{"id":1279671,"date":"2025-08-13T21:26:28","date_gmt":"2025-08-13T18:26:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/prm.ua\/meeting-in-alaska-should-we-expect-a-breakthrough-in-the-negotiations\/"},"modified":"2025-08-14T05:40:59","modified_gmt":"2025-08-14T02:40:59","slug":"meeting-in-alaska-should-we-expect-a-breakthrough-in-the-negotiations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/prm.ua\/en\/meeting-in-alaska-should-we-expect-a-breakthrough-in-the-negotiations\/","title":{"rendered":"OSINT: Russian Forces Intensify Push Toward Dobropillya"},"content":{"rendered":"

Source: Author’s Facebook<\/a> page<\/em><\/p>\n

The Alaska meeting between the U.S. and Russian presidents was a pure coincidence, sparked by Witkoff\u2019s \u2018broken phone\u2019 and Trump\u2019s drive to continue his self-styled \u2018peacemaking series\u2019 by seeking an end to the war in Ukraine.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Let\u2019s sum it up:<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    No one knows how this meeting will turn out<\/strong>, as it was unplanned. Of course, Putin might reread his notes on medieval history, recalling how the Polovtsy searched for Russian traces near Kyiv a thousand years ago.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Most likely, the purpose of the meeting is to test Putin\u2019s readiness for negotiations, as described by Donald Trump and Marco Rubio. According to the U.S. president, the first two minutes will be decisive in determining the next steps.<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. \n

      A breakthrough should not be expected<\/strong>. The Americans themselves state this clearly.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Typically, leaders\u2019 meetings are carefully prepared in advance: technical details are agreed upon, and preparatory work is conducted. During the meeting, only fundamental issues are discussed. The Alaska meeting is completely unconventional because no one knows what will be on the agenda. Expectations are therefore minimal. The only risk is that Trump\u2019s desire to \u201cend the war at any cost\u201d could result in Ukraine paying the price\u2014and that price could be unacceptable.<\/p>\n

      \u00a0 \u00a03. Since neither Ukraine nor Europe is participating in the Alaska negotiations, any agreements on territorial concessions would be meaningless. Only Russia and Ukraine are responsible for implementing any agreements. If Ukraine is absent, the subject of bargaining could involve only Russian concessions or arrangements made with Ukraine.<\/p>\n

      The worst-case scenario for us is that Putin convinces Trump to stop supporting Ukraine, particularly with weapons funded by Europeans. It is currently unclear what Putin could offer that would be valuable enough for Trump to agree. Just a month ago, the Americans persuaded Europe to significantly increase defense budgets and spend those funds on purchasing U.S. weapons. It is therefore unclear why Washington would refuse European funding.<\/p>\n

      Over the past week, we have heard numerous statements from European leaders. It is important that they not only support Ukraine, but also explicitly back Trump\u2019s peacekeeping mission regarding a ceasefire. Given Donald Trump\u2019s commercial approach, it is highly unlikely he would reject European funds.<\/p>\n

      In other words, for Putin to force Trump to abandon arms supplies to Ukraine, he would need to offer something extremely valuable.<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      \u00a0 \u00a04. The word \u201cArctic\u201d is being mentioned frequently. Some suggest that Putin might offer the Americans the opportunity to develop the Arctic basin and extract oil.<\/p>\n

      However, these are entirely incomparable propositions. The Arctic is not about business. Yes, there are abundant natural resources, but extraction is extremely difficult and expensive, which is why no one has dared invest there in the past 50 years. In the Arabian deserts, it is enough to \u201cstick\u201d a pipe in the sand and oil flows. In the Arctic, one must practically start from scratch\u2014build polar cities, design icebreakers, and develop the necessary infrastructure. Economically, this would only make sense at oil prices of $150\u2013200 per barrel. Moreover, in the context of the \u201cgreen transition,\u201d as the world gradually moves away from liquid fuels, such projects make even less sense.<\/p>\n

      Thus, the Arctic is driven not by economics or profit, but by geopolitics. And the U.S. has never lacked geopolitical projects.<\/p>\n

      In other words, the only thing Putin could \u201csell\u201d to Trump with real value is a ceasefire in Ukraine.<\/strong><\/p>\n

      \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a05. Many interpretations have circulated regarding the phrase \u201cterritorial exchange.\u201d There is ample room for speculation\u2014the British newspaper The Times<\/em> even published four illustrative maps.<\/p>\n

      I rely on what the Americans themselves say: no agreement will involve Ukraine\u2019s surrender. Kyiv rejected proposals to hand over unoccupied territories to Russia a few months ago as frivolous.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n\t\t