Analysis: Trump and Putin Find Common Ground on One Issue: Biden
seattletimes.com -- Sunday, August 17, 2025, 6:25:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: U.S. Elections & Voting Rights, U.S.–Russia Relations, Foreign Policy & International Relations

ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- President Donald Trump and President Vladimir Putin of Russia did not agree on a ceasefire to the war in Ukraine during their meeting in Alaska. But they did agree on something else: They both despise Joe Biden.
During their private meeting and their public appearance in Anchorage on Friday, both leaders blamed Biden for the war in Ukraine, never mind that Putin was the one who ordered troops to invade his neighbor and keeps authorizing strikes against civilian targets.
The Russian president complained that Biden did not accede to Russian demands before the full-scale invasion 3-1/2 years ago, and he played to the current president's ego by agreeing that the war would not have happened had Trump still been in office in 2022. By Trump's account, Putin behind closed doors also endorsed the lie that Trump actually won the 2020 election, only to have it stolen by Democrats.
"I think that he respects our country now," Trump said of Putin during a post-summit interview on Fox News. "He didn't respect it under Biden, I can tell you that. He had no respect for it. I was so happy when he said this would have never happened. This -- all those lives would be saved if they had a competent -- if we had a competent president."
It was unorthodox, to say the least, to see a sitting American president join a foreign dictator accused of war crimes onstage in Anchorage to bash a former American president. But it underscored that Trump, with his increasingly authoritarian tendencies, in some ways finds more common ground with the repressive leader of Russia than he does with his own country's leaders.
Indeed, even though he expressed frustration with Putin in the weeks leading up to the Alaska meeting over the war in Ukraine, Trump has still never publicly said anything as harsh about the Russian leader as he does with great regularity about Biden -- or, for that matter, about former President Barack Obama and even, to a lesser extent, former President George W. Bush.
In that, too, Putin is like-minded. He has long nursed grievances against Bush and Obama, often venting during interviews and meetings about how he believes they mistreated him when they were in office. Putin, who has dealt with five American presidents during his quarter-century in power, has come to believe that they are all more or less alike in disregarding Russian concerns, according to people who have heard his rants -- all, that is, except Trump.
The shared animosity toward Biden provided a moment of enemy-of-my-enemy convergence between the two leaders during their Alaska encounter. And while analysts said it reflected genuine resentment on Putin's part, it also underscored his penchant for finding ways to play to the values and vanities of his foreign counterparts.
A former KGB officer once charged with managing agents during a Cold War stint in East Germany, Putin has long demonstrated a skill at adapting to the particulars of the person across the table. He does his research. He reads his briefings. He figures out what matters to them. And he finds ways of currying favor when it suits his interests.
When he hosted Strobe Talbott, a Russia specialist serving as President Bill Clinton's deputy secretary of state, Putin made a point of mentioning Fyodor Tyutchev and Vladimir Mayakovsky, the Russian poets Talbott studied at Yale and Oxford. "He wanted his visitor to know that he'd done his homework," Talbott wrote in his memoir.
When Bush, a man known for his deep faith, first met Putin, a man not known for his deep faith, in Ljubljana, Slovenia, in 2001, the Russian made a deep impression on the American by relating a story about a cross his mother had given him as a child.
The cross was the only object to survive a fire that burned down Putin's dacha, a sign of its importance, or so he told Bush. Putin at the time was not actually wearing the cross that was supposedly so dear to him, but a few months later took it to Genoa, Italy, to show Bush at their next encounter.
Putin likewise played to European leaders, at least in his early years in office. But he also used their personal vulnerabilities against them when he thought it would give him an advantage.
Knowing that Angela Merkel, then the chancellor of Germany, was afraid of dogs after once being bitten, Putin brought his black Labrador to a 2007 meeting and let it sniff around his uncomfortable visitor. Merkel deemed it a power play and later wrote that Putin was "enjoying the situation."
As for Trump, Putin understands his insecurity and need for validation. During a meeting in Japan in 2019, according to people in the room at the time, he listened as Trump boasted that Poland planned to name a military base "Fort Trump" and Israel planned to name a settlement "Trump Heights." Putin replied drolly, "Maybe they should just name Israel after you, Donald."
Putin certainly knew what he was doing in Alaska when he aired his disdain for Biden, grousing that the previous president did not defer to Russian concerns during the months leading up to the 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
"I tried to convince my former U.S. counterpart that we should not bring the situation to a point fraught with serious repercussions in the form of hostilities, and I said directly at the time that it would be a big mistake," Putin said, eliding over his own decision to order the invasion.
He went on, unasked, to endorse Trump's counterfactual version of history. "Today, we hear President Trump saying, 'If I had been president, there would have been no war,'" Putin said. "I believe it would have been so. I confirm this because President Trump and I have established a generally very good, businesslike and trustworthy contact."
Whether that is true is hard to say. Trump acts as if the war started with the 2022 invasion, but in fact it began in 2014 when Putin seized Crimea and territory in eastern Ukraine. The war persisted at a simmering level throughout Trump's first term and Russia never backed off even with Trump in office.
