Investors react to US-Russia summit reaching no agreement
HELIMA CROFT, GLOBAL HEAD OF COMMODITY STRATEGY AT RBC CAPITAL MARKETS, NEW YORK:
Live Events
CAROL SCHLEIF, CHIEF MARKET STRATEGIST, BMO PRIVATE WEALTH, MINNEAPOLIS:
ERIC TEAL, CHIEF INVESTMENT OFFICER, COMERICA, CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA:
EUGENE EPSTEIN, HEAD OF TRADING AND STRUCTURED PRODUCTS, NORTH AMERICA, MONEYCORP, NEW JERSEY:
TOM DI GALOMA, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF RATES AND TRADING AT MISCHLER FINANCIAL IN PARK CITY, UTAH
MICHAEL ASHLEY SCHULMAN, CHIEF INVESTMENT OFFICER, RUNNING POINT, EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA:
JAMIE COX, MANAGING PARTNER, HARRIS FINANCIAL GROUP, RICHMOND, VIRGINIA:
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel
A highly anticipated summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday yielded no agreement to resolve or pause Moscow's war in Ukraine, despite both leaders describing the talks in Alaska as productive.During a brief appearance before the media following the nearly three-hour talks, the two leaders said they had made progress on unspecified issues. But they offered no details and took no questions, with the normally loquacious Trump ignoring shouted questions from reporters."There were many, many points that we agreed on. I would say a couple of big ones that we haven't quite got there, but we've made some headway," Trump said, standing in front of a backdrop that read, "Pursuing Peace.""It seems to be the scenario that we anticipated in our note. Soundbites signaling diplomatic progress but few concrete deal specifics. We will be watching to see whether the 'too be continued' outcome is enough to table the secondary sanctions on India for continuing to import Russian oil. Certainly will fall short of anything that will convince the Europeans to consider vacating their Russian energy sanctions.""The only news was absolutely no news out of it. Not sure there will be any market impactful portions - geopolitical issues in general do not tend to preoccupy market attention for very long if at all.""Markets are at new highs despite this conflict going on for three years. Markets care more about consumers, inflation and commentary from Wyoming next week.""The fact that there were no economic sanctions is a positive and markets should breathe a sigh of relief, but it doesn't appear as though a deal is in hand.""If anything, we see opportunity in the energy sector, as oil prices are at pretty low levels here and the prospect of sanctions on oil did not bear out. There could be a relief rally and that would be an opportunity to invest in energy as we head into higher seasonal demands and economic growth beginning to re-accelerate.""Gold and precious metals are likely to sell off because of being an asset class good for safety. Given concerns about inflation, they are a good buying point as well if any weakness.""I don't think anybody expected it to be particularly specific or substantive. It's essentially a first step towards potentially something more. They both kind of said everything diplomatically. But it's more about the significance of the meeting as a whole, as opposed to the content of what they're saying.""Again, I don't think anybody really expected them to suddenly within a couple of hours come up with a very specific set of plans or any kind of blueprint to something. It basically was just showing their willingness to have continued talks to arrive at a conclusion that is beneficial for all parties. And I think this is just the first steps, and many more to come.""Basically, President Trump needs to go back to the European Union and relay what Putin has said. And then he's got to negotiate with Zelenskiy. For the most part, I think they've laid the groundwork for a deal. And my feeling is that it will probably get done, but there's probably a couple more steps. I'm thinking one of those steps will be Trump, Putin and Zelenskiy all meeting in the next month.""They will probably reach a deal in 30 days. I was kind of surprised that they didn't take any questions. So there's a little bit of disappointment in that, but until a deal is done, you can't really take any questions.""Overall, the markets will like it marginally because I think they've made some progress. But I don't think we will be up 400 points in Dow futures on Sunday night.""At this point, it has been three years into the war, so it really shouldn't have much effect. I think markets will take it as status quo, but I think there's only upside from here.""Without Ukraine at the table, there was little chance for a peace accord. That Putin attended at all was significant, but he can't be seen ending the conflict while on American soil meeting with Trump."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
17 minutes ago
- First Post
‘Trump-Putin Alaska talks a performance for domestic audiences, not peace': Ukraine expert
In an exclusive conversation with Firstpost, Dr Hanna Shelest, Security Studies Programme Director at Prism UA and Editor-in-Chief of Ukraine Analytica, shares how Ukrainians are perceiving the Alaska Summit and what they are expecting from a Trump-Zelenskyy meeting The world watched closely as the US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin came face-to-face in Alaska to discuss possibilities and ways to end the war in Ukraine, which has been raging on for three-and-a-half years. However, the three hours of talks ended with no major breakthrough announcements. While addressing the American press after their meeting, neither Trump nor Putin mentioned the word ' ceasefire', and the presser ended with no questions. Soon after the summit came to an end, it was announced that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy would be visiting Washington, DC, to discuss the takeaways from the Alaska summit with Trump. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Multiple reports from different media outlets suggested that Putin wants Ukraine to cede two of the four regions Russia has staked claim on (Donetsk and Luhansk), and freeze the front lines in the other two (Kherson and Zaporizhzhia). Russia controls nearly all of Luhansk, and about three-quarters of Donetsk. However, Zelenskyy has opposed all suggestions that compromise Ukraine's pre-war territorial integrity. In an exclusive conversation with Firstpost's Bhagyasree Sengupta, Dr Hanna Shelest, the Security Studies programme director at Prism UA and the editor-in-chief of Ukraine Analytica, said Putin apparently aimed for delaying sanctions in his meeting with Trump, and might not have seriously considered the ceasefire option at this point of time. Edited excerpts: Q. The US laid out a red carpet to welcome Putin, and even Trump was applauding the Russian president's arrival. What kind of message does this send to Ukraine? The red carpet arrival was not necessary. However, with the military jets in the background, that was the play of the protocol. They wanted to display respect for Putin to put him in a good mood for negotiations, but at the same time to demonstrate the strength of the United States. In Ukraine, such a warm welcome was not accepted, considering that Putin is considered a war criminal. Even in the United States, he is under sanctions. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Putin at the 2025 Alaska summit with Donald Trump. Reuters/File Photo Despite all this, there is a minor understanding that it could potentially lead to nice negotiations that could be accepted. However, as we saw in the final press conference, it looks like the red carpet was positively accepted only by the Russian media and is now actively being used in the Russian state propaganda. Q. What do you make of Russian President Putin's claim that Russia and the US should 'turn the page and go back to cooperation'? Do you see genuine scope for such a reset, or is it primarily rhetorical? There are no preconditions for 'turning the page' as of now. However, we understand that from the very beginning, since 2021, the rhetoric of the Russian president was that Ukraine doesn't matter, that all issues should be resolved just between Washington and Moscow. So in this case, Putin wanted to demonstrate that the page can be turned when it comes to global politics, trade, issues about China, Iran, Syria, etc. But Ukraine is just one of the small issues. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD That's how he usually tries to present it at the international forum where he is meeting the US representative or someone from Brics. He would like to present that it is not a major geopolitical and security concern of the whole world, as for now, because it has ruined all the international norms. But it is one of the issues that they can easily overcome. He is marginalising the issue, and in this case, he hoped that Trump could jump onto other issues like Iran or China instead of discussing the war in Ukraine. Q. The word ceasefire was not mentioned by either leader after the talks. What does this signify? The word ceasefire was not mentioned because that is not what Putin wants. His idea was to postpone sanctions, not to call a ceasefire. Also consider that the same night, the Russian armed forces sent more than 100 drones and ballistic missiles against Ukraine. So it doesn't demonstrate the goodwill of the ceasefire. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin hold a press conference following their meeting to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine, at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska on August 15. File image/Reuters As we know from the morning news, Putin proposed a full and quick settlement. The reason is that in this case, he is not being seen as the bad guy who is disagreeing with the ceasefire, but he perfectly understands that, considering the complexities of this war and the issues that are currently in play, it is impossible to have a quick solution in one meeting. Q. Putin repeatedly said that Russia's 'legitimate concerns' must be addressed as part of any peace deal. In your view, what are the likely demands underlying this phrasing, and how might they clash with Ukrainian and European interests? 'Legitimate concerns,' he even said, the 'prerequisites of this war'. In Ukraine, the answer is that the main reason for this war is Putin himself. It was his unilateral decision after which he made the whole country, the Russian Federation, believe that the war was necessary. That is the rhetoric he had been using even earlier than 2022. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD His legitimate concern was whether Ukraine should join Nato even when it was officially a neutral state. We were perfectly sure that inclusion in Nato was not the main reason for Putin's concern when Finland and Sweden joined two years ago, because this organisation is purely for defence. But this became a very successful propaganda narrative because, in this case, he can blame this war on the European countries instead of blaming his aggressive intervention in Ukraine. So this phrase of legitimate concerns is quite classical for Russian diplomacy. It is what we have heard in 2022; that's what we are hearing now. But when you start asking, all his answers are de facto about the invasion of Ukraine and the dismantling of statehood. We saw in some of the media that one of the demands he had was that Ukraine would reconsider learning the Ukrainian language in Ukrainian schools. That's something inappropriate; that's not a question of sovereignty, but that's just a demonstration of the imperial policy of Russia. