Diplomatic Poker — Who Emerged as Winner in Alaska and Washington Negotiations?

In Alaska, Donald Trump, known for his admiration of strong leaders, greeted Putin with royal honors — a red carpet, applause (later cut from the official White House video). Even a joint ride in a presidential Cadillac was a privilege reserved for the select few.

After three hours of negotiations, Putin delivered an eight-minute speech, followed by a three-minute response from Trump. The first spoke of “historical commonality and traditional friendship,” praised Trump (“if he had been president, there would be no war”), and reiterated points about “eliminating the root causes of the crisis.”

Trump was more concise: “We couldn’t find full understanding; no deal has been made.”

Later, in an interview with Fox News, he added that “everything now depends on Zelensky,” hinting at concessions from Ukraine, and did not rule out territorial changes: “There will be more land for Russia.”

Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin after negotiations

What was achieved in Alaska: Putin returned to the global stage, gained legitimacy, and received symbolic honors. Trump demonstrated his “exceptionality” as a negotiator.

According to the Financial Times, Putin demanded the complete withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from Donetsk and Luhansk regions, proposing to “freeze” the front line in Zaporizhzhia and Kherson without further claims to expand them. The sides agreed to continue negotiations.

What didn’t happen: any breakthrough except for an agreement to hold future meetings.

Just three days after Alaska, on August 18, a meeting took place in Washington between Trump, European leaders, and Zelensky — an attempt to “counterbalance” Alaska.

Leaders of the EU, Zelensky, and Trump at the August 18 meeting

Zelensky, even without a tie but in a suit, arrived in Washington with a clear stance — no territorial concessions.

During the first minutes, he thanked Trump 16 times — a lesson learned after Vice President Pence’s March reproach about “ingratitude.”

Zelensky at the August 18 meeting with Trump

Trump insisted Zelensky “needs to be more flexible” (meaning territorial concessions). European allies should provide security guarantees to Ukraine, thus shifting primary responsibility away from Washington. Overall, Zelensky and the EU were not pleased.

Trump, acting as a political theater director — in Alaska, he gave Putin a stage for legitimacy but no victories; in Washington, he created the appearance of supporting Ukraine but shifted real responsibility onto Europe and Zelensky himself.

Putin was the clear winner symbolically. He emerged from international isolation, gained a platform to present his version of events, and boosted his internal image — but made no concessions; sanctions remain, and the war continues.

Trump is a tactical winner. He enhanced his “peacemaker” image, shifted responsibility onto others, and avoided an immediate crisis — but the strategic picture is different: allies are unhappy, Ukraine has not surrendered, and Russia has not capitulated.

Zelensky is a tactical loser. He had to abandon key demands (like a ceasefire as a precondition for talks), but avoided capitulation and retained European support. He was caught in a trap — Trump shifted responsibility onto Europe and Zelensky himself.

Europe’s role remains unclear. Officially satisfied with the White House summit, but in reality, they are observers, not players. Security guarantees without full U.S. involvement are hollow.

So, who outplayed whom? No one. Putin gained a diplomatic bonus in Alaska — welcomed in the U.S. with a red carpet, fighter jet escort, and a ride in a presidential Cadillac. This signals to the world that Russia is back at the big table.

Trump wants to be a peacemaker, but his rhetoric shift from threats to compliments raises questions. He clearly hoped for a significant victory, headlines like “Trump Forced Putin to Retreat,” but nothing of that sort happened. Instead, he left Alaska promising to continue “diplomatic shuttle diplomacy” and to call Zelensky and European leaders.

Meanwhile, in Washington, everyone tried to impress Trump, but he remained indifferent — he has his own game. Their position is precarious, with increasing pressure.

What’s happening can be compared not to chess, but to poker: everyone’s bluffing, but no one knows who’s got the ace up their sleeve. The war in Ukraine persists, and Alaska with Washington merely demonstrate that no one is ready for real concessions yet.