'No deal': Takeaways from Trump's Alaska summit with Putin
delawareonline.com -- Saturday, August 16, 2025, 5:57:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–Russia Relations, Media Coverage & Press Relations
President Donald Trump called the Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin "very productive," but said "there's no deal."
WASHINGTON - Vladimir Putin caught a ride in the presidential limousine and achieved recognition on the world stage.
Donald Trump flew more than 4,000 miles and rolled out the red carpet for the Russian leader in Alaska - and left empty-handed after some three hours of negotiations.
A much-hyped summit between Trump and Putin that saw the U.S. president flex his deal-making skills achieved no major breakthrough in peace negotiations over Russia's war against Ukraine.
The talks culminated in a vague statement to the media in which Putin spoke of an "agreement." Trump was then left in the awkward position of declaring "no deal" had been reached.
A planned press conference? Called off. The two leaders spoke briefly and answered no questions.
"There were many, many points that we agree on," Trump said without elaborating. "A couple of big ones that we haven't quite gotten there," he added. "So there's no deal until there's a deal."
Trump said he'd be calling Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and NATO allies on his way home to debrief them on the conversation with his Russian counterpart, who had been isolated by Western leaders after invading Ukraine in 2022.
As the American president, who'd warned of "severe consequences" if a ceasefire wasn't reached, waved goodbye to the press while boarding Air Force One for Washington, Putin taxied down the runway in the distance.
Putin invokes 'root causes' of war, jabs Trump foe Biden
For a television president who regularly fields questions from reporters, Trump's quick exit after the meeting was abnormal.
The two men spoke for a combined 12 minutes - with Putin going first. He praised Trump for convening the meeting, saying relations between the two countries had fallen to their lowest point since the Cold War.
But he soon brought up old charges about the "root causes" of the conflict that he's long blamed on NATO enlargement and Ukraine's alignment with the West.
And while Putin notably said "the security of Ukraine should be secured" and Russia was "prepared to work on that," he did not say what he had in mind.
"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," Putin added, without saying what it entailed.
He then warned Ukrainian and European leaders not to "throw a wrench in the works" with "backroom dealings to conduct provocations to torpedo the nascent progress."
"I just don't think we heard anything that signaled any sort of shift in Russia's maximal position," said David Salvo, a former State Department official who served in Russia.
He cast Putin's comments as "grandstanding" and said of security guarantees for Ukraine, "I don't think he's ready to soften his position quite yet."
Putin also jabbed at former President Joe Biden and said he agreed with Trump's assertions that the war never would have happened if the Republican had won in 2020.
Trump said Putin's comments were "very profound." He described the meeting as "extremely productive" and said the two sides agreed on "many points" without divulging the details.
"We didn't get there, but we have a very good chance of getting there," Trump said.
Trump leaves without a ceasefire agreement
Hanging over the summit was a potential ceasefire, which Zelenskyy and European leaders thought could emerge from the talks.
But expectations fell quickly as Trump talked up potential "land swaps" that have been rejected by Zelenskyy. Trump sought to lower expectations ahead of the summit and cast the conversation as talks about future talks.
Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska told CNN while the summit was happening, "I think the best that we could hope for is that there is a commitment coming out of Putin to a ceasefire with enough contours to it that it is believable that it will be more than just a brief moment to check a box here."
The summit ended without any mention of a ceasefire by Putin or Trump, who repeated in an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity after the summit that he believed an agreement was in sight.
Trump added: "Now it's up to President Zelenskyy to get it done."
He indicated that a prisoner swap between Russia and Ukraine was part of the discussion.
Putin teases possible business deals with Trump
First, there were joint hockey games. Then, there were films promoting "traditional values." And at their Alaska summit, Putin made another enticement: potential economic investments.
"It is clear that the U.S. and Russian investment and business cooperation has tremendous potential," Putin said. "Russia and the U.S. can offer each other so much in trade, digital, high tech and in space exploration. We see that Arctic cooperation is also very possible."
