Ukraine war: what can a Trump-Putin meeting achieve?

Rzeczpospolita remains sceptical:

“Up to now the Kremlin was of the opinion that the details of the peace deal had to be agreed prior to a ceasefire. Washington took the opposite view. According to the Washington Post, however, Putin could propose a partial ceasefire in which the bombing and air strikes would cease but the fighting on the front would continue. However, such an agreement would be very unfavourable for the Ukrainians, whose drone attacks deep inside Russian territory are becoming increasingly effective.”

The Spectator sees good and bad aspects:

“It's significant that Europe will be completely sidelined from the proposed talks. Clearly, Trump expects to present whatever he agrees with Putin to the rest of the world as a fait accompli. ... How many of Putin's demands will Trump concede during their face-to-face negotiations? Many Ukrainians will ask what right Trump has to negotiate over their heads. ... The good news is that in calling for direct talks with Putin, Trump has offered a quick route to the end of the war. The bad news is that it's likely to be on Putin's terms.”

Political scientist Viktor Shlinchak warns on Facebook against expecting too much from the talks:

“The negotiation process itself, as conducted by Russia, is a hybrid element of this war. Russia's goal is to generate mood swings and create illusory scenarios - while at the same time sticking to its psychological attrition strategy: vis-à-vis the US, Europe and us. That's why we should start with the most critical scenarios and not lapse into an illusionary euphoria that the war will end in 24 hours, 100 days or six months. Nor is disappointment our good ally right now. So don't let yourselves be blinded prematurely.”

Hospodářské noviny comments:

“Even if he wants to avoid an agreement that leaves Ukraine out of the picture, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy needs Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin to reach a deal on a solution for Ukraine at their planned meeting next week. Zelensky's domestic situation is deteriorating and his popularity is at a record low. And the latest Gallup poll shows that for the first time since Russia's invasion in February 2022 more Ukrainians want peace through an agreement than through military victory. Only 24 percent of respondents still believe that Ukraine should continue fighting until it achieves a final victory, while 69 percent want an end to the war as soon as possible.”

After issuing his ultimatum, Trump is tacking back and forth between several goals, the Kremlin-affiliated Moskovskij Komsomolets comments:

“Why is India being punished for the 'continued Russian aggression'? And how does this fit in with Trump's feverish euphoria and his plans to meet with Putin as soon as possible, perhaps even next week? The blow directed at India was clearly already 'in the bag', and the decision was taken not to give up on it. The task of resolving the Ukraine crisis and that of ousting Russia from global energy markets are closely interlinked in Trump's mind. But it remains unclear which is more important to him. ... For Trump, it is also important to have someone he can demonstratively humiliate. Now India under Prime Minister Modi has been chosen for this role.”

Mladá fronta dnes stresses that Trump must really make Russia sweat now:

“Yesterday, there was nothing to suggest that Vladimir Putin would give in to Washington's recent applied pressure or at least offer a compromise. If the preliminary conclusions of the meeting are confirmed, this will mean that Trump no longer has a choice. Although a head-on collision between the two locomotives is not yet necessary, the American president needs to not only take a tougher stance vis-à-vis Russia verbally, but also make good on his promises. No one can accuse him of not being extremely patient with Putin. But that has achieved nothing. Now he should show what his sanctions can accomplish if he wants to save face.”

The prospects for Ukraine haven't improved at all, complains Le Soir:

“Not even the US president himself really believes in the effect of these threats, and the Kremlin's environment is already trying to minimise the scope of possible measures. What lazy trick will the Kremlin pull out of its hat to make the storm pass? An offer of a bilateral air truce? ... Be that as it may, the prospect of a 'just and lasting peace' in Ukraine still seems a long way off. Not to mention a unification of the peoples of Europe with a pacified Russia.”

In a Telegram post republished by Echo, Journalist Dmitry Kolesev doesn't expect the meeting to have produced any major results:

“Witkoff spoke with Putin for three hours and then reported back to Trump something which made the latter talk enthusiastically about unprecedented progress having been made. ... It's hard to believe that Putin actually agreed to substantial concessions. I think it's more likely that Trump is grasping at any straws that might allow him to avoid imposing the threatened sanctions and tariffs and will present any new move by Putin (such as the announcement of an air truce) as 'progress'.”

Because of the difficulties in reaching compromises that could bring lasting peace, interim solutions should be the goal for now, Keskisuomalainen puts in:

“Russia would have to accept that Ukraine receives security guarantees from Nato or Western countries. In a peace agreement, Ukraine would lose huge chunks of its territory and perhaps even some of its population. On the other hand, Russia would not achieve its ultimate objective of subjugating Ukraine. European countries must see to it that this does not happen. A quick peace solution à la Trump is unlikely in the coming weeks, but if a ceasefire could be reached it would already be a major step forward.”