The one thing Trump wants out of his meeting with Putin
politico.com -- Friday, August 15, 2025, 5:58:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–Russia Relations, U.S.–NATO Relations
"The second meeting is going to be very, very important, because that's going to be a meeting where they make a deal," Trump said Thursday.
Anything short of that, the president warned, could mean "severe consequences" for Russia.
Still, Russia and Ukraine are nowhere close to a deal. Putin has shifted his country's economy onto a wartime footing and escalated his attacks over the last several months. And he has signaled that it would take Ukraine surrendering huge swaths of land, including territory the Russian army has not conquered for him to end the war -- a proposal Zelenskyy has rejected.
The Ukrainian president, meanwhile, has asserted that Putin's overtures to Trump aren't serious and that his country's intelligence shows Russia planning for the war to continue into next year. He and European allies have leaned on Trump to ratchet up the economic pressure on Putin for eschewing diplomacy in favor of fighting on.
But Trump, who is now more aligned with Europe and Ukraine due to frustrations with Putin, is telling a different story. He's betting again on his own ability to bend -- or pressure -- these two leaders and a complex geopolitical reality to his own, determined will.
"We're going to see what happens," Trump said. "And I think President Putin will make peace. I think President Zelenskyy will make peace. We'll see if they can get along, and if they can, it'll be great."
European allies, even after making inroads with the president, will be watching nervously, despite public assurances that they and Trump are aligned. And if Putin can convince Trump that he's serious about peace, pressure could mount on Zelenskyy to engage despite his conviction that Russia remains intent on annexing more, if not all, of Ukraine.
Putin "will try to create an impression that they are participating in the negotiations" to avoid Trump's imposition of secondary sanctions, which could damage Russia's economy, said Olga Tokariuk, a Ukraine expert at the Center for European Policy Analysis. "But there are really no indications that I see of Russia actually willing to put an end to the war in Ukraine."
After speaking with Trump on Wednesday, several European leaders expressed confidence that the president won't let Putin off the hook and that he planned to push for a ceasefire on the front end of peace talks, a priority for Ukraine and NATO allies.
European diplomats were particularly heartened by Vice President JD Vance's reassurances, a welcome change after he berated Zelenskyy in the Oval Office.
"People were pretty impressed by Vance, who is looking for solutions while being clear that Putin is the bad guy here," said a European official.
European leaders also insisted following their conversation with Trump that Friday's meeting with Putin would not include any details about the parameters of an eventual deal, including territorial concessions by Ukraine, whose president will not be in Alaska.
But Trump, speaking on Thursday, suggested that, if he deems Putin to be serious about peace, he could urge Zelenskyy to meet them in Anchorage for a second summit to hammer out the actual deal.
"I'd like to see it happen, actually, in Alaska where we just stay because it's easier," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office Thursday afternoon.
And hours earlier during an appearance on Brian Kilmeade's radio show, Trump was explicit about his vision for an almost immediate second summit where Zelenskyy and Putin would negotiate the details. "And I don't want to use the word divvy things up, but you know, to a certain extent, it's not a bad term, OK? But there will be a give and take as to boundaries, lands, etc., etc." Trump said.
But in a telling mark of Trump's own uncertainty, the president who routinely promises total victory, acknowledged that a second meeting was no sure thing.
"There is a 25 percent chance this meeting will not be a successful meeting," he told Kilmeade.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent news surrounding the anticipated meeting between former President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin illuminates the complex and often tumultuous relationship between the United States, Russia, and Ukraine. At its core, this situation is not merely a diplomatic chess game, but a reflection of historical tensions that have long characterized the region and the broader geopolitical landscape. As we delve into the implications of this meeting, it becomes evident that the stakes are not only high for Ukraine but also for global democracy and the rule of law.
Historically, the conflict in Ukraine can be traced back to the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, which left a power vacuum and a myriad of unresolved national identities and territorial disputes. The subsequent Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014 marked a significant escalation, showcasing Russia's willingness to use military force to assert its influence over former Soviet territories. This aggressive stance has been met with international condemnation, yet the responses from Western powers have often been fragmented and inconsistent. Trump's previous presidency was marked by an ambiguous approach to Russia, where he oscillated between confrontation and appeasement. This current meeting raises questions about whether he will adopt a similar stance or if genuine diplomatic efforts will be prioritized.
