US, Russia agreed on Ukraine security pledges, Witkoff says
keenesentinel.com -- Sunday, August 17, 2025, 5:56:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–Russia Relations, U.S.–NATO Relations
Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin agreed at their summit in Alaska last week that the U.S. would be able to offer Ukraine security guarantees, according to Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy.
"We got to an agreement that the U.S. and other nations could effectively offer Article 5-like language to Ukraine," Witkoff said on CNN's "State of the Union," referring to the NATO provision that says if one ally is attacked, it is considered an attack on all member states.
But Witkoff, who attended the leaders' meeting at a military base in Alaska on Friday, said their agreement stopped short of allowing Ukraine to achieve its longstanding goal of NATO membership.
"Putin says the red flag is NATO admission," Witkoff said.
Russia went into the summit demanding that Ukraine give up territory that Russia seized in its three-year war. Witkoff said Putin "made some concessions with regards with all five of those regions," and added, "There needs to be a discussion of Donetsk" with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy when he meets Trump at the White House on Monday, suggesting there is room to negotiate.
European leaders will be joining Zelenskyy at the White House meeting with Trump, in a show of support as Ukraine's leader faces growing U.S. pressure to agree to a quick peace deal with Russia that involves giving up territory.
Trump on Sunday insisted that he made "BIG PROGRESS ON RUSSIA" in a post on Truth Social.
While Trump had gone into Friday's summit with Putin seeking a ceasefire, he'd emerged saying he was going to focus on a final settlement.
Witkoff said the switch was made because Putin and Trump made "so much progress" that there was no need for a ceasefire period in which the details would be worked out.
"The thesis of a ceasefire is that you'd be discussing all of these issues that we already resolved" in Alaska, Witkoff said on CNN, noting that they couldn't finalize any discussion of land swaps because Zelenskyy needed to be directly involved. Trump didn't invite Zelenskyy to the meeting in Alaska.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday the U.S. hasn't ruled out a ceasefire in Ukraine as part of the goal of brokering a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine, while arguing that additional sanctions would be unlikely to force Putin to accept a deal.
Rubio also said that the U.S. remains committed to crafting a deal that includes both "what the border lines are going to look like" and Russia accepting that Ukraine "is a sovereign country."
"They have a right, like every sovereign country does in the world, to have, to enter into security alliances with other countries to prevent an invasion in the future, to prevent threats to their national security," Rubio said on CBS's "Face the Nation." "That's not an unreasonable request."
Rubio said no U.S. sanctions on Russia have been relaxed and the U.S. may eventually end up imposing tougher penalties if talks stall.
"And so those options remain to the president," he said. "The minute he takes those steps, all talks stop."
Engaging with Russia is necessary to end the war, "as distasteful people may find it," Rubio said.
Asked whether a ceasefire is off the table, Rubio said, "No, it's not off the table." At the same time, he added, "Let's be frank, this is not our war."
Sign Our PetitionThe recent developments surrounding the U.S.-Russia summit in Alaska hold significant implications for the geopolitical dynamics in Eastern Europe, particularly concerning Ukraine. The comments made by Steve Witkoff, special envoy to Donald Trump, indicate a complicated web of negotiations that highlights not only the urgency of the ongoing conflict but also the historical intricacies of U.S.-Russian relations. The notion of providing "Article 5-like" security guarantees to Ukraine—without full NATO membership—reflects a precarious balance between supporting Ukraine's sovereignty and navigating Russia's longstanding opposition to NATO's eastward expansion. This situation is emblematic of a more profound struggle for self-determination that has defined Ukraine's history since gaining independence in 1991, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
Historically, Ukraine has been caught in a geopolitical tug-of-war. Following the 1991 independence, the country faced challenges in establishing a cohesive national identity amidst deep-seated divisions between pro-European and pro-Russian sentiments. The 2014 annexation of Crimea by Russia intensified these divisions and underscored the vulnerability of Ukraine in the face of external aggression. The agreement discussed at the summit aims to provide Ukraine with a semblance of security, yet it raises troubling questions about the extent to which international powers are willing to support Ukraine in its struggle against Russian expansionism. The failure to grant Ukraine full NATO membership despite its aspirations and the historical context of its territorial integrity reveals a disheartening pattern of great power politics prioritizing realpolitik over genuine support for self-determination and sovereignty.
