Trump and Putin: A strained relationship
Their complicated relationship will be put to the test at a summit in the U.S. state of Alaska on Friday, where the two leaders who claim to admire each other will seek to outmaneuver one another over how to end Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
While the two were close to a bromance during Trump's first term (2017-21), their relationship has grown strained during his second term. The U.S. president has expressed anger with Putin for pressing on with his brutal 3-year-old war in Ukraine, which Trump calls "ridiculous."
Trump describes the summit as "really a feel-out meeting" to evaluate Putin's readiness to negotiate an end to the war.
"I'm going to be telling him, 'You've got to end this war,'" Trump said.
The two leaders notably have radically different negotiating strategies: The Republican real estate magnate usually banks on making a deal, while the Russian president tends to take the long view, confident that time is on his side.
Referring to Trump's meeting with Putin, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Tuesday that Trump needs "to see him face-to-face ... to make an assessment by looking at him."
Trump praised Putin for accepting his invitation to come to Alaska, which was once a Russian colony.
"I thought it was very respectful that the president of Russia is coming to our country, as opposed to us going to his country or even a third place," Trump said Monday.
It will be only the second one-on-one meeting between the men since a 2018 Helsinki summit.
Trump calls Putin smart and insists he's always "had a very good relationship" with the Kremlin leader.
Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin during a joint news conference in Helsinki, Finland in 2018. The two leaders are set to meet face-to-face this week in Alaska. |
Doug Mills / The New York Times
But when Russian missiles pounded Kyiv earlier this year, Trump accused him of "needlessly killing a lot of people," adding in a social media post: "He has gone absolutely CRAZY!"
For his part, Putin has praised the Republican billionaire's push to end the Ukraine war. "I have no doubt that he means it sincerely," Putin said last year when Trump was running for president.
Since returning to the White House in January, the American president has forged a rapprochement with Putin, who has been sidelined by the international community since the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
Trump and Putin, 79 and 72, respectively, spoke for 90 minutes by phone in February, both expressing hope for a reset of relations.
But after a series of fruitless talks and continued deadly Russian bombing of Ukrainian cities, Trump has appeared increasingly frustrated.
"I am very disappointed with President Putin," Trump told reporters last month. "I thought he was somebody that meant what he said. And he'll talk so beautifully and then he'll bomb people at night. We don't like that."
Trump and Putin have met six times, mostly on the sidelines of international events during Trump's first term.
In his recent book "War," Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward wrote that Trump spoke to Putin seven times between leaving the White House in 2021 and returning there earlier this year. The Kremlin denies this.
But the defining moment in their relationship remains the July 2018 summit in the Finnish capital Helsinki. After a two-hour one-on-one meeting, Trump and Putin expressed a desire to mend relations between Washington and Moscow.
But Trump caused an uproar during a joint press conference by appearing to take at face value the Russian president's assurances that Moscow did not attempt to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election — even though US intelligence agencies had unanimously confirmed that it did.
"I have great confidence in my intelligence people, but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today," Trump said. "He just said it's not Russia. I will say this: I don't see any reason why it would be."
Given this history, Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen is worried about what could happen at the Trump-Putin summit.
