International Press Review dated 11 – 22 August 2025
- Anton Kuchuhidze
- 14 hours ago
- 5 min read
In recent weeks, global media has focused on a series of diplomatic initiatives aimed at ending russia’s aggression against Ukraine and achieving peace. Despite several high-profile meetings — including talks between U.S. President Donald Trump and russian president putin in Alaska, as well as a summit at the White House involving Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders — moscow and Kyiv continue to hold fundamentally opposing positions.
The Washington Post provides a detailed analysis of the main factors slowing down the peace process. Moscow insists on international recognition of the occupied territories as part of the russian federation, while Ukraine categorically rejects any cession of its land.
Ukraine’s neutrality also remains a central issue. Russia demands that Ukraine remain a non-aligned state and not join any military alliances, particularly NATO. President Zelenskyy, on the other hand, views NATO and EU membership as essential for Ukraine’s long-term security. The issue of sanctions is also highly relevant. The restrictive measures imposed by the Biden administration have had a significant impact on the russian economy, particularly its energy sector and banking system. While the kremlin publicly demands the full removal of sanctions, analysts suggest it may unofficially be open to partial concessions such as restoring financial transactions and lifting restrictions on energy exports.
The humanitarian dimension of the talks is gaining increasing importance. President Zelenskyy emphasized that one of Ukraine’s top priorities is the return of thousands of abducted Ukrainian children, as well as military prisoners, civilians, and journalists.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Trump publicly stated for the first time that the U.S. would participate in providing Ukraine with security guarantees as part of a peace agreement with russia. While he did not disclose specifics, the mere fact that the U.S. is not ruling out support reflects a realistic approach to achieving lasting peace. Trump also stressed that he is not seeking a deal that lasts only two years. His goal is a long-term peace, with an effective deterrence mechanism that would prevent putin from restarting the war once he has rearmed.
For these security guarantees to be effective, U.S. involvement cannot be merely symbolic. It must include intelligence sharing, the possible deployment of additional aircraft in the region, as well as support for rearming Ukraine and strengthening its defense capabilities.
In a Politico article dedicated to the Alaska summit, it is noted that although a ceasefire agreement was not reached, the U.S. achieved an important breakthrough — progress toward offering Ukraine "NATO Article 5-style" security guarantees. Steve Witkoff confirmed that putin had allegedly agreed to such terms.
Meanwhile, Le Monde reports that French President Emmanuel Macron called for stronger sanctions against russia should putin refuse to make concessions in peace talks with Ukraine. Macron emphasized that Trump believes peace is achievable, but if the negotiations fail, sanctions against russia must be expanded.
The diplomatic process surrounding the war in Ukraine remains extremely complex and multilayered. The lack of consensus on key issues continues to hinder the achievement of peace. At the same time, there is a growing recognition that without realistic, long-term, and comprehensive action, the threat of war will remain high.
Amid a rapid run of diplomacy that included talks between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska followed by a White House summit between Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and European leaders, the Russian leader has maintained maximalist conditions for any potential settlement to the bloodiest war in Europe since World War II. Ukraine and Russia remain at an impasse over key issues, including the matter of a ceasefire as negotiations proceed, Russian demands that Ukraine cede territory and security guarantees for a postwar Ukraine.
After the Trump-Putin meeting on Friday in Alaska, which ended early without a deal, Trump said “many points were agreed to” and “very few” are left. After his subsequent meeting with Zelensky, he said peace was “within reach.”
Even if Zelensky and Putin do meet, there is no reason to expect a breakthrough. After all, Russian and Ukrainian negotiators already met twice this year. The second meeting, on June 2, lasted all of an hour and achieved only another prisoner exchange.
If you want to judge Putin’s intentions, ignore his duplicitous words and look at his brutal actions. Just hours before Zelensky arrived at the White House, Russian attacks killed 14 people across Ukraine, including two children in Kharkiv. And hours after Zelensky left the White House, the Russians launched their largest missile and drone attack of the month. By removing, at least for the time being, the threat of greater U.S. sanctions, Putin’s diplomatic offensive is merely creating breathing space for his troops to continue their war of aggression. Thus, the latest peace talks, far from ending the killing, are perpetuating it.
European leaders returned relieved on Tuesday from a damage control mission to the White House after talking President Donald Trump down from pressuring Ukraine and receiving promises of a U.S. role in securing a peace deal with Russia.
With pushback and flattery, the Europeans flanking Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky seemed to wean Trump off the idea of any immediate concessions of Ukrainian land as demanded by Russian President Vladimir Putin when he sat down with Trump in Alaska.
But while they put the onus back on Putin, European leaders said the road to any settlement seems long. They cheered Trump’s openness to security guarantees, even as officials conceded that securing postwar Ukraine would be no simple task, and that they had yet to pin down the exact U.S. role.
A reporter asked Mr. Trump whether he’d rule out U.S. troops as part of a security guarantee to deter further depredations from Vladimir Putin. “There’s going to be a lot of help,” Mr. Trump said. “They are first line of defense because they’re there. They’re Europe. But we’re going to help them out also. We’ll be involved.” The Europeans “want to give protection. They feel very strongly about it, and we’ll help them out with that.”
Mr. Trump offered no specifics and the details will matter. But Mr. Trump conspicuously declined to exclude American support, and this is welcome realism about what it will take to gain a durable peace in Ukraine. Also notable is that Mr. Trump said that he isn’t looking for a peace accord that only lasts two years. He wants something that lasts—which means a deal that offers a credible deterrent for Mr. Putin not to restart the war after he has a chance to rearm.
French President Emmanuel Macron called on Monday, August 18, for stepping up sanctions against Russia if its leader Vladimir Putin does not move forward on peace with Ukraine. "President Trump believes we can get an agreement and believes that President Putin also wants a peace accord," Macron told reporters after talks at the White House. "But if at the end this process is met by refusal, we are also ready to say that we need to increase sanctions."
He pointed to recent secondary sanctions imposed by the Trump administration on India, which has emerged as a major buyer of Russian energy as Western nations cut back due to sanctions following Putin's invasion of Ukraine. The secondary sanctions on India have "had a lot of effects," Macron said.
Special envoy Steve Witkoff says the White House extracted critical wins from its Friday summit with Vladimir Putin in Alaska, even as President Donald Trump failed to walk away with the ceasefire he was loudly advocated for.
Security guarantees offering Ukraine “Article 5-like protections” are the real prize, Witkoff told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Sunday. They’re “game-changing,” he said.
He continued, saying, “We got to an agreement that the United States and other European nations could effectively offer Article 5-like language to cover a security guarantee.”