Trump Rolls Out the Red Carpet for Putin in Alaska
foreignpolicy.com -- Friday, August 15, 2025, 5:58:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: U.S.–Russia Relations, Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S. Elections & Voting Rights
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
U.S. President Donald Trump rolled out the red carpet (literally) for Russian President Vladimir Putin when the two men arrived in Alaska on Friday for their closely watched summit on the Ukraine war. Between Trump's warm welcome to his Russian counterpart and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's notable absence from the talks, it is unclear just how much progress will be made toward securing a peace deal.
Trump and his lineup of top U.S. officials hosted Putin and his own senior delegation at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson. Upon landing in Anchorage, Trump gave Putin a first-class greeting: ordering a military flyover, applauding Putin as he approached, and even sharing the presidential limousine (known as the "Beast") to ride through the U.S. military base.
"It struck me as an arrival that would be worthy of an ally, instead of a country and a Russian president that considers the United States its enemy or, at best, its adversary," former U.S. Ambassador to Russia John Sullivan said. This was starkly different treatment from the open hostility that Trump expressed toward Zelensky during their White House summit in February.
Russian trolling ahead of the meeting also had Ukrainian allies pessimistic about Moscow's intentions. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stepped onto the tarmac in Alaska wearing a CCCP sweatshirt, which are the Russian initials for the "USSR" or Soviet Union. And Russian journalists' in-flight meal appeared to be chicken Kiev, a dish bearing the name of Ukraine's capital city (though with a Russian spelling). Even the United States made some questionable choices, with Trump posting on Truth Social on Friday that he had a "wonderful talk" with Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko, a longtime ally of Putin's who allowed Moscow to use Belarus as a staging ground for the Ukraine invasion.
Ahead of the meeting, the White House also announced an eleventh-hour change of plans. Trump and Putin were initially supposed to speak one-on-one without additional advisors present beyond their respective translators. But ahead of their arrival, the Trump administration notified reporters that the meeting format had been changed to a three-on-three, with Trump being joined by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House special envoy Steve Witkoff and Putin being accompanied by Lavrov and Kremlin advisor Yuri Ushakov. No explanation for the format change was given.
Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday that he wants to see a cease-fire quickly. "I don't know if it's going to be today, but I'm not going to be happy if it's not today," he said. Although he expressed optimism about Putin's decision to bring several business-oriented people with him, Trump added that "they're not doing business until we get the war settled," and he reiterated past threats that he would impose severe economic consequences on Moscow if Putin appeared uninterested in making progress to end the war.
Several points of contention appear off the table, though. This week, Trump promised Zelensky and his European allies that no decision would be made concerning potential territorial swaps without Ukrainian involvement; Kyiv opposes all land concessions. Trump also suggested on Friday that using NATO for security guarantees was "not gonna happen," which places doubts on whether Trump will negotiate a deal that allows Ukraine to seek NATO membership in the future.
This is the first in-person Trump-Putin summit since the former began his second term in January, and it is the first time in a decade that the Russian leader has stepped onto U.S. soil. At the time of writing, the two world leaders -- along with their last-minute additions -- had entered hour three of talks. Experts predict that it may be some time before any news emerges from the room.
Refugee cap with a bias. The Trump administration is discussing a potential cap on refugee admissions that would reserve the majority of slots for white Afrikaners, Reuters reported on Friday. A cap of roughly 40,000 admissions for the coming year reflects the White House's closed-door mindset toward immigration; to compare, the Biden administration issued a cap of 100,000 refugee admissions for 2024. By allocating some 30,000 of the 40,000 spots to Afrikaners, the White House would also be doubling down on its unsubstantiated claims that an anti-white "genocide" is taking place in the country.
On Tuesday, the U.S. State Department released its annual human rights report that, for the first time, included allegations of discrimination linked to Pretoria's land redistribution acts. South Africa maintains that the policy seeks to return land to dispossessed Black South Africans who suffered under decades of apartheid; today, white South Africans comprise roughly 7 percent of the population yet own around 72 percent of farmland. However, Trump and some of his closest advisors have falsely accused Pretoria of engaging in a genocide against white farmers.
