Trump's Misstep in Alaska

In a historic meeting in Alaska, US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin came face-to-face, ending more than three years of Western diplomatic isolation of the Kremlin. The choice of Alaska for the meeting was significant, as Russians, including major figures in state media, routinely claim Alaska for Russia.

Timothy Snyder, a renowned historian and author of 20 books, wrote an article discussing the summit for Project Syndicate. According to Snyder, Trump's approach in Alaska was a "listening exercise" to Putin's words. However, Trump has a history of repeating Putin's words without making policy himself.

During the summit, Trump threatened "severe consequences" if Putin did not accept an unconditional ceasefire in Ukraine. Yet, so far, the consequences of Trump's words have been more words. Putin, on the other hand, proposed an obviously ridiculous and provocative counter to Trump's demand for an unconditional ceasefire, implying that Russia continues bombing.

Trump's foreign policy approach involves making fantastic promises and using obnoxious bullying tactics with foreign leaders. However, his meeting with an indicted war criminal (Putin) signaled that the killings, torture, and abductions in Ukraine do not matter to him.

Trump has made extraordinary concessions to Russia in exchange for nothing at all. For instance, at the 2025 Alaska summit, Trump made the extraordinary concession of supporting Russia's demand for an "agreement before a ceasefire," rather than Ukraine's and Europe's opposing demand for a "ceasefire before agreement." This effectively shifts pressure onto Ukraine to cede territory to end the war; no formal agreement was announced after the meeting.

Moreover, Trump grants that Russia can determine Ukraine's and the US' foreign policy on the crucial point of NATO membership. This encourages further aggression, as granting Russia the right to decide the foreign policy of other countries undoes the world order.

Abandoning the obvious legal and historical responses to criminal wars of aggression (reparations and trials) encourages war in general. Trump does not speak of justice for Russian war criminals or of the reparations Russia owes. Putin, on the other hand, is not moved to end the war in Ukraine, even when his propaganda is repeated by the US president.

Foreign enemies perceive Trump's bullying tactics as weakness, and they do not work abroad. Putin, however, has no reason to prefer Trump's vision of a beautiful future over his own, which includes a puppet government in Ukraine, a population cowed by violence, and resources in Russian hands.

In conclusion, the Alaska summit between Trump and Putin raises concerns about the future of US-Russia relations and the stability of the world order. The concessions made by Trump to Putin, without any clear benefits, and the lack of commitment to justice and reparations for Ukraine, suggest a dangerous shift in US foreign policy.