Trump and Putin to spar Ukraine peace and arms control at Alaska summit By Reuters
investing.com -- Friday, August 15, 2025, 12:18:09 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: U.S.–Russia Relations, Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–NATO Relations
MOSCOW (Reuters) -Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin hold talks in Alaska on Friday, with the U.S. president's hopes of sealing a ceasefire agreement on Ukraine uncertain but with a last gasp offer from Putin of a possible nuclear deal that could help both men save face.
The meeting of the Russian and U.S. leaders at a Cold War-era air force base in Alaska, their first face-to-face talks since Trump returned to the White House, comes amid Ukrainian and European fears that Trump might sell Kyiv out.
Trump, who once said he would end Russia's war in Ukraine within 24 hours, said on Thursday the three-and-a-half-year conflict had proven a tougher nut to crack than he had thought.
He said if his talks with Putin went well, setting up a subsequent three-way summit with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy - who was not invited to Friday's meeting - would be even more important than his encounter with Putin.
Trump is pressing for a truce to bolster his credentials as a global peacemaker worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize, something he has made clear is important to him.
Ukraine and its European allies were heartened by their conference call on Wednesday in which, they said, Trump agreed Ukraine must be involved in any talks about ceding land. Zelenskiy said Trump had also supported the idea of security guarantees in a post-war settlement, although the U.S. president has made no public mention of them.
Wednesday's call eased their fears of a Trump-Putin deal that would leave Ukraine under pressure to make territorial and other concessions.
Putin, whose war economy is showing signs of strain, needs Trump to help Russia break out of its straitjacket of ever-tightening Western sanctions, or at the very least not to hit Moscow with more sanctions, something Trump has threatened.
The day before the summit, the Kremlin leader held out the prospect of something else he knows Trump wants - a new nuclear arms control agreement to replace the last surviving one, which is due to expire in February next year.
TRUMP SAYS PUTIN WILL DO A DEAL ON UKRAINE
Trump said on the eve of the summit that he thought Putin would do a deal on Ukraine, but he has blown hot and cold on the chances of a breakthrough. Putin, meanwhile, praised what he called "sincere efforts" by the U.S. to end the war.
A source close to the Kremlin told Reuters it looked as if the two sides had been able to find some unspecified common ground beforehand.
"Apparently, some terms will be agreed upon tomorrow (Friday) because Trump cannot be refused, and we are not in a position to refuse (due to sanctions pressure)," said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the matter's sensitivity.
Putin has set stringent conditions for a full ceasefire, but one compromise could be a phased truce in the air war, although both sides have accused the other of flouting a previous accord.
Analysts say Putin could try to look like he's giving Trump what he wants while remaining free to escalate in Ukraine if he wants to.
"If they (the Russians) are able to put a deal on the table that creates some kind of a ceasefire but that leaves Russia in control of those escalatory dynamics, does not create any kind of genuine deterrence on the ground or in the skies over Ukraine... that would be a wonderful outcome from Putin's perspective," said Sam Greene, director of Democratic Resilience at the Center for European Policy Analysis.
TRUMP SUGGESTS LAND TRANSFERS WILL BE NEEDED
Zelenskiy has accused Putin of bluffing and playing for time to avoid U.S. secondary sanctions and has ruled out handing Moscow any territory.
Trump has said land transfers between Russia and Ukraine could be a possible way of breaking the logjam.
Putin, whose forces control nearly one fifth of Ukraine, wants Trump to start reviving the two countries' shrunken economic, political and business ties and, ideally, not to make that process contingent on progress on Ukraine.
But it is unclear whether Putin is willing to compromise on Ukraine. In power for a quarter of a century, the Kremlin chief has staked his legacy on coming out of the war with something he can sell to his people as a victory.
Chief among his war aims is complete Russian control over the Donbas industrial region in eastern Ukraine, which comprises the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Despite steady advances, around 25% of Donetsk remains beyond Russian control.
Putin also wants full control of Ukraine's Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions; NATO membership to be taken off the table for Kyiv; and limits on the size of Ukraine's armed forces.
Ukraine has said these terms are unacceptable and tantamount to asking it to capitulate.
