&w=3840&q=100)
Donald Trump heads to 'high stakes' Alaska summit with Putin on Ukraine
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, who was not invited to the talks, and his European allies fear Trump might sell out Ukraine by essentially freezing the conflict and recognising - if only informally - Russian control over one fifth of Ukraine.
Trump sought to assuage such concerns as he boarded Air Force One, saying he would let Ukraine decide on any possible territorial swaps. "I'm not here to negotiate for Ukraine, I'm here to get them at a table," he said.
Both the U.S. and Russian presidents, due to meet at a Cold War-era air force base in Alaska's largest city, are seeking wins from their first face-to-face talks since Trump returned to the White House.
Trump, who casts the war as a "bloodbath" fraught with escalatory risk, is pressing for a truce in the 3-1/2-year-old war that would bolster his credentials as a global peacemaker worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize.
For Putin, the summit is already a big win as he can use it to say that years of Western attempts to isolate Russia have unravelled and that Moscow has retaken its rightful place at the top table of international diplomacy.
The summit, the first between a U.S. and Russian leader since 2021, was set to start at 11 a.m. Alaska time (1900 GMT).
Trump, who once said he would end Russia's war in Ukraine within 24 hours, conceded on Thursday it had proven a tougher nut to crack than he thought. He said that if Friday's talks went well, quickly arranging a second three-way summit with Zelenskiy would be even more important than his encounter with Putin.
"It's time to end the war, and the necessary steps must be taken by Russia. We are counting on America," Zelenskiy wrote on the Telegram messaging app on Friday, adding that the Trump-Putin meeting should open the way for a "just peace" and three-way talks with him included.
'SMART GUY'
Of Putin, Trump said on Friday: "He is a smart guy, been doing it for a long time but so have I... We get along, there's a good respect level on both sides." He also welcomed Putin's decision to bring a lot of businesspeople with him to Alaska.
"But they're not doing business until we get the war settled," he said, repeating a threat of "economically severe" consequences for Russia if the summit goes badly.
One source acquainted with Kremlin thinking said there were signs that Moscow could be ready to strike a compromise on Ukraine given that Putin understood Russia's economic vulnerability and costs of continuing the war.
Reuters has previously reported that Putin might be willing to freeze the conflict along the front lines, provided there was a legally binding pledge not to enlarge NATO eastwards and to lift some Western sanctions.
Russia, whose war economy is showing signs of strain, is vulnerable to further U.S. sanctions - and Trump has threatened tariffs on buyers of Russian crude, primarily China and India.
"For Putin, economic problems are secondary to goals, but he understands our vulnerability and costs," the Russian source said.
On the eve of the summit, Putin held out the prospect of something else he knows Trump wants - a new nuclear arms control agreement to replace the last surviving one, which is due to expire in February next year.
COMMON GROUND?
The source familiar with Kremlin thinking said it looked as if the two sides had been able to find some common ground.
"Apparently, some terms will be agreed upon... because Trump cannot be refused, and we are not in a position to refuse (due to sanctions pressure)," said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the matter's sensitivity.
Putin has so far voiced stringent conditions for a full ceasefire, but one compromise could be a truce in the air war.
Putin has said he is open to a ceasefire but has repeatedly said the issues of verification need to be sorted out first.
Zelenskiy has accused Putin of playing for time to avoid U.S. secondary sanctions and has ruled out formally handing Moscow any territory.
Beyond territory, Ukraine has been clear in talks with Western allies that it needs a security guarantee backed by Washington. It is unclear how that guarantee could work - and what part the U.S. would play in it.
Ukrainians who spoke to Reuters in central Kyiv on Friday were not optimistic about the Alaska summit.
