Zelenskiy to Meet Trump Monday as Putin Doesn't Budge on War
'Ukraine reaffirms its readiness to work with maximum effort to achieve peace,' Zelenskiy said in a social media post after a call with Trump on Saturday. Trump confirmed the Ukrainian president's visit to Washington in a Truth Social post, and said a meeting with Putin and Zelenskiy could be scheduled 'if all works out.'
Zelenskiy and European leaders spoke with Trump as the US president flew back from Friday's talks in Alaska with Putin that failed to deliver a path to end the war, currently halfway through its fourth year. Still, Trump called his meeting productive, and signaled he would tell Zelenskiy to make a deal.
Trump said on the call that while it's up to Ukraine to decide on what to do with its territory, Putin's stance hasn't changed — he still wants Kyiv to cede control of the entire Donbas region in Ukraine's east, according to people familiar with the matter who spoke on condition on anonymity.
Zelenskiy has repeatedly ruled out giving up all of Donetsk and Luhansk, which Moscow's forces only partially control and have so far failed to take militarily. Russia would halt advancing its claims over the parts of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson region it doesn't now control, effectively freezing the battle-lines there, the people said.
Trump told the leaders that he was prepared to contribute to guaranteeing Ukraine's security as long as it didn't involve NATO, they added. The president suggested Putin would be OK with that, the people said.
The US president said in the post that his meeting with Putin and the call with Zelenskiy both went 'very well.' Trump wrote that 'it was determined by all' that the best way to end the war was to achieve a peace agreement and 'not a mere Ceasefire Agreement.'
The statement comes after Trump said previously that a ceasefire would be his key demand of Putin at the summit. He also threatened to walk out of the meeting and to impose new tough punitive measures if it wasn't met.
Monday's visit to the White House raises the stakes for Zelenskiy, who's had an uneasy relationship with Trump. His last visit in the Oval Office in February descended in a shouting match between the two leaders and briefly led to the US pausing military aid to Ukraine, which undercut the country's fighting capabilities.
Trump and Zelenskiy have since met repeatedly, including at the NATO leaders summit in Hague and at the Vatican, and patched up their ties.
European officials welcomed Trump's efforts during their call with the US president. They also reiterated the need for a trilateral meeting between Trump, Putin, and Zelenskiy in a statement released on Saturday. That statement made no mention of earlier demands for an immediate ceasefire as a first step toward negotiations.
The topic of a trilateral summit wasn't raised in Alaska, Russia's state TV channel Vesti reported on Saturday, citing Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov.
European leaders also said that it will be up to Ukraine to make decisions on its territory. 'International borders must not be changed by force,' according to the statement, signed by the leaders of France, Italy, Germany, Finland, Poland the UK and the president of the European Commission.
Some European officials are concerned that Trump will now pressure Zelenskiy to make territorial concessions to reach a deal, according to people familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations.
'President Trump's resolve to get a peace deal is vital,' said EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas. 'But the harsh reality is that Russia has no intention of ending this war anytime soon.'
Putin continues to drag out negotiations and 'left Anchorage without making any commitments to end the killing,' Kallas said.
In an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity after the Alaskan summit, Trump said that there were a few sticking points remaining after his discussion with Putin, even as he cautioned that the two hadn't reached a deal, and shifted his focus to Zelenskiy, saying it was up to him to resolve the war.
'We are clear that Ukraine must have ironclad security guarantees to effectively defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity' and 'no limitations should be placed on Ukraine's armed forces or on its cooperation with third countries,' the statement from European leaders said. 'Russia cannot have a veto against Ukraine's pathway to EU and NATO.'
Meanwhile, Ukraine's Air Force said on Telegram Saturday morning that Russia launched 85 drones and a ballistic missile at Ukrainian territory overnight, underscoring Moscow's intention to press on with the war. 'On the day of negotiations, the Russians are killing as well. And that speaks volumes,' Zelenskiy said on X.
Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council, said on Telegram that Friday's Trump-Putin meeting in Alaska showed that negotiations are possible even as the fighting continues.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
5 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Trump administration in talks to take 10% stake in Intel, reports
The Trump administration is in talks to take a 10% stake in Intel by converting some or all of the struggling company's Chips Act grants into equity, Bloomberg News reported, citing a White House official and other people familiar with the matter. Shares of Intel fell 3.8% on Monday, after rallying last week on hopes of US federal support. A 10% stake in the American chipmaker would be worth about $10 billion. Intel has been slated to receive a combined $10.9 billion in Chips Act grants for commercial and military production, and the figure is roughly enough to pay for the government's holding, according to the Bloomberg report on Monday. Reuters could not immediately verify the report. Intel and the White House did not respond to Reuters requests for comment. Media reports said last week that the US government may buy a stake in Intel, after a meeting between CEO Lip-Bu Tan and President Donald Trump that was sparked by Trump's demand for the new Intel chief's resignation over his ties to Chinese firms. Federal backing could give Intel more breathing room to revive its loss-making foundry business, analysts have said, but it still suffers from a weak product roadmap and challenges in attracting customers to its new factories. Trump, who called the meeting with Tan 'very interesting,' has taken an unprecedented approach to corporate interventions. He has pushed for multibillion-dollar government tie-ups in semiconductors and rare earths, such as a pay-for-play deal with Nvidia and an arrangement with rare earth producer MP Materials to secure critical minerals. Intel last year secured nearly $8 billion in subsidies, the largest outlay under the act, to build new factories in Ohio and other states as former CEO Pat Gelsinger bet on them to restore the company's manufacturing edge. Tan, however, pared back such ambitions, slowing construction in Ohio. He plans to build factories based on demand for the services, which analysts have said could put him at odds with Trump's push to shore up American manufacturing.
