After Alaska Summit Trump and Putin will further squeeze Zelensky and the European Union
August 15th, 2025
Summary:
Directed by President Putin, the Russian army invaded Ukraine in February 2022. Like all wars, it has been brutal.
Amid much speculation, the August 15, 2025 Alaska summit between President Trump and President Putin took place. Trump was going to ‘deliver a deal for peace’. Observers expected a formal announcement of territory ‘exchange’ between Ukraine and Russia. But the meeting closed only with plans for future meetings. However, it seems possible that an agreement was achieved – to force the Ukraine to agree to this.
In the meantime, the Ukrainian struggle against the Russian imperialist aggressors continues. However, there is an increasing awareness that the legitimate Ukrainian struggle for their territorial integrity is failing. An increasing view is that without massive new inputs of military equipment, arms and troops – it is doomed. The Russian neo-imperialists have finally achieved a military dominance – at least for now.
This new military situation is accompanied by the developing internal battle within the oligarchic ruling class of Ukraine. While the ruling oligarchs of the Zelensky forces adopts the disguise of a struggle “against corruption”, the Ukrainian masses have recently begun to see through Zelensky. Massive demonstrations against him recently forced a reversal of adopted policies.
At time of writing, it seems likely that a certain portion of Ukrainian territory will be ceded to Russia. For purely cosmetic reasons, Trump and Putin prefer Zelenksy sign this with Putin. This is why the Alaska Summit closed with no formal treaty of territory transfer.
However, this all takes place amidst an extraordinary armament boom in the European Union. The developing war and arms profiteering – especially in Germany – is a part of the developing new world war. Of itself, it marks the emergence of a sizeable EU military force largely under its own control.
Table of Contents:
Summary
Introduction
1. The Alaska Summit August 2025 echoes Munich 1938
2. Setting up of the summit
3. The European Union tries to put its oar back in
4. The territorial demands of Putin
5. Current estimates of war dead
6. The military situation tilts to favour the Russian side
7. After the summit
8. Corruption inside Ukraine
9. The Guns versus Butter strategy -the EU Arms Race
To Conclude
1. The Alaska Summit August 2025 echoes Munich 1938
The Alaska Summit carries at least two echoes of a previous high-profile meeting of heads of state.
In September 1938 representatives of then Great Powers of England, France, fascist Italy and fascist Germany met at Munich. Negotiators at key stages included Adolf Hitler, Neville Chamberlain, and Eduardo Daladier. At no stage were representatives of the state of Czechoslovakia included.
Britain and France agreed to German demands, supported by Italy – which were placed on Czechoslovakia. These called to cede Germany all territories where the German population was over 50% of the Sudetenland’s total population. Supposedly, Britain and France would then guarantee Czechoslovakia’s independence. While Czechoslovakia initially rejected the proposed solution, for lack of Allied support it finally was forced to concede.
Despite this latter detail, later the Great Powers came to an agreement whereby Germany would occupy Czechoslovakia. Chamberlain has been ever since condemned as the Great Appeaser of Hitler’s fascism. Historians agree by and large on the significance of this.
It signaled the maturation of the contradictions between fascist Germany and Western imperialist nations on the one hand, and with the USSR on the other. The Second World War was ushered in. Throughout the prologue, the Allies of England, France, and the USA refused to make an anti-fascist Pact with the USSR, hoping to drive Germany into war with the USSR.
President Trump of the USA met President Putin of Russia in Anchorage, Alaska on 15 August 2025. It was heralded that it would stop the Ukrainian-Russian war. This war of aggression and territorial annexation was launched by neo-imperialist, Putinite Russia.
It is true that Russia had been increasingly encircled by the countries of the imperialist NATO alliance. However, the war remained a naked and unjust attack upon the Ukraine.
In a striking parallel to Munich, this summit did not include any Ukrainian representatives despite an express request from President Zelensky of the Ukraine.
Another striking resemblance is that Munich was a prelude to the Second World War. The Alaskan Summit stands as a prelude to a likely coming inter-imperialist war between the USA and China.
2. Setting up of the summit
Recall that Trump came to power claiming he (“the deal maker”) would end the war quickly. This then faded into an apparent anger with Putin for not cooperating in making peace. Threats emerged of further sanctions on Russian finances, trades and oil. However, the anger – and the sanction threats – dissipated after his special envoy Steve Witkoff returned from Moscow with a proposal for a summit:
“Trump, who came to office promising to end the war within 24 hours, has voiced irritation with Putin being “very nice” while simultaneously attacking Ukraine and feeding Washington “a lot of bullshit”. For the first time since taking office, Trump has begun enabling more significant transfers of weaponry to Kyiv, and threatening to apply tariffs on India for buying Russian oil.
