The recent summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and former U.S. President Donald Trump in Anchorage, Alaska, has reshaped the diplomatic landscape of the war in Ukraine, with many observers concluding that Putin walked away as the clear winner.
Putin’s Firm Stance
Upon his return to Moscow, Putin declared to senior officials that the summit had “brought us closer to the necessary solutions.” By this, he referred to Ukraine conceding to the very demands that underpinned Russia’s 2022 invasion — including territorial withdrawal and the abandonment of NATO membership ambitions. Analysts note that Putin offered little in the way of concessions, yet succeeded in shifting Washington’s stance closer to Moscow’s.
Shifting the Negotiating Framework
Before the summit, Trump had threatened consequences if Russia refused a ceasefire. By the end, however, no ceasefire was agreed and no consequences imposed. Instead, Putin reframed the negotiations: a ceasefire would no longer be the entry point but the final outcome of a comprehensive settlement. Trump reinforced this view on his Truth Social platform, stating that the priority should be a “Peace Agreement” rather than a “Ceasefire Agreement.”
Demands Difficult for Ukraine
Putin’s conditions included Ukraine’s withdrawal from the Donbas region and a formal renunciation of NATO aspirations. Such demands would significantly curtail Ukraine’s sovereignty and alter Europe’s post-Cold War security framework. While the U.S. has signaled these as potential compromises, critics argue that they represent a hardening of Russia’s position rather than a path toward peace.
Symbolism and Optics
The Anchorage meeting marked a symbolic rehabilitation of Putin on the global stage. Trump offered a red-carpet welcome, rode with Putin in the presidential limousine, and publicly engaged with him in ways that drew criticism in Washington but celebration in Moscow. Russian commentators described the meeting as a restoration of Putin’s international standing.
U.S. and European Concerns
Despite the optics, key issues remain unresolved. Washington has placed the burden on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to negotiate directly with Putin, but the Kremlin has consistently rejected such proposals. Another sticking point is security guarantees: Ukraine seeks firm protection from future Russian aggression, but Moscow opposes NATO membership for Kyiv. Discussions have included the idea of a Western-backed mutual defense clause, though it remains unclear whether such a measure would satisfy either side.
Limited Progress Beyond Symbolism
While the summit elevated Putin’s status, it did not deliver concrete agreements on trade or security. Russian economic officials traveling with Putin did not participate in the talks, and divisions persist over how to structure any future settlement. Analysts warn that without credible security guarantees for Ukraine, any agreement risks prolonging or reigniting conflict.
A Tactical Win for Moscow
For now, Anchorage is seen as a tactical victory for Putin, allowing him to maintain pressure on Ukraine while avoiding immediate concessions. Russian officials emphasized that there would be no unconditional ceasefire, with Senator Andrey Klishas reiterating that Moscow’s objectives would be achieved “either by military or diplomatic means.”
The summit underscores the ongoing volatility of the conflict: while Putin gained political leverage, the fundamental disputes over territory, sovereignty, and security guarantees remain unresolved.
