President Donald Trump proposed a takeover of Ukrainian power plants as a means of protection against ongoing Russian aggression, suggesting that American ownership could deter attacks on critical infrastructure. This proposal unfolded during a high-stakes call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on March 18, 2025, amid escalating discussions about a potential limited ceasefire agreement between Ukraine and Russia.
During a joint statement, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and Secretary of State Marco Rubio explained that Trump emphasized the benefits of U.S. ownership of Ukraine's nuclear facilities. They noted, "American ownership of those plants could be the best protection for that infrastructure and support for Ukrainian energy infrastructure." This sentiment underscores Trump's ongoing interest in not just aiding Ukraine militarily, but also deeply engaging in its energy sector as a strategic move.
Trump's proposal appears to be closely linked to a stalled minerals deal with Ukraine, aimed at securing essential resources as partial payment for U.S. military assistance. The New York Times reported that Trump views the control of Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant as key to advancing the extraction of crucial minerals from a war-torn region, where the plant is currently under Russian occupation. Zelenksy, on the other hand, refrained from commenting directly on the minerals deal, but he did reaffirm a commitment to working closely with the U.S.
Zelensky, also during the call, expressed his belief that a lasting peace with American support is achievable this year. "We agreed that Ukraine and the United States should continue working together to achieve a real end to the war and lasting peace," he stated firmly, recognizing the complex international dynamics at play.
Just a day before, Trump had conversed with Russian President Vladimir Putin for nearly three hours regarding a potential partial truce. The discussions indicate a multi-dimensional negotiation environment as Trump attempts to navigate between the desires of both belligerents while aiming to secure U.S. interests.
The talks took another turn when, post their respective calls with Trump, Zelensky conveyed that Ukraine and Russia had tentatively agreed to a limited ceasefire. However, the exact nature of this agreement remains uncertain. Trump had proposed a comprehensive 30-day ceasefire, which Putin was unwilling to endorse, demonstrating the complexities in securing a stable resolution.
During a press conference after the call, Zelensky indicated that technical discussions in Saudi Arabia this coming weekend would seek to clarify which types of infrastructure would be protected under any ceasefire agreement. He noted the potential for confusion as different parties had divergent interpretations of what the ceasefire entailed. While the U.S. suggested a broad coverage including energy and infrastructure, Russian officials insisted it was just energy infrastructure, and Zelensky wanted to expand protections to include railways and ports as well.
Reflecting on their talks, Zelensky stated, "One of the first steps toward fully ending the war could be ending strikes on energy and other civilian infrastructure," emphasizing his support for the ceasefire initiative despite the ongoing hostilities.
In another critical aspect of the discussions, Trump proposed that Zelensky consider giving the U.S. ownership of Ukraine’s power plants for their long-term security. This suggestion exemplifies a dramatic shift in the scope of U.S. involvement in Ukraine’s energy management. According to statements made by Rubio and Waltz, Trump assured Zelensky that the U.S. could lend expertise in operating these plants, proposing that such arrangements could maximize safety and operational efficiency.
Although Zelensky requested additional Patriot missile defense systems during the call, the conversations reflected broader strategic considerations than simply hardware provision. Concerns were raised as both sides engaged in military strikes post-conversations—Russia launched drone attacks that struck various Ukrainian infrastructure, showcasing a fragile ceasefire scenario.
Reports indicate that shortly after the Trump-Putin dialogue on March 18, air raid sirens wailed throughout Kyiv, signifying the continuation of threat in the region. It was stated that several strikes targeted civilian infrastructure, and although Russia claimed to have paused attacks on energy facilities, reports contradicted this. Assertively, Zelensky dismissed Putin’s condition to halt Western military aid, stating that such a demand would jeopardize civilian safety against incoming threats.
Despite aspirations for peace, the tensions between Ukraine and Russia remain palpable. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov accused Kyiv of failing to reciprocate in peace efforts while Zelensky's administration remains adamant about not conceding occupied territories to Russian control.
The unfolding situation highlights the intertwined complexities of international relations, energy geopolitics, and wartime diplomacy. As both nations prepare for technical discussions in Saudi Arabia, the prospect of a concrete ceasefire hangs precariously above the volatile landscape of ongoing conflict.
As negotiations unfold, it remains critical for the international community, particularly in Washington, to monitor developments closely, as they have significant repercussions in shaping the future of the Ukrainian conflict.
The exchange of prisoners between Ukraine and Russia was another critical development, when both parties reported swapping 175 individuals, marking one of the largest exchanges to date during this protracted war. While the return of captured soldiers symbolizes hope, the substantive issues at play remain unresolved, indicating more complex dialogues ahead.
Ultimately, while Zelensky supports ceasefire negotiations, he acknowledges that material and military support must continue unabated. "Assistance to Ukraine should be increased," he asserted firmly, as it plays a crucial role in countering Russian advances and safeguarding national sovereignty. As of now, the path to peace remains arduous but not altogether lost.