But this impatient mood shifted almost overnight after US special envoy Steve Witkoff’s visit to Moscow last Wednesday— just two days before Trump’s ceasefire-or-sanctions deadline. Rather than more trouble for the Kremlin, what emerged was Putin’s first invitation to America to meet a US president since he saw George W Bush in 2007.”
Anastasia Stognei and Fabrice Deprez; “What Vladimir Putin wants from Donald Trump at Alaska summit”; Financial Times (hereon FT) 11 August 2025.
This about-face came as a shock to both Zelensky, but also to the European powers. Zelensky’s aides – correctly in our view – identified the gains that Putin wished to make:
“For Ukrainian officials, the move to talks represents an attempt by Putin to achieve at least three distinct goals. Alyona Getmanchuk, the newly appointed head of Ukraine’s mission to NATO, said it was to emerge from isolation, avoid new sanctions, and to use Trump’s determination to end the war “in order to solve by diplomatic means the tasks he failed to complete by military means”.
Anastasia Stognei and Fabrice Deprez; “What Vladimir Putin wants from Donald Trump at Alaska summit”; FT 11 August 2025.
“The main goal is to eliminate the root causes of this crisis,” Putin added, citing his nearly 90-minute speech from last June, in which he listed his demands, interspersed with historical anecdotes.
They include Ukraine’s official renunciation of Nato membership and its non-nuclear status, its “demilitarisation” and “denazification” — a vague demand that is essentially tantamount to Zelenskyy’s removal.
He also said Ukraine had to “fully withdraw” its forces from four Ukrainian regions that Russia occupies only partly, but still decided to officially incorporate into its territory.
Putin “does not exclude” that Ukraine could “maintain sovereignty” over Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions provided it gives Russia access to Crimea through them.“ Kyiv has to guarantee a servitut [a legal term for a right to use land],” he added.
The demand for Ukraine to pull back its troops from the Donetsk and Luhansk regions is “a negotiating trap”, said Volodymyr Fesenko, a Kyiv-based political analyst.”
Anastasia Stognei and Fabrice Deprez; “What Vladimir Putin wants from Donald Trump at Alaska summit”; FT 11 August 2025
A deal had probably already been made. The European Union leaders and Ukrainian President Zelensky feared this scenario:
“For the Ukrainians and Europeans, the worst-case scenario is that Trump and Putin emerge from the meeting with an agreement on “land swaps” — which would, in reality, mean Ukraine ceding large swaths of its territory permanently to Russia.
Putin’s goal is probably to reach a deal with Trump that is then presented to Ukraine as a fait accompli. As Alexander Gabuev of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center puts it, the sort of deal that Putin wants would leave Ukraine “indefensible, uninvestable and on a path to implosion”. If Ukraine rejects that deal, the Russians hope the US will then cut off support to Kyiv.”
Gideon Rachman; “Trump, Putin and the future of Ukraine”; Financial Times (FT) London; 11 August 2025.
Zelensky was therefore very vocal in rejecting the notion of “swapping”.
“The American leader has insisted in recent days that a peace deal would involve ‘some land swapping’ — to which Mr. Zelensky responded, “Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupier.”
Constant Méheut; “Russia Makes a Swift Battlefield Advance, Seeking an Edge in Trump Talks”; New York Times; Aug. 12, 2025.
Of course, this vocal rejection cuts little ice with those with power – namely, the USA and the Russian president. In Trump’s brutal and humiliatingly public words at an earlier White House meeting, Ukraine had “no cards”.
As for the European Union (EU), that has also been sidelined.
3. The European Union (EU) tries to put its oar back in
Accordingly, the EU tried to stage a very public appeal to restrain the Alaska Summit proceedings:
“European leaders declared that Ukraine’s border “must not be changed by force” after Volodymyr Zelenskyy appealed for allies to oppose a peace deal floated by Donald Trump that could involve “some swapping of territory”.
In a joint statement, leaders from the European Commission, France, Italy, the UK, Poland, and Finland said “the current line of contact should be the starting point of negotiations”.
They said “the path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine”, ahead of a meeting next week between the US president and Russian President Vladimir Putin . . .
the Russian proposal included a freezing of the frontline in south-eastern Ukraine if Kyiv agreed to pull back from parts of the eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions that it still controlled.
