Details of post-summit call were leaked in which US president supports plan for Kyiv to give up Donbas region

Donald Trump will back a plan to cede unoccupied Ukrainian territory to Russia to secure an end to the war between the two countries, it was reported on Saturday, after details of his post-summit call with European leaders leaked out.

Trump told European leaders that he believed a peace deal could be negotiated if the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, agreed to give up the Donbas region, which Russian invaders have not been able to seize in over three years of fighting, the New York Times reported, citing to two senior European officials.

Two sources with direct knowledge of the talks in Alaska told the Guardian that Putin demanded Ukraine withdraw from Donbas, which is made up of the Donestk and Luhansk regions, as a condition for ending the war, but offered Trump a freeze along the remaining frontline.

top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 81 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Next Putin will claim Alaska used to be Russian, and should be handed back.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    There's some nutjobs in the Duma who have already said that. Though this should be taken the same way as when some nutjob in the US House says something. Probably nothing will come of it, but occasionally, it does.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 74 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    Doesn’t much matter, Zelensky has already said that’s a non-starter and their constitution forbids it anyway.

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Got a translated source? That’d be a really interesting constitution

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago

    In rejecting Mr. Trump’s proposal, Mr. Zelensky invoked Ukraine’s Constitution, which states that the Ukrainian territory is indivisible and inviolable. “The answer to Ukraine’s territorial question is already in the Constitution of Ukraine,” Mr. Zelensky said. “No one will step back from this, nor will anyone be able to.”

    https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/09/world/europe/zelensky-trump-ukraine-russia.html

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    None of these demands are remotely acceptable to European leaders, either. Donbas is the part the headlines focus on, but the security guarantees sought by Russia are more egregious, given they would leave Ukraine totally defenseless.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -20 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    Constitution doesn't matter much when your invader is stronger than you

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    stronger than you

    lmao, 3 years and the great superpower once thought equal to the United States can't win the war they started. Give me a break.

    USA was stronger than Vietnam and they still lost. USSR was stronger than Afghanistan and they still lost.

    Clearly strength isn't everything. Russia just needs to relearn this lesson they forgot - a determined foe can't be beaten with brute strength alone.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    lmao, 3 years and the great superpower once thought equal to the United States can't win the war they started

    Nobody in the right mind though russia nowhere near usa power

    USA was stronger than Vietnam and they still lost. USSR was stronger than Afghanistan and they still lost

    If russia was losing there wouldn't be discussion about ukraine giving up some land but don't get me wrong i don't think they will control those lands forever. No occupation is eternal

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    If russia was losing there wouldn’t be discussion about ukraine giving up some land

    You might have some semblance of a point if Zelenskyy and Putin were the ones having this negotiation, but the only two people seriously discussing this are Trump (a moron and a traitor) and Putin (the guy currently losing).

    Why does Russia want peace so badly if they could just win at any time? Believe me, dipshits like you have been flooding my DMs for 3 years saying Russia is only a few weeks away from crushing Ukraine and I love nothing more than setting up reminders to come back and taunt you when Ukraine is still here, still fighting, and not willing to take some shitty deal that Trump the Traitor and Putin decided on themselves behind closed doors.

    So tell me, how much longer before Russia wins this conflict? Can't wait for your next big prediction Nostradumbass. I'll be sure to save it and come back to make fun of you just like all the others. Nothing else makes me feel more superior.

    You are right about one thing, though. No occupation is eternal. The Russian invaders will be expelled from Ukraine eventually.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    You are insulting me just because i disagree with you about who has the upper hand in the war although i support ukraine and i agree that morally ukraine shouldn't give up it's land just like palestinians also do? . You piece of trash. Learn some manner

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    You can disagree all you like, but facts are facts. Ukraine is not losing, Russia is not winning.

    If you woke up tomorrow and started saying "I disagree, the sky is not blue it is red." people would rightly treat you like a fucking moron. Same here. Fuck your feelings.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Luckily then that in this case the invader looks weaker. Only thing they seem to be able to do is parrot ”but muh nukes” in all negotiations. If China would drop their support, Russia would be toast. It’s the only thing keeping this conflict alive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Is china support to russian invasion that big compared to nato and the usa support to ukraine? I think ukraine will lose some territory temporarly. No military occupation is eternal

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    The crucial difference is that China does it covertly, and partly through its satellites like N-Korea. Western support is open, and frankly the right thing to do in the face of aggressive invasion.

