ECFR experts warn of risks to Ukraine and Europe ahead of Trump-Putin Alaska summit

On Friday (15 August) U.S. President Donald Trump will meet Russian President Vladimir Putin at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska, to discuss the future of Ukraine, a summit that has sparked intense concern across Europe. As the summit looms, experts from the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) warn of its implications for Ukraine, European security, and transatlantic unity, highlighting both risks and opportunities in this high-stakes diplomatic moment.

Jana Kobzova, ECFR’s Programme Co-Director for the European Security Programme, sees the summit as a significant win for Putin.

“The Alaska summit effectively means an end to Putin’s international isolation – no major western leader has met with him since the wake of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine,” she notes. “Now he gets a summit with the U.S. president, without any concessions on his part, such as a pause in his war against Ukraine.”

Kobzova warns that Putin’s ability to discuss Ukraine and European security without Ukrainian or European representation aligns with his vision of great powers dictating the fate of smaller nations, clashing directly with Europe’s principles. She suggests Putin will balance feigning flexibility to appease Trump’s peacemaking ambitions while leveraging Russia’s battlefield gains to avoid concessions, potentially floating offers like joint U.S.-Russian energy ventures or arms control talks to reduce U.S. involvement in Ukraine.

Leo Litra, an ECFR Visiting Fellow, doubts the summit will yield meaningful outcomes.

“It is very unlikely that the summit in Alaska will result in a decision to end the war, a cease-fire, or in any decision at all,” he says, pointing to Putin’s unchanged war goals, which amount to Ukraine’s surrender. Litra argues that the meeting serves Putin’s interests by weakening his post-invasion isolation and breaching the U.S.-European consensus that negotiations require a ceasefire first. He cautions that without a clear U.S. strategy, the summit risks straining coordination with Ukraine and Europe, potentially casting Kyiv as the obstacle to peace if it rejects Russia’s unacceptable terms.

Rafael Loss, an ECFR Policy Fellow, highlights Europe’s reactive posture.

“If there is one silver lining…it’s that Europeans have gotten rather good at jumping on a quick coordination call with their colleagues in Ukraine, the EU, and NATO headquarters – even during summer break,” he says. However, he warns that Europe’s dependence on U.S. security guarantees and trade relations limits its ability to defy a potential U.S.-Russia deal. Loss urges European and Ukrainian leaders to present a unified stance to Trump, emphasizing his NATO and trade victories while preparing for Putin to exploit Trump’s desire to normalize relations with ambiguous promises.

Lesia Ogryzko, another ECFR Visiting Fellow, underscores the unlikelihood of peace.

“Peace or even ceasefire in Ukraine remains a distant prospect. This war cannot be resolved at the negotiating table – only on the battlefield,” she asserts. Ogryzko notes that Putin views a ceasefire as a bargaining chip, preferring an “air ceasefire” to shield Russian territory while continuing the war in Ukraine. She warns that Putin seeks to gain concessions – like Ukraine withdrawing from key cities or an end to his isolation – without reciprocating. For Zelenskyy, agreeing to such terms would be “political suicide,” as Ukrainian law and public opinion firmly oppose territorial concessions.

Ogryzko advocates for Europe, particularly the UK as a Budapest Memorandum co-signatory, to demand a seat at future talks and commit to long-term support for Ukraine’s war effort.

Jim O’Brien, an ECFR Distinguished Visiting Fellow, frames Trump’s approach as driven by optics.

“Trump has based his presidency on constant activity as a show of strength, so he needs the meeting, a headline, and a promise of more activities to come,” he says. O’Brien predicts vague announcements, possibly ceasefire principles or bilateral commercial deals, but expects outcomes to be quickly rewritten. He advises European leaders to dissuade Trump from pro-Russian concessions by highlighting the risks of resuming Russian gas imports, a key interest for Trump’s team.

The Trump administration has tempered expectations, framing the meeting as a “listening exercise”. In comments made on Wednesday, Trump threatened “severe consequences” if Putin does not agree to peace in Ukraine but also said that a meeting between them could swiftly be followed by a second that would include the leader of Ukraine.

Trump did not specify what the consequences could be, but he has warned of economic sanctions if his meeting with Putin in Alaska on Friday proves fruitless.

Edited by g.g.

Caption: A t-shirt featuring portraits of Russian President Putin (R) and US President Trump (L) is on display for sale at a souvenir market in Moscow, Russia, 13 August 2025. A meeting in Alaska, USA of Putin and Trump is scheduled for 15 August 2025. EPA/MAXIM SHIPENKOV