Moscow has previously laid claim to the entire Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions despite the two regional capitals remaining under Ukrainian control.
Swaths of land controlled by Russian forces in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions as well as small areas in the Sumy and Kharkiv regions, may be up for discussion, the officials said.”
Christopher Miller and Fabrice Deprez: “European allies back Ukraine’s borders after Donald Trump floats land swap with Russia”; FT 9 August 2025
In a frantic series of video call conferences and personal meetings – Zelensky went to Berlin – the European leaders tried to get back into the game.
The reality is that any further move of Russia into Western Europe immediately and directly affects the EU more than it does the USA. Many refugees fled Ukraine seeking safety in several countries. But the large bulk of Ukrainian refugees are in Europe. Germany has the highest number 1,227,090), while Poland has the second highest (1,000,320):
Map 1: Location of Ukrainian refugees following Putin’s invasion
Vanessa Brown, Martin Stabe, Alan Smith, Emma Lewis, Joanna S Kao, Sam Learner and Ændra Rininsland ; “Ukraine’s battle against Russia in maps and charts: latest updates -A visual guide to the war”; Financial Times Feb 24 2022; Updated Aug 13 2025
Another refugee influx from other parts of Europe will not be easy to accommodate. Finally Germany has already been a vocal supporter of Zelensky.
Hence, a virtual meeting at short notice was set up, designed to seek maximal public visibility:
“European leaders will hold consultations over Ukraine with Donald Trump ahead of the US president’s encounter with Russian leader Vladimir Putin, as they seek to shape talks that could determine the continent’s long-term security. Germany has convened a virtual meeting on Wednesday (i.e 13th August – Editor) to discuss ways to exert more pressure on Moscow ahead of pivotal US-led talks in Alaska on Friday on how to end Russia’s three-year war in Ukraine, according to a German government spokesman. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will join the leaders of Germany, France, UK, Italy, Poland and Finland to discuss the issues of Russian-occupied territories and security guarantees for Ukraine, as part of a possible ceasefire agreement. Nato secretary-general Mark Rutte, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen and European Council president António Costa will also attend. The European leaders will then take part in a videoconference with Trump, vice-president JD Vance and Zelenskyy.”
Anne-Sylvaine Chassany and James Politi; “EU leaders to meet ahead of Trump- Putin meeting over Ukraine”; FT 12 August 2025.
The main article of contention is the idea of “territorial swaps”:
“They (the EU – Ed) have pushed back against Trump’s suggestion of territorial “swaps” – meaning Russia would consolidate its occupation of Ukrainian land, even of areas it currently does not hold – and have insisted the current frontline should be the starting point of any ceasefire negotiations.
“Putin only acts under pressure,” Merz said on Sunday. The German chancellor has also been pushing for Zelenskyy to attend the Alaska meeting in one form or another. Trump on Monday said Zelenskyy would attend the next summit with Putin.”
Anne-Sylvaine Chassany and James Politi; “EU leaders to meet ahead of Trump- Putin meeting over Ukraine”; FT 12 August 2025
4. The territorial demands of Putin
The summit was driven by an increasing realization in the USA that, in its present form, the Ukrainian war of self-defense is unwinnable. At least unless massively more military equipment, money and troops are poured into Zelensky’s war coffers. Albeit reluctantly, the Western powers, including leading elements of European ruling classes – are being forced by circumstances to realise the truth of this.
As the USA initially tried to force President Zelensky to pay for its armaments, Trump, Vice-President Vance and the cabinet publicly humiliated Zelensky during the latter’s visit to the White House.
The USA then revealed its vision of territorial and economic control over the various mineral resources of the Ukraine. At first Zelensky refused to sign any such commitment despite much pressure. After the public humiliation of Zelensky – he did eventually sign such a treaty.
However, a very obvious complication has arisen. This concerns the geographical area of some of the main Ukrainian deposits of the coveted so-called “rare earths”. The maps below show the problem. The largest deposits lie in the currently Russian occupied Ukraine territory.
Map 2. Distribution of mineral resources in Ukraine
Steven Bernard and Christopher Miller;
Ukraine’s battle against Russia in maps and charts: latest updates
“A visual guide to the war”; FT Feb 24 2022; update August 23, 2025; from
Institute for Study of War at:
But Map 3 shows even more clearly that this all lies in Russian-held territory:
Map 3. The Russian occupied force in Ukrainian territory currently
Map of Ukraine and Russian occupying forces; August 15, 2025; at Institute for Study of War; August 15, 2025
When Trump’s envoy to Putin – Steve Witkov – announced the forthcoming Alaska Summit, ‘land swaps’ were included from the start. Of course, these make trading of rare earths for the USA necessary via Russia. Trump somewhat casually but explicitly used the words “land swaps”:
“There’ll be some swapping of territories, to the betterment of both,” Trump said. Immediately after the meeting, Moscow called Witkoff’s proposals “acceptable” but did not comment on Trump’s statements about a land swap.