"I am very concerned that President Putin will view this as a reward and another opportunity to further prolong the war instead of finally seeking peace," she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Mainichi
2 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Editorial: 80 years after World War II, now is the time for Japan to act for global peace
Eighty years have passed since the end of a war that brought Japan to the brink of destruction and claimed countless lives in the Asian countries it invaded. It is time to reaffirm the weight of the peace built on such immense sacrifices. The journey of postwar Japan, marked by reconstruction and economic growth while upholding a vow to never wage war again, is something to be proud of. This was made possible by the postwar international order, underpinned by the rule of law and free trade. However, this foundation is on the verge of collapse. The international community has failed to stop the two wars continuing in Europe and the Middle East, while the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump is disrupting the global economy with coercive high tariffs. The risk of nuclear weapons being used is increasing, and natural disasters caused by climate change are unending. The "Doomsday Clock," which warns of how close humanity is to its final hour, is set at its shortest time ever at 89 seconds to midnight. The logic of the powerful prevails In these turbulent times, the arrogance of powerful nations is rampant. The Israeli military is destroying the Gaza Strip in the Palestinian territories, while Russia is pressuring Ukraine, once referred to as "Little Russia," to surrender. This is a structure where the weak are suppressed. Nazi Germany incited hostility toward Jews and drove its people into World War II. As the number of people who experienced the war dwindles and the preservation of their memories becomes challenging, there is concern about the rise of distorted nationalism and exclusionism. Japan is no exception. Politicians have made remarks denying the historical facts about the Battle of Okinawa and the Nanjing Massacre. During the recent House of Councillors election, false rumors such as "foreigners are being given preferential treatment" and "crime rates are high" were rampant. "It is tough for us, though we're the ones supporting Japan's convenient lifestyle." This was a comment received by Jiho Yoshimizu, the representative director of the nonprofit Nichietsu Tomoiki Shienkai (the Japan Vietnam Mutual Support Association), which supports Vietnamese residents in Japan. Intolerance that excludes minorities is continuous with the logic of "survival of the fittest." We must not allow the clock to be turned back to an era of war. Postwar Japan has maintained war-renouncing Article 9 of its Constitution and bases its security on the Japan-U.S. alliance to avoid direct involvement in armed conflict. By relying on the U.S. military for security, rapid economic growth was also possible. However, there is no denying that postwar Japan's societal trend was strongly influenced by the idea of "one-country pacifism," or a desire never to be caught up in war again, as noted by University of Tokyo professor Tadashi Karube. Now that the Trump administration has turned its back on global stability, Japan's ability to devise and create peace on its own initiative based on its postwar experience is put to the test. The most urgent task is to rebuild order. Japan must listen to the voices of the Global South and help create fair international rules. Instead of lamenting its declining national power, Japan should work to strengthen the function of the United Nations as "a forum where middle powers can join hands with small countries to exert their presence," as stated by U.N. Under-Secretary-General Izumi Nakamitsu. The free trade system must be protected. Deepening dialogue with Southeast Asian countries and the European Union, and expanding the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), is a logical step. The creation of an environment that brings stability to East Asia is also urgent. Japan is in a position to propose the establishment of a regional framework for dialogue aimed at building trust. It is crucial not to impose "Japan-centric Asianism" as seen before the war, but to work as equal partners. Breaking away from 'own country first' policy According to a public awareness survey by the Japanese Red Cross Society, more than half of respondents believe "Japan is peaceful," while less than 20% feel "the world is peaceful." How can this gap be bridged? Professor Toshikazu Inoue of Gakushuin University, an expert on Showa-era (1926-1989) history, pointed out, "Japan must fulfill its fair share of responsibility in building world peace." There are notable citizen efforts. The Kyoto-based nonprofit Terra Renaissance sends staff to countries including Uganda in East Africa to help children, who were abducted by anti-government forces and forced to become soldiers, return home and reintegrate into society. Founder Masaya Onimaru explained, "We want to reclaim child soldiers and dismantle armed rebel groups. What is needed is to end conflicts through means other than violence." Now is the moment for Japan's political leadership to reflect on history and present a vision for a "world without war." It is perplexing that Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba chose not to issue a statement to mark the anniversary of the end of WWII. Diplomatic critic Kiyoshi Kiyosawa, who was slammed as a "pacifist" during wartime, lamented the narrow, self-centered nationalism in his "A Diary of Darkness," writing, "Japan sees only its own position." His words still strike at the heart of the issue, even 80 years later. We must not shut ourselves off from the world and be bystanders to others' plights. At this 80-year postwar milestone, what is required of Japan is action that spreads the practice of peace across the globe.