    Eternal is a difficult term, but in Russia’s case they never cede anything except in the face of absolute catastrophe, like the soviet collapse was. For instance, Finland has not gotten any of the territories taken from it back, and will not unless Russia happens to dissolve into its states. And those areas are mostly turned into wasteland by now which will be the fate on Donbas too if they get it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Treaties dont matter when your enemy doesnt respect them,

    Russias conditions for peace are surrender, and surrender is death. The Russian army has from day 1, displayed that their intention is ethnic cleansing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 47 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 39 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    I don't seem to remember anyone other than Trump appointing Trump the lead deal negotiator for this, people would be losing their brains of Xi Jinping or Kier Starmer randomly started saying they were negotiating a ceasfire between Russia and Ukraine, Trump starts trying to do and it's all "sure let's give him a crack at it" regardless of the ridiculous outcomes of his meetings with either Putin or Zelinsky.. I've seen toddlers with better negotiating skills than this demented fool

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    It ain't his tho?

    This is like selling someone else's car to a third party.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    He who drinks with the enemy while his ally bleeds is no hero but a fool. You grant him honor while he seeks to burn your and your ally’s home. No word of peace holds meaning while his sword is still raised against those who stand with you.

    Install troops in Ukraine and show Putin already god damn it. That makes putin mad? Good that will make EU more unified. And its not like putin is gonna drop nuclear bombs cause thats suicide :) So bring him to his knees.

  • source
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    who the fuck does he think he is to "negotiate" ceding someone else's territory? (I'm not expecting any answers, the oompa loompa simply defies all logic)

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    something something, Alpha country, Beta country, Having cards, not having cards.

    In all seriousness. these are people who have been parroting the same Kremlin lies that were confidentley asserting that Ukraine was already defeated like 1 month in and that everything after that was just prolonged suffering. These people are either Cowards, or Complicit. or both.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    What the hell do you expect when two criminals meet. Fuck Vlad and and his orange sock puppet. The EU and Ukraine already know they will have to contain the Russians without the MAGAt fuckers.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Trump is an imbecile. His grave is going to be a gender neutral bathroom for the rest of human history.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Oh so we negotiate with and reward terrorists now? Because they aren't going to stop here any more than they stopped with Crimea.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    To be fair, we always have. Despite it being said that we don't, that's always been bullshit. It's said so terrorists think that they can't be rewarded for their actions, but almost every time they try to negotiate we do, which is probably a good thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago*

    European intervention is looking like the only option now. because America is a captured state. there are only bad options now. and Europe is more than a year behind reality,

    they sat on their hands hoping Kamala would win, and that they'd be allowed to continue offshoring their own defense matters to America, she didnt

    so they sat on their hands hoping Trump wouldn't be who everyone thought he would be, He was exactly what everyone thought he'd be.

    so they sat on their hands hoping he would change with time. He didn't, he accelerated his agenda and threw kerosone on the world by Parroting Putin, advocating Bibi, and Bombing Iran.

    So they sat on their hands hoping he'd have a change of heart. And he rolled out the red carpet for the most honored guest, VVP.

    Trump is an Ally of the Russian Mafia, Article 5 is already useless in terms of America, America wont go to war with Russia even if a KAB landed in Berlin tonight. Europe ought to consider their choices ahead.

    Option 1 > Stop Bleating at America, Stop insisting that America Negotiate on Ukraines behalf in a specific way, and show some fucking teeth, and prepare for war.

    Option 2 > Keep bleating at America, and accept Russia controls your politics now, and probably watch as your alliance disintegrates in 3 years when a military conflict breaks out in Latvia and no one wants to go to war with Russia.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    This’ll be the second time they’ve taken territory from Ukraine and gotten away with it. They’ll probably take Belarus once that dictator dies, and they’ll eventually take Moldova since they already control part of it. They’ll keep trying to take all of Ukraine until it happens.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Belarus is already taken. Fully.

