WASHINGTON — Standing alongside President Trump at his Palm Beach estate, Volodymyr Zelensky could only smirk and grimace without overtly offending his host. “Russia wants to see Ukraine succeed,” Trump told reporters, shocking the Ukrainian president before claiming that Vladimir Putin is genuine in his desire for peace.
It was just the latest example of the American president sympathizing with Moscow in its war of conquest in Europe. Yet Zelensky emerged from the meeting Sunday ensuring once again that Ukraine may fight another day, maintaining critical if uneasy support from Washington.
Few signs of progress toward a peace agreement materialized from the meeting at Mar-a-Lago, where Zelensky traveled with significant compromises — including a plan to put territorial concessions to Russia before the Ukrainian people for a vote — in order to appease the U.S. president.
But Zelensky won concessions of his own from Trump, who had for weeks been pushing for a ceasefire by Christmas, or else threatening to cut off Ukraine from U.S. intelligence that would leave Kyiv blind on the battlefield. “I don’t have deadlines,” Trump said Sunday.
Over the course of Trump’s first year in office, Zelensky and other European leaders have repeatedly worked to convince Trump that Russia’s President Putin is, in fact, an aggressor opposed to peace, responsible for an unprovoked invasion that launched the deadliest conflict in Europe since the Second World War.
Each time, Trump has come around, even going as far over the summer as to question whether Ukraine could win back the territories it has lost on the battlefield to Russia — and vowing to North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies, “we’re with them all the way.”
Yet, each time, Trump has changed course within a matter of days or weeks, reverting to an embrace of Putin and Russia’s worldview, including a proposal that Ukraine preemptively cede sovereign territories that Russia has sought but failed to occupy by force.
Zelensky’s willingness to offer concessions in his latest meeting with Trump has, at least temporarily, “managed to keep President Trump from tilting further towards the Russian position,” said Kyle Balzer, a scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. “But Trump’s position — his repeated insistence that a deal is necessary now because time is not on Ukraine’s side — continues to favor Putin’s line and negotiating tactics.”
U.S. intelligence agencies have assessed that Putin’s revanchist war aims — to conquer all of Ukraine and, beyond, to reclaim parts of Europe that once were part of the Soviet empire — remain unchanged.
Yet Trump’s director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, whose own sympathies toward Russia have been scrutinized for years, recently dismissed the assessments as products of “deep state” “warmongers” within the intelligence community.
On Monday, hours after speaking with Trump, Putin ordered the Russian military to push toward Zaporizhzhia, a city of 700,000 before the war began. The city lies far outside the Donbas region that Moscow claims would satisfy its war aims in a negotiated settlement.
“Trump’s instincts are to favor Putin and Russia,” said Brian Taylor, director of the Moynihan Institute of Global Affairs at Syracuse University. “Ukraine and its European partners still hope to convince Trump of the obvious fact that Putin is not interested in a deal that doesn’t amount to a Ukrainian surrender.
“If Trump was convinced of Putin’s intransigence, he might further tighten sanctions on Russia and provide more assistance to Ukraine to try to pressure Putin into a deal,” Taylor added. “It’s an uphill battle, one might even say Sisyphean, but Zelensky and European leaders have to keep trying. So far, nearly a year into Trump’s second term, it’s been worth it.”
On Monday, Moscow claims that Ukraine orchestrated a massive drone attack targeting Putin’s residence that would force it to reconsider its stance in negotiations. Kyiv denied an attack took place.
“Given the final degeneration of the criminal Kyiv regime, which has switched to a policy of state terrorism, Russia’s negotiating position will be revised,” Sergei Lavrov, Russia’s foreign minister since 2004, said in a Telegram post.
Another senior Russian official said the reported attack shocked and infuriated Trump. But Zelensky, responding on social media, said that Russia was “at it again, using dangerous statements to undermine all achievements of our shared diplomatic efforts with President Trump’s team.”
“We keep working together to bring peace closer,” Zelensky said. “This alleged ‘residence strike’ story is a complete fabrication intended to justify additional attacks against Ukraine, including Kyiv, as well as Russia’s own refusal to take necessary steps to end the war.”
“Ukraine does not take steps that can undermine diplomacy. To the contrary, Russia always takes such steps,” he added. “It is critical that the world doesn’t stay silent now. We cannot allow Russia to undermine the work on achieving a lasting peace.”
Frederick Kagan, director of the Critical Threats Project, which collaborates with the Institute for the Study of War to produce daily battlefield assessments on the conflict, said that the meeting did not appear to fundamentally shift Trump’s position on the conflict — a potential win for Kyiv in and of itself, he said.
“U.S.-Ukraine negotiations appear to be continuing as before, which is positive, since those negotiations seem to be getting into the real details of what would be required for a meaningful set of security guarantees and long-term agreements to ensure that any peace settlement will be enduring,” Kagan said.
Gaps still remain between Kyiv and the Trump administration in negotiations over security guarantees. While Trump has offered a 15-year agreement, Ukraine is seeking guarantees for 50 years, Zelensky said Monday.
“As Trump continues to say, there’s no deal until there’s a deal,” Kagan added. “We’ll have to see how things go.”
President Donald Trump presented Ukraine with a “peace deal” on Nov. 21, 2025, which frankly reads more like a surrender plan. But when President Volodymyr Zelenskyy expressed concerns about the terms, he decided to bully him online.
Trump’s 28-point peace plan has put Ukraine in a sensitive position. Accepting the plan would mean ceding its eastern territories to Russia, capsizing its postwar troops, and abandoning its NATO dreams. On top of it, Trump has threatened that if they refuse the plan, they’re practically on their own. He also wants the Ukrainian leadership to accept the plan by Thanksgiving, i.e., Nov. 27. Failing to do so also invites threats from Russia to continue their offense.
So, it’s Trump’s bullying on the one hand, and Russia’s threat to push on with its offensive on the other. In a speech on Friday, Nov. 21, Zelenskyy called it “one of the most difficult moments in our history.” He explained that the nation is being forced to choose between “loss of dignity” or “losing a key partner.” He also feared that if the war didn’t end now, Ukraine would have to face “an extremely difficult winter.” (via NY Times)
Zelenskyy decided to “offer alternatives” to Trump’s peace plan
For the sake of his country’s sovereignty, Zelenskyy announced that he would “offer alternatives” to Trump’s 28-point plan. But Trump isn’t having any of it. On Saturday, he asserted that Zelenskyy will “have to like” his proposed plan. If that doesn’t sound like a threat in itself, he continued, “If he doesn’t like it, then you know, they should just keep fighting.”
The words don’t echo like something out of an empathetic leader’s mouth. Trump added that “at some point he’s going to have to accept something.” However, he offered some relief to Kyiv, saying it’s not his final offer, and there’s some room for negotiation. Trump keeps giving mixed signals to Ukraine, but the nation doesn’t have enough time to play around with it.
Trump calls Ukraine ungrateful for his help
Then, on Nov. 23, Trump took to his Truth Social to badmouth the Ukrainian leadership and the former U.S. government under Joe Biden. “The War between Russia and Ukraine is a violent and terrible one that, with strong and proper U.S. and Ukrainian LEADERSHIP, would have NEVER HAPPENED,” he wrote. He went on to claim that if he had won the 2020 elections, “there would be no Ukraine/Russia War.”
Patting his own back, he said that “Putin would never have attacked” during his term. He substantiated this claim by asserting that there was “not even a mention” of the war during his first term. “It was only when he saw Sleepy Joe in action that he said, Now is my chance,”” the president wrote. He then diverted his attack to Ukraine, claiming that “UKRAINE ‘LEADERSHIP’ HAS EXPRESSED ZERO GRATITUDE FOR OUR EFFORTS.”
Naturally, no part of Trump’s long rant is true. The conflict between Russia and Ukraine began way before even Trump’s first term. In Feb. 2014, Moscow first launched military operations leading to the annexation of Crimea, followed by a seizure of Donetsk and Luhansk. (via Britannica) So, Russia’s intent to attack Ukraine has been clear before Trump took office in 2017.
Ukraine thanks Trump, presents a counter-plan to his proposal
President Zelenskyy has time and again expressed his thanks to the U.S. for its military and intelligence aid. Yet, after the Sunday attack, the president again reiterated his gratitude. On X, he wrote:
“Ukraine is grateful to the United States, to every American heart, and personally to President Trump for the assistance that – starting with the Javelins – has been saving Ukrainian lives. We thank everyone in Europe, in the G7, and in the G20, who is helping us defend life. It is important to preserve the support.”
Then on Sunday, during talks in Geneva, the U.S. and Ukraine reportedly discussed a new version of the 28-point deal. In the counter-plan suggested by Ukrainian officials, they refused to cede the Donbas region to Russia. Instead, Ukraine insists that “negotiations on territorial swaps will start from the Line of Contact” after the war ends.
For now, a joint statement from the U.S. and Ukraine claimed that the talks were “constructive, focused, and respectful.” But Russia is yet to respond to the counter-plan.
President Trump originally gave Ukraine until Thursday to accept their peace proposal, but overnight Rubio downplayed that deadline after meeting with Ukrainian officials over the weekend, noting he is optimistic with the progress made. It is probably the most productive day we have had on this issue. Maybe in the entirety of our engagement, but certainly in *** very long time. Rubio did not go into detail there. The peace proposal drafted by the US to end the Russia-Ukraine war has sparked concern for both Democrats and some Republicans and also for Kiev. The original plan gives in to many Russian demands that Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelinsky has rejected on multiple occasions, including giving up large pieces of territory. On Sunday night, the White House. Put out *** statement noting the Ukrainian delegation affirmed that all of their principal concerns like security guarantees, long-term economic development, political sovereignty were addressed during the meeting. In *** video statement, Zelinsky said diplomacy has been activated. Rubio called this peace proposal *** living breathing document that could change and made it clear that any final product will have to be presented to Moscow. In Washington, I’m Rachel Herzheimer.
Trump officials express optimism after meeting with Ukraine to end Russia’s war
Secretary of State Marco Rubio expressed optimism after meeting with Ukrainian leaders to discuss the Trump administration’s peace plan, despite concerns over the proposal’s concessions to Russia.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio met with Ukrainian leaders in Europe to address concerns in the Trump administration’s peace plan to end the nearly four-year war between Russia and Ukraine, which has drawn criticism from both Democrats and some Republicans, as well as Kyiv.President Donald Trump initially set a deadline for Ukraine to accept his peace proposal by Thursday, but Rubio downplayed this deadline after meeting with Ukrainian officials over the weekend.”It is probably the most productive day we have had on this issue, maybe in the entirety of our engagement, but certainly in a very long time,” Rubio said.The peace proposal drafted by the U.S. has sparked concern due to its concessions to Russian demands, which Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has rejected multiple times, including the surrender of large pieces of territory. On Sunday night, the White House released a statement that says in part, “The Ukrainian delegation affirmed that all of their principal concerns—security guarantees, long-term economic development, infrastructure protection, freedom of navigation, and political sovereignty—were thoroughly addressed during the meeting.”In a video statement, Zelenskyy said, “Diplomacy has been reinvigorated.”Over the weekend, a group of bipartisan U.S. Senators said Rubio told them on Saturday that the plan had originated with Russia and that it was actually a “wish list” for Moscow rather than a serious push for peace.A State Department spokesperson said that was “blatantly false.” Rubio suggested online that the senators were mistaken, even though they said he was their source of information.”It rewards aggression. This is pure and simple. There’s no ethical, legal, moral, political justification for Russia claiming eastern Ukraine,” Independent Maine Sen. Angus King said of Trump’s proposal.”We should not do anything that makes (Putin) feel like he has a win here,” said Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina. Rubio described the peace proposal as a “living, breathing document” that would continue to evolve and emphasized that any final agreement would need to be presented to Moscow.Keep watching for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:
President Donald Trump initially set a deadline for Ukraine to accept his peace proposal by Thursday, but Rubio downplayed this deadline after meeting with Ukrainian officials over the weekend.
“It is probably the most productive day we have had on this issue, maybe in the entirety of our engagement, but certainly in a very long time,” Rubio said.
Fabrice COFFRINI / AFP via Getty Images
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio holds a press conference following closed-door talks on a U.S. plan to end the war in Ukraine at the US Mission in Geneva, on Nov. 23, 2025.
The peace proposal drafted by the U.S. has sparked concern due to its concessions to Russian demands, which Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has rejected multiple times, including the surrender of large pieces of territory.
On Sunday night, the White House released a statement that says in part, “The Ukrainian delegation affirmed that all of their principal concerns—security guarantees, long-term economic development, infrastructure protection, freedom of navigation, and political sovereignty—were thoroughly addressed during the meeting.”
Over the weekend, a group of bipartisan U.S. Senators said Rubio told them on Saturday that the plan had originated with Russia and that it was actually a “wish list” for Moscow rather than a serious push for peace.
A State Department spokesperson said that was “blatantly false.”
Rubio suggested online that the senators were mistaken, even though they said he was their source of information.
“It rewards aggression. This is pure and simple. There’s no ethical, legal, moral, political justification for Russia claiming eastern Ukraine,” Independent Maine Sen. Angus King said of Trump’s proposal.
“We should not do anything that makes (Putin) feel like he has a win here,” said Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina.
Rubio described the peace proposal as a “living, breathing document” that would continue to evolve and emphasized that any final agreement would need to be presented to Moscow.
Keep watching for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:
President Trump initially said he was giving Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelinsky until Thursday to accept the peace plan, but yesterday President Trump told reporters this is not his final offer. The Ukraine war with Russia should have never happened. If I were president, it never would have happened. We’re trying to get it ended one way or the other. We have to get it. The plan gives in to many Russian demands, including that Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelinsky has rejected on multiple occasions, including giving up large pieces of territory to Russia. Over the weekend, senators on both sides of the aisle said they spoke with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who told them the Peace plan President Trump pushing Kiev to accept is actually *** wish list of the Russians and not the actual proposal offering Washington’s positions. Now Rubio denied this and claims that the plan was authored by the US with input from Ukraine and Russia. Zalinsky said on Friday the pressure on Ukraine is at its most intense, adding he will work quickly and calmly with the US and its partners to end the war at the White House. I’m Rachel Herzheimer.
President Trump’s Ukraine peace plan faces criticism from senators
President Donald Trump’s proposal to end the Ukraine-Russia war is under scrutiny from senators, including Republicans, who argue it favors Russia and leaves Ukraine vulnerable.
President Donald Trump’s plan to end the nearly four-year Ukraine-Russia war is drawing criticism from senators, including some Republicans, who say it strongly favors Russian President Vladimir Putin and puts Ukraine in a vulnerable position. This comes as top U.S., European, and Ukrainian officials meet Sunday in Switzerland to discuss President Trump’s plan to end the war.”It rewards aggression. This is pure and simple. There’s no ethical, legal, moral, political justification for Russia claiming eastern Ukraine,” Independent Maine Sen. Angus King said of Trump’s proposal.”We should not do anything that makes (Putin) feel like he has a win here,” said Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina.Trump initially said he was giving Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy until Thursday to accept the peace proposal, but later said it was not his final offer.”The Ukraine war with Russia should have never happened. If I were president, it never would have happened. We’re trying to get it ended one way or the other. We have to get it ended,” Trump said.The plan reportedly accommodates many Russian demands, including concessions that Zelenskyy has repeatedly rejected, such as ceding large areas of territory to Russia. Over the weekend, senators from both parties said they spoke with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who informed them that the peace plan Trump is urging Kyiv to accept is actually a “wish list” of the Russians and not the actual proposal reflecting Washington’s positions. Rubio denied this, claiming that the plan was authored by the U.S. with input from Ukraine and Russia. Zelenskyy said Sunday that “a positive result is needed for all of us” and that he will continue to work with American and European partners to end the war. Keep watching for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:
WASHINGTON —
President Donald Trump’s plan to end the nearly four-year Ukraine-Russia war is drawing criticism from senators, including some Republicans, who say it strongly favors Russian President Vladimir Putin and puts Ukraine in a vulnerable position.
