Putin causes trouble and Trump criticizes him, but after the criticism, Trump does not take substantive punitive actions. This cycle of response continues to showcase the power dynamics between the US and Russia. An explanation is needed as to why Trump cannot utilize his relationship with Putin effectively.
On May 26th, U.S. President Donald Trump attended a Memorial Day ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia. Despite criticizing Russian President Vladimir Putin as “crazy,” analysis indicates that Trump refrains from imposing sanctions or other penalties on Russia.
The New York Times reported on May 26th that although Trump condemns Putin’s violent acts, he does not hold Russia accountable. The newspaper detailed that Trump expressed uncertainty about Putin’s actions and later criticized him as “completely crazy.”
Public criticism of Putin by Trump is unusual, especially following Russia’s significant bombing on Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital. The response came shortly after Trump praised a two-hour call with Putin as “great” and predicted imminent peace negotiations, leaving Trump perceived as backstabbed when hostilities resumed.
This pattern is not new, as Trump previously boasted of good relations with Putin, only to have Russia attack Ukraine with missiles and drones soon after. Despite posting a plea to Putin to “stop,” Trump did not follow through with punitive measures.
Trump has not taken decisive actions against Russia or joined EU financial sanctions, even halting arms support to Ukraine. He condemns Putin’s provocations but does not enforce strict penalties, a pattern familiar to experts and former officials.
Describing the war as Europe’s issue, Trump suggested the possibility of withdrawing U.S. involvement. His contemplation of sanctions surfaced as Putin repeatedly presented unacceptable conditions for peace.
Trump vacillates when crucial decisions, like participating in European economic sanctions against Russia, need to be made. The geopolitical consultancy Eurasia Group’s head, Ian Bremmer, noted that Russia dismisses a ceasefire while Trump withdraws, deprioritizing U.S. support for Ukraine.
The NYT evaluated that the repeated odd interactions between Trump and Putin underscore that ending the war rests solely with their leadership. However, post a U.S.-Russia call, Trump maintained that the war’s resolution is in the hands of the Russian and Ukrainian leaders.
Following meetings with leaders from Germany, France, Italy, and Finland, Trump shifted to thinking Putin, feeling victorious, would lead the narrative. Officials reported Trump had no intention to pressure Russia with economic sanctions.
Reports also suggested Trump echoed Vice President JD Vance’s sentiment about exiting negotiations, indicating a withdrawal from the conflict. While Trump previously promised European leaders to participate in economic sanctions against Russia, he showed intentions to back out.
NYT argued that explanations are needed regarding Trump’s inability to leverage his relationship with Putin to end the war. As a candidate, Trump critiqued Joe Biden and Barack Obama for being dismissed by Putin, claiming he could end the war within 24 hours of taking office. This claim, NYT suggested, should be revisited post-election.
Last weekend, Trump said he felt uneasy about Putin, acknowledging their past rapport but denouncing the violence committed. He stated that if Putin overtook Ukraine entirely, it might lead to Russia’s downfall.
In response to Trump’s remarks, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov labeled them as “emotional reactions,” as reported by NYT.