logo
B-52s Join B-2s On Diego Garcia, 10 Bombers Now At Indian Ocean Outpost

B-52s Join B-2s On Diego Garcia, 10 Bombers Now At Indian Ocean Outpost

Yahoo08-05-2025
Satellite imagery indicates there are now 10 U.S. heavy bombers – six stealthy B-2s and four B-52s – on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. A key question now is whether the arrival of the B-52s, which occurred this week, will lead to the B-2s departing the highly strategic British island territory. Since they first deployed to Diego Garcia in March, the B-2s have been used in strikes against Houthi militants in Yemen, with which U.S. authorities recently concluded a ceasefire deal, and their presence has also been a huge show of force aimed at Iran.
A low-resolution satellite image taken today, seen in the social media post below, appears to show the six B-2s and four B-52s. An array of other large aircraft, which could include KC-135 tankers, as well as C-5 and C-17 airlifters, are also visible. KC-135s arrived at Diego Garcia along with the B-2 in March, and C-17s have also been key to supporting that deployment.
10 US Air Force strategic bombers are at Diego Garcia as of today.Yet to be seen is whether the B-2s will return to the States or stay for a while longer. https://t.co/vVNqnfRqm2
— TheIntelFrog (@TheIntelFrog) May 8, 2025
Satellite imagery had already emerged yesterday that looked to show a pair of B-52s having touched down on the Indian Ocean island. This all also aligns with online flight tracking data that began emerging earlier in the week, which had pointed to the deployment of two separate pairs of B-52s from Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana to Diego Garcia.
NSF Diego Garcia
For those that have been watching, not surprised to see 2x B-52 bombers at Diego Garcia along with 6x KC-135, 6x B-2 bombers, 1x C-5 Galaxy and 1x unknownCaveats apply given resolutionSrc
: @esa7 May, 2025 pic.twitter.com/4Zbwr0yKgg
— MT Anderson (@MT_Anderson) May 7, 2025
#WAKE11 flt, a second pair of Barksdale B-52H heading to Diego Garcia, working San Francisco Radio HF 13288. https://t.co/bJ9WNrKu47 pic.twitter.com/PAeDIQjnjy
— EISNspotter
(@EISNspotter) May 6, 2025
While testifying before members of the House Armed Services Committee yesterday, U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Andrew Gebara, Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategic Deterrence and Nuclear Integration, did say 'there's a Bomber Task Force of B-52s going on as we speak,' but did not name Diego Garcia or provide any additional details.
The Air Force uses the term Bomber Task Force (BTF) to refer to irregular deployments of bombers to forward locations around the world, as you can read more about here. The last known B-52 BTF deployment, which saw four of the bombers head to RAF Fairford in the United Kingdom from Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota, wrapped up in March.
In response to questions about the B-52 deployment and whether the B-2s will now depart Diego Garcia, a U.S. defense official told TWZ that 'we have nothing to provide.'
Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) 'routinely conducts global operations in coordination with other combatant commands, services, and participating U.S. government agencies to deter, detect and, if necessary, defeat strategic attacks against the United States and its allies. To preserve operational security, we do not discuss details about exercises or operations,' the command, which oversees the vast majority of America's B-52s and other bomber fleets, also told Air & Space Forces Magazine in a statement.
Sending six B-2s to Diego Garcia in March was already a major show of force. This represents roughly a third of the 19 of these stealth bombers currently in operational Air Force service. Only a portion of the B-2 fleet is actually available for mission taskings at any one time, too.
The B-2s are the Air Force's preeminent aircraft for prosecuting penetrating nuclear or conventional direct strikes deep inside heavily defended enemy territory. The stealth bombers also offer a unique conventional strike capability against deeply buried and otherwise hardened targets through their ability to drop 30,000-pound-class GBU-57/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) precision-guided bunker buster bombs. B-2s, each of which can carry a pair of MOPs on a single sortie, are the only aircraft currently certified to employ these weapons operationally.
