Anchorage, the largest city in Alaska, became the center of global attention on August 15, 2025.
Here, the long-awaited meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin took place.
The summit, intended to bring peace closer, ended without concrete agreements, leaving behind many questions and mixed assessments.
The talks were held in a “three-on-three” format behind closed doors at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson.
The atmosphere was saturated with symbolism: red carpets, honor guards, and F-22 jets patrolling the skies.
Yet behind the external spectacle, the decisions the world was waiting for never came.
What Trump and Putin said
U.S. President Donald Trump stated after the meeting:
There were many points we agreed on. There are several big ones where we haven’t reached agreement yet… There is no deal.
His words underscored the uncertainty hanging over the talks.
Vladimir Putin, for his part, stressed that resolving the conflict in Ukraine is only possible after
eliminating the security imbalance in Europe
. According to media reports, among his proposals were recognition of the annexation of Crimea, Ukraine’s abandonment of NATO, and special status for Donbas.
Western leaders responded that such concessions were unacceptable without Kyiv’s participation.
No full press conference followed the talks. Only brief remarks were made, which concealed more than they revealed.
World reactions
The international community reacted ambiguously to the event. Analysts at the Atlantic Council noted that
Alaska emboldened Putin, who will likely continue the war
.
In the U.S., Senator Marco Rubio emphasized:
Peace is still far away, and agreements without Ukraine are unacceptable
.
Commentators from the Daily Telegraph pointed out that Putin dominated the summit, while Donald Trump looked less confident.
Former tennis star Martina Navratilova even described him as “a man with the body language of the defeated.”
In Ukraine, the reaction was also reserved. A Gradus Research poll showed that most Ukrainians do not believe in a quick end to the war after the summit.
Expert Hanna Hopko stated that “Alaska became a trap not for Ukraine, but for Trump,” since Putin once again managed to use the negotiations to his advantage.
What’s next?
Despite the scale and symbolism, the Alaska summit was not a historic breakthrough.
Instead, it revealed differences between the sides and the Kremlin’s unwillingness to compromise on key issues.
For Washington, the event was more a test of policy than a true diplomatic achievement.
Whether this meeting becomes the first step toward a new format of negotiations or remains just a loud but empty event remains to be seen.
For Ukraine, the main thing is that such discussions do not happen without its participation, since no agreement can be fair without the voice of those directly affected.
