Russia and U.S. Agree to Limited Ceasefire in Ukraine Following Trump-Putin Call March 18, 2025

The United States and Russia have agreed to a 30-day pause in attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure following a high-level phone call between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Both the White House and the Kremlin released statements outlining the conditions of the ceasefire, which marks a tentative step toward broader negotiations aimed at ending the ongoing conflict.

According to the White House, the agreement represents an initial move toward peace, with plans to negotiate a maritime ceasefire in the Black Sea and work toward a comprehensive resolution to the war. The Biden administration has stated that discussions on these broader measures will begin immediately, though it remains unclear whether Ukraine has endorsed the phased ceasefire plan. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt shared a readout of the call in a post on X (formerly Twitter).

Putin’s Demands and U.S. Negotiations

The Kremlin’s statement outlined Russia’s conditions for continued talks, with Putin emphasizing the necessity of halting all foreign military and intelligence assistance to Ukraine. Moscow claims this measure is essential to preventing further escalation of the war, which has entered its fourth year.

During the call, which lasted over 90 minutes, the two leaders reportedly discussed various aspects of a potential final agreement. According to a White House source, the conversation was "going well." Trump stated a day prior that while "many elements of a final agreement have been agreed to, much remains to be finalized."

One of the key points under discussion is the fate of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in southern Ukraine, which Russian forces seized in the early weeks of the war. U.S. officials, including special envoy Steve Witkoff and Karoline Leavitt, indicated that negotiations on control of the plant had been ongoing between Washington and Moscow.

"There’s a power plant that is on the border of Russia and Ukraine that was up for discussion with the Ukrainians, and [Trump] will address it in his call with Putin tomorrow," Leavitt said on Monday.

International organizations have repeatedly warned about the risks of military operations around Zaporizhzhia, which remains Europe’s largest nuclear facility. Ongoing hostilities in the area have heightened fears of a potential nuclear catastrophe.

Ukraine’s Response

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy criticized Russia’s approach, accusing Putin of deliberately prolonging the conflict. In his nightly address, Zelenskyy said, "The implementation of this proposal could have begun long ago. Every day in wartime is a matter of human lives."

Next Steps in Negotiations

The Trump-Putin phone call followed U.S.-led negotiations in Saudi Arabia, where Washington proposed the 30-day ceasefire. While official statements from both leaders are still forthcoming, early reports from both U.S. and Russian officials suggest that the call was productive.

CNN, citing a Russian source with knowledge of the conversation, reported that the discussion "went very well." White House Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino echoed this sentiment, and Kirill Dmitriev, one of Russia’s negotiators during the Saudi talks, claimed on X that "under the leadership of President Putin and President Trump, the world has become a much safer place today."

As negotiations continue, the international community will be watching closely to see if the ceasefire leads to further de-escalation and a more comprehensive peace agreement.

Shortly after Putin signaled readiness for peace following his call with the U.S. president, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky took to Twitter to respond, dismissing Russia’s stance as manipulative and insincere.

“We have all heard Putin’s predictable words on a ceasefire, but in reality, he is preparing to reject it,” Zelensky wrote. “He won’t tell President Trump directly that he wants to continue this war, so instead, Moscow surrounds the ceasefire with preconditions designed to stall or derail it. This is a familiar tactic—Putin never outright says ‘no,’ but he delays and makes real solutions impossible.”

Zelensky highlighted that the U.S. had proposed an unconditional ceasefire across air, sea, and frontline operations, which Ukraine accepted. He noted that American and European partners were ready to monitor and verify compliance, making the ceasefire entirely feasible.

During this pause, discussions could take place to establish long-term security and a lasting peace plan. “Ukraine is ready to work quickly and constructively,” he added, emphasizing that European and global allies are fully informed of the situation.

He accused Russia of being the only party obstructing peace, stating, “They need this war. Putin has stolen years of peace and continues this conflict day after day.” Zelensky called for increased international pressure on Russia, urging stronger sanctions and collective action to force an end to the war.

Russian President Vladimir Putin discussed the possibility of restoring Russian-American relations, stating that former U.S. President Donald Trump is actively working to reverse what he described as damage caused by the Biden administration.

Putin confirmed that he recently spoke with Trump and addressed the situation in the Kursk region, where Ukrainian soldiers are surrounded. He expressed willingness to spare their lives if they surrender but emphasized that those responsible for crimes against civilians would be prosecuted as terrorists.