    It benefits Russia to keep Belarus as a phoney, pretend sovereign state because its another vote and voice in international matters, it lends legitimacy to their arguments when they're at a stage like the UN and fighting with whomever, to have a bunch of warlord states voting alongside them.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Without any guarantees for peace, like joining NATO, any peace agreement isn't worth the paper it's written on. Putin will demand such things won't happen and Trump will immediately agree.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Zelenskyy says NO. So does EU

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Neither of them have the resources to continue the fight. This was always on America's dime, because national security had been outsourced to private American businesses

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago

    To be fair, appeasement worked quite well in the 1930s...

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago

    Go fuck yourself with an umbrella, cheeto

  • source
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    It’s comically and frustratingly obvious that his “ideas” are simply “whatever the last guy he talked to said”

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yup, upcoming summit with Zelenskyy and the EU, and his tone will change after that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    No, Trumps team will insist on going forward with the deal they arranged with Vlad. Europe (which includes Ukraine) will say fuck that, and team Trump will then use it as political ammo to justifiy more tarriffs and more energy into the Asia pivot. IE they will say they're pulling out and leaving Russia to have its fun.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Okay, well, the last time I made this joke it came true, so I'm going to throw some salt over my shoulder after I say it, but how about instead of that, we just give Russia about 20,000 square miles of Alaska. We can start with the entirety of the Aleutian Island chain (about 6,800 sq. miles), and then work out some chunk of the mainland for the rest. That seems reasonable.

    And if that does come true, then by God I'm going to go out and buy a lottery ticket.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (19 children)

    So I think I missed something? Why is Trump thinking he has a say in this?

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Since if Ukraine don't listen, US will cut off military aid.

    Which unfortunately, Ukraine need since no one else can provide the numbers and TACO would likely even block EU and AU from buying US weapons if they were intended for Ukraine.

    Meanwhile he's giving away Alaska to Putin.

    It was obvious three days ago, but it's painfully obvious now why Trump has initiated quasi martial law in DC.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    If he actually gave Alaska to Russia, the Republican majority in the Senate would be down to one seat. The House is a little harder to quantify, because Alaska has one seat that would be reaportioned somewhere, but it wouldn't help their thin House majority much, either.

    Also, I'm pretty sure Alaska would say fuck you, we're an independent nation now. Russia could do fuck all about it. Their military is already at the breaking point, they don't have a lot of capacity to land equipment across the sea, Alaska has a very well armed population, and the geography is ideal for insurgent tactics.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Because the usa is still the major military power and he is the president now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

    One angle of analysis is, that this war is a proxy war between the world‘s hegemon and a state that does not want to be subjugated to their rule, but rather insists on their own sovereignty.

    The power balance in the world tipped in the (now) hegemons favor with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Since then the US further increased the pressure on the remnants of the old world power, Russia, through their military alliances they have with other, subjugated, western states.

    The US works to stay the only power in the whole world, which is right now a so-called unipolar world, but lots of other countries aim for a multipolar world, because they don‘t want to suffer under the heavy boot of the US. Some might even strive to do things differently, but if they try, the bully of the world comes knocking.

    The Ukraine, which also wants sovereignty, only has a marginal voice in all of this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    That doesn't explain why Russia is invading an adjacent sovereign state. Ukraine "wants sovereignty" because it already has it and doesn't want it taken away.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    "Has" is a bit strong at the start of the war (2014). The revolution of dignity built actual sovereignty by slowly ousting the puppeteers. At the start of the major conflict (2022), the Ukrainian identity was only a fraction of how strong it is now.

    In the end, there is perhaps some conspirational truth to what he said. Heavy hints that Russia invaded exactly after Maidan (2014), "separatists super unhappy with less ties with Russia and revolted too", in the same week, is the weakest shit I have ever seen. Happy for 25 years, suddenly revolted. And Russia brought a whole occupational army to help the poor peacefully seceding citizens. Doesnt take a genius to see it's just an already planned out show of force, "You don't suckle on great big Russia's teet, so we can slowly eat you? Then I will take your lands"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago*

    It‘s nice that you want that kind of explanation, but that‘s not what I offered. You can argue strawmen all day, but your question wasn‘t asked.

    What I’m saying is, that what Ukraine wants is just wholly irrelevant, as two nuclear powers have to figure out some stuff between themselves.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

    What’s up, smelling some conspiracy?  OMG, you might just be on to something! 

