Donald Trump promised his phone call with Vladimir Putin would be a groundbreaking step towards peace in Ukraine.
Instead, Russia’s hard-line stance on the terms of any ceasefire has left European leaders feeling even more pessimistic. They are firm that a suspension of Western military and intelligence support to Kyiv, in return for a 30-day pause by Moscow on attacks against energy sites, would never be a fair deal. Has Putin called Trump’s bluff?
Among those disappointed – but unsurprised – by the outcome so far is Lt Col Alexander Vindman, a former White House adviser from Trump’s first term in office.
The US President’s strategy towards negotiations with Russia, favouring Putin over Volodymyr Zelensky, has been “awful” from the start, Vindman argues.
“Trump is going to get burned,” he predicts in an interview with The i Paper from his home in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. “He’s getting manipulated.”
This Ukrainian-born security expert spent years at the US embassies in Moscow and Kyiv, but what makes his career so notable is how it ended.
Vindman, 49, was a member of Trump’s national security team in 2019 when he joined a phone call between the president and his counterpart Zelensky. He was so alarmed at hearing an alleged threat to withhold aid for Ukraine – unless it investigated Trump’s political rival Joe Biden and his son Hunter – that he made an official complaint.
His sensational congressional testimony led to Trump’s first impeachment, but the president clung on to power – and sacked Vindman.
Alexander Vindman testifying to Congress in 2019 about Donald Trump's conduct towards Volodymyr Zelensky (Photo: ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / AFP via Getty Images)
Alexander Vindman testifying to Congress in 2019 about Trump’s conduct towards Zelensky (Photo: Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP)
Vindman dearly hopes that Trump is successful in achieving a fair, long-term peace deal. “That should be welcomed by everybody, Ukrainians certainly first and foremost,” he says. It would be genuine justification for the President “to get his Nobel Peace Prize”, which former aides say he covets.
Hope isn’t enough, however. He realises that Tuesday’s talks were just a starting point, but is fearful of Washington accepting Putin’s demands and trying to impose them on Ukraine.
That, he explains, would surely split the West and store up bigger problems for Europe in future – perhaps leading to a World War Three.
Reactions to Trump and Putin’s phone call
The White House said that both leaders “agreed this conflict needs to end with a lasting peace” during their conversation. It announced further talks were beginning “immediately”, first to establish a ceasefire and then ultimately a permanent settlement.
Fiona Hill, the British foreign affairs expert who advised Trump for two years in his first term, said there was no sign of Putin making any serious compromises. “He’s waiting, basically, to see what it is that the US is going to offer him – and the US has offered him a great deal already”.
Germany’s defence minister, Boris Pistorius, mocked this “supposedly pivotal and great phone call,” noting that Russia launched strikes on Ukrainian civilian sites just hours later.
The EU foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, said the talks showed “Russia does not really want to make any kind of concessions”.
Spain’s foreign minister concluded there is “no real will from Putin to stop this war”.
Donald Trump's controversial phonecall with Volodymyr Zelensky took place a few weeks after the US President met Vladimir Putin in June 2019 (Photo: Mikhail Svetlov / Getty Images)
Trump’s controversial phone call with Zelensky took place a few weeks after the president met Putin in June 2019 (Photo: Mikhail Svetlov/Getty Images)
The looming worst-case scenario
Vindman is firm that Biden and European leaders must accept blame for not helping Ukraine earlier and more actively – including before the full-scale invasion even took place, to deter the attack.
In his new book, The Folly of Realism, he outlines how the West has consistently failed to understand and tackle a growing threat from Russia for 35 years, since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
But that’s no excuse for Trump’s approach now, he says.
Vindman believes Trump fundamentally undermined his chances of success weeks ago – when he said Ukraine “can forget” about joining Nato, castigated Zelensky in their blistering Oval Office row, and temporarily paused military and intelligence support to Kyiv. No wonder he had few cards to play, to use Trump’s terminology, in his phone call with Putin.
Vindman finds it strange that someone who boasts about deal-making skills would make so many pre-emptive concessions, “gifting Russia all of the things that it’s asking for, even before negotiations really start”.
Perhaps the White House believes Putin will only take negotiations seriously if the West treats Russia with respect and demonstrates it is prepared to make sacrifices, rather than simply ordering the Kremlin what to do.
