How Trump backed away from promising to end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours

US President Donald Trump and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick (R) look on before Trump signed a proclamation expanding fishing rights in the Pacific islands. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 19 April 2025
Follow

How Trump backed away from promising to end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours

  • He has changed his tone since becoming president again.
  • Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday suggested the U.S. might soon back away from negotiations altogether without more progress.

DUBAI: During his campaign, Donald Trump said repeatedly that he would be able to end the war between Russia and Ukraine “in 24 hours” upon taking office. He has changed his tone since becoming president again.
As various US emissaries have held talks looking for an end to the war, both Trump and his top officials have become more reserved about the prospects of a peace deal. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday suggested the US might soon back away from negotiations altogether without more progress, adding a comment that sounded like a repudiation of the president’s old comments.
“No one’s saying this can be done in 12 hours,” he told reporters.
The promises made by presidential candidates are often felled by the realities of governing. But Trump’s shift is noteworthy given his prior term as president and his long histories with both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
The White House on Friday did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment on Trump’s evolving deadline comments.
Here’s a look at Trump’s evolution on the way he talks about the Russia-Ukraine war:
‘A very easy negotiation’
MARCH 2023: “There’s a very easy negotiation to take place. But I don’t want to tell you what it is because then I can’t use that negotiation; it’ll never work,” Trump told Fox News Channel host Sean Hannity, claiming that he could “solve” the war “in 24 hours” if he were back in the White House.
“But it’s a very easy negotiation to take place. I will have it solved within one day, a peace between them,” Trump said of the war, which at that point had been ongoing for more than a year since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
MAY 2023: “They’re dying, Russians and Ukrainians. I want them to stop dying. And I’ll have that done — I’ll have that done in 24 hours,” Trump said during a town hall on CNN.
JULY 2024: When asked to respond to Trump’s one-day claim, Russia’s United Nations Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia told reporters that “the Ukrainian crisis cannot be solved in one day.” Afterward, Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung said that “a top priority in his second term will be to quickly negotiate an end to the Russia-Ukraine war.”
AUGUST 2024: “Before I even arrive at the Oval Office, shortly after I win the presidency, I will have the horrible war between Russia and Ukraine settled,” Trump told a National Guard Conference. “I’ll get it settled very fast. I don’t want you guys going over there. I don’t want you going over there.”
After Trump wins in November
DEC. 16, 2024: “I’m going to try,” Trump said during a news conference at his Mar-a-Lago club, asked if he thought he could still make a deal with Putin and Zelensky to end the war.
JAN. 8, 2025: In a Fox News Channel interview, retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg — now serving as Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine and Russia — proposed a 100-day deadline to end the war. Friday marked 100 days since that interview. The 100th day of Trump’s presidency is April 30.
Trump becomes president and starts negotiations
JAN. 31: Trump says his new administration has already had “very serious” discussions with Russia and says he and Putin could soon take “significant” action toward ending the grinding conflict.
“We will be speaking, and I think will perhaps do something that’ll be significant,” Trump said in an exchange with reporters in the Oval Office. “We want to end that war. That war would have not started if I was president.”
FEB. 12: Trump and Putin speak for more than an hour and Trump speaks afterward with Zelensky. Trump says afterward, “I think we’re on the way to getting peace.”
FEB. 19: Trump posts on his Truth Social site that Zelensky is serving as a “dictator without elections.” He adds that “we are successfully negotiating an end to the War with Russia, something all admit only ‘TRUMP,’ and the Trump Administration, can do.”
FEB. 28: Trump and Zelensky have a contentious Oval Office meeting. Trump berates Zelensky for being “disrespectful,” then abruptly calls off the signing of a minerals deal that Trump said would have moved Ukraine closer to ending the war.
Declaring himself “in the middle” and not on the side of either Ukraine or Russia in the conflict, Trump went on to deride Zelensky’s “hatred” for Putin as a roadblock to peace.
“You see the hatred he’s got for Putin,” Trump said. “That’s very tough for me to make a deal with that kind of hate.”
The Ukrainian leader was asked to leave the White House by top Trump advisers shortly after Trump shouted at him. Trump later told reporters that he wanted an “immediate ceasefire” between Russia and Ukraine but expressed doubt that Zelensky was ready to make peace.
MARCH 3: Trump temporarily pauses military aid to Ukraine to pressure Zelensky to seek peace.
Trump claims his 24-hour promise was ‘sarcastic’
MARCH 14: Trump says he was “being a little bit sarcastic” when he repeatedly claimed as a candidate that he would have the Russia-Ukraine war solved within 24 hours.
“Well, I was being a little bit sarcastic when I said that,” Trump says in a clip released from an interview for the “Full Measure” television program. “What I really mean is I’d like to get it settled and, I’ll, I think, I think I’ll be successful.”
MARCH 18-19: Trump speaks with both Zelensky and Putin on successive days.
In a March 18 call, Putin told Trump that he would agree not to target Ukraine’s energy infrastructure but refused to back a full 30-day ceasefire that Trump had proposed. Afterward, Trump on social media heralded that move, which he said came “with an understanding that we will be working quickly to have a Complete Ceasefire and, ultimately, an END to this very horrible War between Russia and Ukraine.”
In their own call a day later, Trump suggested that Zelensky should consider giving the US ownership of Ukraine’s power plants to ensure their long-term security. Trump told Zelensky that the UScould be “very helpful in running those plants with its electricity and utility expertise,” according to a White House statement from Secretary of State Marco Rubio and national security adviser Mike Waltz.
APRIL 14: Trump says “everybody” is to blame: Zelensky, Putin and Biden.
“That’s a war that should have never been allowed to start and Biden could have stopped it and Zelensky could have stopped it and Putin should have never started it,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office.
Talk of moving on
APRIL 18: Rubio says that the US may “move on” from trying to secure a Russia-Ukraine peace deal if there is no progress in the coming days.
He spoke in Paris after landmark talks among US, Ukrainian and European officials produced outlines for steps toward peace and appeared to make some long-awaited progress. A new meeting is expected next week in London, and Rubio suggested it could be decisive in determining whether the Trump administration continues its involvement.
“We are now reaching a point where we need to decide whether this is even possible or not,” Rubio told reporters. “Because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on. It’s not our war. We have other priorities to focus on.”
He said the US administration wants to decide “in a matter of days.”
Later that day, Trump told reporters at the White House that he agreed with Rubio that a Ukraine peace deal must be done “quickly.”
“I have no specific number of days but quickly. We want to get it done,” he said.
Saying “Marco is right” that the dynamic of the negotiations must change, Trump stopped short of saying he’s ready to walk away from peace negotiations.
“Well, I don’t want to say that,” Trump said. “But we want to see it end.”