    Or, go figure, my native language could just use definitive articles for what is just „Ukraine“ in the English language and I just made a grammatical mistake, which has nothing to do with the content of what has been said. How about you engage with that instead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    "The Ukraine" specifically referred to the Ukraine region of the USSR. Since it gained independence its just been "Ukraine." Typically anyone calling it "The Ukraine" is either misinformed or some flavor of Russian nationalist.

    And you forgot the part where russian imperialism is basically working as a recruitment drive for NATO. If you want to call Ukraine a proxy war, sure, but who the fuck started it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Alright, there‘s no „questioning Ukraine‘s sovereignty“ by deadnaming it from my side. I already started leaving the „the“ out from other comments, so thanks for the English lesson, I appreciate it.

    I forgot nothing, tho, I was rather describing a valid political analysis that offers an answer to OP‘s question, and the only one as it stands. It‘s a starting point, of course not the complete story.

    There‘s also no gotcha to be had. Concluding with „Russia bad“, because they invaded Ukraine is, although true as a statement of fact, dishonest and overly simplistic. Downplaying or downright whitewashing the role of the USA is … lacking, at best.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Downplaying or downright whitewashing the role of the USA is … lacking, at best.

    What did they do specifically?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Here you go, fishing for trigger words. I‘m certain you know some of the accusations already, but for a myriad of reasons never seriously engaged with them. But you do seem to like making fun of the people bringing them up.

    So, tell me, where are your doubts or holes in your own narrative and I might be willing to provide you with a vantage point from my perspective, so as a result we actually can have a sincere exchange. 

    Until now, tho, I haven‘t gotten the impression, that you are asking in good faith and I‘m unwilling to enter debate bro territory.

    Anyway, I answered OPs (rhetorical) question with well enough key words for you to start your own little reading endeavor. You don‘t need to be scared to become a tankie for actually reading stuff that‘s not western mainstream, since that „angle“ is supported by actual American scholars and journalists, already (if that makes it more approachable for you).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    No, I was actually asking because I didn't want to automatically assume you are a tankie, but seeing as this is a relatively fresh account that only cries about shitlibs on meanwhileongrad, I think that speaks for itself.

    The tankie perspective on Ukraine would require me to be a massive western chauvinist. Basically I'd have to believe that the CIA psyop'd the cast majority of Ukraine into wanting closer economic ties with the EU, that yanukovych is a NATO puppet who got elected promising closer EU ties, then did a full 180 on that position specifically to spark a revolution, then also supported the revolution and performed false flag killings of protesters. And then they baited putin into sending little green men across the border, sustaining low level conflict for almost 10 years, then in a master stroke suckered him into an unprepared full scale invasion into a brick wall, wasting tens of thousands of Soviet vehicles and over a million killed and wounded and revealing Russia as a paper tiger.

    If you think none of that was organic and the US and NATO orchestrated the downfall of Russia's military, you have much more faith in their power than me.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I back ceding Donald Trump and Mar a Lago to Putin.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Every day, guillotines become more attractive.

  • source
  • He was talking so tough before he saw his pimp, now he’s got his tail between his leg and he changed his tune

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Ofc he does. Surprised he can even talk while gargling so much Russian balls...

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The important thing to remember is that Putin said Trump won the 2020 election though. Why is everyone so focused on this "Ukraine" thing?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Honestly not even news, tbh.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    If it works that way, when will Trump start giving out states to the highest bidder?

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    trump logic dictates that trump should give up portions of mar-a-lago back to the American People.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Muscovites 1 MAGAts 0

    F-off! The French should have ignored the American colonists plea for financial and military aid to boot out the Red Coats.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    MAGAts 0

    What have they lost? MAGA was aligned with Putin from the start, because it was the opposite of what Biden wanted. It's not their territory that's being lost and they generally think Ukrainians are soy liberals who deserve to lose.

    Liberals keep trying to turn this into a contest between Americans and Russians, but it is clearly not

    The French should have ignored the American colonists plea for financial and military aid

    The American Natives and African future slaves would have been far better off if they had.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Makes sense. Draw a north south line from moscow and the parts of ukraine west of it become russia while the parts of russia east of it become ukraine. Would provide a nice buffer for the nordic countries and help belarus to rethink its way of life.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    33 comments in c/ukraine@sopuli.xyz view that post
    9 comments in c/globalnews@lemmy.zip view that post
    2 comments in c/theguardian_us@ibbit.at view that post