Alaska talks will test the desire for peace in Ukraine
A few months ago, it became clear to Moscow that the US and the Europeans were on the same page to push for additional support for Ukraine's sovereignty; the geopolitical realignment by the US-Nato places increased pressure on Russia.
Now, President Donald Trump is set to meet Mr Putin during a landmark summit in Alaska this week as a prelude to presumably further negotiations, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. This is long-shot diplomacy, which may get a long-awaited ceasefire in the war, or it could be just another opportunity for Mr Putin to smile and stall, to keep the clock running in Kyiv.
While the meeting on American soil offers Moscow's leader both the legitimisation of diplomatic breakout without being slapped with an ICC arrest warrant, it offers Mr Putin the first in-person meeting with Mr Trump since 2018. This certainly trumps (no pun intended) Mr Putin's meetings with Arab leaders, a host of African potentates, and Brazil's Lula da Silva. This is gold standard stuff.
Yet the Ukraine peace talks are set in the shadow of an overlooked backdrop of another diplomatic development very close to Mr Putin's concerns, as it borders Russia's southern frontier.
Just last week, the Trump administration sponsored a quietly arranged peace agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan. There's a poignant lesson here for the Ukraine talks. Though the mountains and rugged Caucasian region are far removed from the flat steppes of Ukraine, the fact remains that both the longtime antagonists, Armenia and Azerbaijan, were once, as was Ukraine, also part of the former Soviet Union. For 35 years, Armenia, a small ancient Christian land, has been militarily bullied by a Muslim and oil-rich Azerbaijan. Conflicts over borders ensued, and fighting flared as recently as two years ago. Equally, Azerbaijan borders Iran and has long featured in Tehran's strategic concerns.
This forgotten conflict in the Caucasus was addressed by American diplomacy, as Mr Trump brokered a deal that ended decades of conflict and offered both sides economic incentives. So, beyond the style of the summit, what substance can we expect?
First, it's doubtful Mr Putin will make the proverbial peace deal. Instead, he will play the moment politically, spin subterfuge and offer hints of future concessions. The wish that Russia will withdraw troops from the nearly 20% of Ukrainian territory it occupies is a dream few hold, even in Kyiv. There can be rich rhetorical arguments, but there's a red line the Russian leader can't cross without looking weak to his own security apparatus. Mr Putin holds a neo-Soviet imperial view of Ukraine in which this former part of the Soviet Union has broken away and dares to confront the Kremlin. Crimea, with its key naval ports, especially, is viewed as a sacred part of the Russian motherland. Compromise isn't in the Russian vocabulary.
Second, the US will pressure and cajole Mr Putin and warn that he will face wider sanctions. While tough measures will be threatened, Washington and the Europeans have not broken Russia's petro-driven economy. Both China and India remain major consumers of Russian petroleum.
Third, a major Russian military offensive still has time for at least six weeks of good weather. While the Ukrainians are fighting valiantly with additional US and European military supplies, the Russians still have the raw numbers. Though Mr Putin has often stupidly used Russian conscripts and North Korean troops as cannon fodder, the bloodletting has emasculated Ukraine. Can Kyiv seriously fight Moscow to a draw?
While European leaders have welcomed news of the Trump/Putin meeting, the Europeans are pushing for an uncompromising Ukrainian stance towards Moscow. Yet, a Gallup Poll taken in July shows "69% of Ukrainians say they want a negotiated settlement as soon as possible, while 24% support fighting until victory."
