KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — Ukraine and Russia have agreed in principle to a limited ceasefire after discussions involving President Donald Trump, amidst ongoing challenges in defining the terms of the truce. While both sides showed interest in ceasing hostilities, Russian President Vladimir Putin rejected Trump’s proposed full 30-day ceasefire, revealing significant disparities in the understanding of what the ceasefire entails.
Following a phone call between Trump and both Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Putin on March 19, 2025, Zelenskyy indicated that technical discussions would commence in Saudi Arabia this weekend to clarify which infrastructures would be protected during the ceasefire. The White House stated that “energy and infrastructure” would be included, while the Kremlin narrowly focused on “energy infrastructure,” and Zelenskyy pushed for additional protection for railways and ports as well.
“One of the first steps toward fully ending the war could be ending strikes on energy and other civilian infrastructure,” Zelenskyy said, expressing readiness for Ukraine to uphold its part of the agreement. During the conversation, Trump proposed that Zelenskyy consider transferring ownership of Ukrainian power plants to the U.S., enhancing their long-term security. According to a White House statement, this suggestion was made while discussions on the U.S.'s acquisition of access to Ukraine's critical minerals were ongoing, as part of an arrangement for support during the conflict.
“American ownership of those plants could be the best protection for that infrastructure,” Trump commented, with an understanding that the U.S. could potentially help manage these facilities effectively. The Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, in particular, became a focal point of their talks as it remains under Russian occupation.
This call, considered “fruitful” by Zelenskyy, came just weeks after a troubled meeting in the Oval Office, which resulted in the temporary suspension of intelligence sharing and military aid to Ukraine. In addition to conservation discussions, Zelenskyy requested more Patriot defense missile systems, to which Trump agreed to explore options particularly available in Europe.
On March 18, the day preceding Trump's call, Putin signaled his willingness not to target Ukraine’s energy infrastructure but did not support the full ceasefire proposed. The Kremlin insisted that discontinuing foreign military aid and intelligence sharing must be included in any agreement, a demand firmly dismissed by the U.S.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt clarified that U.S. intelligence support would persist in Ukraine’s defense, contrasting the Kremlin's messaging that Ukraine wasn't meeting its obligations. Zelenskyy remarked that Putin’s ceasefire logic was “very much at odds with reality,” considering a fresh wave of Russian drone strikes that hit various Ukrainian facilities.
Amidst the rhetoric, both Zelenskyy and the Kremlin exchanged accusations regarding violations of ceasefire terms. Shortly after the Trump-Putin phone call, air sirens blared across Kyiv, signaling fresh attacks that struck civilian infrastructures such as hospitals and residential buildings, showcasing the combatants’ ongoing mistrust.
“If the Russians don’t hit our facilities, we definitely won’t hit theirs,” Zelenskyy stated emphatically, indicating Ukraine’s commitment to de-escalation, though skepticism lingered regarding the viability of such promises given recent history.
The two sides also reported an exchange of 175 prisoners on March 19, one of the largest of such swaps during the protracted conflict. In the ongoing debate over concessions, Zelenskyy rejected Putin’s stipulation that military assistance and intelligence sharing to Ukraine cease, stating, “I don’t think anybody should make any concessions in terms of helping Ukraine but rather assistance to Ukraine should be increased,” noting it would act as a bulwark against Russian advances.
Highlighting his firm negotiating stance, he articulated, “For us, the red line is the recognition of the Ukrainian temporarily occupied territories as Russian,” asserting that Ukraine would not lightly concede territory lost during the war.
As discussions move to Saudi Arabia, where technical experts from all involved parties are expected to focus on implementation details of the ceasefire, the possibility of peace remains intricately tied to evolving realities on the ground. The juxtaposition of rhetoric and armed conflict underscores the fragile nature of any truce in the face of ongoing hostilities.
