July 3, 2025

Institute for the Study of War: Putin rejects Trump’s proposal to end Ukraine war

Institute for the Study of War

Russian President Vladimir Putin rejected US President Donald Trump’s call for a quick peace in Ukraine during a phone call with Trump on July 3.[1] Russian Presidential Aide Yuriy Ushakov claimed on July 3 that Trump once again raised the issue of a quick end to Russia’s war in Ukraine and that Putin claimed that Russia continues its efforts for a negotiated end to the war. Ushakov claimed, however, that Putin reiterated that Russia “will achieve its goals” and “eliminat[e] the root causes” that led to the war and that “Russia will not back down from these goals,” essentially emphasizing that Russia will continue its war on its own terms. Ushakov claimed that Putin and Trump discussed the possibility of a third round of Ukrainian–Russian negotiations in Istanbul and agreed that peace negotiations will continue in a bilateral format at an unspecified date. Ushakov claimed that Putin and Trump did not discuss the recent US decision to halt military aid shipments to Ukraine but discussed bilateral economic projects, including in the energy and space spheres.

Putin’s stated commitment to his goals in Ukraine, including eliminating the so-called “root causes” of the war directly contradicts his claim that Russia supports meaningful negotiations to end the war. Putin and other Kremlin officials have repeatedly referred to the need for any future peace settlement to eliminate the alleged “root causes” of the war to allude to Russia’s unwavering demands for regime change in Ukraine, Ukrainian neutrality, and changes to NATO’s foundational open-door policy.[2] ISW continues to assess that Russia remains uninterested in good-faith peace negotiations to end the war. Putin’s statement that Russia will not back down from its goals further demonstrates Putin’s willingness to prolong the war in Ukraine and achieve his goals through military means should Russia be unable to force Ukraine to capitulate through diplomatic means — in direct contrast to Trump’s calls for a speedy end to the war. The Kremlin has continually indicated in recent weeks that there are no plans yet for a third round of bilateral negotiations in Istanbul, so it is unclear if or when bilateral Ukrainian–Russian negotiations will resume.[3] ISW continues to assess that Russia will likely leverage any future negotiations to try to extract concessions from Ukraine and the United States while Russian forces continue efforts to secure additional gains on the battlefield through creeping and highly attritional advances. Russia previously exploited peace talks with Ukraine in Istanbul to obfuscate its own uninterest in meaningful negotiations, and any future Ukrainian–Russian negotiations on anyone’s terms but Kyiv’s are very unlikely to bring about Trump’s desired expeditious end to the war and just and lasting peace.

Details about the recent US suspension of aid to Ukraine remain unclear. Journalists for National Public Radio (NPR) and the Economist stated on July 2 and 3 that the United States halted aid shipments to Ukraine in Poland that included 30 PAC-3 interceptors for Patriot air defense systems; 8,496 155mm high explosive howitzer munitions; 142 AGM-114 Hellfire air-to-ground missiles; 252 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS) rockets; 25 missiles for Stinger man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS); 125 AT-4 grenade launchers; and 92 AIM air-to-air missiles.[4] TheEconomist reported on July 3 that the Pentagon turned around planes carrying air defense interceptors and other US military aid to Ukraine on June 30 and July 1, suspending deliveries.[5] US Department of State Spokesperson Tammy Bruce stated on July 3 that Trump has indicated his “remaining commitment” to US provisions of Patriot interceptors to Ukraine.[6] Bruce stated that the United States “hasn’t paused” sending weapons to Ukraine but that the recent suspension is “one aspect, one situation, one event that has been changed.” Chief Pentagon Spokesperson Sean Parnell stated on July 2 that the US Department of Defense (DoD) “paused” weapons shipments to Ukraine to conduct a “capability review” to ensure that US military aid aligns with the DoD’s defense priorities while preserving US military readiness.[7] Parnell stated that DoD recommendations about military aid to Ukraine are consistent with US President Donald Trump’s stated goal of ending the war in Ukraine.

A Ukrainian strike killed the deputy commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy in Kursk Oblast, and an unknown actor may have assassinated a high-ranking Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) official in Moscow City. The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) acknowledged on July 3 that Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy Major General Mikhail Gudkov died on July 2 during combat operations in the Kursk Oblast border area.[8] Gudkov previously served as commander of the 155th Naval Infantry Brigade (Pacific Fleet), and Russian President Vladimir Putin promoted him to deputy commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy in March 2025.[9] Primorsky Krai Governor Oleg Kozhemyako reported on July 3 that Captain Second Rank Nariman Shikhaliev died alongside Gudkov.[10] Gudkov’s obituary from the “Typhoon” All-Russian Organization of Naval Infantry stated that Ukrainian forces launched a missile strike against the command post of the 155th Naval Infantry Brigade near Korenevo, Kursk Oblast, on July 2, killing over 10 servicemembers, including Gudkov and several senior officers.[11] Ukrainian military observer Yuriy Butusov reported that the strike killed Gudkov’s deputy and 20 other Russian servicemembers.[12] Radio Svoboda stated that “unconfirmed official reports” suggest that a Ukrainian HIMARS strike killed Gudkov.[13] Telegram channel Nextaadditionally claimed on July 3 that there are unconfirmed reports that Alexei Komkov, head of the FSB’s Fifth Directorate, which is officially tasked with overseeing operational information and international relations, died after a car exploded in central Moscow City.[14] ISW cannot confirm the death of Komkov or the actor responsible for the reported car explosion in Moscow City.

Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) reportedly assassinated the former occupation mayor of Luhansk City. Kremlin newswire TASS reported on July 3 that former occupation mayor of Luhansk City Manolis Pilavov died in an explosion in occupied Luhansk City.[15] Ukrainian outlet Suspilne reported on July 3 that sources stated that the SBU killed Pilavov by detonating an explosive device.[16] Pilavov was the occupation mayor of Luhansk City from 2014 to 2023.

Ukraine’s Western allies continue to provide military aid to Ukraine, but the United States remains the only Ukrainian partner that can provide certain critical weapons systems – especially air defenses — at scale and quickly. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced on July 3 that Ukraine signed a memorandum on a long-term strategic partnership with US autonomous system engineering company Swift Beat, agreeing to produce hundreds of thousands of interceptor drones in 2025 that are capable of shooting down Russian Shahed drones and to expand production further in 2026.[17] Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov also announced on July 1 that Ukraine is launching a joint arms production program with its international Ramstein format partners to produce weapons for the Ukrainian military in Ukraine and abroad.[18] Swedish Defense Minister Pål Jonson stated on July 3 that Sweden is allocating an additional 1.5 billion Swedish kroner (roughly $156 million) to purchase over 10 new Archer artillery barrels, augment long-range strike and underwater capabilities, and support unspecified logistical support for Ukraine.[19] The Latvian Ministry of Defense (MoD) announced on July 2 that Belgium and Turkey joined the UK- and Latvian-led international drone coalition.[20] The Latvian MoD also announced on July 1 that it approved the transfer of 42 Patria armored personnel carriers (APCs) and other military equipment to Ukraine.[21] UK defense and security enterprise Prevail Partners announced on July 2 that it launched a joint partnership with Ukrainian drone manufacturer Skyeton International to increase production of long-range drones as part of efforts to supply drones to Ukraine and provide the UK with modern military equipment.[22] Unspecified German security forces told German media outlet Die Welt on July 1 that Germany signed a contract to finance the production of over 500 Antonov-196 (AN-196) ”Lyutyi” long-range drones for Ukraine.[23] ISW continues to assess that US aid to Ukraine, particularly Patriot air defense systems and interceptors, is critical to Ukraine’s ability to protect its defense industrial base (DIB) and safeguard the capabilities it obtains from its partners in the face of long-range Russian strikes.[24] Such US-provided systems are required soh that Ukraine’s DIB can grow to be largely self-sufficient and able to sustain Ukraine’s materiel requirements with domestic production.

Key Takeaways:

  • Russian President Vladimir Putin rejected US President Donald Trump’s call for a quick peace in Ukraine during a phone call with Trump on July 3.
  • Putin’s stated commitment to his goals in Ukraine, including eliminating the so-called “root causes” of the war directly contradicts his claim that Russia supports meaningful negotiations to end the war.
  • Details about the recent US suspension of aid to Ukraine remain unclear.
  • A Ukrainian strike killed the deputy commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy in Kursk Oblast, and an unknown actor may have assassinated a high-ranking Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) official in Moscow City.
  • Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) reportedly assassinated the former occupation mayor of Luhansk City.
  • Ukraine’s Western allies continue to provide military aid to Ukraine, but the United States remains the only Ukrainian partner that can provide certain critical weapons systems – especially air defenses — at scale and quickly.
  • Ukrainian forces recently advanced near Borova and Siversk and in western Zaporizhia Oblast. Russian forces recently advanced near Kupyansk, Toretsk, and Velyka Novosilka and in western Zaporizhia Oblast. 
Share the Post:

Wilson Center

Forced displacement represents one of the most pressing humanitarian issues of our time. Individuals and families, torn from the fabric of their communities, find themselves navigating a world of uncertainty, often without basic necessities or a clear path to safety. There are currently some 110 million forced displaced, and this number is growing by 10 million each year!

At the heart of this crisis are the political triggers. Armed conflicts, ethnic or religious persecutions, and systemic human rights abuses force millions to flee their homes in terror. Many are displaced within their own national boundaries, while others seek asylum abroad. If these factors change as a result of political shifts at home or the pressures from abroad, they can return to their homes. Forced displacement is thus different from environmentally driven displacement, as victims of climate change may never be able to return to their homes.

The ramifications of any sort of displacement are profound, not just for those directly affected, but also for host communities and countries. Overburdened infrastructures, socio-economic strains, and cultural tensions can arise, necessitating comprehensive strategies to foster harmony and integration. Yet the root causes of forced displacement can be remedied with a concerted focus by local players and international diplomacy.

Organizations like Refugees International play a crucial role in this arena, advocating for the rights and needs of the displaced, conducting on-the-ground assessments, and influencing policymakers to take informed actions. Their relentless work underscores the gravity of the situation and the urgency ofinternational cooperation. But they, too, are overwhelmed by the rapid expansion of the crisis.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), with its core principles centered on the protection of civilians during conflicts, plays a pivotal role in this discourse. Yet, despite clear legal frameworks, compliance remains
inconsistent. This initiative emphasizes the importance of upholding and reinforcing these international standards.

It’s not just about recognizing the problem; it’s about active engagement. We urge governments, organizations, and individuals to prioritize the rights and needs of the forced displaced. Through collective efforts, informed policies, and sustained advocacy, we can shift the narrative from passive acknowledgment to proactive intervention.