Home > Global Politic > Lavrov, Trump and Russia's strategy: How Moscow tries to influence the US on the Ukraine war


Lavrov, Trump and Russia's strategy: How Moscow tries to influence the US on the Ukraine war


Analysis of Sergey Lavrov's tactics in relations with the US, Trump's position and consequences for the Russia-Ukraine war and global politics.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has stated his readiness for both phone talks and face-to-face meetings with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Lavrov emphasized that the US should consider Russia’s vision of how the war it started against Ukraine should end.

Lavrov blames the failed potential meeting between the US and Russian presidents in Budapest on Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and European partners, not himself or the Kremlin, which repeats its maximalist demands. According to Lavrov, the US guaranteed at an Alaska summit that Zelensky would not interfere with the peace process, but ran into difficulties. He also claims that European countries are negatively influencing the Americans.

This rhetoric fits Moscow’s strategy since Donald Trump’s presidency: stress Trump’s constructiveness, ignore US proposals for a ceasefire, and blame Ukraine and Europe for deadlock. Such an approach helped Moscow block new sanctions and slow military assistance to Ukraine for some time.

However, the situation has shifted: after Secretary Rubio spoke with Lavrov and concluded Russia was unyielding, the US cancelled the presidents’ meeting and imposed new sanctions on Russian oil giants. If the war continues, further sanctions are promised, affecting the Russian economy and oligarchs.

Lavrov denies theories about his responsibility for the failed meeting, maintaining his advisory role to Putin on nuclear issues. It is clear that Russian diplomacy continues its current strategy—continuing the war, complimenting Trump and blaming Europe for the conflict’s prolongation.

Nonetheless, this approach is losing effectiveness. While Moscow stubbornly pursues its goals and hopes for Ukraine’s capitulation, protraction brings no real prospects of success. Objectively, Russia would benefit from compromise, as demanded by global shifts, but the Kremlin shows no sign of changing course.