The moment Ukraine has feared – yet anticipated – may now be drawing close.
The US, Kyiv’s most powerful ally, has suggested it would abandon Ukraine if a peace deal with Russia proves impossible to broker.
“If it’s not possible, if we’re so far apart that this is not going to happen, then I think the President’s probably at a point where he’s going to say, well, we’re done,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Friday after meeting with European and Ukrainian officials in Paris.
“We need to figure out here now, within a matter of days, whether this is doable in the short term, because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on.”
The stark contrast between Donald Trump’s early proclamation that he could end the war in 24 hours and the current uncertainty over “whether this is even possible or not”, underscores the profound differences between the negotiating parties, as well as America’s larger interests.
Rubio’s comments are “par for the course for this uber-practical administration”, said James Nixey, director of the Russia and Eurasia programme at the London-based think-tank Chatham House.
“Of course Russia was going to be more awkward than they boasted. And their response to it, to wash their hands of it. What they haven’t realised yet is that a less secure Europe means a less secure America. They just can’t see the connection.”
Business interests outweigh genuine peace goals
The unsettling reality that negotiations between the US and Russia may be driven more by future business opportunities than by a genuine desire to end the war is becoming increasingly clear, experts argue.
The discussions are “partly about war in Ukraine” but “they are a lot about business deals that will be able to be done once everything comes back to a sort of acceptable situation”, said Samantha de Bendern, associate fellow in the Russia and Eurasia Programme at Chatham House.
The two “main people who are talking to each other” are Steve Witkoff, a real estate developer and Trump’s special envoy, and Kirill Dmitriev, who is the head of the Russian Investment Fund, De Bendern pointed out.
“These guys are not talking about geostrategic issues, they’re talking about business deals. That is really, really, really fundamentally important to understand.”
But, at the same time, Europe “can do a lot” to support Ukraine, particularly with the UK’s continuing involvement, she said.
Following Rubio’s remarks and the talks in Paris, Foreign Secretary David Lammy reaffirmed that “unity is our strength”.
“We are working hard with allies to secure a lasting peace in Ukraine,” he said. “Russia must agree to an immediate, full and unconditional ceasefire as Ukraine has done.”
Ukraine is bracing for the US to cut funding for a second time, which would leave Europe to pick up the slack, said Mykola Bielieskov, a Ukrainian analyst at the government-run National Institute for Strategic Studies in Kyiv.
“The Trump administration has demonstrated close to zero interest to authorise new aid,” he said. “They are very consistent that Ukraine’s support is more a European responsibility.”
Putin ‘exploiting’ Trump’s desire for quick deal
While unsettling to hear, Rubio’s remarks representing the broader US position at this stage are hardly surprising.
Trump wants a quick deal, but if that is not possible within “days”, not weeks or months, he is likely to “lose interest” – a prospect Vladimir Putin appears to be banking on to achieve his maximalist agenda.
“Putin is playing a waiting game and trying to exploit Trump’s desire for a quick deal,” said John Lough, senior research fellow and head of foreign policy at the New Eurasian Strategies Centre, a think-tank based in London and Washington, DC.
The Russian president “is taking a risk by not engaging properly in talks at this stage and trying to put pressure on Ukraine and its European allies by achieving greater advantage on the battlefield”, he said.
“The danger is that Trump will lose interest and move on to other issues.”
John Foreman, a British former diplomat who served in Moscow and Kyiv, said he believes “the stage is being set for the US to walk away, blame Ukraine, and leave it up to the Europeans”.
“Trump doesn’t care about Ukraine, which he and his team don’t see as a vital US national security concern. There’s been no budging so far from the Russians and Trump doesn’t seem willing to impose costs on them.”
Foreman thinks the possible scenarios moving forward include continuing negotiations in hopes of reaching some type of compromise, imposing greater military and economic costs on Russia to bring Moscow to the table with less conditions, or simply “walk away”.
Trump puts pressure on Ukraine, not Russia
The Trump administration appears to be putting extra pressure on Ukraine, while defending Moscow’s interests and its aggression.
On Thursday, Ukraine announced that Kyiv and Washington had signed a memorandum marking the first step toward securing an agreement on developing Ukraine’s mineral resources, championed by the US President.
Although both sides were ready to sign the agreement back in February, the process was postponed after a heated exchange erupted during an Oval Office meeting between Trump and Zelensky.
“We continue to work on the agreement itself. There is a lot to do, but the current pace and significant progress give reason to expect that the document will be very beneficial for both countries,” Ukraine’s economy minister Yulia Svyrydenko said in a post on social media.
Meanwhile, Zelensky said on Thursday that Ukraine believes China is supplying weapons to Moscow – just days after claiming Ukrainian soldiers captured Chinese nationals fighting for Russia’s army.
Zelensky’s remarks mark Kyiv’s first public suggestion that Beijing may be supporting Russia’s war effort by supplying arms – despite China’s official stance of neutrality in the conflict.
Iran and North Korea are also among Moscow’s allies providing military support.
‘Snatching survival from the jaws of defeat’
Read Next
square UKRAINE
Read More
The victim in the war, Ukraine has become “the main casualty” of the current US administration’s policies, Nixey, of Chatham House, argued.
America’s “entire understanding of security is different to the traditional understanding anyway. As always, the main casualty is Ukraine”, he said.
However, “we should have learned by now not to count them out. They’re masters of improvisation – and snatching survival from the jaws of defeat”.
“Right now, the sort of tectonic plates are shifting, and we have no idea which way they’re going to go. But we’re entering an era of complete uncertainty, with a lot of risk and a lot of opportunities,” said De Bendern of Chatham House.