The Trump administration aims to end this bloody conflict for the families on both sides. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce stated on FOX News, "The killing has to end…What Ukraine needs now is a ceasefire." Indeed so, and soon.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bangkok Post
7 hours ago
- Bangkok Post
Rare earths are definitely China's trump card
China's weaponisation of rare earths has emerged as a major flash point in US-China trade negotiations. These critical materials, especially the high-performance magnets they make possible, are vital components in electric vehicles (EVs), wind turbines, industrial robotics, and advanced defence systems. In response to China's strict rare-earths export controls, the United States has quietly lowered tariffs, relaxed export controls on AI chips, and even softened visa restrictions for Chinese students. At the same time, the US is scrambling to secure alternative supplies. In July, the Department of Defense announced a landmark multi-billion-dollar investment package to boost MP Materials, the company behind America's flagship rare-earths project. But what if, despite massive subsidies and years of effort, the US still can't escape its dependence on Chinese rare earths? Japan offers a cautionary tale. In 2010, following a maritime standoff over the Senkaku Islands, China abruptly cut off exports of rare-earth to Japan. In response, the Japanese government pursued a series of strategic measures: investing in Lynas Rare Earths, an Australian producer; boosting domestic research and development in recycling and substitution; forging its own commercial partnerships with Chinese magnet manufacturers; and building strategic stockpiles to cushion future supply shocks. More than a decade later, Japan still sources over 70% of its imports of rare-earths from China. China's rare-earths dominance wasn't built overnight, and it won't be easily eroded. Its strength does not lie in hoarding raw materials, but in the industrial capacity to refine, process, and produce at scale. Today, China controls between 85% and 90% of global rare-earths refining capacity, and produces roughly 90% of the world's high-performance rare-earths magnets. It is the only country with a fully vertically integrated rare-earths supply chain -- from mining to chemical separation to magnet fabrication. China's manufacturing edge has given it not only an industrial lead, but also a technological moat. Between 1950 and 2018, China filed more than 25,000 rare earths-related patents, more than twice the number filed in the US. Decades of hands-on experience in the complex chemistry and metallurgy of rare-earths processing have yielded a depth of expertise that Western firms cannot easily replicate. Moreover, in December 2023, China's government moved to cement its lead, imposing sweeping export bans on the technologies behind rare-earths extraction, separation and magnet production. China's lax environmental regulation has also given its firms a powerful advantage over their Western competitors. In 2002, the Mountain Pass Rare Earth Mine in California was forced to halt refining operations after a toxic waste spill. By contrast, China's more permissive regulatory environment has allowed rare-earths production to expand rapidly, with fewer delays and far lower costs. Importantly, rare-earths chokepoints are not fixed; they evolve with technology. China understood this, waiting patiently as Western dependence on rare-earths magnets increased exponentially with the global green transition, which created massive demand for EVs and wind turbines. Even if the West succeeds in building a parallel supply chain for today's rare-earths needs, tomorrow's chokepoints may lie elsewhere. Quantum computing, for example, increasingly depends on rare isotopes like ytterbium-171, as well as on elements such as erbium and yttrium. These emerging applications could become the next pressure points, leaving the US and its allies once again racing to catch up. The US therefore must confront an uncomfortable truth: China's dominance in rare earths is likely to endure for the foreseeable future. Defensive strategies like supply-chain diversification may address some vulnerabilities, but true resilience demands an offensive strategy that enhances American leverage. The US still holds many valuable cards. As long as it retains control over technologies or infrastructure that China cannot live without -- be it advanced chips, frontier AI models, and access to the dollar-based financial system -- China has a strong incentive to keep rare earths flowing. For years, though, the US has pursued the opposite course: gradually decoupling and restricting key technology flows to China. Since the first Trump administration, the US playbook has been to blacklist leading Chinese tech firms and tighten export controls on cutting-edge chips. While these measures initially hobbled Chinese firms such as Huawei and ZTE, slowing the country's AI development, they have proved difficult to enforce. Riddled with loopholes, they created opportunities for enforcement arbitrage. As outgoing US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo conceded in December 2024, "Trying to hold China back is a fool's errand." At the same time, US export controls have galvanized efforts in China to build indigenous alternatives, effectively accelerating the rise of national champions like Huawei. Far from strengthening American leverage over China, US policy is steadily eroding it. If you are Nvidia, losing access to the Chinese market doesn't just mean forfeiting billions in revenue. It means losing influence over the most important AI ecosystem for developers outside the US. Recent policy shifts suggest that this realisation is starting to take hold. The Trump administration's decision to relax restrictions on sales of Nvidia's H20 chips to China signals a move away from blanket bans and toward more calibrated engagement. Counterintuitively, such engagement may be a smarter form of de-risking. The more that China relies on American technology, the more deeply the two sides' supply chains will become entangled, and the harder it will become for China to weaponise its own strategic assets, including rare earths. ©2025 Project Syndicate Angela Huyue Zhang, Professor of Law at the University of Southern California, is the author of 'High Wire: How China Regulates Big Tech and Governs Its Economy' (Oxford University Press, 2024) and 'Chinese Antitrust Exceptionalism: How the Rise of China Challenges Global Regulation' (Oxford University Press, 2021).