Japan Times
2 hours ago
- Japan Times
Trump's attack on Goldman could prompt watering down of Wall Street's independent analysis
U.S. President Donald Trump's criticism of Goldman Sachs' research on tariff risks could prompt some analysts to water down their research, investors and academics said, an outcome that could leave investors with less reliable information. The reams of research that banks such as Goldman produce are used by institutional investors, such as hedge funds and asset managers, in deciding how to allocate capital. Trump's comments — in which he lambasted Goldman, its economics team and CEO David Solomon and accused them of making "a bad prediction" — have triggered a debate on Wall Street about the possible fallout, according to interviews with banking industry sources and investors. At one Wall Street bank, Trump's comments spurred informal conversations among staff, a source familiar with the matter said. The source said they also discussed how to incorporate government data in the wake of Trump's decision to fire the head of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, claiming — without evidence — that its data had been politicized. Still, the bank was not considering changing the way research operates. "This is going to come down to a person's ability to withstand a barrage of criticism from the Oval Office, and the extent to which these banks provide support for their chief economists," said Dave Rosenberg of Rosenberg Research, who has worked in the economics departments at several banks. "If we notice that research is being watered down ... then we'll know that this has had an effect." Jack Ablin, chief investment strategist at Cresset Capital, said if banks do start self-censoring, smaller investors who do not have the resources to do their own analysis are likely to suffer most. Trump's criticism is his latest attack on corporate America and other institutions, and is a break from historical norms, where presidents have typically avoided calling out private companies and executives for things they do not like. Some companies that have considered passing on tariff costs to customers have faced public criticism, and Trump, who came to politics after running businesses, has intervened directly in private business decisions by making a deal with Nvidia to give a portion of its revenues from sales to China of AI chips to the government. Trump "certainly is taking a number of steps that diverge from the traditional view of the respective roles of the government and private industry,' said Henry Hu, a securities law professor at the University of Texas. In a social media post earlier this week, Trump said foreign companies and governments were mostly absorbing the cost of his tariffs, counter to Goldman's research. "Given that sell-side Wall Street analyst predictions have been about as accurate as random guessing, small investors will do just fine with the president exercising his First Amendment right about flawed Wall Street research," a White House official said. On Wednesday, Goldman's U.S. head economist David Mericle defended its research on CNBC, vowing to "keep doing" what the bank considers informative research. Goldman declined requests for further comment. Other major banks, including Wells Fargo, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank, Bank of America and Citigroup, declined to comment. There has already been evidence of self-censorship. A senior JPMorgan Asset Management investment strategist, Michael Cembalest, earlier this year said during a webinar that he refrained from voicing some of his thoughts on U.S. tariffs publicly. Shortly after Cembalest's comments, Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan's CEO, said that he expects analysts to speak their minds. Both Cembalest and the bank declined to comment for this story. Hu said there is a risk involved in even appearing to give way to political pressure. "Goldman's reputational capital is at stake here,' he said. "If their views on the economy become biased, and they are shown to be wrong, why would anyone choose Goldman to advise them on anything?' Mike Mayo, banking analyst at Wells Fargo, said independent research is critical for an investment bank's reputation. "Investment banks live and die by their reputation and independence. That transcends all other considerations." Wall Street research has long been tightly overseen, one source said, with supervisory analysts reviewing research reports to ensure that language is not inflammatory, emotive or partisan and that reports are objective and cite sources. That person said that if analysts feel unable to speak openly then investors will pay more or take greater risk. Liquidity will suffer and there will be less foreign participation in U.S. markets, the person said. It was large losses by smaller investors that triggered the first major probe of Wall Street research in the aftermath of the dot-com stock bubble of the late 1990s. Eliot Spitzer, then New York's attorney general, found that Wall Street analysts had swapped their honest opinions for unwarranted "buy" ratings on companies to help their banks win underwriting and advisory business. The result: a $1.5 billion global settlement payout by Wall Street and lifetime bans for some analysts. It remains to be seen whether the current kerfuffle will have an outsized impact on Wall Street or if it is a storm in a teacup, said Steve Sosnick, market strategist at IBKR. "It does raise a lot of questions," he added.
