Analysis: Trump, Putin leave Alaska summit with no deal on ending Ukraine conflict
arcamax.com -- Friday, August 15, 2025, 10:26:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: U.S.–Russia Relations, Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S. Elections & Voting Rights
WASHINGTON -- Russian President Vladimir Putin stood at a lectern Friday with the seal of the U.S. presidency -- a surreal sight -- and said he and Donald Trump reached an understanding about the Ukraine conflict. But they left a U.S. military base holding those details close to their vests.
Putin, the ultimate wild card among world leaders, did not describe the contours of that understanding he reached with the anti-war American commander in chief. But he did have a warning for the very European leaders who have for several years worried he might expand his Ukraine front to their soils.
"I would like to hope that the agreement that we've reached together will help us bring closer that goal and will pave the path towards peace in Ukraine. We expect that Kyiv and European capitals will perceive that constructively and that they won't throw a wrench in the works," said Putin, who broke protocol by speaking first at a media availability after a three-hour meeting.
He also said he hopes European leaders "will not make any attempts to use some backroom dealings to conduct provocations to torpedo the nascent progress," he said, as Trump stood like a statue, staring straight ahead.
"I believe we had a very productive meeting," Trump said in what were, for him, very brief remarks. "There's no deal until there's a deal."
Analysts and Democratic lawmakers this week predicted Trump would be unable to make much progress with Putin, a former KGB star known for managing and even changing interlocutors' viewpoints in face-to-face meetings.
"No, I don't think that it could be conclusive at all, because (Ukrainian) President Zelenskyy is not there. I mean, if you really want to put pressure on Russia and you want to get something done, the person that you should be talking to first is President Zelenskyy and our allies, our European allies," House Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member Gregory W. Meeks said this week. "We should be telling Russia and Putin what they must do ... to stop their aggression."
"They are the ones that are trying to take land from Ukraine, not the other way around," the New York Democrat told CNN. "The strength should be coming from the United States, working with Ukraine and our European allies, giving the Ukrainians what they need to support themselves and to defend themselves -- not allowing Russia to dictate what's going on in this war."
Trump also told reporters on the executive jet that he was encouraged Putin was bringing a number of Russian business tycoons in a bit of KGB 101: appealing to an interlocutor's core instincts.
"He's bringing a lot of business people from Russia, and that's good, I like that. They want to do business. But we're not doing business until the war's over," Trump said. "I want everyone to do well. But the war's got to stop and the killing's got to stop."
Here are three takeaways from Trump and Putin's in-person summit.
-- 'It's up to them'
Putin and Trump spoke to reporters assembled at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska for only roughly 10 minutes and did not reveal any plan to present to European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who was not invited to Friday's summit. The pair did not take questions.
"I will call up NATO in a little while. I will call up the various people that I think are appropriate, and of course, call up President Zelenskyy and tell them about today's meeting," Trump said at the joint media appearance.
"It's ultimately up to them. They're gonna have to agree," he added of European leaders and the Ukrainian president.
Trump was more verbose on Air Force One on Friday morning.
"Vladimir Putin wanted to take all of Ukraine. If I wasn't president, he would right now be taking all of Ukraine," Trump told reporters shortly after taking off from Joint Base Andrews in Maryland.
Then came some tough talk for the man he later sat across from in Anchorage: "But he's not going to do it."
The U.S. president, who describes himself as a once-in-a-generation deal-maker, tried all week to manage expectations for the meeting, describing it as an attempt to set up a potential peace pact-signing session between Putin and the Ukrainian president.
"They'll be discussed, but I've got to let Ukraine make that decision. And I think they'll make a proper decision. But I'm not here to negotiate for Ukraine. I'm here to get them at a table," Trump said Friday morning.
Air Force One had not been on the ground for five minutes when the White House announced the structure of the summit had changed: Trump and Putin would no longer meet one-on-one.