Vindman argues this is naive and repeats the “worst mistakes” of relations with Russia, because Moscow only responds to strength. “The Russians are uncompromising, they have completely maximalist objectives. They’re looking for capitulation.”
Alexander Vindman believes Donald Trump's row with Volodymyr Zelensky has emboldened Vladimir Putin (Photo: Andrew Harnik / Getty Images)
Vindman believes Trump’s row with Zelensky has emboldened Putin (Photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
The only way to make Putin compromise is “to compel Russia to negotiate from a weaker position”, he argues. America should have given Ukraine more aid, “ensuring that the Russians aren’t able to win on the battlefield”, to make it clear that talks are the only way forward.
“We’re on the worst-case scenario track. Why? Because we’ve done the exact opposite: we’ve alleviated the pressure on Russia, reduced their desire and interest in compromising, and Ukraine is in a weaker position than it was before, when it was already willing to compromise. That lopsided kind of approach really doesn’t give any impetus for peace.”
Sir Keir Starmer appears to agree, despite refusing to criticise Trump. The UK Prime Minister has called for “maximum pressure on Russia”.
If talks don’t progress, the risk of humiliation might persuade Trump to bolster support for Kyiv after all. Vindman imagines a scenario where “Putin overplays his hand and Trump is embarrassed, and somehow you start to see a ratcheting up of sanctions and support for Ukraine”.
On the other hand, it is conceivable that Trump could wash his hands of the situation and abandon Ukraine. This would mean “cities become more vulnerable because the Ukrainians can’t knock out cruise missiles, and the Ukrainians’ supplies of artillery start to dwindle in the second half this year… Lots more folks are killed”.
He is optimistic the country would not collapse, thanks to European help and its own drone-building programme. “Russia still is not strong enough to achieve its aims.”
But this situation risks Eastern European countries, such as Poland and the Baltics – fearful of Russian rolling on towards them – sending in troops. “They would rather fight on Ukrainian territory than their own.” The potential for “spillover” means a “full-scale war” between Russia and Nato – with or without the US – remains a real possibility, he fears.
Alexander Vindman's testimony led to Donald Trump being impeached (Photo: Drew Angerer / Getty Images)
Vindman’s testimony led to Trump being impeached (Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
Secret missions in Russia after fleeing the USSR
Alexander Vindman was born in Ukraine while it was still part of the Soviet Union. Following the death of his mother, his Jewish family fled persecution in 1979 when he was just three years old, arriving in the US as refugees.
After joining the US army – winning a Purple Heart medal for bravery in the Iraq War and rising to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel – he worked at the US embassies in both Kyiv and Moscow as a military attaché, spending three years in Russia.
When Vladimir Putin was suspected of secretly sending troops into Ukraine in 2014 to support Kremlin-aligned rebels, Vindman risked his life by driving from Moscow to the border, to observe what was really happening. In his book, he describes dodging security to photograph a convoy of Russian military vehicles crossing into the conflict zone. He sent this proof – “the smoking gun” – back to the White House, where his intelligence report was shared with president Barack Obama.
He regrets that the then-president did not act more decisively in standing up to Putin, with “bogus” Russian propaganda delaying an American response.
During Donald Trump’s first term in office, he joined the US National Security Council in 2018. He was part of its delegation to Volodymyr Zelensky when he was elected as Ukrainian president the following year. It was in this capacity that he listened to Trump’s infamous phone call with Zelensky.
The House Intelligence Committee hearing into impeaching Donald Trump in 2019 studied transcripts of his phonecall with Volodymyr Zelensky (Photo: Caroline Brehman / CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
The House Intelligence Committee hearing into impeaching Trump in 2019 studied transcripts of his phone call with Zelensky (Photo: Caroline Brehman/Getty Images)
What Putin and Zelensky might sign up to
What terms might satisfy Putin enough for him to agree a deal?
International acceptance that Crimea now belongs to Russia, after it was annexed in 2014, would be his starting point, says Vindman. The Kremlin may expect to keep all the territory its forces have occupied in eastern Ukraine, he says – or at least a stretch of land linking Crimea to the Donbas region it occupied in 2014.
As someone who has studied Putin, standing in the same room as him several times, Vindman says the crucial thing to understand about the dictator is that he is determined to rebuild his country’s Eastern European empire, which ruled over Ukraine for centuries both under Tsars and communist leaders. This would give Putin the historical “legacy” he yearns for as a “great ruler”. “In order to be one of these figures, Ukraine is absolutely central to that project.”
