U.S. President Donald Trump held a phone conversation on Tuesday with Russian regime leader Vladimir Putin, during which, according to the Kremlin, Putin agreed to a proposal for Russia to halt attacks on Ukraine's energy infrastructure for 30 days.

According to Andreas Kaju, caution is needed when trying to interpret broader conclusions from individual events, as the substance, strategy and effectiveness of negotiations will only become clear over time. Based on the White House summary of the call and the prior interactions between Putin and Trump, he noted that the conversation was not the worst possible outcome.

"From what little we know, the current process suggests a somewhat structured negotiation framework where the presidents themselves do not seem to be improvising extensively. That is a positive sign for us because if decisions were largely dictated by the personal dynamic between the leaders, we would have more reason to be concerned. Right now, it appears that a structured process is in place, with negotiating teams preparing thorough discussion rounds ahead of the leaders' meetings," Kaju explained.

Another positive sign, according to Kaju, was the absence of quick agreements.

"We know that the Russians have a very strong strategy and highly experienced diplomats — unfortunately, this includes their president. The fact that no major agreements were made quickly indicates that the Americans have also firmly established their own positions and interests and were not willing to make rapid concessions just for the sake of achieving progress. That is reassuring because we know that the U.S. president is surrounded by officials and advisors with widely varying perspectives — some of whom may see negotiations with Russia as an opportunity for a major geopolitical realignment or as a chance to find shared interests with Russia, whether in economic matters or in pursuing peace in the Middle East," Kaju said.

He added that it would have been problematic for Estonia if Trump had signaled a willingness to make compromises with Russia in pursuit of such a global realignment.

"Based on what we know so far, there is no reason to believe that this idea of a major geopolitical shift dominates America's negotiation strategy. But, of course, we cannot be certain," he noted.

Kaju emphasized that it is a positive development for Estonia that the U.S. was not willing to enter into quick agreements while Putin is making demands that seem absurd from Estonia's perspective.

"The fact that almost nothing was agreed upon, and that even the minor proposals put forward by the Russians are unlikely to be acted upon by the Americans, shows that there is no reason to believe Putin would agree to anything quickly unless he receives significant concessions on strategic issues or faces real pressure," Kaju said.

He also pointed out that the differences between the White House and Kremlin summaries of the phone call are telling.

"The Kremlin's version stated that Russia also demanded that the U.S. halt all intelligence-sharing and military aid to Ukraine. If I understood correctly, Trump responded that this was not even a topic of discussion. That suggests the conversation was likely quite difficult," Kaju observed.

Saks: Russia trying to show that U.S. does not hold the initiative

Security expert Rainer Saks questioned whether the so-called "energy truce" could even be considered a tangible outcome.

"This is a highly declarative agreement — or I wouldn't even call it an agreement, more like an expressed intention. There's no actual enforcement mechanism in place. The main takeaway from this episode is that Russia's president wanted to create the impression that he is making some kind of concession to the U.S. president. That's the entire point of this, and beyond that, it holds no real significance," Saks said.

Chairman of the Riigikogu Foreign Affairs Committee, Marko Mihkelson, stated on Wednesday that in his view, agreements between the U.S. and Russia are driven solely by Russia's interests. According to Saks, it does indeed seem that Russia has managed to impose its will.

"We aren't seeing any substantial commentary from the U.S. explaining exactly what was discussed in the call. The statements coming out are extremely brief, which suggests that the U.S. was unable to assert any process of its own onto Russia. But I am certain that Russia does not want to completely abandon this process either — it is trying to push the U.S. into accepting something that benefits Moscow. In this situation, the U.S. president is putting on a brave face despite an unfavorable position, and frankly, he doesn't have many other options," Saks noted.

Saks pointed out that, in reality, no peace talks have begun, nor could they start without Ukraine's involvement. For now, there are only vague mentions that negotiations should take place somewhere in the Middle East at some point in the future.

"The most significant aspect of this phone call is that Russia was very quick to inform the media about what was discussed, sometimes in quite specific detail. Russia is trying to convey that it — not the U.S. — is in control of the initiative. And in my opinion, that is exactly what Moscow wants right now," Saks said.

He also suggested that Russia itself needs a longer pause in the war, as its reserve forces are in poor condition and it currently lacks the capacity for a major offensive.

"The fact that they managed to regain control over the Kursk region is undoubtedly a success, but in the grand scheme of things, it is a minor episode compared to the objectives Russia's president has set for his military. They are still very far from achieving those goals," Saks concluded.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!