Andy Semotiuk
Aug 10, 2025
CEED
Putin’s claim that ‘all of Ukraine is ours’ raises fears of appeasement at the Alaska talks.
President Donald Trump repeatedly set — and missed — his own deadlines for ending the Russia–Ukraine war. He claimed he could achieve peace “within 24 hours” of taking office, later shifting to 48 hours, two weeks, 30 days, and 50 days, each tied to threats of new sanctions against Moscow. None produced a ceasefire, underscoring the gap between Trump’s self-image as a dealmaker and the geopolitical genocidal realities he appears not to grasp.
Trump’s Failure To Understand The War
Further evidence of Trump’s failure to understand the realities of the war emerged when he blamed Ukraine — the victim — for the conflict, belittled President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a White House meeting, and ignored the fact that this is the most significant war in Europe since the end of World War II, not to mention the mounting casualties of Ukrainian military and innocent civilians with each passing day. Since that White House meeting, Russia has intensified its attacks on civilian infrastructure in Ukraine. The fact that Trump is willing to treat Putin as his equal despite Putin’s actions in the invasion — relentlessly bombing non-military targets and harming innocent civilians — demonstrates a lack of tact, judgment, and understanding of the conflict.
Russia’s Plan For Ukraine
In a 3 April 2022 op-ed published by RIA Novosti and authored by Timofey Sergeytsev, the piece calls for the “full destruction of Ukraine as a state” and the erasure of Ukrainian national identity under the guise of “denazification.” It explicitly states that Ukraine’s national elite must be “liquidated,” and that remaining Ukrainians should be assimilated into “Russian civilization,” using forced labour, imprisonment, or the death penalty to achieve this outcome. Former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev has amplified this rhetoric, describing Ukraine as a Nazi state that must be “eradicated,” with its collapse paving the way for “an open Eurasia from Lisbon to Vladivostok” (Kyiv Independent, RIA Novosti).
In complete alignment with this thinking, at the June 2025 St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, Putin declared, “all of Ukraine is ours,” adding that “wherever a Russian soldier sets foot is ours” and framing Russians and Ukrainians as “one people” (Atlantic Council, YouTube). These remarks strongly reinforce Putin’s vision of Ukraine as inherently bound to — and ultimately subsumed by — Russia. Putin’s indictment by the International Criminal Court for the mass abduction of Ukrainian children is itself a genocidal act. That indictment makes the Alaska meeting even more extraordinary: America is about to host an accused war criminal on its territory, without consequence.
The Risk Of Repeating A Fatal Flaw
The Kremlin spreads propaganda and deliberately ignores the fact that peace in Ukraine would be immediate if Russian forces withdrew from Ukrainian territory. Without Ukraine and Europe in Alaska to remind Putin of this reality, any deal reached there risks repeating the same fatal flaw of appeasement, such as in Munich in 1938: deciding the fate of a nation without that nation’s consent.
A Time For Implementation – Not Another ‘Peace Agreement”
This is not the time for a new “peace agreement” with Russia. That has been attempted — and broken — too many times before. Russia has already signed and violated the United Nations Charter, the Helsinki Final Act, the Budapest Memorandum, and the Minsk agreements. Putin and Trump have ignored Budapest altogether, even though it is the most damaging: in 1994, Ukraine gave up the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal in exchange for a Russian promise to respect its sovereignty and a U.S. guarantee to defend it.
It’s true that Trump was in office from 2017 to 2021 and did nothing to stop the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine. Now, instead of admitting that, he blames others — and risks consolidating Russia’s gains once again.
What Needs To Be Emphasized
During discussions in Alaska, the point should be emphasized that if Putin refuses to agree to a ceasefire, NATO must immediately admit Ukrainian territories not under Russian control to stop Russia’s illegal occupation of Ukraine. NATO has welcomed Finland and Sweden without Russian backlash and tolerates Turkey and Hungary’s abuses without repercussions.
Why Territorial Exchanges Are Not Appropriate
Arguments supporting territorial exchanges for peace disregard important precedents. Senator Lindsey Graham’s recent assertion that a territorial exchange between Russia and Ukraine would mirror the creation of East and West Germany after World War II ignores a crucial distinction: Germany was defeated, and the two Germanys resulted from the Allied division of the defeated nation. This is not the case here. Similarly, unlike in Korea, Russia, as the aggressor, signed a pledge to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity — a promise it has broken.
How Things Should Be Settled
The Alaska talks should also clarify: Russia will see sanctions gradually lifted, economic links expanded, and possibly a route toward European integration — but only if it fully honours its previous commitments, including a timetable for complete withdrawal. If Moscow refuses, the repercussions must be immediate: the over $300 billion in frozen Russian assets should be transferred to Ukraine, and U.S. tariffs should be applied to China, Brazil, and other nations funding Russia through oil purchases, with replacement supplies supplied by the U.S., Canada, and Middle Eastern producers.
Russia already controls more territory than any other country on Earth. This war is not about land; it is about destroying a people. The city of Pokrovsk, under relentless Russian attack for over a year, remains in Ukrainian hands because its citizens refuse to yield — proof that Ukrainians will not accept a deal that trades their survival for the illusion of peace.
Failure Will Be Remembered As Trump’s Munich
If Trump fails in Alaska, it will be remembered as Trump’s Munich: a moment when, like Chamberlain in 1938, he misunderstood diplomacy for appeasement, encouraging the aggressor and weakening the alliances defending the free world. Since 2014, 11 years of war have claimed hundreds of thousands of lives in Ukraine. To reach an agreement forcing Ukraine to give up land they fought and died for, especially when Russia, the aggressor, is involved—despite the Budapest Memorandum guaranteeing Ukraine’s sovereignty from Russia, the U.S., the U.K., and supported by France and China—would be a shameful act of appeasement.
The stakes are incredibly high — for Ukraine, for Europe, and the United States.
Andy J. Semotiuk is a U.S. and Canadian immigration attorney with Pace Law Firm in Toronto. A former United Nations correspondent stationed in New York, Mr. Semotiuk is a Senior Advisor to the Centre for Eastern European Democracy and a contributor to Forbes. A former President of the Canada Ukraine Foundation, Mr. Semotiuk has written four books and is a human rights activist.