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Q. Ukraine was not given a seat at the Alaska table, excluding Kyiv's agency over its own future. What risks does it pose? Yes, Ukraine was not given a seat. However, it was not expected this time. I think it is not a big problem considering that we already have an announcement that on Monday, President Zelenskyy will be in Washington and they will have bilateral negotiations. Trump immediately informed the Ukrainian president as well as European and Nato leaders. Yellow Ribbon activists in Crimea and the occupied Luhansk region resist Russian occupation. X / @yellowribbonENG So we understand that the dialogue is happening, and considering the press conference, we understand that there were no agreements without agreement from Ukraine and European partners for this deal. Q. Putin warned Europe not to 'torpedo the nascent progress'. Do you think this is a veiled criticism of France and Germany in particular, and how do you think they will react to being essentially cautioned in this way? Putin's criticism of France and Germany is not legitimate, and it is understandable because he always thought that he could make some shadow deal with Washington, and he understands that Europeans would be working according to the values and national interests of Ukraine. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD They are those who became the mediators between Ukraine and Washington when the relations spoiled, and they really became the translators of the Ukrainian position and of the Ukrainian national interest and security. Because they understand that it is not only about Ukraine but also about European security in total. That's why he needs to spoil the reputation. He needs to blame somebody else, and why not Europeans, because he knows that he can always disrupt the perception between European countries and the United States. For Putin, it is extremely important to single out Washington because he never knows how to work against the Union, against the organisation. They are too strong; they are united. That's why he always wants to single out individual nations of Europe or Nato. In this case, it is the United States because he assumes that it is much easier to persuade Nato. Q. Putin endorsed Trump's claim that there would not have been a war in Ukraine if the latter had been the US president in 2022. How do you interpret this narrative? I don't believe that there would have been no war if Trump were the president back in 2022 because former US President Joe Biden was really soft on Putin as well. He was ready for the concessions and the fact that Putin could have these concessions regarding, for example, future nato membership of Ukraine without direct aggression or intervention of the independent state. Putin and Biden talked for three hours in 2021. Reuters So now it is more playing with the ego and more playing with this concerned statement of Mr Trump against his predecessor. That was more of a diplomatic trick, the attempt to manipulate the emotions of the US President, and was he successful? Yeah, maybe. Q. In your final assessment, did the Alaska summit move the needle even marginally on bringing genuine peace closer, or did it mainly serve as a stage for performative diplomacy? I would say the Alaska summit was more of a performance for the domestic audience in Russia and the US rather than bringing actual peace because the statements in the end demonstrated that the positions didn't become closer and the requests of conditions made by Putin are absolutely the same that were made three and a half years ago. Here, the main question is, have we become closer to peace? Definitely not, but has it served the interests of the Russian Federation? Yes, absolutely, because we know that the sanctions are not being imposed, and he would not impose a ceasefire right now. So in this case, it was quite a win for the Russian side; however, let's see how the situation changes on Monday.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
17 minutes ago
- First Post
Will Zelenskyy wear a suit? White House asked Ukraine. He's going in a black jacket
Clothes became a flashpoint at Zelenskyy's previous Oval Office encounter in March, when Trump bristled at his military-style look and the meeting unravelled The White House has asked Ukrainian officials whether Volodymyr Zelenskyy will wear a suit to his Oval Office meeting with Donald Trump on Monday (August 18), according to a report by Axios citing two people with direct knowledge of the preparations. The Ukrainian president plans to arrive in a black jacket similar to the business-style one he wore at the NATO summit in the Netherlands in June, rather than a full suit and tie. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Clothes became a flashpoint at Zelenskyy's previous Oval Office encounter in March, when Trump bristled at his military-style look and the meeting unravelled. Advisers on both sides now say the optics are being handled more carefully, even as Zelenskyy prepares to stick with his signature pared-back aesthetic. Why the outfit matter Trump places stock in leaders 'looking the part', which in his view means a suit. His irritation last time went beyond clothes, advisers say, but the attire set an early tone that proved unhelpful. A Trump adviser quipped that a suit would be a positive sign for peace, while acknowledging they do not expect Zelenskyy to wear one. There is internal theatre here too. US officials suggest vice-president JD Vance took particular issue with Zelenskyy's appearance and approach during the last visit. The 'tie thing', one source said, started with Vance. Zelenskyy is not expected to wear a tie on Monday. Zelenskyy to wear jacket Kyiv officials say the president will opt for a black jacket that reads as 'suit-style' without being a conventional suit. The Nato summit in June marked his first outing in business attire since Russia's 2022 invasion, and US officials noted Trump responded more favourably to that look. The aim this time is to balance wartime authenticity with the formality of the Oval Office. Will the meeting be different? Both camps insist it will. Trump advisers say Zelenskyy has become more adept at framing his arguments for the former president. One adviser said Trump has learned to set aside irritations and move the conversation forward. European leaders are also expected to be part of the Washington programme around the visit, which officials believe will give the talks a different complexion to March.
