Russian President Vladimir Putin has agreed to a limited pause in attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, contingent on Ukraine’s reciprocal cessation of strikes, according to a statement from the Kremlin. This marks the first time Russia has agreed to halt strikes on energy targets as part of a larger de-escalation plan. The agreement, brokered after a two-and-a-half-hour phone call between Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump, appears to be a step toward reducing hostilities. However, the Russian leader stopped short of endorsing a broader, 30-day ceasefire that Ukraine and the U.S. had proposed, meaning that attacks on civilian areas, ports, and other military targets will continue, prolonging the devastating impact on Ukraine’s civilian population and infrastructure.
This limited ceasefire could offer some relief to Ukraine, which has been grappling with repeated Russian assaults on its energy grid. The attack suspension would be welcomed by Kyiv, which has suffered significant disruptions to its power supply, especially during the winter months. However, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky indicated that his government would only accept a halt to energy strikes if it was reciprocal, stressing that Ukraine would not tolerate continued Russian attacks on its energy sector without responding. “We are prepared to agree on a truce on energy infrastructure, but we will respond if Russia continues its attacks,” Zelensky said, adding that the continuation of hostilities would leave Ukraine with no choice but to defend itself.
A Full Ceasefire Requires Ending Western Support to Ukraine
Despite the partial agreement on energy strikes, the Russian president made it clear that any long-term peace agreement would require a complete cessation of foreign military and intelligence support to Kyiv. According to the Kremlin, Putin reiterated that the cessation of U.S. and NATO assistance to Ukraine is crucial for achieving lasting peace. This demand, which has been a consistent feature of Russia’s stance throughout the war, is unacceptable to the Ukrainian government and its Western allies. The Biden administration, along with European partners, has provided billions of dollars in military aid to Ukraine, which has been critical in bolstering its defense against Russian advances.
Ukrainian officials remain resolute in their refusal to give up military support, especially considering the significant losses Russia has inflicted upon Ukrainian cities, civilians, and infrastructure. Zelensky firmly rejected any proposal to limit or halt Ukraine’s defense efforts. Moreover, the talks did not delve into discussions about the future of territories occupied by Russian forces, including Crimea, or the ongoing occupation of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, Europe’s largest. These issues, which remain central to any peace deal, were left unaddressed in the call between Trump and Putin, highlighting the deep divisions between the two sides.
Prisoner Exchange and Diplomatic Outreach
Though the ceasefire discussions have fallen short of expectations, both leaders agreed on some steps aimed at easing tensions. Putin committed to releasing 23 seriously wounded Ukrainian soldiers and set in motion plans for a prisoner exchange later this month. A total of 175 prisoners from each side will be exchanged, offering a brief respite for those caught in the conflict’s humanitarian toll.
However, many analysts remain skeptical that these small gestures will lead to a sustainable peace agreement. The Trump administration, which had initially expressed optimism about reaching a deal with Russia, found that Putin’s terms for peace are unlikely to align with Ukraine’s non-negotiable demands. Despite public statements of optimism, including a social media post from Trump celebrating the phone call, the talks revealed a lack of any concrete agreements on key issues such as territorial concessions and the future role of Ukraine’s armed forces.
While the Trump administration framed the call as a first step toward broader normalization of U.S.-Russia relations, it’s unclear how far that goal can progress given the ongoing differences over Ukraine’s sovereignty and military assistance. The U.S. has also agreed to begin technical negotiations with Russia on a potential maritime ceasefire in the Black Sea, where Russian naval operations have been severely constrained by the ongoing conflict. However, the lack of any breakthroughs on land-based negotiations continues to underscore the difficulties in reaching a lasting peace.
The White House, in its statement, also highlighted discussions on broader global issues, including Middle East cooperation and strategic arms control, with both sides expressing interest in reducing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The 2026 expiration of the last remaining U.S.-Russia nuclear arms control treaty looms large, though it remains to be seen how or whether this will influence the current conflict in Ukraine.
For now, Ukraine’s future remains uncertain, with no clear path to peace emerging from the latest talks. The ceasefire agreement on energy infrastructure, though potentially a positive development, is far from a guarantee of lasting peace.
