Trump to meet with Putin in Alaska next week
Trump announced the meeting on Friday shortly after he suggested that a peace deal between the two countries would include 'some swapping of territories,' signaling that the United States may join Russia in trying to compel Ukraine to permanently cede some of its land.
'We're going to get some back, and we're going to get some switched,' Trump said while hosting the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan for a peace summit at the White House. 'There'll be some swapping of territories to the betterment of both, but we'll be talking about that either later or tomorrow.'
Trump provided little additional detail about what territory could be swapped or about the broader contours of a peace deal, saying he did not want to overshadow the peace pledge between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Ukrainian leaders have been adamantly opposed to relinquishing any of their land to Russia, and the country's constitution bars President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine from ceding any territory. There would also be numerous political and military hurdles for Ukraine in turning over land to Russia.
Trump told European leaders earlier this week that he planned to follow up his session with Putin with a meeting between himself, Putin, and Zelenskyy.
Beyond the question of territory, several equally thorny issues would need to be settled. Among them is whether Zelenskyy would get security guarantees from Europe, the United States, or NATO to keep Russia from pausing, then resuming, a war to try to take the rest of the country.
In the past, Putin has also demanded strict limits on the number and quality of arms that the West could provide to Ukraine, and he has advocated for a range of measures that could alter the government, including elections, which he would presumably attempt to influence by seeking to install a more pro-Russia leader.
Russian officials have demanded that Ukraine cede the four regions that Moscow claimed to have 'annexed' from Ukraine in late 2022, even as some of that land remains under Ukrainian control.
Trump has grown increasingly frustrated with his inability to end a conflict that, as a presidential candidate, he promised to settle within 24 hours. And since taking office, he has oscillated in his approach to Russia. Earlier in his term, he showed considerable deference to Putin.
He also berated Zelenskyy in the Oval Office earlier this year for not showing enough gratitude to the United States for its military support, telling the Ukrainian leader that he didn't 'have the cards' to negotiate a peace deal. But more recently, he has criticized Putin for not accepting the terms of a proposed ceasefire and for prolonging the conflict.
Steve Witkoff, Trump's special envoy, met with Putin in Moscow on Wednesday, a session Trump said was 'highly productive.' But shortly after the meeting, Trump announced he would increase tariffs on India to 50% as a penalty for purchasing Russian oil.
Friday also marked the deadline for Russia to agree to a ceasefire before Trump imposed additional sanctions on its oil exports. However, it remained unclear if Trump would follow through on that threat after confirming his meeting with Putin.
This article originally appeared in
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
9 hours ago
- Observer
Russian forces rapidly pierce Ukraine's lines
KYIV: Russian forces have rapidly advanced in a narrow but important sector of the front line in eastern Ukraine, Kyiv and analysts said on Tuesday, before talks between the Russian and US presidents. Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky warned ahead of the Friday meeting in Alaska between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin that Moscow was laying the groundwork for further attacks, not peace. The Ukrainian army said there had been fighting around the village of Kucheriv Yar in the Donetsk region, acknowledging new and speedy Russian gains. The Ukrainian DeepState blog, which retains close connections with the military, showed Russian advances around 10 kilometres over around two days, punching deep into a narrow sliver of Ukraine on the front. The corridor, now apparently under Russian control, threatens the town of Dobropillia, a mining hub that civilians are fleeing and that has been coming under Russian drone attacks. It also further isolates the embattled and destroyed town of Kostiantynivka, which is one of the last large urban areas in the Donetsk region still held by Ukraine. The Institute for the Study of War, a US-based observatory, said Russia was dispatching small sabotage groups forwards. It said it was "premature" to call the Russian advances in the Dobropillia area "an operational-level breakthrough". The Operational-Tactical Group Donetsk, which oversees parts of the front in the industrial region, also said Russia was probing Ukrainian lines with small sabotage groups, describing battles as "complex, unpleasant and dynamic". Trump, who is scheduled to meet Putin on Friday, has described the summit as a "feel-out meeting" to gauge the Russian leader's ideas for ending the war in Ukraine. European leaders, meanwhile, are rushing to ensure respect for Kyiv's interests. "We see that the Russian army is not preparing to end the war. On the contrary, they are making movements that indicate preparations for new offensive operations," Zelensky said in a statement on social media. Moscow's army, which attacked Ukraine in 2022, has made costly but incremental gains across the sprawling front in recent months and claims to have annexed four Ukrainian regions while still fighting to control them. Ukrainian police, meanwhile, said on Tuesday that Russian attacks in