What to know about past meetings between Putin and his American counterparts
Bilateral meetings between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his U.S. counterparts were a regular occurrence early in his 25-year tenure.
But as tensions mounted between Moscow and the West following the illegal annexation of Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula in 2014 and allegations of meddling with the 2016 U.S. elections, those meetings became increasingly less frequent, and their tone appeared less friendly.
Here's what to know about past meetings between Russian and U.S. presidents:
Putin and Joe Biden
Putin and Joe Biden met only once while holding the presidency –- in Geneva in June 2021.
Russia was massing troops on the border with Ukraine, where large swaths of land in the east had long been occupied by Moscow-backed forces; Washington repeatedly accused Russia of cyberattacks. The Kremlin was intensifying its domestic crackdown on dissent, jailing opposition leader Alexei Navalny months earlier and harshly suppressing protests demanding his release.
Putin and Biden talked for three hours, with no breakthroughs. They exchanged expressions of mutual respect, but firmly restated their starkly different views on various issues.
They spoke again via videoconference in December 2021 as tensions heightened over Ukraine. Biden threatened sanctions if Russia invaded, and Putin demanded guarantees that Kyiv wouldn't join NATO –- something Washington and its allies said was a nonstarter.
Another phone call between the two came in February 2022, less than two weeks before the full-scale invasion. Then the high-level contacts stopped cold, with no publicly disclosed conversations between them since the invasion.
Putin and Donald Trump
Putin met Trump met six times during the American's first term -– at and on the sidelines of G20 and APEC gatherings — but most famously in Helsinki in July 2018. That's where Trump stood next to Putin and appeared to accept his insistence that Moscow had not interfered with the 2016 U.S. presidential election and openly questioned the firm finding by his own intelligence agencies.
His remarks were a stark illustration of Trump's willingness to upend decades of U.S. foreign policy and rattle Western allies in service of his political concerns.
'I have great confidence in my intelligence people, but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today,' Trump said. 'He just said it's not Russia. I will say this: I don't see any reason why it would be.'
Since Trump returned to the White House this year, he and Putin have had about a half-dozen publicly disclosed telephone conversations.
Putin and Barack Obama
U.S. President Barack Obama met with Putin nine times, and there were 12 more meetings with Dmitry Medvedev, who served as president in 2008-12. Putin became prime minister in a move that allowed him to reset Russia's presidential term limits and run again in 2012.
Obama traveled to Russia twice — once to meet Medvedev in 2009 and again for a G20 summit 2013. Medvedev and Putin also traveled to the U.S.
Under Medvedev, Moscow and Washington talked of 'resetting' Russia-U.S. relations post-Cold War and worked on arms control treaties. U.S. State Secretary Hillary Clinton famously presented a big 'reset' button to Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at a meeting in 2009. One problem: instead of 'reset' in Russian, they used another word meaning 'overload.'
After Putin returned to office in 2012, tensions rose between the two countries. The Kremlin accused the West of interfering with Russian domestic affairs, saying it fomented anti-government protests that rocked Moscow just as Putin sought reelection. The authorities cracked down on dissent and civil society, drawing international condemnation.
Obama canceled his visit to Moscow in 2013 after Russia granted asylum to Edward Snowden, a former National Security Agency contractor and whistleblower.
In 2014, the Kremlin illegally annexed Crimea and threw its weight behind a separatist insurgency in eastern Ukraine. The U.S. and its allies responded with crippling sanctions. Relations plummeted to the lowest point since the Cold War.
The Kremlin's 2015 military intervention in Syria to prop up Bashar Assad further complicated ties. Putin and Obama last met in China in September 2016, on the sidelines of a G20 summit, and held talks focused on Ukraine and Syria.
Putin and George W. Bush
Putin and George W. Bush met 28 times during Bush's two terms, according to the Russian state news agency Tass. They hosted each other for talks and informal meetings in Russia and the U.S., met regularly on the sidelines of international summits and forums, and boasted of improving ties between onetime rivals.
After the first meeting with Putin in 2001, Bush said he 'looked the man in the eye' and 'found him very straightforward and trustworthy,' getting 'a sense of his soul.'
In 2002, they signed the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty -– a nuclear arms pact that significantly reduced both countries' strategic nuclear warhead arsenal.
Putin was the first world leader to call Bush after the 9/11 terrorist attack, offering his condolences and support, and welcomed the U.S. military deployment on the territory of Moscow's Central Asian allies for action in Afghanistan.
