Trump and Putin to spar Ukraine peace and arms control at Alaska summit
geo.tv -- Friday, August 15, 2025, 5:28:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: U.S.–Russia Relations, Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–NATO Relations
MOSCOW: Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin hold talks in Alaska on Friday, with the US 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 US 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 US 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 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 US 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.
Zelenskiy has accused Putin of bluffing and playing for time to avoid US 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 recent summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska marks a significant moment in the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, one that lights a spotlight on the complexities of international diplomacy and the geopolitical stakes involved. This meeting, the first since Trump returned to the presidency, occurs against the backdrop of Ukraine's struggle for sovereignty and the implications of Western sanctions on Russia. As history has shown, the interplay between U.S. and Russian relations often dictates the fate of nations caught in the crossfire, particularly those in Eastern Europe. Understanding this context is crucial for grasping the potential ramifications of the discussions held in Alaska.
Historically, the relationship between the United States and Russia has oscillated between confrontation and cooperation, particularly during the Cold War. The current situation in Ukraine is a reflection of unresolved tensions stemming from the dissolution of the Soviet Union, where geopolitical power dynamics have continually reshaped borders and political alliances. The annexation of Crimea by Russia and the subsequent war in Eastern Ukraine are manifestations of these unresolved issues, which remain at the forefront of international relations. Trump's efforts to negotiate a ceasefire, while seemingly benign, cannot be divorced from an understanding of the historical injustices and territorial disputes that have plagued Ukraine since its independence. The stakes are not merely about a truce; they involve recognizing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a nation that has been under siege.
Moreover, the summit highlights the ongoing struggles for social justice and the right to self-determination. The Ukrainian people, who have long fought for democratic governance and independence, are at risk of being sidelined in discussions that could radically alter their future. Trump's assertion that a subsequent three-way summit with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy is contingent on his talks with Putin underscores a troubling trend where powerful leaders often negotiate the fates of smaller nations without their direct involvement. This raises critical questions about the nature of diplomacy and international relations—whose interests are truly being represented, and at what cost to the populations affected by these decisions?
Furthermore, the potential for a nuclear arms control agreement between the U.S. and Russia cannot be viewed in isolation from the broader implications of military strategy and security. The legacy of nuclear proliferation and arms control agreements is fraught with challenges, and any new pact must consider the humanitarian implications of military engagement, especially in conflict zones like Ukraine. The people living in these war-torn areas bear the brunt of geopolitical posturing, and discussions about arms reduction must take into account the dire need for peace and stability. A mere technical agreement on nuclear arms, divorced from the realities on the ground, risks perpetuating cycles of violence rather than fostering true peace.
As we observe the developments from this summit, it is essential to remain critical and informed about the implications these talks may have on the Ukrainian conflict and the broader geopolitical landscape. The past demonstrates that negotiations often favor the interests of powerful nations over those of affected populations. Advocacy for the inclusion of Ukrainian voices in peace talks, coupled with a commitment to justice and accountability, must be at the forefront of any discussion moving forward. It is not just about ending hostilities; it is about ensuring that the principles of sovereignty, democracy, and human rights are upheld in the face of political maneuvering. The future of Ukraine, and indeed the stability of the region, hinges on our collective ability to demand a diplomatic process that is inclusive and just.
The recent summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska serves as a critical juncture in the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the broader geopolitical landscape. This meeting, the first in-person encounter since Trump resumed the presidency, raises significant concerns about the potential repercussions for Ukraine, Europe, and global security. The historical context of U.S.-Russia relations, particularly following the Cold War, emphasizes the fragility of peace and the complexity of diplomatic negotiations. As we analyze this development, it is essential to consider the historical narratives that have shaped current tensions and the implications of this summit for international stability.
Historically, the relationship between the United States and Russia has been fraught with tension, particularly in light of the post-Soviet expansion of NATO and the West's perception of a resurgent Russia under Putin. The ongoing conflict in Ukraine, which erupted in 2014 with Russia's annexation of Crimea, has highlighted the deep-seated divisions and mistrust between these two powers. Trump's desire to present himself as a peacemaker is juxtaposed against a backdrop of skepticism from Ukrainian leaders and European allies. The specter of a potential deal that could sideline Ukrainian interests raises alarms about the integrity of the peace process and the implications for regional security.
As Americans, we must recognize the gravity of the situation and the potential ramifications of a U.S.-Russia agreement that fails to include Ukraine as a key stakeholder. The notion that Trump may prioritize his political reputation over the sovereignty and security of Ukraine is troubling. To counter this, we can engage in activism that advocates for the inclusion of Ukrainian voices in peace talks. This can be achieved through grassroots campaigns that pressure our elected officials to uphold commitments to Ukraine and advocate for its right to self-determination. Public sentiment plays a crucial role in shaping foreign policy, and a well-informed citizenry can push for a more ethical and principled approach to international relations.
