If Trump rushes ceasefire talks, it may backfire because Putin seeks to rewrite the post–Cold War international order. We need a deal that is fair and enduring.
Trump and Putin

Russian newspapers dated February 13 report on a phone call between Trump and Putin in Moscow. (©Reuters)

このページを 日本語 で読む

Efforts by President Donald Trump to end Russia's war of aggression in Ukraine through ceasefire talks face daunting complexity. Even if the fighting halts temporarily, meaningful negotiations beyond that point will encounter significant obstacles.

Russian President Vladimir Putin aims not only to undermine Ukraine's sovereignty but to reduce it to a puppet state. These demands far exceed what Ukraine can accept. 

Moreover, Putin seeks to rewrite the post–Cold War international order — his ambitions likely extend beyond Ukraine and into Europe's broader security architecture.

What we need from President Trump is not a rushed peace deal. We need an agreement that is fair and enduring.

Learning From Shinzo Abe's Failure

I visited Ukraine in February for the sixth time since Russia's full-scale invasion began. Contrary to the common image of a war-weary nation, Ukrainians are not as fatigued as one might expect. Many do hope for a ceasefire — but not one that is unconditional or immediate. Guarantees of Ukraine's independence and security remain non-negotiable. 

With its fighting capacity still intact, Ukraine can still afford time for negotiations.

Russian President Vladimir Putin pets Yume, alongside the late Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (right). February 2014, in Sochi, Russia. (From the Presidential Executive Office website)

Former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's failed efforts to resolve the Northern Territories dispute offer important lessons. There is no doubt that Abe was an exceptionally rare prime minister with strategic vision. Nevertheless, his negotiations with Russia ended in failure. He held 27 summits with Putin, raising hopes in Japan for the return of the disputed islands. Ultimately, however, those hopes were dashed.

Driven by a desire to break the long-stalled territorial negotiations, Abe repeatedly proclaimed, "Putin and I will sign a peace treaty" — a declaration Putin never reciprocated. By setting deadlines, Abe gave Putin the upper hand.

Changing Tactics

In 2016, Abe introduced a "new approach," proposing an eight-point economic plan and joint activities on the disputed islands. At the time, Western nations were sanctioning Russia over the annexation of Crimea. Yet, Abe's initiative failed to gain traction.

At the 2018 Japan–Russia summit, the two sides agreed to "accelerate peace treaty negotiations based on the 1956 Japan–Soviet Joint Declaration." The declaration stated that Shikotan and Habomai would be handed over to Japan after a peace treaty was signed. This effectively marked a shift in Japan's position, signaling a willingness to accept the return of just two islands.

But instead of responding positively to Japan's concessions, Putin grew emboldened. Interpreting Japan's position as a retreat from its claim to all four islands, he delivered a flat rejection, stating, "There is no territorial issue for Russia." 

Putin also argued that the US–Japan Security Treaty was an obstacle to negotiations. The more Japan conceded, the more assertive Russia became.

US President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump board the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force's helicopter carrier "JS Kaga," welcomed by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Akie Abe on May 28, 2019, Yokosuka, Kanagawa. (©Kyodo)

Abe and Trump's Shared Goals

Both Abe and Trump share a strategic goal: resolving disputes with Russia to shift focus toward what they perceive as a larger threat — China. This approach echoes President Nixon's 1970s move to normalize ties with China while isolating the Soviet Union. Today, some analysts even refer to the approach as a "reverse Nixon" strategy.

While the strategy itself is not without merit — every diplomatic overture has potential value — it faces a fundamental difference. During the Nixon era, ideological tensions and border clashes had already divided China and the Soviet Union. Today, China and Russia proclaim a "no-limits" friendship — one that borders on a quasi-military alliance. Their shared interest in challenging the Western-led international order tightly binds them.

A reverse Nixon strategy is thus an exceptionally difficult diplomatic maneuver. Rushing a deal on Ukraine risks encouraging China to act on Taiwan — a consequence the world cannot afford to ignore.

RELATED:

(Read the analysis in Japanese.)

Author: Ryosuke Endo, Foreign News Editor and Editorial Writer, The Sankei Shimbun

このページを 日本語 で読む

Leave a Reply