🔗 Share this article

Reports of an upcoming American-Russian leadership summit have been greatly exaggerated, apparently.

Only a few days after President Trump announced he planned to meet Russian President Putin in the Hungarian capital - "within two weeks or so" - the summit has been suspended indefinitely.

A initial get-together by the both countries' top diplomats has been cancelled, too.

"I don't want to have a fruitless discussion," Donald Trump told the press at the executive mansion on a recent weekday. "I don't want a waste of time, so I'll see what transpires."

• Trump says he did not want a 'wasted meeting' after arrangement for negotiations with Putin postponed
• Letdown in Kyiv as Zelensky leaves White House without results

The frequently changing meeting is another development in Trump's efforts to mediate an conclusion to hostilities in the Eastern European nation – a topic of renewed focus for the American leader after he orchestrated a truce and hostage release agreement in Gaza.

While making remarks in the North African country recently to commemorate that truce deal, Trump addressed his lead diplomatic negotiator, with a new request.

"It is essential to get the Russian situation resolved," he said.

Nonetheless, the conditions that converged to make a Middle East success possible for Witkoff and his team may be difficult to duplicate in a Ukraine war that has been raging for almost four years.

Less Leverage

Per Witkoff, the key to achieving a agreement was Israel's move to attack Hamas negotiators in Qatar. It was a move that infuriated America's Arab allies but gave the president bargaining power to pressure Israel's leader Benjamin Netanyahu into reaching an agreement.

Trump benefited from a history of supporting the Israeli state since his initial presidency, including his choice to relocate the US embassy to the contested city, to change America's position on the lawfulness of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories and, more recently, his backing for Israeli defense operations against Iran.

The US president, in fact, is better regarded among the Israeli public than their prime minister – a position that gave him special sway over the nation's head.

Combine Trump's connections in politics and business to key Arab players in the area, and he had a abundant negotiating strength to force an agreement.

Regarding the conflict in Ukraine, on the other hand, the president has much less leverage. Over the past nine months, he has swung between efforts to strong-arm the Russian president and then the Ukrainian leader, all with little seeming effect.

Trump has warned to enact new sanctions on Russia's oil and gas sales and to supply Ukraine with advanced missile systems. But he has also acknowledged that doing so could harm the global economy and further escalate the war.

At the same time, the US leader has publicly berated Zelensky, temporarily cutting off information exchange with Ukraine and pausing weapon deliveries to the country - then to back off in the wake of worried European partners who warn a defeat of Ukraine could disrupt the whole area.

The president often boasts about his skill to sit down and hammer out agreements, but his face-to-face meetings with both Putin and Zelensky have not appeared to advance the hostilities any nearer a resolution.

Putin may in fact be exploiting the US leader's wish for a deal – and belief in in-person deal-making - as a method of influencing him.

In July, Russia's leader agreed to a summit in Alaska just as it appeared likely that the president would approve on congressional sanctions package supported by Senate Republicans. That legislation was subsequently delayed.

Recently, as news emerged that the US administration was considering seriously sending long-range missiles and Patriot anti-air batteries to Kyiv, the president of Russia called the US president who then touted the potential summit in Budapest.

The following day, the president welcomed Zelensky at the executive residence, but left without agreements after a allegedly strained discussion.

The US leader insisted that he was not being played by the Russian president.

"As you are aware, I've been played throughout my career by the best of them, and I came out really well," he said.

However the president of Ukraine later commented on the timeline of developments.

"As soon as the issue of advanced weaponry became a little further away for us – for our nation – the Russian side almost automatically became less engaged in negotiations," he said.

Thus, in a short period, the president has bounced from entertaining the prospect of sending missiles to the Eastern European country to organizing a Budapest summit with Russia's leader and confidentially urging the Ukrainian president to surrender the entire Donbas region – including land Russian forces has been failed to capture.

He has finally decided on calling for a truce along current battle lines – something the Russian government has rejected.

On the campaign trail previously, the candidate vowed that he could end the conflict in Ukraine in a very short time. He has subsequently discarded that commitment, admitting that ending the hostilities is proving more difficult than he anticipated.

It has been a uncommon admission of the limits of his authority – and the difficulty of establishing a framework for peace when both parties wants, or can afford to, give up the fight.