讀後心得

On March 18, U.S. President Trump had a phone conversation with Russian President Putin regarding the Ukraine-Russia war. Trump described it as "productive," but in reality, both sides failed to reach a consensus on a ceasefire, only agreeing to pause attacks on energy and infrastructure. After the talks, both Ukraine and Russia continued to blame each other for drone attacks, and former British Prime Minister Johnson criticized Putin for mocking the negotiations. Although the U.S. attempted to facilitate peace talks, Putin remained indifferent to a ceasefire, insisting on Russia's conditions, which included ending support for Ukraine. Before the meeting, Putin attended other events, showing confidence in controlling the negotiations. The conditions he demanded indicated that Russia still hopes to solidify its influence in the region. This phone call seemed more focused on repairing U.S.-Russia bilateral relations; Trump planned to increase sanctions against Russia, but the U.S. later proposed easing some sanctions, reflecting a mindset eager to end the war. In conclusion, Putin’s strategy appears to be delaying negotiations to strengthen his position on the international stage, while the U.S. must respond cautiously to avoid concessions that could trigger a larger crisis.

On March 18, the President of the United States and the President of Russia held a bilateral conversation regarding the ceasefire issue in the war between Ukraine and Russia. This dialogue was deemed "productive," but the actual outcomes were limited to an agreement from both parties to pause attacks on each other's energy and infrastructure. The U.S. and Russia did not reach any further consensus on the details of the ceasefire, making the previously expected "quick end to the war" appear less optimistic than anticipated. In fact, both countries continued to accuse each other of carrying out drone attacks after the conversation. Some have bluntly stated about the result of this call: "The other side is not negotiating; they are mocking us."

The U.S.-Russia conversation has not brought new hope for the situation in Ukraine; instead, it has deepened doubts and criticisms towards the U.S. Many believe that the U.S. has misjudged Putin's perceptions and intentions. Regardless of external evaluations of this dialogue, it is evident that even with U.S. active mediation, Moscow's attitude towards the ceasefire and negotiations remains lukewarm, while the U.S. claim of having a good relationship with Putin seems not to have prompted any goodwill from him. This makes one ponder: What exactly does Putin intend in the negotiations? And is the current U.S. policy towards Russia correct?

Although U.S.-Ukraine relations were once tense due to disputes within the White House, this does not prevent European countries, including Ukraine, from realizing that without U.S. support, Europe cannot resist Russia on its own. Therefore, following recent high-level talks, the Kyiv side accepted the U.S.-proposed 30-day comprehensive ceasefire plan, provided that Russia can be persuaded to agree. Compared to the U.S. urgency to promote a ceasefire, the Russian side appeared calm. Before the scheduled call, Putin attended a meeting in Moscow and even responded easily after nearly an hour of delay, indicating that Russia holds the dominant position in the negotiations. After the conversation, even though Moscow supported peace talks in principle, it still insisted on its original positions and conditions, including ending military aid to Ukraine and stopping forced conscription.

The instigator of the war has always been Russia, which continues to be unwilling to pursue peace. The President of Ukraine has already expressed a willingness to resign in exchange for joining NATO, but Russia has not committed to refraining from invading other regions of Ukraine. Putin's coldness displayed during the peace talks stems from his desire for control over the negotiations and the further bargaining chips that the Belarusian military gains over time. At the same time, even though the ceasefire agreement is nominally supported, Russia does not intend to make substantive concessions. The longer Putin delays the negotiations, the more he can control the pace and dominance of the talks.

For Putin, peace talks are not only an opportunity to restore Russia's standing on the international stage but also a means to consolidate his ruling position. He hopes to elevate his personal international status and domestic prestige through a lengthy negotiation process. What concerns Putin is not the long-term sustained warfare of Russia, but the stability of his own regime. His military actions continuously attempt to emphasize Russia's influence and interests in the region.

The conclusion is that our misjudgment is not of Russia but of that dictator. Many overlook that the substantive support and legitimacy that Putin urgently needs to consolidate his power are the fundamental issues. Through continuous concessions from the West, Putin has not only strengthened his leadership position domestically but also gained more international voice. The people of Ukraine endure the most direct suffering in the war, and they are most aware of the threat Russia poses to them.

If we cannot accurately understand Putin's thoughts and intentions, even if the U.S. raises calls for peace, it may not truly facilitate the achievement of a peace agreement. Future peace negotiations will largely depend on global awareness and vigilance regarding this ongoing war.