Moscow: The Kremlin has expressed confidence that U.S. President Donald Trump remains committed to pursuing peace in Ukraine, even after his recent statements appeared to favor Kyiv more aggressively. This assurance comes amid heightened scrutiny over Washington’s stance in the ongoing conflict, which has entered its fourth year.
Earlier this week, Trump met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and asserted that Ukraine could potentially reclaim all territories currently under Russian control, which constitute roughly one-fifth of the country. He emphasized that Kyiv should act swiftly, citing economic pressures facing Moscow. The president’s vice, JD Vance, added that Trump is growing “incredibly impatient” with Russia’s reluctance to engage in substantive negotiations, warning that failure to do so could have serious consequences for Moscow.
Responding to these remarks, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that the apparent shift in rhetoric does not indicate a change in Washington’s or Trump’s underlying commitment to peace. “For now, we assume that Washington retains the political will, and President Trump retains the political will, to continue efforts toward a peaceful settlement in Ukraine,” Peskov said. He also reiterated that Russia remains open to entering peace talks, maintaining a cautious but cooperative posture.
The comments come amid speculation from Russian nationalists that Trump might distance himself from efforts to end the war. European officials and analysts, however, interpret Trump’s statements as a signal urging Europe to increase its support for Ukraine, including military aid and financial assistance. While the practical implications of Trump’s rhetoric remain uncertain, the Kremlin’s response reflects an ongoing commitment to monitor and engage diplomatically, leaving the door open for continued negotiations.
This development underscores the delicate balance in international diplomacy as global powers navigate the complex dynamics of the Ukraine conflict, highlighting the interplay between political messaging and tangible policy actions.