Bangkok Post
7 hours ago
- Bangkok Post
Farmers fret at tariff deal
Local farmers are gradually voicing their fears about the economy after learning that the Thai government may remove non-tariff barriers and reduce the tariff for imported goods from the United States. The Thai negotiating team sent to Washington managed to get a tariff rate of 19% on Thai goods exported to the US, instead of the initial 36%. Let's not forget that the Thai government in the past promised not to sacrifice the local farm sector. But apparently, their promises back then were just more hot air, as the deal with the US may affect local swine farmers and corn growers. The government has agreed to reduce the tariff on US imported products to 0% and may remove non-tariff protective measures, such as a ban on pork products with ractopamine additives. It also promised to invest more in the US and buy American commercial planes, natural gas, and corn. Recently, Termsak Boonchuen, president of the Nakhon Sawan Farmer Council and a member of the national maize policy and management committee, warned that an influx of the much cheaper genetically modified corn from the US would affect local farmers. Thailand would need to purchase 3.5 million tonnes of corn from the US for the local feedstock industry, he said. Sitthiphan Thankiatphinyo, president of the Swine Raisers Association of Thailand, meanwhile, is urging the government to clarify the matter and provide policy help after learning that the ban on ractopamine-fed pork, in place since 2007, may be lifted to accommodate the US tariff deal. Ractopamine is a feed additive used in some countries, especially the US, to promote leanness, muscle, and protein in pigs and cattle. Thailand, along with the European Union, Taiwan, and other markets, has banned the import of ractopamine-fed pork, citing potential negative impact on the health of consumers. What is worrying is that the government does not have answers for local farmers. This week, Finance Minister Pichai Chunhavachira was quoted by the media as giving vague promises, such as financial assistance, subsidies, and arranging training courses, to improve the capacity of local farmers. But the fact is that the government has become tight-lipped about its trade negotiations with Washington. Past experience already shows that free trade agreements and zero-tariff deals often affect local small-scale farmers the most. For example, an FTA that the Thai government signed with Beijing in 2003 has decimated swaths of local farmers and producers. While this particular FTA has helped the export of valuable fruit, the 0% tariff policy has opened the door for the import of cheap vegetables and fruit into the local market. In terms of the local swine industry, the government has failed to deter illegal pork smuggling, causing substandard products to flood the market for the last few years. Getting a favourable tariff deal from the US is welcome, but it is far from enough. The government must help local manufacturers to deal with the impact and make Thai farm products more competitive.
Bangkok Post
2 days ago
- Bangkok Post
Kyiv won't give up land, says Zelensky
KYIV - Ukraine won't give up land to Russia, President Volodymyr Zelensky warned early on Saturday, hours after Washington and Moscow agreed to hold a summit in a bid to end the war. Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump will meet in the far-north US state of Alaska, near Russia, on Aug 15, to try to resolve the three-year conflict, despite multiple warnings from Ukraine and Europe that Kyiv must be part of the negotiations. Announcing the summit on Friday, Trump said that 'there'll be some swapping of territories to the betterment of both' Ukraine and Russia, without providing further details. 'Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier,' Zelensky said on social media hours later. 'Any decisions against us, any decisions without Ukraine, are also decisions against peace. They will achieve nothing,' he said, adding that the war 'cannot be ended without us, without Ukraine'. Three rounds of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine this year have failed to bear fruit, and it remains unclear whether a summit would bring peace any closer. Tens of thousands of people have been killed since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, with millions forced to flee their homes. Putin has resisted multiple calls from the United States, Europe and Kyiv for a ceasefire. Zelensky said Kyiv was 'ready for real decisions that can bring peace' but said it should be a 'dignified peace', without giving details. The former KGB officer in power in Russia for over 25 years has also ruled out holding talks with Zelensky at this stage. Ukraine's leader has been pushing to make it a three-way summit and has frequently said meeting Putin is the only way to make progress towards peace. Far away from war The summit in Alaska, which Russia sold to the United States in 1867, would be the first between sitting US and Russian presidents since Joe Biden met Putin in Geneva in June 2021. This was just nine months before Moscow sent troops to Ukraine. Zelensky said of the location that it is 'very far away from this war, which is raging on our land, against our people'. The Kremlin said the choice was 'logical' because the state close to the Arctic is on the border between the two countries, and this is where their 'economic interests intersect'. Moscow has also invited Trump to pay a reciprocal visit to Russia later. Trump and Putin last sat together in 2019 at a G20 summit meeting in Japan during Trump's first term. They have spoken by telephone several times since January. On Friday, Putin held a round of calls with allies, including China and India, in a diplomatic flurry ahead of the summit with Trump, who has spent his first months in office trying to broker peace in Ukraine without making a breakthrough. The US president has earlier imposed an additional tariff on India for buying Russia's oil in a bid to nudge Moscow into talks. He also threatened to impose a similar tax on China, but so far has refrained from doing so. Away from the talks, across the more than 1,000-kilometre frontline, Russia and Ukraine continued pouring dozens of drones on each other in an overnight exchange of attacks on Saturday. As a result of that, a bus carrying civilians was hit in Ukraine's frontline city of Kherson, killing two people and wounding six.
