Trump’s Putin Deals Put Business Ahead of Ukraine

The Trump administration has discussed lifting sanctions on Moscow and pursued potential business deals with Vladimir Putin while Russia’s war in Ukraine continues. The talks put state power behind economic incentives, with some sanctions relief already granted. The administration says it wants to end the war, even as it weighs proposals to expand commercial ties.

Who Has the Power

Over the previous few weeks, Donald Trump had negotiated potential business deals with Putin. His administration discussed lifting sanctions, including those on Moscow’s flagship government investment fund. Some observers saw the moves as favoritism toward an autocrat Trump appeared to admire, and as an effort to lower U.S. fuel prices before the midterm elections.

That’s the machinery in plain view. Officials decide whether sanctions stay or go while business arrangements take shape at the top. The source describes no public decision-making process or community role in those talks. Instead, the administration weighs sanctions relief and commercial incentives as tools of foreign policy.

Katrin Bennhold, host of The World, said the approach brought to mind Germany’s longstanding effort to influence Russian behavior through business and energy deals. As Berlin bureau chief a few years earlier, she had written about that policy. Germany approved another major gas pipeline even after Moscow invaded Crimea, then abandoned the policy only after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

The history in the analysis offers a concrete warning. A government kept a major energy project moving after an invasion, then changed course after a full-scale invasion. The policy bet that business ties could influence state behavior. But the people and communities caught in the war aren’t the ones setting those terms.

Deals on the Table

Last month, Bennhold’s colleagues reported that the Trump administration wanted a U.S.-led consortium to buy the international assets of Lukoil, one of Russia’s biggest energy companies. The administration waived some U.S. sanctions to buy Russian diesel and pressed Europe to resume buying Russian gas.

The administration later considered a proposal to buy Russian technology to access and liquefy natural gas in Alaska. These were proposed or discussed arrangements, not one completed package. Still, the direction is clear: sanctions, fuel, pipelines and energy technology all sit on the negotiating table, where governments and business interests handle them.

The analysis also points to an electoral calculation. Some observers viewed lower U.S. fuel prices before the midterm elections as part of the motivation. That prospect puts household costs alongside a larger question: who controls energy policy—voters facing prices, or officials negotiating with an autocrat and weighing deals with major energy companies? The article doesn’t describe an electoral proposal that would change who holds that negotiating power.

The Official Justification

The article describes no grassroots, self-organized or mutual-aid response to these negotiations. Nor does it identify an NGO or nonprofit delivering support. Its focus is the state apparatus: sanctions decisions, talks with Putin, and proposed arrangements involving energy companies and governments. Ukraine is where Russia’s war continues; officials make the decisions described elsewhere.

The administration said the negotiations formed part of a broader effort to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. That’s the official explanation. Set beside the Germany example and the list of proposed deals, it leaves one question hanging: can commercial incentives change state behavior, or do the people living with the consequences remain outside the room?