Trump leaves Alaska summit with Putin empty-handed after failing to reach a deal to end Ukraine war - The Malta Independent
independent.com.mt -- Friday, August 15, 2025, 11:58:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–Russia Relations, Media Coverage & Press Relations
President Donald Trump failed to secure an agreement from Vladimir Putin on Friday to end Russia's war in Ukraine, falling short in his most significant move yet to stop the bloodshed, even after rolling out the red carpet for the man who started it.
"There's no deal until there's a deal," the U.S. president said, after Putin claimed they had hammered out an "understanding" on Ukraine and warned Europe not to "torpedo the nascent progress." Trump said he would call Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders to brief them on the talks.
Trump, who for years has balked at American support for Ukraine and expressed admiration for Putin, had pledged confidently to bring about an end to the war on his first day back in the White House. Seven months later, after berating Zelenskyy in the Oval Office and stanching the flow of some U.S. military assistance to Kyiv, Trump could not bring Putin even to pause the fighting, as his forces make gains on the battlefield.
The U.S. president had offered Putin both a carrot and a stick, issuing threats of punishing economic sanctions on Russia while also extending a warm welcome at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, but he appeared to walk away without any concrete progress on ending the war in Ukraine, now in its fourth year.
Instead, he handed Putin long-sought recognition on the international stage, after years of Western efforts to make him a pariah over the war and his crackdown on dissent, and forestalled the threat of additional U.S. sanctions.
In a sign that the conversations did not yield Trump's preferred result, the two leaders ended what was supposed to be a joint news conference without taking questions from reporters.
During a subsequent interview with Fox News Channel before leaving Alaska, Trump insisted that the onus going forward might be somehow on Zelenskyy "to get it done," but said there would also be some involvement from European nations. That was notable since Zelenskyy was excluded from Trump and Putin's meeting.
The U.S. president had wanted to show off his deal-making skills, while Putin wanted to negotiate a deal that would cement Russia's gains, block Kyiv's bid to join the NATO military alliance and eventually pull Ukraine back into Moscow's orbit.
"We had an extremely productive meeting, and many points were agreed to," Trump said while standing next to Putin. "And there are just a very few that are left. Some are not that significant. One is probably the most significant, but we have a very good chance of getting there."
He continued: "We didn't get there."
For Putin, just being on U.S. soil for the first time in more than a decade was validation after his ostracization following his invasion of Ukraine.
His meeting with Trump may stall the economic sanctions that the U.S. president had promised unless Moscow worked harder to bring the fighting to a close. It also may simply lead to more meetings, giving his forces more time to make progress on the battlefield.
Putin said Russia and the United States should "turn the page and go back to cooperation."
He praised Trump as someone who "has a clear idea of what he wants to achieve and sincerely cares about the prosperity of his country, and at the same time shows understanding that Russia has its own national interests."
"I expect that today's agreements will become a reference point not only for solving the Ukrainian problem, but will also mark the beginning of the restoration of businesslike, pragmatic relations between Russia and the U.S.," Putin said.
Despite not reaching any major breakthrough, Trump ended his remarks by thanking Putin and saying, "we'll speak to you very soon and probably see you again very soon."
When Putin smiled and offered, "next time in Moscow," Trump said "that's an interesting one" and said he might face criticism but "I could see it possibly happening."
During the interview with Fox News, Trump bragged that Putin echoed many of the U.S. president's long-standing grievances, including about the 2020 election. This suggests that Putin, a former KGB officer, may have left Trump with the impression that he'd notched a big win even as he left empty handed.
When Trump and Putin arrived in Alaska, they had greeted each other with a warm handshake, chatting almost like old friends, and gripped hands for an extended period on a red carpet rolled out at the military base. As they chatted, Putin grinned and pointed skyward, where B-2s and F-22s - military aircraft designed to oppose Russia during the Cold War - flew overhead. The two then shared the U.S. presidential limo for a short ride to their meeting site, with Putin offering a broad smile as they rolled past the cameras.
It was the kind of reception typically reserved for close U.S. allies and belied the bloodshed and suffering in the war Putin started in Ukraine. Although not altogether surprising considering their longtime friendly relationship, such outward friendliness likely raised concerns from Zelenskyy and European leaders, who fear that Trump is primarily focusing on furthering U.S. interests and not pressing hard enough for Ukraine's.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said shortly before Air Force One touched down that the previously planned one-on-one meeting between Trump and Putin would be a three-on-three discussion including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff. Putin was joined by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and foreign affairs adviser Yuri Ushakov.
The change seemed to indicate that the White House was taking a more guarded approach than it did during a 2018 meeting in Helsinki, where Trump and Putin met privately with their interpreters and Trump then shocked the world by siding with the Russian leader over U.S. intelligence officials on whether Russia meddled in the 2016 campaign.
Zelenskyy's exclusion was also a heavy blow to the West's policy of "nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine."
Russia and Ukraine remain far apart in their demands for peace. Putin has long resisted any temporary ceasefire, linking it to a halt in Western arms supplies and a freeze on Ukraine's mobilization efforts, which are conditions rejected by Kyiv and its Western allies.