Sign Our PetitionThe meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska, as reported, serves as a striking reminder of the interplay between international diplomacy, geopolitical power dynamics, and the historical context of U.S.-Russia relations. The Cold War, a period marked by ideological conflict and military standoffs, still casts a long shadow over contemporary interactions. The summit is not merely a negotiation over Ukraine or nuclear arms control; it is emblematic of deeper systemic issues, including the persistent influence of militarism in foreign policy and the fraught relationship between national interests and global humanitarian concerns.
Historically, U.S. foreign policy has oscillated between engagement and confrontation, often leveraging power dynamics that favor American interests at the expense of smaller nations. The current situation in Ukraine is a stark reminder of this pattern. The conflict, which began in 2014 following Russia's annexation of Crimea, has led to significant loss of life and displacement, a tragedy that is often overshadowed by the grand narratives of diplomacy and power negotiations. The prospect of a ceasefire agreement between Trump and Putin raises critical questions about the role of Ukraine and its sovereignty in a discussion that ostensibly centers on peace. President Zelenskiy's exclusion from these talks suggests a troubling precedent where the voices of those most affected by conflict are marginalized, reminiscent of past instances where U.S. policymakers have overlooked the agency of nations in favor of geopolitical maneuvering.
The notion that Trump seeks to position himself as a "global peacemaker" in the lead-up to the summit is particularly revealing. It reflects a tendency in political leadership to prioritize personal legacy over genuine diplomatic progress. The concept of national security often eclipses the humanitarian needs of those living in conflict zones. Trump's previous remarks claiming he could resolve the Ukraine conflict in a day highlight a misunderstanding of the complexities involved in peace negotiations, which require deep engagement with the historical, social, and cultural contexts of the involved parties. Pursuing a ceasefire for the sake of political capital risks reducing the human cost of war to mere collateral in a game of strategy.
Moreover, the potential for a nuclear arms control agreement as an outcome of this meeting raises further ethical concerns. While arms control is a necessary step toward reducing the threat of nuclear conflict, it cannot come at the expense of addressing the real and immediate needs of civilians affected by the ongoing war in Ukraine. The focus on arms negotiations often diverts attention from the underlying issues of military aggression and territorial integrity. The urgency to stabilize relationships between the U.S. and Russia should not overshadow the urgent need for a comprehensive approach that includes humanitarian aid and support for peacebuilding in war-torn regions.
As we reflect on this summit, it is essential to connect these discussions to broader social justice movements that advocate for the rights of all people, particularly those in conflict zones. The voices of Ukrainians and their lived experiences must be central to any negotiations surrounding their future. Historical patterns of sidelining affected populations in favor of elite negotiations continue to perpetuate cycles of violence and instability. As engaged citizens, it is crucial to advocate for a diplomatic framework that prioritizes human rights and self-determination, ensuring that peace is not merely a political tool but a genuine goal that reflects the interests and aspirations of the people most deeply affected by conflict.
The recent summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska marks a significant moment in the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, as well as the broader dynamics of international relations. The backdrop of this meeting is steeped in a history of post-Cold War tensions, military confrontations, and the struggles of smaller nations caught in the geopolitical crossfire. The fears expressed by Ukraine and its European allies that Trump might compromise their sovereignty in favor of a deal with Putin highlight the precariousness of the situation. The stakes are high, not only for Ukraine but for the principles of international law and the global order that has been painstakingly built since World War II.
Historically, the U.S.-Russia relationship has oscillated between periods of collaboration and confrontation, often influenced by broader geopolitical strategies. Since the annexation of Crimea in 2014, the relationship has been characterized by increasing sanctions and military posturing. The ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine, which has claimed thousands of lives and displaced many more, is a stark reminder of the consequences of these tensions. The meeting in Alaska raises questions about whether the pursuit of a ceasefire, as Trump hopes, will lead to genuine peace or merely serve as a facade for political gains. It is crucial that we remain vigilant and critical of the motivations behind such negotiations, especially given the historical context of power dynamics at play.
In terms of actionable steps, it is imperative for American citizens to advocate for a foreign policy that prioritizes diplomacy over military intervention. We must urge our representatives to support legislation that emphasizes peace-building initiatives, humanitarian aid, and respect for the sovereignty of nations. Grassroots movements can play a vital role in shaping public opinion and pressuring policymakers to take a more principled stand on issues of international conflict. Engaging in community discussions, educating ourselves on the complexities of the Ukrainian situation, and supporting organizations dedicated to peace and justice can amplify our collective voice in demanding a foreign policy that reflects our values.