In April, U.S. officials told TWZ that, despite reports at the time, B-2s flying from Diego Garcia had not dropped MOPs on Houthi targets in Yemen. Since March, B-2s forward-deployed to the Indian Ocean island have conducted strikes targeting the Iranian-backed Yemeni militants using other still unspecified munitions. B-2s flying from their main operating base in Missouri had also struck the Houthis last October with a still unknown mix of weapons.
Questions have emerged previously about the utility of employing B-2s, which are very expensive to operate and maintain, against a non-state group like the Houthis. At the same time, the Yemeni militants have demonstrated that they have air defense capabilities that present real threats. This, in turn, may have contributed to the use of stealthy aircraft like the B-2 and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, as well as a noted increase in the employment of air-launched stand-off munitions by non-stealthy U.S. aircraft. The Houthis have succeeded in downing an alarming number of U.S. MQ-9 Reaper drones. You can read more about what we know about Houthi air defenses in this recent TWZ feature.
| The Houthis show footage from the shootdown of another U.S. Air Force MQ-9 Reaper UCAV.If I'm not mistaken, that would be the 20th MQ-9 downed by the Houthis from Yemen. pic.twitter.com/SCwRVLSs7s
— Status-6 (Military & Conflict News) (BlueSky too) (@Archer83Able) April 18, 2025
Yemeni Houthis (Ansar-Allah group) claim that they have shot down yet another (26th) US Air Force MQ-9 Reaper drone today (April 22, 2025) in the Al-Hajjah governate.This is the 7th Reaper shot this April (22nd in the recent war after Oct 7, 2023). pic.twitter.com/chAiBnx4JZ
— Mehdi H. (@mhmiranusa) April 22, 2025
As already noted, sending such a large number of B-2s to Diego Garcia had also sent signals well beyond Yemen, particularly to Iran. TWZ had highlighted the strategic messaging factor of employing the stealth bombers after the October 2024 strikes on the Houthis.
Diego Garcia was used for years as a launchpad for bomber sorties against targets in Afghanistan and Iraq. The U.S. military has also previously sent B-52s to the Indian Ocean island amid heightened tensions with Iran in the past, though they do not offer the penetrating and GBU-57/B employment capabilities of the B-2. B-52s have dropped MOPs during testing, but are not cleared to do so on operational missions. B-52s can employ a wide range of other munitions, including AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) cruise missiles and smaller precision-guided bunker-buster bombs.
It's interesting to note that Gebara also highlighted the value of having a mix of stealth bombers like the B-2s and the incoming replacement B-21 Raiders, and non-stealthy B-52s, at yesterday's hearing before the House Armed Services Committee. The Air Force's B-52 fleet is in the process of being massively upgraded and is expected to continue serving through at least 2050, as you can read more about here.
'The decision to go forward with the B-52 was a decision made several years ago in that we needed a high-low mix of capabilities,' he said. 'So, it would not be cost-effective to the American taxpayer to have all high-end, exquisite things when many missions could be done with the proverbial 'old truck' that's paid for and we just need to do some upgrades to it.'
The current massing of the huge force of U.S. heavy bombers on Diego Garcia now does follow the announcement of a ceasefire deal between the U.S. government and the Houthis on May 6, which officials in Oman helped broker. There is already skepticism about whether the agreement will hold, especially given that the Iranian-backed Yemeni militants have pledged to continue their campaign against Israel.
The Houthis say they will continue to target Israel until it stops its operations in the Gaza Strip, which first began in response to attacks launched by Palestinian terrorist groups in the enclave on Oct. 7, 2023. Israel, just this week, has conducted its own major airstrikes on Yemen's port of Hodeidah and the international airport in the country's capital Sanaa.
Breaking: Israel
just obliterated Hodeidah port, the largest port of Yemeni Houthis, with 50 massive bombs
pic.twitter.com/ziHn3djnhb
— Dr. Eli David (@DrEliDavid) May 5, 2025
Some of the first footage from tonight's unilateral strikes by the Israeli Air Force against Hodeidah in Houthi-controlled Western Yemen, which is reported to have heavily targeted a cement factory on the outskirts of the city as well as the Port of Hodeidah. pic.twitter.com/gWDSVCLnsV
— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) May 5, 2025
The IDF published images of Houthi targets struck at Sanaa airport. pic.twitter.com/m0PT5ieVtA
— Joe Truzman (@JoeTruzman) May 8, 2025
The U.S. government is also currently engaged in negotiations with Iran, primarily over the latter country's nuclear ambitions. In recent months, President Donald Trump and other American officials have threatened direct action against Iran should those talks fall through, as well as over Tehran's continued support of regional proxies like the Houthis.
'I would much prefer a strong, verified deal where we actually blow them up … or just de-nuke them,' Trump said just yesterday during an interview with radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt. 'There are only two alternatives there, blow them up nicely or blow them up viciously.'
Trump on Iran talks:"I would much prefer a strong, verified deal where we actually blow them up — blow them up or just de-nuke them. "There are only two alternatives there: blow them up nicely or blow them up viciously." pic.twitter.com/dCoCO2USyT
— Jacob N. Kornbluh (@jacobkornbluh) May 8, 2025
'Message to IRAN: We see your LETHAL support to The Houthis,' U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also notably wrote in a post on X on April 30. 'We know exactly what you are doing. You know very well what the U.S. Military is capable of — and you were warned. You will pay the CONSEQUENCE at the time and place of our choosing.'
Message to IRAN:We see your LETHAL support to The Houthis. We know exactly what you are doing. You know very well what the U.S. Military is capable of — and you were warned. You will pay the CONSEQUENCE at the time and place of our choosing.
— Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth (@SecDef) May 1, 2025
There are reports that Hegseth's comments were among the factors that prompted Iran to pressure the Houthis into the ceasefire deal with the United States.
Swapping out the B-2s for the B-52s on Diego Garcia could align with the current focus on diplomatic efforts, while still retaining additional heavy airpower assets for use in future operations targeting the Houthis or Iran. B-2s can and do perform non-stop global power strike missions from the United States, as was demonstrated in the strikes on Yemen last year, and the bombers could still take part in future operations in the region if called upon.
Other factors, including the cost of sustaining a deployment of six B-2s on the Indian Ocean island, could also contribute to a decision to send the B-2s back to their home base following the arrival of the B-52s. The B-2 fleet has unique maintenance requirements, and some of the stealth bombers now at Diego Garcia could require work that cannot be performed at this kind of forward location.
There is the possibility, though it seems less likely, that a combined force of B-2 and B-52 bombers will remain in place at Diego Garcia for the foreseeable future. Doing so could help step up pressure on Iran and its regional proxies like the Houthis.
At the same time, the satellite imagery in hand now of the increasingly tightly packed conditions at the airfield on the island does underscore the limited infrastructure there, especially when it comes to enclosed shelters. The initial deployment of the B-2s in March had already highlighted the lack of shelters at Diego Garcia. This, in turn, had further fueled a heated debate over whether the U.S. military should be investing more in hardened aircraft shelters and other fortified infrastructure at key facilities globally, particularly airbases across the Indo-Pacific region, amid the possibility of a future high-end fight with China.
Part of why Diego Garcia is so strategic is that its remote physical location has historically helped reduce vulnerability to attack, especially from smaller countries like Iran. However, the array of potential threats to the island, particularly from missiles and drones, continues to grow. You can read more about the hardened infrastructure debate and how it applies to Diego Garcia specifically in this past TWZ feature.
For the moment, at least, 10 U.S. heavy bombers do look to be arrayed at the Indian Ocean outpost.
Howard Altman contributed to this story.
Contact the author: joe@twz.com
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Putin spoke first and other key moments from Alaska summit
Putin spoke first and other key moments from Alaska summit

