Can Donald Trump End the War in Ukraine? Inside the High-Stakes Alaska Summit

Watch the Episode

Video originally published on August 13, 2025.

In a development that has sent shockwaves through the international community, American President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin are set to meet in Alaska this Friday to negotiate the fate of Ukraine. The bilateral summit, announced with minimal warning to America's allies, represents one of the most consequential diplomatic moments of the decade. With hundreds of thousands of lives lost since Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, the stakes could not be higher. The meeting could end the war, escalate it dramatically with full American military support for Ukraine, or result in anything from Ukraine's vindication to its permanent territorial division. Yet the most troubling aspect of this historic summit is what—or rather who—is missing: Ukraine itself will not have a seat at the table.

Key Takeaways

President Trump and President Putin will meet in Alaska on Friday, August 15, to negotiate the fate of Ukraine without Ukrainian representation at the table

Trump has stated he expects 'land swapping' negotiations, meaning Ukraine would be expected to cede territory to Russia as part of any agreement

Ukraine's President Zelenskyy has declared any agreements made without Kyiv's input are 'dead decisions' and insists on full territorial restoration

The summit was announced with minimal warning to allies, giving Ukraine and European partners little time to react or influence the agenda

European allies have warned that 'the path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine' and urged against rewarding Russian aggression

Russia demands recognition of its annexation of Crimea and four Ukrainian oblasts (Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, Luhansk), a ban on Ukrainian NATO membership, and restrictions on Ukraine's ability to rearm

The Rocky Road to Anchorage

The announcement of Friday's summit came in characteristic fashion for Trump's second term: almost entirely without warning, with limited explanation, and apparently very little advance warning for America's allies abroad. Even for close observers of geopolitics, the decision to host Vladimir Putin for a summit constituted a rapid reversal for the Trump administration. Just days prior, Trump's perspective on Putin appeared to have finally shifted into alignment with the rest of NATO, with headline news that Trump had acknowledged Russia's dictator had been playing his administration for time and leniency without any intention of actually stopping the invasion of Ukraine.

Over the preceding weeks, Trump had attempted to pressure Putin into stopping the Ukraine invasion on threat of an expanded international sanctions regime, targeting not just Russia but nations like China and India that have continued to buy Russian oil and natural gas. Putin, however, showed absolutely zero sign of interest in Trump's deadline to stop the war, initially set for September but then dramatically pushed forward to August 8. No serious negotiations between Russia and Ukraine took place, Russia continued its intense bombardment of Ukrainian cities, and neither side gave any indication they were ready to pull back from Ukraine's expansive front lines.

Despite Putin's apparent lack of interest in Trump's deadline, Washington continued to interface with Moscow. Last week, Putin and his allies engaged in several negotiating sessions with presidential envoy Steve Witkoff. It was out of those negotiations that the idea for an August 15 meeting was born—as the prior deadline to impose massive sanctions, August 8, slipped by with only minimal acknowledgement. On that day, the world turned its focus to a new set of Trump-imposed tariffs on over fifty nations, and the announcement of the Trump-Putin meeting in Alaska.

Trump's Stated Objectives and Approach

Headed into the talks, Trump has acknowledged repeatedly that Russia and the United States expect to engage in 'land swapping' during the negotiations—meaning the agreement will result in Ukraine being expected to cede at least some of its territory to Russia. When asked about how he'll determine whether Putin is serious, Trump told a press conference on Monday that he'll know within two minutes of the start of the meeting whether any progress will be achieved. That said, Trump has also described the summit as a 'feel-out meeting,' in which he'll try to warm Putin up to the idea of ending the war.

Depending on the result, Trump would then reach out to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Quoting Trump directly: 'I'll call him after, and I may say, "lots of luck, keep fighting," or I may say, "we can make a deal."' Trump has raised the possibility of a future trilateral summit between the US, Russia, and Ukraine, but has indicated that the Alaska meeting will probably be kept bilateral.

The rushed nature of the summit is undeniable. For a Russian and an American president to meet for a bilateral summit on barely a week's notice, with outstanding issues on the scale of Russia's war with Ukraine, is highly unusual—especially because it gives Ukraine and America's allies so little time to react. The choice of Alaska as the meeting location is not because the state is actually a true meeting point between the two nations; it's a nine-hour flight from Moscow and an eight-hour flight from Washington. Instead, the choice likely has to do with an outstanding warrant for Putin's arrest from the International Criminal Court. The US doesn't intend to enforce the warrant, but Putin would risk being stopped if he were to visit other nations that do intend to enforce it, potentially even by traveling over their airspace. To get from Russian territory to Alaska, however, would require just a few short minutes over international airspace.

No Place for Ukraine at the Table

The most troubling irony of this summit is that this bilateral meeting, set to essentially decide the fate of Ukraine if Putin is willing to play ball, won't even give Ukraine a seat at the table. This situation hasn't escaped the notice of Ukrainians, least of all Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who insisted after the Alaska summit was announced that any agreements made without Kyiv's input were 'dead decisions.'