The Hindu
7 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Alaskan winds, India and the Trump-Putin summit
The 'Alaska Moment' between United States President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on August 15, 2025 will translate to other objectives for Ukraine as Mr. Trump engages with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders, leading up to a possible trilateral summit in a quest for the end of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. For New Delhi, however, the Alaska Summit did not yield the clear-cut outcomes many had hoped for before the meeting between the leaders of two of India's closest friends. Nor did it help the peculiar sense of vulnerability that Indian diplomacy faced, of having so much at stake in a meeting while having so little agency in its results. Broadly, the Narendra Modi government had hoped that a U.S.-Russia rapprochement would take off some of the pressure from the U.S. India has felt over its ties with Russia. However, while there was a visible warmth in the Trump-Putin exchanges, this did not result in a less chilling tone that Mr. Trump has had towards India. He has been taking India to task on a number of issues. More specifically, hopes rose that the Alaska meeting would result in a rollback of the U.S.'s planned 25% secondary sanctions on India for buying Russian oil; the resumption of India-U.S. trade talks that Mr. Trump has held up over the Russia oil issue; and a subsequent revision of the 25% reciprocal tariffs already in place. In a severely-worded piece in the Financial Times ('India's oil lobby is funding Putin's war machine — that has to stop'), Peter Navarro, who is Mr. Trump's Senior Counselor on Trade and Manufacturing, virtually dashed such hopes, making it clear that the double tariffs were a 'two-pronged policy' by the U.S. to 'hit India where it hurts', for both the Russian imports and for its curbs on market access. No change in India policies Nor was there any indicator that Mr. Trump would let up on the other pain point: his counter-narrative to the Modi government's account of Operation Sindoor (May 7-10) and how the ceasefire was achieved. Not only did Mr. Trump repeat that he has mediated the India-Pakistan ceasefire, using trade as a leverage to corral both sides, but he now adds that a nuclear conflict would have followed as both sides were 'shooting down airplanes', a version at considerable odds from that of the Modi government, which has thus far conceded that it had no losses in the conflict. Thus, the first takeaway from the Summit must be this: while Mr. Trump's re-engagement and bonhomie with Mr. Putin may help Moscow, it does not mean a revision of his policies toward India. In any case, the rationale behind the secondary sanctions on India is dubious, and more about power games than about punishing Russia. The U.S. has itself increased its trade with Russia since Mr. Trump came to power and China imports of Russian oil have been consistently larger than India's. Hitting India with sanctions while feting the Russian President and ignoring China's actions seems to indicate that the reasons for the U.S.'s actions lie elsewhere. Many have suggested that Mr. Trump has acted out of pique — upset that Mr. Modi ignored his claims to have mediated with the Pakistanis. Reports suggested that Mr. Modi also rebuffed U.S. moves for him to sit down with the Pakistani leadership in Riyadh or in Washington, and that the Modi-Trump call on June 17 was extremely acrimonious and awkward as a result. Mr. Trump's more obvious focus appears to be recognition for his peace-making efforts, and a possible Nobel Peace Prize, and the Modi government has already missed the bus to give him the credit for the Operation Sindoor ceasefire that Mr. Trump so clearly wants. New Delhi must decide whether it wishes to jump through hoops for Washington, or whether it would be more sensible to step back and allow the Trump administration to do its worst before assessing a response and turn its energies to other parts of the world. There may be avenues to shore up India's options on trade relationships with Mr. Modi's upcoming visits to Japan and then to China for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation meet, a possible visit to the U.S. for the United Nations General Assembly, and then South Africa for the G-20 summit. There is also Mr. Putin's visit to India soon. The bellwether event for India-U.S. ties will be the upcoming Quad Summit (India, U.S., Japan, Australia) that India is due to host later this year. It is still unclear whether Mr. Trump will visit India, especially if no India-U.S. trade deal is done by then, and whether the Indian government will be in any mood to roll out the red carpet. Returning to substance The second takeaway should be a lesson in not allowing 'Summitry' to overtake India's broader interests. For more than a decade, the 'Modi mantra' of foreign policy has been about personal magic and chemistry, of dealing one-to-one with leaders of other countries, as his imprimatur on bilateral ties. As a result, visits abroad have been judged by the number of joint public appearances, handshakes and embraces as well as special honours and awards that are given to the Prime Minister, rather than the actual agreements and concessions between them. With China, however, the 18 one-on-one meetings between Mr. Modi and China's President Xi Jinping between 2014-19 did not generate the requisite understanding to foresee Chinese People's Liberation Army's transgressions along