"Nothing good will happen there, because war is war, it will not end. The territories - we're not going to give anything to anyone," said Tetiana Harkavenko, a 65-year-old cleaner.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
28 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Chilling past, warm present
On August 15, U.S President Donald Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin concluded a historic summit in Alaska. After friendly greetings and two-and-a-half-hour-long talks at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, they left without announcing any deal, but claimed to have made progress on many issues. The selection of Alaska as the backdrop for this summit, the first since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, was significant in more than one manner. Alaska was under Russian control for 125 years before being sold to the U.S. in 1867. Alaska is separated from Russia by a distance of 88 km, while the Russian Island of Big Diomede is located just 4 km from the U.S. Little Diomede Island, with the Bering strait separating the two. Also read: Trump-Putin Alaska Summit Highlights Alaska has been populated by Indigenous peoples, including the Athabaskans, Unangan (Aleuts), Inuit, Yupiit (Yupik), Tlingit, and Haida, for centuries. In the early 18th century, Danish explorer Vitus Bering was pressed into service by Russian Tsar Peter the Great to explore the regions to the east of Russia's border. In 1728, Bering sailed through the strait separating the Russian mainland and North America (the strait is now named after him). During his second voyage in 1741, Bering spotted the peak of Mount St. Elias, part of an Alaskan mountain range, from his ship St. Peter. His 'discovery' of Alaska was confirmed later during the voyage of Englishman Captain James Cook, who mapped the area in 1778. Trading outposts Russian traders — the Promyshlenniki — soon set up outposts in Alaska, interested in seal-hunting and otter fur trade. The first Russian colony was set up in 1784 on Kodiak island at Three Saints Bay. In 1799, Tsar Paul I established the Russian American company, and in 1806, their capital was moved from Kodiak to Sitka. The Russians had to contend with opposition from the Alaskan natives, including an armed battle in Sitka in 1804 between Tlingit and Russian forces. British and later American trade interest in the region was also a challenge to the growth of 'Russian America'. Over decades, overexploitation of seals and sea otters in Alaska meant that their populations shrank, gutting profitability for Russian traders. Further, Russia was defeated by the British in the Crimean war (1853-1856). Viewing Alaska as a hard-to-defend territory which was also becoming economically untenable, Tsar Alexander II decided to give it up. Despite British interest, the U.S. emerged triumphant in its bid for Alaska in 1867. Russia sold the parcel of land, measured 665,000 sq. miles, to the U.S for $7.2 million, in a deal brokered by U.S. Secretary of State William Henry Seward. The deal, dubbed as 'Seward's Folly', was widely criticised, since Alaska was viewed as a barren frozen wasteland. The subsequent discovery of natural gas reserves and rare earth minerals, however, changed the public perception. In 1896, gold was found in Yukon and prospectors arrived to seek their fortunes in the Klondike gold fields. In 1959, Alaska officially became the 49th State of the U.S. Traces of its Russian past persist in Alaska till day. Several Orthodox churches, with characteristic ornate decor and onion-shaped domes, dot the region. The Orthodox diocese in Alaska is reportedly the oldest in North America, and it maintains a seminary on Kodiak island, the site of the first Russian settlement. Local dialects, now fast-vanishing, arose from a melange of Russian and local indigenous language, and persisted in regions surrounding Anchorage. Russian, too, is taught in some areas, such as the Kenai peninsula. Alaska is also a strategically important region. Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, the site of Friday's summit, was a forward front of American defence during the Cold War. Given the region's imperial Russian past, it was hardly a surprise that Anchorage was picked as the venue for the Putin-Trump meet — an American town acceptable for the Russians. When Mr. Putin met Mr. Trump on the tarmac of the joint base, he greeted him, saying, 'Good afternoon, dear neighbour.'
