Why the Russia-US agreement is currently unattainable

July 7, 2025, 08:50・Opinion

Trump does not want to give up Ukraine, but rather to sell it. Or more accurately, to exchange it for certain concessions from Russia. Since Moscow and Washington have not yet reached an agreement on "price," both sides are trying to change this price. Russia is lowering its demands, while the United States is raising or maintaining the price.

Author: Gevorg Mirzayan - Associate Professor at the Department of Political Science, Russian Federal Financial University

From the Russian perspective, Vladimir Putin's telephone conversation with Donald Trump was a working-level communication. The two presidents exchanged views on Ukraine, Iran, and US-Russia relations, and even mentioned cooperation in the film industry.

However, according to Trump's statements, things are not as optimistic. The American leader said, "My conversation with President Putin today disappointed me because... he has no desire to end the conflict." Trump did not threaten to impose sanctions or take other measures, but it is clear that there will be no breakthrough in US-Russia negotiations in the near future.

This may come as a surprise to Russian optimists. Those who hoped that, after a pragmatic president came to power in the United States, minor, neglected, or even harmful issues in US-Russia relations would disappear, and Moscow and Washington could achieve a real relationship reset.

But realists find nothing surprising about this. Because they fully understand what American pragmatism means.

Indeed, Donald Trump has revised America's foreign policy toward Russia. It is clear that the result is that he believes he does not need to clash with Russia. Such conflicts bring no additional benefits to the United States — except for those already gained (distancing Europe from Russia, keeping Moscow busy with domestic economic affairs for years to come). Conflicts also divert American attention from more important matters in East Asia and the Middle East. A hostile Russia would not only distract attention but also hinder American efforts in these regions (for example, helping Iran or China counter the United States). A non-hostile Russia at least would not constitute an obstacle.

Moreover, he obviously believes that the main cause of the conflict is the United States' overly active policies in the former Soviet region. This region is not crucial for the United States, but it is a historically significant security buffer zone for Russia. Russia strongly opposes any external interference in this region (let alone organizing color revolutions). If the United States significantly reduces its activities in this region, most of the conflicts with Moscow would disappear on their own.

Trump has somewhat reduced activities. For example, during his term, the United States stopped inciting Georgia to open a second front against Moscow (which the Biden administration did). There is no indication that Americans are actively supporting Moldovan President Maia Sandu's anti-Russian actions. In Armenian and Azerbaijani affairs, Washington is not currently in control; instead, Paris and London are leading (in the case of Azerbaijan, London acts through Ankara as an agent).

However, on the main front — the Ukraine issue — Trump has not reduced activity. Even though Ukraine has become a burden for the United States, and he has not established a relationship with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Trump has not given up Ukraine. He continues to meet with Zelenskyy, offers political support, and shows no pressure on Europe to stop supplying weapons and funds to the Kiev regime.

This has frustrated optimists. But the problem is that they only see one part of the American pragmatic policy — the part they want to see — and not the other part.

For example, American pragmatism does not mean giving up any "asset" for free — especially something that Russia urgently needs. Therefore, Trump does not want to give up Ukraine, but rather to sell it. Or more accurately, to exchange it for certain concessions from Russia. Because so far Moscow and Washington have not reached an agreement on "price," both sides are trying to change this price. Russia is doing everything it can to lower the "asset" price (by increasing missile and bomb attacks on Ukraine's military and industrial facilities, and showing that it will achieve its goals regardless of American help), while Washington tries to raise the price or maintain the current level. To this end, the United States continues to support Kyiv, but avoids getting involved in the war itself.

Furthermore, American pragmatism requires not only actual agreements but also agreements with a demonstrative form. Even if Trump can get some concessions from Russia, he cannot completely give up Ukraine — he also needs to show these concessions in the text of the Ukraine-Russia peace agreement. Russia must at least give up some of its demands — such as withdrawing from all newly annexed Russian territories, allowing Ukraine to join NATO, having the Kiev regime abandon military cooperation with the West, de-Nazification, etc. Otherwise, Trump would not receive the Nobel Peace Prize, but would instead be seen as a weak president who capitulated to Putin (after all, the concessions Russia makes within the framework of American global politics are unlikely to be public, let alone written down).

Currently, Trump has not obtained these concessions. He either does not understand or refuses to understand that all of Russia's demands in the special military operation are not whims of the Russian government, but issues related to Russia's survival. Therefore, he feels dissatisfied and says he is "deeply disappointed." As a result, both sides are once again in a tug-of-war — Trump tries to convince Russia that his wishes are unachievable, while Russia tries to convince Trump that even without his involvement, Russia can achieve all its goals, and the more Trump refuses to accept these demands, the greater the likelihood of new demands.

Finally, American pragmatism also involves teamwork. This is not just about Congress (Congress must vote to lift a series of sanctions against Russia, which Moscow will insist on in a comprehensive agreement with the United States). The president can freely look down on his European allies and give them orders, but he cannot completely ignore their interests in the Ukraine conflict. Moreover, even within the potential framework of a Russia-US agreement, ignoring them would be unwise. Because Moscow needs its conditions not only to be accepted by the United States, but also by the European Union, requiring Europe to stop arming, funding, and ideologically supporting the Kiev regime. Thus, another stalemate arises — Trump must find reasons for the Europeans to agree. And Moscow is not just waiting, but through its own actions (including on the battlefield) is pushing even if not Brussels, at least the governments of European countries to clearly understand the situation.

Therefore, an agreement between Russia and the United States will not be reached for now. Realism and pragmatism both advise everyone to wait patiently.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7524669743932916267/

Disclaimer: The article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion using the [Up/Down] buttons below.