News Desk

US President Donald Trump is reportedly growing increasingly frustrated with the lack of progress in resolving the ongoing war in Ukraine, according to Tom Barrack, the US ambassador to Türkiye and special envoy for Syria. In a recent interview with Turkish broadcaster NTV on June 2, Barrack indicated that Trump’s patience is wearing thin and suggested that the president would only consider engaging in a trilateral summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky if such a meeting promised concrete results.

Barrack’s comments came in the aftermath of the second round of in-person talks between Russian and Ukrainian negotiators in Istanbul, which lasted roughly 90 minutes but produced little immediate progress. Despite Ukrainian appeals for a high-level summit, Barrack emphasized that Trump expects any potential summit to be “meaningful,” and not just another symbolic diplomatic gesture.

“President Trump is not known for his patience,” Barrack told NTV. “Any summit must produce real outcomes. There needs to be a clear framework and guarantee of breakthrough-otherwise, it’s not a good use of his time.”

While Barrack was careful to note that he could not speak for Trump directly, his remarks reflect the administration’s growing skepticism about Kyiv’s handling of the negotiations and the broader diplomatic track. Trump, who has long been critical of Zelensky’s leadership and has publicly blamed both sides for the continuation of the war, appears to be stepping up pressure for a breakthrough-or a reconsideration of Washington’s role in the process.

Zelensky has repeatedly called for a summit with Trump and Putin, hoping such a format would catalyze a peace process. However, Moscow remains reluctant. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on June 3 that such a trilateral summit is “unlikely anytime soon,” adding that direct talks between Putin and Zelensky should only come after significant progress in lower-level negotiations.

Russia has consistently maintained that any top-level meeting should be the culmination of diplomatic efforts-not a shortcut to avoid hard compromises. In the latest round of Istanbul talks, Russian officials proposed two possible paths toward a ceasefire and offered to return the remains of 6,000 fallen Ukrainian soldiers as a goodwill gesture. Kyiv reportedly agreed to reciprocate, but insisted that a Trump-mediated summit could provide the momentum needed to finalize a peace deal.

Despite these overtures, key sticking points remain. Moscow continues to insist on Ukrainian neutrality and recognition of territorial changes, conditions that Kyiv has so far rejected outright. Ukraine, meanwhile, demands a full Russian withdrawal from occupied regions and firm international security guarantees-terms Russia sees as unrealistic under the current military balance.

Amid this deadlock, Türkiye’s role has become increasingly prominent. Ankara, which maintains working relations with both Moscow and Kyiv, has been pushing for a greater diplomatic role. Barrack praised Türkiye’s efforts and suggested that the country could be pivotal in preparing the ground for any future summit involving Trump.

“Türkiye is in a unique position,” Barrack said. “They have the trust of both parties to some extent. If there’s any place a deal can be brokered, it’s here.”

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has attempted to position Türkiye as a credible intermediary since the early days of the conflict. Ankara hosted earlier grain corridor negotiations and has now hosted multiple rounds of preliminary talks. Zelensky’s visit to Türkiye for the initial summit date-despite Putin’s absence-was seen as a symbolic gesture to keep the door open.

While Trump has made bold claims-such as his assertion that he could end the war in 24 hours-his administration’s efforts to pursue direct negotiations have not always been welcomed by America’s European allies. Many NATO countries remain committed to supporting Ukraine militarily and view Trump’s push for rapid diplomacy as undermining Kyiv’s leverage on the battlefield.

European NATO leaders have expressed concern that a premature settlement could lock in territorial losses and reward Russian aggression. Trump, however, has continued to frame the war as a wasteful drain on US resources and an unnecessary provocation of Moscow.

His approach represents a stark contrast to the Biden administration’s strategy, which prioritized arming Ukraine and isolating Russia economically. Trump, by contrast, has consistently signaled that he wants to prioritize a negotiated settlement-even if it means leaning on Kyiv to compromise.

As the war drags into another summer, the diplomatic impasse appears more entrenched than ever. Trump’s growing impatience and insistence on results may place additional pressure on Zelensky to consider difficult compromises. Whether this leads to a breakthrough or simply deepens divisions within the Western alliance remains to be seen.

In the meantime, Türkiye’s mediating role, Trump’s looming political ambitions, and Putin’s strategic calculus will continue to shape the next chapter of this protracted conflict. If a trilateral summit is to happen, it will need more than symbolic diplomacy-it will require all sides to make politically painful decisions. So far, there is little indication that they are ready.