This comes as top U.S., European, and Ukrainian officials meet Sunday in Switzerland to discuss President Trump’s plan to end the war.
“It rewards aggression. This is pure and simple. There’s no ethical, legal, moral, political justification for Russia claiming eastern Ukraine,” Independent Maine Sen. Angus King said of Trump’s proposal.
“We should not do anything that makes (Putin) feel like he has a win here,” said Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina.
Trump initially said he was giving Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy until Thursday to accept the peace proposal, but later said it was not his final offer.
“The Ukraine war with Russia should have never happened. If I were president, it never would have happened. We’re trying to get it ended one way or the other. We have to get it ended,” Trump said.
The plan reportedly accommodates many Russian demands, including concessions that Zelenskyy has repeatedly rejected, such as ceding large areas of territory to Russia.
Over the weekend, senators from both parties said they spoke with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who informed them that the peace plan Trump is urging Kyiv to accept is actually a “wish list” of the Russians and not the actual proposal reflecting Washington’s positions. Rubio denied this, claiming that the plan was authored by the U.S. with input from Ukraine and Russia.
Zelenskyy said Sunday that “a positive result is needed for all of us” and that he will continue to work with American and European partners to end the war.
Keep watching for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:
President Donald Trump said Sunday that the Donbas region of Ukraine should be “cut up,” leaving most of it in Russian hands, to end a war that has dragged on for nearly four years.“Let it be cut the way it is,” he told reporters aboard Air Force One. “It’s cut up right now,” adding that you can “leave it the way it is right now.”Video above: Trump and Zelenskyy to discuss U.S. sending missiles to support Ukraine“They can negotiate something later on down the line,” he said. But for now, both sides of the conflict should “stop at the battle line — go home, stop fighting, stop killing people.”Trump’s latest comments came after Ukrainian drones struck a major gas processing plant in southern Russia, sparking a fire and forcing it to suspend its intake of gas from Kazakhstan, Russian and Kazakh authorities said Sunday.The Orenburg plant, run by state-owned gas giant Gazprom and located in a region of the same name near the Kazakh border, is part of a production and processing complex that is one of the world’s largest facilities of its kind, with an annual capacity of 45 billion cubic meters. It handles gas condensate from Kazakhstan’s Karachaganak field, alongside Orenburg’s own oil and gas fields.Video below: Labor unions challenge Trump administration for visa-holder social media surveillanceAccording to regional Gov. Yevgeny Solntsev, the drone strikes set fire to a workshop at the plant and damaged part of it. The Kazakh Energy Ministry on Sunday said, citing a notification from Gazprom, that the plant was temporarily unable to process gas originating in Kazakhstan, “due to an emergency situation following a drone attack.”Ukraine’s General Staff said in a statement Sunday that a “large-scale fire” erupted at the Orenburg plant, and that one of its gas processing and purification units was damaged.Kyiv has ramped up attacks in recent months on Russian energy facilities it says both fund and directly fuel Moscow’s war effort.Trump says Ukraine may have to give up land for peaceTrump has edged back in the direction of pressing Ukraine to give up on retaking land it has lost to Russia, in exchange for an end to Moscow’s aggression.Asked in a Fox News interview conducted Thursday whether Russian President Vladimir Putin would be open to ending the war “without taking significant property from Ukraine,” Trump responded: “Well, he’s going to take something.”“They fought and he has a lot of property. He’s won certain property,” Trump said. “We’re the only nation that goes in, wins a war and then leaves.”The interview was aired Sunday on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures,” but was conducted before Trump spoke to Putin on Thursday and met with Zelenskyy on Friday.Then on Sunday evening, while flying from Florida to Washington, Trump — who plans to meet Putin in Budapest in coming weeks — reiterated his stance that Ukraine will need to give up territory by having the fighting “stop at the lines where they are.”“The rest is very tough to negotiate if you’re going to say, ‘You take this, we take that,’” he said. “You know, there are so many different permutations.”The comments amounted to another shift in position on the war by the U.S. leader. In recent weeks, Trump had shown growing impatience with Putin and expressed greater openness to helping Ukraine win the war.Contrary to Kyiv’s hopes, Trump did not commit to providing it with Tomahawks following his meeting with Zelenskyy. The missiles would be the longest-range weapons in Ukraine’s arsenal and would allow it to strike targets deep inside Russia, including Moscow, with precision.Russians modified bombs for deeper strikesMeanwhile, Ukrainian prosecutors claim that Moscow is modifying its deadly aerial-guided bombs to strike civilians deeper in Ukraine. Local authorities in Kharkiv said Russia struck a residential neighborhood using a new rocket-powered aerial bomb for the first time.Kharkiv’s regional prosecutor’s office said in a statement that Russia used the weapon called the UMPB-5R, which can travel up to 130 kilometers (80 miles), in an attack on the city of Lozava on Saturday afternoon. The city lies 150 kilometers (93 miles) south of Kharkiv, a considerable distance for the weapon to fly.Russia continued to strike other parts of Ukraine closer to the front line. In the Dnipropetrovsk region, at least 11 people were injured after Russian drones hit the Shakhtarske area. At least 14 five-story buildings and a store were damaged, said acting regional Gov. Vladyslav Haivanenko.A Russian strike also hit a coal mine in the Dnipropetrovk region. Some 192 miners were brought to the surface without injury, the company that operates the mine said.Ukraine’s General Staff also claimed a separate drone strike hit Russia’s Novokuibyshevsk oil refinery, in the Samara region near Orenburg, sparking a blaze and damaging its main refining units.Video below: Trump reacts to John Bolton, his former national security adviser, being indictedThe Novokuibyshevsk facility, operated by Russian gas major Rosneft, has an annual capacity of 4.9 million tons, and turns out over 20 kinds of oil-based products. Russian authorities did not immediately acknowledge the Ukrainian claim or discuss any damage.Russia’s Defense Ministry said in a statement early Sunday that its air defense forces had shot down 45 Ukrainian drones during the night, including 12 over the Samara region, one over the Orenburg region and 11 over the Saratov region neighboring Samara.In turn, Ukraine’s air force reported Sunday that Russia during the night launched 62 drones into Ukrainian territory. It said 40 of these were shot down, or veered off course due to electronic jamming.
President Donald Trump said Sunday that the Donbas region of Ukraine should be “cut up,” leaving most of it in Russian hands, to end a war that has dragged on for nearly four years.
“Let it be cut the way it is,” he told reporters aboard Air Force One. “It’s cut up right now,” adding that you can “leave it the way it is right now.”
Video above: Trump and Zelenskyy to discuss U.S. sending missiles to support Ukraine
“They can negotiate something later on down the line,” he said. But for now, both sides of the conflict should “stop at the battle line — go home, stop fighting, stop killing people.”
Trump’s latest comments came after Ukrainian drones struck a major gas processing plant in southern Russia, sparking a fire and forcing it to suspend its intake of gas from Kazakhstan, Russian and Kazakh authorities said Sunday.
The Orenburg plant, run by state-owned gas giant Gazprom and located in a region of the same name near the Kazakh border, is part of a production and processing complex that is one of the world’s largest facilities of its kind, with an annual capacity of 45 billion cubic meters. It handles gas condensate from Kazakhstan’s Karachaganak field, alongside Orenburg’s own oil and gas fields.
Video below: Labor unions challenge Trump administration for visa-holder social media surveillance
According to regional Gov. Yevgeny Solntsev, the drone strikes set fire to a workshop at the plant and damaged part of it. The Kazakh Energy Ministry on Sunday said, citing a notification from Gazprom, that the plant was temporarily unable to process gas originating in Kazakhstan, “due to an emergency situation following a drone attack.”
Ukraine’s General Staff said in a statement Sunday that a “large-scale fire” erupted at the Orenburg plant, and that one of its gas processing and purification units was damaged.
Trump says Ukraine may have to give up land for peace
Trump has edged back in the direction of pressing Ukraine to give up on retaking land it has lost to Russia, in exchange for an end to Moscow’s aggression.
Asked in a Fox News interview conducted Thursday whether Russian President Vladimir Putin would be open to ending the war “without taking significant property from Ukraine,” Trump responded: “Well, he’s going to take something.”
“They fought and he has a lot of property. He’s won certain property,” Trump said. “We’re the only nation that goes in, wins a war and then leaves.”
Then on Sunday evening, while flying from Florida to Washington, Trump — who plans to meet Putin in Budapest in coming weeks — reiterated his stance that Ukraine will need to give up territory by having the fighting “stop at the lines where they are.”
“The rest is very tough to negotiate if you’re going to say, ‘You take this, we take that,’” he said. “You know, there are so many different permutations.”
Mark Schiefelbein
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One, Sunday, Oct. 19, 2025, en route to Joint Base Andrews, Md., as he returns from a trip to Florida.
The comments amounted to another shift in position on the war by the U.S. leader. In recent weeks, Trump had shown growing impatience with Putin and expressed greater openness to helping Ukraine win the war.
Contrary to Kyiv’s hopes, Trump did not commit to providing it with Tomahawks following his meeting with Zelenskyy. The missiles would be the longest-range weapons in Ukraine’s arsenal and would allow it to strike targets deep inside Russia, including Moscow, with precision.
Russians modified bombs for deeper strikes
Meanwhile, Ukrainian prosecutors claim that Moscow is modifying its deadly aerial-guided bombs to strike civilians deeper in Ukraine. Local authorities in Kharkiv said Russia struck a residential neighborhood using a new rocket-powered aerial bomb for the first time.
Kharkiv’s regional prosecutor’s office said in a statement that Russia used the weapon called the UMPB-5R, which can travel up to 130 kilometers (80 miles), in an attack on the city of Lozava on Saturday afternoon. The city lies 150 kilometers (93 miles) south of Kharkiv, a considerable distance for the weapon to fly.
Russia continued to strike other parts of Ukraine closer to the front line. In the Dnipropetrovsk region, at least 11 people were injured after Russian drones hit the Shakhtarske area. At least 14 five-story buildings and a store were damaged, said acting regional Gov. Vladyslav Haivanenko.
A Russian strike also hit a coal mine in the Dnipropetrovk region. Some 192 miners were brought to the surface without injury, the company that operates the mine said.
Ukraine’s General Staff also claimed a separate drone strike hit Russia’s Novokuibyshevsk oil refinery, in the Samara region near Orenburg, sparking a blaze and damaging its main refining units.
Video below: Trump reacts to John Bolton, his former national security adviser, being indicted
The Novokuibyshevsk facility, operated by Russian gas major Rosneft, has an annual capacity of 4.9 million tons, and turns out over 20 kinds of oil-based products. Russian authorities did not immediately acknowledge the Ukrainian claim or discuss any damage.
Russia’s Defense Ministry said in a statement early Sunday that its air defense forces had shot down 45 Ukrainian drones during the night, including 12 over the Samara region, one over the Orenburg region and 11 over the Saratov region neighboring Samara.
In turn, Ukraine’s air force reported Sunday that Russia during the night launched 62 drones into Ukrainian territory. It said 40 of these were shot down, or veered off course due to electronic jamming.
President Donald Trump returned to the United Nations on Tuesday to boast of his second-term foreign policy achievements and lash out at the world body as a feckless institution, while warning Europe it would be ruined if it doesn’t turn away from a “double-tailed monster” of ill-conceived migration and green energy policies.His roughly hour-long speech was both grievance-filled and self-congratulatory as he used the platform to praise himself and lament that some of his fellow world leaders’ countries were “going to hell.”The address was also just the latest reminder for U.S. allies and foes that the United States — after a four-year interim under the more internationalist President Joe Biden — has returned to the unapologetically “America First” posture under Trump.“What is the purpose of the United Nations?” Trump said. “The U.N. has such tremendous potential. I’ve always said it. It has such tremendous, tremendous potential. But it’s not even coming close to living up to that potential.”World leaders listened closely to his remarks at the U.N. General Assembly as Trump has already moved quickly to diminish U.S. support for the world body in his first eight months in office. Even in his first term, he was no fan of the flavor of multilateralism that the United Nations espouses.After his latest inauguration, he issued a first-day executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the World Health Organization. That was followed by his move to end U.S. participation in the U.N. Human Rights Council, and ordering up a review of U.S. membership in hundreds of intergovernmental organizations aimed at determining whether they align with the priorities of his “America First” agenda.Trump escalated that criticism on Tuesday, saying the international body’s “empty words don’t solve wars.”Trump offered a weave of jarring juxtapositions in his address to the assembly.He trumpeted himself as a peacemaker and enumerated successes of his administration’s efforts in several hotspots around the globe. At the same, Trump heralded his decisions to order the U.S. military to carry out strikes on Iran and more recently against alleged drug smugglers from Venezuela and argued that globalists are on the verge of destroying successful nations.The U.S. president’s speech is typically among the most anticipated moments of the annual assembly. This one comes at one of the most volatile moments in the world body’s 80-year-old history. Global leaders are being tested by intractable wars in Gaza, Ukraine and Sudan, uncertainty about the economic and social impact of emerging artificial intelligence technology, and anxiety about Trump’s antipathy for the global body.Trump has also raised new questions about the American use of military force in his return to the White House, after ordering U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June and a trio of strikes this month on alleged drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean Sea.The latter strikes, including at least two fatal attacks on boats that originated from Venezuela, has raised speculation in Caracas that Trump is looking to set the stage for the ouster of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.Some U.S. lawmakers and human rights advocates say that Trump is effectively carrying out extrajudicial killings by using U.S. forces to lethally target alleged drug smugglers instead of interdicting the suspected vessels, seizing any drugs and prosecuting the suspects in U.S. courts.Warnings about ‘green scam’ and migrationTrump touted his administration’s policies allowing for expanded drilling for oil and natural gas in the United States, and aggressively cracking down on illegal immigration, implicitly suggesting more countries should follow suit.He sharply warned that European nations that have more welcoming migration policies and commit to expensive energy projects aimed at reducing their carbon footprint were causing irreparable harm to their economies and cultures.“I’m telling you that if you don’t get away from the ‘green energy’ scam, your country is going to fail,” Trump said. “If you don’t stop people that you’ve never seen before that you have nothing in common with your country is going to fail.”Trump added, “I love the people of Europe, and I hate to see it being devastated by energy and immigration. This double-tailed monster destroys everything in its wake, and they cannot let that happen any longer.”The passage of the wide-ranging address elicited some groans and uncomfortable laughter from delegates.Trump to hold one-on-one talks with world leadersTrump touted “the renewal of American strength around the world” and his efforts to help end several wars. He peppered his speech with criticism of global institutions doing too little to end war and solve the world’s biggest problems.General Assembly President Annalena Baerbock on Tuesday said that despite all the internal and external challenges facing the organization, it is not the time to walk away.“Sometimes we could’ve done more, but we cannot let this dishearten us. If we stop doing the right things, evil will prevail,” Baerbock said in her opening remarks.Following his speech, Trump met with Secretary-General António Guterres, telling the top U.N. official that the U.S. is behind the global body “100%” amid fears among members that he’s edging toward a full retreat.The White House says Trump will also meet on Tuesday with the leaders of Ukraine, Argentina and the European Union. He will also hold a group meeting with officials from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan.He’ll return to Washington after hosting a reception Tuesday night with more than 100 invited world leaders.Gaza and Ukraine cast shadow over Trump speechTrump has struggled to deliver on his 2024 campaign promises to quickly end the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. His response has been also relatively muted as some longtime American allies are using this year’s General Assembly to spotlight the growing international campaign for recognition of a Palestinian state, a move that the U.S. and Israel vehemently oppose.France became the latest nation to recognize Palestinian statehood on Monday at the start of a high-profile meeting at the U.N. aimed at galvanizing support for a two-state solution to the Mideast conflict. More nations are expected to follow.Trump sharply criticized the statehood recognition push.“The rewards would be too great for Hamas terrorists,” Trump said. “This would be a reward for these horrible atrocities, including Oct. 7.”Trump also addressed Russia’s war in Ukraine.It’s been more than a month since Trump’s Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin and a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and key European leaders. Following those meetings, Trump announced that he was arranging for direct talks between Putin and Zelenskyy. But Putin hasn’t shown any interest in meeting with Zelenskyy and Moscow has only intensified its bombardment of Ukraine since the Alaska summit.European leaders as well as American lawmakers, including some key Republican allies of Trump, have urged the president to dial up stronger sanctions on Russia. Trump, meanwhile, has pressed Europe to stop buying Russian oil, the engine feeding Putin’s war machine.Trump said a “very strong round of powerful tariffs” would “stop the bloodshed, I believe, very quickly.” He repeated his calls on Europe to “step it up” and stop buying Russian oil.Trump has Oslo dreamsDespite his struggles to end the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, Trump has made clear that he wants to be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, repeatedly making the spurious claim that he’s “ended seven wars” since he returned to office.“Everyone says that I should get the Nobel Prize — but for me, the real prize will be the sons and daughters who live to grow up because millions of people are no longer being killed in endless wars,” Trump offered.He again highlighted his administration’s efforts to end conflicts, including between Israel and Iran, India and Pakistan, Egypt and Sudan, Rwanda and the Democratic Congo, Armenia and Azerbaijan, and Cambodia and Thailand.“It’s too bad that I had to do these things instead of the United Nations doing them,” Trump said. “Sadly, in all cases, the United Nations did not even try to help in any of them.”Although Trump helped mediate relations among many of these nations, experts say his impact isn’t as clear cut as he claims.___AP journalists Tracy Brown and Darlene Superville in Washington and Bill Barrow in Atlanta contributed to this report.
