What Trump Doesn't Understand About Putin
Russian leader Vladimir Putin looks increasingly cornered.
The Ukrainians just staged a stunning drone attack on strategic bombers in far-flung Russian air bases. Putin's battered troops are struggling to gain significant territory in Ukraine, and the frontline has barely shifted in two years. His economy is a mixed bag, with inflation slowing growth and other danger signs flashing. President Donald Trump, who has long admired Putin's brash leadership style, is now questioning the Russian leader's sanity and urging him to 'STOP!' his attacks on Ukraine. And U.S. lawmakers are mulling a heavy new sanctions and tariffs package aimed at Moscow — the type one senator describes as 'bone-crushing.'
Given all these challenges, why won't Putin abandon his goal of conquering Ukraine? I have been asking former U.S. officials versions of this question in recent days. Finally, I realized it's the wrong question — and the wrong way to think about this whole war.
Putin will never abandon his ambition of conquering Ukraine, and convincing him to do so shouldn't be the aim of Ukraine's global supporters. Instead, the goal should be to make it impossible for Putin to fulfill that ambition. In simpler terms: You can't make Putin walk away from Ukraine; you have to put Ukraine out of his reach.
Trump and some of his top aides do not seem to understand this about Putin. They've sent mixed signals about their views of Russia's strongman, with Trump acting as if the carrots of economic deals and Truth Social posts can sway him.
With new sanctions on the table, many Russia watchers hope Trump will seize the moment to show Putin that even if he can't control his ambitions, he can make it too painful for Putin to achieve them. But those same analysts warned that new sanctions alone won't make Putin back down. Neither will continued military aid to Ukraine, nor tough-talking posts on social media.
Showing Putin that he absolutely cannot subsume Ukraine will require all these tactics and more. It will also require patience.
'That's why you do these missions, like Ukraine taking out some of their strategic bombers. That hurts. It's expensive,' said Andrea Kendall-Taylor, a former U.S. intelligence official. 'Can we impose enough costs that he eventually says, 'I cannot do this indefinitely?''
I'm not the first person to posit that Putin will never change his belief that Ukraine belongs to Russia. Putin's own writings make clear that he's convinced Kyiv must be under Russia's thumb if Moscow wants to achieve new heights on the global stage. Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken suggested Putin's view is 'theological.' One analyst has argued that the West's best strategy on the war may require waiting until Putin dies.
A White House official, in response to a request for comment from the administration, told me Trump 'has always been tough on Putin.' The official, whom was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomatic issues, added: 'This president's foreign policy is unique in that he can be tough on our adversaries, but he is simultaneously able to look anyone in the eye to try to deliver peace.'
But many of Trump's words and actions indicate that he has limited appreciation for how hard-core Putin is about pursuing Ukraine.
During the campaign, Trump declared numerous times that he could end the war in his first 24 hours back in office — a claim that he now says was in jest but which nonetheless cast Putin as easy to persuade. In the months since, the president has seemed bewildered that Putin isn't easing up on Ukraine. Trump recently said, with a tone of surprise, that the Russian leader has gone 'absolutely CRAZY.' Trump also seems frustrated with Putin's lack of seriousness in ceasefire talks.
The tough talk from Trump is striking given his past efforts to win Putin over. But his methods are not always consistent. Trump came across as passive in a social media post Wednesday after speaking to Putin, saying the Russian made it clear he'd have to retaliate against the Ukraine drone strikes. 'It was a good conversation, but not a conversation that will lead to immediate Peace,' Trump wrote, not saying if he'd urged Putin to avoid escalation.
Comments and moves by others in the administration also suggest a lack of clarity about the Kremlin boss, who first invaded Ukraine more than a decade ago.
Vice President JD Vance's dismissal of Ukrainian concerns that Putin will not uphold a peace deal — most famously in that awkward Oval Office meeting in February with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy — indicates that he doesn't fully grasp the depth of Putin's desires. It also likely boosted Russian confidence that its efforts to drive wedges between Washington and its allies, including Ukraine and the European Union, are working.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio's assertion that the United States may simply walk away from trying to resolve the crisis didn't exactly help Kyiv, either. It suggests the U.S. lacks patience and that the Russians should forge ahead in seeking a decisive edge in the war. And if there's one thing Putin believes he has on his side, it's time.
What exactly is Putin's breaking point, or the point at which he'll give up on taking over Ukraine?
'This kind of stuff — it's very hard to quantify. It's the psychology of one man,' Eddie Fishman, a former State Department official who dealt with Russia sanctions, told me.
Some of these Russia specialists said Putin is likely aware of the concept of 'TACO Trump' — the 'Trump Always Chickens Out' notion that's swept Wall Street and other realms. Trump's policy inconsistency and his frequent backtracking, such as on tariffs, may suggest to Putin that the U.S. president will try to drive a hard bargain but ultimately cave, giving Moscow wiggle room.