The meeting comes as the war has caused heavy losses on both sides and drained resources. Ukraine has held on far longer than some initially expected since the February 2022 invasion, but it is straining to hold off Russia's much larger army, grappling with bombardments of its cities and fighting for every inch on the over 600-mile (1,000-kilometer) front line.
Alaska is separated from Russia at its closest point by just 3 miles (less than 5 kilometers) and the international date line.
Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson was crucial to countering the Soviet Union during the Cold War. It continues to play a role today, as planes from the base still intercept Russian aircraft that regularly fly into U.S. airspace.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent summit between former President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska exemplifies a troubling trend in U.S. foreign policy—a trend that has significant implications for global peace, democracy, and the ongoing struggle for social justice. Trump’s failure to secure any meaningful agreement to end the war in Ukraine is not merely a diplomatic misstep; it reflects a broader pattern of prioritizing personal diplomacy over the well-being of nations and the global order. This meeting, and its disappointing outcomes, should be viewed within the context of a long history of U.S.-Russia relations, the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, and the rising tides of authoritarianism worldwide.
Historically, the post-Cold War era has seen a precarious balance between U.S. interests and Russian expansionism. The annexation of Crimea in 2014 was a pivotal moment that reshaped European security dynamics and highlighted the need for a robust response to aggression. The ongoing war in Ukraine has laid bare the consequences of inaction and inadequate responses from the international community. Trump's approach—characterized by personal admiration for authoritarian leaders, detrimental withdrawal of American support for Ukraine, and an ambiguous stance on NATO—has not only emboldened Putin but has also undermined the principles of democracy and self-determination that are supposed to govern international relations.
Trump’s assertion that the responsibility to end the war lies with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is particularly revealing of a troubling mentality that places the burden of conflict resolution on the very nations that are under siege. This disregard for the agency and needs of smaller nations is reminiscent of colonial attitudes that have historically justified imperial interventions. Additionally, by sidelining Zelenskyy from discussions with Putin, Trump perpetuated a narrative that diminishes the sovereignty of Ukraine, reinforcing a paternalistic dynamic that has no place in modern diplomacy. Such dynamics not only affect Ukraine but resonate with marginalized communities worldwide who have often found themselves at the mercy of powerful nations.
Moreover, the optics of the summit itself, characterized by a display of camaraderie and mutual respect, serve to normalize autocratic behavior on the global stage. Putin’s presence on U.S. soil after years of diplomatic isolation sends a dangerous message—that aggressive actions can be met with rewards rather than consequences. The failure of the summit to produce even a temporary cessation of hostilities demonstrates the inadequacy of personal diplomacy in resolving deeply entrenched conflicts. It raises the question of how diplomatic efforts can be reconciled with the necessity of holding aggressors accountable.
The broader implications of this meeting extend beyond Ukraine and Russia. The normalization of authoritarianism, as exhibited in Trump’s interactions with Putin, poses a risk to democratic institutions worldwide. As nations grapple with their own internal struggles for justice and equality, the U.S. must confront its complicity in enabling regimes that suppress dissent and violate human rights. A commitment to social justice implies a responsibility to stand firmly against authoritarianism in all its forms. This involves not only supporting beleaguered democracies like Ukraine but also reaffirming a global commitment to human rights, accountability, and the promotion of equitable political structures.
In conclusion, the Trump-Putin summit serves as a stark reminder of the challenges facing global democracy in an era marked by rising authoritarianism. The failure to achieve a meaningful resolution to the conflict in Ukraine underscores the importance of principled diplomacy that prioritizes human rights and self-determination over personal ambitions. As advocates for social justice engage in discussions with those holding counter perspectives, it is crucial to emphasize the interconnectedness of global struggles. Defending democracy and human rights abroad is inherently linked to our ability to foster equitable societies at home. The lessons learned from this summit should galvanize us toward a vision of global solidarity that rejects the normalization of authoritarianism and champions the cause of justice for all.
The recent summit between former President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska has raised serious concerns regarding U.S. foreign policy and its implications for global democracy. Trump’s failure to secure a meaningful agreement to address the ongoing war in Ukraine not only underscores his administration’s historical reluctance to support Ukraine but also reflects a broader pattern of appeasement toward authoritarian regimes. The implications of this meeting are profound, igniting conversations about the necessity of a more principled U.S. foreign policy that prioritizes human rights and international stability over personal diplomacy.
Historically, the conflict in Ukraine has deep roots, stemming from Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014 and subsequent support for separatists in Eastern Ukraine. This aggression has tested international norms and prompted a united response from NATO and the European Union, which have extended military and economic support to Ukraine. However, Trump’s overtures to Putin, characterized by admiration rather than condemnation, signify a troubling departure from this collective stance by undermining the efforts of allies and emboldening autocratic leadership. The apparent inability of Trump to leverage U.S. influence during the summit reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of the geopolitical landscape, where compromise with aggressors can lead to further destabilization.