The current U.S. administration's approach suggests a willingness to negotiate peace, but it also reflects a troubling trend in which the voices of those most affected—namely the Ukrainian people—are sidelined in favor of high-level discussions between powerful leaders. By not including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Alaska summit, the U.S. has risked perpetuating a narrative that undermines Ukraine's sovereignty and autonomy in determining its future. This situation is reminiscent of earlier historical instances where the aspirations of nations have been compromised for the perceived interests of larger powers. The Treaty of Versailles after World War I, for instance, illustrated how the interests of the victors often overshadowed the rights of nations seeking self-determination.
Moreover, the prospect of a peace agreement that may involve territorial concessions raises critical ethical questions. The idea of negotiating away the territorial integrity of a nation—especially one that has faced significant aggression—sends a dangerous message about international norms surrounding sovereignty and territorial rights. It suggests that military might can dictate the terms of peace, ultimately undermining the principles of justice and fairness on which international relations should be grounded. This is particularly poignant given the historical context of post-colonial struggles for independence, where newly sovereign nations fought tirelessly against imperial powers for the right to exist without external interference.
Finally, as citizens concerned about social justice, it is crucial to recognize that the conflict in Ukraine is not merely a geopolitical issue; it is profoundly intertwined with the broader struggles of marginalized populations worldwide. The fight for Ukraine's sovereignty resonates with the global quest for self-determination and the rights of all nations to choose their alliances without coercion. Engaging in thoughtful discourse about the implications of these negotiations can empower individuals to challenge narratives that prioritize power over principle and encourage a more equitable approach to international relations. By advocating for the inclusion of all voices in peace discussions and standing firm against the normalization of territorial concessions, we can work toward a world that respects the rights and dignity of all nations, avoiding the pitfalls of historical injustices that have shaped our present.
The recent summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska has stirred a whirlwind of discussions surrounding the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, particularly regarding the precarious balance of power between the United States and Russia. According to Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy, the meeting resulted in a tentative framework for security guarantees for Ukraine, echoing NATO's Article 5 principles. However, the agreement did not extend to Ukraine's aspirations for NATO membership, which remains a point of contention for both sides. This development is emblematic of a broader struggle, wherein national sovereignty and territorial integrity are pitted against geopolitical maneuvering by powerful states.
Historically, Ukraine's quest for independence and affiliation with Western alliances has been met with vehement opposition from Russia. The annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the ongoing conflict in the Donbas region are stark reminders of Russia's willingness to assert its influence through military means. This backdrop highlights the importance of international solidarity with Ukraine, as its sovereignty continues to be threatened. The lack of a clear commitment from the U.S. regarding NATO membership for Ukraine raises questions about the reliability of American promises to defend democratic nations against aggression. This uncertainty not only emboldens Russia but also undermines U.S. credibility on the world stage.
In light of these developments, it is crucial for Americans to engage in informed discussions about the implications of U.S.-Russia relations on global security and democracy. One actionable step is to advocate for a more robust engagement with international organizations and alliances that prioritize collective security. By supporting measures that strengthen NATO's eastern flank and enhance military cooperation with Ukraine, we can send a clear message that aggression will not be tolerated. Furthermore, encouraging Congress to maintain and expand sanctions against Russia until it respects Ukraine's sovereignty is essential. Sanctions should not merely be punitive but also strategically designed to deter further aggression and hold the Kremlin accountable.
