Putin's Unbelievable Luck: The West Keeps On Offering More Conversations Without Imposing Costs In The Meantime.
Conversations Without Costs: Why Talks Alone Will Not Shift Putin’s Calculus
After Friday’s Russia-Ukraine talks in Istanbul (which yielded a prisoner swap but also reminded the whole world of Russia’s delusional war objectives), Trump thought that what was lacking to move the needle was him having a chat with Putin.
So here we go again, on Monday, Trump will hold a phone call with Putin (and separately with Zelensky).
And yet, in spite of Trump’s willingness to jump through all sorts of hoops to ‘‘end the bloodbath’’, on Sunday, Putin reiterated that any peace deal must "eliminate the causes that triggered this crisis".
Translation: my maximalist war aims remain, and I want ‘‘denazification’’ (regime change) and demilitarization (imposing military capability limits on Ukraine so that Russia can invade again whenever it likes), in addition to other ridiculous demands like full de jure recognition of territories invaded by Russia.
But, why wouldn’t he stick to such demands if he is not seeing a real pushback?
What we’re witnessing today is a refusal—both in Washington and across Europe—to confront the core problem: Putin’s belief that he can outlast Ukraine and the West without paying unbearable costs and the West’s unwillingness to rebut this belief.
Rather than imposing costs and introducing measures to recalibrate Putin’s belief, leaders are still clinging to the idea of “just one more conversation” magically changing things for the better.
Trump continues to speak about the importance of renewed dialogue with Putin, as if the problem is a deficit of conversation. It’s not.
The past two years have included endless rounds of talks, backchannels, and informal overtures.
What’s missing is not diplomacy—but action.
What’s missing is a strategic combination of incentives and disincentives, calibrated to affect Putin’s perception of where this war is headed.
Until Putin becomes convinced that prolonging the war will yield worse outcomes for Russia, he has no reason to make meaningful concessions—no matter how many hours are spent in dialogue or how many calls Trump places.
And even when Trump talks with Putin on Monday, what does he realistically have to offer?
Will he try to force Ukraine to formally recognize the annexed territories?
Even if he tried, it wouldn’t be binding—and no Ukrainian government would survive capitulating to that demand.
Will he urge Ukraine to surrender its currently held territory?
Again, this is a nonstarter. It’s outside the power of the U.S. president to impose on a sovereign, democratically elected government.
Barring that, what does Trump bring to the table?
Unless he’s prepared to threaten future costs or escalate current pressure on Russia, Monday’s talks will yield no durable breakthrough.
At best, they might produce a short-term ceasefire—which Trump could celebrate as a personal diplomatic victory—but the structural conditions that gave rise to the war would remain entirely unresolved.
Europe Reverts Back To Passivity And A Blind Submission To Trump’s Whims
Even more troubling is Europe’s recent behavior.
Europe’s endemic hesitancy is best illustrated here by Macron:
“We just had a phone call with @POTUS while in Albania. Once again, President Putin refuses to respond to the unconditional ceasefire proposal put forward by the Americans and supported by Ukraine and the Europeans. By rejecting the ceasefire and dialogue with Ukraine, Russia shows it does not want peace and is merely trying to buy time by continuing the war. In this context, as the European Political Community gathers for a summit in Tirana, we will continue to coordinate with our European partners, the United States, and the Coalition of the willing to define a united response.”
Last Sunday, there was a 24 hour deadline for Russia to accept an unconditional 30 day ceasefire with a threat of massive European sanctions if Putin refused to accept.
And this was all done in coordination with Trump too.
And yet, less than a week after that plan, one of the leaders that pushed for this ultimatum (others being UK PM Starmer and German Chancellor Scholz) is now softening this threat to coordination with partners to achieve a ‘‘united response’’.
What united response?
You had one!
What changed?
Absolutely nothing that would warrant a deviation from this original plan.
If anything, this was yet another proof of Russia doing everything to stall and delay.
There is now even a stronger case to impose those sanctions and costs that were supposed to trigger within 24 hours of last Sunday.
Just one week ago, there was a serious movement among European capitals to raise costs on Russia—through further sanctions, export controls, and expanded weapons delivery.
Now, in the shadow of Trump’s re-engagement with Putin, many European leaders appear to be retreating once again into passivity and alignment with Washington’s tone.
But this is a false choice: the West can—and must—walk and chew gum at the same time.
It can keep talking to Russia and start imposing new, credible costs today.
Leaders can say to Moscow: “We’re willing to de-escalate. But until we see you negotiate with clarity and realism, we will continue to raise the costs—militarily, economically, diplomatically…. And you can reverse the costs—if you come to the table with normal state interests, not imperial hallucinations.”
Without that dual-track approach—pressure and diplomacy—Putin has no reason to abandon his maximalist aims.
He has survived every previous round of delay.
And every day without added pressure reinforces his belief that time is on his side.
So the question becomes: how many more months are Western leaders willing to waste before they start imposing real, sustained costs on Russia’s war effort?
Until that question is answered with resolve, no amount of talking will produce peace.