The Biden Administration was reluctant to impose significant restrictions on Russia's energy sector, including "Rosatom," as this would undermine its ratings ahead of the elections on November 5 in the U.S. The new Trump Administration has no such reservations and can impose more effective sanctions against the Russian energy sector, including the so-called shadow fleet of Russia, if Moscow refuses to end the war.
This is what Trump and his team publicly promise. However, it is also known that Trump wants to meet with Putin as soon as possible to negotiate a ceasefire, as stated by Kellogg, Rubio, and Trump's national security advisor Mike Waltz. Rubio also adds that the U.S. wants to ensure a lasting peace. "We don't just want the conflict to end and then resume in two, three, or four years. We want to bring stability," Rubio said.
However, it is not entirely clear how the U.S. will achieve the demilitarization of the Russian economy. Additionally, Putin views the cessation of war against Ukraine as a threat to his regime. Levada Center surveys indicate that one-third of Russians place their hopes on Trump, with whom they believe an agreement can be reached. About 50% also sympathize with Trump primarily because they think he can help end the war. This means that Russians attribute the responsibility for ending the war not to Putin and the Russian leadership but to Trump.
First and foremost, this polling data from Russia should be brought to the attention of the White House to understand who they are dealing with. Because all this signals that the Kremlin is not interested in ending the war. And the statement that "Ukraine's refusal to join NATO is one of the key elements for resolution" is yet another excuse and a smokescreen. Before the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Kremlin was not just uninterested in Kyiv's future NATO membership. Then, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov threatened NATO