Overall, this highlights Trump’s efforts to position himself as a peacemaker, taking significant steps toward ending the conflict, improving U.S.-Russia relations, and preventing further escalation into a larger global crisis. His statement read : We have read today’s appeal from President Trump to spare the lives of servicemen of the Ukrainian Army in the Kursk region. In this regard, please note that Ukrainian militants have committed numerous crimes against civilians. These acts, as I have already stated, are classified by us as terrorism. At the same time, we are sympathetic to President Trump’s call to be guided by humanitarian considerations regarding these servicemen. In this regard, I emphasize that if they lay down their arms and surrender, they will be guaranteed life and dignified treatment. To effectively implement President Trump’s call, there must be an appropriate order from the military and political leadership of Ukraine to its troops to lay down their arms and surrender.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has expressed support for a ceasefire "in principle," but attached significant conditions. He emphasized that any ceasefire must be based on the agreement that Ukraine must meet certain terms, including the recognition of territorial changes and the non-interference in Russia's newly claimed territories. Additionally, Putin stressed that Ukraine must adhere to the demands of Russia, and any peace process should reflect these terms. The ceasefire proposal comes amidst ongoing tensions and the need for a resolution, though the conditions outlined suggest a complex path toward peace. READ MORE : PUTIN BACK CEASE FIRE

Paris, France – A massive protest erupted in Paris today as thousands of French citizens took to the streets to express their outrage over President Emmanuel Macron's continued support for Ukraine amid the ongoing conflict with Russia. The demonstrators, many of whom identified as "patriots," called for an immediate halt to any further military aid to Ukraine, the withdrawal of French troops from the region, and Macron's resignation.

The protest, which rapidly gained momentum throughout the day, saw passionate crowds chanting slogans such as "Macron, we won't die for Ukraine." Demonstrators voiced their frustration over France's involvement in the conflict, with many arguing that the French government should focus on domestic issues rather than sending resources and troops to support Ukraine.

One of the central points raised by protesters was the significant level of support for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky within Ukraine itself. "80% of Ukrainians support Zelensky and are ready to fight until victory," one protester was heard saying, with the remaining 20% of the population "living in Ukraine."

A key element of the protest also revolved around Ukraine’s decision to relinquish its nuclear weapons years ago, reportedly in exchange for security guarantees. Critics of the current geopolitical situation pointed out that the very nations that promised security – including Russia and the United States – are now contributing to the ongoing turmoil in the region.

The French protesters did not shy away from holding Western powers accountable, with many blaming the United States for fueling the conflict and questioning the promises made by former U.S. President Donald Trump regarding Ukraine's security.

As the protest continued throughout the day, tensions remained high, with the message clear: many French citizens are calling for an end to France's role in the war and demanding greater attention be paid to national concerns. The movement is rapidly gaining traction across social media, and the political implications for President Macron and his government remain uncertain.

More updates on this ongoing situation will follow as new images, videos, and messages continue to surface from the protest.

Experts Warn Ukraine Could Struggle Without US Military Assistance

United States President Donald Trump has paused military assistance to Ukraine, a move that could significantly impact Kyiv’s ability to defend itself against Russian forces. Since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, the US has been Ukraine’s largest military supporter, providing billions in defense aid. However, Trump’s decision signals a shift in US foreign policy that could have major consequences on the battlefield.

What Happened?

Reports surfaced on Monday that Trump had ordered a pause on US military aid to Ukraine, citing concerns over President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations. The announcement came shortly after Trump accused Zelenskyy on his Truth Social platform of prolonging the war as long as US support remained intact.

According to The Associated Press, an unnamed White House official stated that the pause would remain in place until Ukraine demonstrates a stronger commitment to peace talks with Russia.

Why Did Trump Halt Military Aid?

Tensions between Trump and Zelenskyy had been growing in recent weeks. Just days before the pause, Zelenskyy stated that an end to the Ukraine war was still "very, very far away," a remark that drew immediate criticism from Trump. During a press briefing in Kyiv, the Ukrainian president emphasized that more military support was needed, only for Trump to counter that statement by arguing the US should not be indefinitely funding the war.

Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio met with Zelenskyy at the White House on February 28. The meeting quickly became tense, with Trump and Vance accusing Zelenskyy of not showing enough gratitude for US military support. The Biden administration’s policy of unequivocal backing for Ukraine has been replaced by Trump’s strategy of engaging in direct peace talks with Russia—talks that have excluded Kyiv and European allies.