Educational initiatives also play a vital role in enhancing public understanding of the complexities surrounding the Ukraine conflict and U.S.-Russia relations. By fostering discussions around historical context, international law, and the implications of sanctions regimes, we can empower individuals to engage critically with the information presented in media outlets. Workshops, community forums, and online seminars can serve as platforms for disseminating knowledge and encouraging informed dialogue about the responsibilities of the United States in global diplomacy. An educated public is essential for holding leaders accountable and ensuring that peace negotiations reflect the interests of all parties involved, particularly those most affected by conflict.
Moreover, it is essential to advocate for a multilateral approach to peace negotiations. The involvement of international organizations, such as the United Nations or the European Union, can provide a more comprehensive framework for addressing the complexities of the conflict. By promoting dialogue and collaboration among diverse stakeholders, we can work towards a resolution that respects Ukraine's sovereignty while addressing security concerns for all parties. As citizens, we can support efforts to strengthen international diplomatic institutions and encourage our government to engage in cooperative diplomacy rather than unilateral actions that may exacerbate tensions.
In conclusion, the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska serves as a reminder of the delicate balance of power in international relations and the potential consequences of sidelining key stakeholders in peace negotiations. As Americans, we have a responsibility to advocate for a diplomatic approach that prioritizes justice, transparency, and the voices of those directly impacted by conflict. By engaging with our communities, educating ourselves and others, and supporting multilateral diplomatic efforts, we can contribute to a more equitable and stable world. The path to peace is often fraught with challenges, but through collective action and informed advocacy, we can work towards a future that honors the rights and aspirations of all nations involved.
In the context of the recent summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin regarding the situation in Ukraine, there are several actions individuals can take to advocate for a more just and peaceful resolution to the conflict. Below is a detailed list of ideas and actions that concerned citizens can engage in:
### What Can We Personally Do About This?
1. **Stay Informed**: Engage with reliable news sources and analyses that provide a nuanced understanding of the Ukraine conflict and the implications of U.S. foreign policy.
2. **Advocate for Peace**: Use your voice to promote peace and a just resolution that considers the rights and needs of all affected parties, especially the people of Ukraine.
3. **Support Humanitarian Efforts**: Contribute to organizations providing aid to those affected by the war in Ukraine, advocating for humanitarian relief and support for refugees.
4. **Engage in Political Activism**: Attend town hall meetings, participate in local political discussions, and communicate with elected officials about the importance of a fair approach to the Ukraine conflict.
5. **Mobilize Community Awareness**: Organize or join community discussions and forums focused on international relations, the impact of war, and peace-building efforts.
### Exact Actions You Can Personally Take
1. **Sign Petitions**: - **"Ceasefire in Ukraine" Petition**: Look for petitions on platforms like Change.org or MoveOn.org. For example, you might find a petition advocating for a ceasefire and peace negotiations that you can sign and share. - **Example**: Search for petitions such as "Demand a Ceasefire in Ukraine" and sign it. Share it on social media to gather more support.
2. **Contact Elected Officials**: - **U.S. Senators**: Reach out to your senators to express your concerns about the U.S. approach to the Ukraine conflict. You can use the following template: - **What to Say**: "Dear [Senator's Name], I am writing to urge you to support a diplomatic resolution to the conflict in Ukraine that prioritizes the voices and needs of the Ukrainian people. Please advocate for peace talks that include representatives from Ukraine and promote humanitarian assistance." - **Contact Information**: - **Example**: - Senator [Your State's Senator 1] - Email: [email@example.com] - USPS: [Senator's Office Address] - Senator [Your State's Senator 2] - Email: [email@example.com] - USPS: [Senator's Office Address]
3. **Write to President Biden**: - **Contact the White House**: Express your concerns regarding the U.S. position on Ukraine and the importance of involving Ukrainian leaders in any peace discussions. - **What to Say**: "Dear President Biden, I urge you to ensure that any negotiations regarding Ukraine include the legitimate representatives of the Ukrainian people and prioritize their sovereignty and security. A lasting peace can only be achieved through dialogue that respects Ukraine's territorial integrity." - **Contact Information**: - Email: [comments@whitehouse.gov] - USPS: The White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. 20500
4. **Engage on Social Media**: - Use platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram to raise awareness about the importance of peace in Ukraine. Share articles, write posts, and create discussions around the need for a fair resolution and the risks of further conflict.
5. **Support Local Activism**: - Join or support local organizations that focus on peace-building and international diplomacy. This could include attending rallies, participating in letter-writing campaigns, or volunteering with groups that work on related issues.
6. **Educate Others**: - Host or participate in educational events at local libraries, community centers, or educational institutions to discuss the implications of the Ukraine conflict and the importance of diplomatic efforts.
### Conclusion
By taking these actions, individuals can contribute to a collective push for a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Ukraine and ensure that the voices of those directly affected are heard. It’s essential to remain engaged and proactive in advocating for justice and peace in international relations.