As President Zelenskyy has articulated, there is a pervasive skepticism regarding Putin’s intentions. The suggestion that Ukraine should concede territory is not just a political maneuver; it reflects a broader narrative of imperialism that has plagued the post-Soviet space. Historical patterns reveal that territorial concessions often lead to further aggression rather than peace, as seen in various conflict zones worldwide. The insistence on territorial integrity is not merely a matter of national pride for Ukraine but is essential for maintaining the principle of sovereignty that underpins international law. The potential pressure on Zelenskyy to make concessions is a troubling prospect that echoes past failures of diplomacy that overlooked the agency of smaller nations in favor of perceived geopolitical stability.
Moreover, the economic sanctions imposed on Russia represent a crucial tool in the West's arsenal against aggression. However, the conversation surrounding sanctions often becomes muddled with calls for negotiations that might inadvertently relieve pressure on Putin. The notion that creating an impression of diplomatic engagement could allow Russia to evade meaningful consequences is a dangerous precedent. As Olga Tokariuk points out, the façade of negotiation should not overshadow the reality of ongoing military aggression. This is particularly critical for those advocating for international accountability and justice, as any perception of leniency could embolden authoritarian regimes worldwide.
The role of European allies in this situation cannot be overstated. Historically, Europe has often found itself at the crossroads of US-Russian relations, and the current dynamics showcase a renewed urgency for cohesive action against aggression. The assurances from Vice President JD Vance reflect a growing recognition among European leaders that a strong, united front is essential. However, this also raises concerns about the extent to which American political dynamics, characterized by fluctuating leadership and partisan divides, can effectively align with European interests to support Ukraine. The promise of support from the US cannot afford to waiver, particularly as European nations grapple with their own domestic challenges that may distract from international commitments.
In conclusion, the upcoming meeting between Trump and Putin is not merely a bilateral affair but a pivotal moment that could influence the trajectory of democracy and human rights in Ukraine and beyond. The historical context of this conflict underscores the need for vigilance against authoritarianism and a commitment to upholding international law. The voices advocating for justice and sovereignty in Ukraine must resonate loudly, reminding decision-makers that peace built on concessions to aggression is a fragile peace indeed. As citizens and advocates, we must remain engaged, armed with knowledge of the past and a vision for a future grounded in equality, justice, and the unwavering defense of democratic principles.
The geopolitical landscape surrounding the ongoing conflict in Ukraine has reached a critical juncture, particularly with the anticipated meeting between Trump and Putin. As we analyze the implications of this meeting, it is essential to consider the historical context of U.S.-Russia relations and the impact of this conflict on global stability. The troubling notion that negotiations could be pursued without a genuine commitment to peace raises significant concerns about the potential consequences for Ukraine and the broader international community. Understanding these dynamics provides us with a framework for informed discourse on how we, as engaged citizens, can advocate for a more principled and humanitarian approach to foreign policy.
Historically, the relationship between the U.S. and Russia has been fraught with tension, oscillating between periods of cooperation and confrontation. The post-Cold War era, characterized by the expansion of NATO and the eastward shift of European alliances, has left Russia feeling encircled and threatened. This context is crucial for understanding Putin’s aggressive maneuvers in Ukraine, where he seeks to assert Russian influence and reclaim what he perceives as lost territory. The current conflict is not merely a territorial dispute; it is a manifestation of deeper ideological divides and power struggles that have shaped international relations since the end of the Soviet Union. Recognizing this historical backdrop allows us to grasp the gravity of negotiating from a position of perceived weakness, particularly for Ukraine, which has already suffered tremendous loss and instability.
The comments by Trump, suggesting that he can pressure both Putin and Zelenskyy into a favorable deal, reflect a simplistic understanding of a complex situation. The notion that negotiations can yield peace without addressing the fundamental issues—such as territorial integrity, sovereignty, and the rights of the Ukrainian people—is misguided. While it is true that dialogue is necessary for conflict resolution, it must be rooted in equity and justice, rather than mere expediency. The assertion made by Zelenskyy that Putin's overtures lack sincerity is an important point for advocates of a humane foreign policy to emphasize. If negotiations are to be fruitful, they must prioritize the needs and voices of those directly affected by the conflict rather than the ambitions of powerful leaders.
In light of this, what can we, as engaged citizens, do about the current trajectory of U.S. foreign policy? First, it is vital to advocate for a stronger commitment to supporting Ukraine’s sovereignty through diplomatic channels that respect its territorial integrity. This entails calling on our representatives to reject any proposals that would coerce Ukraine into conceding territory as part of a peace deal. We must demand accountability from our leaders, urging them to implement and enforce sanctions on Russia that reflect its aggressive actions rather than allowing political expediencies to dictate terms. By mobilizing public opinion around these issues, we can create pressure on decision-makers to pursue a more principled stance that aligns with international law and human rights.