If it is true that Russia would not have mounted its full-scale invasion in 2022 had Trump still been president, Democrats maintain that it would have been because he was willing to let Putin dominate Ukraine without having to use force.
But Putin's statement on Friday was just what Trump wanted to hear. He has taken to calling the Ukraine conflict "Biden's war" -- not "Putin's war" -- as he deflects blame for failing to fulfill his campaign promise to end the fighting within 24 hours of taking office in January.
During his interview on Fox with Sean Hannity after the Alaska meeting, Trump described more efforts by Putin to stroke him behind closed doors.
"You know, Vladimir Putin said something, one of the most interesting things," Trump related. "He said, 'Your election was rigged because you have mail-in voting.' He said, 'Mail-in voting, every election.' He said, 'No country has mail-in voting. It's impossible to have mail-in voting and have honest elections.'"
According to Trump, Putin continued: "'You won that election by so much.' And that's how he got it. He said, 'And if you would have won, we wouldn't have had a war. You'd have all these millions of people alive now instead of dead.' And he said, 'And you lost it because of mail-in voting. It was a rigged election.'"
In fact, dozens of countries around the world have allowed some form of postal voting -- including Russia, where Putin signed a law permitting it in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Trump himself has cast ballots by mail. No independent investigation has found widespread fraud that would have changed the outcome of the 2020 election.
Whether Putin weighed in on domestic American campaign processes in quite the way Trump described is unknown. Trump has proved to be an unreliable narrator of events, often describing private conversations that supposedly substantiate his view of the world.
But if Putin gave the impression that he agreed that the 2020 election was rigged, he was appealing to one of Trump's signature fixations -- and successfully changed the subject from the demands that he stop the war.
During the interview with Hannity, Trump used the term "mail-in voting" 13 times and the word "rigged" another three times. The word "ceasefire" never passed his lips.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent meeting in Anchorage between former President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin has raised alarms about the troubling dynamics of global politics, particularly in relation to the ongoing war in Ukraine. While both leaders publicly expressed disdain for President Joe Biden, it is crucial to unpack the implications of their agreement and the underlying historical context that has led to this moment. Their converging animosity is not simply a reflection of personal grievance; it speaks to a broader pattern in which powerful actors manipulate narratives to shift blame, obscure accountability, and cultivate their own political agendas.
At the core of this political theater lies the reality of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, a direct aggression that has resulted in significant civilian suffering and geopolitical instability. It is vital to remember that this conflict did not originate with Biden’s presidency, but rather with Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine in 2022. However, by aligning themselves in their critique of Biden, Trump and Putin are attempting to create a narrative that absolves the Kremlin of responsibility while simultaneously fostering a sense of political unity against a common adversary. This tactic not only distorts the historical record but also undermines the legitimacy of democratic processes in both nations, with Trump’s endorsement of the unfounded claims about the 2020 election further complicating the landscape.
Historically, the relationship between the United States and Russia has been fraught with tension, particularly since the end of the Cold War. During this period, many Russian leaders, including Putin, have felt marginalized by Western policies and interventions. The grievances expressed by Putin regarding Biden reflect a long-standing narrative within Russian political discourse that positions Western leaders as antagonistic, regardless of their actual policies. By positioning Biden as the root of current tensions, Trump and Putin are participating in a political game that seeks to deflect from the real issues at hand—the need for accountability, dialogue, and genuine diplomatic efforts to resolve conflict.
Moreover, the alignment of Trump and Putin offers a glimpse into the troubling nature of right-wing populism, which often thrives on conspiracy and division. Trump’s willingness to echo Putin’s sentiments signals a dangerous erosion of traditional political norms, blurring the lines between patriotic dissent and collaboration with authoritarian regimes. This is a crucial point for discourse: Trump’s admiration for a leader who has consistently undermined democratic values raises questions about the state of American democracy and the willingness of its leaders to uphold accountability and justice. Presenting a united front against Biden, therefore, is less about substantive policy and more about political survival and power consolidation.
As citizens engaged in ongoing social struggles, it is vital to recognize the implications of such political alignments. The rhetoric of Trump and Putin not only obstructs meaningful dialogue regarding international conflict but also serves to diminish the voices of those suffering from the consequences of war. The people of Ukraine, along with countless others affected by imperialistic ambitions and political maneuvering, deserve more than scapegoating and blame-shifting. In advocating for a progressive agenda, it is essential to highlight these connections, emphasizing the need for accountability, solidarity, and active engagement in building a more just world—one that resists the temptations of authoritarianism, whether at home or abroad.
In conclusion, the Anchorage meeting between Trump and Putin underscores the complexities of contemporary geopolitics and the ways in which individual leaders exploit tensions for their own political ends. As we navigate these turbulent waters, it is imperative to hold those in positions of power accountable for their actions and rhetoric, recognizing that the stakes extend far beyond partisan disputes. By grounding our discussions in historical context and the voices of those most affected by these policies, we can create a framework for dialogue that prioritizes justice, peace, and genuine accountability.