Additionally, public discourse around this issue must emphasize the moral imperative of supporting nations under threat from autocratic regimes. Highlighting the importance of Ukraine's struggle for democratic values can foster solidarity across political lines. Engaging with local representatives and urging them to support policies that prioritize human rights and national sovereignty will help ground our foreign policy in the principles of justice and equality. Activating grassroots movements that demand accountability from our leaders in foreign policy decisions can amplify the message that American citizens care about international stability and the upholding of democratic norms.
Finally, education plays a pivotal role in shaping public opinion and policy. By promoting awareness of the historical context and current challenges faced by Ukraine, we can cultivate a citizenry that is informed and engaged. Hosting community forums, discussions, and workshops that explore the complexities of U.S.-Russia relations and the implications for global democracy can empower individuals to communicate effectively on these issues. By fostering a culture of informed activism, we can ensure that the voices of those advocating for peace and security resonate powerfully in the halls of power.
As we navigate these turbulent waters, it is imperative to recognize that the fate of Ukraine is not solely a geopolitical chess game; it is a matter of principle that resonates with the core values of democracy and justice. The summit's outcomes serve as a reminder of the importance of vigilance and sustained advocacy in the face of authoritarianism. By taking collective action, we can influence U.S. foreign policy in a direction that upholds the rights of nations to self-determination and creates a more stable international order.
To address the complexities surrounding the recent discussions on Ukraine's security and the nuances of international relations, there are several proactive measures individuals can take to engage in this critical issue. Below is a detailed list of ideas, actions, and specific steps you can consider:
### What Can We Personally Do About This?
1. **Educate Yourself and Others**: - Understand the history and current context of the Ukraine-Russia conflict, including the implications of NATO involvement. - Share information via social media, community groups, or local discussion forums to raise awareness.
2. **Advocate for Peaceful Solutions**: - Promote dialogue and peaceful negotiations rather than military escalation or territorial concessions.
3. **Engage with Local Representatives**: - Write to your local lawmakers to express your views on foreign policy regarding Ukraine and Russia.
### Exact Actions You Can Personally Take
1. **Petition for Diplomatic Solutions**: - **Create or Sign Petitions**: Utilize platforms like Change.org or MoveOn.org to start or sign petitions that advocate for non-military solutions and prioritize humanitarian aid to Ukraine. - **Example Petition**: "Support Ukraine's Sovereignty Without Compromise" on Change.org.
2. **Contact Elected Officials**: - Write to or email your representatives urging them to support policies that prioritize peaceful negotiations. - **Who to Write To**: - **Senator Elizabeth Warren**: - Email: https://www.warren.senate.gov/contact - Mailing Address: 2400 JFK Federal Building, 15 New Sudbury Street, Boston, MA 02203 - **Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez**: - Email: https://ocasio-cortez.house.gov/contact - Mailing Address: 1655 Sedgewick Ave, 3rd Floor, Bronx, NY 10453
3. **Support Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)**: - Contribute to or volunteer with organizations providing support to Ukrainians affected by the conflict. - **Real-World Example**: Donate to organizations like Doctors Without Borders or the Ukraine Crisis Relief Fund.
4. **Engage in Peaceful Demonstrations**: - Participate in or organize local rallies or events advocating for peace and solidarity with Ukraine. Check local activist groups or social media for upcoming events.
5. **Use Social Media for Advocacy**: - Use platforms like Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook to share articles, express your views, and mobilize others. Consider hashtags like #StandWithUkraine or #PeaceForUkraine.
### What to Say
- **In Correspondence to Officials**: - **Subject Line**: Urgent Call for Peaceful Resolution in Ukraine - **Message**: "Dear [Official's Name], I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the recent developments in the negotiations between the U.S., Russia, and Ukraine. It is imperative that we prioritize diplomatic solutions that respect Ukraine's sovereignty and ensure lasting peace. I urge you to advocate for policies that support a peaceful resolution rather than territorial concessions or increased military involvement.
Thank you for your attention to this crucial matter.
Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address] (optional) [Your Email]"
This approach emphasizes the need for thoughtful engagement and advocacy on both personal and community levels. By taking these actions, individuals can contribute to fostering dialogue and promoting a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Ukraine.