the past hours had killed three people and wounded 12 others, including a child. Meanwhile, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said on Tuesday that he did not support an EU leaders' statement on Ukraine's right to "choose its own destiny" released ahead of a US-Russia summit this week. Orban said the "only sensible action" for EU leaders was "to initiate an EU-Russia summit, based on the example of the US-Russia meeting". "Let's give peace a chance!," he said on X, describing the Trump-Putin summit as "historic". The EU leaders' "statement attempts to set conditions for a meeting to which leaders of the EU were not invited," Orban said. "The fact that the EU was left on the sidelines is sad enough as it is. The only thing that could make things worse is if we started providing instructions from the bench," he added. Orban regularly breaks EU unity on Ukraine, to which he has refused to send arms. Orban is also a Trump ally, describing the Republican president as a "dear friend". Trump, in a press conference on Monday, in turn, described Orban as "a very, very smart man", saying he asked him whether he thinks Ukraine can defeat Russia. "He looked at me like what a stupid question. He said Russia is a massive country and they win their country, they win their lives through wars," Trump added. Europe again increased its military aid to Ukraine in May and June, unlike the United States, and is depending increasingly on its defence industry rather than existing weapons stockpiles, the Kiel Institute for the World Economy said on Tuesday. Europe, the United Kingdom included, sent or earmarked a total of 80.5 billion euros ($93.7 billion) in military aid between the start of the war and the end of June 2025, against 64.6 billion euros allocated by the United States. — AFP
Observer
9 hours ago
- Observer
Climate security is energy security
For all the uncertainties generated by Donald Trump's administration over the past six months, one thing is clear: 'climate' technologies are out and 'energy' technologies are in. But while going along with this rhetorical shift may appease some, it should be recognised for what it is: a change in wording. The fundamental economic and technological forces that are pushing the world away from oil, coal and gas and towards low-carbon, high-efficiency technologies have not abated. Over the past two decades, climate change has been a leading item on the global agenda, driving efforts to deploy technologies that will reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Those efforts are now facing headwinds and not just in the United States. Geopolitical developments elsewhere, like Russia's war in Ukraine, have called attention to the importance of energy affordability and security over other considerations. Policymakers in the US, Europe and elsewhere initially responded to the war by doubling down on the shift from fossil fuels and for good reason. Oil, coal and gas are commodities whose prices will always be linked to geopolitical vagaries (that goes for not only global oil markets but also regional gas markets, which are increasingly linked by trade in liquefied natural gas). As a case in point, the summer of 2022 brought massive inflation, largely driven by fossil-fuel price spikes. Europe's gas prices peaked at ten times their long-term average and US gas prices at around triple their long-term average. While the US Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 is widely considered a misnomer, history will judge the name kindly: The only permanent way to address such bouts with 'fossilflation' is to stop using fossil fuels. Though the blowback against climate policies has been particularly strong at the federal level in the US, Europe, too, has undergone a retrenchment. This is somewhat understandable, even if it is shortsighted. Germany, Europe's largest economy, has been in a recession for more than two years, with high energy prices a chief culprit. Climate technologies that are already commercially viable could help, of course. But taking full advantage of the lower prices of solar, wind and (increasingly) batteries requires a willingness to reform power markets and pass these savings to households and industrial consumers. It also calls for more upfront public investment, an area where climate priorities compete with other priorities like national security that are often perceived to be more immediate. In grappling with these tradeoffs, the European Union delivered the kinds of efficiency measures that Trump's 'Department of Government Efficiency' (DOGE) had promised but failed to achieve. For example, Europe dialed back its carbon border adjustment mechanism by requiring 90 per cent fewer companies to comply. On the surface, this seems like a decisive blow to the goal of establishing a carbon tariff for imports, commensurate with Trump's DOGE hatchet. But unlike Trump and Elon Musk, the EU ensured that the remaining 10 per cent of importers still accounted for over 90 per cent of emissions. This outcome is far from ideal when viewed solely through a climate lens. But viewed from a broader climate-economic perspective, it is exactly the kind of surgical intervention that DOGE promised but never delivered. The summer of 2022 brought massive inflation, largely driven by fossil-fuel price spikes. Still, fiddling at the climate-policy margins ignores the bigger picture. While Europe and America are taking steps back, China is leaping forward. It alone accounted for over 40 per cent of the record $2.1 trillion of global investment in the energy transition last year — more than the EU, the United Kingdom and the US combined. The balance is even more lopsided for specific clean-energy technologies. China produces around 75 per