USA Today

time15 hours ago

  • USA Today

Putin spoke first and other key moments from Alaska summit

Russian leader Vladimir Putin has the first — and the last — word at a summit with President Donald Trump that was held on American soil. WASHINGTON – When Vladimir Putin's summit with Donald Trump ended, the Russian president commanded the world's attention. 'Mr. President. Ladies and gentlemen,' Putin began. That Putin spoke first at a U.S.-hosted summit was highly unusual. Trump gestured to the sanctioned Russian leader as they took the stage that he should lead the way. Addressing the cameras, Putin declared that an 'agreement' had been reached that could solve the 'Ukrainian issue' and restore 'business-like' relations with the United States. Trump said several minutes later that they'd made headway on an agreement – but he said a deal had not been made. He heaped praise on Putin and declined to point out that his predecessor's distaste for Putin was prompted by Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. Here's a look at key moments from the Alaska summit. Trump gives Putin a warm welcome From start to finish, Trump's summit with Putin was rife with pomp and circumstance. A fighter jet escort. Red carpets. A B-2 bomber that flew overhead. Trump clapping as Putin approached, with a grin on his face. The overjoyed greeting the president offered Putin at Joint Base Elmendorf in Alaska was significantly warmer than the one he received the last time he was in the United States. On that occasion, a 2015 visit to New York City to attend the United Nations General Assembly, then-President Barack Obama criticized Putin in a speech for annexing Crimea and stoking aggression in eastern Ukraine. When they posed for a photo together, Obama gave Putin a perfunctory handshake. 'Thank you, everybody,' Obama said. The leaders did not answer reporters' questions as they walked away. Putin gets a presidential limousine ride Nearly a decade later in Alaska, and more than three years into Russia's full-scale assault on Ukraine, Trump smiled at Putin and clasped the leader's hand: first on the red carpet, and again on a platform. Trump and Putin also ignored questions from journalists. Trump ushered Putin into the U.S. president's limousine, known as The Beast, and gave him a ride to the meeting site. Inside the armored vehicle, Putin smiled and waved from behind bulletproof glass. He grimaced and shook his head at the start of their meeting as reporters peppered them with highly critical questions about his country's attacks on civilians in Ukraine. A stony-faced Trump sat to his left, his hands clasped between his legs. Putin has the first – and last word The leaders met for roughly three hours before they reappeared to make joint remarks. Putin spoke first. Then Trump spoke. 'I would like to thank President Putin and his entire team,' Trump said, 'whose faces I get to see all the time in the newspapers.' Trump said Putin's aides were nearly as famous as the Russian leader. 'Especially this one right over here,' Trump said, seemingly referring to Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov. Lavrov had been at the summit site earlier in the day wearing a sweatshirt that said CCCP, which stands for USSR in Russian. The move was interpreted as blatant trolling. The discussions were about Ukraine, which is a former Soviet republic. In wrapping up his remarks. Trump said he hoped to see Putin again 'very soon' and thanked him profusely for coming. 'Thank you very much, Vladimir,' Trump said, calling him by his first name. Putin did not miss a beat. 'Next time in Moscow,' he said. A skeptical Trump said he'd 'get a little heat on that one' but did not rule it out.

Trump offers Putin, Zelensky contrasting approaches
Trump offers Putin, Zelensky contrasting approaches

USA Today

timea day ago

  • USA Today

Trump offers Putin, Zelensky contrasting approaches

President Donald Trump has offered his critics, the world and U.S. allies contrasting images on how America treats its friends and adversaries after failing to broker a ceasefire in Russia's unprovoked war to annex Ukraine. At the Alaska-based summit Russian President Vladimir Putin received a red-carpet welcome from the U.S. that included a B-2 bomber fly-by and a ride in the presidential limousine, nicknamed "The Beast" with video of him laughing with Trump. The two superpower leaders exchanged flatteries, with Putin saying the war wouldn't have started it Trump had been president in 2022. Andrei Gurulyov, a Russian parliament member and retired general, described it as a "breakthrough" moment that was played up heavily on Russian state television. Putin's foreign ministry said it marked an end to the foreign country's reported isolation. That showcase is in sharp contrast to a fiery exchange Trump and top administration officials had earlier this year with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy when the foreign ally's leader was told in the Oval Office he was being disrespectful to the U.S. and risking World War III. Zelenskyy was teased by Trump and others for his attire and eventually booted from the White House. Republican lawmakers, such as Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., suggested Ukraine's president should either resign, change his tune or "send somebody over that we can do business with." The administration went as far to pause intelligence sharing and weapons shipments to Ukraine after the incident, and while Trump has threatened to impose sharp economic penalties on Russian if an agreement to end the war wasn't reached, he suspended those sanctions after the Alaska sit-down with Putin. Now, Trump is poised to welcome Zelenskyy back to Washington on August 18 to discuss a peace agreement. Republican praise Trump's strength, Dems fret 'it was just theater' After being hyped by the administration and its congressional allies as an opportunity to end the more than three-year conflict in region, Trump's dealmaking skills are being tested in an international negotiation that could backfire on the country and globe. "The goal is always peace," the White House said in an Aug. 15 post on X, amid the talks. Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Arkansas, said in an Aug. 16 post on X that Trump "stood firm in defense of U.S. interests," and that the summit marks a critical first step to a "durable and stable peace that protects Ukraine's territorial and economic sovereignty." But Democrats and other detractors warn that the summit has largely benefited Putin, who is facing war crime charges from the International Criminal Court and seeking legitimacy on the global stage after starting a war that has resulted in more than 1.4 million casualties, according to studies. "Our fear is that the Trump-Putin meeting wasn't diplomacy—it was just theater," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, said in a post on X ahead of the talks. Trump seeks reset in pursuit of peace as Europe worries Trump returned to Washington on Aug. 16 carrying plenty of compliments from Putin, who said the war wouldn't have started if Joe Biden hadn't been in charge back in 2022. But without a deal the administration appears to be skipping cease-fire discussions altogether and pivoting quickly to reset its public relationship with Zelenskyy, who will be returning to the Oval Office on Aug. 18 for a talk that remains inconclusive to most observers. Trump began to tip-toe away from Putin and toward Zelenskyy in late April after Russia bombarded Kyiv with missiles. The president, however, is also reportedly considering land swaps including Ukraine areas not currently occupied by the Russians, according to the New York Times, something U.S. allies have opposed in the past. Zelenskyy said in an Aug. 16 post on X that he spoke with Trump and European leaders, adding that the "killings must stop" but that the battling must pause first before a larger peace agreement can be made. "The positions are clear," he said. "A real peace must be achieved, one that will be lasting, not just another pause between Russian invasions." In a joint statement, European leaders echoed that sentiment and expressed support for a Putin-Zelenskyy summit. "I'm disgusted that Donald Trump met with Putin on American soil and did so with no representatives from Ukraine," Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Illinois, a retired Army helicopter pilot, said in an Aug. 16 post on X. "Trump and his inflated ego may not realize it, but it's clear that Putin is not engaging in good faith to end this war."

