A much-anticipated summit — seen by some as constructive, by others as disappointing — has sparked a wave of sharp reactions. Beyond the political leaders, international and Ukrainian media offered critical perspectives on the Alaska meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.
According to The New York Times, the U.S. President and the Russian leader appeared as friends, but no deal on Ukraine was reached. The paper noted that Trump gave Putin a warm reception, effectively ending his international isolation. Still, Putin refused to close the conflict.
“Plenty of fanfare, little result,” was the conclusion of The Washington Post, which highlighted that the summit began with a red carpet welcome but ended sooner than expected, with a gloomy outcome. The Financial Times was blunt: “Trump fails to secure a deal on Ukraine at the Alaska summit.”
The harshest words, however, came from the Ukrainian press.
“A useless and disgusting summit — Putin was treated like a king,” wrote the Kyiv Independent. In its fiery editorial, the meeting was described as a disgrace. “Trump didn’t get what he wanted, but Putin did. The Russian dictator was glowing from the moment he stepped off his plane onto U.S. soil.”
The paper further contrasted the event with the humiliating reception of Volodymyr Zelenskyy during his February visit to the White House. While the Ukrainian president was subjected to “public humiliation,” Putin was indulged and coddled.
Both episodes, Kyiv Independent argued, were shameful. The editorial concluded that Trump fails to grasp a crucial point: “Putin doesn’t see Ukraine in transactional terms — he sees it in messianic terms. At its core, he wants Ukraine for Russia. Period.”
