Another week, another deadline: Timeline of Trump's promises to end Russia's war on Ukraine
Last Monday, Trump dramatically shortened his previous 50-day ultimatum, giving Russia '10 to 12 days' to make progress toward peace or face tougher sanctions.
Sources close to the Kremlin say Putin is unlikely to bow to Trump's threats, believing Russia holds the upper hand in the war and that the potential benefits of improved ties with Washington do not outweigh his military aims.
Still, an agreement has been reached for Putin and Trump to meet 'in the coming days' to discuss a ceasefire - a first since Joe Biden met with Putin in Geneva in 2021.
The talks follow a three-hour meeting between Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff and Putin in Moscow.
Trump has made a meeting between Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky - which would be a first since the invasion began in February 2022 - a condition of a US-Russia meeting. So far, Putin has not conceded.
Having repeatedly vowed to end the war 'within 24 hours' of taking up office, Trump now faces mounting pressure as his deadlines slip and Putin shows no sign of backing down.
But his growing 'disappointment' in Putin and sanction threats suggest his patience is wearing thin.
Here, The Independent looks at the times Trump has set deadlines for Russia:
On the campaign trail
While campaigning for a second term in office, Trump said dozens of times he would end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of returning to the White House.
He repeatedly asserted he would have the war 'settled' if he became president again, including at both presidential debates of 2024.
CNN has counted at least 53 occasions between March 2023 and October 2024 that Trump made such comments.
20 January, Inauguration Day
Trump reiterated his desire to end the war when he was inaugurated, although no explicit deadline was given.
'Our power will stop all wars and bring a new spirit of unity to a world that has been angry, violent, and totally unpredictable,' the US President said in his Inaugural Address.
Later that day, he discussed Putin to reporters: 'I mean, he's grinding it out, but most people thought that war would have been over in one week, and now we're into three years. So he can't be thrilled, [it's] not making him look very good.'
22 January, the first 48 hours
By 22 January, Trump had not spoken to Putin since he was sworn in but he said his aides were working to arrange a conversation.
He threatened unspecified sanctions on Moscow if Putin didn't come to the negotiating table 'soon'. In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump said he was 'not looking to hurt Russia' and expressed 'love' for the Russian people.
The president boasted of his 'very good relationship' with Putin – who in 2016 ordered what the Department of Justice called a 'sweeping and systematic' effort to interfere in the presidential election on Trump's behalf. Trump has repeatedly claims that interference in the election is a 'hoax'.
'All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE,' Trump said.
Russia's deputy UN ambassador Dmitry Polyanskiy said Moscow would need to see what Trump's definition of a 'deal' would look like before coming to the negotiating table.
12 February, Putin-Trump call
Trump said he spoke to Putin and agreed to 'immediately' start talks on ending Ukraine war in the two leaders' first direct exchange since the invasion.
He claimed Putin agreed to closely cooperate and host official visits, and that their teams would begin negotiations right away.
The call marked a break-away from the Biden administration policy to not discuss Ukraine without Kyiv's presence. He said he later spoke with Zelensky but did not commit to making Ukraine an equal participant to US negotiations with Russia.
It came as his defence secretary announced an end to longstanding US policy supporting Ukrainian membership in NATO.
In response, Zelensky maintained a brave face, saying he had a 'meaningful conversation' with Trump and that Kyiv was ready to 'work together at a team level'. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Putin emphasised the need to remove the war's 'root causes' but that settlement could be reached through peace talks.
28 February, The Oval Office meeting
By month's end and moments after saying he wished to be remembered as a 'peacekeeper,' Trump berated Zelensky in the tense Oval Office meeting, as press and stunned diplomats looked on.
With support from his deputy, JD Vance - who repeatedly pressed Zelensky on whether he'd ever said 'thank you' for US military assistance - Trump condemned the Ukrainian leader as 'disrespectful' and called off a minerals deal he had touted as a step toward peace.
Claiming to be 'caught in the middle', he cited Zelensky's 'hatred' for Putin as a major obstacle to ending the war.
Trump suspended military aid to Ukraine on 3 March. The next day, Zelensky extended an olive branch to Trump and said the showdown was 'regrettable' and remained committed to cooperating over a peace deal.
14 March, '24-hour promise was sarcastic'
Trump claimed he was 'being a little bit sarcastic' when he repeatedly said as a candidate that he would end the war within 24 hours.
In the following days he spoke with both Zelensky and Putin on successive days.
In one call on 18 March, Putin refused to back Trump's suggested full 30-day ceasefire but agreed not to target Ukraine's energy infrastructure.
The next day, Trump proposed that Zelensky consider handing over ownership of Ukraine's power plants to the U.S. for security - an idea Zelensky strongly rebutted.
14 April, Trump blames everyone for no deal
By 14 April, Trump blamed everyone: Zelensky, Putin and Biden.
