Ukraine's Zelenskyy to meet Trump after US-Russia summit
fox23maine.com -- Saturday, August 16, 2025, 9:26:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–Russia Relations, Media Coverage & Press Relations
KYIV, Ukraine (AP) -- Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he will meet U.S. President Donald Trump in Washington on Monday after a Russia-U.S. summit ended without an agreement to stop the fighting in Ukraine after 3 1/2 years.
In a reversal only few hours after meeting Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump said an overall peace agreement, and not a ceasefire, was the best way to end the war. That statement echoed Putin's view that Russia is not interested in a temporary truce, and instead is seeking a long-term settlement that takes Moscow's interests into account.
Trump and Ukraine's European allies had been calling for a ceasefire ahead of any negotiations.
Zelenskyy, who was not invited to Alaska for the summit, said he held a "long and substantive" conversation with Trump early Saturday. He thanked him for an invitation to meet in person in Washington on Monday and said they would "discuss all of the details regarding ending the killing and the war."
It will be Zelenskyy's first visit to the U.S. since Trump berated him publicly for being "disrespectful" during an extraordinary Oval Office meeting on Feb. 28.
Trump, who also held calls with European leaders Saturday, confirmed the White House meeting and said that "if all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin."
Trump rolled out the red carpet on Friday for Putin, who was in the U.S. for the first time in a decade and since the start of his full-scale invasion of Ukraine. But he gave little concrete detail afterward of what was discussed. On Saturday, he posted on social media that it "went very well."
Trump had warned ahead of the summit of "very severe consequences" for Russia if Putin doesn't agree to end the war.
Zelenskyy seeks European involvement
Zelenskyy reiterated the importance of involving European leaders, who also were not at the summit.
"It is important that Europeans are involved at every stage to ensure reliable security guarantees together with America," he said. "We also discussed positive signals from the American side regarding participation in guaranteeing Ukraine's security."
He didn't elaborate, but Zelenskyy previously has said that European partners put on hold a proposal to establish a foreign troop presence in Ukraine to deter future Russian aggression because it lacked an American backstop.
Zelenskyy said he spoke to Trump one-on-one and then in a call with other European leaders. In total, the conversations lasted over 90 minutes.
Trump puts onus on Zelenskyy and Europe
Trump said in Alaska that "there's no deal until there's a deal," after Putin claimed the two leaders had hammered out an "understanding" on Ukraine and warned Europe not to "torpedo the nascent progress."
During an interview with Fox News Channel before returning to Washington, Trump insisted the onus going forward might be on Zelenskyy "to get it done," but said there would also be some involvement from European nations.
In a statement after speaking to Trump, major European leaders said they were ready to work with Trump and Zelenskyy toward "a trilateral summit with European support."
The statement by French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk and the European Union's two top officials said that "Ukraine must have ironclad security guarantees" and welcomed U.S. readiness to provide them.
"It will be up to Ukraine to make decisions on its territory," they said. "International borders must not be changed by force." They did not mention a ceasefire, which they had hoped for ahead of the summit.
EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said "the harsh reality is that Russia has no intention of ending this war anytime soon," noting that Moscow's forces launched new attacks on Ukraine even as the delegations met.
"Putin continues to drag out negotiations and hopes he gets away with it. He left Anchorage without making any commitments to end the killing," she said.
Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala said the summit confirmed that "while the U.S. and its allies are looking for ways to peace, Putin is still only interested in making the greatest possible territorial gains and restoring the Soviet empire."
Ukrainian and Russian forces are fighting along a 1,000-kilometer (620-mile) front line. Since spring, Russian troops have accelerated their gains, capturing the most territory since the opening stages of the war.
"Vladimir Putin came to the Alaska summit with the principal goal of stalling any pressure on Russia to end the war," said Neil Melvin, director of international security at the London-based Royal United Services Institute. "He will consider the summit outcome as mission accomplished."
Questions on a Trump, Zelenskyy and Putin meeting
Zelenskyy voiced support for Trump's proposal for a trilateral meeting with the U.S. and Russia. He said that "key issues can be discussed at the level of leaders, and a trilateral format is suitable for this."
But Putin's foreign affairs adviser, Yuri Ushakov, said on Russian state television Saturday that a potential meeting of Trump, Putin and Zelenskyy has not been raised in U.S.-Russia discussions. "The topic has not been touched upon yet," he said, according to Russian state news agency RIA Novosti.
Zelenskyy wrote on X that he told Trump that "sanctions should be strengthened if there is no trilateral meeting or if Russia tries to evade an honest end to the war."
Russian officials and media struck a largely positive tone, with some describing Friday's meeting as a symbolic end to Putin's isolation in the West.
Former President Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of Russia's Security Council, praised the summit as a breakthrough in restoring high-level dialogue between Moscow and Washington, describing the talks as "calm, without ultimatums and threats."
