Photo: Florian Lisi Pexels
By Citizen of Europe · 10 August 2025
The Alaska summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin is set for 15 August. For now, it’s planned as a bilateral meeting. The White House says a trilateral format with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is “open”, but as of today there’s no guarantee Ukraine will be at the table.
That uncertainty has triggered a rare display of unity across Europe.
Europe draws its line
EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas told reporters in Brussels that “any agreement must include Ukraine and the EU, because this war is not just about Ukraine’s future — it is about Europe’s security architecture.” According to Reuters, Kallas will convene EU foreign ministers to align the bloc’s approach ahead of the talks.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has also warned that any settlement requiring advance territorial concessions by Ukraine would run against the principles of the UN Charter.
In Kyiv, President Zelenskyy welcomed the support but was blunt: “The end of the war must be fair. Decisions about Ukraine without Ukraine will not be accepted.”
Historical context — and why it matters
- 1994 Budapest Memorandum — Ukraine surrendered its nuclear arsenal in exchange for security assurances, including from Russia. Those assurances collapsed with Crimea’s annexation and the 2022 invasion.
- 2014 Minsk agreements — Intended to halt fighting in eastern Ukraine; weak enforcement left key provisions disputed and results limited.
These precedents explain why Kyiv and its European allies view exclusion from the Alaska talks as both a strategic and legal red line.
Legal and political stakes
Under international law — notably the UN Charter and the Helsinki Final Act — sovereign states have the right to territorial integrity and political independence. Bypassing Ukraine in talks about its own territory would raise questions about the legitimacy of any resulting agreement and its compliance with those principles.
EU unity — and its limits
EU foreign policy often fractures, but this time capitals from Tallinn to Paris are speaking in near-unison. Baltic states and Poland are the loudest, warning that allowing Russia and the U.S. to define Ukraine’s future alone would embolden further aggression. Berlin and Paris, while backing inclusion, are also discussing tangible measures — from security guarantees to reconstruction funding — to strengthen Ukraine’s negotiating position.
What’s known about the Alaska summit
Media reports suggest the agenda may include ceasefire terms, prisoner exchanges, and possible easing of certain sanctions on Russia in exchange for troop withdrawals. Neither Moscow nor Washington has confirmed these details, and both are keeping negotiations deliberately opaque.
Ukrainian officials say they are preparing counter-proposals to present directly to both the U.S. and Russia before the meeting. Kyiv has stated that any agreement reached without its involvement will be considered non‑binding from its perspective.
Why Europe can’t sit this out
- Security — Excluding Ukraine would weaken NATO’s deterrence posture and undermine European security.
- Precedent — Accepting a deal without Ukraine’s consent risks eroding norms on sovereignty and territorial integrity.
- Credibility — The EU’s self‑image as a defender of the rules‑based order will be judged by its actions now.
Disclaimer
This article is based on public statements by EU, NATO, and Ukrainian officials as reported by major outlets (Reuters, The Guardian, WSJ). Details of the Alaska summit are subject to change and have not been formally confirmed by all parties. Legal references are provided for context and are not judicial determinations.
Sources
- Reuters — reporting on EU/NATO backing for Ukraine’s inclusion and Kallas convening EU foreign ministers (Aug 10, 2025).
- Reuters — White House says trilateral format with Zelenskyy is “open” for Alaska meeting (Aug 10, 2025).
- The Guardian — coverage of Zelenskyy’s remarks welcoming European backing (Aug 10, 2025).
- Background: Budapest Memorandum (1994); Minsk agreements (2014) — official texts and reputable summaries.
Tags: Ukraine, EU, NATO, Trump, Putin, Alaska Peace Talks, International Law, European Security
Truth isn’t free. Coffee isn’t either. We’ll take both.
About the Author
