Alaska's quiet is pierced with a cacophony of questions over Trump-Putin summit
It was hunted by Mike Dunleavy himself on a trip to an island in the Bering Sea, the narrow strait of water which separates the US from Russia, where plane will cross into American airspace before his first foray onto US soil in almost a decade.
The governor, the state's most senior politician, proudly tells me that there is another trophy from his hunting trips on show in the nearby airport, a large brown bear hide, encased in glass.
Follow latest updates from Ukraine war
Alaska is a vast wilderness which is sparsely populated. But the quiet is being pierced now by a cacophony of questions over this summit.
Why was Putin invited here? What does he want? What's he willing to concede? And is Donald Trump about to walk into his trap?
The summit will take place on a military base on the outskirts of Anchorage, Alaska's biggest city.
It was thrown together at short notice so there were few venue options available, given the security that is required.
Even so, many of the visiting journalists and support staff for politicians are staying in Airbnbs because there are not enough hotel rooms available for everyone.
There is the sense that this is a momentous occasion.
The last time Putin met a US president was in 2021, when he exchanged starkly differing views with in Geneva.
But that was before his invasion of Ukraine in 2022. He's been a pariah ever since, wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged war crimes, including the abduction of Ukrainian children.
With this invite, is bringing him back in from the cold.
I ask Governor Dunleavy whether Putin is being rewarded for his invasion of a sovereign nation.
"I don't think so," he replies, "I think this is an opportunity for the president to sit down face to face [with Putin].
"And the president is going to ascertain really quickly in a face-to-face meeting whether he's serious or not for peace. It's difficult to solve these wars unless you have a discussion with the participants."
In a green, timber-framed house around the corner, Meg Leonard - a one-time Republican who describes herself as a "never Trumper" - has a different view.
On a tree in her front garden, the Ukrainian flag hangs. She bought it after watching Zelenskyy's disastrous meeting with Trump in the Oval Office in February on TV.
Read more:Ukrainians are appalled at Trump's naive and cack-handed diplomacy
Zelenskyy was mocked for not wearing a suit and told by Trump he "didn't hold the cards" in the situation.
"I think he was denigrating the president of Ukraine and that is not good," she says.
"Right after that, I ordered the flag and hung it up because I support Ukraine. Putin should not be allowed to take land that is not his.
"I think Donald Trump thinks he's a strongman and that Putin should capitulate to him.
"I don't think Putin has any intention of doing that."
Meg says she is appalled that this meeting is taking place one-on-one, without Ukraine's president. Trump has said that Vlodymyr Zelenskyy will be invited to any follow-up meeting.
"Trump should not be making decisions for Ukraine," Meg says, "Zelenskyy should at least have a voice in what is being decided. It is his country and his people.
"Putin's going to be five miles from here. He's not welcome by me. He is an international criminal; he should be arrested. He is killing women and children, and people in hospitals."
But you don't have to go far in Alaska to find a contrasting view.
In Whittier, a port town mostly home to fishermen, boat operators and tourists, wildlife photographer Tim Colley from New York thinks Trump is an underestimated dealmaker. He's not concerned about Zelenskyy's absence from the summit.
"I think Trump truly wants peace," Tim says, "At some point in time, you've got to decide how many more people need to die. Does Zelenskyy want to just keep throwing people into the fire?
"I think these two guys [Trump and Putin] have probably the ultimate egos in the world. I'm not sure Zelenskyy's got the self-control to tread lightly on those egos."
There is a symbolism to this meeting taking place in Alaska. The US bought the state from Russia in 1867. It's an example of how territories can be traded.
Ukraine is nervous that their land may, too, be carved up, without them in the room.
Trump has promised that is not on the table in this initial meeting with Putin, but the US president is famously unpredictable.
