Anchorage — the Alaska summit between russian president Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump ended without a ceasefire, instead hardening positions and exposing sharp divisions between Washington, Moscow, and European allies. What was meant to be a turning point in the war in Ukraine quickly devolved into a showcase of russian intransigence and American opportunism, leaving Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy more isolated than ever.
Trump, who had promised European leaders he would secure a ceasefire, abruptly shifted his stance after meeting Putin. Instead of pursuing immediate de-escalation, he endorsed Putin’s long-standing demand for a “comprehensive peace deal” that would include territorial concessions and security guarantees favorable to Russia. This shift, widely viewed as a betrayal in Europe, positioned Washington as an enabler of Moscow’s strategy rather than as a mediator of the conflict.
For Putin, the meeting was a diplomatic triumph. Kremlin officials openly celebrated that the russian president made no concessions while successfully pressing his agenda. Russian demands now center on Ukraine’s withdrawal from parts of Donetsk and abandoning its western military integration. By aligning with these demands, Trump effectively legitimized Russia’s objectives while portraying himself as a dealmaker on the world stage.
Zelenskyy, who has consistently ruled out territorial concessions, reiterated his refusal to cede Donbas. Yet he signaled willingness to attend a trilateral meeting with Trump and Putin in Washington. This balancing act reflects the limited options available to Kyiv, trapped between a Russian and an American administration more interested in optics than substance. European leaders, meanwhile, reaffirmed their commitment to sanctions and security guarantees for Ukraine, but their influence at the summit was minimal.
The humanitarian devastation of the Ukraine conflict, including the displacement of families and the destruction of entire cities in Donetsk and beyond, was almost entirely sidelined in the Alaska talks. Western officials who regularly invoke international law made little mention of the International Criminal Court’s charges or the staggering €500 billion reconstruction bill, preferring instead to echo Trump’s rhetoric. By reducing the war to a crude negotiation over territory, Washington once again ignored the deeper moral, legal, and humanitarian dimensions of the crisis.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Putin used the Alaska meeting to restate his preconditions for peace, most notably demanding Ukraine’s withdrawal from eastern Donetsk in exchange for freezing russian advances in the south. The report highlighted how Putin framed these demands as essential for ending the war, while making no compromises of his own.
The Guardian noted that European leaders had hoped Trump would secure a ceasefire but instead watched as the former us president embraced Putin’s vision for a broader peace deal. European alarm over Washington’s willingness to sideline their calls for immediate de-escalation, leaving Europe both divided and diminished in influence.
The BBC emphasized Zelenskyy’s response, reporting that the Ukrainian leader rejected territorial concessions but kept the door open for future negotiations, including a possible trilateral meeting in Washington. The piece also underlined European concerns that Ukraine was being pushed into an impossible diplomatic position where its sovereignty is treated as expendable.
Reuters reported that Trump’s embrace of Putin’s “peace over ceasefire” formula represented a dramatic shift in us policy, one that angered European allies while emboldening Moscow. The agency described the Alaska summit as a turning point where Putin left without making concessions, while Trump aligned with Russia’s long-standing preferences for structuring any peace settlement.