Putin has repeatedly stated that his conditions for Ukraine remain unchanged. “They are not even conditions, but Russia’s goals,” he told Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko as the two sat on a bench in Valaam Monasteryin northern Russia on August 1.”
Anastasia Stognei and Fabrice Deprez; “What Vladimir Putin wants from Donald Trump at Alaska summit”; FT 11 August 2025
But as the Ukrainians fully realized, there was no “swap” involved – only a Russian land-grab:
“Trump said there would be ‘land swaps’ involved. But Ukraine does not occupy more than a sliver of Russian territory since its forces were pushed out of the Kursk region this spring, and so has little to exchange. And the idea of ceding land to Moscow — especially that which its invading army does not currently occupy — is a firm Ukrainian red line.
Moscow, for its part, has since said it would not give up any of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia. “The territorial integrity of Russia is bound in our country’s constitution,” a foreign ministry spokesperson said.”
Christopher Miller and Ben Hall; “Zelenskyy faces his ‘moment of maximum pressure’; FT August 14 2025
At the August 15th summit, it became quickly apparent that Putin remained focused on a territorial land grab. Putin was willing not to grab even more – but what Russia had already taken was to remain as Russian land:
“Vladimir Putin has demanded Ukraine withdraw from the Donetsk and Luhansk regions as a condition for ending Russia’s war, but told Donald Trump he could freeze the rest of the frontline if his core demands were met.
The Russian leader made the request during his meeting with Trump in Alaska on Friday, according to four people with direct knowledge of the talks.
Trump then communicated that message to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders in a call on Saturday, during which he urged them to drop efforts to secure a ceasefire from Moscow.
The move would hand Moscow full control of a territory it has partially occupied for more than a decade and where its troops are advancing at the fastest pace since November.
In exchange for Donetsk and Luhansk, Putin said he would freeze the frontline in the southern regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, where his forces occupy large swathes of land, and not launch new attacks to take more territory, according to three of the people familiar with the talks.
Putin made it clear that he had not dropped his core demands to “resolve the root causes” of the conflict, which would essentially end Ukraine’s statehood in its current form and roll back NATO’s eastward expansion.”
Christopher Miller, Amy Mackinnon, Max Seddon, and Anne-Sylvaine Chassany “Putin demanded Ukraine cede Donetsk and Luhansk in exchange for freezing rest of front line”: FT; 16 August 2025
5. Current estimates of war dead
The current best estimates include a huge death total. Russian deaths or casualties are alone, at the 1 million mark up to June 2025. Ukraine stands at about 60-100,000 deaths:
“Nearly 1 million Russian soldiers have been killed or injured in the country’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, according to a new study, . . . said the study, published Tuesday by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), . . . . Of the estimated 950,000 Russian casualties so far, as many as 250,000 are dead, according to the study. “No Soviet or Russian war since World War II has even come close to Ukraine in terms of fatality rate,” it said. Ukraine has sustained nearly 400,000 casualties, it added, with between 60,000 and 100,000 deaths.”
Christian Edwards, “Russia nears 1 million war casualties in Ukraine, study finds”; CNN ; at: 4 June, 2025. At:
6. The military situation tilts to favour the Russian side
Until recently, the war fronts were stagnant, somewhat in a state of a ‘stalemate’. A long, grueling back-and-forth trench warfare. The Ukrainian initiatives in drone manufacture gave it at first, a certain marginal war advantage. However, with China’s help – the Russian army has firmly overcome this:
“The Russian integration of combined unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)(or drones – Editor) attack tactics and adaptations is giving Russian forces important advantages on the battlefield in Ukraine and facilitating Russian advances on key Ukrainian towns. Russian UAV adaptations are likely achieving some effects of battlefield air interdiction (BAI): The use of airpower to strike targets in the near rear of the frontline to impact battlefield operations in the near term. Neither Ukraine nor Russia has been able to conduct BAI using manned aircraft or UAVs due to the density and sophistication of adversary air defenses and electronic warfare (EW) over the past three years, but Russian forces are now achieving partial BAI effects in support of their offensives. Russia’s allies, especially the People’s Republic of China (PRC), have enabled Russia to develop and scale the production of UAVs that are more resistant to EW interference and capable of operating at longer distances, higher speeds, and in challenging environments.”
