LATIKA M BOURKE: Ball not just in Kremlin’s court with Russia-Ukraine ceasefire, but also in future MAGA moves

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was emphatic.

After talks with his delegation, Ukraine’s agreement to a 30-day ceasefire meant the the ball was now in Russia’s court, he declared, a sentiment echoed by other world leaders.

But in another sense, it is also now in the MAGA movement’s court as well.

The mood in Jeddah was a stark contrast to that in the Oval Office 11 days ago when US President Donald Trump and his attack dog, Vice President JD Vance, tore strips off Ukrainian leader Volodomyr Zelensky, a man who Mr Trump had previously called a dictator and accused of starting the war.

Lawmakers and leading figures in Mr Trump’s Make America Great Again political movement have been outwardly hostile to the Ukrainians, arguing that NATO was to blame for Russia’s imperialism while ignoring the fact that when the international alliance doubled its border when Sweden and Finland joined, there was no response from Moscow.

And Mr Trump has repeatedly emphasised his warm relations with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who launched his unprovoked and illegal invasion in February 2022.

By contrast, under its 45th and 47th President, the US has been quick to dish out retribution to Kyiv for its perceived ingratitude by cutting off intelligence and military aid — tactics that clearly favoured Russia ahead of negotiations.

“This is not Mean Girls,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who sat slumped on the sofa next to Mr Vance during the March 1 Oval Office blow-up, told journalists at the Ritz Carlton where the talks were held.

“This is not some episode of some television show, this is very serious.

“Today, people will die in this war; they died yesterday, and sadly, unless there’s a ceasefire tonight, they’ll die tomorrow.

“The President wants that to stop.

“And what we leave here with today is a commitment that the Ukrainians are ready to stop fighting.”

Ukraine, which did not start the war and has always called for a just and lasting peace, earned not just US favour but material rewards for agreeing to the ceasefire.

“As a result of this positive step forward, the President has decided to lift the pause on aid and on our security assistance to Ukraine going forward, and that’s effective immediately,” US National Security Adviser Mike Waltz said after the meeting.

“We’ve gone from if the war is going to end to now how the war is going to end.

“And that was under President Trump’s leadership, he has literally moved the global conversation.”

A sigh of relief can be breathed at this point. Europe, once excluded by the Americans from even the negotiating table, would now be part of the peace process.=

“In the Joint Statement, you have seen that our European partners will definitely be involved in this process,” said Mr Zelensky’s chief adviser Andriy Yermak, who attended the talks.

UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, who has established a relationship with Mr Trump and whose first act after the Oval Office horror show was not to tweet but hit the phones to call both Presidents warmly, welcomed “the remarkable breakthrough.”

“This is an important moment for peace in Ukraine and we now all need to redouble our efforts to get a lasting and secure peace as soon as possible,” Sir Keir said.

Britain has used its convening power to gather European leaders in London to discuss future security guarantees for Ukraine, including troops to protect any peace.

Sir Keir’s national security adviser, Jonathan Powell, has been in Kyiv alongside the French, helping draw up ceasefire proposals, the details of which are crucial.

The US and Ukraine agreed that during the 30-day ceasefire, prisoners of war should be exchanged and forcibly taken Ukrainian children should be returned to their families.

These are quantifiable and practical steps that can be taken within a month to test the commitment to end the fighting.

Britain and France didn’t get plaudits in the United States’ self-congratulations but do share the credit for their joint leadership. However, there is a long way to go.

As Mr Rubio, Sir Keir and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen all immediately said: “The ball is in Russia’s court.”

This is one of the biggest caveats to note, alongside how to permanently settle a peace that protects Ukraine from further invasion.

European and Ukrainian requests for a US security guarantee to keep Putin within his borders will be central. So far, America has proved unwilling to provide this assurance.

NATO’s boss, Mark Rutte, is heading to Washington DC and will be in the White House on Thursday to press this case.

And then there is MAGA.

It is now incumbent upon those Trump allies in the GOP who have openly sided with Russian interests, claiming their motives are driven by a desire to stop the killing and even peel Moscow away from Beijing, to now prove that their position has been justified and that it also justified the White House humiliation of an allied leader in President Zelensky.

“Ukraine is ready for peace,” Mr Zelensky said in his nightly video address.

“Russia must also show whether it is ready to end the war – or continue it.

“The time has come for the whole truth.”

Mr Zelensky is right.

Mr Trump’s repeated boasts of his friendship with Mr Putin – who he constantly reminds us went through the “Russia hoax” with him – are about to be put to the test.

“Now we have to go to Russia, hopefully President Putin will agree to that also,” President Trump said.

“We’re going to meet with them later on today and tomorrow.

“If we can get Russia to do it, that’ll be great; if we can’t, we just keep going on, and people are going to get killed – lots of people.”

Not quite, Mr President.

If Mr Putin says no, it will be because he determines that he is in a position of strength over his US counterpart.

Not only would this blow apart Mr Trump’s claims of his ability to use his personal relationship with the Russian leader to resolve the war and his statements that Moscow has been supposedly so much easier to deal with compared to Ukraine. It would also trigger questions about the nature of that leverage between the two leaders.

It would undermine the claim that wooing Russia with pledges of a realigned relationship with the US instead of punishing it for launching a war and the subsequent war crimes committed is worth it in order to break up the “no limits” partnership that Mr Putin established with China’s President Xi Jinping on the eve of the invasion.

But if Mr Trump prevails and proves his strength over Mr Putin by forcing a ceasefire, he will claim vindication for his vindictive, punitive treatment of Ukraine, not caring that they shocked allies and prompted open conversations about whether the US remains an ally of the West.