Russian attacks on Ukraine continued overnight, using one ballistic missile and 85 Shahed drones, 61 of which were shot down, Ukraine's air force said. Front-line areas of Sumy, Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk and Chernihiv were attacked.
Russia's Defense Ministry said its air defenses shot down 29 Ukrainian drones over Russia and the Sea of Azov overnight.
___
Morton reported from London. Geir Moulson in Berlin and Emma Burrows in London ontributed.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent dynamics surrounding the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, particularly in light of President Donald Trump’s interactions with both President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and President Vladimir Putin, illuminate the complexities of international diplomacy and the underlying geopolitical interests at play. The meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy, particularly against the backdrop of a Russia-U.S. summit that yielded little more than rhetoric, signals a critical juncture for Ukraine as it seeks to navigate a path toward peace and stability. However, the insistence on a long-term settlement rather than a ceasefire raises questions about whose interests are being prioritized and who truly bears the responsibility for achieving peace.
Historically, Ukraine has been caught in a geopolitical struggle between Russia and the West, dating back to the Soviet era and even earlier. Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Ukraine's independence in 1991 set off a series of events that have seen the nation oscillate between Western influence and Russian hegemony. The 2014 annexation of Crimea by Russia and the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine have only intensified these tensions. This historical context is crucial, as it highlights how the current leadership in the U.S. and Europe must approach negotiations with an understanding of Ukraine's unique position and the legacy of exploitation and imperialism that informs its current predicament.
Zelenskyy’s call for European involvement in guaranteeing Ukraine’s security is particularly poignant. It underscores the critical need for a multi-faceted approach to conflict resolution that does not solely hinge on U.S.-Russia dialogues. The absence of European leaders from significant discussions about Ukraine's future raises concerns about the reliability of security guarantees and the potential for unilateral decisions that may not reflect the desires or needs of the Ukrainian people. Involving European partners is not simply prudent; it is a necessity for creating a robust framework for lasting peace. The historical alliances formed during the Cold War and the subsequent European integration processes should inform current diplomatic strategies.
Moreover, Trump's statement that the onus is on Zelenskyy and Europe to "get it done" reflects a troubling trend in international relations where the burden of resolution is disproportionately placed on those most affected by conflict. It is a reiteration of the idea that local actors must bear the brunt of addressing the consequences of geopolitical strategies that they did not initiate. This sentiment echoes broader social struggles where marginalized communities are often expected to address systemic inequalities without sufficient support from those perpetuating the status quo. The international community must recognize that genuine peace cannot be achieved through the imposition of responsibility on the victim of aggression but rather through collaborative, equitable negotiations that consider the voices and needs of all stakeholders.
Lastly, examining the implications of Trump’s summit with Putin, where the lack of concrete outcomes raises questions about the sincerity of U.S. commitments to Ukraine, we must consider the wider ramifications of such diplomatic engagements. The notion that peace can only be brokered through appeasement or the prioritization of great power interests often leads to the sidelining of smaller nations like Ukraine, which are left to navigate the fallout of decisions made far above their pay grade. This historical pattern of sidelining nations in conflict for the sake of expedient diplomatic relations must be challenged. Advocates for social justice should emphasize the need for a reformed approach to international relations that prioritizes the voices of those who are most affected, ensuring that all nations, regardless of size, have a seat at the table.
In conclusion, as the dialogue surrounding Ukraine continues to unfold, it is imperative for observers and advocates alike to engage critically with the historical and political contexts that shape these discussions. The call for European involvement, the responsibility placed upon Zelenskyy, and the nature of U.S.-Russia relations all speak to the larger need for a more equitable and just approach to international conflict resolution. By framing these discussions within the broader struggles for self-determination, security, and dignity, we can better advocate for a future where the voices of all nations, particularly those like Ukraine, are heard and respected in the corridors of power.
The recent developments surrounding the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, particularly with U.S. President Donald Trump’s meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy following a U.S.-Russia summit, highlight a complex interplay of international diplomacy, historical context, and political maneuvering. The absence of a concrete resolution to the conflict, which has persisted for over three years, underscores the challenges faced by Ukraine in navigating a geopolitical landscape that often favors more powerful nations at the expense of smaller states. As Americans, understanding this dynamic is crucial, especially as we engage in discussions about foreign policy and the implications of our nation's actions on the global stage.
Historically, Ukraine has been a focal point of tension between Russia and the West, particularly since the 2014 annexation of Crimea by Russia and the subsequent conflict in Eastern Ukraine. This conflict has roots in a century of complex relationships involving national identity, territorial sovereignty, and the influence of larger powers. For the U.S., the situation represents an opportunity to affirm its role as a defender of democracy and international norms. However, the apparent willingness of the Trump administration to sideline Ukraine in favor of appeasing Russia raises significant concerns about the U.S.'s commitment to its allies and the principles of self-determination.