He has called Bush 'a decent person and a good friend,' adding that good relations with him helped find a way out of 'the most acute and conflict situations.'
Putin and Bill Clinton
Bill Clinton traveled to Moscow in June 2000, less than a month after Putin was inaugurated as president for the first time in a tenure that has stretched to the present day.
The two had a one-on-one meeting, an informal dinner, a tour of the Kremlin from Putin, and attended a jazz concert. Their agenda included discussions on arms control, turbulence in Russia's North Caucasus region, and the situation in the Balkans.
At a news conference the next day, Clinton said Russia under Putin 'has the chance to build prosperity and strength, while safeguarding that freedom and the rule of law.'
The two also met in July of that same year at the G8 summit in Japan, in September — at the Millennium Summit at the U.N. headquarters in New York, and in November at the APEC summit in Brunei.
In an interview with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson last year, Putin said he asked Clinton in 2000 if Russia could join NATO, and the U.S. president reportedly said it was 'interesting,' and, 'I think yes,' but later backtracked and said it 'wasn't possible at the moment.' Putin used the anecdote to illustrate his point about the West's hostility toward Russia, 'a big country with its own opinion.'
'We just realized that they are not waiting for us there, that's all. OK, fine,' he said.
——
Associated Press writer Yuras Karmanau contributed.
Dasha Litvinova, The Associated Press
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why a sales tax increase will be on Pueblo's November ballot, but criteria changes won't
Registered voters throughout Pueblo city limits will decide in November whether the city will increase its sales and use tax by 1%. Pueblo Mayor Heather Graham pitched the ballot measure as a way to increase revenue and alleviate a multi-million dollar shortfall in the city budget after a previously proposed grocery tax was unpopular with Puebloans. Pueblo City Council approved ballot placement for the 1% sales tax increase with a 5-2 vote at a regular meeting that bled into the early hours of Aug. 12. What Puebloans will vote on Nov. 4 A "yes" vote on the proposed increase would raise the sales and use tax rate from 3% to 4%. Additional revenue would be deposited into the city's general fund. A city background paper discussing the proposed increase states that the city's sales tax revenue has recently declined and is projected to decline or remain static due to declines in consumer spending. "The City is facing a significant budget shortfall for 2026 and will be required to withdraw money from its reserves to balance the budget," according to the background paper. "Without a tax increase, the City will also be required to withdraw money from its reserves in subsequent years which could result in exhausting the City reserve account." City Council President Mark Aliff and Councilors Brett Boston, Dennis Flores, Regina Maestri, and Sarah Martinez voted to advance the ballot measure, while Councilors Roger Gomez and Joe Latino voted against it. Members of the public who spoke in favor of ballot placement included Jimmie Quintana, the president of the IBPO Local 537 union, which represents Pueblo police officers. "We're not asking for property tax increases or anything else," Quintana said. "This is everybody coming through this town that would help us balance our budget. Let's keep jobs. Let's fix streets. Let's keep this city moving forward. We want to be progressive and I think this is one of the biggest ways we can do it, by allowing the voters a chance to vote on this." While stating that he wanted the issue to go to a vote of the public, former Pueblo City Councilor Larry Atencio spoke against a sales tax increase. "I believe that the voters are smart enough to vote this thing down because they are going to see that you have an $8 million deficit, you're asking for $26 million, you have no idea where that other money is coming from or what you are going to do with it," he said. A 1% sales tax increase could generate over $26.14 million in 2026, according to the city's background paper. Mayor decries council's rejection of half-cent sales tax criteria change Shortly before approving ballot placement of a sales tax increase, Pueblo City Council narrowly prevented the placement of a ballot measure asking voters to renew the city's half-cent sales tax with changes to its criteria. Changes would have allowed half-cent sales tax funding to be used for "economic catalyst" projects like infrastructure for businesses along Pueblo Boulevard, "place-making" projects like a Jellystone RV Park, and projects that prevent "economic leakage" to nearby communities. The criteria change proposal was killed 4-3 early Tuesday morning, with Flores, Gomez, Latino and Maestri casting "no" votes. Members of the public, including several developers, spoke fondly of the criteria changes and the potential for bolstered economic development. Several others spoke against changes, warning that they could divert resources from the half-cent sales tax's mission of bringing in "primary jobs." Graham, who initially presented the criteria changes to Pueblo City Council at a June 16 work session, lamented council's decision in an Aug. 12 news release. 