The sanctions bill is a test of sorts for Trump and whether he truly understands Putin's mindset. It has garnered support from the majority of U.S. senators and includes harsh provisions aimed at choking off Russia's last major source of income: its energy exports. The legislation would impose 500 percent tariffs on countries that continue buying Russian oil, gas, uranium and other materials.
It's questionable whether the 500 percent figure will survive talks between the White House and Capitol Hill. The tariffs would land on major U.S. trading partners in Europe, China and India and wreak havoc on the global economy. Still, whatever version of the bill survives could deal a major blow to Russia.
If Trump signs the bill, the Kremlin should worry because it will mean he's not afraid to escalate things with Moscow. But if he signs the bill and then delays, waives or otherwise doesn't enforce the sanctions and tariffs involved, Putin will believe Trump is backing down yet again and that he can take advantage of the American leader's capriciousness.
If Trump also fails to take other meaningful steps to help Ukraine, especially on the military aid front, it could further boost Putin's confidence that he and his troops can ultimately overpower Kyiv.
Of course, the Kremlin chief could still agree to peace talks — he already has, in a way, though he tends to send powerless underlings to the sessions in his place. Those motions seem to be about buying time with Trump, a self-styled dealmaking expert who is eager for a compromise. Even if Putin agrees to a sustained ceasefire or other type of pause in the fighting, Russia analysts I spoke to believe he'll use the downtime to regroup and eventually make another move against Kyiv.
One Trump tactic unlikely to work on Putin is promising him economic deals, should he come to terms with Ukraine. To be fair, Putin himself has raised this prospect in a bid to get sanctions relief from Trump, who largely sees the world through a business lens.
The reality is that the Russian economy has been transformed since the February 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It is now heavily fueled by the war itself. There are signs that this cannot go on forever, but it has continued longer than many Western officials and analysts predicted.
Putin is also likely aware that even if Trump were to lift all U.S. sanctions on Russia, American businesses are unlikely to jump into the Russian market anytime soon. There are too many risks, including the possibility that a future U.S. president could reimpose the sanctions. Besides, European sanctions are likely to remain in place.
'Given sanctions and export controls that need to be lifted, not to mention the reputational risk and the operating environment in Russia, it's hard to see that Western companies would be rushing to go back to that market,' Randi Levinas, a former chief operating officer of the now-dissolved U.S.-Russia Business Council, told me.
Putin is in a corner. But while everyone is watching him, he's still got his eye on Ukraine — all of Ukraine.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
7 minutes ago
- The Hill
Van Hollen on Abrego Garcia's return to US: ‘A victory for the Constitution'
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) celebrated the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man who was mistakenly deported and detained in El Salvador's CECOT prison, calling it 'a victory' for the rule of law. The Trump administration doubled down on the deportation, accusing Abrego Garcia, who illegally immigrated to the U.S. from El Salvador in 2011 but was later protected from removal to his home country, of having gang ties. His legal team has denied these allegations and urged for his return to the U.S. On Friday, Attorney General Pam Bondi, after months of fighting against Abrego Garcia's return in court, announced that he was transported back to U.S. soil to face criminal charges stemming from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee. 'This is a victory for due process. It's a victory for the Constitution. It should not have taken this long. I mean … the Trump administration dragged its feet for a very long time and ignored a 9 to 0 order from the Supreme Court,' Van Hollen said during a Friday appearance on MSNBC. 'But it's important that Abrego Garcia now come home and have his due process rights upheld in a court of law,' he added. The Maryland lawmaker visited Abrego Garcia while he was detained overseas to check on his well being and champion his release from El Salvadoran custody, which White House officials originally said would never happen. Van Hollen on Friday said that the court battle Abrego Garcia will now face should have been launched prior to his removal. 'If they're now going to take this case into the courts, as they should have, you know, from the beginning, before they just took him off the streets of Maryland and deposited him in a gulag in El Salvador, then that is — that is the due process that we've been fighting for,' he said. 'And, again, not just for his case, but for others. And — and I think that Americans understand that everybody deserves to have their rights, you know, respected. That's what the Constitution is for.' Abrego Garcia's attorney said on Friday that the criminal case is just another attempt to persecute his client. 'This shows that they were playing games with the court all along. Due process means the chance to defend yourself before you're punished, not after. This is an abuse of power, not justice,' attorney Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg previously told The Hill in a statement. 'The government should put him on trial, yes—but in front of the same immigration judge who heard his case in 2019, which is the ordinary manner of doing things, 'to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador,' as the Supreme Court ordered.'

Business Insider
27 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Trump's trade talk delegation is set to face off with China's negotiators in London. Here is what's at stake.