Britain needs ‘AI stress tests’ for financial services, lawmakers say

Updated 20 January 2026
Follow

Britain needs ‘AI stress tests’ for financial services, lawmakers say

  • Lawmakers urge AI-specific stress tests for financial firms

LONDON: Britain’s financial watchdogs are not doing enough to stop artificial ​intelligence from harming consumers or destabilising markets, a cross-party group of lawmakers said on Tuesday, urging regulators to move away from what it called a “wait and see” approach.
In a report on AI in financial services, the Treasury Committee said the Financial Conduct Authority and the Bank of England should start running AI-specific stress tests to help firms prepare for market shocks triggered by automated systems.
The committee also called on the FCA to ‌publish detailed guidance ‌by the end of 2026 on how ‌consumer ⁠protection ​rules apply to ‌AI, and on the extent to which senior managers should be expected to understand the systems they oversee.
“Based on the evidence I’ve seen, I do not feel confident that our financial system is prepared if there was a major AI-related incident and that is worrying,” committee chair Meg Hillier said in a statement.

TECHNOLOGY CARRIES ‘SIGNIFICANT RISKS’

A race among banks to adopt agentic AI, which ⁠unlike generative AI can make decisions and take autonomous action, runs new risks for retail customers, the ‌FCA told Reuters late last year.
About three-quarters ‍of UK financial firms now use ‍AI. Companies are deploying the technology across core functions, from processing insurance claims ‍to performing credit assessments.
While the report acknowledged the benefits of AI, it warned the technology also carried “significant risks” including opaque credit decisions, the potential exclusion of vulnerable consumers through algorithmic tailoring, fraud, and the spread of unregulated financial advice through AI chatbots.
Experts ​contributing to the report also highlighted threats to financial stability, pointing to the reliance on a small group of US tech ⁠giants for AI and cloud services. Some also noted that AI-driven trading systems may amplify herding behavior in markets, risking a financial crisis in a worst-case scenario.
An FCA spokesperson said the regulator welcomed the focus on AI and would review the report. The regulator has previously indicated it does not favor AI-specific rules due to the pace of technological change.
The BoE did not respond to a request for comment.
Hillier told Reuters that increasingly sophisticated forms of generative AI were influencing financial decisions. “If something has gone wrong in the system, that could have a very big impact on the consumer,” she said.
Separately, Britain’s finance ‌ministry appointed Starling Bank CIO Harriet Rees and Lloyds Banking Group ‘s Rohit Dhawan as “AI Champions” to help steer AI adoption in financial services.