Hasty celebration by pro-Russian propagandists after Putin-Trump meeting

Pro-Russian propagandists are celebrating victory after the meeting between Putin and Trump, even though he said that there is no deal until there is a deal, i.e. nothing has been signed, let alone the capitulation of Ukraine. This is just the beginning of the negotiations, and Trump has only made vague statements about it. And if Putin won, he should hold a parade in Kyiv, not negotiate. The meeting came after Trump’s ultimatum and his sending of nuclear submarines to Russia, which could have forced it to sit down at the negotiating table. They also say that Ukraine’s position is irrelevant and that it is up to Putin and Trump to decide for it, who will divide it, but it is now joining the negotiations and deciding on possible concessions itself–by refusing to make them

 

Author: Vangel Bashevski

 

The peace process for Ukraine has just begun and final decisions have not yet been made, so this text reflects the situation at the time of writing, but various changes and surprises may soon follow.

The hottest topic right now is the historic meeting between US President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, which took place in Alaska on August 15, 2025. But the meeting is historic simply because relations between the US and Russia have long been tense, not because any agreement of historical significance was signed.

After the meeting, Trump made only brief and general statements about it without specifying anything, and pro-Russian propagandists presented it as a “victory for Russia” and a “defeat for Ukraine,” as if its capitulation had been signed there.

Although Trump expressed satisfaction with the meeting and stated that he had found understanding with Putin on many issues, it lasted much shorter than planned and even the formal lunch was canceled, which may not be the most important thing, but still speaks to a less than successful meeting.

There were no revelations at the press conference that followed, and Trump emphasized that there is no deal until there is a deal, i.e. nothing has been signed, so many things are unclear and “up in the air.”

Trump made something more specific later, when he conveyed to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky Russian demands for territorial concessions in Donbass or Crimea in exchange for peace, but that is nothing new, and Zelensky rejected it and did not sign any capitulation.

Trump can punish Zelensky for his intransigence by cutting off military aid, etc., but the question whether that will happen remains. We have already seen this when Zelensky was publicly reprimanded in the middle of the White House on February 28, 2025, after which his aid was temporarily cut off, but he diplomatically managed that complex situation, and he is still fighting.

What will happen next–we do not know, but if Trump breaks Zelensky’s resistance, it will certainly not be a military victory for Russia and the achievement of all its goals, which are more ambitious, but rather a consolation prize for Russia received on a platter from Trump. He is far more important here than Putin.

In fairness, some analysts consider the meeting with Trump a certain victory for Putin, in the sense that he managed to get the process to not start with a ceasefire, but to go directly to a final peace agreement, which gives Putin a free hand to continue waging war while negotiations are ongoing without being punished with the harsher sanctions that Trump threatened him with.

The Alaska Summit came after Trump lost patience with Putin and his massacres in Ukraine, and gave him an ultimatum to sit down for negotiations within 50 days, which was then shortened to 10-12 days, under threat of harsher sanctions. This suggests that Putin may have gotten scared and caved in, and that’s how he ended up at the negotiating table.

Let’s also add that in early August, Trump sent nuclear-armed submarines towards Russia in response to some of its threatening statements.

Putin is not in a superior and victorious position as many think, and if he were, he would not negotiate, but would hold parades in the middle of Kyiv (or in the middle of Washington or Brussels).

Putin is also credited with a propaganda victory, in the sense that he emerged from the isolation he was placed in by the West. This was extremely unpleasant for Ukraine, but it cannot be said that it was defeated in the war, and we will elaborate on this further.

 

SPECIFIC EXAMPLES FROM OUR WEBSITE

 

On Russia’s alleged “victory”

Commenting on the Putin-Trump meeting, a pro-Russian Facebook post says (excerpts):

Russia is the winner in the Ukrainian war–NATO is the big loser

There are only two superpowers in the world that can solve world problems through dialogue with each other.

In the future, Russia’s influence will only grow.

Another Facebook user says the following:

Murica and Gayropa have OFFICIALLY lost the war in Ukraine!

The same author says this in another post (quoted as in the original and without corrections):

Russia OFFICIALLY won the war!!! This is just the signing of the capitulation of the West today!

Russia cannot be the winner in the Ukrainian war, firstly, because it is not over, and secondly, because Russia did not achieve the set and declared goals, which were:

• Denazification, i.e. the capture of Kyiv and the overthrow and lustration of the government there, which the Russians falsely present as “neo-Nazi”;
• Demilitarization, i.e. destruction of Ukraine’s military potential and its weakening.

However, Russia was defeated in the battle for Kyiv in February-April 2022, and Ukraine became more militarized with modern Western weapons and entered Putin’s home, the Kursk region of Russia, part of which the Ukrainians held for months, and even Moscow has long been a target of their drones.

This has undermined Russia’s status as a superpower, and it is not even a power on a diplomatic level. Russia played no role in the recent peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia, brokered by Trump, and for Russia these are nearby areas that it has always wanted to dominate.