'City Council voted to continue to kill economic development and to keep Pueblo stagnant for the foreseeable future,' she said. 'For months and months, we have heard Council ask for solutions to increase sales tax revenue, make development easier in Pueblo and improve the lives of our citizens, yet last night four of them voted in direct opposition for what they've requested." Pueblo City Council elections: 'Moving Pueblo forward': Mental health professional among Pueblo City Council hopefuls Pueblo Chieftain reporter James Bartolo can be reached at JBartolo@ Support local news, subscribe to the Pueblo Chieftain at This article originally appeared on The Pueblo Chieftain: Pueblo is set to vote on a sales tax increase. Here's what to know Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New Lane County Clerk Tommy Gong ready for his first mail-only election
Lane County's last clerk, Dena Dawson, left to become the statewide elections director in December. Lorren Blythe, the county's director of operations and Dawson's boss, has been serving as interim county clerk. Blythe said in a news release that new clerk Tommy Gong is "an experienced elections administrator and a passionate advocate for building public trust in elections." Gong, who started his new role July 14, has worked in election administration for 22 years. He's been an election administrator in California's Contra Costa, San Luis Obispo and Stanislaus counties. He worked at Contra Costa County while California expanded vote-by-mail, and joins Lane County at a time when Oregon's system of vote-by-mail and automatic voter registration has received scrutiny from national conservatives. Elections in Oregon also have drawn the attention of Judicial Watch, which filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State Lavonne Griffin-Valade that claims the state doesn't properly maintain its voter registration lists. Gong said he saw vote-by-mail expand in California from roughly 28% of the vote when he started, to around 75% before the pandemic, to almost 95% in the 2020 election. He said it has fallen only slightly since then to roughly 92% of the vote. Gong said conducting in-person and vote-by-mail elections simultaneously in California became a "major undertaking" and he is looking forward to running an election in Oregon's all vote-by-mail system. "The extensive in-person preparation goes away and you can really concentrate on serving those voters who are voting by mail, and really sink our teeth into all of the processes and procedures and security," he said. "It just seemed to be getting back to this idea that I could do one job in terms of vote-by-mail really well." Gong described himself as excited, and picked a home in Eugene close enough to the elections office that he can walk to work. Improving trust in elections Gong also said in California he worked hard to improve public trust in elections, and aims to do so in Oregon as well. "My job is making it so that people really have a chance to understand" how elections work, Gong said. "I'm always in a mode of continuous improvement so that's something that I always am looking forward to every election. We're always reviewing how things went and how we could do things better." Gong's education includes a Master of Business Administration from San Francisco State University, the California Professional Election Administrator Credential in 2005 and the national Certified Election Registration Administrator (CERA) program in 2021. In his spare time, Gong also practices and teaches martial arts. He even learned from an instructor who was a student of Bruce Lee. Where to access the clerk's office The county clerk's office conducts elections, records property transactions, issues marriage and domestic partnership licenses, and coordinates the body that hears property value appeals. Starting Aug. 21, the clerk's office will operate out of two buildings: For elections, go to 275 W. 10th Ave. in Eugene. For property recording, marriage licenses, domestic partnership declarations, property value appeals and the public research library, go to the county's public service building at 125 E. Eighth Ave., Eugene. Office hours for most services are Monday - Friday 9 a.m. - noon and 1 p.m. - 4 p.m., with the exception of the public research library which is only open Tuesday and Wednesday. Alan Torres covers local government for the Register-Guard. He can be reached by email at atorres@ on X @alanfryetorres or on Reddit at u/AlfrytRG. This article originally appeared on Register-Guard: Tommy Gong takes helm of Lane County elections as new clerk Solve the daily Crossword
E&E News
22 minutes ago
- E&E News
Nuclear fuel crisis could foil industry's US revival