This sounds ominous, but Vindman contends that it might mean Putin is more practical and open to talks than many people think. If he can secure parts of eastern Ukraine through talks, and genuinely fears all-out war with the West if he tries to take the rest, then he might settle for the little slice of empire he’s won, rather than gambling the whole thing.
As for the Ukrainians, Vindman is confident they are “willing to compromise if they could get lasting peace”, and privately realise they would need to “give up some territory”.
The crucial problem, he says, would be if Russia still senses weakness across the border. In that case, it might use any ceasefire as a chance to “lick its wounds”, before engaging in further hybrid warfare to destablise its neighbour. It might even invade again if Ukraine’s security is not guaranteed by the US and Europe.
“The Ukrainians know Russia better than anybody else… They just know that Russia breaks promises regularly as a habit, frankly.”
Starmer’s premature peacekeeping plans
Starmer has signalled that he would send British troops and jets to Ukraine, as part of a peacekeeping force by an international “coalition of the willing”. The Prime Minister says planning has now moved to an “operational phase”.
Some are sceptical. Italy’s right-wing leader, Giorgia Meloni, has warned the idea would be “risky, complex and ineffective”.
Although it might make sense to plan for such an eventuality now, so that allied forces are ready if they are suddenly sent to Ukraine, Vindman believes this is premature.
“You have to get to a ceasefire before you get to peacekeeping,” he says. “We’re still a way from that.”
While many other European leaders have criticised Trump’s attitude to Zelensky, Vindman thinks Starmer is wise to continue acting as the continent’s good cop towards the US President.
Despite the Prime Minister’s public insistence that the US remains a “reliable ally”, Vindman says that Starmer must privately realise this is no longer true.
The British leader “absolutely should pursue this track of continuing to engage with the US”, he says. Even if a US detachment from Nato commitments is inevitable under Trump, simply delaying this by months or years would be “extremely critical” while Europe rearms.
Alexander Vindman, right, and his brother Eugene Vindman, a Democratic congressman, allege that Donald Trump is using government legal powers to target them as political opponents (Photo: Tom Williams / CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Alexander Vindman, right, and his brother Eugene Vindman, a Democratic congressman (Photo: Tom Williams/Getty Images)
Personal battles
For all his expertise, Vindman still finds it hard to understand why Trump acts so favourably towards Putin.
He does not believe the US President was recruited by the KGB in the 1980s under the codename “Agent Krasnov”, as a former Kazakh spy chief claimed recently. “I don’t believe in conspiracy theories,” he says. “If that were true, I find it hard to believe that we wouldn’t have some more robust evidence.”
Yet he admits other possible reasons – an admiration of dictators, a disliking of Zelensky after he refused to help investigate Biden, a love of doing deals and contradicting his critics – still do not add up. “I’m having a hard time rationalising… I don’t have a good reason that explains it.”
While he waits to see what happens in Ukraine, Vindman – who now runs a think-tank – has personal challenges to contend with. Trump has made it clear that he wants to pursue political enemies, and he clearly see this former official as one of them.
In Washington, an interim US attorney appointed by Trump has targeted Vindman’s brother Eugene – a Democratic congressman – by demanding information about a business the pair set up in Ukraine months after the full-scale invasion to help arm the country.
He has also been embroiled in an online row with Trump’s ally Elon Musk. He cautioned in November that “Musk has access to state secrets”, suggesting that classified information could end up “seeping through” to Russia through the billionaire. Musk shot back that Vindman is “on the payroll of Ukrainian oligarchs and has committed treason”.
Before leaving office, Biden issued pre-emptive pardons to some of Trump’s enemies – including his son, Hunter – in the hope this would shield them from any retribution. Vindman didn’t receive one, however.
His wife later wrote online: “I cannot begin to describe the level of betrayal and hurt I feel.” Vindman explains that he didn’t expect a pardon himself, but he and his family were outraged at the protections Biden granted “selectively and very erratically”. With Trump hunting for other victims, it has pushed them back into “the crosshairs of a political firestorm”.
“I didn’t do anything wrong,” says Vindman. “If the Trump folks want to pick this fight, it’s going to get ugly for him, just like it did in my congressional testimony.”
‘The Folly of Realism: How the West Deceived Itself About Russia and Betrayed Ukraine’ by Alexander Vindman is released on 10 April (£25, Hachette)
@robhastings.bsky.social