By Aleksei Zakharov
The phone call between the Russian and United States (US) presidents, Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, on 18 March 2025—historic in its duration and, judging by the Kremlin’s readout, full of niceties for the American president from his Russian counterpart—provided clues about a possible phased path to the endgame in Ukraine and the modalities of US-Russian rapprochement. While it remains to be seen where these negotiations will lead and whether they will result in a successful deal, the mere fact of talking to the Americans is met with cautious optimism in Moscow.
Positive conversations with modest outputs
The talks with the US so far are perceived to be developing “according to a scenario favourable to Russia.” After his conversation with Trump, Putin managed to throw the ball out of his court by not giving in to the US-Ukraine proposal for a 30-day ceasefire while at the same time not backing away from the idea of ending the war.
The main deliverable—a decision to halt strikes on energy infrastructure—has not survived even a day, as both Russia and Ukraine have moved on with their attacks, including on energy facilities. Similarly, the initiative to implement a maritime ceasefire and restore shipping in the Black Sea is unlikely to be implemented immediately and will be subject to detailed discussions at working-group levels. This points to the gaps between “positive announcements”, even those at the highest level, and the reality on the ground, and highlights the fragility of any future deal.
Russia, with its far-reaching agenda of “demilitarising Ukraine”, does not seem particularly inclined to pursue a ceasefire before coordinating a peace framework. To proceed further, the Kremlin has laid down two conditions: first, the suspension of “forced mobilisation in Ukraine and the rearmament of the [Ukrainian] armed forces”, and second, “the full cessation of foreign military assistance and intelligence information to Kyiv”. It is clear, however, that the road ahead will be bumpy, as Trump did not acknowledge when discussing these items with Putin.
Russia has placed the war in Ukraine in the broader context of its relations with the US, seeking more concessions from Washington on the modalities of peace in exchange for coordination on regional and strategic issues. Addressing the “root causes” of the war and securing a long-term solution are top priorities for the Kremlin. For the US, Ukraine now seems to be secondary to other critical geographies, such as the Middle East, which is mentioned in the White House press release as “a region of potential cooperation” with Russia. This leaves some room for future trade-offs as Moscow apparently supports the transactional diplomacy so dear to the US president.
Adjustment to Trump
Moscow has adopted a disciplined and calibrated approach since its initial interactions with the Trump administration. Russia’s rhetoric towards Washington has shifted from criticism to being restrained and conciliatory, sometimes even echoing the narratives from the White House. What was unheard of a few months ago now sounds like the norm in Russian official discourse, as exemplified by Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov’s statement: “The configurations of US foreign policy largely coincide with [Russia’s] visions.”
What is most appealing to Moscow is when the US treats Russia as an equal. Dialogue with Washington, in which the two discuss issues of strategic importance on an equal footing, fuels Russia’s great power ambitions and overrides setbacks to its global standing in recent years. Although US-Russia relations were under severe strain during the first Trump administration—from the US withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty to the US supply of lethal weapons to Ukraine to the tightening of sanctions policy—Moscow is now reluctant to refer to that time, instead pretending that numerous bilateral irritants were “inherited from previous administrations.”
Potential economic cooperation is an area in which Russia seems to be dallying with Trump’s affections. In particular, the exploration of natural resources and the development of trade routes in the Arctic are high on the agenda of US-Russia talks. Aware of Trump’s fixation with critical minerals, Putin was quick to offer US companies joint work in developing the rare earth industry. In particular, he mentioned a project in Russia’s Krasnoyarsk region involving the construction of a hydroelectric power plant and aluminium production estimated at US$15 billion. This may indicate that Russia is desperate for sanctions relief and the return of Western investment and technology.
Détente without strategic alignment
Moscow’s conciliatory rhetoric should not be misinterpreted as a willingness to make major concessions to the US. Behind the diplomatic talk of “constructive dialogue”, Russian policymakers still believe that the Trump administration is interested in preserving American supremacy. Experts in Moscow are confident that the US president’s peace efforts in Ukraine are merely “preparatory work” for the struggle with the US’s primary opponent, China.
To this end, the US would ideally expect Russia to not strengthen China’s capabilities; therefore, the ultimate goal of rapprochement is to weaken the Moscow-Beijing nexus. This seems like a far-fetched idea, as Russia is unlikely to turn away from China, which has consistently, albeit cautiously, facilitated its military campaign in Ukraine. Another perspective is the view in Moscow that Russia and China are likely to switch places soon; while China will find itself at the forefront of confronting the US, Moscow will pursue a more balanced policy, refraining from undermining US positions wherever possible—an approach it has followed until recently.
Sanctions relief can be an essential incentive for further US-Russia engagement. The prospect of a grand bargain with the US has raised hopes among Russian economists and financial experts of a possible, at least partial, lifting of sanctions. If the sanctions are to be rolled back, it will be done in a gradual and selective manner, with sanctions on medical and humanitarian supplies, consumer goods, and low-tech industrial products being the first to be lifted. Russia may be particularly interested in US exports of aircraft parts, given the difficulties Russian airlines face in servicing US-made jets. At the other extreme are observers who, regardless of the current negotiations and economic incentives, believe that the only viable path to lasting peace in Ukraine is “the complete defeat of the enemy” and that even in the case of a ceasefire, Russia should remain prepared to resume the war.
While the tone and pace of the US-Russia rapprochement are extraordinary, there is still a long way to go before the two sides can achieve a breakthrough on the endgame in Ukraine. Progress on this front may require Russia to budge from its maximalist stance. The pertinent questions are whether Trump and his administration have the patience to deal with the complexities of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and what they would do if their peace efforts fail. As the window of opportunity for the US-Russia détente is relatively narrow, the negotiations could pave the way for a resumption of bilateral cooperation; alternatively, they could send relations into another free-fall.