The latest diplomatic drama surrounding U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin has once again underscored the delicate — and deeply strategic — nature of their relationship. The announcement of a planned meeting between Trump and Putin in Hungary, followed by its abrupt cancellation, revealed not only the volatile dynamic between the two men but also the calculated way Moscow leverages personal politics to influence Washington’s stance on Ukraine.
For a few fleeting days, the world anticipated what could have been a high-stakes summit between two of the most unpredictable leaders in global politics. The Trump administration said preparations were underway for a meeting between the American and Russian presidents, with teams from both sides coordinating details in Budapest. Yet within days, the Kremlin abruptly denied any agreement, calling reports of the summit “premature.” Trump, characteristically, countered by implying that Moscow had backed out.
Soon after, Trump dismissed the idea altogether, saying any meeting without a “peace agreement in hand” would be a “waste of time.”
While the episode might appear to be a diplomatic misunderstanding, it in fact exposes a deeper pattern: Putin’s methodical management of Trump’s ego and emotions — a tactic that ultimately undermines Ukraine’s interests and reshapes the Western alliance.
Since returning to the White House in early 2025, Trump has revived his distinctly personal brand of diplomacy — one that often sidelines traditional institutions in favor of leader-to-leader dealings. Putin, a master manipulator of such dynamics, has proven adept at exploiting this.
The Russian president sees the United States as the indispensable actor in determining the outcome of Russia’s war in Ukraine. But for Putin, the real objective is not peace — it is legitimacy. By engaging directly with Trump, Putin seeks to elevate Russia’s status as a co-equal superpower and to gain recognition of its sphere of influence over Ukraine and Eastern Europe.
Putin has long recognized that Trump admires strength and personal loyalty. After their August meeting in Alaska — the first face-to-face encounter since Trump’s return to office — Trump publicly praised Putin for “agreeing” with his criticisms of mail-in ballots during U.S. elections. The anecdote, trivial as it may seem, revealed the depth of Putin’s psychological insight: he feeds Trump’s ego to earn his trust.
In October, shortly after being snubbed by the Nobel Committee, Putin publicly lauded Trump’s supposed “peacemaking instincts.” The message was not for the global audience but for Trump himself. By showering the American leader with praise and flattery, Putin keeps open a personal channel of influence that consistently yields strategic dividends for Moscow.
The results of this influence have been visible. After private calls or meetings with Putin, Trump has repeatedly echoed Kremlin talking points about the Ukraine war. He has described the conflict as “a tragic misunderstanding” and argued that Ukraine must “compromise to survive.”
These statements, which mirror Moscow’s narrative that blames NATO expansion and Western interference for the war, have become recurring themes in Trump’s public remarks. Most recently, on October 17, 2025, Trump reportedly clashed with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during their meeting in Washington, telling him that “Ukraine will be destroyed by Russia” unless Kyiv accepted Putin’s demands.
Such rhetoric not only undermines U.S. policy but also strains Washington’s credibility with European allies. The pattern reflects how Putin manipulates Trump’s personal diplomacy to sow discord within the Western alliance — a key goal of Moscow since the start of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Putin’s handling of Trump serves three overlapping objectives.
First, it disrupts the U.S.-Ukraine relationship. Each engagement between Trump and Putin — even informal ones — tends to precede moments of tension between Washington and Kyiv. The infamous Oval Office meeting in February 2025, attended by Trump, Zelenskyy, and Vice President JD Vance, occurred shortly after Trump spoke with Putin. That meeting reportedly ended with Trump lecturing Zelenskyy about corruption and NATO’s “burden sharing,” leaving Kyiv alarmed.
Second, Putin’s manipulation of these personal ties directly affects military aid and arms negotiations. The most recent Hungarian summit announcement coincided with an impending U.S.-Ukraine discussion about Kyiv’s request to purchase Tomahawk cruise missiles — a move that would have extended Ukraine’s long-range strike capability deep into Russian-held territory. Following the cancellation of the Trump-Putin summit, those talks evaporated. Without the prospect of new missile systems, Ukraine’s negotiating leverage diminished — precisely what Moscow desired.
Third, Putin seeks to weaken transatlantic unity. Since the 2022 invasion, the United States and Europe have largely presented a united front in support of Ukraine. But Trump’s recurring criticism of NATO spending, coupled with his visible camaraderie with Putin, has rattled European capitals. Each proposed or rumored Trump-Putin meeting reignites fears of a “grand bargain” that would sacrifice Ukrainian sovereignty for geopolitical expediency.
The mere announcement of the Hungarian summit sent alarm bells ringing across Europe. Diplomats from Germany, Poland, and France reportedly sought urgent clarification from Washington, fearing that Trump might unilaterally endorse a ceasefire favorable to Moscow.
Yet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has also learned to adapt. Recognizing Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy, Zelenskyy has adopted his own version of personal diplomacy.
In April, Zelenskyy met privately with Trump during Pope Francis’s funeral in Rome — an encounter that reportedly helped reset relations after February’s tense Oval Office confrontation. In August, Zelenskyy made a deliberate effort to project statesmanship during another meeting with Trump, donning a suit instead of his trademark military attire — a subtle nod to Trump’s earlier criticism of his “casual” appearance.
Zelenskyy has also sought to engage Trump’s business instincts. Ukraine signed agreements to supply rare minerals to U.S. companies and expanded purchases of American-made weapons with partial NATO funding — moves designed to appeal to Trump’s preference for deals that benefit U.S. industry.
While these gestures have yet to yield major policy shifts, they have helped Ukraine maintain a fragile line of communication with a White House whose priorities are often unpredictable.
Following the collapse of the Hungarian summit plan, the Trump administration appeared to pivot toward a tougher stance. The U.S. imposed fresh sanctions on Russian oil exporters and entities circumventing the price cap mechanism — signaling Washington’s continued commitment to economic pressure despite diplomatic confusion.
Trump himself told reporters he was “done wasting time” unless Putin showed “real seriousness about peace.” Yet the statement carried an air of resignation. Putin, after all, has not meaningfully altered his demands since launching the invasion in February 2022.
For the Kremlin, these oscillations between engagement and cancellation serve a purpose. By dangling the prospect of talks, Putin fosters division among Western policymakers — between those advocating negotiation and those pushing for unconditional Ukrainian victory. Each aborted meeting, like the one in Hungary, reinforces Moscow’s image as an indispensable interlocutor while keeping the West off balance.
Despite hopes that personal diplomacy could pave the way for peace, the underlying reality remains bleak. Putin’s interactions with Trump are less about conflict resolution and more about influence projection.
Trump, who has repeatedly boasted that he could “end the war in 24 hours,” has shown a willingness to entertain Russian narratives. This creates space for Putin to insert himself into U.S. domestic debates, shaping perceptions of the war among Trump’s supporters and eroding bipartisan consensus on Ukraine.
For now, the aborted Hungarian meeting stands as a microcosm of this manipulative diplomacy — a theatre of gestures, praise, and cancellations that achieves nothing tangible for peace but plenty for Russia’s strategic aims.
Even if another Trump-Putin summit materializes in the months ahead, the outcome is unlikely to be a breakthrough. The meeting would serve as yet another episode in Putin’s long game: cultivating influence within Washington while buying time on the battlefield.
As Ukraine continues to fight for survival, both Putin and Zelenskyy will keep courting Trump — one to legitimize aggression, the other to preserve support. But only one of them benefits from delay.