Instead, they would be joined by two aides. For Trump, that would be Secretary of State Marco Rubio and his special envoy and global fixer, Steve Witkoff.
That was a major change, literally, on the fly.
The new structure suggests there was some concern about Trump being alone with the former KGB colonel.
-- 'Turn the page'
Putin declared U.S.-Russia relations restored, saying he and Trump have a "very businesslike" relationship after the countries' relations had hit the "lowest point since the Cold War."
"It's very important for our countries to turn the page," Putin said.
The reset was "long overdue," he said, adding he and Trump over the last six months have had "very good, direct contact" and have "spoken frankly on the phone."
The Russian leader called for "cooperation" between Washington and Moscow on "digital, high-tech and space cooperation," as well as on "Arctic exploration" in that contentious region to which multiple parties have made claims.
Trump praised the "tremendous" Russian business leaders who tagged along with Putin.
-- Cadillac style
If anyone had Putin riding in the armored U.S. presidential limousine on their summit bingo card, they could have cashed in early.
After greeting one another on the Elmendorf tarmac along a red carpet, Putin climbed aboard the massive Cadillac sedan known as The Beast and rode to the meeting site with Trump. So there was, it turned out, a one-on-one chat. That would have been unthinkable just seven months ago, when Joe Biden was still president and not speaking to Putin.
The scene conjured the theme of the car brand's marketing ads from the late 1980s and early 1990s, when its television commercials showed scenes of drivers enjoying their luxury cars and telling viewers "the only way to travel is in Cadillac style."
That was just part of imagery from the opening scenes that was rather confusing.
Trump applauded the Russian president, an accused war criminal whom he has criticized for killing Ukrainian civilians, as they met on the L-shaped red carpet. Then four U.S. F-22 Raptor fighters and a B-2 bomber conducted a flyover.
An interesting use of war planes at a summit to discuss possibly ending a war.
But the flyover also likely was a message, from Trump to Putin. Those are the very aircraft that would be heavily involved should war ever break out between the United States and Russia. Putin glanced up as the birds of war roared overhead.
The greeting meant Trump, the host of the meeting, literally rolled out the red carpet for Putin hours after the Russian military hit civilian targets inside Ukraine.
Images the world didn't see, just as tellingly: Trump met with Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, as well as Alaska GOP Gov. Mike Dunleavy on board Air Force One as he waited for Putin's arrival.
The lack of a photo op came a few months after Murkowski lobbied the White House hard for her state to be exempted from parts of the president's so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act, his signature domestic spending and tax law.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent summit between former President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska has reignited debates about international diplomacy and the role of the United States in the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. The meeting underscores the complex interplay of power dynamics that have historically defined U.S.-Russia relations. As both leaders emerged from the meeting without a concrete resolution, it invites scrutiny not only of their tactics and motives but also of the broader implications for global peace and security, particularly in the context of social justice and human rights.
Historically, the U.S. has positioned itself as a champion of democracy and a defender against authoritarianism. However, Trump’s approach to diplomacy with Putin raises critical questions about the effectiveness of such interactions, especially given the longstanding aggression Russia has displayed towards Ukraine since 2014. The annexation of Crimea and the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine are stark reminders of how authoritarian regimes can destabilize regions and violate international norms with little consequence. The notion that a former KGB operative like Putin could reach a “productive understanding” with a sitting U.S. president is alarming, particularly when the voices of the Ukrainian people, represented by their president Volodymyr Zelenskyy, are sidelined in these discussions.
The lack of an explicit framework for peace coming out of the summit is concerning. Analysts and lawmakers, such as House Foreign Affairs Committee member Gregory W. Meeks, emphasize that any meaningful dialogue must include Ukraine as a key player. The omission of the Ukrainian leadership from discussions reflects a troubling trend where powerful nations engage in negotiations that overlook the sovereignty and agency of smaller nations. This not only perpetuates a cycle of imperialism but also undermines the fundamental principles of self-determination and respect for national borders, which are cornerstones of international law. The broader implications of sidelining Ukraine in these talks can lead to further human rights abuses and suffering for civilians caught in the crossfire of geopolitical maneuvering.