When he met with Putin in 2018 in Helsinki, he went against his own intelligence community to side with the Russian president, suggesting there hadn't been Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
The people of Ukraine, who are enduring a terrifying and intensifying onslaught from Russia, will watch nervously as this summit takes place thousands of miles away without an advocate for them in attendance.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
12 minutes ago
- New York Times
New Orleans Mayor Joins Long Line of Louisiana Politicians Accused of Corruption
Hundred-dollar bills stashed in a freezer. Riverboat casino licenses sold to the highest bidder. Truckloads of granite traded in a quid pro quo. Louisiana has a long and colorful history of political corruption allegations, which for decades have ensnared lawmakers at many levels of government. The most recent was Mayor LaToya Cantrell of New Orleans, who was indicted on Friday after a lengthy federal investigation. According to the charges laid out in the indictment, Ms. Cantrell abused public funds to facilitate a romantic relationship with her bodyguard, a city police officer, and then sought to cover up the personal time they spent together in New Orleans and on out-of-state trips while he claimed to be on duty. Ms. Cantrell's lawyer said on Friday that he needed to review the indictment before commenting; he declined to comment again on Saturday. Here's a look back at some of the most significant corruption scandals in Louisiana history: Richard Leche After the assassination of Huey Long, a popular Louisiana governor turned United States senator, in 1935, Richard Leche emerged as his successor. But Mr. Leche's single term as governor came to an early end when he resigned in 1939 amid corruption allegations. His resignation failed to stave off charges, and in 1940, he was convicted of mail fraud in a plot that prosecutors said involved a dealer selling trucks to the state's Highway Department at excessively high prices, and then giving Mr. Leche a kickback. He served five years in prison before President Harry S. Truman pardoned him in 1953. Huey and Earl Long Earl Long, the lieutenant governor under Leche in 1939, was swept into the state's highest office when his predecessor resigned. Mr. Leche's scandals loomed over Mr. Long's first term, and in 1940, Long was himself charged with embezzlement. The charges didn't stick, however, and Mr. Long would go on to win the governorship in two elections, holding office from 1948 to 1952 and from 1956 to 1960, in a career defined by personal excess and eccentric behavior. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
New York Times
12 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump Backs Off Cease-Fire Demand in Ukraine War, Aligning With Putin
After their summit in Alaska, President Trump sided on Saturday with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, adopting Mr. Putin's preference for pursuing a sweeping peace agreement based on Ukraine's ceding unconquered territory to Russia instead of the urgent cease-fire Mr. Trump had said he wanted before the meeting. The change could give Russia an advantage in talks to end the fighting, which are due to continue on Monday when President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine visits the White House. It would also be a break from the strategy that Mr. Trump and European allies, as well as Mr. Zelensky, had agreed to before the U.S.-Russia summit in Alaska, and it provoked a chilly reception in Europe, where leaders have time and again seen Mr. Trump reverse positions on Ukraine after speaking with Mr. Putin. Mr. Trump wrote on social media early on Saturday that he had spoken by phone to Mr. Zelensky and other European leaders after his meeting with Mr. Putin. 'It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up,' Mr. Trump posted. Mr. Trump told European leaders that he believed a rapid peace deal could be negotiated if Mr. Zelensky agreed to cede the rest of the eastern Donbas region to Russia, even those areas not occupied by Russian troops, according to two senior European officials briefed on the call. In return, Mr. Putin offered a cease-fire in the rest of Ukraine at current battle lines and a written promise not to attack Ukraine or any European country again, the senior officials said. Mr. Putin has broken similar promises before. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a private conversation. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Forbes
12 minutes ago
- Forbes
Urban Deployments Raise Questions: What Is Our Military For?
As noted in a recent report by the Center for American Progress, in 2022 Donald Trump stated that 'the next President should use every power at his disposal to restore order — and, if necessary, that includes sending in the National Guard or the troops' to conduct law enforcement activities on U.S. soil. In 2023, said that if restored to office, that he he would send troops to U.S. cities to combat crime: 'The next time, I'm not waiting. … We don't have to wait any longer.' Ominously, the president has talked of using troops to combat 'the enemy within." That time has come. Earlier this year the Trump administration deployed 700 Marines to Los Angeles to deal with immigration protests. At the time, California Attorney General Rob Bonta said 'We don't take lightly to the president abusing his authority and unlawfully mobilizing California National Guard troops.' The new target of troops deploying to a U.S. city is in Washington, DC. On Saturday August 16th West Virginia Governor Patrick Morrissey annnounced a plan to deploy hundreds of National Guard member of his state's National Guard to Washington, DC, stating that 'West Virginia is proud to stand with President [Donald]The question is why? Violent crime in Washington, DC is projected to be down 26% this year from 2024. The demonstrations in Los Angeles were overwhelmingly peacaful until the show of force – police, National Guard and Marines – prompted clashes between protesters and military and law enforcement officials. Local law enforcement officers have gone so far as to fire munitions that have left both protesters and journalists injured. Many veterans have taken exception to the deployments, and some have filed an amicus brief in support of California Governor Gavin Newsom's opposition to the troop presence. One of them, Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, said 'This is the politicisation of the armed forces. It casts the military in a terrible light." President Trump's rationale for sending troops into U.S. cities is the Insurrection Act of 1807, which does indeed allow the president to deploy troops for domestic law enforcement in the event of an insurrection. But neither the immigration protests in Los Angeles nor the crime rate in DC qualify as an insurrection, by any stretch of the imagination. The deployments are deeply disturbing, and should be questioned by our elected leaders across the spectrum, along with veterans and average citizens concerned about federal overreach. Questions about the troop deployments need to be louder and more persistent. This is not a partisan issue. It is a basic issue about the role of the. military in a democracy. We can't afford to ignore it and go about business as usual.
