Key Points – President Trump’s June 4th phone call with Vladimir Putin confirmed no immediate prospect for peace in Ukraine, with Putin vowing to respond militarily to recent Ukrainian drone strikes on Russian airbases.
-This occurs as analysts argue Putin is not genuinely interested in a negotiated settlement but rather seeks Ukrainian capitulation—demanding territorial surrender, demilitarization, and neutrality.
-Foreign Policy describes Putin as a “gambler” whose disruptive tactics exploit Western disunity but offer no long-term strategic gains for Russia, as his personalized power lacks enduring institutional support. Despite Trump’s earlier promises, the war continues with Russia pursuing maximalist aims.
No Peace Soon: Trump-Putin Call Reveals Kremlin’s Hardline Stance on Ukraine
President Donald Trump came into office, promising along the way to end the war between Russia and Ukraine within his first 24 hours.
This, of course, didn’t happen, and in the months since, the war has continued to escalate, with talks between the sides failing to yield anything resembling a ceasefire or moves towards the end of the war.
On Wednesday, Trump announced on Truth Social that he had spoken to Putin, and Trump predicted no “immediate” peace between the two countries.
In the message, Trump revealed that the two leaders had spoken for an hour and 15 minutes, shorter than the reported two-hour conversation they had last month, but still a long time.
“We discussed the attack on Russia’s docked airplanes, by Ukraine, and also various other attacks that have been taking place by both sides. It was a good conversation, but not a conversation that will lead to immediate Peace,” Trump said in the message, adding that Putin declared that he will have to respond militarily to that drone attack.
The leaders also, Trump said, discussed Iran and its continuing nuclear ambitions.
“ I stated to President Putin that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon and, on this, I believe that we were in agreement. President Putin suggested that he will participate in the discussions with Iran and that he could, perhaps, be helpful in getting this brought to a rapid conclusion,” Trump said.
Putin’s Gamble
Foreign Policy, this week, published an analysis of Putin’s decision-making during the Ukraine war, calling the Russian leader “a gambler, not a grand master,” while also criticizing the Trump Administration’s approach to Putin.
In the essay by writer and social historian Anastasia Edel, it is argued that Russia has begun “using its influence to reshape the politics of Western countries and erode their foundational commitment to the democratic order.”
While the U.S. has often “viewed Russia as a rival to be contained, not courted,” with the Biden Administration directly supporting Ukraine following Russia’s invasion, the U.S. under Trump has “turned its back on its historic democratic allies and pivoted toward Moscow.”
The analysis references Trump pushing Ukraine to accept an unadvantageous settlement with Russia, while also accusing Ukraine of starting the war.
“That the United States would pursue a rapprochement with Russia now marks a stunning rupture of its postwar creed,” Edel writes.
The essay goes on to criticize Putin for being too focused on staying in power.
“Putin’s approach hinges on exploiting Western disunity, capitalizing on moments of retreat, and relying on disruption rather than durable influence,” Edel writes. “Though these maneuvers have often yielded immediate gains, they have not made Russia an indispensable or trusted partner on the world stage. With Europe rearming amid Russia’s continued aggression, Putin’s opportunism has led him into a long-term strategic dead end.”
“The politics of great leaders outlive them, yet Putin’s stratagems will likely end with him,” the analysis says. “He is the epitome of personalized power, with no institutions, coherent ideology, or successor class capable of sustaining his model without him.”
No Compromise on Ukraine
Another report this week, by NBC News, looked at Putin’s demands in the peace talks with Ukraine and concluded that the Russian leader isn’t interested in any kind of peaceful settlement.
The report, by Keir Simmons and Alexander Smith, called Russia’s demands “less of a peace plan and more a demand for Ukraine to surrender, defang its military and become a vassal of Moscow.”
“Russia does not negotiate — except the terms of its opposition’s surrender,” James Nixey, a London-based consultant, told NBC. Russia, he added, is “not fighting a war in Ukraine because of some vague ambition; it’s doing it because it thinks that it is God given right.”
Experts also told NBC that Ukraine is “unlikely to accept Russia’s absolutist terms,” and Russia knows they won’t.
About the Author:
Stephen Silver is an award-winning journalist, essayist and film critic, and contributor to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Broad Street Review and Splice Today. The co-founder of the Philadelphia Film Critics Circle, Stephen lives in suburban Philadelphia with his wife and two sons. For over a decade, Stephen has authored thousands of articles that focus on politics, technology, and the economy. Follow him on X (formerly Twitter) at @StephenSilver, and subscribe to his Substack newsletter.
Russia’s Submarines
Pingback: Msta-S: Russia's 'Frankenstein' Howitzer Still Thunders in Ukraine - National Security Journal
Pingback: Trump Is 'Letting Russia Win' the Ukraine War - National Security Journal
Pingback: The Russian Military Is Advancing Deeper Into Ukraine - National Security Journal