cent of the world's solar panels and 80 per cent of its lithium-ion batteries. That dominance is the result of a concerted green industrial policy, in which innovation plays a key role. The claim that China only manufactures and assembles is woefully outdated. China's electric vehicles, for example, are second to none. BYD, the country's leading carmaker, recently unveiled a groundbreaking charging system capable of adding 470 km of range in just five minutes, putting the company in a league of its own globally. China's dominance extends to technologies that are not yet competitive without price support. LONGi, one of the world's top solar manufacturers, formed LONGi Hydrogen in 2021 to pursue green hydrogen production. It now leads the world in electrolyser manufacturing capacity. These are not isolated examples. China's ambitious industrial policy has helped lift five other Chinese hydrogen companies into the global top ten. Have Europe and the US already lost this race for the future? While the US now seems hellbent on turning itself into a petrostate, the EU has a chance to revive its clean-energy fortunes. It is even starting with a significant policy advantage: a CO2 price hovering around $100 per metric tonne means that most low-carbon technologies — from clean electrons and electrification to clean molecules like biofuels — are already economically viable. Others, like green hydrogen, will need further support to help climb the learning curve and slide down the cost curve. According to Bernd Heid, a senior partner at McKinsey & Company who leads its Platform for Climate Technologies, around 90 per cent of climate technologies will be in the money by 2030 with a $100 carbon price. While China dominates with six top-ten global players, three of the others are European. The Swedish startup Stegra is building the world's first low-carbon steel plant using electrolysers made by ThyssenKrupp Nucera, in which the German steelmaker has a majority stake. Despite recent political developments, the US, too, has shown that rapid change is possible. Although breaking China's solar manufacturing dominance will be difficult, the US has made significant inroads just over the past three years. Earlier this year, it exceeded 50 gigawatts of panel manufacturing capacity, a fivefold increase since 2022. These 50 GW in panel supply roughly matched US demand. True, onshoring the solar supply chain comes with costs that can be justified only by priorities other than the climate, such as national security or promoting domestic manufacturing. But that is the point. If political conditions require stronger emphasis on technologies like geothermal and nuclear; and if technologies formerly known as 'climate tech' must be relabelled as more neutral-sounding 'energy tech', so be it. The larger forces propelling us towards decarbonisation remain the same. @Project Syndicate, 2025
Observer
9 hours ago
- Observer
Lee, Trump to hold summit on security alliance, economy
SEOUL: South Korean President Lee Jae Myung and US President Donald Trump will hold their first summit meeting on August 25 in Washington to discuss strengthening the countries' alliance and economic security partnership, Lee's office said on Tuesday. Lee, who was elected president in a snap election in June, has made it a top priority to help his export-dependent country navigate the dramatic changes in the global trading environment triggered by Trump's tariff policies. "The two leaders will discuss ways to develop the US-South Korea alliance into a comprehensive strategic alliance of the future in response to the changing international security and economic environment," presidential spokesperson Kang Yu-jung told a briefing. Based on the tariff deal reached last month, the two leaders will advance partnership in the manufacturing sector, including in semiconductors, batteries and shipbuilding, as well as critical minerals and technology, Kang said. A White House official also confirmed the meeting. Trump announced on July 30 that the countries had reached a trade deal that would subject South Korean goods to 15% import duties, lowering the tariff he had initially set against one of America's top trading partners. In return, Trump has said that South Korea will announce investment plans at the upcoming summit and that Seoul had committed to making $350 billion of investments to be "selected" by him. South Korean officials have offered differing details, however, and topics left unresolved by the deal — which has yet to be committed to writing - provide scope for more disputes between the allies. Trump may use the summit to seek more concessions on defence costs and corporate investments, left out of the deal, while non-tariff barriers and currency could prove thorny issues, experts said. Defence costs are expected to emerge as a key issue during the upcoming summit, with Trump having long said South Korea needed to pay more for the roughly 28,500 American troops based there as a legacy of the 1950-1953 Korean War. The Washington Post reported that the Trump administration wanted Seoul to boost defence spending to 3.8 per cent of GDP, up from 2.6 per cent last year, and to increase its $1 billion-plus contribution toward the troops. Jeremy Chan, a senior analyst at the Eurasia Group, said it was unclear if such issues will be raised directly by Trump, but he said he expected that at least at the working level, discussions are going to move beyond trade and investment to the broader alliance. "I think it is more likely that Trump and his team are going to raise at least quietly, issues related to the security alliance," he said. "So that could be putting pressure on President Lee to increase the defence share of government spending." — Reuters