The recent meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Anchorage, Alaska, reveals a disturbing convergence of interests that transcends national boundaries and political affiliations. By openly expressing disdain for President Joe Biden, both leaders have maneuvered to deflect criticism from their own actions while simultaneously fostering a dangerous alliance based on shared grievances. This moment serves as a stark reminder of the geopolitical implications of individual leadership styles and the ways in which personal animosities can shape international relations.
Historically, the relationship between the United States and Russia has been marred by conflict, misunderstandings, and ideological divides. The Cold War was characterized not only by military tension but also by a fundamental clash of values—democracy and human rights in the U.S. versus authoritarianism and state control in the Soviet Union. As we see today, Putin and Trump have managed to forge a connection that seems to undermine the progress made in global diplomacy since the fall of the Berlin Wall. This partnership of convenience is alarming, particularly in its potential to embolden far-right movements both domestically and internationally. The two leaders' shared animosity toward Biden not only diverts attention from pressing global issues, such as the ongoing war in Ukraine but also risks diminishing the moral authority of the U.S. on the world stage.
As concerned citizens, it is imperative to dissect this troubling alliance and recognize the underlying motivations at play. Trump’s rhetoric, which paints Biden as ineffectual and weak, serves a dual purpose: it bolsters his own political capital while simultaneously validating Putin's aggressive posture. This not only raises questions about Trump's commitment to democratic ideals but also signals a broader trend of normalizing authoritarianism in American politics. It is essential to engage in discussions that counteract this narrative by reaffirming the importance of democratic governance and accountability. By emphasizing the need for a principled foreign policy that advocates for human rights and international law, citizens can reclaim the narrative from those who seek to undermine it for personal gain.
To combat this growing trend, Americans can take concrete actions to hold leaders accountable for their rhetoric and policies. This includes advocating for transparency in foreign relations, urging lawmakers to prioritize diplomacy over aggression, and actively participating in community discussions that promote awareness of international issues. Grassroots movements can mobilize to pressure elected officials to denounce authoritarian alliances and instead promote policies that emphasize cooperation, dialogue, and respect for human rights. Furthermore, engaging with diverse media sources can provide a more nuanced understanding of global dynamics, enabling citizens to challenge misleading narratives and foster informed discussions.
Finally, education plays a critical role in shaping public perception of international relations and domestic politics. Promoting curricula that emphasize critical thinking and media literacy can empower future generations to discern fact from fiction, equipping them with the tools necessary to navigate complex political landscapes. By fostering an informed citizenry, we can cultivate a culture of accountability and resistance to authoritarianism, ensuring that the democratic values we hold dear are defended against those who seek to undermine them. This is not just a matter of national interest; it is a commitment to the principles of democracy, justice, and global solidarity that have the potential to shape a more equitable world.
In light of the troubling dynamics between Trump and Putin as outlined in the article, there are several actionable steps individuals can take to address the underlying issues and promote democratic values, accountability, and international cooperation.
### Personal Actions to Take
1. **Educate Yourself and Others:** - Stay informed about current events concerning U.S. foreign policy and its implications on global peace and democracy. - Share articles, documentaries, and books about the importance of a strong, principled stance against authoritarianism.
2. **Engage in Political Advocacy:** - Join local organizations focused on foreign policy, human rights, or democratic engagement. This could include groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) or the International Rescue Committee (IRC).
3. **Participate in Public Demonstrations:** - Attend rallies or peace marches that support democracy and oppose authoritarian regimes. Look for events organized by local advocacy groups or coalitions.
4. **Contact Elected Officials:** - Write letters or emails to your congressional representatives expressing your concerns about the normalization of authoritarianism and the importance of a strong, ethical foreign policy.
### Exact Actions You Can Take
#### Petitions - **Sign and Share Petitions:** - Look for petitions on platforms like Change.org or MoveOn.org that address foreign policy issues, authoritarianism, or support for Ukraine. For example, a petition calling for increased support for Ukraine or demanding accountability for leaders who undermine democracy would be relevant. #### Writing to Elected Officials - **U.S. Senators and Representatives:** - Identify your congressional representatives and reach out directly. You can find their contact information on the official U.S. Congress website.
**Example Contacts:** - **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://ocasiocortez.house.gov/contact - Mailing Address: 1658 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515
#### What to Say - When contacting officials, consider including points such as: - A strong condemnation of the alignment between Trump and authoritarian leaders like Putin. - Advocating for the protection of democratic institutions and support for international law. - Urging your representatives to support legislation that promotes human rights and holds authoritarian regimes accountable. - Expressing the importance of a clear and consistent foreign policy that safeguards U.S. interests while promoting global democracy.
### Community and Local Engagement - **Host or Attend Community Forums:** - Organize or participate in discussions at local community centers, universities, or libraries. Focus on issues of democracy, international relations, and the importance of standing up to authoritarianism.
- **Volunteer for Campaigns:** - Get involved with political campaigns that prioritize democratic values and international cooperation. This could involve canvassing, phone banking, or attending town halls.
### Conclusion By taking these steps, individuals can play a meaningful role in promoting democratic values and countering the rise of authoritarianism both domestically and internationally. Collective action and advocacy are essential in shaping a future that respects human rights and supports global peace.