Three top Trump administration economic officials will face off against Chinese negotiators in a renewed effort to break the US-China trade deadlock. Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent, Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer will be meeting China's delegation in London on Monday. "The meeting should go very well," President Donald Trump wrote in a social media post announcing the talks. This coming meeting will be the first official talk between the two countries since they mutually lowered tariffs in a temporary truce on May 12, after talks in Geneva. The renewed talks follow a 90-minute phone call between Trump and China's leader Xi Jinping on Thursday, a rare direct conversation that Trump later described as "very good." According to Trump, the two leaders also agreed to visit each other in person, without providing more details in terms of a timeline. The Chinese Embassy of Washington did not respond to a request for who would be attending this negotiation from its side. The team they sent to Geneva consisted of Vice Premier He Lifeng, Vice Commerce Minister Li Chenggang, and Vice Finance Minister Liao Min. Notably, Li has a Master of Laws from the University of Hamburg in Germany and has been part of China's delegation to the World Trade Organization since 2021. International trade experts previously told Business Insider that much is at stake for both China and the US to strike a deal, or at the very least, continue the truce beyond August 12 when the 90-day tariff pause will expire. "The Trump administration made their job harder because the tariff policies they've implemented are costly to Americans and American companies, and therefore, the market doesn't like it," said Philip Luck, director of the CSIS Economics Program. "They are under a lot of pressure to do things fast." Meanwhile, a lawsuit that threatens to undo all of Trump's tariffs enacted under the IEEPA also looms over negotiations with China. Drew DeLong, lead in geopolitical dynamics practice at Kearney, a global strategy and management consulting firm, told BI that if the court strikes down tariffs before trade deals could come to pass, other routes of imposing tariffs could be more complicated and time-consuming. The White House did not provide Business Insider with any additional comment beyond Trump's Truth Social post.


Boston Globe
29 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Supreme Court allows DOGE team to access Social Security systems with data on millions of Americans
The DOGE victories come amid a messy breakup between the president and the world's richest man that started shortly after Musk's departure from the White House and has included threats to cut government contracts and a call for the president to be impeached. The future of DOGE's work isn't clear without Musk at the helm, but both men have previously said that it will continue its efforts. Advertisement In one case, the high court halted an order from a judge in Maryland that has restricted the team's access to the Social Security Administration under federal privacy laws. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'We conclude that, under the present circumstances, SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work,' the court said in an unsigned order. Conservative lower-court judges have said there's no evidence at this point of DOGE mishandling personal information. The agency holds sensitive data on nearly everyone in the country, including school records, salary details and medical information. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said the court's action creates 'grave privacy risks' for millions of Americans by giving 'unfettered data access to DOGE regardless — despite its failure to show any need or any interest in complying with existing privacy safeguards, and all before we know for sure whether federal law countenances such access.' Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined Jackson's opinion and Justice Elena Kagan said she also would have ruled against the administration. Advertisement The Trump administration But U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander in Maryland found that DOGE's efforts at Social Security amounted to a 'fishing expedition' based on 'little more than suspicion' of fraud, and allowing unfettered access puts Americans' private information at risk. Her ruling did allow access to anonymous data for staffers who have undergone training and background checks, or wider access for those who have detailed a specific need. The Trump administration has said DOGE can't work effectively with those restrictions. Solicitor General D. John Sauer also argued that the ruling is an example of federal judges overstepping their authority and trying to micromanage executive branch agencies. The plaintiffs say it's a narrow order that's urgently needed to protect personal information. An appeals court previously refused to immediately to lift the block on DOGE access, though it split along ideological lines. Conservative judges in the minority said there's no evidence that the team has done any 'targeted snooping' or exposed personal information. Advertisement The lawsuit was originally filed by a group of labor unions and retirees represented by the group Democracy Forward. It's one of more than two dozen lawsuits filed over DOGE's work, which has included deep cuts at federal agencies and large-scale layoffs. The plaintiffs called the high court's order 'a sad day for our democracy and a scary day for millions of people. Elon Musk may have left Washington, D.C., but his impact continues to harm millions of people.' Liz Huston, a spokesperson for the White House, applauded the order. 'The Supreme Court allowing the Trump Administration to carry out commonsense efforts to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse and modernize government information systems is a huge victory for the rule of law.' The nation's court system has been ground zero for pushback to President Donald Trump's sweeping conservative agenda, with hundreds of lawsuits filed challenging policies on everything from immigration to education to mass layoffs of federal workers. In the other DOGE order handed down Friday, the justices extended a pause on orders that would require the team to publicly disclose information about its operations, as part of a lawsuit filed by a government watchdog group. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington argues that DOGE, which has been central to Trump's push to remake the government, is a federal agency and must be subject to the Freedom of Information Act. But the Trump administration says DOGE is just a presidential advisory body aimed at government cost-cutting, which would make it exempt from requests for documents under FOIA. The justices did not decide that issue Friday, but the conservative majority held that U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled too broadly in ordering documents be turned over to CREW. Advertisement Associated Press writers Mark Sherman and Chris Megerian contributed to this report.