Alaska Summit: Trump, Putin Fail To Reach Deal To End Ukraine War In First Meeting Since Conflict Began
dailyexcelsior.com -- Saturday, August 16, 2025, 12:57:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–Russia Relations, Media Coverage & Press Relations
Anchorage, Aug 16: 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 Mr. Putin claimed they had hammered out an "understanding" on Ukraine and warned Europe not to "torpedo the nascent progress." Mr. Trump said he would call Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders to brief them on the talks.
Mr. Trump, who for years has balked at American support for Ukraine and expressed admiration for Mr. 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 Mr. Zelenskyy in the Oval Office and stanching the flow of some U.S. military assistance to Kyiv, Mr. Trump could not bring Mr. Putin even to pause the fighting, as his forces make gains on the battlefield.
The U.S. president had offered Mr. 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 Mr. 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 Mr. 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 before leaving Alaska, Mr. Trump insisted that the onus going forward might be somehow on Mr. Zelenskyy "to get it done," but said there would also be some involvement from European nations. That was notable since Zelenskyy was excluded from Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin's meeting.
The U.S. president had wanted to display his deal-making skills, while Mr. 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," Mr. Trump said while standing next to Mr. 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." Putin says Trump shows understanding' that Russia has its own interests For Mr. 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 Mr. 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.
Mr. Putin said Russia and the United States should "turn the page and go back to cooperation." He praised Mr. 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.," Mr. Putin said.
Despite not reaching any major breakthrough, Mr. Trump ended his remarks by thanking Mr. Putin and saying, "we'll speak to you very soon and probably see you again very soon." When Mr. Putin smiled and offered, "next time in Moscow," Mr. 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, Mr. Trump bragged that Mr. Putin echoed many of the U.S. president's long-standing grievances, including about the 2020 election. This suggests that Mr. Putin, a former KGB officer, may have left Mr. Trump with the impression that he'd notched a big win even as he left empty handed.
When Mr. Trump and Mr. 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, Mr. 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 Mr. 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 Mr. 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 Mr. 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 Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin would be a three-on-three discussion including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff. Mr. 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 Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin met privately with their interpreters and Mr. Trump then shocked the world by siding with the Russian leader over U.S. intelligence officials on whether Russia meddled in the 2016 campaign.
Mr. Zelenskyy's exclusion was also a heavy blow to the West's policy of "nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine." War still raging Russia and Ukraine remain far apart in their demands for peace. Mr. Putin has long resisted any temporary ceasefire, linking it to a halt in Western arms supplies and a freeze on Ukraine's mobilisation 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. (Agencies)
Sign Our PetitionThe recent summit between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, occurring in Anchorage, Alaska, has drawn considerable attention as the two leaders attempted to navigate the complex and ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Despite the high stakes of the meeting, the outcome was disappointing for those who hoped for a meaningful resolution to the war that has claimed thousands of lives and displaced millions. The summit illustrates not only the intricate dynamics of international relations but also highlights the recurring themes of power, diplomacy, and the consequences of past actions that shape our current political landscape.
Historically, the conflict in Ukraine can be traced back to Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, which was met with widespread condemnation from the international community. This act was emblematic of a broader struggle between Western interests and Russian imperial ambitions, revealing deep-seated tensions that have persisted since the Cold War. The U.S. and NATO's involvement in Eastern Europe has often been viewed through the lens of containing Russia, yet this approach has not yielded the stability that many had hoped for. Trump's summit with Putin offers a stark reminder of the limitations of American diplomacy when it is undermined by the erratic foreign policy decisions of its leaders, especially when those decisions are influenced by personal relations rather than strategic interests.
Moreover, Trump's record on Ukraine raises serious concerns about his commitment to international norms and the principles of self-determination. His past statements have often reflected a troubling admiration for autocrats and a skepticism towards U.S. alliances. This summit has been framed as a potential turning point where Trump sought to assert his "deal-making" prowess. However, his failure to secure any substantive agreement not only affirms the ineffectiveness of his approach but also highlights a worrying trend of appeasement towards authoritarian regimes. By sidelining Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and attempting to negotiate directly with Putin, Trump effectively undermined Ukraine's sovereignty and legitimacy on the world stage.
