Will Trump get serious about ending the Russia-Ukraine War?

Eighteen months after President Donald Trump launched his bid to broker an end to the Russia-Ukraine War, his chief negotiator, Steve Witkoff, finally traveled to Kyiv. While welcomed by Ukrainians, it remains unclear whether the visit presages a genuine change in the Trump administration’s mediation approach, which thus far has proven a dismal failure.

A successful mediation will require more than Witkoff visiting the Ukrainian capital.

The Russia-Ukraine conflict dates back to 2014, when Russian military forces seized Crimea and became involved in fighting in Donbas. Moscow’s 2022 invasion turned that conflict into the largest war in Europe since 1945.

The first Trump administration (2017-2021) did nothing to advance a settlement that might have averted the 2022 Russian assault. However, when Trump returned to office in 2025, he claimed he would quickly end the war . While Kyiv has shown a readiness to take painful decisions to stop the fighting, Trump’s mediation has failed to produce a settlement or a general ceasefire or even some evident change in the Kremlin’s harsh demands.

After nine visits to Moscow, Witkoff paid his first visit to Kyiv on Sept. 6 . Accompanied by Jared Kushner, he met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. It is good that he went. One can hardly expect to mediate a conflict if one talks only to one side. The British, French and German national security advisors joined part of the discussion, also a positive step given Europe’s interest in how the conflict might be settled.

Witkoff’s visit bought the Ukrainian capital a brief respite from daily Russian missile and drone attacks. Unfortunately, his meetings in Kyiv and in Moscow the day before produced no sign of a substantive breakthrough. If Trump seriously wants to move the settlement process forward, he has more to do.

First of all, Trump needs to understand Vladimir Putin and learn how to deal with him. He regularly says his Russian opposite number wants a settlement. For example, in early July: “President Putin wants it to end , I will tell you that very strongly.” No serious observer shares that view, and the Kremlin repeatedly states that it will settle only on its terms, terms which remain the same as in 2024. On Aug. 28, Putin spokesman Dmitriy Peskov said that Russia’s “position has not changed . It was set out two ⁠years ago by [Putin].”

Putin obviously would like to negotiate about Ukraine with Trump, because the American president wants a deal but shows little apparent interest in the specific terms or whether an agreement would be just or durable. Moreover, Putin games Trump. Take their August 2025 meeting in Alaska . Trump flew to Anchorage telling reporters on Air Force One that he would insist on a ceasefire or serious consequences would follow. In the event, Putin did not agree to a ceasefire and faced no consequences.

In October, Zelensky expected a positive Oval Office meeting , perhaps including Trump’s agreement to provide Kyiv long-range missiles. Putin called Trump on the eve of that meeting, and Zelensky left Washington with nothing .

Putin respects strength. Trump has not shown that in his dealings with the Russian.

Neither has Witkoff. He should stop naively fawning over Putin and not take Russian pronouncements at face value. When Putin denied to Trump that Moscow had shared with Iran intelligence on U.S. military forces, Witkoff commented that “ We can take them at their word .” He should adopt a more balanced approach. That means not repeating ideas such as November’s 28-point peace plan that favored the Russian side, among other things calling on Ukraine to cede territory that the Russian military had never occupied. No wonder Moscow considers Witkoff (and Kushner) friends; as Putin said, “ We work with them with pleasure .”

Second, Trump has to back U.S. diplomacy with pressure to get Moscow to negotiate in a serious manner. He cannot afford to repeat the Anchorage debacle or the numerous times earlier in 2025 when he set deadlines for Putin to agree to a ceasefire but then did nothing when the Russian ignored his demand.

Were the president so inclined, he has substantial leverage. He could encourage Elon Musk to allow the Ukrainian military to use Starlink to guide drones against targets in Russia. He could move aggressively to halt the flow of American advanced technology products that seep into Russia, often ending up in weapons that pound Ukrainian cities .

To cut the revenues feeding the Russian war machine, Trump could apply secondary sanctions against countries such as China that buy Russian oil and target more Russian “shadow fleet” tankers . He could send Putin a stark message by asking Congress to fund new military assistance for Ukraine and make clear that the West will ensure that Ukraine’s soldiers receive the funding they need to defend their country.

These steps would confront Putin with high and growing costs of his war of aggression. These steps would strengthen Witkoff’s and Kushner’s bargaining hand.

Unfortunately, Trump thus far has shied away from such actions. Putin has learned that he can game Trump and Witkoff and, more importantly, that he can defy Trump and face no penalty. Absent a radical change in its approach, the Trump administration will not bring peace closer to Ukraine. It will only continue to fail.

Steven Pifer, an affiliate with Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, is a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.