UNITED NATIONS —
President Donald Trump returned to the United Nations on Tuesday to boast of his second-term foreign policy achievements and lash out at the world body as a feckless institution, while warning Europe it would be ruined if it doesn’t turn away from a “double-tailed monster” of ill-conceived migration and green energy policies.
His roughly hour-long speech was both grievance-filled and self-congratulatory as he used the platform to praise himself and lament that some of his fellow world leaders’ countries were “going to hell.”
The address was also just the latest reminder for U.S. allies and foes that the United States — after a four-year interim under the more internationalist President Joe Biden — has returned to the unapologetically “America First” posture under Trump.
“What is the purpose of the United Nations?” Trump said. “The U.N. has such tremendous potential. I’ve always said it. It has such tremendous, tremendous potential. But it’s not even coming close to living up to that potential.”
World leaders listened closely to his remarks at the U.N. General Assembly as Trump has already moved quickly to diminish U.S. support for the world body in his first eight months in office. Even in his first term, he was no fan of the flavor of multilateralism that the United Nations espouses.
After his latest inauguration, he issued a first-day executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the World Health Organization. That was followed by his move to end U.S. participation in the U.N. Human Rights Council, and ordering up a review of U.S. membership in hundreds of intergovernmental organizations aimed at determining whether they align with the priorities of his “America First” agenda.
Trump escalated that criticism on Tuesday, saying the international body’s “empty words don’t solve wars.”
Trump offered a weave of jarring juxtapositions in his address to the assembly.
He trumpeted himself as a peacemaker and enumerated successes of his administration’s efforts in several hotspots around the globe. At the same, Trump heralded his decisions to order the U.S. military to carry out strikes on Iran and more recently against alleged drug smugglers from Venezuela and argued that globalists are on the verge of destroying successful nations.
The U.S. president’s speech is typically among the most anticipated moments of the annual assembly. This one comes at one of the most volatile moments in the world body’s 80-year-old history. Global leaders are being tested by intractable wars in Gaza, Ukraine and Sudan, uncertainty about the economic and social impact of emerging artificial intelligence technology, and anxiety about Trump’s antipathy for the global body.
Trump has also raised new questions about the American use of military force in his return to the White House, after ordering U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June and a trio of strikes this month on alleged drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean Sea.
The latter strikes, including at least two fatal attacks on boats that originated from Venezuela, has raised speculation in Caracas that Trump is looking to set the stage for the ouster of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Some U.S. lawmakers and human rights advocates say that Trump is effectively carrying out extrajudicial killings by using U.S. forces to lethally target alleged drug smugglers instead of interdicting the suspected vessels, seizing any drugs and prosecuting the suspects in U.S. courts.
Warnings about ‘green scam’ and migration
Trump touted his administration’s policies allowing for expanded drilling for oil and natural gas in the United States, and aggressively cracking down on illegal immigration, implicitly suggesting more countries should follow suit.
He sharply warned that European nations that have more welcoming migration policies and commit to expensive energy projects aimed at reducing their carbon footprint were causing irreparable harm to their economies and cultures.
“I’m telling you that if you don’t get away from the ‘green energy’ scam, your country is going to fail,” Trump said. “If you don’t stop people that you’ve never seen before that you have nothing in common with your country is going to fail.”
Trump added, “I love the people of Europe, and I hate to see it being devastated by energy and immigration. This double-tailed monster destroys everything in its wake, and they cannot let that happen any longer.”
The passage of the wide-ranging address elicited some groans and uncomfortable laughter from delegates.
Trump to hold one-on-one talks with world leaders
Trump touted “the renewal of American strength around the world” and his efforts to help end several wars. He peppered his speech with criticism of global institutions doing too little to end war and solve the world’s biggest problems.
General Assembly President Annalena Baerbock on Tuesday said that despite all the internal and external challenges facing the organization, it is not the time to walk away.
“Sometimes we could’ve done more, but we cannot let this dishearten us. If we stop doing the right things, evil will prevail,” Baerbock said in her opening remarks.
Following his speech, Trump met with Secretary-General António Guterres, telling the top U.N. official that the U.S. is behind the global body “100%” amid fears among members that he’s edging toward a full retreat.
The White House says Trump will also meet on Tuesday with the leaders of Ukraine, Argentina and the European Union. He will also hold a group meeting with officials from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan.
He’ll return to Washington after hosting a reception Tuesday night with more than 100 invited world leaders.
Gaza and Ukraine cast shadow over Trump speech
Trump has struggled to deliver on his 2024 campaign promises to quickly end the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. His response has been also relatively muted as some longtime American allies are using this year’s General Assembly to spotlight the growing international campaign for recognition of a Palestinian state, a move that the U.S. and Israel vehemently oppose.
France became the latest nation to recognize Palestinian statehood on Monday at the start of a high-profile meeting at the U.N. aimed at galvanizing support for a two-state solution to the Mideast conflict. More nations are expected to follow.
Trump sharply criticized the statehood recognition push.
“The rewards would be too great for Hamas terrorists,” Trump said. “This would be a reward for these horrible atrocities, including Oct. 7.”
Trump also addressed Russia’s war in Ukraine.
It’s been more than a month since Trump’s Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin and a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and key European leaders. Following those meetings, Trump announced that he was arranging for direct talks between Putin and Zelenskyy. But Putin hasn’t shown any interest in meeting with Zelenskyy and Moscow has only intensified its bombardment of Ukraine since the Alaska summit.
European leaders as well as American lawmakers, including some key Republican allies of Trump, have urged the president to dial up stronger sanctions on Russia. Trump, meanwhile, has pressed Europe to stop buying Russian oil, the engine feeding Putin’s war machine.
Trump said a “very strong round of powerful tariffs” would “stop the bloodshed, I believe, very quickly.” He repeated his calls on Europe to “step it up” and stop buying Russian oil.
Trump has Oslo dreams
Despite his struggles to end the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, Trump has made clear that he wants to be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, repeatedly making the spurious claim that he’s “ended seven wars” since he returned to office.
“Everyone says that I should get the Nobel Prize — but for me, the real prize will be the sons and daughters who live to grow up because millions of people are no longer being killed in endless wars,” Trump offered.
He again highlighted his administration’s efforts to end conflicts, including between Israel and Iran, India and Pakistan, Egypt and Sudan, Rwanda and the Democratic Congo, Armenia and Azerbaijan, and Cambodia and Thailand.
“It’s too bad that I had to do these things instead of the United Nations doing them,” Trump said. “Sadly, in all cases, the United Nations did not even try to help in any of them.”
Although Trump helped mediate relations among many of these nations, experts say his impact isn’t as clear cut as he claims.
___
AP journalists Tracy Brown and Darlene Superville in Washington and Bill Barrow in Atlanta contributed to this report.
Watched by the world, President Donald Trump returns to the United Nations on Tuesday to deliver a wide-ranging address on his second-term foreign policy achievements and lament that “globalist institutions have significantly decayed the world order,” according to the White House.Watch live video from the United Nations in the video player aboveWorld leaders will be listening closely to his remarks at the U.N. General Assembly as Trump has already moved quickly to diminish U.S. support for the world body in his first eight months in office. Even in his first term, he was no fan of the flavor of multilateralism that the United Nations espouses.After his latest inauguration, he issued a first-day executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the World Health Organization. That was followed by his move to end U.S. participation in the U.N. Human Rights Council, and ordering up a review of U.S. membership in hundreds of intergovernmental organizations aimed at determining whether they align with the priorities of his “America First” agenda.“There are great hopes for it, but it’s not being well run, to be honest,” Trump said of the U.N. last week.The U.S. president’s speech is typically among the most anticipated moments of the annual assembly. This one comes at one of the most volatile moments in the world body’s 80-year-old history. Global leaders are being tested by intractable wars in Gaza, Ukraine and Sudan, uncertainty about the economic and social impact of emerging artificial intelligence technology, and anxiety about Trump’s antipathy for the global body.Trump has also raised new questions about the American use of military force in his return to the White House, after ordering U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June and a trio of strikes this month on alleged drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean Sea.The latter strikes, including at least two fatal attacks on boats that originated from Venezuela, has raised speculation in Caracas that Trump is looking to set the stage for the ouster of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.Some U.S. lawmakers and human rights advocates say that Trump is effectively carrying out extrajudicial killings by using U.S. forces to lethally target alleged drug smugglers instead of interdicting the suspected vessels, seizing any drugs and prosecuting the suspects in U.S. courts.“This is by far the most stressed the U.N. system has ever been in its 80 years,” said Anjali K. Dayal, a professor of international politics at Fordham University in New York.Trump to hold one-on-one talks with world leadersWhite House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump would tout “the renewal of American strength around the world” and his efforts to help end several wars.“The president will also touch upon how globalist institutions have significantly decayed the world order, and he will articulate his straightforward and constructive vision for the world,” Leavitt said.Following his speech, Trump will hold one-on-one meetings with U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres and the leaders of Ukraine, Argentina and the European Union. He will also hold a group meeting with officials from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan.He’ll return to Washington after hosting a reception Tuesday night with more than 100 invited world leaders.Gaza and Ukraine cast shadow over Trump speechTrump has struggled to deliver on his 2024 campaign promises to quickly end the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. His response has been also relatively muted as some longtime American allies are using this year’s General Assembly to spotlight the growing international campaign for recognition of a Palestinian state, a move that the U.S. and Israel vehemently oppose.France became the latest nation to recognize Palestinian statehood on Monday at the start of a high-profile meeting at the U.N. aimed at galvanizing support for a two-state solution to the Mideast conflict. More nations are expected to follow.Leavitt said Trump sees the push as “just more talk and not enough action from some of our friends and allies.”Trump, for his part, in the lead-up to Tuesday’s address has tried to keep focus on getting agreement on a ceasefire that leads Hamas to releasing its remaining 48 hostages, including 20 still believed be alive.“I’d like to see a diplomatic solution,” Trump told reporters Sunday evening. “There’s a lot of anger and a lot of hatred, you know that, and there has been for a lot of years … but hopefully we’ll get something done.”Leaders in the room will also be eager to hear what Trump has to say about Russia’s war in Ukraine.It’s been more than a month since Trump’s Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin and a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and key European leaders. Following those meetings, Trump announced that he was arranging for direct talks between Putin and Zelenskyy. But Putin hasn’t shown any interest in meeting with Zelenskyy and Moscow has only intensified its bombardment of Ukraine since the Alaska summit.European leaders as well as American lawmakers, including some key Republican allies of Trump, have urged the president to dial up stronger sanctions on Russia. Trump, meanwhile, has pressed Europe to stop buying Russian oil, the engine feeding Putin’s war machine.Trump has Oslo dreamsDespite his struggles to end the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, Trump has made clear that he wants to be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, repeatedly making the claim that he’s “ended seven wars” since he returned to office.He points to his administration’s efforts to end conflicts between Israel and Iran, India and Pakistan, Egypt and Sudan, Rwanda and the Democratic Congo, Armenia and Azerbaijan, and Cambodia and Thailand.Although Trump helped mediate relations among many of these nations, experts say his impact isn’t as clear cut as he claims.Still, Trump’s Nobel ambitions could have impact on the tenor of his address, said Mark Montgomery, an analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington.“His speech is going to be driven by how much he really believes he has a chance of getting a Nobel Peace Prize,” Montgomery said. “If he thinks that’s still something he can do, then I think he knows you don’t go into the U.N. and drop a grenade down the tank hatch and shut it, right?”___AP journalists Tracy Brown and Darlene Superville in Washington contributed to this report.
NEW YORK —
Watched by the world, President Donald Trump returns to the United Nations on Tuesday to deliver a wide-ranging address on his second-term foreign policy achievements and lament that “globalist institutions have significantly decayed the world order,” according to the White House.
Watch live video from the United Nations in the video player above
World leaders will be listening closely to his remarks at the U.N. General Assembly as Trump has already moved quickly to diminish U.S. support for the world body in his first eight months in office. Even in his first term, he was no fan of the flavor of multilateralism that the United Nations espouses.
After his latest inauguration, he issued a first-day executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the World Health Organization. That was followed by his move to end U.S. participation in the U.N. Human Rights Council, and ordering up a review of U.S. membership in hundreds of intergovernmental organizations aimed at determining whether they align with the priorities of his “America First” agenda.
“There are great hopes for it, but it’s not being well run, to be honest,” Trump said of the U.N. last week.
The U.S. president’s speech is typically among the most anticipated moments of the annual assembly. This one comes at one of the most volatile moments in the world body’s 80-year-old history. Global leaders are being tested by intractable wars in Gaza, Ukraine and Sudan, uncertainty about the economic and social impact of emerging artificial intelligence technology, and anxiety about Trump’s antipathy for the global body.
Trump has also raised new questions about the American use of military force in his return to the White House, after ordering U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June and a trio of strikes this month on alleged drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean Sea.
The latter strikes, including at least two fatal attacks on boats that originated from Venezuela, has raised speculation in Caracas that Trump is looking to set the stage for the ouster of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Some U.S. lawmakers and human rights advocates say that Trump is effectively carrying out extrajudicial killings by using U.S. forces to lethally target alleged drug smugglers instead of interdicting the suspected vessels, seizing any drugs and prosecuting the suspects in U.S. courts.
“This is by far the most stressed the U.N. system has ever been in its 80 years,” said Anjali K. Dayal, a professor of international politics at Fordham University in New York.
Trump to hold one-on-one talks with world leaders
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump would tout “the renewal of American strength around the world” and his efforts to help end several wars.
“The president will also touch upon how globalist institutions have significantly decayed the world order, and he will articulate his straightforward and constructive vision for the world,” Leavitt said.
Following his speech, Trump will hold one-on-one meetings with U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres and the leaders of Ukraine, Argentina and the European Union. He will also hold a group meeting with officials from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan.
He’ll return to Washington after hosting a reception Tuesday night with more than 100 invited world leaders.
Gaza and Ukraine cast shadow over Trump speech
Trump has struggled to deliver on his 2024 campaign promises to quickly end the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. His response has been also relatively muted as some longtime American allies are using this year’s General Assembly to spotlight the growing international campaign for recognition of a Palestinian state, a move that the U.S. and Israel vehemently oppose.