'That's a war that should have never been allowed to start and Biden could have stopped it and Zelensky could have stopped it and Putin should have never started it,' Trump said.
He proceeded to alternate blame between Zelensky and Putin. On 23 April, Trump said Zelensky was prolonging the 'killing field' after pushing back on ceding Crimea to Russia as part of a potential peace plan. He added that Zelensky's stance was 'very harmful' to talks and that a deal had been close.
The next day, he urged Putin to stop after Russia's deadly barrage of assaults on Kyiv - at the time it was the biggest attack since the summer before. 'I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing. Vladimir, STOP! 5000 soldiers a week are dying,' Trump said in a post on his Truth Social platform. 'Lets get the Peace Deal DONE!'
Rubio warned the US may abandon Ukraine peace talks if progress was not made in the coming days.
28 May, two-week deadline
Asked about Russia's escalating violence in Ukraine, Trump appeared to issue a two-week deadline for Vladimir Putin to demonstrate he actually wants to end the war.
Pressed on whether he thought Putin wanted to end the war, Trump said: 'I can't tell you that, but I'll let you know in about two weeks.'
'Within two weeks. We're gonna find out whether or not (Putin is) tapping us along or not. And if he is, we'll respond a little bit differently.'
The comments came as the Kremlin ramped up its attacks on Ukraine, including some of the deadliest attacks of the war and were a sign of Trump's growing frustration at the lack of efforts to achieve peace.
14 July, 50-day deadline
Trump announced the US could impose 'very severe' secondary tariffs, potentially 100 per cent, on Russia if the war in Ukraine is not concluded within 50 days.
He expressed strong disappointment with Russian President Putin, accusing him of being 'all talk' and condemning Russia's attacks on Ukrainian civilian targets.
While the US does not have a current trade relationship with Russia, following Biden's sanctions, secondary tariffs aimed to punish countries buying Russian oil. China and India are among the biggest purchasers and refine the oil for export elsewhere.
But rather than be spooked, the Russian stock market rose by 2.7 per cent as the country had expected tougher sanctions.
28 July, shortens deadline 10-12 days
Trump again said he is 'very disappointed' in Putin and that he's cutting Moscow's 50-day deadline to avoid secondary sanctions on Russian oil to between 10 and 12 days from then, unless Putin ends the war.
Speaking alongside Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer on the steps of his Turnberry golf resort in Scotland, Trump complained that Putin had too often talked a good game about wanting to reach a ceasefire in the conflict only to resume bombing civilian targets in short order.
As Trump grew significantly frustrated with Putin in recent weeks, he gave him until Friday 8 August to make progress toward peace in Ukraine or face tougher sanctions.
However, the day before the deadline the Kremlin said Putin would be meeting with Trump next week.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
Netanyahu's new plan for Gaza City will be the end of him
Last night, from my apartment in Tel Aviv, which overlooks Hostages Square – a rallying point for relatives of the Israeli captives – I watched the protesters against Benjamin Netanyahu, whose calls for an immediate ceasefire have become a permanent fixture. When news broke of his plan to take over Gaza City and further extend the war, the commotion increased. My dog Pippa – who is half Corgi, half Jack Russell – insisted we go down. It wasn't quite the mass demonstration one would expect, more an expression of the depleted energy levels of a fatigued Israeli public. But there was a palpable combination of anger and resolve – and it felt like it could be the beginning of something. Could Netanyahu's reckless decision to 'demilitarise' and occupy the Gaza Strip, involving a fresh round of ferocious fighting, prove to be the trigger for a fierce and sustained backlash? Could this be what eventually forces him out of office? If so, it will have been a long time coming. First, there was the debilitating trauma of the October 7 Hamas terror attack in 2023 – undoubtedly the worst calamity and darkest day in Israel's history. Then came the profound humiliation and dejection of learning with horror about the more than 200 hostages held in Gaza tunnels. Shortly after came Netanyahu's intransigent and depraved refusal to take responsibility and be held accountable for what had happened under his watch and, to a large extent, as a result of his policies. Then there was his rancorous dismissal of the IDF chief of the general staff, his acrimonious firing of the head of the Shin Bet Security Agency, the repeated protraction of the war with different pretexts, the war's expansion into Lebanon, Syria and Iran, and his current attempt to force out the attorney general. It has all helped create an aura of an ongoing national crisis. And still, none of that drove a million people onto the streets. But now comes the confluence of a decision to extend the war indefinitely by occupying Gaza with a cynical, politically and morally corrupt decision to codify the exemption of thousands of ultra-Orthodox Jews from military service. The question is, where is the Israeli public now? When will all these trajectories converge to form a critical public mass that says: Enough is enough, this will not pass, not in our name? If you ask the demonstrators in Tel Aviv last night, where I was, the answer is 'now'. But if you looked around, there were thousands, not hundreds of thousands – and that is not nearly enough. Any March of Folly -type decision to take full military control of Gaza City will not be accepted or tolerated by the public, especially if it involves the inevitable sacrificing of the hostages and suffering casualties in a war that seems less and less sensible. Families of those being held are opposed, and army reservists are failing to sign up in disgust. Netanyahu's latest