How Much Military Aid Has the US Provided?

Since February 2022, the US has pledged approximately $86 billion in military aid to Ukraine. These funds have been allocated through various channels:

• $46 billion via the Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA)

• $33 billion via the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI)

• $7 billion via Foreign Military Financing (FMF)

The aid has provided crucial weapons, including air defense systems, missiles, tanks, and body armor. However, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), most of the allocated funds have yet to be disbursed, meaning large portions of Ukraine’s expected military assistance are now at risk due to Trump’s pause.

What Exactly Is on Hold?

While the White House has not explicitly detailed the scope of the pause, experts warn that tens of billions of dollars in military aid could be suspended. Trump has not authorized any new aid packages since taking office, meaning that funds approved under the Biden administration may be at risk.

CSIS estimates that out of the $86 billion committed to Ukraine, only $20.2 billion has actually been delivered. The suspension could freeze undelivered funds, cutting Ukraine off from crucial weapons shipments and military supplies.

Can Ukraine Continue Fighting Without US Aid?

While Ukraine has increased its domestic defense production, experts believe it remains heavily reliant on US military aid. Mark Cancian, a senior advisor at CSIS, warns that without continued US support, Ukraine’s forces could hold out for only two to four months before Russia gains a decisive battlefield advantage.

“Pausing US aid deliveries removes about half of Ukraine’s weapons, munitions, and supplies. Ukraine was already struggling with Russia’s continuous advances. Without US assistance, Ukrainian lines may eventually buckle,” said Cancian.

Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow at the Brussels-based think tank Bruegel, also noted that a freeze on US assistance would limit Ukraine’s ability to conduct deep strikes against Russian forces. “Washington has been supplying long-range missiles like HIMARS and ATACMS, allowing Ukraine to hit Russian positions deep inside enemy territory. A halt in military support would severely impact Kyiv’s operational capabilities,” Kirkegaard said.

Beyond military hardware, analysts also highlight the importance of US intelligence-sharing, which has been crucial for Ukraine’s battlefield targeting. As of now, there is no indication that intelligence cooperation will stop.

Will Europe Step Up to Fill the Gap?

With US aid in limbo, Ukraine’s European allies may attempt to increase their military support. However, European leaders have admitted they cannot fully replace US military assistance.

One alternative could be using $300 billion in frozen Russian Central Bank assets, currently held by the US and European nations. Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia have pushed for these funds to be redirected to Ukraine’s military efforts. However, French President Emmanuel Macron has opposed the move, citing concerns over foreign asset immunity and potential diplomatic fallout.

Reactions to Trump’s Decision

Trump’s decision to pause military aid has drawn criticism from Democratic lawmakers.

Congressman Brendan Boyle called the move "reckless, indefensible, and a direct threat to our national security," pointing out that aid for Ukraine had been approved on a bipartisan basis.

Representative Dan Goldman also condemned the decision, stating, "Trump’s move is another attempt to extort President Zelenskyy. It mirrors his previous actions in 2019 when he withheld military aid to pressure Ukraine for political favors."

JUST IN:  Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei says in 2014 he warned that "Europeans are making a strategic mistake by putting themselves at the service of the US. The US will betray them."

US Aligns with Russia in Opposing UN Call for Troop Withdrawal

The United States took an unexpected stance at the United Nations on Monday, breaking away from its European allies by refusing to hold Russia accountable for its ongoing war in Ukraine. In a series of crucial votes on three different UN resolutions, the US’s positioning highlighted a shift in its diplomatic approach to the conflict, sparking global debate.

The Three Resolutions: A Breakdown

1. UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution: This resolution called for “advancing a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace in Ukraine.” It urged de-escalation, a cessation of hostilities, and a diplomatic resolution to the war. Despite broad international support, the US voted against it.

2. UN Security Council Resolution (Drafted by the US): Titled The Path to Peace, this resolution called for an immediate end to hostilities and the establishment of long-term peace. However, it notably avoided directly condemning Russia, instead presenting the conflict in neutral terms.

3. A Competing UNGA Resolution: The United States abstained from voting on its own alternative resolution after last-minute amendments strengthened the language condemning Russia’s actions.

