Since Donald Trump was inaugurated in January, a series of intense diplomatic maneuvers – full of announcements, reversals and behind-the-scenes strategies – have unfolded without producing a resolution to the war in Ukraine. The successive diplomatic meetings between Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska [on August 15], followed by a meeting with Volodymyr Zelensky in Washington and then talks with European leaders [on August 18], raise the question: Has a breakthrough become possible?
The answer remains unclear. Despite all parties praising the quality of the discussions, no specific details of a possible settlement, its terms or its timeline have been revealed to date. Meanwhile, the idea of an unconditional ceasefire has dropped from the agenda, and Russia has continued bombing Ukraine without losing favor with the American president.
In Alaska, Putin emerged as the main political beneficiary of the meeting. Welcomed with unprecedented honors by Trump, he scored a symbolic victory: To both his electorate and the international community, he did not appear as a pariah but as an indispensable peacemaker.
Beyond the staging, the Russian president largely imposed his approach. Now, Trump no longer supports an immediate ceasefire, as Kyiv and Brussels had demanded, but instead a “comprehensive agreement” with vague terms that would include recognition of Crimea as part of Russia, as well as the four regions in eastern Ukraine; the exclusion of Ukraine from membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO); the recognition of Russian as a second official language in certain regions; and the return to favor of the Orthodox Church under the Moscow Patriarchate. In exchange, Putin now appears to grudgingly accept the principle of Western security guarantees for Ukraine. Whether this major shift is genuine, however, remains to be seen.
You have 69.47% of this article left to read. The rest is for subscribers only.