move has vindicated those – a majority of Israelis, according to polls – who believe the war had no clear and coherent political objectives, that his military means were never aligned with strategic goals, that the war was protracted artificially and needlessly for political survival, and that what the public believed to be a just war was upended and Israel turned into an ostracised villain in the eyes of the world. It is important to understand the Israeli psyche in order to understand the absence of a broader public outcry. A majority of Israelis may detest Netanyahu – but the inclination, incentive, impetus and energy to protest during a war was always relatively low. It is 'un-Israeli' to do so. There have been several stages in the evolution of the public mood regarding the war. Initial shock turned into fury and anger toward Netanyahu. But this never matured into mass demonstrations because Israelis are patriots, the military is a people's military and when there's a war, you don't protest. That's the default political-cultural reaction. The one constant feature was the willingness and persistence in protesting for the release of hostages held by Hamas, a movement that grew with Netanyahu's callous disregard for their fate. October 7 2023 was a day of infamy – on such a scale that the public at large was devastated into paralysis. The hostility, animosity and disdain for Netanyahu reached record numbers in the immediate aftermath of the indelible catastrophe. It is important to remember that October 2023 followed a year of mass demonstrations against Netanyahu's illiberal constitutional coup and his open war against the judiciary and 'deep state elites'. First, there was a natural desire for retribution and revenge, manifested in a massive retaliation. Consistent polls throughout 2024 and into the first half of 2025 showed that 70 per cent thought Netanyahu is responsible for the debacle, 70 per cent thought he should resign, 65 per cent wanted an early election. As Netanyahu, commensurate with his constitutional coup, refused to be held accountable, tried to dump the entire responsibility on the military which 'failed me', the intelligence organisations that were surprised, deep state elites that 'weakened Israeli society' (his words) and was increasingly perceived as prosecuting and protracting the war for political expediency, the public grew restive, furious and frustrated. Now, the conditions seem ripe for a public uproar. This will be fuelled by the knowledge that the IDF is adamantly opposed to this pseudo-plan to occupy Gaza. The next few days will be critical. If the IDF chief of staff, Lt-General Eyal Zamir, continues to divulge his reservations, the public may wake up. On the other hand, never discount the power of fatigue and resignation.
The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
Man filmed telling rioters to kill cops on Jan 6 is now working at Trump's DOJ
A man who was filmed telling rioters to kill police officers on January 6 is now working at Donald Trump 's Department of Justice. Bodycam footage shows Jared Lane Wise shouting at police officers in 2021, telling them that they are 'disgusting'. 'You are the Nazi. You are the Gestapo and you can't see it because you're chasing your pension,' the former FBI agent cried, before shouting: 'F*** them! Kill them!' Wise is now working as a senior adviser in the DOJ, and in a statement shared with The Independent by the White House, the government department said it 'appreciates his contributions to our team'.
Reuters
27 minutes ago
- Reuters
Trump administration eyes military action against some cartels
Aug 8 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump's administration can use the military to go after drug cartels that have been designated as global terrorist organizations and has directed the Pentagon to prepare options, U.S. officials said. The Trump administration designated Tren de Aragua, the Sinaloa Cartel and other drug cartels as global terrorist organizations in February, as Trump stepped up immigration enforcement against alleged gang members. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Thursday the administration could now use the military to go after cartels. "It allows us to now target what they're operating and to use other elements of American power, intelligence agencies, the Department of Defense, whatever... to target these groups if we have an opportunity to do it," Rubio said. "We have to start treating them as armed terrorist organizations, not simply drug dealing organizations." The New York Times reported on Friday that Trump had secretly signed a directive to begin using military force against the groups. A U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed that move but said military action against the designated groups did not appear imminent and it was unclear exactly what type of operations they would carry out. A second U.S. official said the authority would, among other things, give the U.S. Navy the authority to carry out actions at sea and could include drug interdiction operations. The U.S. military has already been increasing its airborne surveillance of Mexican drug cartels to collect intelligence to determine how to best counter their activities. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said on Friday that members of the U.S. military would not be entering Mexican territory. Sheinbaum said her government had been informed of a coming order but that it had nothing to do with the U.S. military operating on Mexican soil. Trump has previously offered to send U.S. troops to Mexico to help Sheinbaum combat drug trafficking, an offer Sheinbaum said in May she had refused. He has said publicly the U.S. would take unilateral military action if Mexico failed to dismantle drug cartels. Trump considered military action in Mexico during his first term. His former defense secretary, Mark Esper, wrote in his memoir that Trump asked at least twice in 2020 if the military could "shoot missiles into Mexico to destroy drug labs." Esper wrote that he replied that it would be illegal and an act of war.
