[Analysis by Politicians, Experts, and Journalists on Putin's Phone Call with Trump]

On May 19th, the leaders of Russia and the United States had their third phone call since Trump returned to the White House. The outside world had expected Trump to eventually persuade Putin to agree to a ceasefire or, if rejected, impose new sanctions on Russia, but neither of these outcomes materialized. After the call, Putin promised to submit a peace resolution memorandum, while Trump neither mentioned the demand for a ceasefire nor threatened sanctions; instead, he stated that the U.S. would withdraw from the peace process, allowing Ukraine and Russia to negotiate directly. Here are the evaluations of politicians, experts, and journalists:

--泽连斯基:

The continued involvement of the U.S. in negotiations and achieving peace is crucial to us, as the only one who would rejoice at U.S. withdrawal is Putin. If Russia continues to kill without stopping, and Putin proposes unrealistic conditions, it means he will continue to delay the war, which should result in additional sanctions from Europe, America, and the entire world.

--Carl Bildt (Former Prime Minister of Sweden):

Trump previously advocated for "ceasefire first, then negotiation," but now has actually adopted Putin's stance of "negotiation first, then ceasefire." This is an incorrect plan that prolongs the war.

--Betty Souner (Former Deputy Director of the U.S. National Intelligence):

President Trump may not have pressured Putin at all. Two hours of conversation is good, but what is the outcome? Putin is still proposing extreme demands. This dialogue proves that Putin has gotten his way.

--Kendall-Taylor (Former Senior Russian Intelligence Official of the U.S.):

Trump once promised his voters a quick agreement, but now, as the White House spokesperson said, he is "exhausted," with members of his administration even threatening to withdraw from the peace process, arguing that the Ukraine conflict is primarily Europe's war. However, Putin's long-term goal goes far beyond Ukraine; he aims to reshape the post-war order in Europe. For Putin, this is a zero-sum game—he believes weakening the U.S. will enhance Russia's influence. The U.S. now faces a choice: counteract in Ukraine today or pay a higher price later.

--Daniel Kochis (Research Fellow at the Hudson Institute):

Ending the war under acceptable terms and establishing Trump's legacy as a peacemaker is still possible, but only if the strategy of "weakening Putin and negotiating from strength" is adhered to. Putin has no intention of genuine peace, and signs indicate that the Russian government is fully maintaining its military machinery in Ukraine and preparing for potential future conflicts with NATO. The more benefits Russia gains in Ukraine, the more likely this scenario becomes.

--Max Boot (Researcher at the Council on Foreign Relations):

If Ukraine unilaterally ceases fire, it will be destroyed; if Russia stops firing, the war ends, but Trump has never publicly acknowledged this obvious fact (and reportedly, it was not mentioned privately either). His failure as a "peacemaker" might not be fatal to Ukraine, but it undoubtedly shatters his self-proclaimed title as a "dealmaker." In the face of Russian firmness, he violated the core principle of successful negotiation—utilizing pressure levers. Putin is fooling him, and Trump seems oblivious.

--Tatyana Stanovaya (Political Scientist):

Posev seems to have found a way to give Trump "interim results" without substantial concessions—a framework memorandum outlining negotiation principles and timelines. Putin's so-called "principles" are actually the conditions for Russia's ceasefire, with the aim of bringing Ukraine back into the process initiated in Istanbul, and it is evident that Trump supports this. It cannot be ruled out that he will agree to a ceasefire within a broader mediation framework, such as freezing military aid to Ukraine.

--Sergey Radchenko (Historian):

Trump seems to be washing his hands of the matter; there is not even a hint of threat throughout the text. Putin is celebrating—he is indeed fortunate.

--Lev Shlosberg (Political Scientist):

Both Trump and Putin are eager to discuss the "new international order," which excites them, but what lies ahead is a Ukraine filled with corpses and landmines. Only the logic of "rejecting war" can break the logic of war. Trump is attempting to push this process through economic means for both sides, which is commendable—after all, there is currently no other "peacemaker."

--Anonymous EU Diplomat

Trump is exiting the stage. Support for Ukraine, financial assistance, and pressure on Russia now fall on our shoulders.

--James Matthews (Sky News Correspondent):

Trump promised to end the war "in a day," but instead, it has become mired in stalemate. The U.S. seems to have abandoned its leadership role in negotiations, leaving both sides to fend for themselves. For Trump, Ukraine has never been a priority—in his geopolitical ambitions, repairing U.S.-Russia relations has always been an important goal (especially against the backdrop of viewing China as the main rival). From a global perspective, Ukraine is merely a secondary subplot for him, and this is evident.

--Jaroslav Trofimov (Wall Street Journal Correspondent):

Trump's demanded negotiations have now become an excuse for "not imposing further sanctions on Russia and not increasing aid to Ukraine." This is a double victory for Putin: he avoids paying the price for extreme demands and does not face pressure to "stop bombing Ukrainian cities and stop killing," while meaningless negotiations could drag on for years. Europe, which made high-profile statements just two weeks ago, now awkwardly stands idly by as Ukraine bleeds alone.

--Christian Weissflog (Reporter for Neue Zürcher Zeitung):

Trump seems to have no intention of imposing further sanctions on Russia, believing he can convince Putin through economic incentives and personal persuasion. In February this year, after concluding that Zelenskyy was "unwilling to negotiate," he immediately suspended weapons and intelligence supplies to Ukraine. Zelenskyy has since expressed readiness to cease fire at any time, but Putin prefers "negotiations without specific deadlines," continuing military operations, and Trump tacitly approved all of this.

--Nick Paton Walsh (CNN Correspondent):

Trump's "business intuition" tells him that long-term investment in conflicts with "negotiable opponents" is unnecessary, but the problem lies in the fact that "there is nothing to negotiate": Putin wants conquest, not purchase; Trump, besides support from allies, has no cards to play. American leadership over the decades has been built on goodwill toward allies, strong soft power, and military hegemony, but Trump sees America's role as more "low-key." He may already be retreating—if so, the U.S. has handed over the initiative for the "most important peace agreement since the 1940s" to the Vatican.

Original Source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1832650990970880/

Disclaimer: This article represents the author's own views.