The Hindu
28 minutes ago
- The Hindu
The British Left's second act
In late July 2025, Jeremy Corbyn announced the formation of a new left-wing political party alongside former Labour MP Zarah Sultana, marking a new chapter for one of Britain's unique political figures in the past decade. Operating under the provisional name 'Your Party', this venture represents Mr. Corbyn's boldest move since his expulsion, last year, from the Labour Party he once led. Mr. Corbyn is also part of the Independent Alliance, a parliamentary grouping of six independent MPs consisting of five Muslims — including Ms. Sultana as the sole woman — who have positioned themselves as vocal critics of the current Labour government's policies on everything from welfare cuts to arms sales to Israel. The announcement has already generated strong grassroots enthusiasm, according to Mr. Corbyn, with over 6,50,000 people signing up for membership in the party's first weeks — a figure that suggests a significant appetite for an alternative to current Prime Minister Keir Starmer's Labour. This surge of support recalls the unexpected momentum that first propelled Mr. Corbyn to the Labour leadership nearly a decade ago. The Corbyn breakthrough In 2015, Mr. Corbyn's successful bid for the Labour leadership caught the political establishment completely off guard. As Andrew Murray, one of Mr. Corbyn's key advisers, reflected in a recent interview in Jacobin magazine, the victory was 'totally unexpected' and driven by 'exasperation within the Labour membership with the legacy of New Labour'. While his rivals offered tepid continuations of the (Tony) Blair-(Gordon) Brown era, Mr. Corbyn represented something genuinely different: authentic opposition to neoliberalism, a commitment to mass movement politics rather than pure parliamentary politics, and an uncompromising anti-imperialist foreign policy stance. This combination was remarkable in the context of European social democracy. Unlike left-wing movements in Spain, Germany, or France that emerged from communist traditions or as entirely new formations, Mr. Corbyn accomplished something unique in European politics: he captured the leadership of a major, mainstream, social democratic party from a position of fundamental opposition to its decades-long trajectory toward centrism. In some ways, his rise was similar to that of Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Party in the U.S. at a similar time. His programmatic positions included renationalisation of utilities, massive public investment, and wealth redistribution — policies that were always characterised as 'Old Labour' and hadn't been seriously proposed by Labour leadership in decades, except by popular but sidelined leaders like Tony Benn. The 2017 general election validated this approach. Against all expectations, Mr. Corbyn led Labour to its biggest vote swing since 1945, securing 40% of the vote — a performance matched by only two other Labour campaigns since 1970, under Mr. Blair. Enemies within However, Mr. Corbyn's functioning as Labour leader was constantly undermined by fierce resistance from within his own party. Mr. Murray estimates that at least 80% of Labour MPs opposed Mr. Corbyn 'with different degrees of vehemence and for different reasons'. This internal hostility created what Mr. Murray describes as feeling 'like an encampment in the middle of enemy fire the whole time, coming from your own side'. This was also exacerbated by a hostile media that lampooned or mischaracterised many of his positions ruthlessly. The opposition intensified around Mr. Corbyn's foreign policy positions, particularly his solidarity with Palestinian rights and criticism of Israeli policies, honed over decades as a Labour back-bencher and peace activist. This anti-imperialist stance proved especially threatening to the Labour establishment, which as Mr. Murray notes, was willing to tolerate domestic policy changes such as nationalising water companies but 'if a government was going to compromise nuclear weapons or NATO or even support for Israel, those would be red lines'. This foreign policy stance became a focal point of opposition, with allegations of anti-Semitism within the Labour Party being used to attack his leadership. While Mr. Murray acknowledges there were genuine issues that needed addressing, he and others have argued that the controversy was inflated into a smear campaign with the aim of discrediting Mr. Corbyn's critique of Israeli policies. The accusations created a 'moral damage' that paralysed Mr. Corbyn's leadership and drained energy from his team, even if they weren't the primary factor in his eventual electoral defeat. The issue that ultimately proved fatal to Mr. Corbyn's leadership was Brexit. Initially, he managed to straddle Britain's fundamental political divide by promising to 'respect the referendum result' in 2016 while delivering a different Brexit than the Tories. This position helped maintain support amongst traditional Labour voters in working-class constituencies who had voted Leave, while not completely alienating Remain supporters. However, mounting pressure from a newly energised pro-EU movement and overwhelming Remain sentiment among Labour members forced him into an increasingly untenable position. By 2019, Labour had committed to a second referendum — a stance that proved electorally catastrophic. As Mr. Murray predicted, this position cost Labour dozens of seats in traditional working-class strongholds