Ukraine has been very consistent about the terms it's willing to accept in a peace negotiation: no less than the full return of lands Russia has occupied, and a restoration of Ukraine's internationally recognized borders. Practically speaking, that wasn't a demand Ukraine was particularly likely to get Russia to agree to, and any actual settlement between the two sides would almost certainly see Ukraine forced to accept Russian control over formerly Ukrainian lands. But for Trump to enter this bilateral meeting with the starting condition that Russia and Ukraine will be swapping land, and for Trump to suppose that America and Russia will make those decisions without Ukrainian involvement, is a massive blow to Ukraine's hopes of securing at least somewhat neutral terms to a ceasefire.

As the Chief of Staff to Ukraine's president, Andriy Yermak, stated on X: 'A ceasefire is necessary – but the front line is not a border.' And Zelenskyy himself, also on X: 'Russia refuses to stop the killings, and therefore must not receive any rewards or benefits.'

European Allies Sound the Alarm

In response to the news of the meeting, Ukraine and America's mutual allies in Europe sounded off with a collective message: great work to get Putin into a summit where a ceasefire could be a possibility, but make sure to keep pressure on Moscow, protect Ukrainian and European security interests, and get Ukraine in the room. As a collection of some of Europe's most important defense leaders put it in a joint response: 'The path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine. […] International borders must not be changed by force.'

European and Ukrainian leaders met with American Vice President JD Vance at a country house south of London on Saturday to offer a counterproposal that, according to the Wall Street Journal, would demand a ceasefire before intensive negotiations begin and would guarantee a reciprocal exchange of Russian and Ukrainian territory. British Prime Minister Kier Starmer described a commitment to 'not reward aggression or compromise sovereignty'—or to 'trust President Putin as far as you can throw him.'

But whether Washington actually pays attention to those demands once the summit with Putin begins is another story entirely. As of the time of writing, the US has yet to indicate that it'll adopt any of the positions that its European allies have suggested. It also hasn't made any mention of changing the way that a territorial exchange will be discussed to better align with Ukrainian expectations for its own sovereignty. European leaders have vowed a hard line on Russia moving forward, but in reality, there are limits to what the EU and its international partners could achieve through extended sanctions, ramped-up aid for Ukraine or anything else, if Moscow knows that Washington has already agreed to favorable terms for a deal.

The Possibility of Ukrainian Inclusion

There is some indication from Washington that Ukraine could be indirectly included in Friday's affairs. According to several US officials speaking anonymously, the prospect of inviting Volodymyr Zelenskyy to Alaska for the summit is currently under discussion, although it's not assured that Zelenskyy will actually get an invite. For that matter, it's also not clear that he would accept.

Although US officials do seem to describe the prospect of this bilateral meeting suddenly becoming trilateral as a realistic option, those are terms that Russia would be highly unlikely to agree to, unless it believed that the deck was stacked in its own favor. And at the same time, Zelenskyy and his inner circle will likely be hesitant to either go to Alaska with no promise of being included, or to participate in negotiations where Russia has suddenly, inexplicably decided that now is the time for a direct confrontation between Zelenskyy and Putin.

Barring that, Trump has agreed to a call with Ukraine and European allies before the meeting on Friday takes place, with representatives from NATO, the EU, and several major European leaders expected to take part. Whether those leaders can substantively shape Trump's approach, however, is an open question.

Diametrically Opposed Terms

Unfortunately, Ukraine and Russia's terms to accept a ceasefire are diametrically opposed. Ukraine wants its territory back, including all the land that Russian forces currently occupy, and the isthmus of Crimea, captured and annexed by Russia all the way back in 2014. Ukraine wants the option to join NATO, it wants Russian war crimes prosecuted, it wants security guarantees, and it wants to be done with Russian wars of expansion. As Zelenskyy has repeatedly emphasized, Ukraine's constitution does not allow the nation's government to simply negotiate away its land.

Russia, however, has refused to budge on its own demands, which are diametrically opposed to the terms that Ukraine has laid out. Russia wants full control and global recognition of its claim over not just Crimea, but the four Ukrainian oblasts, or regions, of Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, and Luhansk—including territory in those oblasts that it doesn't currently control, and has never managed to capture, over the course of this three-and-a-half-year invasion. Russia's terms also include a ban on Ukrainian membership in the NATO alliance, strict controls over Ukraine's ability to re-arm itself, and agreements to prevent the deployment of Western forces on Ukrainian soil.

Potential Outcomes: The Optimistic Scenarios

When trying to game out the potential outcomes of Friday's summit, there really aren't many possibilities that would satisfy both sides. One option that could at least leave all parties engaged would be that the US and Russia focus on establishing a plan for a larger series of peace talks, bringing in Ukraine, the nations of Europe, and potentially even Russian partners like China as a counterweight. Perhaps Trump and Putin could have a more frank discussion about where Russia would be willing to compromise, if Putin intends to explore terms for a peace within the privacy of a meeting behind closed doors.

Or, team Trump could find out from team Putin which of its public demands are actually non-negotiables, and which ones are points where Russia is privately willing to compromise. And as unlikely as it may be, the possibility cannot be discounted that if this meeting does involve discussions of territory changing hands, it could end with Ukraine gaining back a portion of the territory that Russia currently occupies, or even seeing its borders restored to pre-2014 boundaries.