In this context, it becomes essential for Americans to advocate for a robust and principled approach to foreign policy. Engaging with right-wing perspectives that advocate for isolationism or a transactional view of international relations can be counterproductive. Instead, emphasizing the importance of solidarity with Ukraine and other nations facing aggression is crucial. This can be achieved through grassroots movements that promote awareness of the plight of Ukrainians and the necessity of international support in maintaining their sovereignty. By fostering public discourse that highlights these issues, we can encourage policymakers to prioritize human rights and democratic values in their foreign engagements.
Moreover, the discussions led by Zelenskyy regarding the involvement of European leaders in guaranteeing Ukraine's security are vital. The U.S. must not only support Ukraine but also collaborate closely with European allies to develop a coordinated strategy that addresses the roots of Russian aggression while respecting Ukraine’s sovereignty. This approach should include diplomatic efforts that emphasize collective security arrangements that could deter future incursions. Advocating for a united front among NATO allies can strengthen Ukraine's position and signal to Russia that aggression will not be tolerated.
Finally, it is imperative to hold our own government accountable for its foreign policy decisions. Engaging in local politics, contacting representatives, and demanding transparency in U.S.-Russia negotiations are steps that concerned citizens can take. The conversation should not be limited to mere criticism of the administration but should focus on constructive proposals that advocate for a principled stance on international relations. By framing our discussions around the themes of democracy, human rights, and international law, we can effectively challenge isolationist narratives and push for a more humane and just foreign policy that recognizes the inherent dignity and rights of all nations and their peoples.
In conclusion, the situation in Ukraine presents a critical platform for Americans to engage in meaningful dialogue about our role in the world. By understanding the historical context, advocating for international solidarity, promoting European involvement, and demanding accountability from our leaders, we can contribute to a more just and effective foreign policy that not only supports Ukraine but also upholds the values that define our nation.
Analyzing the article regarding ongoing tensions and diplomatic efforts surrounding Ukraine, here are some actionable steps that individuals can take to make their voices heard and advocate for peace and support for Ukraine:
### Personal Actions to Take
1. **Educate Yourself and Others**: - Stay informed about the situation in Ukraine, the implications of U.S.-Russia relations, and the role of international allies. Share what you learn with friends and family through discussions or social media.
2. **Advocate for Ceasefire Initiatives**: - Support campaigns that advocate for an immediate ceasefire and a peaceful resolution to the conflict. Engaging in local discussions or online forums can amplify the call for peace.
### Exact Actions
1. **Sign Petitions**: - **Petition for Peace in Ukraine**: Search platforms like Change.org or MoveOn.org for petitions calling for a ceasefire or increased humanitarian aid for Ukraine. - Example: A petition titled "Demand a Ceasefire in Ukraine" can be found on Change.org (you can search for it as it may vary over time).
2. **Write to Elected Officials**: - **Contact Your Senators and Representatives**: - Find your local representatives via the official Congress website (www.congress.gov). Use the following template for your message: - **Subject**: Urgent Action Needed for Ukraine - **Message**: "Dear [Official's Name], I urge you to advocate for a ceasefire in Ukraine and support initiatives that promote peace negotiations involving all stakeholders, including European allies. The war has caused immense suffering, and it is crucial for the U.S. to prioritize humanitarian efforts and diplomatic solutions." - Example Contacts: - **Senator Elizabeth Warren (MA)**: - Email: https://www.warren.senate.gov/contact - Mailing Address: 2400 JFK Federal Building, 15 New Sudbury St., Boston, MA 02203 - **Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14)**: - Email: https://ocasiocortez.house.gov/contact - Mailing Address: 1651 3rd Ave, New York, NY 10128
3. **Engage with Local Activist Groups**: - Connect with organizations like Amnesty International or local peace and justice groups that focus on international conflicts. Attend meetings or volunteer for initiatives that support humanitarian assistance for Ukraine.
4. **Social Media Advocacy**: - Use platforms like Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook to advocate for peace. Share posts about Ukraine, use hashtags like #StandWithUkraine, and encourage your network to participate in petitions and advocacy events.
5. **Participate in Rallies and Events**: - Look for local rallies or events advocating for peace in Ukraine. This can help raise awareness and show solidarity with those affected by the conflict. Check community boards, local activist websites, or social media.
6. **Support Ukrainian Communities**: - Contribute to organizations that provide aid directly to Ukraine, such as the Ukrainian Red Cross or similar humanitarian organizations.
7. **Call Your Representatives**: - Use platforms like 5calls.org to find calling scripts and contact information for your representatives. For example: - Call your senator's office and say, "I am calling to urge you to support peace initiatives in Ukraine and ensure that U.S. policies prioritize humanitarian assistance."
By taking these steps, individuals can contribute to a broader movement aimed at promoting peace and supporting the people of Ukraine.