the Line of Actual Control and the Galwan clashes. With the U.S., too, Mr. Modi's close engagements during the Trump 1.0 tenure (the 'Howdy Modi' rally in Texas in 2019 and the 'Namaste Trump' rally in Gujarat in 2020), as well as his early visit to Washington under the Trump 2.0 administration in February 2025 should have given the two leaders enough of an understanding of the other. Given the shocks that have followed, it may be time to turn back the focus to substance over style. But that substance becomes more difficult to seek in Trumpian times, given that most foreign policy decisions are being taken by Mr. Trump himself and a small ring around him in the White House, with few appointments being made on the desks that deal with India in the National Security Council or the State Department. In the 'good times' Delhi and Washington have worked well, even without a U.S. Ambassador in place in India. But at present, it is clear that a senior envoy with a keen knowledge of India as well as the U.S. President's ear are necessary to navigate the turbulence in ties. Maintain a political balance The third lesson of the past few months is that India must reclaim bipartisanship in diplomatic relations, and build and maintain ties on both sides of the political spectrum, regardless of which party is in power. In the U.S., the Democratic party establishment was unhappy about the Trump-Modi rallies because they were held just months before the U.S. presidential election in 2020, and India had to spend some time, subsequently, repairing ties with the Joe Biden administration. Four years later, this annoyed Mr. Trump, the Republican contender, especially as he felt the contrast between the close personal bonhomie while he was in power and the fact that the Mr. Modi and his envoys did not spend time with him when he was out of power, including during the three times Mr. Modi travelled to the U.S., in 2021, 2023 and 2024, to hold talks with Mr. Biden. Closer home, this bipartisanship has been proven to trip up India's ties in the neighbouring countries as well — Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and the Maldives. Fourth, Mr. Trump's penalties on India's import of oil, after the U.S. allowed, even actively encouraged the purchases before, show how fickle the global power can be and how futile it is for India to forego its principles in order to please a particular regime. India's time-honoured principle of only acceding to UN-mandated sanctions was broken in 2018 when the government bowed to Mr. Trump's threats of sanctions against Iranian oil, and then Venezuelan oil, possibly emboldening him to demand the same against the use of Russian oil this time. By accepting such unreasonable orders, India does not just risk economic losses in foregoing cheaper oil. It also becomes complicit in the U.S.'s foreign policy objectives that do not necessarily align with India's national interests. Conversely, when India resists such moves, it wins the support of others in the Global South. And while they object, western powers grudgingly accept India's strategic autonomy in these matters. Finally, New Delhi must consider measures and countermeasures to deal with U.S. actions that hurt India's interests acutely — like the reciprocal and penalty tariffs that will make Indian goods far less competitive than those of its exporting rivals, curbs on U.S. manufacturing in India, or the remittance taxes on Indians working in the U.S. Getting back India's agency will require a firmer stance — one that is not buffeted by the winds in Alaska, at a summit meeting thousands of kilometres away from India. suhasini.h@
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
7 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Open to elections in Ukraine, but only once peace is restored: Zelenskyy
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Monday (IST) said that elections in the war-torn country can only be held once peace is restored. Zelenskyy made the remarks during a joint press conference at the White House with US President Donald Trump. 'Yes of course. We need to work in Parliament because during war, you can't have elections but we need it to make it possible for people to have democratic open election,' Zelenskyy said in response to a reporter's question. "Under martial law, elections remain suspended." He further said, 'We need... a truce, yes, everywhere — the battlefield, the sky and the sea, to make it possible for people to do democratic open legal elections.' Elections in Ukraine The last presidential elections in Ukraine were held on March 31, 2019, with a second round on April 21, 2019 because no candidate won more than half the votes in the first round. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, a popular comedian and TV star, surprised many by winning with over 73 per cent of the vote against the previous president, Petro Poroshenko. Zelenskyy had never worked in government before and became famous for acting as a fictional president on TV. His campaign promised to fight corruption and bring change to Ukraine. He became president in May 2019 Russia-Ukraine conflict 'easiest to end', says Trump Trump told reporters that both Kyiv and Moscow wanted peace. 'I don't know when this war will end but we have to end this war. Zelenskyy wants to end it, Putin wants to end it,' he said, adding he believed this was the 'easiest' conflict to resolve. Zelenskyy called for US and European involvement, saying, 'We are ready for a trilateral meeting with Russia and US for peace.'