Accompanying Putin at the summit was Kirill Dmitriev, the special envoy for investment and economic cooperation. The Putin adviser met with Trump envoy Steve Witkoff in Washington in April.
"He's bringing a lot of business people from Russia. And that's good, I like that, because they want to do business," Trump told reporters on Air Force One on his way to Alaska. "But they're not doing business until we get the war settled."
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick came with Trump.
Trump later referred to "tremendous Russian business representatives" at the summit and said "everybody wants to deal with us."
In his Hannity interview, Trump indicated that Putin also tried to flatter him by saying the 2020 election he lost to Biden was "rigged" and fanned baseless claims that the outcome was the result of widespread voter fraud.
Trump rolls out the red carpet for Putin
Putin received a warm reception in Alaska after years of being left out in the cold by Western leaders.
The summit began with Trump giving Putin an outreached hand, as the Russian leader walked down an intersecting red carpet on the tarmac to greet him. Trump clapped his hands in applause as Putin approached.
They shook hands, patted each other's arms, and walked together, posing for pictures on a platform with a sign reading "Alaska 2025." In the background: Military planes and personnel and green cloud-covered mountains.
A reporter shouted, "President Putin, will you stop killing civilians?" while Putin stood next to Trump on the platform. He gestured but didn't say anything.
Trump and Putin rode together, without aides, to the summit in Trump's limousine.
Gone was the frustration that Trump had expressed throughout the summer over Putin's reluctance to agree on a peace deal.
"I've always had a fantastic relationship with President Putin, with Vladimir," Trump said of his Russian counterpart as they shared a stage together in Alaska.
Now what? Severe consequences? Secondary Tariffs? Another meeting?
The lack of progress at the Trump-Putin summit raised questions about what comes next.
Trump said he planned to speak with Zelenskyy and NATO leaders to brief them. He again talked about moderating a three-way meeting between Putin and Zelenskyy.
And although he'd warned before the meeting that if Putin wasn't cooperative, he would face "severe consequences" and threatened tariff hikes on Russia's top trading partners, for now, he said he was letting China off the hook.
"Because of what happened today, I think I don't have to think about that," Trump told Hannity. "Now I may have to think about it in two weeks or three weeks or something, but we don't have to think about that right now, I think the meeting went very well."
Trump's next moves will be closely watched to see if he maintains the friendly posture toward Putin that he took at the summit or takes a firmer approach.
"By framing it as a positive meeting, in his own mind, it takes the pressure off of himself to make Russia pay a price for continuing the war," former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine John Herbst said. "At least for right now."
Trump told reporters before the meeting that he was "not looking to waste a lot of time and a lot of energy and a lot of money" on negotiations and wanted to see the war quickly wrapped up.
"The wildcard now is whether Trump's actually going to get tough on Russia, or whether it's going to be in sort of endless talks and letting Russia stall for time," said Salvo, managing director for the Alliance for Securing Democracy at the German Marshall Fund.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent summit between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska has reignited discussions surrounding U.S.-Russia relations, particularly in the context of the ongoing war in Ukraine. While Trump characterized the meeting as "very productive," the reality remains starkly different: no significant agreements were reached. This encounter underscores a broader narrative of diplomatic failures that have plagued U.S. foreign policy, especially under an administration that has frequently prioritized personal diplomacy over substantive policy discussions. The absence of a concrete deal speaks volumes, revealing not only the limitations of Trump's approach but also the broader implications for global peace and security.
Historically, U.S.-Russia relations have been characterized by a series of ups and downs, often reflecting the prevailing geopolitical climate. The Cold War, defined by ideological rivalry and military posturing, set the stage for the adversarial relationship that persists today. In recent years, the annexation of Crimea and ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine have further strained these ties, presenting a complex challenge for any administration. Trump's meeting with Putin, however, appears to gloss over these historical grievances, opting instead for a superficial dialogue that lacks the necessary depth to address the root causes of the conflict. The stark reality is that without acknowledging the historical context and the consequences of past decisions, any diplomatic effort is likely to fall short.