Russia alienated the Armenians by hindering them in the recent war against Azerbaijan, and it alienated them by shooting down a passenger plane on December 25, 2024. Russia has influence mainly in developing countries like Niger and Burkina Faso, and it is precisely these countries that dominate among the BRICS candidates, which, without insulting any country, is not exactly a geopolitical success.

The US and NATO are not losers in the Ukrainian war because they are not participating in it. Battles between NATO and Russia have not been recorded, and if that had happened, Russia should have declared war on NATO and severed diplomatic relations with its members, but it did not.

And if the post believes that NATO was defeated by not expanding to Ukraine, there is no consensus in NATO to accept Ukraine anyway. France and Germany blocked its entry back in 2008. In exchange for Ukraine not joining NATO, two other members–Finland and Sweden–joined the pact, so Russia is actually the loser here.

And, although Ukraine will not join the pact now, it may receive security guarantees similar to those in Article 5 of the NATO Treaty, so that if it is attacked again, the United States will help it. In such a case, Russia can hardly embark on a future annexation of Ukraine, which is a loss for Russia.

On September 30, 2022, Russia illegally annexed the following Ukrainian regions: Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia, and Kherson, but it never fully occupied them, so this annexation was hasty and largely on paper.

Putin never captured Zaporozhye, although according to the constitution and law he counts it as a “city in Russia,” which also applies to Slavyansk and Kramatorsk in the Donbass, and he captured Kherson, but lost it on November 11, 2022.

From Russia’s perspective, it has no control over its own territory and can only occupy small and unknown places to the world, such as Kurakhovo, Bakhmut, or Avdeevka. The question is whether it is a victory for Russia to occupy these small places after months or years of fighting with huge casualties, and whether it is a victory for it to destroy and massacre them and consider them its own.

Russia cannot take everything it claims, so it is asking the Ukrainians to cede it to it in exchange for peace, which they refuse, and there is not much it can do about it, so it is not clear what kind of “victory” its supporters are celebrating.

 

Ukraine is not excluded from the peace process, and neither are the Europeans

The above also undermines the claim of pro-Russian propagandists that Ukraine’s opinion is irrelevant and that only Putin and Trump will decide for it. However, Trump has announced that Ukraine will join the negotiations, and although he believes that it must make territorial concessions, he leaves the final decision to Ukraine, which has already expressed its opinion on this—and negatively.

It is said that the negotiations will grow into trilateral ones, with the inclusion of Zelensky, and on August 18, 2025, he had a meeting with Trump, which was also attended by European politicians: Ursula Von Der Leyen , Emmanuel Macron, Friedrich Merz, Giorgia Meloni, and Alexander Stubb. This also undermines the pro-Russian narrative that the Europeans are completely marginalized from the negotiations.

The narrative is also spreading that Zelensky’s participation in the negotiations is just a formality and that Trump will dictate what he should do, but, as we have already seen, this is not the case, at least not for now.

 

On the alleged division of Ukraine

Pro-Russian propagandists are also spreading defeatism in Ukraine and among its supporters that Putin and Trump will divide its territory between themselves, but given the above, that scenario is unlikely. An example of this is the following post:

Trump-Putin talks on Ukraine are exactly what happened to Macedonia in 1913

Ukraine has lost the war that should never have started, it will be divided

The authors of such posts draw parallels between the Bucharest Treaty of 1913 and the negotiations between Putin and Trump, but there is something specific here. These authors are outraged by the division of Macedonia, but they do not mind Ukraine being divided, thus demonstrating double standards.

But, as much as the division in 1913 was a historical trauma for many in our country, there was no Macedonian state then, and Ukraine now exists as a state, it is widely recognized and has its own army, diplomacy, and supporters in the developed world, so it would hardly be dismembered without anyone reacting.

Something like this happened to Ukraine in the more distant past, when it was divided between Russia, Poland, or other neighbors (read about the Truce of Andrusovo from 1667 and the Treaty of Riga from 1921), but the situation is different now.

For what its worth, Ukraine does not have control over about 20 percent of its territory and the US is demanding that it face that reality, but there is no indication that it is also demanding recognition of the Russian annexation.

According to the peace plan, those territories, just as before, would only be under Russian control de facto, but not de jure and not forever–as American negotiator Keith Kellogg says. It is not a plan to dismember Ukraine, although it does imply temporary concessions.

The fact that these territories will not be sealed as part of Russia leaves the possibility that Ukraine will regain them at some more favorable future. The already mentioned Azerbaijan regained control over the Nagorno-Karabakh region after as many as 30 years.

A new and rather unpleasant moment for Ukrainians is Trump’s post on his famous social network from August 18, 2025. In that post, Trump suggests that they forget about Crimea, which may mean a request to recognize that annexation. But Trump is vague, stingy with words, and known for his scandalous outbursts, and Zelensky rejected this suggestion anyway, as we have already mentioned.

There is no agreement until there is an agreement, Ukraine has not signed any capitulation and is not just a passive observer in this whole thing, and what will happen next remains to be seen.

 

 

All comments and remarks regarding this and other Vistinomer articles, correction and clarification requests as well as suggestions for fact-checking politicians’ statements and political parties’ promises can be submitted by using this form