I’m writing to you tonight from the mountains of Kazakhstan, where I’ve been closely following the announcement of an upcoming meeting between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. The summit is expected to take place in Alaska, a choice that’s already stirred more than a little controversy.

During a recent press conference, President Trump misspoke twice, saying he would be going “to Russia” rather than Alaska. That slip didn’t go unnoticed in Moscow, where nationalists still talk about Alaska as if it were theirs for the taking. In fact, I’ve seen images of a patch making the rounds among Russian military units that shows Russia and Alaska side by side, with the slogan “We’ll take it all.” Needless to say, the symbolism here is troubling.

Why Ukraine Is Really at Stake
This meeting is about more than just a photo op in Alaska it’s about Ukraine. For over three years, Russia has been waging a brutal war of aggression, making only modest territorial gains while losing staggering numbers of troops and equipment. Despite that, they’re now ramping up attacks, likely to grab as much land as possible before any potential negotiations.

From my vantage point, it’s obvious that Putin’s idea of “peace talks” is simple: keep whatever he’s already taken, and take more if he can before the talking starts. That’s not compromise, that's conquest.

Trump’s Framing of the Talks
President Trump says he’ll go into this meeting to “see what they want to meet about,” and afterward, he’ll speak with President Zelensky and European leaders. He’s also made it clear he wants a “fair deal for both parties.” My question is why should Russia, the aggressor, get a fair shake at the expense of the country they invaded?

Ukraine’s constitution requires a public referendum before giving up any territory. That safeguard exists to prevent exactly the kind of forced surrender Putin is hoping for. Yet Trump has criticized Zelensky for this, as if it’s somehow unreasonable that the Ukrainian president can’t just hand over land.

In the mountainous city of Vanadzor, Armenia, a stunning sunset masks the turbulent reality facing this small, ancient nation. Last week in Washington, D.C., President Donald Trump hosted Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev for talks aimed at ending one of the world’s longest-running conflicts.

Despite the headline-grabbing announcement, no true peace treaty was signed. Instead, three separate agreements emerged from the summit symbolic steps toward peace, but far from a resolution.

Three Key Agreements But No Peace Deal

1. Dissolving an Ineffective Peace Body
   Armenia and Azerbaijan agreed to withdraw from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) framework that was originally designed to mediate between the two nations. Over time, it became largely ineffective, failing to prevent repeated clashes.

2. U.S.–Armenia Infrastructure Pact
   Armenia and the United States signed an agreement to jointly develop a transport route across southern Armenia, connecting Azerbaijan to its isolated Nakhchivan exclave. This 29-mile corridor could eventually include a highway, railway, and oil pipeline, granting Baku direct access to Turkey and Western energy markets.

3. Framework for Future Negotiations
   Armenia and Azerbaijan signed a memorandum to begin discussions on a potential peace deal. However, Azerbaijan’s demands—such as constitutional changes in Armenia remain politically sensitive and highly unlikely in the near term.

A Corridor of Opportunity or Vulnerability

Azerbaijan has long sought a direct route between its mainland and Nakhchivan. For Baku, the corridor promises a strategic energy export path to the West, bypassing Russian and Iranian routes. For Armenia, the project is divisive. Some see it as an economic opportunity to benefit from transit fees and potential normalization with Azerbaijan and Turkey. Others view it as a dangerous concession to a hostile neighbor.

Critics point out that the agreement fails to address two pressing humanitarian issues:

• The displacement of over 150,000 Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh in 2023, following a swift Azerbaijani offensive.

• The continued detention of around 80 Armenian hostages in Azerbaijani prisons, despite international concern.