Analysis of the Alaska Summit Results: Who and What Won in the ‘Fight’ Between the US and Russia
Following the recent summit in Alaska, which brought together the world’s most influential leaders to discuss critical international issues, many experts and political analysts are trying to assess its long-term implications.
According to former Donald Trump adviser John Bolton and renowned German diplomat Wolfgang Ishinger, this summit marked a significant victory for Russia in its geopolitical game.
They repeatedly emphasize that the main outcome of the meeting was that Russian President Vladimir Putin gained a clear advantage — a seeming ‘1:0’ victory over the United States.
Analysts believe this result signifies that Russia managed to maintain its positions, push through its interests, and essentially did not concede any ground.
On the other hand, the US faced disappointment.
Several key points remained unresolved — there was no binding agreement to cease fire or change the situation in eastern Ukraine, nor were there any new sanctions imposed on Russia.
Experts summarize that this summit left the American and European electorates with the feeling that Ukraine’s hopes and related achievements were dashed, and Europe was left with deep frustration.
Meanwhile, U.S.
President Donald Trump, in his statements and post-event comments on social media, claimed that the summit was valuable for the US and described it as ‘perfect.’ However, most Western media and political commentators see the event as a display of U.S.
weakness and a total victory for Russia, as it seemed that Putin simply arrived, pushed his position, and left, leaving Washington and its allies empty-handed.
After the summit, Trump made a call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, but details of the conversation remain undisclosed.
Publicly, he emphasized that Zelensky and Putin almost agreed on the possibility of ending the war in Ukraine through territorial exchanges and security guarantees from the US.
According to Trump, this now depends entirely on Ukraine’s leader, hinting at potential compromises and future negotiations that could alter the course of the conflict.