Moreover, we must also be wary of narratives that seek to simplify the conflict into a binary struggle between "East" and "West." The situation in Ukraine is multifaceted, involving not just the actions of Russia but also the historical grievances and aspirations of the Ukrainian people. Acknowledging the agency of Ukrainians in their fight for self-determination and their right to choose their own path is fundamental to any discussion about a resolution. This includes recognizing the importance of including Ukrainian leadership in negotiations and ensuring that their voices are not sidelined in the pursuit of a deal that may prioritize the interests of larger powers over the needs of those directly affected by the conflict.
Finally, we must remain aware of the broader implications of this summit for global arms control. The potential for a new nuclear arms agreement, while necessary, should not come at the cost of ignoring the humanitarian crises that arise from military conflicts. As we observe the posturing and bargaining between Trump and Putin, let us not lose sight of the need for a comprehensive approach to disarmament that includes transparent dialogue, mutual understanding, and a commitment to reducing the proliferation of nuclear weapons. By advocating for policies that prioritize human security and peace, we can contribute to a more stable and just world, one where diplomacy triumphs over division and conflict.
Analyzing the recent summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin concerning Ukraine and arms control reveals important avenues for citizen action. Here’s a comprehensive list of how individuals can engage with these issues:
### What Can We Personally Do About This?
1. **Educate Yourself and Others**: Understand the complexities of the Ukraine conflict, the implications of U.S.-Russia relations, and the potential consequences of a ceasefire agreement that may not prioritize the interests of Ukraine. Share this knowledge through community discussions, social media, or local events.
2. **Support Ukrainian Voices**: Amplify the voices of Ukrainians, particularly those who advocate for peace and justice. Share articles, social media posts, and videos that highlight their perspectives and demands.
3. **Advocate for Transparency**: Push for transparency in government negotiations and agreements involving Ukraine. Citizens should have access to information about decisions that affect international peace and security.
### Exact Actions We Can Personally Take
1. **Sign Petitions**: - **Petition for Ukrainian Involvement**: Support petitions that advocate for the inclusion of Ukrainian representatives in peace talks. Websites like Change.org or MoveOn.org often have relevant petitions. - **Example Petitions**: - "No Peace Without Ukraine's Voice" (search for relevant titles on Change.org). - "Support Ukraine's Sovereignty" (check platforms like Care2 or other advocacy sites).
2. **Write to Your Representatives**: - **Who to Contact**: - **U.S. Senators**: You can find your senator’s contact information on [www.senate.gov](https://www.senate.gov). Look up your state’s representatives and reach out directly. - **Example**: - Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) - Email: schumer.senate.gov/contact/email-chuck - Mailing Address: 322 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510 - Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) - Email: mcconnell.senate.gov/contact - Mailing Address: 361A Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
3. **Encourage Sanctions Against Russia**: - Write to your elected officials urging them to maintain or increase sanctions against Russia until there is a credible commitment to peace that respects Ukraine's sovereignty. - Sample Message: "I urge you to support continued sanctions against Russia until there is a definitive and transparent commitment to peace that prioritizes Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity."
4. **Support Humanitarian Aid to Ukraine**: - Donate to organizations providing humanitarian assistance, such as the Ukrainian Red Cross or Doctors Without Borders. - Example Organizations: - **Ukrainian Red Cross**: [redcross.org.ua](https://redcross.org.ua/en/) - **GlobalGiving**: [globalgiving.org](https://www.globalgiving.org/projects/ukraine-crisis-relief-fund/)
5. **Participate in Local Events**: - Join or organize local rallies, discussions, or educational events to raise awareness about the situation in Ukraine and the implications of U.S.-Russia negotiations.
6. **Social Media Advocacy**: - Use platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram to share information and updates on the Ukraine conflict, using hashtags like #StandWithUkraine and #PeaceForUkraine. - Tag and mention your elected officials in your posts to encourage them to take action.
By engaging in these actions, individuals can contribute to a broader movement advocating for peace, transparency, and respect for international law in the Ukraine conflict. It's crucial that citizen voices are heard in matters that directly impact global stability and humanitarian rights.