The stars are aligning for U.S. nuclear power. Ambitious companies — with the backing of Amazon, Google and other technology titans — are working on safer and cheaper nuclear reactors. Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are eager to facilitate an industry comeback, and the Trump administration has made nuclear development a priority. But America's limited capacity to supply its own nuclear fuel has dampened some of the exuberance out of Washington. Advertisement 'We are in the game, but we've got to get better at the game if we are ever going to be able to power our new nuclear fleet,' said Rep. Chuck Fleischmann (R-Tenn), chair of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee. The Department of Energy has started to pull startup nuclear companies into the uranium enrichment business. Earlier this month, San Francisco-based General Matter said it would build a $1.5 billion uranium enrichment facility in Paducah, Kentucky, the site of a former U.S. government enrichment plant. The company led by former SpaceX engineer Scott Nolan has said it can produce at a lower cost the type of enriched uranium sought out by developers of advanced nuclear reactors. But the United States' decision to ban Russian uranium imports — to break Moscow's dominance over global supply and as a response to the war in Ukraine — has ratcheted up the pressure to generate an American supply. That's compounded by the limited success that U.S. companies in the nuclear fuel business have had since the Cold War. The lone U.S. commercial uranium enrichment facility, located in New Mexico, has seen uranium production go down, not up, since 2018. It wasn't always this way. In 1985, the U.S. was the nuclear fuel leader. Government-operated enrichment plants processed more than six times the uranium the nation enriches today and nearly four times what American reactors consumed. These facilities — legacy operations of the Atomic Energy Commission and later the Department of Energy — served national security, utility needs and international markets alike. But the Cold War's end triggered sweeping changes. The collapse of the Soviet threat changed the U.S. government's calculus on domestic nuclear fuel production, and it led to supply agreements with Russian suppliers. China wasn't quite the strategic competitor that it is today, and on the energy front, U.S. utilities had stopped building new reactors. 'So it made a lot of sense to be like, 'Why are we doing this as a government? Let's get out of that business,'' said Kurt Terrani, a nuclear engineer and CEO of Oak Ridge, Tennessee-based Standard Nuclear. With the anticipation that the U.S. would always have access to foreign enrichment supplies, the U.S. Enrichment Corp. spun off from the Energy Department in 1992 and fully privatized in 1998. 'The privatization of the United States Enrichment Corporation was potentially a good idea at the time,' said Katy Huff, a former DOE official and now a professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. 'But frankly, in light of our global economic system and the state-backed enterprises that it competes with, the enrichment market in the United States being privatized puts U.S. producers at a disadvantage compared to the remainder of the market.' 'Then Fukushima happened' U.S. Enrichment's last large-scale enrichment operations closed in 2013, and the company was renamed Centrus Energy. It had locked up contracts in the U.S., Europe and Japan. 'Then Fukushima happened,' said Jonathan Hinze, president at UxC, a nuclear consulting firm, referring to the nuclear accident in Japan in 2011. 'The bottom fell out of the market, and they never really recovered from that.' The price of enriched uranium declined from a peak of $155 in 2011 to $34 per unit measurement in 2018 following the events in Japan and the decline in global demand. To fulfill national security missions, the U.S. must use its own enrichment technology, as long-standing nonproliferation agreements forbid the use of foreign-origin technology for such purposes. High-assay, low-enriched uranium, or HALEU, is enriched to a higher purity than conventional reactor fuel and is generally needed for Generation IV nuclear reactor designs. In November 2023, amid growing progress on the development of Generation IV reactors, Centrus Energy, based in Bethesda, Maryland, produced its first batch of HALEU. With Centrus' inaugural batch and plans to expand their centrifuge cascade, the U.S. might yet break Russia's de facto monopoly on advanced reactor fuel. But expanding Centrus' Ohio plant will require billions of dollars in investment, customer commitments and a level of sustained political backing that has often eluded U.S. nuclear initiatives. Since the rebrand, Centrus has yet to establish commercial-scale uranium enrichment, and it's squabbled with DOE. A July audit from the DOE's inspector general questioned a 2019 contract with Centrus. The audit raised concerns about DOE's procedures and Centrus' financial viability at the time, saying the contract potentially prevented the government from getting the best value. 'The inability by Centrus to deliver sufficient quantities of cost-competitive SWUs in the U.S. market has resulted in the U.S. nuclear power fleet sourcing two-thirds to 75 percent of its enriched uranium needs from Europe and Russia,' said Brian Wirth, head of the University of Tennessee's nuclear engineering department. 'SWU' measures the ability to separate isotopes during the uranium enrichment process. It's critical for developing nuclear fuel. 'Based on this record, it is very difficult to be confident in their ability to deliver on the increased enrichment demands' to supply the HALEU required by small modular reactors, Wirth continued. But Hinze, the consultant, says Centrus was largely responding to the post-Fukushima market. Now, nuclear power's apparent comeback could pull uranium enrichment home. 