Moreover, Trump’s remarks about bringing Russian business leaders into the conversation raise ethical concerns. While economic engagement can be a tool for fostering peace, it must not come at the expense of human rights or the lives of those suffering from the consequences of war. The suggestion that business interests could lead to a favorable outcome in a complex military conflict suggests a transactional view of diplomacy that prioritizes profit over principles. This reflects a historical pattern where economic interests often take precedence over humanitarian concerns, leading to complicity in human rights violations.
The summit also highlights the need for a revitalized approach to international diplomacy that prioritizes collaboration and solidarity among allies, rather than appeasement of authoritarian regimes. The U.S. must leverage its influence to support Ukraine, not only in terms of military aid but also in amplifying the voices of its citizens and ensuring that their needs and aspirations are central to any discussions of peace. The international community, particularly European allies, must unite in a collective stance against aggression, sending a clear message that the violation of sovereignty will not be tolerated.
In conclusion, the recent summit between Trump and Putin serves as a critical reminder of the complexities of international relations in a world where power dynamics often overshadow the principles of justice and equity. As we navigate these discussions, it is vital to recognize the historical context and the ongoing social struggles that shape these conflicts. A commitment to uplifting the voices of marginalized nations and prioritizing human rights will be essential in fostering a more just and peaceful global community. Engaging in these conversations with a focus on solidarity and principled diplomacy can serve as a powerful counter to the often transactional nature of international politics.
The recent summit between former President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska has revealed a troubling dynamic in international relations, particularly concerning the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Despite the potential for a breakthrough, the absence of substantive agreements highlights the complexities surrounding diplomatic negotiations when key players are not present. The discussions, which reportedly left many details undisclosed, raise important questions about the United States' approach to foreign policy, and the role we as Americans can play in advocating for a more principled stance on international conflicts.
Historically, the relationship between the U.S. and Russia has been fraught with tension, particularly since the Cold War era. The annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine are manifestations of Russia's aggressive foreign policy. It is essential to recognize that these actions are not isolated incidents but part of a broader pattern of imperial ambition that requires a concerted and united response from the international community. The failure of Trump and Putin to reach a meaningful accord at this summit speaks volumes about the lack of coherent strategy from the U.S. and its allies in addressing Russian aggression. Instead of engaging in backroom negotiations that exclude the voices of those most affected, such as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, we must prioritize transparency and inclusion in diplomatic efforts.
One of the critical lessons from this summit is the importance of empowering allies rather than allowing adversaries to set the terms of engagement. As House Foreign Affairs Committee member Gregory W. Meeks aptly pointed out, the focus should not solely be on appeasing Russia but rather on supporting Ukraine and other European allies in their fight against aggression. This shift in focus requires a grassroots movement in the U.S. to advocate for policies that prioritize humanitarian aid and military support to Ukraine. By amplifying the voices of those advocating for a strong, united front against Russian expansionism, we can push our government to adopt a more principled stance in international relations.
Moreover, it is crucial for Americans to engage in informed discussions about the implications of foreign policy decisions. The rhetoric used during the summit underscores a broader narrative that equates business interests with diplomatic success. While fostering economic ties can be beneficial, it should never come at the cost of endorsing aggression or undermining the sovereignty of nations. Educating ourselves and those around us about the nuances of these international relationships will enable us to challenge the narrative that prioritizes profits over principles. Engaging our communities in conversations about foreign policy can help build a more informed electorate that demands accountability from its leaders.
In terms of actionable steps, we must advocate for a robust foreign policy that reflects our commitment to democracy, human rights, and international law. This means supporting legislation that provides military assistance to Ukraine, while also ensuring that diplomatic channels remain open for discussions that involve all stakeholders, particularly those directly impacted by the conflict. Additionally, we should hold our representatives accountable by demanding that they support initiatives aimed at countering Russian aggression and fostering stability in Eastern Europe. By mobilizing our communities and engaging in advocacy, we can create a powerful movement that insists on a principled approach to foreign policy.
