Opinion Progress was made in Trump-Putin summit, even as sticking points remain

US President Donald Trump’s decision to align with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s approach to peace in Ukraine at the Alaska Summit has provoked sharp criticism in Europe and at home. Yet this reaction may be missing the essence of what Trump is trying to do. He has long been indifferent to the censure of the mainstream press and foreign policy establishment that labels him “soft on Putin.” Trump has endured that line of attack for a decade, including attempts to remove him from the White House during his first term. Across three presidential campaigns — in 2016, 2020, and 2024 — Trump has consistently reaffirmed his conviction that the United States needs better relations with Russia. In his latest campaign, he promised a quick end to the war in Ukraine. The Alaska Summit was the culmination of that commitment. By moving beyond the narrow objective of a ceasefire and pressing for a peace agreement, Trump has signalled recognition of battlefield realities, rather than deference to Putin. Speaking to a television channel after the summit, Trump bluntly stated that Ukraine has little chance of defeating Russia, a far larger power.

Both leaders spoke of “considerable progress” in Alaska. The main sticking point, however, remains the issue of territorial concessions. Putin is pressing for Ukraine to cede parts of the Donbas still under its control in return for Russia freezing the rest of the frontline. For Kyiv, this is a bitter pill to swallow. Trump has said he will urge Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy —due at the White House on Monday — to accept concessions in exchange for the benefits of peace. Europe, briefed by Trump after the summit, has not outrightly rejected the idea of territorial compromise. But European leaders insist on robust security guarantees for Ukraine and the preservation of its freedom to choose its security partners. The reality, however, is stark: Neither Ukraine nor Europe holds a veto over US policy. Should Trump decide to disengage from Ukraine — a move that would resonate strongly with his anti-war MAGA base — Kyiv’s resistance would collapse quickly. Europe, for its part, lacks the capacity to replace Washington as Ukraine’s security guarantor. This imbalance creates space for Trump’s peace diplomacy in the coming weeks. Flexibility in Kyiv and Brussels could open the door for a second Trump-Putin summit to formalise new arrangements for Ukraine. But entrenched resistance to compromise across the Atlantic could still derail the process.

Advertisement

India, for its part, welcomed the progress at Alaska. A thaw in US-Russia relations tends to widen India’s geopolitical space. Yet Delhi faces an immediate challenge: Trump’s threat of secondary tariffs on Indian purchases of Russian oil. These tariffs, set to take effect on August 27, could impose a crippling 50 per cent duty on Indian exports to the US, its most important trading partner. At the summit’s close, Trump sent mixed signals by saying he would decide on the tariffs “in a couple of weeks,” once the Ukraine situation becomes clearer. For India, the moment demands deft diplomacy abroad and a credible economic plan at home to cope with the potential shock of punitive tariffs.