In a recent press briefing following a conference of conservative political figures, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stated that President Donald Trump is confident that the war, which began on 24 February 2022 when Russia launched its offensive against Ukraine, could be resolved as early as next week.
Leavitt’s remarks come amid a series of repeated assurances from Trump and his team, who have long promised a rapid end to the hostilities. However, the precise mechanism by which such an expedited conclusion is expected to be achieved remains unclear.
During the briefing, Leavitt highlighted that the President and his advisers are placing significant emphasis on continuing negotiations with both sides of the conflict. This marks the latest in a series of shifting deadlines. Initially, Trump claimed that the war would be over in 24 hours, a figure that was subsequently revised to 48 hours upon his return to the White House. Over time, the projected timeframe was extended first to 180 days and later to a full year. Now, the renewed promise of a near-term resolution has once again raised questions regarding the underlying strategy.
The forthcoming round of negotiations is expected to involve American and Russian delegations, with Ukrainian representatives notably excluded. The proposed meeting, scheduled to take place next Tuesday in Saudi Arabia, has not been confirmed unequivocally. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov indicated that a meeting between the two delegations might occur within the next two weeks, but he stressed that the location is not definitively set to be in Saudi Arabia. This ambiguity underlines the uncertainties surrounding the diplomatic process at present.
A key element of the strategy appears to be the careful selection of the American negotiating team. Reports suggest that the Kremlin is keen to exercise some influence over which U.S. representatives will participate in the discussions. There is a view that the Russian leadership wishes to prevent the inclusion of American figures who might adopt a tougher stance towards Russia. For example, General Keith Kellogg, previously assigned to oversee discussions regarding the war, was not permitted to join initial negotiations in Yerevan. Instead, figures from within Trump’s inner circle, some of whom are regarded as sympathetic to Russian perspectives, are being considered. This approach is perceived by some observers as an attempt to ensure that negotiators are amenable to the idea of a swift settlement and are less likely to make statements that could complicate the process.
Despite the recurring promises of a rapid resolution, the White House has provided few details on how President Trump intends to leverage diplomatic pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin. The administration has not clarified which instruments of pressure will be employed or how the discussions with Putin will be structured.
Furthermore, it remains uncertain whether any measures will be directed towards Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky should the negotiations require his involvement. The lack of clarity over these critical issues has led to scepticism among experts, who note that without a concrete strategy, the possibility of a prompt end to the war remains speculative.
It is instructive to compare this approach with that of the current Biden administration. While Trump’s statements have consistently focused on a swift negotiated settlement, President Joseph Biden has instead pursued a policy of economic sanctions designed to isolate Russia. These sanctions are viewed by many as a more tangible form of pressure on Moscow.
