Skip to content
Home » Alaska Summit Paves the Way for Trump and Putin’s Dangerous Maneuvering Over Venezuela

Alaska Summit Paves the Way for Trump and Putin’s Dangerous Maneuvering Over Venezuela

Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin are meeting in Alaska during a time of considerable uncertainty. Photo: via social media

Guacamaya, August 15, 2025. In Anchorage, Alaska, U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin are participating in a summit that, while officially centered on the war in Ukraine, encompasses a range of geopolitical, historical, and diplomatic elements. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s absence from the meeting intensifies the international tensions and economic sanctions surrounding this event.

What is the Composition of the Delegations?

For the United States, the attendees include:

– President Donald Trump

– Vice President J.D. Vance

– Secretary of State Marco Rubio

– Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent

– Special Envoy Steve Witkoff

For the Russian Federation, the attendees are:

– President Vladimir Putin

– Defense Minister Andrey Belousov

– Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov

– Finance Minister Anton Siluanov

– Presidential Advisor Yuri Ushakov

– Special Envoy Kirill Dmitriev

What Are the Background and Political Context to Consider?

The meeting occurs while many significant diplomatic roles in Washington remain unoccupied. The U.S. Embassy in Moscow has been without a confirmed ambassador since Lynne Tracy stepped down earlier this summer.

In the lead-up to the summit, Trump had a phone conversation with Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, a key ally of Putin, in which he expressed gratitude for the release of an American prisoner. The U.S. leader hinted at a future encounter with Lukashenko. Relations between Moscow and Minsk have grown stronger since the onset of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

What is the Historical Significance of the Location?

The selection of Alaska as the summit venue is intentional. Once part of the Russian Empire, it was sold to the U.S. by Tsar Alexander II in 1867 for $7.2 million—barely two cents an acre. Initially criticized in the U.S., the purchase’s value changed with the Klondike Gold Rush. In Russian nationalist narratives, the sale is often deemed a historical error, and Putin’s presence in what a state TV presenter has called “our Alaska” bolsters his image as a leader striving to restore Russia’s influence globally.

Putin’s visit holds additional significance because he has limited travel since the war in Ukraine began due to international sanctions and an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued against him in 2023. This year, the U.S. had also hosted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who similarly faced an ICC arrest warrant.

Trade and Sanctions

U.S.-Russia trade relations occur within an international framework characterized by numerous and intricate sanctions, especially since the Ukraine conflict escalated in February 2022. The U.S. has imposed measures aimed at crippling Russia’s economic, technological, and military capabilities, isolating it from the global financial system.

Structure and Scope of U.S. Sanctions Against Russia

The sanctions are coordinated with the EU, UK, Canada, Japan, and other allies, although each nation has its own legal structure. Key measures include:

1. Financial and Banking Sanctions

– Exclusion of Russian banks from the SWIFT system.

– Freezing assets of financial institutions and the Russian Central Bank overseas.

– Ban on new U.S. investments in Russia.

2. Commercial and Technological Sanctions

– Restrictions on critical exports in aerospace, energy, semiconductors, and telecommunications.

– Export controls on industrial equipment, electronic components, and advanced software.

– Prohibition on importing Russian oil, gas, and coal.

3. Individual and Corporate Sanctions

– Asset freezes and entry bans for government officials, military leaders, oligarchs, and their families.

– Inclusion of Russian state and private companies on the U.S. Treasury’s SDN list.

4. Secondary Sanctions

– Possible penalties against third-party countries, firms, or banks aiding Russian evasion of sanctions.

Impact on Bilateral Relations

Bilateral trade has plummeted by nearly 90% since 2022, although the U.S. still imported around $3 billion in Russian goods last year. The EU’s import of Russian products dropped by 86% in 2024 compared to early 2022.

U.S. Objectives and Messages

Trump has cautioned Putin about “very severe consequences” if he does not agree to end the war during their discussions. The U.S. president has mentioned that a successful summit could lead to a second trilateral meeting with Zelensky and European leaders “almost instantly.”

Zelensky’s omission from the initial talks was viewed as perilous by the Ukrainian leader, who hoped the summit could facilitate a “just peace.” Before the Alaska meeting, Zelensky connected with French President Emmanuel Macron to align their positions.

Russia’s Objectives and Messages

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has dismissed the possibility of formal agreements during the summit, stressing that the main focus is to address “the most challenging issues” and explore resolutions to the Ukraine conflict.

Moscow’s strategic aim is to normalize relations with Washington, interpreting the summit as a superpower dialogue rather than a Ukraine-centered negotiation. Putin has framed this meeting as an opportunity “to create long-term conditions for peace between our nations, in Europe, and worldwide” without specifying concrete steps to end the ongoing war.