France became the latest nation to recognize Palestinian statehood on Monday at the start of a high-profile meeting at the U.N. aimed at galvanizing support for a two-state solution to the Mideast conflict. More nations are expected to follow.
Leavitt said Trump sees the push as “just more talk and not enough action from some of our friends and allies.”
Trump, for his part, in the lead-up to Tuesday’s address has tried to keep focus on getting agreement on a ceasefire that leads Hamas to releasing its remaining 48 hostages, including 20 still believed be alive.
“I’d like to see a diplomatic solution,” Trump told reporters Sunday evening. “There’s a lot of anger and a lot of hatred, you know that, and there has been for a lot of years … but hopefully we’ll get something done.”
Leaders in the room will also be eager to hear what Trump has to say about Russia’s war in Ukraine.
It’s been more than a month since Trump’s Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin and a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and key European leaders. Following those meetings, Trump announced that he was arranging for direct talks between Putin and Zelenskyy. But Putin hasn’t shown any interest in meeting with Zelenskyy and Moscow has only intensified its bombardment of Ukraine since the Alaska summit.
European leaders as well as American lawmakers, including some key Republican allies of Trump, have urged the president to dial up stronger sanctions on Russia. Trump, meanwhile, has pressed Europe to stop buying Russian oil, the engine feeding Putin’s war machine.
Trump has Oslo dreams
Despite his struggles to end the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, Trump has made clear that he wants to be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, repeatedly making the claim that he’s “ended seven wars” since he returned to office.
He points to his administration’s efforts to end conflicts between Israel and Iran, India and Pakistan, Egypt and Sudan, Rwanda and the Democratic Congo, Armenia and Azerbaijan, and Cambodia and Thailand.
Although Trump helped mediate relations among many of these nations, experts say his impact isn’t as clear cut as he claims.
Still, Trump’s Nobel ambitions could have impact on the tenor of his address, said Mark Montgomery, an analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington.
“His speech is going to be driven by how much he really believes he has a chance of getting a Nobel Peace Prize,” Montgomery said. “If he thinks that’s still something he can do, then I think he knows you don’t go into the U.N. and drop a grenade down the tank hatch and shut it, right?”
___
AP journalists Tracy Brown and Darlene Superville in Washington contributed to this report.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un will make his first visit to China in six years to attend a military parade next week, the two countries said Thursday, in an event that would bring him together with a group of world leaders for the first time since taking office in late 2011.Kim and Russian President Vladimir Putin will be among 26 foreign leaders who attend next Wednesday’s parade in Beijing to mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and China’s resistance against Japan’s wartime aggressions, according to the Chinese Foreign Ministry.“We warmly welcome General Secretary Kim Jong Un to China to attend the commemorative events,” Hong Lei, China’s assistant minister of foreign affairs, told a press conference. “Upholding, consolidating and developing the traditional friendship between China and the DPRK is a firm position of the Communist Party of China and the Chinese government.”DPRK refers to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, North Korea’s official name.North Korea’s state news agency, KCNA, said Kim will visit China at the invitation of Chinese President Xi Jinping to attend celebrations of the 80th anniversary of the war’s end. It gave no further details, including how long he will stay in China and whether he will hold an official meeting with Xi, Putin or other leaders visiting China.Others coming for the parade include the leaders of Iran, Belarus, Serbia, Cuba, Indonesia, Myanmar, Pakistan and Malaysia. No leaders from the United States or other major Western European countries are expected to attend, in part because of their differences with Putin over the war in Ukraine. The parade is expected to feature some of China’s newest weaponry and a speech by Xi.If Kim’s trip is realized, it would be his first trip to China since 2019. Since inheriting power upon his father’s death in December 2011, Kim has met Xi, Putin, U.S. President Donald Trump, former South Korean President Moon Jae-in and others, but all those summits were bilateral meetings and Kim hasn’t attended any multilateral events involving foreign leaders.In all, Kim traveled to China four times from 2018 to 2019 to meet Xi.China has long been North Korea’s biggest trading partner and main aid provider, but there have been questions about their relations in recent years. North Korea has been focusing on expanding cooperation with Russia by supplying troops and ammunition to support its war against Ukraine in exchange for economic and military assistance.But many observers say North Korea is expected to take steps to improve ties with China to revive its troubled economy, because there is a limit to what it can get from Russia and it’s also unclear if North Korea and Russia would maintain the same level of cooperation after the Ukraine war ends. In 2023, about 97% of North Korea’s external trade was with China, while 1.2% was with Russia, according to Chinese data.Kim’s visit to China could also be related to efforts to restart diplomacy with Trump, who has repeatedly highlighted his relationship with Kim and expressed his hopes to resume talks. North Korea has so far dismissed Trump’s outreach, but many analysts say North Korea would return to talks if it believes the U.S. would make greater concessions.“Pyongyang’s illicit cooperation with Moscow has strained ties with Beijing, even as China’s political and economic support remains vital for the North Korean regime,” said Leif-Eric Easley, professor of international studies at Ewha Womans University in Seoul.“To re-engage Trump from a position of strength, Kim seeks to repair relations with Xi, and attending the parade in Beijing is a highly visible way of doing that,” Easley said.During a meeting with Lee in Washington this week, Trump spoke of his past summits with Kim, including one at the Korean Demilitarized Zone. Responding to a question over whether he would return to the Demilitarized Zone, Trump told reporters, “I loved it. Remember when I walked across the line and everyone went crazy.”During Trump’s first term, he met Kim three times from 2018-19, but their high-stakes summit eventually collapsed due to wrangling over U.S.-led sanctions on North Korea. Kim has since conducted weapons tests to modernize and expand his nuclear arsenal.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un will make his first visit to China in six years to attend a military parade next week, the two countries said Thursday, in an event that would bring him together with a group of world leaders for the first time since taking office in late 2011.
Kim and Russian President Vladimir Putin will be among 26 foreign leaders who attend next Wednesday’s parade in Beijing to mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and China’s resistance against Japan’s wartime aggressions, according to the Chinese Foreign Ministry.
“We warmly welcome General Secretary Kim Jong Un to China to attend the commemorative events,” Hong Lei, China’s assistant minister of foreign affairs, told a press conference. “Upholding, consolidating and developing the traditional friendship between China and the DPRK is a firm position of the Communist Party of China and the Chinese government.”
DPRK refers to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, North Korea’s official name.
North Korea’s state news agency, KCNA, said Kim will visit China at the invitation of Chinese President Xi Jinping to attend celebrations of the 80th anniversary of the war’s end. It gave no further details, including how long he will stay in China and whether he will hold an official meeting with Xi, Putin or other leaders visiting China.
Others coming for the parade include the leaders of Iran, Belarus, Serbia, Cuba, Indonesia, Myanmar, Pakistan and Malaysia. No leaders from the United States or other major Western European countries are expected to attend, in part because of their differences with Putin over the war in Ukraine. The parade is expected to feature some of China’s newest weaponry and a speech by Xi.
If Kim’s trip is realized, it would be his first trip to China since 2019. Since inheriting power upon his father’s death in December 2011, Kim has met Xi, Putin, U.S. President Donald Trump, former South Korean President Moon Jae-in and others, but all those summits were bilateral meetings and Kim hasn’t attended any multilateral events involving foreign leaders.
In all, Kim traveled to China four times from 2018 to 2019 to meet Xi.
China has long been North Korea’s biggest trading partner and main aid provider, but there have been questions about their relations in recent years. North Korea has been focusing on expanding cooperation with Russia by supplying troops and ammunition to support its war against Ukraine in exchange for economic and military assistance.
But many observers say North Korea is expected to take steps to improve ties with China to revive its troubled economy, because there is a limit to what it can get from Russia and it’s also unclear if North Korea and Russia would maintain the same level of cooperation after the Ukraine war ends. In 2023, about 97% of North Korea’s external trade was with China, while 1.2% was with Russia, according to Chinese data.
Kim’s visit to China could also be related to efforts to restart diplomacy with Trump, who has repeatedly highlighted his relationship with Kim and expressed his hopes to resume talks. North Korea has so far dismissed Trump’s outreach, but many analysts say North Korea would return to talks if it believes the U.S. would make greater concessions.
“Pyongyang’s illicit cooperation with Moscow has strained ties with Beijing, even as China’s political and economic support remains vital for the North Korean regime,” said Leif-Eric Easley, professor of international studies at Ewha Womans University in Seoul.
“To re-engage Trump from a position of strength, Kim seeks to repair relations with Xi, and attending the parade in Beijing is a highly visible way of doing that,” Easley said.
During a meeting with Lee in Washington this week, Trump spoke of his past summits with Kim, including one at the Korean Demilitarized Zone. Responding to a question over whether he would return to the Demilitarized Zone, Trump told reporters, “I loved it. Remember when I walked across the line and everyone went crazy.”
During Trump’s first term, he met Kim three times from 2018-19, but their high-stakes summit eventually collapsed due to wrangling over U.S.-led sanctions on North Korea. Kim has since conducted weapons tests to modernize and expand his nuclear arsenal.
Last Friday, President Donald Trump hosted Vladimir Putin for a bilateral summit in Alaska and then, on Monday, received Volodymyr Zelensky and a half-dozen European heads of state at the White House. It was the latest attempt by Trump to bring the war in Ukraine to a close through diplomatic intervention. “While difficult, peace is within reach,” he said, on Monday. “The war is going to end.” Zelensky and Putin, he went on, “are going to work something out.” Trump, famously, has made such promises before—on the campaign trail, he declared that he would end the war within twenty-four hours of taking office—but is there reason to think that it might be different this time?
To answer that, one has to return to the question of why Russia invaded Ukraine in the first place, and why the war has continued for three and a half years since then. Territory, an issue that Trump and his special envoy, Steven Witkoff, have returned to time and again, most recently when talking of unspecified “land swaps,” is actually not the primary concern for either side. “They’ve occupied some very prime territory,” Trump said, of Russia’s invasion force. “We’re going to try and get some of that territory back for Ukraine.”
For Putin, lopping off Ukrainian territory—and, in the process, levelling Ukrainian cities with artillery barrages and aerial bombs—is a way to achieve his ultimate goal: a loyal and neutered Ukraine that does not threaten Russia and is free of undue Western influence. This aim is connected to a wider set of concerns that Putin calls the “root causes” of the war, which touch on a range of issues: language, history, and identity in modern-day Ukraine, and also the treaties and deployment of Western military forces undergirding security in Europe.
As Tatiana Stanovaya, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, has been noting since the beginning of the war, in Putin’s understanding, if Ukraine is “ours,” then it doesn’t so much matter who controls which city or where its de-facto borders are drawn; but if Ukraine remains “theirs,” then it must be steadily destroyed, until Kyiv and its Western backers realize the folly of their stubbornness and acquiesce to the former scenario. “Putin has considered war to be the least desirable option from the outset,” Stanovaya told me. “He’d rather make a deal, but only in line with his maximalist conditions, which, neither then nor now, is he ready to rethink. And so, according to his logic, he is forced to continue to wage war.”
On the land question, Putin’s position appears to be that Ukraine should withdraw from the parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, in the country’s east, that it still controls. But this is no small amount of territory: Ukrainian forces hold thirty per cent of the Donetsk region, including its most fortified strongholds, which Russia has not been able to seize despite years of constant assaults. It’s unclear exactly what territorial concessions Putin and Trump have discussed, but Trump told reporters in Alaska that “those are points that we have largely agreed on.” Afterward, a Ukrainian diplomatic source told me, “People were concerned Trump might express some willingness or even demands on the territorial issue.” But the fact that, in Washington, Trump didn’t pressure Zelensky on the point means that “Trump didn’t go for a ‘dirty deal’ with Putin.”
Putin wants the entirety of the Donbas, as the Donetsk and Luhansk regions together are known, for two reasons—neither of which relates to the intrinsic qualities or benefits of the land, per se. The first reason essentially pertains to image and propaganda. In February, 2022, when Putin announced the start of the so-called “special military operation,” the supposed need to protect the Russian-speaking populations of the Donbas was his most precise, clearly articulated war aim. Since then, the bulk of the Russian war effort—and where its Army has seen the majority of its estimated million casualties—has been focussed on the Donbas. If Russia emerges from the war, effectively, with control of the region, Putin will have an easier time selling the idea of victory and the virtue of the sacrifice required to achieve it. The dual propaganda and repression machines could probably keep things stable at home for Putin in nearly any scenario, but all segments of Russian society—veterans returning from the war zone, families who have lost husbands or fathers in the war, once globally connected economic élites—will be all the less likely to express even tentative displeasure or doubt if the Donbas ends up in Russian hands.
The second reason that Putin wants control over the Donbas is that Russian forces will be in constant striking distance of other Ukrainian population centers, in particular cities such as Dnipro and Kharkiv, so that both the threat and the means of a renewed Russian invasion will be ever present. A perpetually insecure Ukraine, Putin believes, is one more amenable to Russian interests and liable to be manipulated or suborned by Moscow.
Zelensky faces the same pressures, but in reverse. I reached Balazs Jarabik, a political analyst and a former longtime European diplomat, in Kyiv, who spoke of the combined impediments to Zelensky agreeing to such a scheme: namely, the political (“the Donbas is where Ukrainians see this war as having started, in 2014, and losing the entirety of it would be a big blow to morale”) and the military (“after Donbas, there is basically just open steppe without any natural defensive lines”). Zelensky himself has cited a clause in the Ukrainian constitution that prevents any leader from ceding or transferring any of the country’s territory.
Still, this would presumably not be the final barrier to a deal, were a realistic one to materialize. Ukraine could, for example, withdraw its troops from particular areas without making any formal territorial concessions, creating an unrecognized but indefinite line of separation, like the one that followed the Korean armistice, in 1953, or the division of Berlin, during the Cold War. However, such a thing could be considered only if Ukraine felt that its long-term security was assured. “If the choice was, say, NATO or Donbas, Ukraine would obviously choose NATO,” Jarabik said. (Not that this option is on the table: Trump reiterated again this week that there will be “no going into NATO by Ukraine.”)
The question of land, then, is a proxy for more essential issues for both Russia and Ukraine: Ukraine’s future orientation as a state, and its ability to protect and defend that sovereignty, or the possibility that it remains perpetually exposed and vulnerable. Putin’s list of “root causes” presupposes changes to Ukrainian politics and society, a process that Putin appears to expect Trump to force on Kyiv as part of a peace settlement. In Alaska, Putin achieved partial success on this point. On one hand, he convinced Trump that the war can end only by addressing Russia’s strategic concerns, hence Trump’s move away from calling for an immediate ceasefire to advocating for a long-term peace agreement. (The ceasefire, which Ukraine and its European backers favor, could be done quickly and without taking into account Russia’s wider set of demands; a more lasting treaty can be achieved only when exactly that has happened.) On the other hand, Trump seems disinclined to serve as Putin’s proxy in achieving Russia’s wish list in full. “Putin would like Trump to force its conditions on Ukraine,” Stanovaya said. “But Trump appears to be saying that, on matters of Ukraine’s future borders, laws, and constitution, Putin and Zelensky will have to come to some arrangement between themselves.” That is a more complicated, less desirable situation for Putin, who sees Zelensky as an illegitimate figure—Putin’s preferred interlocutor has always been in Washington, not Kyiv.
By hosting an unprecedented short-notice summit with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky and key European leaders on Monday, President Trump significantly raised the prospects for ending Russia’s three-and-a-half-year-long war against Ukraine. The vibe at the opening was affable and positive. The participants genuinely looked determined to work out compromises that only a few weeks ago appeared illusory. It was a good sign for long-term Euro-Atlantic security cooperation in the face of challenges that, in Trump’s words, we have not faced since World War II. Toward the end, Trump’s call to Moscow brought a follow-up U.S.-Ukraine-Russia summit within reach.