The White House has issued several retaliatory measures against South Africa for its alleged rights violations, including ambushing South African President Cyril Ramaphosa with purported evidence of white genocide during a summit at the Oval Office in May as well as imposing a 30 percent tariff on South African goods this month.
Not the friendliest neighbors. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi marked India's Independence Day on Friday with a warning for its neighbor Pakistan. "India has decided that it will not tolerate nuclear threats," Modi said. "For a long time, nuclear blackmail had been going on, but this blackmail will not be tolerated now." He vowed to punish Islamabad for any future attacks on Indian soil, saying India's "new normal" does not differentiate between "terrorists" and those who support terrorism.
The threat comes roughly three months after the nuclear-armed rivals engaged in days of rare, intense fighting that regional experts worried could escalate into a larger war. And it follows Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif's announcement of the creation of a new Army Rocket Force Command on Thursday, aimed at bolstering the nation's defense capabilities.
During Friday's speech, Modi also reiterated the importance of India's self-reliance in a not-so thinly veiled critique of the United States' steep tariffs on Indian goods. And he suggested that India would continue its unilateral suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, which outlines regional water usage rights. Islamabad previously warned that stopping or diverting the Indus River from flowing into Pakistan would be considered an "act of war."
A shift to the right? For the first time in nearly 20 years, analysts suspect that round one of Bolivia's general election on Sunday may experience a swing to the right. Local polling currently has two conservative figures, businessman Samuel Doria Medina and former Bolivian President Jorge "Tuto" Quiroga, leading the presidential race. And the long-ruling Movement for Socialism (MAS) is expected to lose seats in the legislature as public dissatisfaction with the left-wing party grows.
Bolivia's election comes at a time of economic crisis for the country. Inflation rates soared to a 34-year high in July, fuel scarcity remains rampant across the country, the national currency has lost more than half of its value, and cost of living continues to skyrocket for residents. Conservative candidates have capitalized on these concerns to try to push the MAS from power.
It doesn't help that some of Bolivia's biggest left-wing figures are not in the running. President Luis Arce announced in May that he would not seek reelection following his internal party rift with former President Evo Morales. And that same month, the country's Constitutional Court upheld a ruling barring Morales from running due to term limits. Morales claims to have won a fourth term in 2019 but was forced into self-imposed exile over backlash from his political opponents.
FP's news team may be excited about the start of the English Premier League season on Friday, but there's another major sporting event drawing massive crowds. China kicked off its three-day World Humanoid Robot Games on Friday to showcase advances in technology and artificial intelligence. Around 280 teams from 16 countries entered robot contestants to participate in events including boxing, soccer, and track and field. "We come here to play and to win, but we are also interested in research," said Max Polter, a (human) member of HTWK Robots soccer team from Germany.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent summit between former U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska has reignited crucial discussions regarding diplomacy, international relations, and the ongoing crisis in Ukraine. In stark contrast to the treatment of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, whose absence from this high-profile meeting was conspicuous, Trump’s warm reception of Putin raises significant concerns about the United States’ foreign policy and its implications for global stability. This meeting exemplifies the troubling trend of prioritizing personal diplomacy over established alliances, particularly when it comes to supporting nations facing aggression and systemic oppression.
Historically, the United States has positioned itself as a defender of democracy, especially in regions like Eastern Europe, where post-Soviet states have frequently been under threat from Russian expansionism. The warm welcome afforded to Putin, characterized by military displays and shared transportation, is reminiscent of approaches taken during the Cold War when the West often underestimated the implications of engaging with authoritarian regimes. The optics of this summit—Trump’s extravagant gestures toward a leader whose government has been accused of numerous human rights violations—contradict the foundational principles that have traditionally guided U.S. foreign policy. It raises the question: can we truly support democracy and freedom abroad while simultaneously rolling out the red carpet for leaders who violate these very tenets?
Moreover, the timing of this meeting is particularly concerning given the ongoing war in Ukraine, where Russian aggression has led to widespread devastation and displacement. The choice to exclude Zelensky from the discussions signals a troubling disregard for Ukraine's sovereignty and the voices of those directly affected by the conflict. The optics of Putin's arrival, particularly the CCCP sweatshirt worn by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, serve as a reminder of the historical legacy of Soviet oppression, a legacy that should not be so cavalierly dismissed in favor of diplomacy based on personality rather than principles. It reflects an unsettling trend where the U.S. may be prioritizing personal rapport over the lived realities of those fighting for freedom and self-determination.