Mint
17 minutes ago
- Mint
GST revamp, S&P ratings upgrade fuel rally in Indian equities
Benchmark indices edged higher on Monday as the proposed goods and services tax (GST) revamp lifted hopes of boosting domestic consumption. Adding to the momentum were India's sovereign ratings upgrade and a temporary relief for countries importing Russian oil. The Nifty 50 index ended Monday at 24,876.95 points, up 1% or 245.65 points, its highest gain since 23 May. The Sensex closed 0.83% higher at 81,273.75 points. Chirag Mehta, chief investment officer at Quantum Mutual Fund, said that while the GST rationalization announced on 15 August could drive up consumption, in the near term reduced collections could strain government finances. However, the expectation is that stronger demand will eventually make India's economic growth more sustainable, he said. Consumption heavy sectoral indices gained on Monday. Nifty Auto closed 4.18% higher, Nifty consumer durables gained 3.38%, and Nifty Realty ended the day up 2.17%. 'With external conditions volatile, the government's focus is on strengthening internal demand which compliments earlier tax cuts and lower interest rates,' said Mehta. The reduction in GST slabs to two from four is expected to be supportive for sectors such as insurance, consumer durables, auto, and cement, said Aparna Shanker, CIO, equity, at The Wealth Company Mutual Fund. The proposed changes to the GST structure, however, could hurt demand in the short-run for the auto industry, other experts said. Uncertainty around when the new GST tax rates will be implemented may prompt customers to defer purchases, potentially affecting demand during regional festivals such as Ganesh Chaturthi in Maharashtra (end-August) and Onam in Kerala (late August to early September), said Kumar Rakesh, analyst–information technology and auto, BNP Paribas, in a report dated 18 August. Prolonged uncertainty could also lead to inventory challenges, as several manufacturers have begun building stock ahead of the festive period, he added. Prime Minister Narendra Modi on 15 August said the GST reforms would be implemented by Diwali, targeting a significant reduction in taxes on everyday items, as a 'Diwali gift' for the common man. A day earlier, 14 August, India won its first sovereign rating upgrade from S&P Global Ratings since 2007. Morgan Stanley said in a report dated 4 August that while a soft patch in earnings growth appeared to be fading, and despite a dovish central bank, investor confidence may hinge on greater clarity around the external environment and the GST rate rationalization. However, foreign institutional investors remain uncertain towards India. FIIs pulled out equities worth $182.9 billion in August and $285.2 billion in July, as per Bloomberg. As per an Asia Fund Manager Survey by BofA Global Research, within Asia, Japan continued to be the most favored market by a significant margin, with China leaping to the second spot, followed by Taiwan and Korea. India tumbled to the bottom of the pack, chiefly because of US President Donald Trump's proposed 50% tariff on Indian goods. On Monday, the Nifty Midcap index closed 1.9% higher at 21,267.05 while the Nifty Smallcap index climbed 1.33% to 16,878.7. For Nifty 50, the zone of 24,800-24,770 will act as an important support, while on the upside, the zone of 25,000-25,050 will act as a crucial hurdle, said Sudeep Shah, head–technical and derivatives research, SBI Securities. Any sustainable move above the 25,050 level will lead to a sharp upside rally up to the level of 25200, he added.
