WASHINGTON – On Wednesday, President Donald Trump issued a strong warning to Russian President Vladimir Putin, suggesting that he either negotiate to conclude the Ukraine conflict or face severe economic consequences.

Trump indicated that he would impose various taxes, tariffs, and sanctions on Russian goods coming to the U.S., and he hinted at possible punitive measures for countries that maintain commerce with Russia.

“We can take the easy path or the difficult one – and the easy path is always preferable,” he stated. “Now is the time to MAKE A DEAL. NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!”

This announcement followed a warning Trump made the night before, suggesting that if Putin does not engage in talks, additional sanctions against Russia are probable. Trump had previously committed to swiftly terminating the violence when he was a candidate, asserting at different times that he could achieve this as president-elect or within 24 hours after taking office.

However, the situation has proven to be more complex than Trump originally portrayed, which he partially attributes to limitations he encounters when negotiating directly with Putin.

During a January press conference, Trump mentioned that Putin expressed interest in meeting with him, but he believed it would be inappropriate to do so while Joe Biden was still in power.

The Logan Act prohibits private citizens from engaging with foreign governments in a manner that could undermine U.S. foreign policy. After Russia’s attack on Ukraine, Biden ceased communication with Putin and his administration adopted a policy of providing military support to Ukraine for as long as necessary to repel Russian forces, unless Ukraine opted for a change in strategy.

Trump remarked on Tuesday night that Putin had shown disregard for Biden and should not be allowed to disrespect him. He claimed to have discussed the situation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and signaled that he would be contacting Putin.

“President Zelenskyy desires peace. He expressed that very emphatically to me. Achieving peace is a mutual effort,” Trump informed YSL News during a spontaneous press meeting.

When asked about the timing and venue for his potential meeting with Putin, he responded, “Anytime they wish.”

If Putin refuses negotiations, Trump stated he would “likely” impose sanctions on Russia.

Robert O’Brien, who served as Trump’s national security advisor, expressed in a prior interview his anticipation that the new administration would pressure Russia into negotiating by intensifying sanctions against the nation causing aggression.

“I would expect President Trump to tell Putin, if you don’t come to the negotiating table swiftly, the sanctions will be significantly harsh and damaging,” O’Brien noted.

O’Brien mentioned that both parties would need to compromise. However, he believed Trump would not support a scenario allowing Putin to rebuild his military to launch further assaults on Ukraine in the future.

In a social media post on Wednesday, Trump emphasized that he did not aim to “hurt Russia” and pointed out that he had previously maintained a positive relationship with Putin before the conflict began. “We should always remember that Russia aided us in winning World War II, sacrificing nearly 60 million lives in the process.”

The Russian government did not immediately respond to a request for remarks.

Trump avoids addressing how a ceasefire would be implemented

Throughout his candidacy, Trump asserted that he could resolve the conflict within a day, even suggesting during a debate in September that it could be finalized during the presidential transition. However, as the inauguration approached, he adjusted his statement, committing instead to conclude the conflict within six months.

“That’s quite a challenge, much more complicated than it would have been previously, I can assure you,” Trump told reporters at a January 7 press conference at Mar-a-Lago. “An arrangement could have been made by even an average negotiator. It was achievable,” he added.

Last month, Trump proposed an immediate ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine following his meeting with Zelenskyy. However, he has not clarified how such a ceasefire would function or how he plans to resolve the ongoing conflict. He has also refrained from confirming whether he would continue military aid to Ukraine and has shown understanding of Russia’s concerns regarding Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO.

He remarked to reporters on Tuesday night that he believes the European Union should contribute more financial support to Ukraine compared to the United States.

“Are we fools? I suppose the answer is yes,” he answered his own rhetorical question.

Since the war began, the European Union claims to have invested $145 billion towards financial, military, humanitarian aid, and assistance for refugees in Ukraine. Additionally, it has pledged $20 billion in loans. The U.S. has allocated $175 billion to Ukraine since the war began, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

Trump’s advisors have mentioned various strategies, such as freezing the conflict along current frontlines during negotiations, postponing NATO membership for Kyiv for 10 to 20 years in exchange for significant military support and the withdrawal of Russian troops from eastern Ukraine, and creating a demilitarized zone monitored by European peacekeepers to uphold an agreement.

Almost three years into Russia’s comprehensive invasion of Ukraine, Moscow controls nearly 20% of Ukrainian territory, as reported by the Institute for the Study of War.

Ukraine has regained some of its captured regions, but its attempts at a counteroffensive are largely stagnant due to Russia’s increase in weaponry and troops in Ukraine’s northeastern Kharkiv area, also receiving help from North Korean forces.

Russia continues to target Ukrainian cities with missile and drone strikes and aims to blockade its ports. In response, Ukraine has intensified drone attacks on Russian vessels and infrastructure and has also targeted locations inside Russia with long-range missiles supplied by the U.S. and European nations.

New administration seeks a negotiated resolution to the conflict

In a recent hearing, Marco Rubio, nominated as Trump’s secretary of state and later confirmed, indicated that the administration would adopt an official stance aimed at concluding the Ukraine-Russia war.

He mentioned that providing unlimited aid to Ukraine as long as it continues to resist is not a feasible approach, and both sides would need to make compromises.

“The specifics of that comprehensive plan will require substantial effort,” he stated. “My hope is that it can start with some semblance of a ceasefire.”

