While we recognize the need for discretion surrounding what was discussed between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin at their Alaskan summit on Friday, the lack of specifics remains frustrating. The absence of information has created a vacuum that voices on both sides of the aisle, particularly the Left, are eager to fill with their own interpretations.
During a weekend interview with Fox News host Jonathan Scott, former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Kurt Volker opined on what he’s been hearing from his sources about the rendezvous in Alaska: not only does Putin insist on retaining the territory Russia currently occupies, but he is also demanding that Ukraine hand over territory that Moscow has so far been unable to conquer.
In fact, unconfirmed stories about Putin’s demand for unconquered territory have been circulating since the talks ended. It is entirely plausible, even likely, that it’s true. And clearly, that demand is unrealistic.
Volker dismissed this as an unserious proposal that, in his words, “really makes [Trump] look very weak.”
As a seasoned diplomat, Volker is well aware that Friday’s summit was merely the opening phase of a high-stakes negotiation. And in any such process, parties begin by shooting for the moon, knowing they will ultimately have to settle for less. I would remind Volker that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has said he will not give up any territory, which is an equally unrealistic expectation.
In Volker’s eyes, Putin was the clear winner on Friday night. “Putin got away without doing anything,” he said. “He got the red carpet treatment from President Trump. He did not agree to a ceasefire. He did not reduce any of his maximalist demands.”
Did Volker forget that Putin was not welcomed with a wide red carpet, but with a narrow red strip leading directly to Trump? Moreover, the Russian dictator was met on arrival by the roar of a B-2 bomber and a fighter jet flyover.
He criticized Trump for not immediately slapping Putin with sanctions because he didn’t walk away with the ceasefire he’d hoped for.
But Volker wasn’t finished. Although he “hates to make comparisons to the 1930s, but this is very similar to giving Hitler the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia and hoping that’s all he takes, and then he takes the whole country.”
Secretary of State Marco Rubio joined Fox News host Maria Bartiromo on Sunday morning. Asked why Trump did not place sanctions on Putin, Rubio said that would have ended the talks.
I want everyone to understand, if this morning, the president woke up and said, ‘I’m putting these terrible, strong sanctions on Russia,’ that’s fine, may make people feel good for a couple of hours. But here’s what you’re basically saying. Talks are over for the foreseeable future, for the next year or year and a half, there’s no more talks.
Putin has shown a willingness to speak with Trump. The two appear to have developed a rapport. The war that was expected to last for two weeks is now well into its fourth year. Stronger sanctions can be enacted at any time — and if current negotiations collapse, they almost certainly will be.
Putin is already feeling the squeeze. Although the Russian economy showed some initial resilience, the weight of existing sanctions, war costs, and shrinking oil revenues are taking their toll. Trump’s new 50% tariff on India caught Putin’s attention, as did the U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites in June. Far from viewing Trump as weak, Putin understands that he is dealing with a leader unpredictable enough — and willing enough — to change the course of the conflict at any moment.
Rubio further noted that if a peace deal is possible, President Trump is the only one who can bring it about. “Putin’s not going to meet with [French President Emmanuel] Macron, he’s not going to meet with the U.K., with all due respect to these leaders. These leaders are not going to bring him to the table.”
Pressed on a timeline for negotiations, Rubio was noncommittal. In the end, he said, it’s up to Russia and Ukraine. “But here’s what I can tell you for certain: You can’t have a peace deal between two warring factions unless both sides agree to give up something and both sides agree that the other side gets something. If one side gets everything they want, that’s not a peace deal, that’s called a surrender.”
Although this is unrelated to the immediate topic, The Daily Mail published a video of Putin’s presumably involuntary leg spasms at the end of the summit.
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY