The announcement by Donald Trump of a meeting with Vladimir Putin in Alaska on August 15 shocked Kyiv and Western allies. Instead of new sanctions or pressure on Russia, this development shifted the international negotiation landscape regarding the war in Ukraine.
Expert Vitalii Portnikov draws parallels with previous diplomatic moves: ultimatums, joint Western sanctions, and negotiations meant to constrain Russia. Now, Portnikov observes, Trump appears to leverage the war for his own political agenda, such as pressuring India, rather than isolating Russia or China.
The possibility of territorial exchanges between Ukraine and Russia has become a topic of speculation. Nevertheless, Portnikov stresses that both Russian and Ukrainian constitutions rule out such trades, and the international community continues to uphold Ukraine's territorial integrity.
Historical precedents—like Munich 1938 and Czechoslovakia—demonstrate that appeasement only emboldens aggressors and threatens statehood. Any concessions would likely lead to political turmoil and increased instability in Ukraine.
Portnikov underlines that Ukraine does not intend to trade territory with Russia, and Europe’s firm stance along with clear communication with the US should help avoid diplomatic traps. Putin, meanwhile, seeks to break Russia’s isolation by securing a meeting with Trump as part of his broader geopolitical ambitions.
Ending the war should only be possible under terms recognizing Ukraine’s independence and territorial integrity, not through ultimatums or backroom deals. Peace terms must serve the interests of Ukraine and its partners, and not simply reflect agreements between powerful states.