But the rising expectations also reveal formidable obstacles on the path to peace. As the world’s leaders were heading to Washington, Putin’s forces unleashed 182 infantry assaults, 152 massive glide bombs, more than 5,100 artillery rounds and 5,000 kamikaze drones on Ukraine’s defenses and 140 long-range drones and four Iskander ballistic missiles on Ukraine’s cities. The attacks claimed at least 10 civilian lives, including a small child. This is how Russia attacks Ukraine daily, signaling disrespect for Trump’s diplomacy.
The Monday summit also revealed that Putin’s ostensible concession at the Alaska summit to agree to international security guarantees for Ukraine is a poisoned chalice. On the surface, it seemed like a breakthrough toward compromise. The White House summit participants jumped on it and put the guarantees at the center of discussions.
And yet there has been no agreement, and the world has more questions than answers. How could the Ukrainian armed forces be strengthened to deter Russia? Who would pay? How could Russia be prevented from rebuilding its Black Sea Fleet and blocking Ukrainian grain exports? What troop deployments would be needed? Who would put boots on the ground in Ukraine? What kind of guarantees should match what kind of territorial concessions?
Such questions are fraught with complex debates. Between the U.S. and Europe. Within Europe. Within the Trump administration. Within Ukraine. And all of that even before having to negotiate the issue with the Kremlin. The net outcome of the past week’s diplomatic huddles will be Putin buying time for his aggression as Washington abstains from sanctions hoping for peace.
Disingenuously, in exchange for this poisoned chalice of a concession, Putin demanded that Ukraine should cede not only lands currently under Russia’s illegal military occupation but also a large piece of the Donetsk province still under Kyiv’s control. That area is home to 300,000 people and is a major defense stronghold. Controlling it would give Russia a springboard to deeper attacks targeting big cities and threatening to bring Ukraine to its knees.
Putin’s offer also threatens to tear apart Ukraine’s society. In my tracking poll with Ukraine’s Academy of Sciences Institute of Sociology completed in early August, close to half of 567 respondents want Ukraine to reassert control over all of its internationally recognized territories, including the Crimean peninsula illegally annexed in 2014. Only 20% would be content with freezing the conflict along the current front lines. The option of ceding territories to Russia still under Kyiv control is so outrageous that it was not included in the survey. Eighty percent of Ukrainians continue to have faith in Ukraine’s victory and to see democracy and free speech — core values Putin would take away — as vital for Ukraine’s future.
Getting Ukrainian society right is important for Trump’s peace effort to succeed. Discounting Ukrainians’ commitment to freedom and independence has a lot to do with where we are now. Putin launched the all-out invasion in February 2022 expecting Ukrainians to embrace Russian rule. Then-President Biden assessed that Ukrainians would fold quickly and delayed major military assistance to Kyiv.
Misjudging Ukrainians now would most likely result in a rejection of peace proposals and possibly a political crisis there, inviting more aggression from Moscow while empowering more dogged resistance to the invasion, with a long, bloody war grinding on.
Thankfully, Trump has the capacity to keep the peace process on track. First, he can amplify two critically important messages he articulated at the Monday summit: U.S. willingness to back up Ukraine’s security guarantees and to continue to sell weapons to Ukraine if no peace deal is reached. Second, he can use his superb skills at strategic ambiguity and pivot back to threats of leveraging our submarine power and of imposing secondary sanctions on countries trading with Russia. Third, he can drop a hint he’d back up the Senate’s bipartisan Supporting Ukraine Act of 2025, which would provide military assistance to Ukraine over two years from confiscated Russian assets, the U.S.-Ukraine minerals deal proceeds and investment in America’s military modernization.
The Monday summit makes the urgency of these and similar moves glaringly clear.
Mikhail Alexseev, a professor of international relations at San Diego State University, is the author of “Without Warning: Threat Assessment, Intelligence, and Global Struggle” and principal investigator of the multiyear “War, Democracy and Society” survey in Ukraine.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
The recent summit between Trump, Zelenskyy, and European leaders represents a significant breakthrough that has substantially raised the prospects for ending Russia’s prolonged war against Ukraine. The author emphasizes that participants appeared genuinely determined to work out compromises that seemed impossible just weeks earlier, marking a positive development for Euro-Atlantic security cooperation in the face of challenges not seen since World War II.
Putin’s offer of international security guarantees for Ukraine constitutes a deceptive “poisoned chalice” that appears promising on the surface but creates more problems than solutions. The author argues that this ostensible concession has generated complex debates about military strengthening, funding, territorial deployments, and guarantee structures without providing clear answers, ultimately allowing Putin to buy time for continued aggression while Washington abstains from sanctions.
Putin’s territorial demands are fundamentally outrageous and threaten Ukraine’s social fabric, as the author notes that surveys show nearly half of Ukrainians want complete territorial restoration while only 20% would accept freezing current front lines. The author contends that ceding additional territories currently under Kyiv’s control would provide Russia with strategic springboards for deeper attacks and potentially bring Ukraine to its knees.
Trump possesses the strategic capacity to maintain momentum in the peace process through amplifying U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s security guarantees, utilizing strategic ambiguity regarding military threats, and supporting bipartisan legislation that would provide sustained military assistance through confiscated Russian assets and defense modernization investments.
Different views on the topic
Trump’s approach to Putin diplomacy has been criticized as counterproductive, with concerns that his warm reception of the Russian leader constituted a major public relations victory for the Kremlin dictator that was particularly painful for Ukrainians to witness[1]. Critics argue that Trump’s treatment gave Putin undeserved legitimacy on the international stage during ongoing aggression.
Analysis suggests that Trump’s negotiation strategy fundamentally misunderstands Putin’s objectives, with observers noting that while Trump appears to view peace negotiations as a geopolitical real estate transaction, Putin is not merely fighting for Ukrainian land but for Ukraine itself[1]. This perspective challenges the assumption that territorial concessions could satisfy Russian ambitions.
Military and diplomatic experts advocate for increased pressure on Russia rather than accommodation, arguing that Russian rejection of NATO troop deployments in Ukraine and resistance to agreed policy steps demonstrates the need to make Putin’s war more costly through additional sanctions on the Russian economy and advanced weapons supplies to Ukraine[1]. These voices contend that Putin’s opposition to current proposals underscores the necessity of making continued warfare harder for Russia to sustain.
The presidents of Russia and Ukraine may finally meet to discuss peace after 3½ years of war, President Trump said Monday, hosting European leaders at the White House in a push to resolve the conflict.
But it is unclear whether the Kremlin has agreed to the proposal, telling reporters only that Russian President Vladimir Putin would consider “raising the level” of negotiations between Russia’s and Ukraine’s representatives.
Trump proposed that Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky meet one-on-one “at a location to be determined,” taking a call with the Russian leader in the middle of a high-stakes meeting with Zelensky and his European counterparts.
“After that meeting takes place, we will have a Trilat, which would be the two Presidents, plus myself,” Trump wrote on social media. “Again, this was a very good, early step for a War that has been going on for almost four years.”
The president’s statement came after European leaders urged Trump to “put pressure” on Russia, after his meeting with Putin in Alaska last week sparked widespread fears over the fate of U.S. support for security on the continent.
The meeting had a historic flavor, with six European heads of government, the NATO secretary general and the president of the European Commission all converging on Washington for discussions with the president.
Trump first met with Zelensky in the Oval Office, striking an affable tone after their last, disastrous meeting in the room in February. This time, Trump emphasized his “love” for the Ukrainian people and his commitment to provide security guarantees for Kyiv in an ultimate peace settlement with Russia.
Zelensky offered only praise and gratitude to Trump, telling reporters that they had their “best” meeting yet.
But an expanded meeting with Zelensky and the chancellor of Germany, the presidents of France and Finland, the prime ministers of the United Kingdom and Italy, and the heads of NATO and the European Commission hinted at a more challenging road ahead for the burgeoning peace effort.
President Trump speaks to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, left foreground, as French President Emmanuel Macron listens during a meeting at the White House on Aug. 18, 2025.
(Alex Brandon / Associated Press)
“The next steps ahead are the more complicated ones now,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said. “The path is open — you opened it, but now the way is open for complicated negotiations, and to be honest, we would all like to see a ceasefire, at the latest, from the next meeting on.”
“I can’t imagine the next meeting would take place without a ceasefire,” Merz added. “So let’s work on that. And let’s put pressure on Russia.”
Emmanuel Macron, the French president, sat sternly throughout the start of the meeting before echoing Merz’s call.
“Your idea to ask for a truce, a ceasefire, or at least to stop the killings,” Macron said, “is a necessity, and we all support this idea.”
Trump had been in agreement with his European counterparts on the necessity of a ceasefire for months. Zelensky first agreed to one in March. But Putin has refused, pressing Russian advantages on the battlefield, and in Anchorage on Friday, he convinced Trump to drop his calls for an immediate halt to the fighting.
“All of us would obviously prefer an immediate ceasefire while we work on a lasting peace. Maybe something like that could happen — as of this moment, it’s not happening,” Trump said at the meeting. “But President Zelensky and President Putin can talk a little bit more about that.”
“I don’t know that it’s necessary,” Trump added. “You can do it through the war. But I like the ceasefire from another standpoint — you immediately stop the killing.”
The European leaders all emphasized to Trump that they share his desire for peace. But the president of the commission, Ursula von der Leyen, called for a “just” peace, and Zelensky would not engage publicly with reporters on Putin’s central demand: a surrender of vast swaths of Ukrainian territory to Russian control.
Putin first invaded Ukraine in 2014, occupying the Crimean peninsula in a stealth operation and funding an attack on the eastern region of Donbas using proxy forces. But he launched a full-scale invasion of the entire country in 2022, leading to the bloodiest conflict in Europe since World War II.
In a hot mic moment, before the media were ushered out of the expanded meeting with European leaders, Trump told Macron that he believes the Russian president and former KGB officer would agree to a peace deal because of their personal relationship.
He “wants to make a deal for me,” he said, “as crazy as it sounds.”
‘Article 5-like’ guarantees
European leaders said that detailed U.S. security guarantees — for Ukraine specifically, and more broadly for Europe — were at the top of the agenda for Monday’s meetings, including the prospect of U.S. troops on the ground in Ukraine to enforce any future peace settlement.
Asked whether U.S. forces would be involved, Trump did not rule it out, stating, “We’ll be talking about that.”
“When it comes to security, there’s going to be a lot of help,” he said in the Oval Office. “It’s going to be good. They are first line of defense, because they’re there — they are Europe. But we’re going to help them out, also. We’ll be involved.”
Von der Leyen, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer praised the Trump administration for discussing what it called “Article 5-like” security guarantees for Ukraine, referencing a provision of the North Atlantic Treaty Organizaton charter that states that an attack on one member is an attack on all.
But the provision also provides countries in the alliance with broad discretion on whether to participate in a military response to an attack on a fellow member.
Starmer and Macron have expressed a willingness for months to send British and French troops to Ukraine. But the Russian Foreign Ministry said Monday that Moscow would oppose the deployment of NATO troops to the country as “provocative” and “reckless,” creating a potential rift in the negotiations.
President Trump walks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and White House protocol chief Monica Crowley in the White House on Aug. 18, 2025.
(Alex Brandon / Associated Press)
Despite the gulf between Europe and Russia, Trump expressed hope throughout the day that he could schedule a trilateral meeting with Putin and Zelensky.
He planned on calling Putin shortly after European leaders left the White House, he told reporters, only to interrupt the meeting to call the Russian leader with the proposal for bilateral talks.
Trump’s team floated inviting Zelensky to attend the negotiations in Alaska on Friday, and Zelensky has said he is willing to participate in a trilateral meeting. He repeated his interest to Trump on Monday and asked him to attend.
It is unclear whether Moscow will agree to a summit involving Zelensky in any capacity. Ahead of Friday’s meeting, Russian officials said that conditions weren’t right for direct talks between Putin and the Ukrainian president. The Russian leader has repeatedly questioned Zelensky’s legitimacy and has tried to have him assassinated on numerous occasions.
Quiet on territorial ‘swaps’
In the Oval Office, a Fox News reporter asked Zelensky whether he was “prepared to keep sending Ukrainian troops to their deaths,” or whether he would “agree to redraw the maps” instead. The Ukrainian president demurred.
“We live under each day attacks,” Zelensky responded. “We need to stop this war, to stop Russia. And we need the support — American and European partners.”
Trump and his team largely adopted Putin’s position Friday that Russia should be able to keep the Ukrainian territory it has occupied by force — and possibly even more of Donetsk, which is part of the Donbas region and remains in Ukrainian control — in exchange for an end to the fighting. But European officials were silent on the idea on Monday.
The Ukrainian Constitution prohibits the concession of territory without the support of a public referendum, and polls indicate that 3 in 4 Ukrainians oppose giving up land in an attempt to end the war.
Steve Witkoff, the president’s envoy for special missions, said Sunday that Putin agreed to pass legislation through the Kremlin that would guarantee an end to wars of conquest in Ukraine, or elsewhere in Europe.
But Russia has made similar commitments before.
In 1994, the United States and Britain signed on to a agreement in Budapest with Ukraine and Russia that ostensibly guaranteed security for Kyiv and vowed to honor Ukraine’s territorial integrity. In exchange, Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons.
President Trump said Monday he would renew his assault on mail-in voting after Russia’s autocratic leader, Vladimir Putin, told him to do so at their meeting in Alaska last week.
The president provided few details, but wrote on social media that he would “lead a movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS, and also, while we’re at it, Highly ‘Inaccurate,’ Very Expensive, and Seriously Controversial VOTING MACHINES.”
Already in March, Trump had issued an executive order directing the Justice Department to “take all necessary action” to prevent mail-in ballots received after election day from being counted. The order also attempted to impose a proof of citizenship requirement for voter registration.
Those portions of the executive action has been enjoined by courts over constitutional concerns. But another provision, directing the independent U.S. Election Assistance Commission to shift its guidance on voting machines banning the use of certain bar codes and quick-response codes, has been allowed to proceed.
The U.S. Constitution states that the timing, place and manner of elections “shall be prescribed in each state” by local legislatures, and that Congress has the ability to pass laws altering state election regulations. The president is given no authority to prescribe or govern election procedures.
Nevertheless, Trump wrote Monday that states “are merely an ‘agent’ for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes.
“They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY, to do,” he wrote.
Trump’s action comes on the heels of his meeting with Putin in Anchorage, where the Russian leader told him that mail-in ballots led to his electoral defeat in 2020, according to the president.
The U.S. intelligence community has assessed that Putin attempted to influence the last three U.S. presidential elections in Trump’s favor.
Trump blamed his 2020 election loss to President Biden on a conspiracy of voter fraud. But independent analysts, state attorneys general and every court that reviewed the matter found no evidence of fraud that altered results in the race.
“Vladimir Putin said something — one of the most interesting things. He said, ‘Your election was rigged because you have mail-in voting,’” Trump told Fox News in an interview.
Trump has criticized mail-in voting since entering politics in 2015. But his presidential campaign embraced the practice leading up to the 2024 election, encouraging his supporters — especially those affected by Hurricane Helene in North Carolina — to take advantage of mail-in voting opportunities.
“Absentee voting, early voting and election day voting are all good options,” Trump said at the time. “Republicans must make a plan, register and vote!”
But on Monday, Trump wrote that voting machines “cost Ten Times more than accurate and sophisticated Watermark Paper, which is faster, and leaves NO DOUBT, at the end of the evening, as to who WON, and who LOST, the Election.”
“With their HORRIBLE Radical Left policies, like Open Borders, Men Playing in Women’s Sports, Transgender and ‘WOKE’ for everyone, and so much more, Democrats are virtually Unelectable without using this completely disproven Mail-In SCAM,” Trump wrote.
“I, AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, WILL FIGHT LIKE HELL TO BRING HONESTY AND INTEGRITY BACK TO OUR ELECTIONS,” he added. “THE MAIL-IN BALLOT HOAX, USING VOTING MACHINES THAT ARE A COMPLETE AND TOTAL DISASTER, MUST END, NOW!!!”