The shifting dynamics of this meeting, including the last-minute change to a three-on-three format, suggest a lack of transparency and a potential attempt to downplay the seriousness of the dialogue. Such actions undermine the credibility of U.S. diplomatic efforts and send a confusing message both to allies and adversaries. If the objective is to secure a ceasefire and foster peace, it is essential that U.S. leadership remains steadfastly committed to supporting those who are directly impacted by the conflict, rather than engaging in theatrics that may placate authoritarian figures without yielding substantial results.
The implications extend beyond the immediate circumstances of the summit. This meeting underscores a broader social struggle: the need for a foreign policy that prioritizes human rights, international law, and the voices of oppressed peoples. As citizens and activists, it is crucial to critically engage with these developments, understanding that the world is watching how the U.S. navigates its relationships with authoritarian regimes. The challenge lies in holding leaders accountable to a vision of international cooperation that is rooted in justice and solidarity rather than transactional diplomacy. In doing so, we reaffirm our commitment to a more equitable world, one where the aspirations of oppressed nations are not just acknowledged but actively supported. This is not merely a political issue; it is a moral imperative that transcends borders and requires collective action and vigilance.
The recent summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska starkly illustrates the complexities and contradictions of American foreign policy, particularly concerning the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Trump's warm welcome to Putin, complete with a military flyover and shared transportation in the presidential limousine, raises significant questions about the U.S. stance toward both Russia and Ukraine. This meeting, set against the backdrop of a devastating war that has led to immense suffering in Ukraine, highlights a troubling trend where diplomatic niceties overshadow the critical geopolitical context. The stark contrast in the treatment of Putin compared to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky underscores a troubling tendency to prioritize superficial diplomacy over substantive support for allies facing aggression.
Historically, the United States has positioned itself as a champion of democracy and a counterweight to authoritarianism. However, Trump's approach to foreign relations appears to be driven by personal affinity rather than adherence to these principles. This is particularly evident in his decision to host Putin with open arms while refusing to extend the same courtesy to Zelensky, whose country is under siege. The optics of the event, especially the shared ride in the "Beast," convey a message of alignment with an adversary rather than solidarity with a partner in distress. This dissonance is not only damaging to Ukraine but also erodes the credibility of the U.S. on the global stage, where consistency in supporting democratic values is vital for maintaining international alliances.
What can we, as engaged citizens, do in response to such troubling developments? First and foremost, it is essential to elevate the discourse around American foreign policy by urging our elected representatives to prioritize support for Ukraine. Advocacy for increased military aid and humanitarian support can be powerful tools in countering the aggression from Russia. By mobilizing grassroots campaigns, we can pressure lawmakers to allocate resources for Ukraine and condemn any appeasement strategies that embolden authoritarian regimes. Additionally, we can promote educational initiatives that highlight the importance of international solidarity, emphasizing that supporting a nation under siege is not merely a diplomatic obligation but a moral imperative.
Moreover, it is crucial to hold our leaders accountable for their actions and rhetoric. The stark contrast in Trump's treatment of Putin and Zelensky should serve as a rallying point for discussions about the implications of such diplomatic gestures. Engaging in conversations that challenge the normalization of relationships with authoritarian figures can foster a more informed public. Citizens can utilize social media platforms to disseminate information, share personal anecdotes about the war's impact, and create a narrative that emphasizes the necessity of standing with those who fight for their sovereignty and democracy.
Lastly, we must foster a culture of critical engagement where historical context is integrated into our understanding of current events. The fact that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov donned a CCCP sweatshirt upon arrival in Alaska is not only provocative but also a reminder of the historical undercurrents that shape contemporary geopolitics. It serves as a call to remember the lessons of the Cold War and the importance of vigilance against the resurgence of imperialistic ambitions. As citizens, we can educate ourselves and others about the historical dynamics between the U.S., Russia, and Ukraine, ensuring that current discussions are grounded in a comprehensive understanding of past mistakes and triumphs.
