How Russia and Ukraine Are Fighting to Shape Trump’s View of the War
As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky made his way back from Florida on Monday, he likely felt a sense of relief. His discussion with President Trump regarding a peace plan appeared to have concluded smoothly — the American leader did not criticize him or parrot Kremlin narratives, at least in public. By former meeting standards, this represented a step forward. However, while Mr. Zelensky was returning home, President Vladimir V. Putin was speaking with Mr. Trump, presenting a new development. Mr. Putin alleged that a Ukrainian drone strike had targeted one of his residences in Russia during the night. “I don’t like it,” Mr. Trump later shared with reporters while recalling the conversation. “It’s not the right time to do any of that. I was very angry about it.” The accusation was precisely the type that could disrupt Ukraine’s diplomatic initiatives. Mr. Zelensky quickly refuted the claim, labeling it on social media as “a complete fabrication” intended “to undermine all achievements of our shared diplomatic efforts with President Trump’s team.” Ukrainian negotiators discussed the allegation with American counterparts, Mr. Zelensky noted, and his foreign minister also commented. Simultaneously, various Russian officials publicly reiterated the charge, asserting that Moscow would adopt a firmer position in negotiations as a reaction. The storm of statements from Ukraine and Russia regarding the claim, which currently lacks definitive evidence, highlighted an information war that holds considerable significance in the peace negotiations: the struggle to influence Mr. Trump’s perspective. Both parties in the conflict see the American president as crucial leverage for negotiating a future peace agreement. For months, they have endeavored to shape his understanding of the battlefield dynamics. This has included Russia’s assertions about seizing cities that remain untaken and Ukraine failing to promptly acknowledge when a city has fallen. Kyiv and Moscow have also accused one another of unwillingness to compromise for a peace agreement and attempting to destabilize the talks. Mr. Trump’s stance on the conflict remains ambiguous after almost a year of unsuccessful attempts to conclude it. Analysts indicate that Russia has gained the upper hand in shaping his perspective. Mr. Trump has aligned with Moscow multiple times this year, in part due to Russia’s battlefield advantages, which coincide with the president’s reiterated belief that the dominant side will prevail. Mr. Zelensky has frequently found himself racing to rescue diplomatic endeavors by regularly engaging with the American side and rallying European allies to guide Mr. Trump towards a less pro-Russian stance. “Zelensky has this challenge in appealing to Trump that Putin doesn’t have,” remarked Harry Nedelcu, a senior director at Rasmussen Global, a research organization, noting that Mr. Putin maintains a closer relationship with Mr. Trump than the Ukrainian president does. Mr. Putin often speaks with Mr. Trump soon before the American leader meets with Mr. Zelensky — as occurred on Sunday — to directly advocate his case and influence the negotiations. Dmitri S. Peskov, the spokesman for the Kremlin, reiterated on Tuesday that Russia would toughen its negotiating approach, though he did not specify how Moscow would alter its requests. He informed reporters that Russia would “continue the negotiation process and dialogue primarily with the Americans.” Local officials in Russia’s Novgorod region, where the residence allegedly attacked is located, reported a Ukrainian drone strike early on Monday. However, the attack and its potential ramifications could not be independently verified, and Russian authorities did not publicly provide any evidence. Despite this, the allegation dominated news broadcasts in Russia and triggered a wave of bellicose rhetoric, with state-aligned media and lawmakers advocating for retaliation. Aleksander Kots, a war correspondent for the pro-Kremlin publication Komsomolskaya Pravda, penned an article that echoed the prevailing sentiment, suggesting it was time to adopt a more aggressive stance against “this provincial Napoleon,” a reference to Mr. Zelensky. The response should be “decisive and devastating,” he wrote, calling for the assassination of high-ranking Ukrainian officials and commanders. He concluded that “now the peace process is dead.” In an effort to counter Russia’s assertion, Ukrainian officials highlighted that Russia had made conflicting statements regarding the number of drones purportedly involved