The summit's lack of concrete outcomes raises questions about the effectiveness of Trump’s so-called expertise in deal-making. The mere act of convening a meeting should not be mistaken for productive diplomacy. Trump's quick exit after a brief exchange with Putin, coupled with the cancellation of a planned press conference, indicates a reluctance to engage meaningfully with the complexities of the situation. Instead of leveraging this high-profile opportunity to advocate for the Ukrainian people's rights and sovereignty, Trump left the stage with vague assurances and an empty promise to further consult with NATO allies. This approach not only undermines the urgency of the conflict but also signals a troubling tendency to prioritize optics over substance in international relations.
Moreover, Putin's remarks during the summit, where he invoked the "root causes" of the war, serve as a reminder of the narratives that can shape public perception and policy. By blaming NATO's expansion and Ukraine's Western alignment for the conflict, Putin attempts to frame Russia's aggression in a light that absolves it of accountability. This rhetoric can resonate with certain segments of the American public and political landscape, who may share similar grievances against perceived Western imperialism. It is crucial for advocates of social justice and global equity to counter such narratives with a clear articulation of Ukraine's right to self-determination and the illegitimacy of Russia's military interventions. Failure to do so risks allowing authoritarian narratives to dominate the discourse surrounding international conflict.
Ultimately, the lack of a deal at the Trump-Putin summit reflects a broader theme of missed opportunities for genuine dialogue and conflict resolution. As advocates for social justice and peace, it is imperative to emphasize the need for accountability and comprehensive approaches to international relations. Engaging with historical context, recognizing the complexities of global power dynamics, and advocating for the rights of vulnerable populations are critical components of a just foreign policy. This summit provides a fertile ground for discussion about the responsibilities of leaders in promoting peace and the necessity of addressing systemic injustices—both domestically and globally. As we reflect on this meeting, we must continue to hold our leaders accountable and advocate for a vision of foreign policy that prioritizes human rights and justice for all.
the current U.S. administration, making veiled criticisms about President Biden and the direction of American foreign policy. This summit, characterized by its lack of substantial outcomes, serves as a critical lens through which we can examine the broader implications of U.S.-Russia relations, the effectiveness of American diplomacy, and the necessity of a unified approach to global security.
Historically, the relationship between the United States and Russia has been fraught with tension, particularly following the Cold War. The expansion of NATO and the West's support for democracy in Eastern Europe have often been cited by Russian leaders as provocations, feeding into a narrative that frames the U.S. as an aggressor rather than a collaborator. However, the reality is that the United States has the opportunity to engage with Russia not only to address ongoing conflicts, like that in Ukraine, but also to curtail the proliferation of nuclear arms and to tackle shared global threats such as climate change and terrorism. By dismissing dialogue as a failure when it yields no immediate results, we risk missing the opportunity to foster long-term solutions that are essential for both nations and the world.
The empty rhetoric of "no deal" and vague promises of cooperation showcased in this summit only underscore the necessity for Americans to advocate for a more transparent and accountable foreign policy. This includes demanding that leaders prioritize diplomacy over bravado, engaging in constructive dialogue rather than antagonistic posturing. Moreover, citizens should push for a reevaluation of how military alliances and interventions are framed and enacted, recognizing that the endless cycle of conflict does not lead to security but rather to instability. Engaging in local advocacy, participating in town hall meetings, and using platforms to discuss peace-building initiatives can amplify these critical conversations within communities.
In terms of actionable steps, Americans can also support organizations that focus on peace and diplomacy. Groups such as the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and the Center for International Policy advocate for a foreign policy that prioritizes diplomacy over military engagement. By aligning with these organizations, individuals can contribute to a collective voice that calls for a reassessment of how the U.S. interacts with global powers. Moreover, educating oneself and others on the historical and political nuances of U.S.-Russia relations can foster a more informed public discourse, bridging the gap between differing political ideologies and generating a more unified approach to international diplomacy.