'Until the last few years, you haven't had any market interest in having them develop a commercial enrichment plan,' Hinze said. 'But I would argue that has changed now. The tides are turning, so this could be different.' 'Chicken and egg' Although Urenco, a consortium owned by the British and Dutch governments and two German utilities, has been reducing production and some would criticize Centrus' historic neglect of enrichment infrastructure, the uranium enrichment crisis facing the U.S. is predominantly driven by inconsistent market signals. U.S. Enrichment was privatized in the 1990s, yet in the past 10 years, the federal government has increasingly offered subsidies to the sector. In the early 2000s, expectations were high for a nuclear renaissance before the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident soured utility, government and public appetite for the source. 'This back and forth makes your infrastructure disappear,' said Terrani of Standard Nuclear. 'That needs to come back up. It confuses the markets. You're either market-based or you're not.' The market signals are even weaker for HALEU, said Dale Klein, a mechanical engineering professor at the University of Texas and former chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. He noted that North America doesn't yet have any commercial reactors operating that would use HALEU. That's a problem for the dozen-plus entities planning to build Generation IV reactors. 'It is a chicken and egg,' Klein said. 'The fuel enrichers are not going to make the fuel unless they know they've got a market.' 'You have to put in a lot more centrifuges, and you're not sure what that market is going to be because none of these advanced reactors are running,' he continued. 'It's an unsolved problem.' Shrinking anchor in the desert Centrus has competitors. Orano, a French government-owned company, in 2024 announced plans to build a multibillion-dollar enrichment facility in Oak Ridge. But it has some limitations that Centrus doesn't. Orano's U.S. branch has hyped the proposed facility, but its chief executive in Paris said that they will not make a financial investment decision until 2027. In contrast, Centrus argues that it's ready to scale up its Ohio facility — which is already enriching small amounts of uranium — as soon as it secures federal backing. 'Our facility is already licensed. We've secured $2 billion in customer contracts. As soon as federal funding is awarded, we'll pair it with private dollars and get to work,' Dan Leistikow, Centrus' vice president of corporate communications, wrote in an email. 'Centrus offers a fully American solution: proven U.S. technology, built by American workers.' Fleischmann thinks that last point could be key to the company's success. 'Centrus' strength is that they're American, which means ultimately, if they get their act together, they'll be able to produce weapons-grade uranium in addition to HALEU,' he said. The other major U.S. operator is Urenco. Opened in 2010, an enrichment plant in Eunice, New Mexico, is designed to produce one-third of U.S. utility requirements for enriched uranium. Yet in 2024, capacity was significantly less. Data compiled from Urenco's annual reports shows the plant's annual capacity has dropped roughly 12 percent since 2018. No commercial enrichment facility in the U.S. or Europe lost that much capacity over the same time frame. Experts say the reason isn't demand for fuel. If anything, demand is rising. Urenco uses 'TC-21' centrifuge machines that are bigger and far more powerful than earlier centrifuge technology known as the TC-12. Urenco also deploys the bigger centrifuges in Germany and a few at Almelo in the Netherlands. Those two plants saw a respective 10 percent and 4 percent decline in enrichment capacity since 2018. Public information is limited on failure rates of the larger centrifuges. But technical experts in academia and the industry interviewed for this story say the large TC-21s enrich a lot of uranium but tend to fail more quickly than the earlier model. 'The TC-12, some of those were running for like decades uninterrupted, which is an incredible feat,' said Terrani of Standard Nuclear. A Urenco-Orano joint venture keeps details about the technology closely guarded and have not responded to POLITICO's E&E News' request for failure rates of the two centrifuge models. Urenco USA's Director of Communications Jeremy Derryberry said that declining demand was the main reason for Eunice's decline in capacity. Uranium prices sank after Fukushima in 2011, only months after the New Mexico facility opened. In the last three years, prices have spiked due to restrictions on trade with Russia. 'At any enrichment facility, machine failures are to be expected, and ours are within our forecasts and expectations,' Derryberry said. 'We are actively deploying the TC-21 at Urenco sites in campaigns to expand new capacity and to refurbish existing capacity, and we believe it is a superior technology to what is being deployed at other facilities around the world.' Urenco is actively expanding its operations in New Mexico.