Trump said he would take additional executive action before the 2026 midterm elections, but provided no details on timing.
In the Oval Office yesterday for a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump said his lawyers were currently in the process of drafting an order. “It’s time that the Republicans get tough and stop it,” he said.
“Mail-in ballots are corrupt. You can never have a real democracy with mail-in ballots. And we as a Republican Party are going to do everything possible to end mail-in ballots,” Trump said. “They’re corrupt.”
In a more cordial affair than their last Oval Office meeting, President Donald Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy sat down Aug. 18 at the White House to discuss how to end the Russia-Ukraine war.
The talks, which included a second meeting with seven European and NATO leaders, took place three days after Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Anchorage, Alaska. Since meeting with Putin, Trump has talked about reaching a peace deal saying he no longer thinks Ukraine “needs a ceasefire” and noting that there needs to be concessions on both sides.
Here are the meeting’s top lines, fact-checked.
Mail-in ballots are fraud? For a meeting about a war in Ukraine, mail-in ballots in the U.S. got a surprising spotlight.
Following a social media post earlier in the day in which Trump called for getting rid of mail-in voting — a voting practice he had embraced — Trump called mail-in ballots “corrupt” and “a fraud” and promised to end mail-in voting.
Trump has spread falsehoods about voting by mail for the last decade. Mail-in voting provides more opportunity for fraud than in-person voting, but it’s still rare, and election officials have safeguards in place. Around 94% of registered voters live in states that have some version of ballot tracking, reducing the probability of fraud.
Trump had a hand in deals that have recently eased conflicts between Cambodia and Thailand; Israel and Iran; and India and Pakistan, although some of those countries’ leaders dispute his role. The U.S. was also involved in a peace deal between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda that experts said is significant but remains shaky. In other conflicts, there is little evidence of war brewing or solutions on the table. On Aug. 8, after our fact-check’s publication, the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan joined Trump in the White House to sign a joint peace declaration after nearly 40 years of conflict.
One “one” war left? As Trump spoke about how difficult it’s been to end the Russia-Ukraine conflict, he said that, “with all of the wars that I got involved in, we only have this one left.”
But his comment notably ignores Israel’s nearly two-year war with Hamas in Gaza that started on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas attacked Israel and killed around 1,200 people and took another 251 hostage. Since then, the war has killed more than 60,000 Palestinians, including about 18,000 children and minors, according to Gazan health statistics. (Gaza’s numbers do not distinguish between civilians and combatants.) Hunger has surged in Gaza as the enclave has been largely cut off from aid.
Trump’s remark also comes a day after hundreds of thousands of Israelis took to the streets to protest the war. The demonstrators called for the release of the remaining hostages amid Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanayhu’s plan to launch a ground invasion into Gaza City. Trump weighed in on Truth Social, saying that “we will only see the return of the remaining hostages when Hamas is confronted and destroyed!!!”
Sign up for PolitiFact texts
$350 billion for Ukraine doesn’t add up. Trump said he thought the U.S. had given Ukraine “over $300 (billion)” or “$350 billion worth of equipment and money.” This is misleading.
U.S. appropriations for Ukraine total about $184.8 billion, as of March 2025. A White House spokesperson told PolitiFact that Trump’s figure included direct funding to Ukraine and indirect economic costs, such as war-related inflation, rising fertilizer costs and lost trade because of sanctions on Russia.
Trump’s district dining anecdote. In a pivot to Washington, D.C., crime, Trump said the district went from “the most unsafe place anywhere” to a place where people are going out to dinner again. He credited this to his Aug. 11 federal takeover of the district’s police, saying he’s made the area safer in a matter of days.
This ismisleading. The district experienced a sharp rise in crime during the COVID-19 pandemic, but crime rates have continued to decline since. When it comes to dining out, reservation data for the district’s restaurants shows a decline in diners since Trump summoned the National Guard and took over the police force.
Trump’s election “joke.” After a reporter asked if Zelenskyy was open to holding an election — something Trump had criticized him for not doing — he said he would be open to it once the war is over.
Zelenskyy would have been up for reelection in 2024, but Ukrainian law prohibits elections under martial law, which Ukraine imposed after Russia’s invasion.
Trump jumped in: “So you say during the war, you can’t have elections. So let me just say three and a half years from now. So you mean, if we happen to be in a war with somebody, no more elections?”
Zelenskyy laughed.
There is no precedent for postponing or canceling a U.S. presidential election; they were even held during the Civil War. “The date is set by Congress and elections are administered by the states,” Adav Noti, executive director of Campaign Legal Center, previously told PolitiFact. “The president has no role in setting Election Day or moving it.”
ANCHORAGE — President Trump made his expectations clear entering a summit with Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday: “I won’t be happy if I walk away without some form of a ceasefire,” he said aboard Air Force One.
Yet he did, emerging from their meeting in a diplomatic retreat, endorsing Russia’s territorial ambitions and adopting Putin’s position that would put off ceasefire negotiations in favor of more comprehensive talks.
Trump told his European counterparts he had agreed with Putin’s demand that Ukraine make territorial concessions to end the conflict, a painful prospect for Ukrainians at the heart of the war, a European official told The Times on Saturday.
Trump also wrote on social media that he would adopt the Kremlin line deferring talks on an imminent ceasefire.
“It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up,” Trump wrote on social media. “If all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin. Potentially, millions of people’s lives will be saved.”
It was a remarkable success for Putin, who sees a Russian edge on the battlefield and has put off discussions of a ceasefire for months as Russian forces press their advantage along the Ukrainian front lines.
Putin was greeted on the tarmac of Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson with applause and smiles from the American president and offered a ride in his iconic vehicle. After years in isolation over his repeated invasions of Ukraine, facing an indictment from the International Criminal Court over war crimes, a red carpet awaited Putin on U.S. soil.
Landing in Washington, Trump spoke with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, as well as the secretary-general of NATO and other European leaders. A follow-up meeting with Zelensky is scheduled for Monday in Washington.
But achieving a peace agreement is an even higher bar than the ceasefire that has eluded the Trump administration in recent months, requiring comprehensive, often protracted negotiations that, in the meantime, will allow Russia to continue its battlefield offensive.
The New York Times first reported details of Trump’s conversations with European leaders.
Details of the meeting are still unclear. In Alaska, both men referenced “agreements” in statements to reporters. But Trump acknowledged the question that matters most — whether Russia is prepared to implement a ceasefire — remains unresolved.
Share via
“We had an extremely productive meeting, and many points were agreed to. There are just a very few that are left,” Trump said. “Some are not that significant. One is probably the most significant, but we have a very good chance of getting there.”
In a follow-up interview on Fox News, Trump said the meeting went well. “But we’ll see,” he said. “You know, you have to get a deal.”
Trump’s failure to secure a ceasefire from Putin surprised few analysts, who see Putin with the military initiative, pushing forward with offensive incursions along the front, and offering no indication he plans to relent.
The question is whether Putin will be able to sustain Trump’s goodwill when the war continues grinding on. On Friday alone, hours before the summit began, Russian forces struck a civilian market in the Ukrainian city of Sumy.
The Russian delegation left immediately after the press availability, providing no comments to the press corps on how the meetings went behind closed doors. And after sitting down with Fox, Trump promptly left Anchorage for Washington. The White House issued no statements, readouts or fact sheets on the summit. Administration officials fell silent.
“Putin is going to have to give Trump some kind of concession so that he is not completely embarrassed,” said Darren Kew, dean of the Joan B. Kroc School of Peace Studies at the University of San Diego, “probably a pledge of a ceasefire very soon — one of Trump’s key demands — followed by a promise to meet the Ukrainians for talks this fall.”
“Both serve Putin’s goals of delay and appeasing Trump, while allowing more time for Russian battlefield victories,” Kew added, “since ceasefires can easily be broken, and peace talks can drag on for years.”
In brief remarks of his own, Putin said that points of agreement reached with Trump would likely face opposition across Europe, including from Ukraine itself, warning continental allies not to “torpedo nascent progress” in follow-up talks with the White House.
“I would like to hope that the agreement that we have reached together will help us bring us close to that goal, and will pave the path toward peace in Ukraine,” Putin said. “We expect that Kyiv and European capitals will perceive that constructively, and that they won’t throw a wrench in the works.”
It was an acknowledgment that whatever terms agreed upon bilaterally between Putin and Trump’s team are almost certainly unacceptable to Ukraine, a party to the conflict that has lost hundreds of thousands of lives fighting Russia’s invasion since February 2022.
The Financial Times reported Saturday that Putin had demanded Ukraine cede two eastern administrative divisions at the heart of the conflict — Donetsk and Luhansk — in exchange for Moscow agreeing to freeze the rest of the front line.
Trump told Fox that a Russian takeover of Ukrainian lands was discussed and “agreed upon,” pending Ukrainian approval — an unlikely prospect given vocal opposition from Zelensky and provisions in the Ukrainian Constitution that prohibit the concession of territory.
“Those are points that we negotiated, and those are points that we largely have agreed upon, actually. I think we’ve agreed on a lot,” Trump said. “I think we’re pretty close to a deal. Now, look. Ukraine has to agree to it. Maybe they’ll say no.”
Europe and Ukraine have argued that conceding land to Putin is not enough. After invading Crimea in 2014, and successfully holding it, Putin came back for more territory in the eastern Donbas — only to launch a full-scale invasion of the country in 2022.
The Russian Foreign Ministry said this week that its war aims remain unchanged.
“We’re convinced that in order to make the settlement last in the long term, we need to eliminate all the primary roots, the primary causes of that conflict,” Putin said, “to consider all legitimate concerns of Russia, and to reinstate a just balance of security in Europe, and in the world on the whole.”
“The root causes of the conflict,” he added, “must be resolved.”
ANCHORAGE — Three hours of negotiations with Vladimir Putin over Russia’s war in Ukraine were “extremely productive,” but only Kyiv can decide whether a deal toward a ceasefire is possible, President Trump said Friday, capping a historic summit with the Russian leader.
At a news conference at a U.S. air base in Alaska, the two men alluded to agreements made, but offered no details and took no questions. “We didn’t get there,” Trump said.
“I believe we had a very productive meeting. There were many, many points that we agreed on,” Trump said, adding: “There’s no deal until there’s a deal. I will call up NATO in a little while. I will call up various people.
“It’s ultimately up to them,” he added.
Share via
Standing alongside Trump, Putin warned Europe not to “torpedo the nascent progress” of “the agreement that we’ve reached.”
“We’re convinced that, in order to make the settlement last in the long term, we have to eliminate all the primary roots, the primary causes of the conflict,” Putin said. “Naturally, the security of Ukraine should be ensured as well.”
The talks were the first high-level negotiations in Russia’s years-long military campaign, a war of conquest that has resulted in Europe’s bloodiest conflict since World War II.
Trump had said before the summit he would know if Putin was serious about peace within minutes of their meeting. Yet, before the talks began, the Russian leader, a global pariah since launching his full-scale invasion of Ukraine three years ago, received a red carpet arrival on American soil and a greeting of applause from the U.S. president.
Share via
It was an extraordinary welcome for Putin, whose government has called the United States an “enemy state” and who faces an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court over war crimes in Ukraine. Putin’s war has led to 1.4 million casualties, according to independent analysts, including 1 million dead and wounded among Russian soldiers alone.
At the end of their news conference, Putin suggested Trump visit Moscow for their next summit. Trump said he would consider it.
Thehigh-stakes summit came amid ongoing Russian strikes on civilian targets. Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, condemned Russian forces for striking a market in Sumy mere hours before the Alaska summit.
“On the day of negotiations, the Russians are killing as well,” Zelensky said in a statement. “And that speaks volumes.”
Zelensky was not invited to the Anchorage negotiations. But Trump said he hoped his meeting Friday would lead to direct talks “very shortly.”
The Ukrainian president met with Britain’s prime minister in recent days, and planned to meet with French President Emmanuel Macron after the Alaska summit.
Speaking with reporters aboard Air Force One on his way to Anchorage, Trump suggested he had planned to take a tougher line with Putin, threatening to walk if he didn’t see immediate progress.
“I want to see a ceasefire,” Trump said. “I don’t know if it’s going to be today, but I’m not going to be happy if it’s not today.”
The two men were scheduled to meet privately, accompanied only by interpreters, before joining their aides for a working lunch. But in-flight, Trump’s plans changed to include his secretary of State and national security advisor, Marco Rubio, as well as his special envoy to the conflict, Steve Witkoff.
Whether Putin is ready to implement an immediate ceasefire is far from clear, with the Russian Foreign Ministry stating this week that the Kremlin’s war aims are “unchanged.” Over the past week, with the presidential summit scheduled, the Russian army launched an aggressive attempt to breech the Ukrainian front lines.
Trump’s deference toward Putin has been a fixture of his time in office, with the president often refusing to criticize the Russian leader. But his tone began to shift toward Putin at a NATO summit in June, held in The Hague, where European leaders agreed to significant defense spending commitments in a bid to keep Trump on their side.
Since then, Trump has repeatedly expressed “disappointment” with Putin’s refusal to heed his calls for a ceasefire, authorizing the deployment of Patriot missiles in Ukraine and the shipment of other U.S. military equipment.
The Trump administration set a deadline of Aug. 8 for Putin to demonstrate he was seriously committed to peace negotiations, or otherwise face a new round of sanctions, this time targeting its trading partners. Witkoff, a real estate investor with no experience in the region and no diplomatic background, was dispatched to Moscow for meetings with Kremlin leadership.
Within hours of Witkoff’s departure, White House planning for the summit was underway.
The summit came together with so little time that the White House and the Kremlin struggled to secure hotels and venue spaces across Anchorage. The Kremlin press corps, comprising roughly 50 journalists, found itself sleeping on American Red Cross cots on the floor of a University of Alaska sports center.
President Trump meets with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin. At right is Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
(Julia Demaree Nikhinson / Associated Press)
Trump received Putin on the tarmac of the U.S. air base with a U.S. stealth bomber flying overhead, flanked by U.S. fighter jets and Air Force One. The two men then entered the “Beast,” the official presidential vehicle, for a short ride that included no aides or translators.
On his way to Anchorage, Trump said that Putin would face “economically severe” consequences if the negotiations failed to yield progress toward peace. He said that only Ukraine could decide whether to cede territory to Moscow. And he expressed support for U.S. security guarantees for Ukraine in any future peace agreement, so long as they fall short of NATO membership for the beleaguered nation.
“Yes, it would be very severe,” Trump said. “Very severe.”
Putin brought several Russian business leaders along with him from Moscow, according to the Kremlin, a sign he had hoped to begin discussions on normalizing relations with Washington. But Trump said he would not discuss business opportunities until the war is settled. Despite bringing his Treasury and Commerce secretaries to Alaska alongside him, a lunch scheduled to include an expanded circle of their aides, to discuss matters other than Ukraine, did not appear to go forward.
European leaders have urged Trump to approach Putin with a firm hand after months of applying pressure on Zelensky to prepare to make concessions to Moscow.
Trump had said in recent days that a peace deal would include the “swapping” of land, a prospect roundly rejected in Kyiv. But the Ukrainian constitution prohibits territorial concessions without the support of a public referendum.
He seemed to soften that stance ahead of the Friday meetings.
“They’ll be discussed, but I’ve got to let Ukraine make that decision,” the president said of land swaps. “I’m not here to negotiate for Ukraine. I’m here to get them to the table.”
The summit is the first of its kind between a U.S. and Russian president since 2021.
ANCHORAGE — Vladimir Putin is lavishing praise on President Trump ahead of their high-stakes summit in Alaska on Friday, thanking his host for “energetic and sincere efforts to stop the fighting” in Ukraine over three years since the Russian leader attempted to conquer the country.
Trump, at the White House, also expressed optimism ahead of the talks, telling reporters he believes Putin “would like to see a deal” after suffering more than a million Russian casualties on the battlefield.