and failed to deliver equivalent gains in Remain-supporting areas. The Brexit debate starkly exposed the deep division within Labour's electoral coalition, pitting its liberal and urban supporters against the party's traditional working class constituency in seats that voted to leave the EU. This split mirrors similar divisions affecting left-wing parties across the developed world, where globalisation has created divergent interests between different segments of the progressive coalition, particularly seen in the Democratic Party in the U.S. with the rise of Donald Trump's populism. Following Labour's 2019 defeat, Mr. Starmer systematically dismantled Mr. Corbyn's legacy within the party. Mr. Corbyn was suspended and eventually expelled, while many of his allies were marginalised or forced out. Mr. Starmer's centrist approach proved electorally successful in 2024, delivering Labour its largest parliamentary majority in decades. However, this victory hid a glaring statistic — Labour actually received fewer votes than Mr. Corbyn had achieved in his 2019 defeat, winning primarily due to the collapse of Conservative support and vote-splitting on the Right between the Tories and Reform UK. With a historically low vote share for a winning party, Mr. Starmer's government has struggled to maintain public support. More problematically for Labour's left flank, Mr. Starmer has continued many Conservative policies, maintaining austerity measures such as cutting winter fuel allowances for pensioners, and continuing defence partnership with Israel despite its devastating attacks in Gaza, which international rights organisations and many in Britain describe as genocide. This has created the political vacuum that Mr. Corbyn's new party hopes to fill. Yet, his new venture faces formidable challenges. At 76, Mr. Corbyn is no longer the energetic outsider who captured imaginations in 2015. As writer Richard Seymour noted in his assessment of the post-Corbyn Left in 2020, the fundamental conditions that enabled the original Corbyn surge — economic austerity as the dominant political issue, faith in traditional social democratic solutions — have evolved significantly. There is a reason why Mr. Corbyn's strongest allies presently have been limited to those who agree with his positions on the Gaza issue. 'Democratic crisis' The current political moment is shaped by different dynamics: immigration anxieties, cultural polarisation, and what Mr. Seymour identifies as a broader 'democratic crisis' that transcends simple economic grievances. The Left's traditional focus on 'bread and butter' issues, while still relevant, may prove insufficient in addressing these deeper structural problems. Moreover, the working-class base that formed Labour's traditional foundation has been fundamentally altered by decades of deindustrialisation and social change. The Brexit vote exposed how many traditional Labour voters prioritise cultural and democratic concerns over economic redistribution, creating the very split that ultimately destroyed Mr. Corbyn's electoral coalition. While his name recognition and symbolic value remain significant assets, the energy and dynamism required for party-building may need to come from younger figures such as Ms. Sultana. Also, the British first-past-the-post system makes breakthrough difficult for new parties, while Labour's current weakness across multiple fronts— facing challenges from Reform UK on the Right, the Greens and independents on the Left, and the SNP in Scotland —suggests the political landscape remains highly fragmented. Yet, the early enthusiasm for 'Your Party' suggests genuine hunger for an alternative to Mr. Starmer's centrist approach. With Britain facing continued economic stagnation, social unrest, and international crises, there remains space for a left-wing alternative. Whether this new formation can avoid the sectarian splits that have historically plagued the British Left, adapt to changed political conditions, and provide leadership beyond Mr. Corbyn's eventual retirement, remains an open question.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Putin's Jet!': Alaska Becomes the Center of the Universe for One Weekend
ANCHORAGE, Alaska—Nearly two decades ago, when the presidential nominee John McCain selected then-Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his Republican running mate, this Far North metropolis was swarmed with media, political consultants and other outsiders. It turns out that was merely a warm-up act. Anchorage now finds itself in a global spotlight, having hosted the much-anticipated summit between President Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin. 'I thought we had sunk back into obscurity,' joked the veteran Alaska pollster Ivan Moore, referring to the end of the Palin frenzy. Instead, Trump-Putin mania has gripped Anchorage, with hotel rooms and car rentals sold out, and buzz about the historic moment sweeping through tourist destinations, including salmon-fishing spots and the Alaska Railroad depot, where visitors await the scenic ride to Denali National Park and Preserve, famed for its grizzlies and high peaks. Reactions have varied. Some are outraged Alaska would host Putin after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Others hope this marks a step toward peace. But most everyone agrees on one point. This summit—with the deadly war at stake—is perhaps the most notable event to happen in Alaska in modern memory. 