Click to see the full-size image
The negotiations between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin at Elmendorf-Richardson military base in Alaska marked a pivotal event in international diplomacy. The meeting, held in a “three-on-three” format (Russian delegation: Putin, Lavrov, Ushakov; U.S. delegation: Trump, Rubio, Whitcoff), lasted a record-breaking 2 hours and 45 minutes – longer than any previous Russia-U.S. summits in recent years. The atmosphere, as assessed by CNN, was far from cold: a handshake on the tarmac, a joint ride in the US presidential limousine “The Beast,” and even Trump applauding Putin.
Click to see the full-size image
Key Agreements and Leaders’ Rhetoric
Progress Without Breakthrough: Both leaders described the talks as “constructive” and “productive” but acknowledged the absence of a finalized deal on Ukraine. Trump stated: “There will be no deal until it’s made,” while emphasizing “substantial progress” and “good chances for agreement.” Putin expressed hope that the achieved understanding would “pave the way for peace.”
Pressure on Kyiv: Trump unequivocally placed responsibility for the next step on Zelensky and the EU:
“Now it’s up to Zelensky. And I’d also say European states need to be a little involved. But it all depends on Zelensky… Ukraine has to agree, but they might refuse.”
He justified this with a power imbalance:
“Russia is a great power, and Ukraine is not, despite Ukraine having truly brave fighters. I advise Zelensky to make a deal.”
He also criticized financial support for Kyiv under Biden:”Biden handed out money like candy, and Europe gave them a lot of money too.”
Click to see the full-size image
Guarantees and “Root Causes”: Putin agreed on the need to ensure Ukraine’s security but insisted on eliminating “the root causes of the crisis” and addressing “Russia’s legitimate security concerns” in Europe – a direct allusion to the impermissibility of Ukraine’s NATO membership. Trump confirmed discussions on security guarantees for Kyiv but ruled out a NATO framework. Trump also acknowledged that “Russia has major nuclear capabilities that must be factored in.”
Prospects for Dialogue: The key symbolic outcome was Putin’s invitation to hold the next meeting in Moscow, to which Trump responded: “Oh, that’s interesting! I could see that happening.” Leaders agreed to prepare a trilateral meeting involving Zelensky.
Meanwhile, European bureaucrats are in rush to sabotage any prospects of peace settlement. While Putin and Trump sought paths to de-escalation, London and Brussels activated mechanisms aimed at cementing division and militarization of the region:
British Defense Secretary John Healey announced readiness to deploy British troops to Ukraine “from the first day of a ceasefire” under the “Coalition of the Willing”.
British Defense Secretary John Healey
“Multinational coalition forces are ready to act from day one of a ceasefire. Military planning is complete,” he stated.
Stated objectives include “supporting the population, ensuring air and maritime security, and strengthening the country’s defense capabilities.” Healey declared:
“The best guarantee that Russia won’t renew aggression is a strong Ukraine,” ignoring Russia’s red-line warnings.
Though a plan to deploy 30,000 troops (The Times) was scrapped due to lack of consensus, London promotes a “realistic mission” for airspace control in western Ukraine, AFU training, and Black Sea demining.
EU leaders (France, Germany, Italy, UK, etc.) also released a joint statement rejecting any Russian concerns regarding NATO activities in Ukraine.
“Russia cannot have veto power over Ukraine’s path to the EU and NATO.”
This directly contradicts Moscow’s core demand to eliminate the threat of NATO eastward expansion – a primary conflict trigger. As Quincy Institute expert Anatol Lieven notes:
“I don’t see any European strategy at all. Before this year… they demanded things that will never happen, like full Russian withdrawal from all Ukrainian territories.”
Following summit, Trump stated that “a peace deal is the best way to stop the conflict.” However, per NYT, this “marks a significant departure” from the alleged agreements with European leaders (including Merz, Macron, Starmer), who insisted peace plan discussions “must occur only after a ceasefire.” Europe effectively accuses Trump of capitulating to the Kremlin.
Ignoring Russian security interests seems to be a joint position of the current NATO majority. The deployment of NATO forces in Ukraine under a cover of the ceasefire is one of the unacceptable scenarios for Russia. Therefore, by these declarations and public posture, the UK and other European states clearly demonstrate that they are not interested in a real peace settlement of the conflict. Instead of supporting the dialogue initiated by Washington and Moscow, European elites choose to entrench confrontation, further militarize Ukraine, and ignore the root causes of the crisis. This not only nullifies the results of arduous negotiations in Alaska but also heightens risks of escalation to direct NATO-Russia confrontation.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