For Americans who wish to advocate for a robust and principled foreign policy, several actions can be taken. Engaging in grassroots advocacy that emphasizes the importance of defending democracy and human rights is imperative. This can include supporting organizations that provide aid to Ukraine, advocating for continued military assistance, and pressuring elected officials to prioritize diplomatic efforts that involve inclusive discussions with Ukrainian leaders. Furthermore, raising awareness about the consequences of failing to confront authoritarianism can galvanize public support for a more assertive stance against regimes that violate international law.
In addition to grassroots advocacy, it is crucial to engage in informed discussions about the implications of U.S. foreign policy on domestic politics. The normalization of conversations surrounding authoritarian leaders can lead to a dangerous precedent where democratic values are compromised in favor of personal diplomacy. Americans should engage in dialogues that highlight the historical failures of appeasement, drawing parallels with previous conflicts where a failure to confront aggression led to greater violence and instability. Such discussions can provide valuable context when addressing the perceived shortcomings of current and past administrations.
Lastly, fostering an understanding of the interconnectedness of global politics and local outcomes can empower citizens to hold their leaders accountable. The war in Ukraine is not merely a foreign policy issue; it has direct ramifications for global security, economic stability, and human rights. By emphasizing the importance of solidarity with oppressed nations, Americans can advocate for a foreign policy that reflects their values. Encouraging educational initiatives that promote awareness of international affairs and their implications on domestic issues can cultivate a more informed electorate that is equipped to challenge narratives that favor appeasement over accountability.
In conclusion, the recent summit between Trump and Putin serves as a stark reminder of the critical need for a principled foreign policy rooted in democratic values. As citizens, we have the power to influence the direction of our nation’s foreign policy through advocacy, informed discourse, and educational initiatives. By engaging in these efforts, we can challenge the normalization of authoritarianism and work towards a more just and stable world. The responsibility lies with us to ensure that our leaders uphold the principles of democracy and human rights in their dealings on the global stage.
In light of the recent developments surrounding the meeting between President Trump and President Putin regarding the ongoing war in Ukraine, it is crucial for individuals to take proactive steps to address the situation. Here’s a detailed list of actions we can take personally, along with real-world examples, petitions, and key contacts:
### Personal Actions to Take:
1. **Educate Yourself and Others**: - Stay informed about the conflict in Ukraine and the geopolitical implications of the U.S. response. Share this knowledge with friends, family, and community members.
2. **Support Humanitarian Efforts**: - Contribute to organizations providing aid to those affected by the war. Examples include: - **World Central Kitchen**: Provides meals to those in crisis. (Website: www.wck.org) - **Doctors Without Borders**: Offers medical assistance. (Website: www.doctorswithoutborders.org) 3. **Advocate for Comprehensive Support for Ukraine**: - Participate in campaigns that call for increased military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine and support for Ukrainian sovereignty.
### Specific Actions and Petitions:
1. **Sign Petitions**: - **Petition to Support Ukraine Aid**: Search for online petitions on platforms like Change.org or Care2 that advocate for continued U.S. military and humanitarian support for Ukraine. Example: - A petition titled "Support Ukraine: Stand Against Russian Aggression" can be found on Change.org. 2. **Contact Elected Officials**: - Write to your congressional representatives urging them to support robust aid for Ukraine and to take a strong stance against any negotiations that undermine Ukrainian sovereignty. - **Example Contacts**: - **Senator Chuck Schumer** (Majority Leader) - Email: schumer.senate.gov/contact/email-chuck - **Senator Mitch McConnell** (Minority Leader) - Email: mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contactform - **Representative Nancy Pelosi** (Speaker of the House) - Email: pelosi.house.gov/contact
3. **Organize or Participate in Local Events**: - Attend or organize local rallies or community forums focused on raising awareness about the Ukraine conflict and advocating for strong support for Ukraine. - Example: Check local community boards or social media for events hosted by groups like the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) or local peace organizations.
4. **Engage with Media**: - Write letters to the editor of local newspapers expressing your views on the need for an active U.S. response to the conflict, highlighting the importance of supporting Ukraine against aggression. - Find your local newspaper contact information online and submit your letter via their submission guidelines.
5. **Utilize Social Media**: - Use platforms like Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook to raise awareness about the situation in Ukraine. Share informative articles, graphics, and personal reflections. Tag relevant organizations and public figures to amplify your message.
6. **Join Advocacy Groups**: - Become a member of organizations that focus on foreign policy and humanitarian aid, such as: - **Amnesty International**: Advocates for human rights globally, including in conflict zones. (Website: www.amnesty.org) - **Human Rights Watch**: Investigates and reports on human rights abuses worldwide. (Website: www.hrw.org)
### What to Say:
When writing emails or letters to officials, consider the following points:
- Express your concern about the ongoing war in Ukraine and its humanitarian impact. - Urge them to support policies that provide robust military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine. - Highlight the importance of holding Russia accountable for its actions and ensuring that Ukraine's sovereignty is respected. - Encourage collaboration with European allies to present a united front against aggression.
### Conclusion:
By taking these actions, we can contribute to a more informed and active citizenry dedicated to supporting Ukraine and advocating for a just resolution to the conflict. Each step, no matter how small, can contribute to a larger movement that seeks to uphold democracy and human rights globally.