March 13, 2025
DIANE FRANCIS
American negotiators are to meet with Putin in Moscow on March 13 to discuss a 30-day ceasefire that Ukraine has agreed to. “If their response is ‘yes,’ there’s a real chance of peace,” said US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “If their response is ‘no, then it’ll make their intentions clear.” Of course, to most observers, Russia’s intentions toward Ukraine have been clear for centuries. Its most recent war against Ukraine began in 2022 and continues to slowly grind on, damaging the country and the Western alliance. By most accounts, Putin is not in a hurry to halt the violence because Russians are beginning to push Ukrainian troops out of the Kursk region and continue to hold territory in eastern Ukraine. Putin must also be encouraged by the dressing down in the Oval office of Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky because it clearly removes expectations of long-term American support for Ukraine. Putin dismissed a ceasefire in January, but his strategy is clear, explained exiled Russian diplomat Boris Bondarev. “Putin’s initial idea in Ukraine,” explained, “is that he must do what he wants, and the West will have no other way but to back down. It was the right idea. He is now saying: Make us an offer we can’t refuse. We’ll wait.”
Trump’s attempt to stop the fighting is laudable but is mostly rooted in his belief that Putin respects him and will do a deal. Russian negotiators have also been stringing him along, promising a Grand Bargain designed to isolate China and modulate Iran. But China is Russia’s biggest oil customer, and Iran’s its biggest drone supplier. Besides, Moscow has no sway over China, which dominates it economically, and Putin cannot control Iran. For instance, the Iranian President recently told Trump he won’t negotiate with him about nuclear development and brushed off threats of American military action by declaring, “Do whatever the hell you want”. The reality is that these three “evil empires” get along. They are currently conducting naval drills in the Gulf of Oman throughout March.
Putin plays Trump. If Putin accepts the ceasefire, he won’t abide by it or will simply use the pause to recoup and attack. Putin does not want peace. Never did. He does not want to end this war. He does not care about casualties or economic hardship for his people. He won’t keep his word because he never has. Worse, it is dangerous that Americans have supported Moscow’s demand that free elections be held in Ukraine, which is ironic given that Russia has never held free and fair elections.
Putin’s call for an election will destabilize Ukraine. A vote would require that Ukraine’s armed forces, totaling 900,000 soldiers, be dissembled to vote, allowing Russia to gain more territory. An election would also require organizing a massive absentee vote among the 6 to 8 million Ukrainians outside the country. This includes 3 million (mostly draft dodgers) who live in Russia or Belarus and would mostly vote in favor of pro-Russian parties in Ukraine. (In 2019, Russia controlled the second largest party in Ukraine’s parliament or Rada.) Such an outcome would be disastrous. “An election will finish off Ukraine, leaving a nation with a powerful army of
900,000. A pro-Russian government will take control of the country’s government and the army and represent a threat to Europe,” said a source.
Concerns are that if there is a ceasefire, it must be underpinned by security guarantees for Ukraine, which Trump has dismissed out of hand. The proposed US-Ukraine minerals deal won’t stop tanks and missiles, and Americans won’t put boots on the ground. So who will enforce the ceasefire to ensure neither party abrogates its terms? Or will this agreement simply stop fighting for only 30 days, after which time the war will resume? The British have proposed the creation of a coalition of the willing from Europe to keep the peace — an idea that has merit but also major pitfalls. There is one scenario making the rounds in military circles: If Trump sidesteps the alliance and Europe is preoccupied with guarding Ukraine, Russia plans to seize a portion of Estonia to test NATO’s resilience and commitment.
Estonia is the size of Vermont and New Hampshire, and its 1.5 million people have been battered by Russia for years. It was disabled for weeks following a vicious cyberattack a few years ago, and recently, its undersea telecom cables in the Baltic Sea were sabotaged, disconnecting it from Europe and the internet. In essence, the country is the canary in the coal mine in terms of the next phase of Putin’s war against Europe. “Estonia knows NATO won’t fight for them or the Baltics, not worth it for Germany, the UK, and France to get involved,” commented the strategist.
This would divide NATO, perhaps permanently. On March 5, The Wall Street Journal noted that Putin has counted on Trump’s distancing from Europe: “Putin dug in as his military suffered battlefield setbacks and his economy was squeezed by Western sanctions. He played the long game. That perseverance appears to be paying off as the world shifts decisively in his direction. The U.S. has paused military aid to Ukraine and called for an end to Moscow’s isolation (then reconnected it). It is distancing itself from traditional allies in Europe.”
A peace deal may never happen because Putin has shown no sign of abandoning his goal to gobble up Ukraine and beyond. And Europe has not gotten its act together quickly enough. Since the war began in 2022, Europe has failed to confiscate Russia’s frozen assets to give to Ukraine. It has failed to crack down on Europeans selling technology to Moscow via Kazakhstan or prevent the purchase of Russian oil and gas by Europeans. Now, NATO’s future is a question mark because Trump is disaffected; to him, it’s simply another treaty that can be broken without pushback from Congress. The result is that Europeans aren’t even at the table with the Americans and Russians and Ukrainians in Saudi Arabia despite the fact that their continent is existentially threatened.
Clearly, NATO needs a new mission statement. In 1949, its founding leader said its purpose was “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” Now, its ambition must be to tap Germany’s trillions to build a military force, extend France’s and Britain’s nuclear umbrella to protect the continent, support Ukraine to protect its eastern flank from Russia, and replace the Americans by militarizing the entire region in a hurry.