The Trump–Putin Anchorage Summit: Style Over Substance

On Friday 15 August 2025 in Anchorage, Trump greeted Putin with full pomp: red carpet, flyovers, and a tone of theatrical cordiality. He called the summit “extremely productive”, yet no ceasefire was agreed, and no concrete commitments emerged regarding Ukraine’s fate.  Putin departed with his prestige enhanced—evidenced by the spectacle—and no need to change course. Analysts at the Atlantic Council noted that Putin “got away with not even agreeing on a pause”, allowing Russia to continue her offensive unscathed. 

European leaders were openly hostile to any talks that might sideline Ukraine. They insisted Moscow must not gain a veto over Ukraine’s path to EU or NATO membership, and reaffirmed unwavering support for Kyiv’s sovereignty. 

The Diplomatic Mismatch: Conflicting Demands and Weak Leverage

Trump’s approach reveals two key issues:

1. Clashing Expectations

   
   

   • Russia demands territorial concessions or partial recognition, leveraging battlefield gains.

     
     

   • Ukraine demands a ceasefire, security guarantees, and respect for sovereignty, refusing to barter territory. 

     
     

   • Europe stands firmly behind Ukraine, rejecting territorial compromise and demanding escalated sanctions on Russia. 

   
   

Trump seemed to side with a “comprehensive peace agreement” over a ceasefire, echoing Russia’s framing where peace equates to territorial bargaining. 

2. Eroded US Leverage

   
   

   Trump’s recent policies, including attempts to extract half of Ukraine’s mineral revenues in return for support, have eroded trust. This stance amplifies Ukrainian scepticism of American reliability and fuels European concerns about transactional diplomacy.

What to Expect from the Trump–Zelensky Meeting on Monday

The forthcoming Washington meeting comes amid deep scepticism:

• Ukraine will likely be uncompromising, pressing for tangible security guarantees rather than vague “agreements”. President Zelensky has already called for strong, explicit assurances from both the United States and Europe. 

  
  

• Europe’s role may be decisive, insisting on continued sanctions and rejecting any deal that ignores Ukraine’s sovereignty—a striking contrast to Trump’s less assertive posture toward Russia.

  
  

• Trump’s credibility is in question, given his flirtations with resource-for-security trade-offs. His “it’s up to Zelenskyy” posture signals a shift of responsibility onto Ukraine, while sidestepping American strategic commitments.

Assessment of Trump’s Shuttle Diplomacy: An Uphill Battle

Factor	Outlook
Northern Anchorage Summit	More spectacle than substance: no progress on the ground while elevating Putin’s diplomatic standing.
Ukrainian Red Lines	Firm rejection of territorial compromise; demands ceasefire and security guarantees.
European Backing	Strong, unconditional backing for Ukraine, rejecting any Soviet-style arrangements for "power sharing" between Ukraine and Europe.
US Reliability	Tarnished by transactional overtures (e.g. mineral deal), weakening negotiating legitimacy.

Trump’s diplomatic gambit appears ill-suited to resolve a conflict where the demands of peace—rooted in principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity—clash fundamentally with those of the aggressor. Without a shift in US posture—moving from transactional manoeuvring to principled, enforceable support aligned with European allies—his shuttle diplomacy is likely to falter. Ukraine’s steadfast alignment with Europe renders any framework that ignores these fundamentals not just fragile—but potentially dangerous in perpetuating the war.