Putin Got Three Major Wins From Trump, But Talks Aren't Over
Putin Got Three Major Wins From Trump, But Talks Aren't Over

Time​ Magazine

timea day ago

  • Time​ Magazine

Putin Got Three Major Wins From Trump, But Talks Aren't Over

Imagine sitting in a cafe or a foxhole or a government office in Ukraine on Friday, watching those first scenes in Anchorage. There was Russian President Vladimir Putin, the man who had twice ordered an invasion of their country and been indicted for war crimes, taking his first steps on American soil in nearly a decade…on a red carpet. There were the two leaders—Putin and President Donald Trump—shaking hands and grinning as American warplanes, including a B-2 bomber, flew over them in formation. And then they were ducking into the 'Beast,' the U.S. presidential limousine, for a private ride to the summit venue. It was a welcome tailored for a close friend, not a war criminal, and it had to have looked to Ukrainians like their worst nightmare — a total sellout. Surely the Russian dictator had already won. But if those were the tea leaves, the early signs, what followed (or didn't follow) will have soothed anxieties—somewhat. The talks ended hours earlier than expected. There was no joint press conference. And while both leaders tried to put a positive public spin on their talks, there was, as Trump himself put it, 'no deal.' 'Many points were agreed to, and there are just a very few that are left,' Trump said, but the rosy, feel-good nature of the arrival ceremony was gone. 'There's no deal until there's a deal.' For his part, Putin had shown no willingness to shift course, reverting to complaints about 'fundamental threats to our security' and 'the need to eliminate all of the primary causes of the conflict,' which have been code since February 2022 for Putin's idea that his invasion was justified by grievances and warped claims about Russia's rightful place in the world. Who won? So who 'won' at Anchorage? We may not know for some time. But the day brought some surprises. Putin came to Alaska seeking to deepen a divide between the U.S. and its allies. He brought top economic aides to the summit, hoping to discuss a broader U.S.-Russia agenda, including a normalization of diplomatic and business relations. But that broader dialogue never happened, and Trump said it wouldn't happen 'until we get the war settled.' That said, Putin could claim three major 'wins' after his Alaska visit. The first was an agreement from Trump to abandon ceasefire talks and move directly to negotiations for a broader settlement. That mirrored a longstanding Putin demand and represented a 180-degree turn for Trump, who said this week that a ceasefire had to come first – and that Putin would face 'severe consequences' if he didn't agree to one. The second win for Putin was what didn't happen. He left Anchorage facing no 'consequences'—none of the secondary sanctions Trump had threatened, and no new deadlines for a ceasefire. Perhaps the most important 'win' was the glow of that red-carpet welcome. It was a remarkable form of global rehabilitation for the Russian leader. Russian state TV aired glowing reports of the arrival ceremony. Dmitri Medvedev, the former Russian president who has issued regular anti-U.S. diatribes over the years, called Friday's summit 'calm, without ultimatums and threats,' and said that Trump had 'abandoned the escalation of pressure on Russia.' When 'no deal' is good news For Ukraine, meanwhile, 'no deal' wasn't a bad outcome. The runup to Anchorage had featured an almost nonstop Ukrainian diplomatic effort to ensure that Trump wouldn't sell out their country to Putin. Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky joined a remote summit of European leaders on Wednesday that was chaired by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, after which Merz said, cryptically, that Trump had 'largely shared' the Europeans' views. That left everyone wondering what was meant by 'largely'—and Anchorage brought some answers. Trump abandoned the Europeans' ceasefire-first approach, but remained on board with another core principle: Ukraine must be heard. The good news for Kyiv was that there was no forced 'land swap' or other Trump-Putin plan announced in Alaska. Trump called Zelensky on his way home – a conversation that the Ukrainian leader called 'long and substantive' – and invited him to the White House on Monday. That was a positive development as well. As for Trump himself, the obvious takeaway is that he didn't get the ceasefire he was expecting. Beyond that, it's hard to say, in part because his administration has yet to articulate a policy or strategy towards Ukraine or Russia beyond the desire for peace and a warming of U.S.