“This could be the first stage of the final act of negotiations”: Ukrainian political scientist Ruslan Bortnik on the Putin–Trump meeting in Anchorage
The meeting between the presidents of Russia and the United States in Anchorage has become the central event in world politics in recent weeks. Kazakhstan officially welcomed the summit, calling it “the beginning of a negotiation process on Ukraine at the highest level.” President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev emphasized that this historic meeting became possible thanks to the political will of the leaders.
@ukraina.ru
So what does this summit mean for Ukraine, Russia, and the United States? And can it be considered the start of a new peace process? Answering the questions of DKNews.kz, political analyst and Director of the Ukrainian Institute of Politics, Ruslan Bortnik.
— Ruslan, from your perspective, could the Anchorage meeting become a turning point in the conflict, or was it more of a symbolic gesture?
— Time will tell, but it’s already clear: this meeting was not merely symbolic. It was more than a show of willingness to talk - these were strategic negotiations where concrete, substantive issues were discussed.
Andrew Harnik / Getty Images
I would call it the first stage of the final act of a large negotiation process between Russia and the West. The talks were not only about Ukraine but also about the future architecture of global security - in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia. The leaders spoke openly and to the point, without excessive diplomatic rhetoric, which makes this format very different from previous ones.
— Does U.S. participation in this format increase the likelihood that Ukraine’s interests will be taken into account?
— Today, only the United States has the potential to genuinely safeguard Ukraine’s interests in negotiations with Russia. Europe, unfortunately, is divided and more focused on continuing hostilities than on seeking diplomatic solutions.
Reuters/Jeenah Moon
The U.S. has both military power and political subjectivity, as well as the status of an equal negotiating partner with Russia. Therefore, Washington’s participation undoubtedly raises hopes that the Ukrainian factor will be taken into account. But as Donald Trump’s statement showed - that “the further fate of the peace agreement depends on Volodymyr Zelensky” - part of the responsibility is being shifted directly onto Kyiv.
— President Tokayev noted that the summit became possible thanks to the political will of the leaders. Can this will translate into real steps toward ending the war?
— I fully agree with President Tokayev. There are numerous bureaucratic and political barriers to negotiations today. Only the personal will of the leaders can overcome them.
president.gov.ua, пресс-службы Акорды, kremlin.ru
The Anchorage meeting was already the 12th high-level contact between the U.S. and Russia: six phone conversations between Putin and Trump, five visits by special envoys, and now this summit. Without Trump coming to power in 2024, most likely we would still be living in a phase of hopeless escalation. His readiness to go against the mainstream in the West was decisive for the very fact that negotiations took place.
— Kazakhstan has previously provided platforms for negotiations on Syria and Afghanistan. Could Astana become the center of future dialogue on Ukraine? And how acceptable would that be for Kyiv?
— Kazakhstan has already been considered as a potential venue. The only difficulty lies in geography and logistics. But in terms of political weight and neutrality, Astana fits perfectly.
© Sputnik / Abzal Kaliev
Kazakhstan is perceived as a reliable, respected, and equidistant player. Moreover, Tokayev has established working relationships with Putin, Zelensky, and Trump. Therefore, in the future, Kazakhstan could indeed take on a key role, especially in the economic stages of the peace process - in matters of logistics, trade, and energy.
— In your view, was the Anchorage meeting the beginning of a new peace process, or more of a “trial of strength” between Moscow and Washington?
— I would say it was both. The sides were undoubtedly testing each other’s intentions, trying to define the boundaries of possible compromise. But the very fact of the meeting at the highest level, along with the leaders’ statements about their readiness for dialogue, shows that we have entered a new phase.
Sergey Bobylev / RIA Novosti
There are signs that the parties have at least outlined the contours of a future process:
- no new sanctions were imposed against Moscow,
- the demand for an immediate ceasefire has disappeared,
- formats for a possible Zelensky–Putin meeting are being discussed.
These are signals that the U.S. and Russia have found some basic points of agreement and are now trying to bring Ukraine and Europe into the framework.