Yet Russian Foreign Ministry officials said Wednesday that Putin’s war aims remain “unchanged.” And an aggressive Russian advance along the front lines this week provided evidence to military analysts that Moscow has no plans to implement a ceasefire.
It was a day of diplomatic maneuvering ahead of an extraordinary visit from a Russian president to the U.S. homeland, and the first audience Putin has received with a Western leader since the war began.
“It’s going to be very interesting — we’re going to find out where everybody stands,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Thursday. “If it’s a bad meeting, it’ll end very quickly. And if it’s a good meeting, we’re going to end up getting peace in the very near future.”
Putin’s positioning ahead of the summit, and Trump’s eagerness for a deal, continue to fuel worries across Europe and in Ukraine that the Alaska negotiations could result in a bilateral agreement designed by Moscow and endorsed by Washington that sidelines Kyiv.
In London, Britain’s prime minister, Keir Starmer, hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Thursday, offering support for Trump’s effort while placing the onus on Putin to “prove he is serious about peace.”
“They agreed there had been a powerful sense of unity and a strong resolve to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine,” 10 Downing Street said in a statement.
Trump said the Alaska summit, to be held at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, is meant to “set the table” for direct talks between Putin and Zelensky that could include himself and European leaders.
Journalists stand outside Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage on Thursday ahead of Friday’s summit between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
(Jae C. Hong / Associated Press)
But addressing reporters, Trump suggested that denying Putin dominion over all of Ukraine — and allowing him to hold on to the territories he has seized militarily — would be concession enough from Moscow. The president had said in recent days that land “swapping” would be part of an ultimate peace settlement, a statement rejected by Kyiv.
“I think President Putin would like to see a deal,” Trump said. “I think if I weren’t president, he would take over all of Ukraine.”
“I am president, and he’s not going to mess around with me,” he added.
Russian state media reported Thursday that Putin had gathered his advisors to inform them of “how the negotiation process on the Ukrainian crisis is going.”
Trump, “in my opinion, quite energetic and sincere efforts to stop the fighting, stop the crisis and reach agreements that are of interest to all parties involved in this conflict,” Putin said.
But U.S. efforts to get Russia to halt the fighting have proved futile for months, with Moscow pressing forward in an offensive that has secured incremental gains on the battlefield.
“Putin thinks that he is winning this war militarily,” said Frederick Kagan, director of the Critical Threats Project, which collaborates with the Institute for the Study of War to produce daily battlefield assessments on the conflict. “He’s also confident that Western support for Ukraine, and particularly U.S. support, will break, and that when it does, Ukraine will collapse, and he’ll be able to take control of the whole thing.”
“It’s been his theory of victory for a long time,” Kagan said, “and it’s a huge part of the problem, because he’s not going to make any concessions so long as he’s confident that he’s winning.”
Russian incursions along a strategic portion of the front line, near a crucial Ukrainian logistics hub, spooked Ukraine’s supporters earlier this week. While serious, Kagan said that Russia does not hold the territory, and said that the conditions for offensive Russian operations had been set over the course of months.
“The Russians continue to have the initiative, and they continue to make gains,” he added. “The first step in changing Putin’s calculation about the war is to urgently help the Ukrainians stop the gains.”
Zelensky, after meeting with Starmer in London, said that he and the British leader had “discussed expectations for the meeting in Alaska and possible prospects.”
“We also discussed in considerable detail the security guarantees that can make peace truly durable,” Zelensky said, “if the United States succeeds in pressing Russia to stop the killings and engage in genuine, substantive diplomacy.”
Trump and Putin plan on arriving of the U.S. airbase within moments of one another, and are expected to meet on the tarmac before retreating into a private meeting.
WASHINGTON — After styling himself for decades as a dealmaker, President Trump is showing some receipts in his second term of ceasefires and peace agreements brokered on his watch. But the president faces extraordinary challenges in his latest push to negotiate ends to the world’s two bloodiest conflicts.
Stakes could not be higher in Ukraine, where nearly a million Russian soldiers have been killed or wounded in pursuit of Vladimir Putin’s war of conquest, according to independent analysts. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers add to the catastrophic casualty toll. Trump’s struggle to get both sides to a negotiating table, let alone to secure a ceasefire, has grown into a fixation for Trump, prompting rare rebukes of Putin from the U.S. president.
And in the Gaza Strip, an alliance that has withstood scathing international criticism over Israel’s conduct of its war against Hamas has begun to show strain. Trump still supports the fundamental mission of Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to destroy the militant group and secure the release of Israeli hostages in its possession. But mounting evidence of mass starvation in Gaza has begun to fray the relationship, reportedly resulting in a shouting match in their most recent call.
Breakthroughs in the two conflicts have evaded Trump, despite his efforts to fashion himself into the “peacemaker-in-chief” and floating his own nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize.
In Turnberry, Scotland, last month, Trump claimed that six wars had been stopped or thwarted under his watch since he returned to office in January. “I’m averaging about a war a month,” he said at the time.
He has, in fact, secured a string of tangible successes on the international stage, overseeing a peace agreement between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda; hosting a peace ceremony between Armenia and Azerbeijan; brokering a ceasefire between Cambodia and Thailand, and imposing an end to a 12-day war between Israel and Iran after engaging U.S. forces directly in the conflict.
Olivier Nduhungirehe, Rwanda’s foreign minister, from left, U.S. Vice President JD Vance, President Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Democratic Republic of the Congo foreign minister Therese Kayikwamba Wagner in the Oval Office of the White House on June 27. The Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda agreed to a U.S.-backed peace deal meant to end years of deadly conflict and promote development in Congo’s volatile eastern region.
“We’ve only been here for six months. The world was on fire. We took care of just about every fire — and we’re working on another one,” he said, “with Russia, Ukraine.”
Trump also takes credit for lowering tensions between Serbia and Kosovo, and for brokering a ceasefire between two nuclear states, India and Pakistan, a claim the latter supports but the former denies.
“Wars usually last five to 10 years,” said Michael E. O’Hanlon, chair in defense and strategy at the Brookings Institution. “Trump is tactically clever, but no magician. If he actually gets three of these five conflicts to end, that’s an incredible track record.
“In each case, he may exaggerate his own role,” O’Hanlon said, but “that’s OK — I welcome the effort and contribution, even if others deserve credit, too.”
One-on-one with Putin
Well past his campaign promise of ending Russia’s war with Ukraine “within 24 hours” of taking office, Trump has tried pressuring both sides to come to the negotiating table, starting with the Ukrainians. “You don’t have the cards,” Trump told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in an infamous Oval Office meeting in February, chastising him to prepare to make painful concessions to end the war.
But in June, at a NATO summit in the Netherlands, Trump’s years-long geniality with Putin underwent a shift. He began criticizing Russia’s leader as responsible for the ongoing conflict, accusing Putin of throwing “meaningless … bull—” at him and his team.
“I’m not happy with Putin, I can tell you that much right now,” Trump said, approving new weapons for Ukraine, a remarkable policy shift long advocated by the Europeans.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and King of Malaysia Sultan Ibrahim walk during a welcoming ceremony at the Grand Kremlin Palace on Wednesday in Moscow. Malaysian King Sultan Ibrahim is on an official visit to Russia.
(Getty Images)
The Trump administration set Friday as a deadline for Putin to demonstrate his commitment to a ceasefire, or otherwise face a new round of crushing secondary sanctions — financial tools that would punish Russia’s trading partners for continuing business with Moscow.
Those plans were put on hold after Trump announced he would meet with Putin in Alaska next week, a high-stakes meeting that will exclude Zelensky.
“The highly anticipated meeting between myself, as President of the United States of America, and President Vladimir Putin, of Russia, will take place next Friday, August 15, 2025, in the Great State of Alaska. Further details to follow,” Trump wrote on his social media platform, Truth Social, on Friday. “Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
Meeting Putin one-on-one — the first meeting between a U.S. and Russian president in four years, and the first between Putin and any Western leader since he launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 — in and of itself could be seen as a reward for a Russian leader seeking to regain international legitimacy, experts said.
In this June 28, 2019, file photo, President Trump, right, meets with Russian President Vladimir Putin during a bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the G-20 summit in Osaka, Japan.
(Susan Walsh/Associated Press)
Worse still, Putin, a former KGB officer, could approach the meeting as an opportunity to manipulate the American president.
“Putin has refused to abandon his ultimate objectives in Ukraine — he is determined to supplant the Zelensky government in Kyiv with a pro-Russian regime,” said Kyle Balzer, a scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. “He wants ironclad guarantees that Ukraine will never gain admittance to NATO. So there is currently no agreement to be had with Russia, except agreeing to surrender to Putin’s demands. Neither Ukraine nor Europe are interested in doing so.
“Put simply, Putin likely believes that he can wear down the current administration,” Balzer added. “Threatening Russia with punitive acts like sanctions, and then pulling back when the time comes to do so, has only emboldened Putin to strive for ultimate victory in Ukraine.”
A European official told The Times that, while the U.S. government had pushed for Zelensky to join the initial meeting, a response from Kyiv — noting that any territorial concession to Russia in negotiations would have to be approved in a ballot referendum by the Ukrainian people — scuttled the initial plan.
The Trump administration is prepared to endorse the bulk of Russia’s occupation of Ukrainian territory, including the eastern region of Donbas and the Crimean peninsula, at the upcoming summit, Bloomberg reported. On Friday, Trump called the issue of territory “complicated.”
“We’re gonna get some back,” he said. “There will be some swapping of territories.”
Michael Williams, an international relations professor at Syracuse University, said that Trump has advocated for a ceasefire in Ukraine “at the expense of other strategic priorities such as stability in Europe and punishment of Russia through increased aid to Ukraine.”
Such an approach, Williams said, “would perhaps force the Kremlin to end the war, and further afield, would signal to other potential aggressors, such as China, that violations of international law will be met with a painful response.”
Gaza
At Friday’s peace ceremony, Trump told reporters he was considering a proposal to relocate Palestinian refugees to Somalia and its breakaway region, Somaliland, once Israel ends hostilities against Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
“We are working on that right now,” Trump said.
It was just the latest instance of Trump floating the resettlement of Palestinians displaced during the two-year war there, which has destroyed more than 90% of the structures throughout the strip and essentially displaced its entire population of 2 million people. The Hamas-run Health Ministry reports that more than 60,000 civilians and militants have died in the conflict.
Hamas, recognized as a terrorist organization by the United States, the European Union and others, has refused to concede the war, stating it would disarm only once a Palestinian state is established. The group continues to hold roughly 50 Israeli hostages, some dead and some alive, among 251 taken during its attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, which also killed about 1,200 people.
Protesters gather in a demonstration organized by the families of the Israeli hostages taken captive in the Gaza Strip since October 2023 calling for action to secure their release outside the Defense Ministry headquarters in Tel Aviv on Saturday.
(Jack Guez/AFP via Getty Images)
Israel’s Cabinet voted this week to approve a plan to take over Gaza City in the north of the strip and, eventually, the rest of the territory, a deeply unpopular strategy in the Israeli military and among the Israeli public. Netanyahu on Friday rejected the notion that Israel planned to permanently occupy Gaza.
Despite applying private pressure on Netanyahu, Trump’s strategy has largely fallen in line with that of his predecessor, Joe Biden, whose team supported Israel’s right to defend itself while working toward a peace deal that, at its core, would exchange the remaining hostages for a cessation of hostilities.
The talks have stalled, one U.S. official said, primarily blaming Hamas over its demands.
“In Gaza, there is a fundamental structural imbalance of dealing with a terrorist organization that may be immune to traditional forms of pressure — military, economic or otherwise — and that may even have a warped, perverse set of priorities in which the suffering of its own people is viewed as a political asset because it tarnishes the reputation of the other party, Israel,” said Robert Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “So Trump really only has leverage over one party — his ally, Israel — which he has been reluctant to wield, reasonably so.”
In Ukraine, too, Trump holds leverage he has been unwilling, thus far, to bring to bear.
“There, Trump has leverage over both parties but appears reluctant to wield it on one of them — Russia,” Satloff said.
But Trump suggested Friday that threatened sanctions on India over its purchase of Russian oil, and his agreement with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to secure greater security spending from European members, “had an impact” on Moscow’s negotiating position.
“I think my instinct really tells me that we have a shot at it,” Trump said. “I think we’re getting very close.”
When Russia invaded Ukraine it sparked international outrage. It also triggered a wave of international sanctions designed to cripple Russia’s economy so badly…it couldn’t fight the war.
And yet…two-and-a-half years later, the fighting continues and the International Monetary Fund predicts, this year, Russia’s economy will grow over 3%. More than the U.S. and Europe.
The architect behind the United States sanction strategy is Daleep Singh – the deputy national security advisor for international economics at the White House.
We first interviewed him in the weeks after the 2022 invasion…when he told us he expected a barrage of sanctions to bring Russia’s economy to its knees.
Earlier this month, we went to Washington to ask Daleep Singh about those early predictions of a nosedive.…and he told us something we don’t hear very often on 60 Minutes.
Daleep Singh: So let’s be– let’s be honest. This is not the nosedive that I predicted two years ago. But– I don’t think anybody should mistake Russia’s rebound with resilience. On the surface, Russia’s economy may appear to be a fortress, but underneath the foundations are fragile.
Hours after the invasion, the U.S. began striking that foundation.
At the White House, Daleep Singh announced the administration’s strategy…
Daleep Singh
60 Minutes
Within 72 hours, the U.S. and its allies…. blocked Russia’s central bank from accessing $300 billion it stashed around the world, then froze the foreign bank accounts of dozens of Russian billionaires …later, seizing their trophies for good measure.
Since then, 45 countries have directed over 5,000 sanctions at Russian targets… everything from diamonds and semiconductors to Vladimir Putin himself. And yet…
Sharyn Alfonsi: The war is still raging. The Russian economy is growing. It looks like sanctions have been a failure.
Daleep Singh: No, not at all so he’s turbo-charged government spending to fuel the war machine. He’s frozen infrastructure and education spending. And– yes, that’s lifted GDP growth. But there’s a cost. Sky-high inflation, almost 9%. Nosebleed interest rates, almost 19%. Both are choking off growth.
But the sanctions have not been able to curb the flow of cash from the Kremlin’s most valuable asset… oil. Russia is the third largest producer in the world…and this year, its oil and gas revenues are expected to increase 2.6% to nearly $240 billion.
We wondered how – despite all those sanctions- the Kremlin is still making so much money from its oil. We found the answer in an unexpected place.
Twenty miles off the coast of Greece.
We went there with Samir Madani….
Madani runs a company from Stockholm that tracks oil tankers for dozens of international clients…such as insurance companies or shippers…who want to know exactly where oil is moving in case of a spill or accident.
Samir Madani
60 Minutes
But he took us to see this oil tanker…called the Sprite. It’s part of Russia’s “dark fleet” – one of an estimated 200 ships that move a million barrels of Russian oil around Western sanctions every day.
Madani and his team monitor satellite images, signals from ships, and photographs from the ground to track tankers.
He told us, one day, in January 2023, he noticed something suspicious on his dashboard…a tanker sending signals from a port in Japan…a country that doesn’t export crude oil.
Samir Madani: That didn’t make sense. So I was able to review that with satellite imagery and saw that there was no vessel at the port. Instead– it was a spoof where in fact we saw the vessel in Kozmino, in Russia.
Sharyn Alfonsi: So they’re able to lie about their location?
Samir Madani: Yes: in real time.
Sharyn Alfonsi: And so that allows them to move wherever they want to move–
Samir Madani: Absolutely.
Sharyn Alfonsi: –undetected.
Sharyn Alfonsi: And that happened how quickly after the sanctions took place?
Samir Madani: Immediately. Immediately.
Sharyn Alfonsi: When you’re sitting at your dashboard and you’re watching all of this, what makes you know that’s part of the dark fleet?