Kateryna Stepanenko; “Executive Summary of: ‘Russian drone innovations are likely achieving effects of battlefield air interdiction in Ukraine’”; Institute for the Study of War; August 7, 2025;
The demoralisation of the Russian army that had plagued the early stages of the Russian invasions seems to have been dissipated. This was effected largely by the use of very high payment incentives:
“Recruits from Russia’s Moscow region will receive 5.2 million rubles (about $60,000) for the first year of service, and a one off payment of 1.9 million rubles (about $22,000) for signing up, bringing the annual total for joining Russia’s military to 7.1 million rubles, according to an advert aired on state TV last week.”
Isabel van Brugen; “Russian Soldiers Could Earn Nearly as Much as Putin in Ukraine War”; Newsweek; Jul 29, 2024.
Although it is true that upon return to Russia, many either get scammed by corrupt police (BBC 29 July 2025); or face authorities refusing to pay out (Moscow News March 22, 2023).
There have also been a significant number of mercenary soldiers used by Russia. This includes convicts as we discussed before (“What just happened in Russia? Putin and the failed coup leader Prigozhin are two peas in the same pod”). But it also includes Yemeni and North Korean soldiers.
A new Russian offensive – no doubt timed to allow Putin maximum bargaining power at the Alaska summit – was an unexpected surprise. The Russian move aimed to control the Eastern Ukraine area:
“Russian troops have made surprise gains in eastern Ukraine ahead of a crucial summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday, in which the Russian president is expected to try to lock in battlefield gains. Ukrainian and western military analysts said Moscow’s forces had advanced nearly 15km over the past few days along a narrow corridor parallel to Dobropillia, a coal mining town turned key logistical hub north of the stronghold of Pokrovsk that Russian troops have nearly encircled.
The shock advance threatens to cut off a vital road linking Dobropillia to Kramatorsk, the de facto capital of the Ukrainian-held Donetsk region which the Russians aim to capture, while allowing the Kremlin’s forces to bypass and flank a belt of fortifications and defensive lines built in recent months. It marks some of the most significant Russian gains in the past year, and comes at a perilous moment for Ukraine, whose army is struggling with shortages of manpower and ammunition.”
Steven Bernard and Christopher Miller; Ukraine’s battle against Russia in maps and charts: latest updates – A visual guide to the war”; FT Feb 24 2022; update August 23, 2025
Map 4: The map below shows the thrust towards Dobropillia (from Bernard and Miller Ibid)
The defensive line of fortresses sealing Ukraine off from Russia – in this instance, the city of Pokrovsk – is at risk of being breached by a flanking manoeuvre:
“In recent days, Russia’s troops broke through a segment of Ukraine’s defensive line near the city of Pokrovsk, a longtime stronghold. They have advanced several miles into Ukrainian-held
territory, threatening to outflank Ukraine’s positions.
“The situation is quite chaotic, as the enemy, having found gaps in the defense, is infiltrating deep inside, trying to quickly establish a foothold and accumulate forces for further advancement,” said
Deep State, a Ukrainian group with ties to the military that maps the battlefield. . .
Pokrovsk, which was once a critical logistical hub for Ukrainian forces in the east, is now semi-encircled from the northeast to the southwest. Ukrainian troops must pass through a narrow 10-mile corridor to enter the city, leaving them vulnerable to drone attacks.”
Constant Méheut; “Russia Makes a Swift Battlefield Advance, Seeking an Edge in Trump Talks”; New York Times; Aug. 12, 2025,
This has intensified the “frenzy” of European diplomats anxious about Ukraine:
“The diplomatic frenzy is unfolding as Ukrainian forces have been facing increasing pressure in the east, with the Russian military now pushing to encircle several cities that have served as strategic strongholds for Ukrainian defenders.
Russia seized 502 sq km of Ukrainian territory in July, a rate similar to its advances in June and May and one of the highest in the past year, according to Black Bird Group, an open source intelligence agency monitoring the conflict.
Deep State, a war monitoring group with ties to the Ukrainian defence ministry, reported on Sunday that Russian forces had managed to advance nearly 7km in an area near the city of Pokrovsk, which Russian forces have attempted to surround for the past year.”
Anastasia Stognei and Fabrice Deprez; “What Vladimir Putin wants from Donald Trump at Alaska summit”; FT 11 August 2025
Correspondingly, any military despondency left has infiltrated the Ukrainian side.
