Former President Donald Trump often boasts about his "great relationship" with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Now, the world is watching to see if that relationship holds any real weight.

On Thursday, Putin responded to a U.S.-backed ceasefire proposal—one that Washington pushed Kyiv to accept—with familiar Moscow-style tactics. Instead of outright rejecting the plan, he issued a series of demands and conditions that Ukraine is unlikely to accept. His strategy seemed aimed at appealing to Trump, who is eager for a diplomatic victory.

Putin described Trump’s proposal as “great and correct” but avoided full endorsement, ensuring he didn’t alienate the former U.S. president, who has already signaled potential concessions, such as ruling out Ukraine’s NATO membership. At the same time, the Russian leader’s insistence on further discussions, including direct talks with Trump, seemed designed to stall for time while his military gained ground in Ukraine’s contested territories.

Beyond delaying, Putin raised concerns over ceasefire enforcement and whether Ukraine could rearm during a pause in fighting—signaling his intent to shape any eventual deal in Russia’s favor. He also invoked the need to address the “root causes” of the war, referencing grievances about NATO’s expansion and the presence of Western troops in former Soviet-aligned states like Poland and Romania.

Moscow’s response follows its classic diplomatic playbook—dragging negotiations out to achieve strategic gains. Meanwhile, Trump appeared eager to push forward, seeking a political win amid economic uncertainty fueled by his trade policies.

Despite Putin’s hesitation, Trump remained optimistic, calling the Russian leader’s response “very promising” while acknowledging that key details were missing. However, his willingness to overlook Putin’s additional conditions contrasted sharply with his past skepticism toward Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Retired Admiral James Stavridis noted that Putin was carefully maneuvering, neither fully accepting nor rejecting Trump’s terms. Meanwhile, U.S. allies remain doubtful about Russia’s willingness to negotiate a just and lasting peace. Latvian Defense Minister Andris Sprūds called Russia’s approach a continuation of its “salami tactics”—gradually securing its goals piece by piece.

If Trump manages to broker a sustainable peace in Ukraine, it would be a major achievement—potentially even earning him the Nobel Peace Prize he has reportedly sought. However, his past praise of Putin, his policy shifts favoring Moscow, and his decision to suspend military aid to Ukraine have raised questions about his true motives.

Trump has taken steps to pressure Moscow, threatening tariffs and sanctions. Yet, after years of efforts to isolate Russia, its economy remains resilient, supported by partnerships with nations like China. The question now is what leverage Trump truly has over Putin—and whether he is negotiating with the Russian leader or being manipulated by him.