-Russia relations. 'The meeting was a 10 in the sense that we got along great,' Trump told Sean Hannity after the summit. He didn't offer a grade for the substance. Ukrainians and their supporters will still worry that Trump wants a grand global peace deal – and that he has no qualms about coddling a war criminal to get one. To date, the man who promised repeatedly to end the wars in Gaza and Ukraine (the latter 'in 24 hours') has nothing to show for his efforts, despite a series of concessions to Moscow. Ukrainian anxieties weren't soothed in the runup to Anchorage, when Trump went out of his way to hail Russia's victories against Napoleon and Hitler, and then called and praised President Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus, perhaps Putin's closest ally. But in the end, when the 'deal or no deal' moment came in Anchorage, Trump said no. At least for now. Perhaps the exhortations of the Ukrainian and other European leaders had resonated. Or perhaps this was a reprise of Trump's rare diatribe last month: 'We get a lot of bullshit thrown at us by Putin, if you want to know the truth,' he said then. Had Trump called 'BS' on Putin in Alaska? Doubtful. But we don't yet know. What comes next? Monday's Zelensky White House visit – and the surrounding atmospherics and post-meeting statements – will say a lot about the way forward. Trump may yet wash his hands of the war, if the two leaders – Putin especially – frustrate his efforts. If Trump chooses to stay engaged, he may at some point have to inflict pain on Putin, or at least the prospect of pain, to win concessions. Policymakers and analysts on both sides of the Atlantic have urged a range of levers the White House might use—among them, signing the Senate's Russia sanctions bill, reopening the weapons spigot to Ukraine and removing targeting restrictions on Ukraine's use of U.S.-supplied weapons. To date, Trump has shown no inclination to take such steps. The question may be just how badly he wants to get credit for ending the war. It may seem strange – or insane, even – to speak about a Nobel Peace Prize for Donald Trump, especially in the wake of a summit that achieved no peace. But it's worth noting that Trump has long been 'obsessed' with the prize, as Le Monde wrote recently, and it's not far-fetched to imagine that his obsession will persuade him to keep pushing for a Ukraine agreement. A half dozen countries have recognized this and recommended a Nobel for Trump as a supreme form of flattery – Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu added the flourish of hand-delivering his nomination to the President. Just last month, Trump himself cold-called the Norwegian finance minister last month to discuss the prize, the newspaper Dagens Næringsliv reported. Earlier this year, when the idea of a Trump-Putin summit was first broached, I asked several former U.S. diplomats and intelligence officials how they might counsel the president before a Putin summit. I thought on Friday about one of those conversations—with John McLaughlin, a former acting director of the CIA, who told me that while he generally supported the idea of American presidents meeting with adversaries to advance the cause of peace, Putin represented 'a special case.' 'He's not just an adversary,' McLaughlin said. 'We're talking about this as though Putin's just another senior bad guy we may meet with, but we really have to say, at the end of the day, he broke all the rules. He's an indicted war criminal. He's not the normal bad leader — he's a pariah.' McLaughlin offered several suggestions: that Trump make clear demands of the Russian leader in exchange for the 'gift' of a summit; that he go in with total alignment with our NATO allies; above all, he counseled the president to 'know in advance what you want at the end'. 'Putin will not come in improvisationally,' McLaughlin said. 'So Trump would have to know, very clearly, 'what do I want at the end of this?'' On the day after the summit, it's hard to avoid the conclusion that Trump came to Anchorage 'improvisationally,' to use McLaughlin's word. We will know soon whether his approach yielded anything. The fear is that history will judge the Alaska meeting much as it has judged Trump's summits in 2018 and 2019 with the North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un—heavy on theatrics and promises and warm words for a brutal dictator, and beyond all that, no progress at all.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store