in the Novgorod incident. A senior French official, speaking anonymously due to governmental protocols, corroborated this perspective, stating there was no evidence supporting Moscow’s claims. Nevertheless, India, Pakistan, and the United Arab Emirates issued statements condemning the alleged attack. When asked on Monday if he had seen any intelligence report or other evidence validating the Russian assertion, Mr. Trump replied: “Well, we’ll find out. You’re saying maybe the attack didn’t take place. That’s possible, too, I guess, but President Putin told me this morning it did.” With negotiations at a standstill over territorial disputes, much of the narrative contention in recent weeks has revolved around which party is gaining ground on the battlefield. In early December, Mr. Putin invited journalists to come and “see for themselves” that Russian troops had taken the northeastern city of Kupiansk. Instead, it was Mr. Zelensky who arrived about ten days later and recorded himself by the city’s entrance sign to announce that it was predominantly under Ukrainian control — a fact verified by battlefield maps from independent organizations. On Monday, Mr. Putin convened with senior commanders in the Kremlin and declared that Russian forces were positioned only about nine miles from the vital southern Ukrainian city of Zaporizhzhia, a significant industrial hub. He instructed his troops to seize the city “in the near future.” However, Russia has not secured any major city since 2022, and military analysts assert that it lacks the necessary forces to accomplish this. Even so, Russian troops have made progress in recent weeks — a reality that Ukraine has attempted to downplay. Ukraine’s high-ranking military leaders, for instance, were initially hesitant to acknowledge that the eastern town of Siversk had slipped into Russian hands last week. On Monday, Ukraine’s leading commander, Gen. Oleksandr Syrsky, offered a rather positive assessment of the situation in Pokrovsk, a strategic city in the eastern Donetsk region, asserting that Russian forces controlled merely half of it. However, the battlefield maps compiled by independent entities indicate that approximately two-thirds of Pokrovsk is under Russian control, and Ukrainian personnel on the ground have admitted the city is nearly lost. Managing the narrative regarding advances in Donetsk is crucial for both sides since one of the Kremlin’s principal demands for concluding the war is for Ukraine to relinquish the quarter of the region that it still controls — an unacceptable proposition for Kyiv. Russia has contended that its advances in the area are unavoidable and that Ukraine should agree to terms now, even if it means ceding territory, rather than risking more casualties in the defense of Donetsk. Mr. Trump echoed this sentiment on Sunday after his meeting with Mr. Zelensky, stating that Ukraine would be “better off taking a deal rather than losing it on the battlefield in the coming months.” Ukraine has sought to refute that perspective by emphasizing that Russia’s progress has been sluggish and that it will require many additional months for Moscow to secure the remainder of Donetsk. During an Oval Office meeting in August with Mr. Trump, Mr. Zelensky utilized a map of the battlefield to bolster his argument. Over the 1,000 days leading up to that meeting, he noted, Russia had managed to capture less than 1 percent of Ukrainian territory. Both sides have also attempted to engage Mr. Trump’s business-oriented mindset, hinting at potentially profitable agreements that could be part of a resolution. A peace plan crafted by one of Russia’s leading negotiators, Kirill Dmitriev, who heads Russia’s sovereign wealth fund, alongside American representatives last month included a clause that the United States would enter into a lengthy economic partnership with Moscow in areas as diverse as energy, artificial intelligence, and mineral extraction. Ukraine’s negotiating framework features a financial plan to aid the country’s postwar reconstruction along with American participation. Mr. Zelensky stated that it would encompass “the entry of American business, special conditions for Ukraine’s development and reconstruction, and the creation of a free-trade agreement with the United States.” On Sunday, as he welcomed Mr. Zelensky at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, Mr. Trump expressed amazement at the wealth that could be generated from reconstructing Ukraine. “There’s a lot of wealth to be had,” he remarked. Ivan Nechepurenko and Neil MacFarquhar contributed reporting.
Published: 2025-12-30 19:21:00
source: www.nytimes.com