However, all outward indicators would suggest that these scenarios are incredibly unlikely.

Potential Outcomes: The Troubling Realities

For the United States to deny Ukraine a place in these talks, as Washington seems on course to do, would suggest that if a deal is reached between Washington and Moscow, then it's a deal that would have to be imposed on Ukraine, instead of a deal that Ukraine would voluntarily accept. Of those sorts of deals, possibly the best-case scenario would be a freeze in the current line of conflict, the establishment of a demilitarized zone or fortified border of some kind, and a situation similar to the one shared by North and South Korea.

Washington could agree unilaterally to Russia's claim that it should occupy the entirety of the four oblasts it claims to have annexed, or, seeing that the US would agree to something like that, Putin and his delegation could even try to push further. The US and Russia could agree to prohibit Ukraine from joining NATO, they could agree to pressure Europe to end its sanctions regime, or they could agree to terms that would ensure that Ukraine can't rearm, can't welcome a coalition of European allies, and can't otherwise protect itself against further Russian aggression.

In a worst-case scenario, Russia could essentially clear the way for a brief interlude in the war, for Moscow to rest, resupply, and reorganize its troops along a frozen front line a few hours' drive from Kyiv, before re-trying the lightning assault that it first attempted back in 2022—and in those circumstances, probably succeeding.

The Critical Question: Why Exclude Ukraine?

The question of why these troubling scenarios seem more plausible than the idea that Trump could force concessions out of Russia comes down to one simple question: Why else would Ukraine not be in the room? If the United States intended to gain concessions from Putin, or force Putin to accept Ukraine and NATO's terms for a peace, then what would be the purpose in excluding Ukraine?

Could this all be some Machiavellian attempt to get Putin alone, before holding his face to the fire and showing that America still calls the shots? It's not technically impossible. But if Ukraine and its European allies are trying to figure out why Kyiv doesn't have a seat at the table, then it's difficult to ignore the much more obvious explanation: Zelenskyy isn't invited because if Zelenskyy were in the room, then he'd never agree to what will be discussed there.

The answer to whether this assessment is correct will be revealed on Friday, in what promises to be one of the single most pivotal moments of this year, and quite possibly, this decade in geopolitics.

Related Coverage

FAQ

When and where is the Trump-Putin summit taking place?

The summit is scheduled for Friday, August 15, in Alaska. The meeting was announced with barely a week's notice, which is highly unusual for a bilateral summit of this magnitude.

Why is Ukraine not included in the Alaska summit?

The meeting is being held as a bilateral summit between the US and Russia only. Trump has indicated he may call Zelenskyy after the meeting and has raised the possibility of a future trilateral summit, but Ukraine will not have a seat at the table for this initial meeting. There is some discussion of potentially inviting Zelenskyy to Alaska, but it's not confirmed.

What does Trump mean by 'land swapping'?

Trump has acknowledged that negotiations will involve 'land swapping,' meaning any agreement would result in Ukraine being expected to cede at least some of its territory to Russia. This represents a starting position that contradicts Ukraine's demand for full territorial restoration.

What are Ukraine's terms for peace?

Ukraine demands no less than the full return of all lands Russia has occupied, restoration of its internationally recognized borders (including Crimea, annexed in 2014), the option to join NATO, prosecution of Russian war crimes, and security guarantees. Zelenskyy has emphasized that Ukraine's constitution does not allow the government to simply negotiate away its land.

What are Russia's demands?

Russia demands full control and global recognition of its claim over Crimea and four Ukrainian oblasts (Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, and Luhansk)—including territory it doesn't currently control. Russia also wants a ban on Ukrainian NATO membership, strict controls over Ukraine's ability to rearm, and agreements preventing deployment of Western forces on Ukrainian soil.

Why was Alaska chosen as the meeting location?

The choice is likely due to an outstanding International Criminal Court arrest warrant for Putin. While the US doesn't intend to enforce it, Putin would risk being stopped if visiting other nations that do intend to enforce it, potentially even by traveling over their airspace. Getting from Russian territory to Alaska requires just a few minutes over international airspace, making it a safer option for Putin.

How have European allies reacted to the summit?

European allies have expressed concern while cautiously supporting the effort. They've emphasized that 'the path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine' and that 'international borders must not be changed by force.' European and Ukrainian leaders met with VP JD Vance to propose a counterproposal demanding a ceasefire before negotiations and guaranteeing reciprocal territorial exchange. British PM Kier Starmer committed to 'not reward aggression or compromise sovereignty.'

What happened to Trump's previous deadline for Putin to stop the war?

Trump initially set a September deadline, then dramatically pushed it forward to August 8. Putin showed no interest in the deadline, no serious negotiations took place, and Russia continued its bombardment of Ukrainian cities. The deadline passed with minimal acknowledgement as attention shifted to new Trump-imposed tariffs and the announcement of the Alaska summit.

Sources

About the Author

Jackson Reed

Jackson Reed creates and presents analysis focused on military doctrine, strategic competition, and conflict dynamics.

About the Team →