What is particularly disconcerting is Trump's assertion that the responsibility to resolve the conflict may rest with Zelenskyy and European nations, a statement that reflects a significant misunderstanding of the geopolitical realities at play. The ongoing war in Ukraine is not merely a regional dispute; it is a manifestation of larger global struggles involving democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. By placing the onus on Ukraine and its allies, Trump shifts the narrative away from the aggressor—Russia—while further marginalizing the voices of those directly affected by the war. This narrative not only distorts the reality of the situation but also serves to embolden Putin, who continues to pursue policies that destabilize not just Ukraine but the broader European security landscape.
In a broader context, this summit serves as a reminder of the importance of solidarity in the face of aggression and the necessity for a unified response from democratic nations. The world has witnessed the dangers of allowing authoritarian leaders to dictate terms without accountability. As advocates for social justice and global peace, it is essential to recognize the interconnectedness of struggles for self-determination and human rights worldwide. The failure of the recent summit illustrates the critical need for a robust, principled approach to foreign policy—one that prioritizes the voices of those affected by conflict and affirms the commitment to uphold international law. Continued advocacy for support of Ukraine, both militarily and diplomatically, is essential not only for Ukraine's future but also for the preservation of democratic values globally.
The recent Anchorage summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin serves as a stark reminder of the complexities and often troubling dynamics of international diplomacy, particularly in the context of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. For years, the war has resulted in immense human suffering, with approximately 13 million Ukrainians displaced and countless lives lost. The summit's failure to yield a meaningful agreement signals not just a missed opportunity for peace, but also reflects the broader geopolitical landscape that enables such conflicts to fester, even when diplomatic channels are allegedly open. Trump's inability to secure a deal raises questions about the sincerity of his commitment to resolving the crisis and suggests a troubling acquiescence to authoritarian regimes.
Historically, the relationship between the United States and Russia has been marked by cycles of tension and confrontation. The post-Cold War era saw an initial thaw in relations, punctuated by hopes for cooperation; however, the resurgence of aggressive nationalism in Russia under Putin, particularly following the annexation of Crimea in 2014, has led to a renewed adversarial stance. Trump's overt admiration for Putin and his reluctance to support Ukraine through military aid highlight a significant departure from long-standing U.S. foreign policy, which has typically viewed support for democratic movements as a cornerstone of global stability. This summit, thus, must be seen through the lens of a broader trend where authoritarianism is legitimized while democratic nations are left to fend for themselves.
As citizens of a democratic society, we must grapple with the implications of this diplomatic failure. The lack of a concrete outcome from the Anchorage meeting underscores the need for active civic engagement to hold our leaders accountable. It is vital to advocate for a foreign policy that prioritizes human rights, democracy, and international cooperation over appeasement of authoritarian figures. We can mobilize through grassroots campaigns, engage in dialogue with our elected representatives, and support organizations that promote peace and stability in Eastern Europe. By voicing our concerns and demanding a robust, principled approach to foreign policy, we can help reshape the narrative around U.S. involvement in international conflicts.
Moreover, it is imperative to educate ourselves and others about the historical context of the Ukraine conflict and the ramifications of U.S. foreign policy decisions. The more we understand the roots of the crisis—ranging from historical grievances to economic factors—the better equipped we are to engage in informed discussions. By framing the conflict not just as a bilateral issue between Ukraine and Russia, but as one that implicates global democratic norms, we can shift the conversation to emphasize solidarity with Ukraine and the necessity of international support. This education can also extend to understanding the role of NATO, the implications of military alliances, and the importance of supporting countries in their pursuit of sovereignty.
Finally, we should also recognize the potential for grassroots movements to influence change in U.S. foreign policy. The recent surge in activism around climate change and social justice illustrates that ordinary citizens can and do shape political discourse. By leveraging social media, organizing protests, and participating in town hall meetings, we can amplify our voices and advocate for a foreign policy that aligns with the values of justice and peace. Engaging with right-wing perspectives will be essential in this endeavor; we must challenge the notion that appeasing aggressive regimes is a viable path to peace. Instead, we must articulate a vision of diplomacy rooted in respect for sovereignty, human rights, and international law.
