Russian President Vladimir Putin and United States President Donald Trump are poised for what could be a landmark phone call today, March 18, 2025. Scheduled to take place between 1:00 PM and 3:00 PM GMT, this conversation is not just another diplomatic engagement; it could signify pivotal strides toward halting the nearly three-year-long conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
The impending call arrives at a juncture of rising hopes for peace within Ukraine, as White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt indicated during a conference, "Ukraine has never been closer to a peace deal." This declaration follows efforts by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who, after discussing potential security guarantees with French President Emmanuel Macron, appears cautiously optimistic about the outcome of today's discussion.
Yet, skepticism abounds. Zelensky himself expressed doubt about Russia merely paying lip service to diplomatic efforts, retaining concern over the Kremlin's intentions. This uncertainty is exacerbated by reports of fresh aggression, with Russia launching 137 drones over Ukraine overnight, significantly testing the resilience of Ukrainian defenses.
Indeed, on the day of the anticipated call, Ukrainian air defense systems were able to intercept and destroy 63 of the drones, though 64 went missing, representing the persistent threat and urgency of the situation. The dramatic escalation highlights the gap between diplomatic optimism and the harsh realities on the ground.
A significant issue on the negotiation table concerns the discussions surrounding the controversial recognition of Crimea as Russian territory, which Trump is reportedly contemplating as part of broader peace negotiations. This potential concession has stirred tension, as many view it as capitulating to Russia’s illegal annexation carried out back in 2014.
What’s more, the call aims to address proposals from the U.S. for both nations to agree to a 30-day ceasefire. This plan is intended as confidence-building should the parties navigate toward establishing long-term peace. Trump has been vocal about his desire for swift resolutions, asserting, "Each week brings 2,500 soldier deaths, from both sides, and it must end NOW." He expresses confidence, believing the two leaders will discuss paths to solidify any agreements already tangentially aligned.
Conversely, the Kremlin's narrative differs, with officials like Yuri Ushakov maintaining skepticism about the prospects of the ceasefire. Putin has demanded during these talks to halt not just military support from the United States but also those from European nations, fearing it would allow Ukrainian forces to regain strength if arms deliveries continue during any agreed pause. This approach underlines the complex tangle of expectations from both sides.
European leaders, including those from Italy and Spain, have voiced reluctance to commit to halting military support for Ukraine even as pressure mounts from Russia. The consensus within the EU is cautious; stopping arms supplies could put Ukraine at greater risk, allowing Russian troops to fortify their positions for renewed assaults.
With these factors swirling, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has echoed the need for the U.S. to have reciprocal commitments from Russia akin to Ukraine’s prior dedication to ceasefire negotiations made last week. Speaking to the media, Rubio emphasized, "We got a good commitment from Ukraine last week...Now we need to secure something like this from the Russians,” highlighting the bilateral effort required for meaningful progress.
This morning's phone call between Trump and Putin is being watched closely by observers across the globe as they wait to see if this engagement yields tangible fruit amid fears of diverging actions on the battlefield versus negotiations. Ukraine's Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha articulated optimism on the chance for clarity on peace talks, affirming the belief, "With the Trump presidency, Ukraine can achieve a just and lasting peace."
Trump’s advisors hope this call could cement relations and establish groundwork to alleviate the humanitarian devastation inflamed by the conflict. Observers remain cautious, noting the considerable concessions necessary from both sides to achieve lasting peace.
Overall, as both leaders prepare for this pivotal conversation, many are left wondering: Is this diplomatic effort merely symbolic, or could it genuinely shift the course of the protracted conflict?