Samir Madani: Yeah. The ownership– will change, the vessel– age is beyond 15 years– that’s a red flag. And so these vessels were supposed to be scrapped. And then somebody makes a bid in the last minute, with a– with a million dollars, and gets to extend the life of this tanker.
The Sprite is one of those tankers. 21 years old, it was last purchased in February and is registered to a shell company in the Caribbean. So what was it doing floating off the coast of Greece?
Samir Madani: SPRITE here is acting as a dropbox for Russian oil. If you can see on her starboard side on the right side there you have the 4 buoys. And that means they placed those there for contact with other vessels.
The Sprite
60 Minutes
Other dark fleet vessels that will transfer oil onto or off of the Sprite…Madani spotted one of them, the Zambra, a mile away.
These are images Madani’s team provided of Zambra moving oil from Russian ports on the Black Sea through the Bosphorus Strait in Turkey and then transferring it onto the Sprite just off the coast of Greece.
Sharyn Alfonsi: We were there with you, we’re watching you know transfer, transfer, transfer. What’s going on there?
Samir Madani: The transfers are an additional layer of obfuscation when it comes to– transferring oil. So when you have a “floating dropbox” act like that, you know, where it’s able to take in any kind of oil, and then output any other kind of oil, it confuses things.
The point of this tanker shell game is to get around Western sanctions…specifically a price cap that was supposed to limit Moscow’s oil profits.
In 2022, the G-7, which includes the U.S., Canada, Japan, and four European countries…banned the import of Russian oil. But they didn’t want to risk a global price spike. So, they allowed Russian oil to continue to flow internationally but imposed a $60 a barrel price cap on the purchase of Russian crude oil.
Russia’s workarounds are paying off…. almost all of its crude oil is selling above the price cap. In the last two years, Russia’s dark fleet has moved an estimated $45 billion worth of crude oil.
Sharyn Alfonsi: And where is all that oil going?
Samir Madani: Yeah. Most of the oil that– departs Russia by sea– nowadays is going to China and India.
60 Minutes analyzed four years of data from India’s Ministry of Commerce. We found the value of India’s imports of Russian crude oil increased by more than 2,000% since the invasion of Ukraine.
Much of that crude goes to an Indian port called Sikka…where it is refined into other oil products, such as gasoline. But those products don’t necessarily stay in India.
Sam Madani helped us track a tanker of “refined products” from India’s port … around the tip of Africa …across the Atlantic Ocean…and ultimately, here …to New York.
Sharyn Alfonsi: We saw the ship coming from India into the New York Harbor. How often is that happening?
Samir Madani: It happens around– twice a month, and they bring in around half a million barrels of refined product. Fuel.
Sharyn Alfonsi: So, is the Russian crude oil untraceable?
Samir Madani: After it becomes refined it’s untraceable. Yeah.
The U.S. Treasury has sanctioned 38 Russian “dark fleet” tankers… but Sam Madani says he’s identified 170 others that are still active, moving Russian oil.
Sharyn Alfonsi: They’re not doing it in the middle of the night. They’re doing it in broad daylight. How do you stop that?
Daleep Singh: First, identify them. Second, let them know– that– they’re subject to our sanctions. And then, three, deliver those sanctions. Any player in Russia’s shadow fleet network would be subject to our sanctions.
Sharyn Alfonsi: Why not do it right now?
Daleep Singh: What we’re trying to balance right now is– is to continue to move the global oil market into balance, to continue to have– a downward movement in the level of inflation across the world, and to sustain unity. We can’t sanction Russia’s shadow fleet by ourselves: so, there’s a diplomatic component to this too. This is about stamina more so than it is about shock and awe.
There’s another market the U.S. is trying to keep in balance – American nuclear energy.
The U.S. is still paying Russia $1 billion a year for enriched uranium to help fuel 94 nuclear reactors that provide about a fifth of America’s energy needs.
In May, Congress took notice and banned the import of Russian-enriched uranium. But the ban won’t go into full effect for four years.
Sharyn Alfonsi: Does the U.S. have the capacity right now that it needs for enriched uranium?
Amir Vexler: No. So un– unfortunately– about 25% of it to 30% has been imported from Russia.
Amir Vexler
60 Minutes
Sharyn Alfonsi: We don’t have it.
Amir Vexler: Right. We– we are dependent.
That’s because the United States stopped making enriched uranium a decade ago. Amir Vexler runs Centrus Energy.
Last year, Centrus began enriching uranium inside this Piketon, Ohio facility. The only American company with that capability.
Vexler showed us how it’s done — those 40-foot-tall centrifuges spin uranium gas until it’s enriched and can be used as nuclear fuel.
But these 16 centrifuges can only make a fraction of the enriched uranium the U.S. needs. See those squares…on the ground? Those are placeholders for 11 thousand more centrifuges Centrus wants to build.
Sharyn Alfonsi: And how long in the best-case scenario would it take to get those up and running?
Amir Vexler: It will take about six to seven years to get to full capacity.
Sharyn Alfonsi: And to not be reliant on Russia.
Amir Vexler: That is correct.
In Russia, businesses quickly pivoted. When Western companies left the country at the start of the war, Russian versions replaced them. Starbucks with Stars Coffee…Zara with Maag. Coca Cola …Dobry Cola. even authentic Western products– such as the latest iPhones are still getting into the hands of Russians.
Sharyn Alfonsi: When we first started hearing about sanctions against Russia, we anticipated seeing, you know, bread lines in Moscow. Has that happened?
Richard Connolly
60 Minutes
Richard Connolly: In a word, no. The most goods that Russians would have accessed before the war are available now.
Richard Connolly is an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in London and a specialist on the Russian economy.
Richard Connolly: Sanctions prohibit the sale of western cars to Russia, Mercedes or Chryslers. But a lot of them are still making their way to Russia via third parties, like Georgia and the South Caucasus, or Kazakhstan, or China. Now, of course, if you’re gonna have to send an American or German car on this roundabout route to reach Russia, the price of that car when it’s sold is much higher than it was before the war. But, a lot of Russians with a lot of money in their pocket who are prepared to pay that higher price. There’s an incentive for lots of Russian small businesses to acquire goods on foreign markets from sanctioning countries, bring them back to Russia, and sell them at a very healthy markup.
Sharyn Alfonsi: So evading sanctions has become good business in Russia–
Richard Connolly: It’s become a business– sector of its own in Russia, yes.
Sharyn Alfonsi: What kind of businesses are we talking about?
Richard Connolly: Some people are selling goods that were previously sanctioned. They’re producing them at home. The number of small- and medium-sized businesses registered in Russia is at an all-time high. Before the war Russia had a big problem. It wasn’t investing enough. But since the war began the single biggest source of investment is in trade and logistics.
Sharyn Alfonsi: It almost sounds like, from an economic perspective, that the war’s the best thing that’s happened to Russia.
Richard Connolly: It certainly changed the economic trajectory. This is the fastest it’s grown for a consecutive period in over a decade and a half. Whether they can sustain that over time is, of course– the big question. It’s possible they may confound expectations in the future as well.
Produced by Lucy Hatcher. Associate producer, Erin DuCharme. Edited by Robert Zimet.
The death of Alexei Navalny in a Russian prison in the Arctic this February sparked an outcry around the world. He was compared to Nelson Mandela as a prisoner of conscience. While behind bars, he completed a memoir, documenting his three-year battle to survive the unspeakable prison conditions.
This is our third story on Navalny – the first in 2017 when he stood up to Vladimir Putin by running against him for president of Russia. When he was arrested in 2021, Navalny’s popularity as the most prominent leader of the Putin opposition was growing.
Alexei Navalny speaking in Russian (English translation): Putin is a thief and the head of the entire corrupt system!
He was defiant, brave for taking on the all-powerful Vladimir Putin out in the open, denouncing him as a gangster. He refused to back down and paid the ultimate price: three years in Russian prisons and then this year, death at age 47.
His wife Yulia, once her husband’s silent partner, is now the leader of his opposition movement. She says Alexei’s memoir, “Patriot,” represents his final act of defiance.
Yulia Navalnaya: It was his life. It was his every-minute job to fight with Putin’s regime.
Lesley Stahl: And now he’s fighting from the grave.
Yulia Navalnaya: I would prefer he would fight not from the grave. And of course, it’s very tough to– for me to say like this. But we can say so.
Yulia Navalnaya
60 Minutes
Over the summer, a Russian court issued an arrest warrant for her.
Lesley Stahl: It’s a dangerous place to be.
Yulia Navalnaya: I don’t care at all.
Lesley Stahl: You’re not afraid?
Yulia Navalnaya: No, not really. Why should I be infra– afraid?
Lesley Stahl: They could kidnap you. They could try to poison you.
Yulia Navalnaya: They could. But I don’t want to live my life and to spend my life everyday thinking about if they kidnap me today or tomorrow, if they are going to poison me today or tomorrow. I’m not thinking about poisoning–
Lesley Stahl: You know who you sound like? You sound like Alexei. (laugh) He would say the same thing.
Yulia Navalnaya: Of course! I’ve been living with him more than 25 years.
In that time, Alexei, trained as a lawyer, became Russia’s most famous anti-corruption activist and investigator, posting his findings online about bribes and kickbacks and evidence of the wealth Putin and his cronies had — as Navalny said — stolen from the Russian people.
Lesley Stahl (in 2017): I mean, you’re goading them.
Alexei Navalny (in 2017): These are people who are trying to steal my country and I’m strongly disagree with it. I’m not going to be, you know, a kind of speechless person right now. I’m not going to keep silent.
He called Putin “a madman” who was “sucking the blood out of Russia,” and more insults as he built a pro-democracy movement, opening offices all across Russia.
It was a time when other Putin opponents were dying in suspicious suicides, a car bombing, dissident Boris Nemtsov was shot out in the open near the Kremlin. And Navalny himself was subjected to multiple arrests and beatings, an attack with green dye laced with a caustic chemical, and in 2020, an assassination attempt that he recounts in the beginning of his book.
He writes that shortly before he boarded a plane in Siberia, he was poisoned with a Soviet-era, military-grade nerve agent.
He collapsed, moaning in agony, as his body began to shut down. While he was in a coma at a Russian hospital, Yulia waged a campaign to pressure Putin to release Alexei so he could fly to Germany for treatment.
We met them in Berlin about two months after the attack.
Lesley Stahl (in 2020): You have said you think that Mr. Putin’s responsible.
Alexei Navalny (in 2020): I don’t think. I’m sure that he is responsible.
He spent five months recovering in Germany — that’s when he started writing the memoir. Then, in January of 2021, the Navalnys returned to Russia.
Alexei Navalny’s memoir
When they landed, they were met by Russian police.
He was arrested, said goodbye to his wife, and was led away.
Lesley Stahl: This is a question you’re going to be asked over and over and over, but it’s, it’s almost the essential question: Why did you decide to go back, the two of you? You knew the danger for sure. And do you regret it now?
Yulia Navalnaya: You ask me about our decision like we were sitting together and discussing if he needs to go back, or he doesn’t need to go back. It, it didn’t work like this. From the first day of when I realized that he could recover after this poisoning, I knew that he would go back as soon as possible.
Lesley Stahl: So, it wasn’t even a debate.
Yulia Navalnaya: No.
Lesley Stahl: It was just “when do we go back?” as opposed to if.
Yulia Navalnaya: We never had any debates and of course, I would love to live all my life with my husband. But at that moment, I knew that there is just one decision which he could take. And it was his decision. And I knew how important it was for him. And I knew that he wouldn’t be happy to live in exile.
His arrest sparked protests across Russia. But far from disappearing in prison, Navalny managed to maintain a presence on social media. How – we’ve been asked not to say – but it enabled him to keep up his attacks on Putin.
Meanwhile, his team of investigators released drone footage of what they said was Putin’s billion dollar palace on the Black Sea. it was viewed more than 100 million times on YouTube.
Lesley Stahl: It must’ve driven Putin insane that he, he locked him up and he’s still getting the anti-Putin message out.
Yulia Navalnaya: That’s why he con— his conditions were worse way— from month to month.
Those conditions, Navalny wrote in his diaries, included “sleep deprivation,” “punitive solitary confinement,” almost no medical care. And when none of that broke him, he was sent repeatedly to “a concrete black hole” called the “punishment cell,” where he would remain for up to 15 days at a time.
Lesley Stahl: Here’s how he described it: he said it was a doghouse and this is the place where prisoners were sent to be tortured, and raped, and sometimes murdered. I wondered how you read those passages. I was thinking of you when I read it and thought, ‘What is she feeling? What is– how are you reading this?’
Yulia Navalnaya: It’s very tough moment to think about all this torturing place and torturing conditions, and about him, how he was laughing at these people, even while he was there.
Yulia Navalnaya
60 Minutes
Navalny thought of his life in prison as his work, surviving and staying positive, his job.
“I know one thing for sure…” he wrote: “…that I’m among the happiest 1 percent of people on the planet—those who absolutely adore their work… I have enormous support from the people. And I met a woman with whom I share not only love but … [who] is just as opposed as I am to what is going on. Maybe we won’t succeed … But we have to try.”
Lesley Stahl: He wrote much of this book while he was in prison. He was under constant surveillance, cameras on him all the time and he managed to get the pages out.
Yulia Navalnaya: Alexei was very smart– smart, very inventive. (LAUGH)
Lesley Stahl: Let me read you what he says in the book, okay, about this–
Yulia Navalnaya: Okay.
Lesley Stahl: He says, “I had to devise a whole clandestine operation to bamboozle the guards, involving the substitution of identical notebooks.” And after that, “[we went to court] where I was able physically to pass items to someone.”
Yulia Navalnaya: It was very difficult. That’s why we have diaries from the first year, much less from the second year, and not from the third year because it wasn’t possible.
These are some of the diaries he smuggled out when he went to court, which was often, as he was tried and convicted several times on various pretexts. After each verdict, he was moved to a different prison with harsher conditions.
Last December, he was transferred to this penal colony north of the Arctic Circle.
This would be his final court appearance. He looked healthy and in good spirits, sharing a laugh with court officials. The very next day, Feb. 16, 2024, he was dead. Russian officials announced later that the cause was, quote, “not criminal in nature” and due to “combined diseases.”
Lesley Stahl: It was at the time that, that the negotiations over a prisoner swap were underway and Alexei might be one of the prisoners who was to be released.
Yulia Navalnaya: Putin realized that Alexei is so big that he’s– he could be the new leader of Russia. He could encourage people to stand against Putin. And all the things just brought Putin to this understanding that it’s not possible to let Navalny be, be free.
Lesley Stahl: You posted a message shortly after his death. You said, bravely I thought, “[Vladimir] Putin killed my husband. By killing Alexei, Putin killed half of me, half of my heart, and half of my soul.”
Yulia Navalnaya: That’s true. I can say now the same, nothing has changed.
Lesley Stahl: Here’s something else you said. You posted this on X: “Please do not forget… Vladimir Putin is a murderer and a war criminal. His place is in prison, and not somewhere in The Hague in a cozy cell with a TV, but in Russia in the same… two-by-three-meter cell in which he killed Alexei.”
Yulia Navalnaya: For me, it’s very important. I think that for Vladimir Putin, he needs to be in Russian con– prison to feel everything, what not just my husband, but all the prisoners in Russia.
Yulia Navalnaya
60 Minutes
His political network inside Russia has been crushed. Yulia and their two children have been forced to live in exile. Many of his old team now operate out of here in Vilnius, Lithuania, and three of his lawyers are on trial in Russia.
And Yulia is constantly on the road, lobbying Western leaders to stand up to Putin.
Lesley Stahl: So, the question is inevitable. Painful but inevitable. Has Putin won? Has he shut down the opposition to such an extent that it’s over?
Yulia Navalnaya: But it’s not finished. We continue our fight. He still has millions of supporters, we can see it by how many people go still every day to his grave, how many flowers on his grave.
Produced by Richard Bonin. Associate producer, Mirella Brussani. Broadcast associate, Aria Een. Edited by Matthew Lev.
