Vice President JD Vance said Sunday that the White House is working on scheduling a trilateral meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin, President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. This is good news.
Trump obviously is frustrated with the situation in Ukraine, a war he’s saddened by and wants desperately to end.
Early in his term, he took out that frustration on Zelensky, culminating in that Oval Office UFC match.
But then the president rightly noted that Putin was “tapping us along” — that the dictator offered smiles and compliments then targeted civilians with missiles and drones.
Relations between Ukraine and Trump improved. Ukraine signed an agreement with the US to set up a reconstruction investment fund, and Europe agreed to pay for US weapons on behalf of the country. Trump gave Putin 50 days to come to the table, then shortened the deadline to this past Friday when the bombardment didn’t stop.
Then . . . the record scratch.
On the day of the deadline, rather than hit Russia with new sanctions, Trump agreed to meet Putin face-to-face, this Friday in Alaska.
What changed? Some reporting suggests that Putin has dropped his requirement of regime change in Ukraine. But he’s still demanding one-third of the country, including land he’s been unable to take on the battlefield, such as Ukraine’s “fortress belt” that’s been blocking Russian advances since 2014.
More likely is that Trump, facing more months of killing even with sanctions, jumped at the chance when his envoy, Steve Witkoff, said Putin was open to discussion.
But any agreement forged between Trump and Putin in Alaska means nothing if Ukraine isn’t involved.
First, despite the claims of anti-Ukraine podcasters, Putin is not coming into this meeting from a position of strength. His vaunted “summer offensive” is inching along, with little hope of winning the areas Putin’s demanding as part of a deal.
By sheer population advantage, Russia can grind out some progress, but at a tremendous cost: 250,000 soldiers dead, 1 million casualties so far. The Russian economy is fraying.
Ukraine has pulled off some stunning victories — including using a drone ploy to destroy long-range bombers on the other side of Russia.
Putin is in no position to dictate terms. He has not vanquished his foes; they humiliated him.
Ah, the podcasters continue, but this would only be possible with US weapons.
Certainly, American arms have played a key role, but it is not Americans who are dying. Ukraine has defended itself while hobbling a geopolitical foe and making the world a safer place.
Think of how emboldened and dangerous Putin would have been had Ukraine capitulated quickly. Where would he be looking now? The Balkans? Eastern Europe?
How many more battles would the United States be facing? The Ukrainians don’t owe us; we owe them a debt of gratitude.
For these reasons and more, a treaty cannot be imposed upon the people of Ukraine. They will fight on. Even if American arms dry up, the Europeans will help.
They understand that Putin can’t be trusted: Any agreement that doesn’t include hard provisions for Ukraine’s future security — and automatic, severe sanctions if Moscow doesn’t live up to its word — just gives time for Russia to rearm, regroup and then invade again.
All that said, the fighting is a horrifically destructive near-stalemate, and Ukraine may need to make concessions. But these are concessions Kyiv must help negotiate.
Don’t let Alaska go down as one of history’s notorious giveaways. Make sure Ukraine has a seat at the table, Mr. President; it’s the only way to get to a fair and lasting peace.
