Russian President Vladimir Putin described his meeting with a high share with US President Donald Trump on Alaska as “Frank, factual and very useful” and claims that Moscow and Washington brought dialogue “more closely to the necessary decisions” in Ukraine.
The day after the summit spoke in Moscow and told Putin by higher officials that interviews with Trump were a rare opportunity for both parties to return their positions in detail. “At this level we did not have direct negotiations on this kind,” he said. “The conversation was very honest, factual, and in my opinion it brings us closer to the necessary decision.”
The Kremlin broadcast images of the meeting and framed the discussion as a timely and constructive step towards the end of the war, which has now raged for more than two years.
What did Trump and Putin discuss in Alaska?
According to diplomatic sources, Alaskan interviews focused on possible levels for peace settlement. Trump later told reporters that Ukraine should “conclude an agreement” with Russia and note: “Russia is very great and not.”
Reuters reported that Putin was pushing Ukraine to advance all the donations – with an industrial heart -focused Moscow – in exchange for freezing on most of the current front lines. This would be an important territorial concession of Kiev, which Ukrainian officials constantly excluded in public statements.
How did Ukraine react?
Trump organized a subsequent briefing with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelsky, with several European leaders. The source that is familiar with the discussion said that Trump had outlined Putin’s proposal, suggesting that the Kremlin could stop further advances if Donetsk gave up.
It has previously insisted that Ukraine will not agree with territorial concessions and claim that any peace agreement must be based on the full renewal of the sovereignty of Ukraine. The Ukrainian leader has not publicly commented on the reported details of interviews on Alaska.
What security guarantees are proposed?
In an effort to reassure Kiev, Washington hovered the idea of a collective defensive arrangement in NATO style, which would come into force in the case of a peace agreement. According to the Italian Prime Minister and other European diplomatic sources, the guarantee would not be a formal commitment of NATO Article 5, but a parallel mechanism that would reject future Russian aggression.
“As one of the security guarantees for Ukraine was proposed by the American side of Article 5, allegedly agreed with Putin,” said one diplomatic source AFP. Such a frame could be the spine of any peace plan supported by the Western match, although it remains unclear, as it would be forced or whether Kiev would accept it.
Why does it matter now?
Putin’s remarks suggest that Moscow is open to investigating negotiations, albeit under the conditions still strongly respected in Russian benefit. Trump’s insistence for Ukraine to “conclude an agreement” is a remarkable departure from the traditional Washington line, which focused on the armament of Kiev and pushing on the Russian withdrawal.
Whether these conversations really mean a turning point in the war remains uncertain. Meanwhile, Putin has welcomed the meeting as a success, Trump has suggested that a compromise is inevitable, and Ukraine is facing a daunting task to weigh international pressure against its own territorial integrity.
(Tagstotranslate) Putin