'All eyes are on Anchorage,' declared a headline in the Anchorage Daily News, while Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy told a local news station that the event 'puts Alaska on the world map—where we should be.' 'This trip is very big,' said Mike Porcaro, a radio talk show host who said calls about the event flooded his conservative program. 'There have been other high-level meetings, but not of this magnitude.' 'Bucket list' On Friday morning, onlookers gathered on a pier, beneath the flight path to Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, to see the plane carrying Putin, and Air Force One, land there. A website for the base, in the wooded outskirts, recommends that new arrivals enjoy a 'bucket list' of experiences including the Moose Run Golf Course and beluga whale watching. But the chance to see the rare joint landings of two world leaders topped that. 'Putin's jet!' local resident Cheryl Shroyer, 73, shouted from an overlook as a large plane believed to be carrying the Russian leader appeared first as a black dot against the snow-capped Alaska Range. The big jet grew larger, gliding over the Cook Inlet before disappearing as trees blocked the view of the base's airfield. At 10:17 a.m. local time, Shroyer shouted again: 'There it is, Air Force One!' as Trump's plane emerged from the clouds. (As it turned out, Putin's plane was another one, which came in after Trump.) Though Anchorage has nearly 300,000 people, it feels like a small town. Many locals drive pickup trucks, and the airport greets visitors with taxidermied grizzly, Kodiak and polar bears. Some Alaskans feel more kinship with Canada than the 'Outside,' local lingo for the Lower 48 U.S. states. Of course, Russia has long ties to Alaska. Once Russian territory, Alaska was sold to the U.S. in 1867 for $7.2 million. Palin, as McCain's running mate, drew late-show ridicule for reportedly saying, 'I can see Russia from my house.' (She actually said Russia is visible from the Alaskan island of Little Diomede island, which is about 2.5 miles from the Russian island of Big Diomede.) As hundreds of reporters and officials descended on Anchorage for the summit, local entrepreneurs seized on the surprise windfall. Some proprietors said it had been a challenging summer, with tourism hampered by a slowdown in foreign travel. David Liles, manager of the Ramada by Wyndham in downtown Anchorage, said occupancy jumped from 60%, with rooms running about $300 nightly, to fully booked, with rooms temporarily between $500 and $1,000. (Among those not getting hotels? Some Russian journalists who arrived as part of Putin's press pool Thursday night and slept on beds inside a sports stadium on the campus of the University of Alaska.) The Ramada price was nothing compared with what the owner of an Airbnb tried to charge: $7,000 a night after canceling a previous offer of $1,500. 'Some people are getting greedy ' Liles said. Autumn hues on the tundra on the Chugach peaks above Anchorage signal the approaching long winter. 'People who make money off tourists only have three months to do it in, so any publicity that brings extra people here is good for the economy,' said Kirill Gashenko, who rents out used cars. They were in hot demand. Cheers and jeers America's political divisions were on full display across Anchorage. 'We're really distraught that Putin is allowed on our soil, period,' said Janice Bunting, 65, watching for planes with her husband, Glenn, from lawn chairs beside a Ukrainian flag. Standing nearby, Jeff Henson, a 61-year-old Air Force veteran, disagreed. He said talking is the only way to resolve the conflict. 'The previous administration had three years,' said Henson, a Trump supporter accompanied by his husky mix, Leo. As the two presidents huddled, hundreds of Putin critics converged on a park near downtown Anchorage and unfurled a 132 foot by 65 foot Ukrainian flag—one of the largest in the world, organizers said. 'I can't think of a bigger F U to Trump and Putin,' organizer Erin Jackson-Hill said over a microphone to cheers. Minutes earlier, a lone man taunted the crowd with shouts of 'U.S.A.! U.S.A.!,' to which a demonstrator, Courtney Moore, shot back, 'Bootlicker!' A giant Ukrainian flag was unfurled at Delaney Park Strip in the heart of Anchorage. For her part, hotel clerk Amber Rookard just wanted the whole summit to go away. 'It just makes everybody uneasy,' said Rookard, who said three FBI agents came in and asked her if she had seen any 'unusual people.' Confused, she answered, 'I see a lot of unusual people.' Still, most locals seemed supportive. Soon after Anchorage was announced as the summit venue, Ivan Moore's Alaska Survey Research conducted a poll of 848 registered voters that found 59% said it was appropriate that Putin was invited to participate in the summit on U.S. soil—even if only 6% gave Putin a favorable rating. Unfortunately, there was little time for the two leaders to enjoy the outdoor adventures for which Alaska is revered. The incoming planes passed a line of fishermen at a creek known for its salmon. That might have caught the eye of Putin, who has been pictured fishing shirtless. At the Alaska Railroad depot, Steve Richmond, an Oregon resident visiting with his wife, suggested that Trump and Putin follow the group and see the park's famed wildlife. 'They should take advantage of being in this area,' Richmond, 74, said, as the train whistle blew nearby in preparation for departure. Write to Jim Carlton at