Symbolism and Historical Significance

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov arrived in Anchorage in a peculiar outfit: light blue jeans, a black jacket, and a white sweater emblazoned with the Cyrillic letters “CCCP” (USSR). This homage to the Soviet era evokes Russia’s “golden age” as a superpower during the Cold War, resonating with the Kremlin’s narrative of restoring its former status.

Kirill Dmitriev, Russia’s special envoy, likened the summit to the 1945 Yalta Conference, suggesting that just as that meeting helped stave off another world war, Alaska could avert a third. Likewise, pro-Russian Crimean leader Sergei Aksyonov posited that Trump should visit Crimea to discuss a “new Yalta peace.”

Implications for the Arctic and the Northern Sea Route

Choosing Alaska as the summit location brings strategic implications connected to the Arctic, which is warming at four times the global average, increasing its geopolitical relevance due to energy resources, shipping routes, and military positioning.

Moscow sees the melting ice as a chance to enhance the Northern Sea Route (NSR), a maritime corridor that significantly shortens transit times between Europe and Asia. Russia has invested in updating icebreakers, port facilities, and military bases along its Arctic coast, aiming to make the NSR a practical alternative to the Suez Canal while asserting control over the region.

The U.S., with Alaska serving as its entry point to the Arctic, is wary of these developments. Both the Pentagon and Coast Guard have flagged that growing Russian naval activities—including nuclear submarines and coastal defense systems—threaten free navigation and strategic equilibrium in the area.

Furthermore, both Washington and Moscow have an inherent economic interest in tapping into the region’s estimated reserves of oil, gas, and essential minerals. Any rapprochement could reshape the rules of engagement in a domain historically fraught with tension and where multilateral forums like the Arctic Council have become increasingly fragmented since the Ukraine war.

Space Cooperation: A Possible Revival?

A potential topic for discussion could be the revival of space cooperation, a rare area of mutual understanding amidst past political tensions.

Prior to 2022, the International Space Station (ISS) was emblematic of this collaboration, with NASA astronauts and Roscosmos cosmonauts working seamlessly together. However, the war has obstructed much of this relationship, prompting Russia to plan for an independent orbital station and strengthen ties with partners like China.

If relations thaw somewhat, limited technical cooperation in areas such as manned space missions, Earth observation data sharing, and planetary defense initiatives could be revisited. These areas may align with shared interests focused on safeguarding critical space infrastructure from orbital debris or cyber threats.

Nonetheless, any progress hinges on the trajectory of the Ukraine conflict and the U.S. Congress’s disposition, where resistance to high-profile projects with Russia persists without obvious political concessions. Even introducing the subject in Anchorage could signal that for both nations, space remains a plausible avenue to restore trust.

Where Does Venezuela Stand?

Russia and Venezuela have been exploring alternative methods for bilateral trade in light of Western sanctions, such as:

– Utilizing national or third-country currencies for transactions.

– Utilizing their own or allied shipping routes to bypass Western oversight.

– Trading energy, military, and technological goods and services outside standard financial channels.

These strategies have deepened cooperation between the two nations but have also exposed them to secondary sanctions and international diplomatic pressures. The current world stage is marked by a fragmented order, with ongoing conflicts in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East, and rising tensions in the Asia-Pacific.

Venezuela—representing the Global South—seeks to reintegrate into the global arena while facing U.S. efforts to undermine Nicolás Maduro’s administration.

Venezuela’s position on the Ukraine conflict is particularly relevant, yet often overlooked. Going back to March 2024, *The Sunday Times* reported that Boris Johnson, the former UK prime minister, had interrupted his Dominican Republic vacation for a brief detour to Venezuela to meet Maduro, feeling at home in Caracas.

British media stated that the controversial trip was financed by the investment firm Merlyn Advisors, overseen by Maarten Petermann, though it was communicated to the UK Foreign Office, then run by Johnson’s ally David Cameron.

During the meeting, Johnson stressed the importance of restoring democracy and discussed the contested Essequibo region, claimed by both Venezuela and Guyana, a former British territory with significant oil interests. Venezuela’s support for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was also a point of discussion, despite Caracas officially claiming neutrality. A Johnson spokesperson indicated this trip aimed to assess “potential UK-Venezuela rapprochement.”

Numerous Western nations have engaged with Maduro since the Ukraine conflict began, despite not recognizing him as Venezuela’s legitimate leader since 2018. Recent examples include U.S.-Venezuela dialogue facilitated by Doha and ongoing interactions under both Biden and Trump, allocating U.S. oil firms access back into Venezuela.