“Bohdan Krotevych, former chief of staff of the Azov brigade and a National Guard lieutenant colonel, made a public appeal to Zelenskyy.
“Mr President, I sincerely don’t know what exactly is being reported to you, but I’m informing you: on the Pokrovsk-Kostyantynivka line, without exaggeration, it’s complete chaos,” he wrote on social media. “And this chaos has been growing for a long time, worsening with each passing day.”
Warning of the penetration of Ukraine’s defences on the eastern front, he added: “A stable line of combat contact, as such, effectively doesn’t exist.”
Fabrice Deprez and Christopher Miller “Russian breach sparks alarm on Ukraine’s eastern front”: FT; 12 August 2025
7. After the summit
Signing the deal and announcing it – as a deal solely made between Trump and Putin had now become more than awkward! Largely because of the international attention that European leaders ensured, to such a private deal without Zelensky’s participation (see section 3). Therefore the original plan was simply modified.
Now pressure will be piled onto Zelensky to just give way. This is facilitated by the quiet understanding that Zelensky had already “quietly conceded”:
“Zelensky has quietly conceded in recent months that Kyiv might tolerate a freezing of the conflict that would amount to continued de facto Russian occupation of Ukrainian soil, as part of an accord that respected some of its key demands. But de jure recognition would rewrite the postwar settlement in Europe, by in effect legitimising the first redrawing of a European state’s borders since 1945 through a foreign invasion.”
Editorial Board; “How Trump can win in Alaska“; FT 12 August 2025.
To make this politically palatable in the Ukraine, however, any concession could be only as a “de facto occupation” rather than as a “change of borders”:
“Kyiv could in any case never agree: changing its borders requires amending its constitution via a referendum. Zelenskyy has noted that “Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier”. They might well topple him if he proposed it.”
Editorial Board; “How Trump can win in Alaska“; FT 12 August 2025.
“President Trump on Saturday (16 August, 2025 -Ed) split from Ukraine and key European allies after his summit with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, backing Mr. Putin’s plan for a sweeping peace agreement based on Ukraine ceding territory it controls to Russia, instead of the urgent cease-fire Mr. Trump had said he wanted before the meeting.”
Jim Tankersley, Ivan Nechepurenko and Steven Erlanger; “Trump Backs Plan to Cede Land for Peace in Ukraine”; New York Times 16 August 2025,
Now the quid-pro-quo looks in its territory almost exactly the same as it had always looked since the days of the so-called Steinmaier formula deal – or the Minsk Agreement. That was one that Zelensky had steadfastly rejected in 2015 (See Imperialist Danse Macabre over the Peoples of Ukraine ML Currents Today by Hari Kumar; February 10, 2022 at MLRG.online). The difference is that the Minsk Agreement envisaged these territories being reintegrated ulitmtely into Ukraine. What does it look like now?
“Mr. Trump told European leaders that he believed a rapid peace deal could be negotiated if Mr. Zelensky agreed to give up the rest of the Donbas region to Russia, even those areas not occupied by Russian troops, according to two senior European officials briefed on the call.
In return, Mr. Putin offered a cease-fire in the rest of Ukraine at current battle lines and a written promise not to attack Ukraine or any European country again, the senior officials said. He has broken similar promises before.”
Jim Tankersley, Ivan Nechepurenko and Steven Erlanger; “Trump Backs Plan to Cede Land for Peace in Ukraine”; New York Times 16 August 2025.
There are two other considerations to take into account for a fuller picture of the current state of Ukraine and the EU.
8. Corruption inside Ukraine
As for Zelensky, his position inside Ukraine was already severely weakened. This was largely because of his hasty attempt to disable two key anti-corruption committees:
“Volodymyr Zelenskyy rushed through a law last week eliminating the independence of two anti-corruption bodies, thousands of Ukrainians took to the streets. The president quickly appeared to understand the scale of his blunder and backtracked; the country’s parliament will vote this week on a law reversing the changes.“
The Editorial Board; “Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s unforced error”; FT 30 July 2025
“the law fast-tracked through parliament and signed by the president last Tuesday touched a nerve. It granted his office greater control over the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), both set up in the wake of the 2014 Maidan protests that toppled pro-Russia president Viktor Yanukovych. Those demonstrations were not just against Kremlin interference but also a model of kleptocratic governance seen as Russian— in contrast to “European” rule-of-law principles — even if some Ukrainian oligarchs and officials were even more rapacious than their Russian counterparts.
