Dr. Gil Feiler
As we look at the current geopolitical landscape in April 2025, the possibility of an agreement between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the war in Ukraine represents a significant potential shift in international relations. What such an agreement might entail and what outcomes could be expected.
President Trump, now in office since January 2025, campaigned with promises to negotiate an end to the conflict in Ukraine. His approach to foreign policy differs significantly from his predecessor, potentially creating new diplomatic openings. Putin, for his part, has maintained Russia’s position regarding its territorial claims in Ukraine while facing continued economic pressure from sanctions.
Trump-Putin agreement would likely centre on several key components:
Territorial Considerations: A negotiated settlement would need to address the status of territories Russia has claimed to annex, including Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson. The most likely scenarios include: A formalized “frozen conflict” with current frontlines becoming de facto borders; Special autonomous status for certain regions within Ukraine; and potential referendums under international supervision in disputed territories.
Security Guarantees: Both sides would require significant security assurances: Limitations on Ukraine’s NATO aspirations, possibly with a moratorium on membership for a defined period; Demilitarized zones along border regions; International peacekeeping presence in contested areas; and guarantees against further territorial claims or military action.
Economic Reconstruction and Sanctions Relief: Gradual lifting of Western sanctions on Russia in exchange for compliance with peace terms; International funding for Ukraine’s reconstruction with specific commitments mainly from the US and EU; Restoration of economic ties between Ukraine, Russia, and Western economies; Energy security agreements, particularly regarding natural gas transit.
Expected Outcomes
Ukraine would face difficult compromises in any Trump-Putin brokered deal. The country may need to accept the loss of effective control over some territories, at least temporarily; adopt neutrality or limited security arrangements rather than full NATO integration; implement constitutional reforms providing autonomy to certain regions; and focus on economic recovery with Western assistance.
Russia would likely achieve some core objectives while making concessions: Recognition (formal or de facto) of some territorial gains; relief from economic sanctions that have impacted its economy; prevention of Ukraine’s NATO membership; and requirement to withdraw from certain areas and cease military operations.
The Western response would be complex: Potential divisions within NATO about the terms of any agreement; relief from the financial burden of supporting Ukraine militarily; questions about the precedent set regarding territorial aggression; need to maintain credibility while pursuing pragmatic solutions.
Several factors could complicate or derail negotiations: Resistance from Ukraine if terms are seen as too favourable to Russia; opposition within Russian leadership to any significant concessions; disagreements among NATO allies about acceptable terms; public opinion backlash in various countries; questions about enforcement mechanisms and international monitoring; and potential for resumed hostilities if agreement terms break down.
The broader implications of a Trump-Putin agreement would be far-reaching: Reconfiguration of European security architecture; precedent for resolving other “frozen conflicts” in post-Soviet regions; impact on the international rules-based order regarding territorial integrity; shift in US-Russia relations with potential cooperation on other issues; and changes in NATO’s strategic posture and purpose.
A Trump-Putin agreement on Ukraine would represent a major shift in international relations and potentially end a devastating conflict. However, it would come with significant compromises for all parties involved and uncertain long-term implications for regional security and international norms.
The success of such an agreement would ultimately depend on specific terms, implementation mechanisms, and the willingness of all parties to accept necessary compromises for peace. Most importantly, any sustainable peace would need to address the core security concerns of both Russia and Ukraine while providing a pathway toward stability and reconstruction.
The chance of reaching a Trump-Putin agreement to end the Ukraine war is difficult to predict with certainty. I’d estimate there’s a moderate possibility - perhaps 40-60% - that some form of agreement could be reached, though the scope and durability of such an agreement remain uncertain.
Several factors increase the likelihood: President Trump’s consistent statements about wanting to end the conflict quickly; economic and military fatigue on both sides after years of conflict; Russia’s potential interest in sanctions relief and international normalization; Trump’s demonstrated willingness to engage directly with Putin; and the high domestic political value for Trump in claiming a foreign policy victory.
However, significant obstacles remain: Deep Ukrainian resistance to territorial concessions; Putin’s potential unwillingness to accept terms that appear as Russian retreat; domestic political constraints for both leaders; and NATO ally concerns about undermining international norms.
A potential deal between Trump and Putin to end the Ukraine war would have several significant geopolitical, domestic and economic implications for the former USSR countries. We shall deal with it following the Trump Putin potential deal.