How Countries Voted on the UNGA Resolution

Countries That Voted in Favor (93 Nations)

These countries supported the resolution calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities and peace negotiations:

• A: Albania, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Austria

• B: Bahamas, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria

• C: Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, Comoros, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic

• D: Denmark, Djibouti

• E: Egypt, Estonia

• F: Fiji, Finland, France

• G: Gambia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana

• I: Iceland, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Ivory Coast

• J: Jamaica, Japan, Jordan

• L: Latvia, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg

• M: Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Myanmar

• N: Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway

• P: Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal

• R: Romania

• S: Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Korea, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland

• T: Thailand, East Timor, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Türkiye

• U: Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay

• V: Vanuatu

Countries That Voted Against (18 Nations)

These countries rejected the resolution, aligning with Russia:

• B: Belarus, Burkina Faso, Burundi

• C: Central African Republic

• E: Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea

• H: Haiti, Hungary

• I: Israel

• M: Mali, Marshall Islands

• N: Nicaragua, Niger, North Korea

• P: Palau

• R: Russia

• S: Sudan

• U: United States

Countries That Abstained (65 Nations)

These countries chose not to take a definitive stance, either due to political neutrality, economic considerations, or strategic alliances:

• A: Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Armenia

• B: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei

• C: Chad, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba

• D: Dominican Republic

• E: El Salvador, Ethiopia

• G: Gabon, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea

• H: Honduras

• I: India, Iran, Iraq

• K: Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan

• L: Laos, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya

• M: Malawi, Mauritania, Micronesia, Mongolia, Mozambique

• N: Namibia, North Macedonia

• O: Oman

• P: Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay

• Q: Qatar

• R: Rwanda

• S: Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, São Tomé and Príncipe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Syria

• T: Tajikistan, Togo, Tuvalu, Tanzania

• U: Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan

• V: Vietnam

• Y: Yemen

• Z: Zambia, Zimbabwe

Global Reactions to the US Stance

The United States’ decision to vote against the resolution has drawn criticism from its European allies and NATO partners, many of whom supported the measure. Diplomats from Germany, France, and the United Kingdom expressed disappointment, stating that Washington’s reluctance to condemn Moscow outright could embolden Russia’s military actions.

On the other hand, some political analysts argue that the US’s approach is strategic, aimed at keeping diplomatic channels open with Russia while simultaneously advocating for peace. The move also raises questions about Washington’s evolving foreign policy stance under the current administration.

Conclusion

As the war in Ukraine enters another year, the role of international diplomacy remains critical. The UN vote demonstrates the complex political landscape surrounding the conflict, with nations balancing geopolitical interests, economic ties, and security concerns. Whether this resolution will have any tangible impact on the ground remains uncertain, but it signals a continued global divide on how to address the ongoing war.

Source: Adapted from Al Jazeera and official UN voting records.

On August 27, temperatures in the UAE exceeded 50°C once again. The UAE National Center of Meteorology reported that at 1:30 PM, the highest temperature in Suihan (Al Ain) reached 50.7°C.

In July of this year, the UAE recorded temperatures exceeding 50°C twice.

Although the high temperatures are still ongoing, the appearance of the Suhail star on August 24 indicates that the hot summer weather will gradually come to an end.

However, daytime temperatures will not drop immediately, but nighttime temperatures will start to cool down.

Over the 40 days following the appearance of the Suhail star, the UAE will transition from the hot weather to cooler conditions. It is expected that it will take about 70 to 80 days before a noticeable decrease in temperatures occurs.

UAE Criticizes Israeli Prime Minister's Remarks on "Gulf States Helping to Govern Gaza Post-War"

On Saturday, the UAE condemned remarks made by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu regarding the potential involvement of Gulf states in aiding the future government of Gaza after the war.

In a post on social media, UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan expressed the UAE government's disapproval of the Israeli leader's statements.

"The UAE government condemns Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's remarks calling for certain countries to participate in the civil administration of the Gaza Strip under Israeli occupation."

"The UAE government emphasizes that the Israeli Prime Minister has no legal authority to take such a step, and the UAE refuses to be drawn into any plan aimed at providing cover for Israel's presence in the Gaza Strip."

"The UAE is prepared to support a Palestinian government that meets the hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian people... aspirations that include independence.

On the morning of May 10th, local time, at the request of multiple countries, the 10th Emergency Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly resumed.

The session reviewed the issue of admitting Palestine as a new member state of the United Nations and passed a resolution granting more rights to Palestine.

China welcomed the adoption of this historic resolution by the General Assembly.

The Israeli representative condemned the UN General Assembly's decision on Palestinian membership and, in protest, tore up the UN Charter during the session.