Ukraine’s president justified the move against NABU and SAPO by suggesting they had been penetrated by pro-Russian interests. But he offered no evidence. Many in Ukrainian civil society — which has once again displayed its vibrancy —suspect the law was motivated by the fact that corruption probes have closed in on figures close to the presidency.
As well as inflaming domestic opinion, the law jeopardised Ukraine’s EU accession process, and potentially financial support from the EU and the IMF on which Kyiv is entirely dependent, and which have insisted on the independence of the anti-graft bodies.
Zelenskyy quickly reversed course, saying he would submit a new bill to parliament that would guarantee the agencies’ autonomy. But the fact that the presidential administration had initially gone ahead with the law — despite pleadings not to from France’s President Emmanuel Macron and European Council President António Costa — points to what even some of the country’s supporters call a worsening bunker mentality. They suggest the leadership circle has gone beyond necessary wartime consolidation of control and used its powers to silence dissenting voices and curb rival power centres.
There is no suggestion of personal wrongdoing by the president… “
The Editorial Board; “Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s unforced error”; FT 30 July 2025
We will write further on this aspect, but more details here are not necessary.
9. The Guns versus Butter strategy -the EU Arms Race
The European Union has been somewhat battered in the international inter-capitalist rivalry recently. They have now moved to an old and tested capitalist strategy summarised in the slogan “guns or butter?”:
“On January 17, 1936, Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels stated: “We can do without butter, but, despite all our love of peace, not without arms. One cannot shoot with butter, but with guns.”. . .
US President Lyndon B. Johnson used the phrase to catch the attention of the national media while reporting on the state of national defense and the economy.”
“Guns versus butter model”; Wikipedia,
All this frenzied activity on the diplomatic front we described has one goal for the USA. It is designed to enable the USA focus and concentrate on its main military and economic strategic threat – China.
To this end – Trump has clearly told the EU that if they want to defend the Ukraine further – they need to produce arms and money and troops to do so. They have certainly taken this on with great seriousness. The shock they experienced at the Munich 2025 conference when Vice-President Vance berated them publicly inspired a new strategy.
The economic doldrums that the EU faces currently have multiple origins. But in large part it is primarily due to the after-effects of COVID; the longer pattern of failure of industry to reinvest profits in infrastructure; the increasing competition especially with escalating China entry of goods; and electronic backwardness (being beholden to the big USA and Chinese manufacturers).
All this is made especially intense by the USA tariff war initiated by Trump – which has also included the EU. The USA high tech financiers are also busily stripping out the EU financial markets:
“A ‘super league’ of US asset managers is dominating the sector’s expansion across Europe and the UK, more than doubling assets under management over the past decade and far outstripping the growth of local rivals.
American fund groups led by BlackRock, Vanguard and JPMorgan Asset Management oversaw $4.9tn in the region as of the end of May, up from $2.2tn a decade earlier, according to data from ISS Market Intelligence…
The UK sector’s assets under management rose from $1.2tn to $2tn over the same period and France’s grew from $870bn to $1.5tn, while Switzerland’s and Germany’s each roughly doubled to $1.4tn.
The figures — which cover mutual and exchange-traded funds but not money market, fund of funds or private market products — underline the scale of the challenge faced by European players from their larger US rivals.”
“We’re seeing the emergence of a ‘super league’ of asset managers that have broken away [from the rest of the industry] — dominated by US firms and alternative asset managers, who also are growing share in Europe,” said Huwvan Steenis, partner and vice-chair at management consultancy Oliver Wyman.”
Emma Dunkley and Harriet Clarfelt; “BlackRock and Vanguard lead US ‘super league’ dominating Europe”; FT 11 August 2025
These problems facing the EU capitalists and their leaders are finally being dealt with in a classic manner.
First drive down the benefits of the working class from a ‘welfare-type’ economy; drive down wages; increase unemployment; and generally depress consumption and working-class living standards.
Secondly, to cope with the reduced demand for finished goods, and in particular the German motor industry – whose products are no longer competitive – they are turning to a guaranteed source of income – arms. The type of factory equipment for either cars or tanks – is very similar, making this an easy option.
“Europe’s weapons factories are expanding at three times the rate of peacetime, stretching over 7mn sq metres of new industrial development that represents rearmament on a historic scale.
Building activity at European arms sites has gone into overdrive since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, according to a Financial Times analysis of radar satellite data covering 150 facilities across 37 companies.
The data shows that Europe’s long-promised defence revival, driven by an injection of public subsidies, is beginning to materialise not just in policy rhetoric or spending pledges but also in concrete and steel. . .