Ultimately, the meeting between Trump and Putin in Alaska should not be seen as a mere diplomatic encounter but as a critical juncture in U.S. foreign policy. By rallying around the support for Ukraine, holding leaders accountable, and fostering informed discourse, we can contribute to a more robust and principled approach to international relations. This is not just about Ukraine; it is about reaffirming the commitment to democracy and human rights in a world increasingly threatened by authoritarianism.
In light of the recent developments surrounding the meeting between Trump and Putin in Alaska, it’s crucial to consider how we can personally contribute to promoting peace and supporting Ukraine. Here are some actionable ideas and steps to take:
### 1. **Advocate for Diplomatic Solutions**
- **Write to Representatives**: Contact your congressional representatives to express your concerns about the handling of U.S.-Russia relations and the treatment of Ukraine in peace negotiations.
- **Who to Write to**: - **Your House Representative** - Find your representative's contact information through [House.gov](https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative). - **Your Senators** - Find your senators at [Senate.gov](https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm).
- **What to Say**: - Express your discontent with the warm reception given to Putin while Ukrainian President Zelensky was sidelined. - Urge them to prioritize diplomatic solutions that respect Ukraine's sovereignty. - Sample message: "I am concerned about the recent summit between President Trump and President Putin, which seemed to undermine our commitment to supporting Ukraine. I urge you to advocate for a strong diplomatic approach that prioritizes peace and respects the rights of nations."
### 2. **Participate in Petitions**
- **Online Petitions**: Sign and share petitions that call for stronger support for Ukraine and a reevaluation of U.S.-Russia relations.
- **Examples**: - **Petition to Congress for Ukraine Support**: Search for petitions on platforms like [Change.org](https://www.change.org/) or [MoveOn.org](https://front.moveon.org/petitions/). - **Petition Against Normalization of Relations with Russia**: Look for initiatives that specifically address the normalization of relations with Putin without addressing the ongoing aggression in Ukraine.
- **What to Say**: When signing or sharing, include a personal note about why this issue matters to you and encourage friends and family to participate.
### 3. **Engage with Local Advocacy Groups**
- **Join Local Organizations**: Connect with local peace and justice organizations that focus on international relations and support for Ukraine.
- **Examples**: - **Peace Action**: [Peace Action](https://peaceaction.org/) is an organization focused on a wide range of peace issues, including U.S. foreign policy. - **Ukrainian American Community Organizations**: Reach out to local Ukrainian organizations to see how you can support their efforts.
- **What to Do**: Attend meetings, volunteer for events, or contribute to their campaigns promoting awareness and support for Ukraine.
### 4. **Social Media Advocacy**
- **Raise Awareness Online**: Use your social media platforms to discuss the implications of the summit and the importance of supporting Ukraine.
- **What to Post**: Share articles, personal commentary, and petitions. Engage your followers by asking for their views on U.S.-Russia relations and how they feel the U.S. should approach the situation. - **Example Post**: "The recent summit between Trump and Putin raises serious concerns about the future of U.S. support for Ukraine. It's essential we advocate for a peace that respects Ukraine's sovereignty. Join me in signing this petition [link]."
### 5. **Attend Public Forums**
- **Engage in Community Discussions**: Look for town hall meetings or public forums that discuss foreign policy, and attend to voice your opinions.
- **Action Steps**: - Prepare questions or statements that highlight your concerns about the U.S. approach to Russia and support for Ukraine. - Engage with local officials and community members to foster a dialogue on this important issue.
### 6. **Contact Media Outlets**
- **Express Your Opinion**: Write letters to the editor of local newspapers or online news platforms regarding the coverage of U.S.-Russia relations and the treatment of Ukraine.
- **What to Say**: - Share your perspective on why it's vital to hold leaders accountable for their diplomatic choices and to ensure that Ukraine is not sidelined in negotiations.
- **Where to Submit**: Look for submission guidelines on your local newspaper’s website or major outlets that cover political news.
### Conclusion
Each of these actions contributes to a larger movement advocating for peace and justice in international relations. By actively engaging with representatives, participating in petitions, joining local organizations, using social media, attending public forums, and contacting media outlets, we can ensure our voices are heard in the push for a fair and just approach to U.S.-Russia relations and support for Ukraine.