In conclusion, the Anchorage summit serves as a critical juncture for Americans to reflect on our responsibilities as global citizens. As we navigate the complexities of international relations, it is vital to advocate for policies that support democracy and uphold human rights. By engaging in informed discussions, mobilizing grassroots activism, and holding our leaders accountable, we can contribute to a world where peace is prioritized, and the voices of those suffering from war are heard. Let us take the lessons from this summit to inspire action and foster a commitment to a more just and equitable international order.
In response to the recent developments surrounding the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the lack of meaningful progress from international leaders, individuals can take action to advocate for a peaceful resolution. Below is a detailed list of ideas and actions that can be personally undertaken:
### 1. **Educate Yourself and Others** - **Action**: Stay informed about the Ukraine conflict, its history, and current events. Share resources with your community. - **Example**: Host a discussion group or book club focusing on literature about Ukraine, international relations, or conflict resolution.
### 2. **Support Humanitarian Aid** - **Action**: Contribute to organizations providing aid to those affected by the war. - **Example**: Donate to organizations like the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) or local Ukrainian support organizations. - **ICRC Donation Link**: [ICRC Donations](https://www.icrc.org/en/donate)
### 3. **Petitions for Government Action** - **Action**: Sign and share petitions that call for increased diplomatic efforts or humanitarian support for Ukraine. - **Example**: Use platforms like Change.org or MoveOn.org to find and sign relevant petitions. - **Petition Example**: “Demand the U.S. increase humanitarian aid to Ukraine” on Change.org.
### 4. **Contact Elected Officials** - **Action**: Write to your representatives urging them to take a stronger stance on supporting Ukraine. - **Who to Write**: - **Senator**: [Your State Senator's Name], email: [Senator's Email] (Find your Senator's email through [Senate.gov](https://www.senate.gov/)). - **Representative**: [Your Representative's Name], email: [Representative's Email] (Find your Representative's email through [House.gov](https://www.house.gov/)). - **What to Say**: Express your concerns about the ongoing conflict and urge them to prioritize diplomatic solutions. Example message: ``` Dear [Senator/Representative's Name],
I am writing to express my concern regarding the ongoing war in Ukraine and the recent summit between President Trump and President Putin. It is crucial that the U.S. government takes a strong and supportive stance in favor of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. I urge you to advocate for increased diplomatic efforts and humanitarian support for the Ukrainian people. Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address] [Your Email] ```
### 5. **Participate in Local Advocacy Groups** - **Action**: Join local organizations focused on peacebuilding or international solidarity. - **Example**: Look for groups like the Peace Action or local chapters of the United Nations Association. - **What to Do**: Attend meetings, volunteer for events, and participate in campaigns.
### 6. **Engage on Social Media** - **Action**: Use your social media platforms to raise awareness about the conflict and advocate for peace. - **Example**: Share articles, statistics, and personal messages supporting Ukraine, using relevant hashtags like #StandWithUkraine or #PeaceForUkraine.
### 7. **Attend Rallies and Events** - **Action**: Participate in demonstrations or events that call for peace in Ukraine. - **Example**: Check local events on platforms like Facebook or community bulletin boards for upcoming rallies.
### 8. **Contact International Organizations** - **Action**: Write to international bodies, such as the United Nations, urging them to take a stronger role in facilitating peace talks. - **Who to Write**: - **UN Secretary-General António Guterres** - Email: [UN Contact Page](https://www.un.org/en/contact-us) - **What to Say**: Advocate for their involvement in mediating peace talks and providing humanitarian aid.
### 9. **Support Refugees and Displaced Persons** - **Action**: Volunteer or donate to organizations that assist Ukrainian refugees. - **Example**: Organizations like the Refugee Council or local shelters.
### 10. **Promote Peaceful Conflict Resolution Programs** - **Action**: Advocate for educational programs focused on conflict resolution in schools and community centers. - **Example**: Support initiatives that promote dialogue and understanding among diverse communities.
By engaging in these actions, individuals can contribute to a broader movement advocating for peace and support for those affected by the conflict in Ukraine. Each action, no matter how small, can create a ripple effect leading to greater awareness and change.