One notable moment was U.S. Special Envoy Richard Grenell’s visit to Caracas. The Trump administration displayed two contrasting approaches to Venezuela: Marco Rubio’s “maximum pressure” policy and Grenell’s more pragmatic, negotiation-focused approach.

Days after his visit to Caracas, Johnson traveled to Ukraine to meet Zelensky, whom he had solidly backed during his time in office. Understanding the energy context is key to comprehending the Ukraine conflict, wherein Russia waged an attrition war against NATO, making energy diversification a strategic necessity.

The Essequibo territorial dispute remains a potential ignition point, with U.S. and UK military support for Guyana contrasting against China’s—an ally of Maduro—interests in the region. The G7 has raised concerns over growing tensions here.

The Financial Times previously covered ExxonMobil’s ambitions to consolidate what it falsely claims as “the world’s last petrostate” in Guyana, tapping into oil reserves in the Essequibo’s Atlantic waters, where around 11 billion barrels have been found. China engages through Cnooc, while ExxonMobil pours significant resources into the contested Stabroek block, making Essequibo a potential strategic hotspot near U.S. shores.

In response, Russia has criticized U.S. and UK military backing for Guyana while enhancing its cooperation with Venezuela. Noteworthy, Venezuela acknowledged Russia-backed breakaway regions in Georgia in 2008 but has been cautious regarding Ukraine, not validating Donetsk and Luhansk.

The Ukraine war also affects Venezuela’s energy landscape. Johnson’s discussions in Caracas addressed Venezuela’s stance on the conflict and its energy capacity. The U.S. Treasury’s License No. 44A explicitly limited Russian companies, prohibiting:

1. New investments in Venezuela tied to Russian firms.

2. Transactions related to Russian oil/gas investments in Venezuela.

These restrictions aim to exclude Gazprom and Rosneft—key partners for Maduro—from Venezuela’s energy sector. Western sanctions have struck Gazprom severely, leading to a 30% drop in its revenues in 2023 ($6.9 billion loss), impacting Russia’s war economy.

During Trump’s first term, Russian banks played a vital role in helping Venezuela navigate sanctions. However, this also heightened Venezuela’s vulnerability to Russian financial fluctuations and U.S. diplomatic pressures.

The Trump administration later granted a private license to Chevron, aiming to limit Russian and Chinese advancements in Venezuela’s energy sector. Nonetheless, China remains the sole nation with the capacity to revitalize Venezuela’s oil production, as expressed by Tamara Herrera in *UCAB’s “On Sanctions in Venezuela.”* Even if sanctions linked to Russia were lifted, Maduro wouldn’t instantly regain access to funding for PDVSA, given Rosneft’s ambiguous status amidst Qatari ownership.

Any global agreement would unlikely involve direct negotiations regarding Maduro’s leadership. Broader strategic discussions between Russia and the U.S. extend beyond Venezuela, yet if cooperation between Washington and Moscow increases, it could revive dialogue among Venezuelan factions.

The Trump administration has offered strong support to opposition leader María Corina Machado, while Russia has stood firmly with Maduro. Strategically, this may foster the groundwork for renewed internal negotiations—though this remains a multifaceted issue requiring thorough examination.

Ultimately, the U.S. aims to secure its foothold in Venezuela’s energy sector, restrict Russian earnings, and promote American interests in local oil production amid the ongoing Ukraine war.

France has also seen diplomatic engagement. Macron, alongside Petro and Lula, facilitated 2022-2023 discussions in Paris between the Venezuelan government and opposition to find stability and reintroduce Venezuelan oil into the market. Companies like Maurel et Prom (France), Repsol (Spain), and ENI (Italy) aim to reclaim permits revoked by the Trump administration. The EU, motivated by energy security and wariness of Russia, may discover strategic pathways but lacks the firm stance that the U.S. adopts.

Additional global dynamics add layers of uncertainty:

– Tensions in the Middle East, including Houthi assaults in Yemen and the Red Sea.

– The Zangezur Corridor agreement in the Caucasus, diminishing Russian influence while enhancing Turkey and the U.S.

– The conflict in Libya, placing pressure on European energy supplies.

– Russia’s naval base in Sudan, patrolling the Red Sea amid rising tensions regarding Western oil shipments.

Amid this complicated backdrop, reaching a peace deal in Ukraine could have profound implications for Venezuela. However, energy disputes, territorial conflicts, and geopolitical rivalries necessitate careful consideration before any predictions about Venezuela’s stability or reintegration can be made.

As always, the answer extends beyond a straightforward yes or no—requiring in-depth analysis to capitalize on this international moment for the benefit of the Venezuelan populace.