In conclusion, the recent summit between Trump and Putin serves as a stark reminder of the challenges we face in global diplomacy. While the absence of tangible agreements is disheartening, it presents an opportunity for Americans to reflect on their role in shaping a more just and equitable international order. By advocating for a foreign policy that prioritizes the voices of those affected, and by fostering informed discussions within our communities, we can contribute to a movement that champions democracy and human rights on the global stage. Engaging with these issues not only strengthens our national identity but also reinforces our commitment to a world where peace and justice prevail.
The recent summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin has raised significant concerns about the future of the Ukraine conflict and the role of U.S. leadership in addressing global aggression. As citizens who aspire for peace and stability in the region, there are concrete actions we can take to advocate for a strong and principled U.S. foreign policy. Here is a detailed list of ideas concerning personal actions we can take, including petitions, communication with elected officials, and advocacy efforts.
### 1. **Advocate for Strong Support for Ukraine** - **Action:** Write to your congressional representatives urging them to support Ukraine, emphasizing the importance of U.S. backing for Ukrainian sovereignty and democracy. - **Who to Write To:** - Your local U.S. House Representative: Find their contact information [here](https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative). - Example: If your representative is Rep. John Doe, you could email him at johndoe@mail.house.gov. - **What to Say:** - Express your concern regarding the lack of transparency and effectiveness in U.S. diplomatic efforts. - Ask them to prioritize military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine and to ensure that any negotiations involve Ukrainian leadership.
### 2. **Participate in Petitions for Peace and Support for Ukraine** - **Action:** Sign and share petitions that call for increased support for Ukraine and advocate against appeasement strategies toward Russia. - **Example Petitions:** - **"Support Ukraine's Sovereignty":** Find it on platforms like Change.org or MoveOn.org. Search for petitions using keywords like "support Ukraine" or "end aggression." - **What to Do:** After signing, share the petition on social media to gather more signatures and raise awareness.
### 3. **Engage with Advocacy Groups** - **Action:** Join or support organizations that focus on international peace and support for Ukraine. - **Examples of Organizations:** - **National Endowment for Democracy (NED):** They work to support democratic institutions in Ukraine. - **Ukrainian National Women's League of America (UNWLA):** Engage with local chapters to participate in initiatives supporting Ukraine. - **What to Do:** Attend meetings, volunteer, or donate to these organizations.
### 4. **Raise Awareness Through Social Media** - **Action:** Use your social media platforms to educate others about the Ukraine conflict and the implications of U.S. foreign policy. - **What to Post:** Share articles, infographics, and personal insights on the importance of U.S. support for Ukraine. Encourage discussion and awareness within your circles.
### 5. **Engage in Local Politics** - **Action:** Attend town hall meetings or local government sessions to discuss the importance of international engagement and foreign policy. - **What to Say:** Advocate for your local representatives to support policies that uphold human rights and international law concerning conflicts like that in Ukraine.
### 6. **Write Opinion Pieces** - **Action:** Submit op-eds or letters to the editor in local newspapers regarding U.S. policy towards Ukraine. - **What to Say:** Highlight the dangers of appeasement with authoritarian regimes and the necessity for a strong stance in support of democracy.
### 7. **Connect with Your Senators** - **Action:** Contact your U.S. Senators to express your views on foreign policy regarding Ukraine. - **Who to Write To:** Find your senators’ contact information [here](https://www.senate.gov/senators/index.htm). - **What to Say:** Urge them to support sanctions against Russia and increased aid for Ukraine, emphasizing the importance of U.S. leadership in global peacekeeping efforts.
By taking these actions, we can collectively amplify our voices and demand a proactive and principled U.S. response to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, while also fostering a culture of peace and cooperation on the international stage.