This week, President Trump announced a “10-12 days” window for Russian President Vladimir Putin to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine. This marks a shift in his rhetoric, reflecting his mounting frustration with Moscow and signaling to many in the US and Europe what they’ve been eager to hear.
Yet, these tone changes aren’t translating into real actions. Russia perceives this as ongoing hesitation under pressure, using the time to ramp up attacks on Ukrainian civilians and infrastructure.
Now, the Russian military is achieving its fastest territorial gains in over a year, with more sophisticated tactics. They are utilizing mass-produced, Iran-designed Shahed drones, adapting them within Russia itself. The speed of these operations is alarming for Ukraine’s air defenses.
Just last month, Russia launched 728 drones, decoys, and missiles in a single coordinated strike. Ukrainian interceptors are doing everything they can, but the strain is immense.
Meanwhile, there are American resources that remain untapped. A bipartisan sanctions bill, backed by Senators Lindsey Graham and Richard Blumenthal and supported by 85 senators, aims to impose heavy costs on Russian oil and gas dealings and to levy secondary tariffs on countries like China, India, and Brazil. Yet, in July, Senate leaders decided to shelve the bill after Trump suggested he would act if Russia didn’t show progress towards peace in 50 days. Senate Majority Leader John Tune announced that he would delay the bill, and the House followed suit.
This decision could turn out to be a mistake. While it’s a relief to see Trump assert his stance, putting off congressional actions allows Putin to use the time to further escalate the situation. Each week of delay represents a missed chance to exert financial pressure on Russia’s war efforts.
Time is of the essence in Ukraine, I mean, they can’t afford to wait. The broader geopolitical contest also involves China.
China’s involvement in the conflict has become increasingly evident. Chinese firms are supplying not just components, but complete weapons systems to Russia. Drones and decoys from China help overwhelm Ukrainian defenses. Moreover, Chinese officials have welcomed delegations from occupied territories in Ukraine, continuing to trade heavy equipment there. Reports indicate that Chinese foreign ministers have expressed to the EU that they do not want Russia to be defeated, fearing that such an outcome would enable the US to concentrate fully on Asia.
In response, Ukraine has been proactive. In early July, two Chinese nationals were detained in Kyiv on suspicions of attempting to steal military technology. Recently, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced sanctions against five Chinese companies alleged to be supporting Russian military efforts. These are not merely symbolic; they indicate Ukraine’s growing understanding of the stakes involved and the nature of China’s ties with Moscow.
Supporting Ukraine isn’t merely a distraction from US competition with China; it’s a crucial element. Weakening Putin’s military capabilities undermines key parts of China’s global strategy. Failing to hold Russia accountable could embolden China in key areas from the Taiwan Strait to the South China Sea.
Due to this context, the Trump administration is becoming increasingly vocal about Beijing’s role. In a recent round of trade discussions, a senior US official raised concerns over China’s intention to purchase Russian oil and sell over $15 billion in dual-use technology. While these are important warnings, without concrete follow-through, there’s a risk they might get absorbed into the delays already exploited by both Moscow and Beijing.
The Graham-Blumenthal sanctions bill needs to progress. It represents a serious effort to impose real consequences on countries, notably China, that may aid Russia in evading sanctions. This approach would complement, rather than compete with, efforts to pressure Moscow and signifies that the US intends to translate warnings into action.
Countdowns can create a sense of urgency, but urgency without follow-through doesn’t equate to strategy. It’s critical to focus on how they use this time rather than counting down the days.