Among the sites with the biggest expansion was a joint project between German defence giant Rheinmetall and Hungarian state defence company N7 Holding, which has built a vast production site for ammunition and explosives in Várpalota in western Hungary…
The EU is negotiating a new €1.5bn defence programme that “replicates the logic of ASAP” through grants, and would also fund joint procurement, according to the European Commission.
Kubilius, defence commissioner, said the commission was looking at whether similar methods could be used “to incentivise industries to expand their production in other areas”. Priority areas include missiles and air defence, artillery and drones…”
Laura Dubois, David Djambazov and Chris Cook; “Europe builds for war as arms factories expand at triple speed”; FT; 12 August, 2025
To Conclude:
The Alaska summit may not have yet “delivered” the territory to the Putinite Russian forces. But this process has been slightly slowed to enable a face-lift on the proceedings. Better than Trump and Putin signing it, is that Zelensky and Putin. sign it . . . Naturally from a bilateral wish and a bilateral love of peace and justice. In the meantime:
“Donald Trump appeared to back away from plans to penalise Russia’s economy if Vladimir Putin did not agree a ceasefire.
Trump indicated to Fox News host Sean Hannity in an interview after Friday’s Alaska summit that he would defer any proposal to penalise importers of Russian oil such as China.“Because of what happened today, I think I don’t have to think about that,” he said. “Now I may have to think about it in two weeks or three weeks or something, but we don’t have to think about that right now: I think the meeting went very well,” Trump continued.”
“Peter Wells; “Trump appears to back away from plans to hit Russia’s economy”;
FT 16 August 2025.
“The US president held out the possibility of future meetings with Putin and Ukraine’s leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy, but afterwards suggested responsibility for ending the conflict now rested with Kyiv and its European allies.
“Now, it’s really up to President Zelenskyy to get it done,” he told Fox News host Sean Hannity after the summit. “And I would also say the European nations, they have to get involved a little bit. But it’s up to President Zelenskyy . . . And if they’d like, I’ll be at that next meeting.”
Max Seddon, Amy Mackinnon, James Politi, Steff Chávez, Christopher Miller; “Trump fails to secure Ukraine deal at Alaska summit with Putin”; FT 16 August 2025
The huge explosion of arms have a distinct use-value. To stockpile for the coming inter-imperialist war that has its pivot on USA-China rivalry. But also to finally move towards the goal that the French President Macron has urged for a long time – an independent EU armed force. This seems to be finally likely to emerge. The EU is well aware that Putin wants to block even further expansion of NATO. Putin’s vision has not wavered:
“Mr. Putin has uttered the phrase — “pervoprichiny” in Russian — in just about every conversation concerning the war going back at least to February, when he used it in his first phone call with Mr. Trump after he returned to the presidency. It has become shorthand for the Russian president’s unwavering vision of Ukraine’s future. . .
What exactly is Mr. Putin talking about? The “root causes” refers to Russia’s justification for the invasion of Ukraine — a concoction of Mr. Putin’s grievances over Ukraine’s political and historical choices that is hard to parse even for Eastern European experts.
But at its heart is Mr. Putin’s fixation with NATO’s expansion after the Cold War ended into what he believes should be Russia’s sphere of influence, and his desire to have a pliable, pro-Russia government in Kyiv.
Perhaps the closest Mr. Putin came to defining these root causes of late came in June 2024, when he outlined the conditions that he thought must be met for Russia to enter into a cease-fire agreement with Ukraine.
These included Ukrainian withdrawal from four Ukrainian regions Mr. Putin declared officially part of Russia in September 2022, even though his troops do not control all the territory in any of these regions. Ukraine, he said at the time, must also abandon its long-stated aspirations to join NATO, and the West must lift all sanctions imposed on Russia.
Mr. Putin’s continued use of the phrase, despite the exertions of the Trump administration to bring about the war’s end, suggest that for the Russian president, little has changed since he first announced the start of what he described was a “special military operation” in the early hours of Feb. 24, 2022.”
Michael Schwirtz; “Putin keeps talking about the ‘root causes’ of the war. What does he mean?” New York Times; Aug. 16, 2025
See also
“Theses at a time of an obvious attempted re-division of world ‘spheres of interest’” 2022.
First published at ‘ML Currents Today’ and “Berlin Left’; Republished MLRG.online August 15, 2025.
“Imperialist Danse Macabre over the Peoples of Ukraine”; Originally at ‘ML Currents Today’; and at Berlin Left; February 2022 ;Republished MLRG.online August 15, 2025
