As high-ranking U.S. officials gear up for a crucial meeting with a Russian delegation in Saudi Arabia this Sunday, concerns have escalated regarding how the Trump administration will persuade Moscow to prolong a preliminary ceasefire.
Recently, Russian President Vladimir Putin consented to a temporary halt in military strikes on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, which notably includes Europe’s largest nuclear facility, the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Station.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, both of whom will travel to Jeddah for the negotiations, indicated that the forthcoming step will focus on securing a ceasefire in the Black Sea.
MILITARY LEADERS TO CONVENE ON UK-FRANCE ‘COALITION OF THE WILLING’ STRATEGY FOR UKRAINE
Previously, Moscow had accepted a similar arrangement facilitated by Turkey and the United Nations in 2022, known as the Black Sea Grain Initiative, aimed at ensuring Ukrainian agricultural exports to stabilize global prices; however, Putin withdrew from the agreement in 2023.
Security analysts express skepticism regarding Putin’s trustworthiness in this negotiation.
Furthermore, another topic likely to be addressed during the discussions in the Middle East is Ukraine’s nuclear energy capabilities.
As the president’s focus on a mineral agreement with Ukraine seems to have waned, his interest has shifted to a new initiative concerning U.S. “ownership” of Kyiv’s “electrical supply and nuclear power plants.”
The joint statement issued by Rubio and Waltz following Trump’s conversation on Wednesday with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy suggested that “American ownership of these facilities would provide optimal protection for that infrastructure and bolster Ukrainian energy security.”
TRUMP HAS A ‘VERY GOOD’ CALL WITH ZELENSKYY AFTER AGREEMENT WITH PUTIN
When inquired by Fox News Digital about Putin’s clear interest in the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and how he may respond to Trump’s new ambitions, Rebekah Koffler, a former DIA intelligence officer and author of “Putin’s Playbook,” expressed skepticism about its reception.
“Putin is almost certainly opposed to this idea and will likely try to undermine such a deal,” Koffler stated, having briefed NATO officials on Putin’s aspirations in Ukraine long before the 2022 invasion. “Additionally, Zelenskyy is unlikely to approve such an agreement.”
Koffler continued, “Zelenskyy might consider relinquishing control of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant to the U.S., which is currently under Russian administration. The Russians will not willingly relinquish control of Zaporizhzhia. Any attempts to seize it by force would be met with fierce resistance.”
It remains uncertain when Trump’s interest in acquiring Ukraine’s energy infrastructure originated, although it appears to relate to his past claims that Ukraine would be better safeguarded with American businesses and personnel operating within its territory.
This argument has sparked debate, especially since there have been and still are American companies in Ukraine during the Russian invasion. This debate led to a heated exchange between Trump and Zelenskyy in the Oval Office last month.
Koffler suggested that Putin might interpret a U.S. acquisition of Kyiv’s four nuclear power plants as a “backdoor strategy” for the U.S. to extend security guarantees for Ukraine and a “clever method of controlling Ukraine’s nuclear capacity, which the Russians believe can be weaponized.”
WHAT’S NEXT IN THE RUSSIA-UKRAINE CEASEFIRE DISCUSSIONS?
Koffler remarked, “This would be perceived as a threat to Russia.”
When asked about the potential implications of U.S. ownership of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure on negotiations, former CIA Moscow station chief Dan Hoffman conveyed to Fox News Digital that he doubts it will significantly influence the pursuit of peace.
“We have yet to see a deal. Currently, we only have a ceasefire that has been violated concerning energy infrastructure,” Hoffman observed. Even after Putin agreed to cease attacks on Ukraine’s infrastructure on Tuesday, the subsequent morning saw a drone strike targeting a railway power system in the Dnipropetrovsk region, resulting in civilian power outages.
“This is just another talking point. Numerous other issues are of greater significance. Putin will likely leverage this in negotiations, saying, ‘Sure, you can do that, United States, but I want something in return.’ That’s always the case,” Hoffman reflected on his negotiation experiences with Russian counterparts during his CIA tenure.
“His goal is Ukraine. He aims to overthrow the government. That is his objective,” Hoffman emphasized. “Any agreements he may make in the short term are merely tactics to undermine Ukraine’s capacity to deter Russia in the future and to provide Russia maximum leverage.”
While various topics will be on the agenda, Hoffman asserted that a genuine indication from Putin that he genuinely desires to end the war is crucial for achieving any form of ceasefire.
“The pivotal question for John Ratcliffe is to clarify why Putin would want a ceasefire. I argue he has no such intentions,” Hoffman remarked, referring to the CIA director. “There is absolutely no evidence suggesting he desires one.”
Hoffman concluded by stating that historical precedents indicate most major wars end on the battlefield: “One side loses, one side wins, or both sides lack the capacity to continue fighting. That’s how wars conclude.”
Ultimately, the resolution of the conflict in Ukraine appears contingent on tangible change in Putin’s approach and willingness to consider peace negotiations.