During the transition, the Biden administration moved quickly to supply aid to Ukraine due to concerns that Trump would leverage military assistance as a bargaining tool. A Biden administration official indicated to YSL News in January that the funding appropriated by Congress for Ukraine had been exhausted.

In a pre-inauguration discussion, Rep. Michael McCaul, previously the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs committee, expressed uncertainty about whether Trump would request further funds from Congress.

“I’m hopeful that Trump discerns Putin’s true nature through this process,” he noted.

“He is not a trustworthy partner. He’s not negotiating in good faith,” stated McCaul, a prominent supporter of aid to Ukraine in Congress.

In early January, Trump mentioned during a press conference that Putin reached out for a meeting during the transition period. However, he felt it wasn’t suitable to engage with the Russian leader until he officially took office.

“He can’t be happy; things aren’t going well for him. People initially thought that the war would conclude within a week, and now we’re three years in,” Trump commented to reporters in the Oval Office on Monday evening, just hours after being inaugurated for his second term. “Therefore, he can’t be pleased, as it doesn’t reflect well on him,” he added.

Preparations for a meeting are in progress, as indicated by Trump’s national security adviser, Michael Waltz, in an interview with ABC News earlier this month.

“From the viewpoint of President Trump, entering into a deal requires some form of rapport and dialogue with the other party,” he explained. “We will definitely establish that in the upcoming months.”

It’s still uncertain when and where the leaders plan to convene. The initial meeting happened in Helsinki during Trump’s first term, but since then, Finland has joined NATO and aligned with Ukraine in the ongoing conflict.

A source familiar with the ongoing discussions mentioned that Trump’s special envoy for Russia and Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, is expected to engage with Putin’s government first.

Before any sanctions or measures are instituted, dialogue must take place, the source noted, emphasizing that Kellogg’s conversations have primarily revolved around Ukraine and European nations.

Kellogg deferred his planned trip to Kyiv until after the inauguration. While he didn’t provide comments on the matter, he did mention to Fox News earlier in January that he aims to resolve the war within 100 days.

President Zelenskyy expressed his intentions to meet with Trump following the inauguration, though the timing remains uncertain. The two leaders have maintained regular communication over the past months, exchanging calls post-election and meeting in September during the United Nations General Assembly in New York. They also spoke while in Paris in December.

In a January interview with podcaster Lex Fridman, the Ukrainian president remarked that it is “naive” to believe Putin desires to end the war, indicating that Trump would need to apply pressure on him to cease hostilities. Zelenskyy recalled a ceasefire agreement he made with Putin in 2019, which Russia ultimately disregarded after failing to respond to his calls.

Zelenskyy pointed out that unless the U.S. provides significant security assurances to Ukraine, Trump would find himself in a similar situation as before.

“Today (Putin fears) Trump. However, if Trump manages, for instance, to establish a ceasefire without serious security pledges for Ukraine, he would inadvertently give Putin an advantage,” Zelenskyy explained. “He does not want that scenario. I trust what he asserts. Yet, he might create an opportunity for Putin, as Putin wants me to battle with Trump.”

During his speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Tuesday, Zelenskyy made what seemed to be his first public comments regarding Trump since the latter returned to office, questioning Trump’s commitment to NATO and overall European security.

“Will President Trump even pay attention to Europe? Does he view NATO as vital? And will he uphold EU institutions?” Zelenskyy posed to an audience of leaders and influencers.

He did not provide an answer to his question.

Putin continues to insist that Ukraine should be barred from NATO membership and is demanding that Ukraine renounce territories it has annexed, according to former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, John Herbst.

“What Trump has proposed, while not ideal, isn’t disastrous either if European troops are prepared to act between the two sides to maintain peace. That’s quite similar to a security guarantee,” mentioned Herbst, the senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.

He expressed confidence that European nations could be convinced to agree to such an arrangement if they receive their own security assurances from the United States.

“I think Trump isn’t keen on contemplating this right now. However, if this becomes crucial to achieving a deal, he might consider it: if the Russians commence firing at Europeans and the Europeans retaliate, the U.S. would also respond,” he added.

O’Brien, the former national security adviser to Trump, stated, “You could have security guarantees that are more substantial than mere formal agreements yet fall short of full NATO membership.”

This could involve deploying British and European forces on-site. “There are significant security assurances that could provide support to Ukraine without necessitating NATO membership. I don’t believe NATO membership is the ultimate solution for Ukraine,” O’Brien commented.

A senior European defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the topic amid apparent divisions among allies over Trump’s strategies for Ukraine, stated that no scenario exists where a peace deal that requires Ukraine to cede territory represents “the optimal resolution to the conflict.”

The official asserted that Western allies should “never endorse” an agreement that results in Ukraine relinquishing its lands to Russia; Putin must be held accountable for the war crimes committed in Ukraine and must also provide reparations for the damages and destruction of Ukrainian infrastructure incurred during the conflict.

“The only viable and sustainable solution is a complete victory for Ukraine,” the official added. They also warned that if Trump’s peace proposal merely “freezes” the conflict—ending the hostilities but lacking a peace treaty or political resolution—it would simply allow Russia to reorganize its military and potentially threaten other European nations.

The most critical issue for Ukraine currently is to establish the strongest possible position against Russia and to compel Putin to engage in negotiations.

“This aspect is paramount,” the official stated, “and it remains unresolved.”