Just when Ukraine thought Donald Trump had realised it was Vladimir Putin that was the real problem, it now finds itself facing a nightmare scenario at the Alaska summit between the American and Russian leaders.
It fears an outcome that could effectively gift Russia Ukraine’s “fortress belt” — making a future invasion into its territory that much easier. And if Ukraine rejected such a fait accompli, Mr Trump could conceivably blame Kyiv and withdraw US support.
“This would be convenient for Trump,” said Jan Techau at the Eurasia Group, a think tank.
“He can say the real enemies of peace are elsewhere: It’s the Ukrainians and the Europeans who stand in the way.”
Mr Trump and Putin are set to meet on Saturday morning, Australia time, at an air base in Anchorage, Alaska’s largest city.
Summits are usually the tasty cherry on a dense diplomatic cake.
The leaders grin and shake hands, have lunch and hold press conferences. But all the leg work has been done beforehand.
Not at this summit happening on August 15. Mr Trump has great belief in his talents as a deal maker. He is insistent that if he can get in the room with someone, they can hammer out a plan, mano-o-mano.
Yet almost as soon as the US president announced the hastily prepared summit a week ago, just as he was about to levy all manner of sanctions and tariffs on Russia, the White House began lowering expectations for any major breakthrough in Alaska.
Mr Trump has said the meet up is more of a “feel out” to see if Putin is really interested in peace; the White House labels it a “listening session”.
The US president said on Thursday there was a “25 per cent chance” the summit would be a failure. Besides, he reassured, the real decisions would have to be made in a second meeting between Mr Zelensky and Putin – a meeting that the Russian leader has shown no desire in having.
Kyiv’s fear is that without it being in the room, a sweet talking Putin will win the mercurial Mr Trump around to Russia’s unacceptable demands for Ukraine’s subjugation.
Memories remain of a summit in Helsinki between Mr Trump and Putin in 2016 when the US leader was so enamoured he trusted the Russian president’s word about election interference above that of his own security services.
Two of these three people will talk about the future of Ukraine. (AP Photo/Aurelien Morissard, left and center, Pavel Bednyakov, right, File)
That’s why Ukrainian and European leaders have spent the last week being extremely vocal about what they see as an acceptable outcome of talks they will play no role in but could shape the future of their continent.
Prime Minister Evika Siliņa of Latvia, a country that was controlled by Communist Moscow for more than four decades, said Europe’s overtures to Mr Trump had been successful.
“We are all on the same page” she told US website Politico.
“President Trump is an excellent and unique negotiator, so I believe he aims for the best possible outcomes of the talks”.
‘Land swaps’
Mr Trump, for instance, has said he won’t trade away Ukrainian land without Ukraine being at the table.
Nonetheless, he has in the last week spoken enthusiastically about “land swaps” between Russia and Ukraine.
It’s unclear what this means in practice.
Ukraine occupies only a tiny part of Russian territory, in the Kursk region. It could maybe swap that with the slither of Ukraine’s Sumy region which Russian troops are in.
Any other “swaps” would involve areas entirely within Ukraine’s borders.
There has been talk of Ukrainian forces pulling out entirely of the eastern Donetsk region. That would see Moscow have full control of the wider Donbas region.
In return, it was suggested Russian troops might pull out of two southern regions – Zaphorhizia and Kherson – which Moscow claims but is not anywhere near to fully controlling.
But it now seems Putin would like Donetsk without giving up the land it controls in Ukraine’s south.
So much for a “swap”.
A view of an entrance to Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska on August 13, 2025, ahead of the August 15 scheduled meeting between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. (Photo by Drew ANGERER / AFP)
‘Fortress belt’
Some might say gifting Russia the rest of Donetsk in exchange for a ceasefire might be worth it. Mr Zelensky passionately disagrees.
That’s partly because it’s Ukrainian soil, which Ukrainians right now live on, which modern day Russia has never controlled.
But there are more practical concerns.
One of the reasons Russia hasn’t managed to take all of Donetsk is because of Ukraine’s so-called “fortress belt”.
This is a string of medium sized cities and towns within the vicinity of the frontline including Kramatorsk and Slovyansk.
These serve as vital logistics hubs to supply troops. The area also includes large scale fortifications which have taken years to amass.
It would be a gift to Russia to take through diplomacy what it was not able to get through fighting.
It would also mean Russian troops would then be that much closer to Ukraine’s major cities. And there is currently no fortress belt to shore up what would be a new front.
Kyiv believes Russia would simply wait for the right time, and then surge forwards deeper into Ukraine from a far more advantageous position.
That’s why Mr Zelensky is so keen on stopping the fighting where it is, because it preserves the fortress belt.
The “fortress belt” in Ukraine which Russia wants.
“We find ourselves at a total dead end,” a Kremlin official was quoted as saying by The Guardian.
Russia wants Mr Trump to pressure Mr Zelensky to give up land because he has so far resisted attempts to do so.
“Despite the deepening dialogue with Washington, Putin has no intention of retreating from his strategic objectives in Ukraine, and Moscow believes it has the resources to sustain the war in Ukraine for several more years if needed,” an analysis from think tank the New Eurasian Strategies Centre states.
That’s not to say Moscow is not nervous about events in Anchorage. Mr Trump has clearly become more frustrated with Putin and The Kremlin is anxious that if it appears uncompromising it could put the US off side permanently.
In Alaska it may feel it has to offer Mr Trump something, some kind of vaguely reasonable compromise. An end to air strikes on major cities, for instance?
Mr Trump has already warned of “severe consequences” if he deems Russia is uninterested in peace.
Face masks depicting U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin hang for sale at a souvenir shop in St. Petersburg, Russia, Wednesday, Aug. 13, 2025. (AP Photo/Dmitri Lovetsky)
Despite the reassuring words from Mr Trump, however, there is real concern in Kyiv and beyond that the White House is in such a rush to claim success it will do a bad deal rather than no deal.
“Trump is viewed as having no interest in Ukraine beyond finding a resolution to the conflict to demonstrate his effectiveness as a leader and strengthen his position at home,” the New Eurasian Institute stated.
The nightmare for Ukraine is that a beaming Mr Trump announces he’s all on board with Putin’s plan and threatens to isolate Kyiv unless it gets on board too.
No matter if, down the track, the conflict erupts in a weakened Ukraine all over again.
Leave a Reply