Moreover, we must engage in educational initiatives to inform ourselves and others about the nuances of U.S.-Russia relations and the implications of the Ukraine conflict. This includes fostering discussions about the importance of grassroots activism, international solidarity, and the role of civil society in influencing foreign policy. By educating ourselves and our communities on the complexities at play, we can better articulate our positions and counter the narratives that seek to minimize the significance of Ukraine’s sovereignty and the human cost of the conflict. Sharing resources, hosting discussions, and engaging with organizations that advocate for peace and justice can amplify our collective voice.
Ultimately, the potential meeting between Trump and Putin serves as a reminder of the importance of vigilance and engagement in foreign policy discussions. As citizens, we have a role to play in shaping the narrative around international conflicts, advocating for policies that prioritize peace, justice, and the dignity of all people. By standing firm against coercive negotiations that compromise the rights of nations and their citizens, we can work towards a world where diplomacy is grounded in respect for sovereignty and a commitment to upholding human rights. It is through these efforts that we can contribute to a more just and equitable global order.
In light of the ongoing geopolitical tensions and the complex dynamics between Russia, Ukraine, and the United States, there are several proactive steps that individuals can take to advocate for a peaceful resolution and support Ukraine. Here’s a detailed list of actions you can personally engage in:
### 1. **Advocate for Diplomatic Solutions** - **Write to Elected Officials**: Reach out to your local representatives and urge them to prioritize diplomatic efforts in addressing the conflict. - **What to Say**: Emphasize the importance of supporting Ukraine's sovereignty and the need for diplomatic negotiations that do not involve territorial concessions. - **Who to Contact**: - **Your U.S. Senators**: Find their contact information at [senate.gov](https://www.senate.gov). - **Your U.S. Representative**: Locate your representative's contact info at [house.gov](https://www.house.gov).
### 2. **Support Humanitarian Efforts** - **Donate to Charities**: Contribute to organizations providing humanitarian aid to Ukraine. - **Examples**: - **GlobalGiving**: [GlobalGiving.org](https://www.globalgiving.org/projects/ukraine-crisis-relief-fund/) - **UNICEF**: [UNICEF.org](https://www.unicef.org/). - **Share Fundraising Campaigns**: Use social media to promote fundraisers or initiatives that support Ukrainian refugees and humanitarian aid.
### 3. **Engage with Petitions** - **Sign Petitions**: Participate in online petitions that call for increased support for Ukraine and a peaceful resolution to the conflict. - **Example Petitions**: - **Change.org**: Search for Ukraine-related petitions that advocate for U.S. support for Ukraine. - **MoveOn.org**: Check for petitions regarding foreign policy and support for Ukraine.
### 4. **Educate and Mobilize Your Community** - **Host Informational Sessions**: Organize community discussions or webinars to raise awareness about the situation in Ukraine and the importance of international solidarity. - **Use Social Media**: Share informative articles, updates, and calls to action on platforms like Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.
### 5. **Contact International Organizations** - **Write to the United Nations**: Express your views on the importance of a peaceful resolution to the conflict and the need for international support for Ukraine. - **Example Contact**: - **United Nations Headquarters** 405 East 42nd Street New York, NY 10017 Email: [contact@un.org](mailto:contact@un.org)
### 6. **Support Local and National Advocacy Groups** - **Join Advocacy Organizations**: Engage with groups that focus on international peace and support for Ukraine. - **Examples**: - **Human Rights Watch**: [hrw.org](https://www.hrw.org/) - **Amnesty International**: [amnesty.org](https://www.amnesty.org/en/)
### 7. **Engage in Political Discourse** - **Attend Town Halls**: Participate in local town hall meetings to voice your concerns about U.S. foreign policy and the importance of supporting democracy in Ukraine. - **Write Opinion Pieces**: Submit articles or letters to local newspapers advocating for a strong stance against aggression and support for Ukraine.
### 8. **Promote Economic Sanctions Against Aggressors** - **Contact Your Senators and Representatives**: Urge them to support legislation that imposes or maintains sanctions on Russia to deter further aggression. - **What to Say**: Advocate for comprehensive sanctions that target sectors of the Russian economy while ensuring that humanitarian aid continues to flow to those in need.
By taking these actions, individuals can contribute to a collective push for peace and support Ukraine in the face of ongoing aggression. Each effort, no matter how small, can create ripple effects in the broader call for justice and diplomacy.