Finally, it is crucial to hold our leaders accountable for their actions and statements. The quick exit from the summit and the lack of a substantive press conference highlight a broader trend of opacity within U.S. foreign policy. Encouraging transparency and demanding that elected officials provide clear explanations of their diplomatic strategies can foster a culture of accountability that serves to better inform the public and challenge narratives that prioritize militarism over dialogue. Engaging with right-leaning counterparts about the importance of diplomacy, presenting well-researched arguments, and emphasizing the shared benefits of peace could pave the way for more constructive discussions on foreign policy that transcend partisan divides.
In conclusion, the recent Alaska summit between Trump and Putin serves as a pivotal reminder of the complexities of international relations and the need for a thoughtful, strategic approach to diplomacy. As Americans, we possess the power to influence our leaders and advocate for a policy framework that prioritizes negotiation, mutual understanding, and global cooperation. By actively participating in the political process, supporting diplomatic efforts, and fostering informed discussions, we can work toward a more peaceful and secure world, one where dialogue takes precedence over discord.
While the recent summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska garnered considerable media attention, it ultimately yielded no significant agreements regarding peace negotiations over the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Here are several actions we can take as individuals to respond to this situation and advocate for a more constructive approach to international relations:
### Personal Actions
1. **Educate Yourself and Others**: - Stay informed about international relations, particularly regarding the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Share informative articles, podcasts, or documentaries with friends and family.
2. **Engage on Social Media**: - Use platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram to voice your opinions on the importance of diplomatic efforts and peace negotiations. Create or share posts using relevant hashtags such as #PeaceInUkraine and #DiplomacyFirst.
3. **Support Organizations**: - Contribute to or volunteer with organizations that promote peace and diplomacy. Examples include: - **International Crisis Group**: Focuses on preventing and resolving conflicts. - **Amnesty International**: Advocates for human rights and can provide resources on how to support affected populations.
### Advocacy and Political Action
1. **Petitions**: - Sign and share petitions that call for diplomatic solutions to the conflict in Ukraine. A relevant site for finding and signing petitions is **Change.org**. Look for petitions aimed at promoting peace talks or condemning military escalation.
2. **Contacting Elected Officials**: - Write to your congressional representatives to express your views on U.S.-Russia relations and the need for robust diplomacy regarding Ukraine. - **Find Your Representative**: Visit [House.gov](https://www.house.gov) to locate contact information. - Sample message: ``` Dear [Representative's Name],
I am writing to urge you to prioritize diplomatic efforts in resolving the conflict in Ukraine. The recent summit between President Trump and President Putin underscored the need for comprehensive dialogue rather than empty rhetoric. It is crucial that our government supports peace initiatives and engages with international partners to ensure stability in the region.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address] [Your Email] ```
3. **Engage with Local Events**: - Attend town hall meetings or community forums discussing foreign policy, and voice your concerns about the lack of effective diplomacy in the Ukraine crisis.
4. **Write Letters to the Editor**: - Submit letters to local newspapers emphasizing the importance of peaceful resolutions and the detrimental impact of military posturing on international relations.
### Specific Contacts
1. **Write to the Department of State**: - Address concerns directly to the Secretary of State regarding diplomatic relations. - **Contact Information**: - U.S. Department of State - 2201 C St NW - Washington, DC 20520 - Email: [Use the contact form on the State Department website](https://www.state.gov/contact-us/)
2. **Engage with the White House**: - Share your thoughts on the need for peace initiatives directly with the President's office. - **Contact Information**: - The White House - 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW - Washington, DC 20500 - Email: [Use the contact form on the White House website](https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/)
By taking these steps, we can collectively advocate for a more peaceful and diplomatic approach to international conflicts, emphasizing the importance of dialogue and cooperation over confrontation.