Japan Times
2 hours ago
- Japan Times
Modi slams ‘economic selfishness' in defiance of U.S. tariffs
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced tax cuts, pledged policy reform and urged the citizens to design and produce high quality goods at home, in a sweeping Independence Day speech that advocated for self reliance in a protectionist global economy. "In the global situation, economic selfishness is increasing day by day,' Modi said in his address to the nation from the historic Red Fort in New Delhi on Friday. "The demand of the time is to move ahead with courage and meet our own goals.' The remarks come against the backdrop of U.S. President Donald Trump's global trade war. In the last few weeks, Trump hit India with a 50% tariff rate — much higher than regional peers. The levies could hurt exports and put nearly 1% of the nation's gross domestic product at risk, analysts said. In the 103-minute speech, Modi batted for self sufficiency in critical sectors, including energy, minerals and defense. Labeling India's dependence on imports as "unfortunate,' Modi asked industrialists and the private sector to build quality goods and look at ways to lower production costs. "We should not waste our energy in belittling others, our focus should be on strengthening ourselves,' he said. "For a nation, the greatest criteria for self-dignity is its self-reliance,' Modi added, while addressing a crowd wearing white hats printed with the slogan "New India.' For years, Modi has promoted "Make in India" policy, with his government spending billions of dollars in incentives for companies to manufacture locally. However, the push for homegrown goods and technology have taken on new urgency amid the rising global uncertainty. The Indian leader said the government is taking steps to make the nation self-reliant in energy, with initiatives in the solar, hydrogen and nuclear sectors. He also added that the country is now working in "mission mode' in the semiconductor sector, with first locally made chips expected in the market by the end of this year. "The speech suggests that there is greater focus on self sufficiency across various sectors amid growing geo-economic fragmentation and weaponization of global supply chains,' said Sonal Varma, an economist with Nomura Holdings. New normal Hitting a nationalistic note, Modi said that India's security policy had entered a "new normal' where nuclear blackmail would not be tolerated. "We will no longer differentiate between terrorists, those giving support and strength to them,' said Modi, with the name of the military mission undertaken against Pakistan, "Operation Sindoor' spelled out with flower petals on a massive hoarding in the backdrop. He also said India and its farmers have sole right over its share of water from the Indus river. Declaring that the ways of war have changed, Modi said that India was adapting to the evolving warfare and will develop a "precise' and "targeted' indigenous weapon system in the coming decade, to protect strategic installations, cities and sacred places from missile and drone attacks. "This will be a formidable deterrent to any hostile attempt to harm us,' he added. Turning to domestic security, Modi announced the government will be setting up a "demography mission' to address the imbalance caused by infiltration and illegal migration into India. The government has been aggressively pursuing the issue of immigration from its Muslim-majority neighbor Bangladesh and has instituted policies in the past to counter it. Protecting farmers Modi reiterated his commitment to protect its agriculture, dairy and marine sectors from global headwinds. "I will stand like a wall against any harmful policies impacting them,' the prime minister asserted. "India will never accept a compromise on anything related to its farmers, cattle herders and fishermen.' Modi and his ruling party have seized on growing friction with the U.S. to bolster support from farmers ahead of a crucial state election. Farmers are one of the most influential voting blocs in the world's most populous nation. India's trade agreement with the U.S. has been stuck due to its reluctance to open up its domestic market to U.S. agriculture and dairy products. More reforms Hailing India's might, the prime minister said the nation's macro-economic fundamentals remain strong, with inflation in control and a foreign reserve war chest adequate. That means India "must focus on even greater goals now,' he said. The government will cut consumption tax for the first time since it was introduced nearly a decade ago, to spur economic demand and boost consumption. "We are bringing next-generation Goods and Services Tax reforms that will reduce the tax burden drastically across the country,' Modi said. Since its introduction in 2017, businesses had been calling for simplification of the complex tax structure. The changes will be unveiled around the Hindu festival of Diwali, scheduled for October this year, the Indian leader said, though he did not give details of the proposed changes. The tax tweaks could boost a slowing economy and lift disposable incomes for the middle class. India's central bank sees the economy expanding 6.5% in the fiscal year that started in April — same as last year and way below the average 8% growth seen before that. "The India GST reform could be a trigger to shake Indian markets out of their slumber,' said Rajeev De Mello, a portfolio manager at Gama Asset Management. The nation's equity benchmark, NSE Nifty 50 Index, is up 4% in 2025, underperforming the S&P 500's 10% gains and the MSCI China Index's 27% advance. The nation will also set up a task force that will suggest next-generation reforms in a time-bound manner, Modi added. Its mandate will be to accelerate economic growth, cut red tape, modernize governance, and prepare the country for the demands of a $10 trillion economy by 2047, he said.
