Vladimir Putin has inched closer to his objective of mending Russia's ties with the United States while simultaneously driving a wedge between Washington and its European allies. However, his contribution to Donald Trump's diplomatic efforts in Ukraine remains minimal.

Prior to the two leaders’ extended phone conversation on Tuesday, U.S. officials had intended to secure Moscow’s approval for a 30-day ceasefire—a proposal Ukraine had tentatively agreed to—as an initial step toward a comprehensive peace settlement. Instead, Putin consented only to a limited truce, agreeing that Russia and Ukraine would halt attacks on each other’s energy infrastructure for one month.

Keen to ensure that Trump did not appear to walk away empty-handed, Putin offered what was framed as a breakthrough: for the first time in over three years of conflict, both sides agreed to scale down hostilities, albeit in a restricted manner. The White House portrayed the development as progress, announcing that discussions on expanding the ceasefire to maritime engagements in the Black Sea, as well as broader peace efforts, would begin immediately.

Restricting assaults on energy targets and at sea presents notable challenges for Ukraine. Since the war's onset, Kyiv has inflicted significant damage on Russia’s oil infrastructure—a critical revenue source for Moscow’s war effort—and has resisted Russia’s superior naval power. Yet, despite the partial truce, Russia retains the freedom to advance its military objectives on land, particularly in its western Kursk region, where its forces are on the verge of expelling Ukrainian troops who seized Russian territory in a surprise operation last August.

Putin reiterated Russia’s conditions for a broader ceasefire, insisting that Ukraine must not use the pause to replenish its weapons stockpiles or reinforce its military. Kyiv rejected these terms outright.

According to Nigel Gould-Davies, a Russia expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Putin had effectively dismissed the broader ceasefire proposal by attaching terms he knew would be unacceptable. "He's saying he's open to it, but he's laid out conditions that make it clear he isn't serious. It's a rejection in all but name," Gould-Davies explained.

Despite this, Trump’s team framed the call as a diplomatic win and a step toward a larger ceasefire. "Until now, there wasn’t real agreement on these two key elements—the energy and infrastructure ceasefire and the Black Sea de-escalation. Today, we reached that understanding, and from here, a full ceasefire seems within reach," said Steve Witkoff, a Trump envoy, during an interview on Fox News' "Hannity" program.

However, Andrei Kozyrev, a former Russian foreign minister turned Kremlin critic, dismissed the notion that Trump had achieved anything substantial. Speaking to the Dozhd news channel, he argued, "Putin has every incentive to prolong the war while stringing America along."

A Kremlin-connected source echoed this sentiment in remarks to Reuters, stating that Putin intends to keep up the pressure on Trump while continuing military operations. "Ukraine will keep retreating, losing territory and people," the source predicted.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy signaled Kyiv’s willingness to support a pause on energy strikes, but within hours, both sides were accusing each other of fresh attacks. Even if the temporary energy ceasefire holds, analysts argue that it represents little more than a tactical maneuver by Putin rather than a meaningful concession.

By pausing strikes on Ukraine’s energy grid, Putin secures a reprieve from Ukrainian drone attacks on Russia’s oil refineries, which have already disabled an estimated 3.3 million tons—or 4%—of the country’s refining capacity since the start of the year, according to Reuters. Kozyrev emphasized that Putin had sacrificed nothing, calling the energy ceasefire "intentionally ambiguous." He added, "This is not what Trump was pushing for, nor what Ukraine agreed to. It’s a ceasefire targeting select infrastructure, not an actual cessation of hostilities."

The Kremlin’s readout of the call stated that both leaders agreed to continue their diplomatic efforts "in a bilateral format"—a strategy that unsettles Ukraine and its European allies, who fear that Trump might negotiate a settlement that marginalizes them and leaves them vulnerable in the long run.

The conversation also touched on broader issues of cooperation, including Middle Eastern affairs and nuclear security, with the Kremlin underscoring the "special responsibility" of both nations in maintaining global stability. This aligns with Putin’s broader ambition to reestablish Russia as a diplomatic heavyweight, negotiating with the U.S. as an equal rather than an isolated adversary burdened by sanctions.

Tatiana Stanovaya, a political analyst, described this as a major victory for Putin, allowing him to separate U.S.-Russia relations from the constraints of the Ukrainian conflict. Meanwhile, Gould-Davies noted that Putin—who has also hinted at lucrative business opportunities for American companies—seeks to deal with the U.S. alone, bypassing NATO in a bid to fracture Western unity.

"If this trend continues, Europe will have to quickly mobilize its own defense resources while scrambling to limit the geopolitical realignment already underway," Gould-Davies warned.