Putin Sets Additional Preconditions For Ceasefire in Ukraine

Executive Summary:

• Russian President Vladimir Putin has declined his U.S. counterpart Donald Trump’s proposal for a comprehensive ceasefire without preconditions in Russia’s war against Ukraine. 
• Putin has set new preconditions for a comprehensive ceasefire, namely a unilateral halt to Ukrainian military mobilization, the resupply of frontline units, and the cessation of external military assistance and intelligence sharing with Ukraine.
• Russia and Ukraine have each declared a 30-day pause of air strikes on each other’s energy infrastructure, potentially leading to a wider ceasefire on land or at sea. Kyiv, however, will not willingly accept a ceasefire that lacks monitoring and enforcement mechanisms and post-conflict security arrangements for Ukraine.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump conferred by telephone on March 18. They determined that Russia and Ukraine should refrain from attacking each other’s energy infrastructure from the air for a 30-day period. Trump was, in effect, speaking on Ukraine’s behalf on this matter in the otherwise wide-ranging call with Putin (Kremlin.ru; X.com/@PressSec, March 18; The White House, March 19).

Trump formulated his request for a 30-day ceasefire on attacks against energy infrastructure without preconditions, a steep climb down from his quest for a comprehensive ceasefire all along the frontline on the ground, in the air, and at sea . Kyiv was skeptical of a ceasefire that entailed neither a monitoring mechanism nor security guarantees for Ukraine, simply “freezing” the frontlines for now and allowing Russia to potentially attack again any time. The Trump White House, however, pressured Ukraine’s Presidential Office into accepting that ceasefire concept at their March 11 bilateral meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (President of Ukraine, March 11). The pressures included suspending U.S. military assistance and intelligence sharing from March 3 through March 11 amid Russian offensive actions along the frontline (Ukrainska Pravda, March 4, 5).

The Kremlin rejected a comprehensive ceasefire without fear of U.S. pressures and proceeded with its war strategy. Putin’s senior adviser, Yurii Ushakov, told U.S. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz by telephone on March 13, “A temporary ceasefire would only provide a breathing spell for the Ukrainian military. We do not need imitations of peaceful measures in the current situation” (TASS, March 13).

Putin phrased his refusal diplomatically, framing it as, yes, Moscow is in favor, but there are some nuances. He asked rhetorical questions instead of stating assertions. Putin wondered aloud during a joint press conference on March 13 with Belarusian President Alyaksandr Lukashenka: Should Russian forces simply stop the momentum of their offensive actions in multiple frontline sectors? Will the Ukrainian military use the ceasefire to resupply their frontline units and mobilize and train civilians for combat?  He suggested discussing the situation directly with Trump by telephone, leading to their March 18 conference call (Kremlin.ru; Ukrainska Pravda, March 13).

In the call, Putin added a set of preconditions to any ceasefire, turning his March 13 rhetorical questions into blunt assertions, stating: 

For a possible ceasefire along the entire frontline, it is necessary to halt the mobilization of Ukrainian civilians into the armed forces and the resupply of Ukrainian forces with military equipment.

Key conditions for preventing the escalation of the conflict and working toward a political-diplomatic settlement must be the full cessation of external military assistance to Kyiv and intelligence sharing with it (Kremlin.ru, March 18).

The first conditionality seems tied to the duration of a ceasefire and would restrict the in-country resupply of Ukrainian forces, whereas the second conditionality signifies cutting off Ukraine entirely from its Western military partners. All of those measures would apply to Ukraine only, not to Russia. The two-tiered conditionalities seem crafted in response to the Trump administration’s vision of a sequenced “peace process,” a full ceasefire on the ground leading to a political-diplomatic settlement—all on the administration’s accelerated timetable.

Beyond a hypothetical ceasefire, Putin reaffirmed his preconditions for negotiating a political settlement, namely “removing the primordial causes of the Ukraine crisis.” He served that reminder again in his March 13 and March 18 statements, firmly but unobtrusively and without listing those purported causes chapter and verse—demilitarizing, de-“nazifying,” and neutralizing Ukraine (see EDM, June 20, 2024). Should a full ceasefire materialize and political settlement negotiations commence, Moscow would undoubtedly slap the other negotiating parties at that stage with the demand to “remove the primordial causes.” Meanwhile, no agreed format exists—nor is it known to have been proposed—for negotiations on a political settlement.

The Kremlin’s readout of the call seems to imply that Trump responded to Putin by climbing down sharply from his initial ceasefire concept. Russian state-owned news agency TASS reported that “Putin has backed Trump’s idea of Russia and Ukraine mutually refusing to strike energy infrastructure for 30 days and has given the military an appropriate order, the Kremlin has announced” (Telegram/@TASS_Agency, March 18). 

Trump also brought up with Putin some possible measures to promote stability in the Black Sea.  These would entail a “maritime ceasefire,” according to the White House readout of the call X.com/PressSec, March 18). Otherwise, a “Black Sea moratorium on firing” from as yet unspecified weapons and platforms, according to presidential special envoy Steve Witkoff, who “hopes that the Ukrainians would agree” (Fox News, March 18).

Putin’s response seems even more elusive. According to the Kremlin’s readout of the call, “Trump proposed to implement the well-known initiative for the safety of commercial shipping in the Black Sea basin. They agreed to begin talks and work out additional details of such an agreement” (Kremlin.ru, March 18). Putin’s referencing “the well-known initiative” might allude to Türkiye’s quest for resurrecting the defunct Black Sea Grain Initiative, which had placed Ukraine’s maritime trade under joint Russian-Turkish supervision in 2022–2023. Ukrainian naval drone warfare, however, succeeded in lifting Russia’s naval blockade, rendering Türkiye’s mitigating role unnecessary (see EDM, July 26, 27, 31, August 18, September 11, 12, 26, 2023).

In parallel with the Trump-Putin call, the Trump administration has hinted at reactivating the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant—the largest in Europe in terms of number of reactors, located in Russian-occupied Ukrainian territory—to supply Ukraine with electricity. The idea involves U.S. technical assistance, operation, or even acquisition of the plant from Russia’s state corporation Rosatom, which seized this plant unlawfully from Ukraine in 2022 (RBC-Ukraine; The White House, March 19). 

According to the Kremlin’s readout, the two leaders “confirmed the intention to continue their efforts toward a Ukrainian settlement in the bilateral format.” They will “create Russian and American expert-level groups toward that end” (Kremlin, March 18). Moscow suggests a Russia-U.S. bilateral process that excludes Ukraine and its European partners from key decisions. Kyiv’s consent is necessary but can also be sought post factum, while the Europeans can simply be presented with faits accomplis.

Trump’s takeaway from his call with Putin is a hoped-for “understanding that we will be working quickly to have a complete ceasefire and, ultimately, an end to this very horrible war between Russia and Ukraine,” whereas “quick” might matter more than the terms of a political settlement (see EDM, January 14; Truth Social, March 18).

Putin greatly benefited from this call by staying in Trump’s graces through a limited concession, pausing—reciprocally with Ukraine—airstrikes on energy infrastructure in lieu of a comprehensive ceasefire, piling up more preconditions, retaining a free hand to continue offensive military actions and nibble additional Ukrainian territory, and delaying a political settlement unless it amounts to Ukraine’s capitulation. 

Meanwhile, Putin ensured that the Trump White House remains politically vested in negotiations with Russia. At the same time, Putin and Trump are excluding Ukraine’s European partners from negotiating the settlement terms or post-conflict security arrangements in Ukraine.