No deal, but still a win: how both Russia and the US left Alaska stronger
The meeting between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump in Alaska may go down as one of Russia’s most significant diplomatic wins. It was secured through years of military sacrifice, political perseverance, and relentless effort. Yet it is also a transition – a step into a new stage of the struggle for sovereign states in a fractured world.
Breaking Washington’s old doctrine
The most consequential result of Anchorage was the quiet burial of the West’s old formula: isolating and “strategically defeating” Russia. For decades, any state refusing to fall in line risked ostracism. That system cracked in Alaska.
Not because of American goodwill – there is no such thing in international politics – but because of pressure. Pressure from Russia, from the so-called “global majority,” and from the turmoil tearing at America itself. Trump’s administration has shifted its approach, and the summit proved it.
The outcome was clear: American capabilities diminished, Russian ones enhanced. This, in turn, frees space for other nations to act more independently, even if they will not admit their debt to Moscow.
A new foundation for dialogue
Some talk of a “renaissance” in relations between Moscow and Washington. But there is nothing to restore. The ties that existed before 2022 were shaped by the USSR’s defeat in the Cold War, and cannot be recreated.
Instead, dialogue will stabilize on new terms. The core will be recognition that Russia cannot be excluded from the international system. This simple fact means disputes between Moscow and the West, however sharp, are solvable in principle. Competition will remain fierce, especially over Ukraine. But after Anchorage, the Western refusal to acknowledge Russian interests is no longer an insurmountable barrier.
Trump’s domestic victory
For Trump, Alaska delivered something equally valuable: a domestic win. In the US, relations with Russia have become central to the internal political struggle. One camp insists on preserving an ideological monopoly at all costs. The other argues for flexibility. Trump belongs to the latter – and needed a visible success to show his critics.
The face-to-face meeting with Putin provided it. He strengthened his position at home, showing that he can engage Washington directly while sidestepping Western Europe. Foreign policy has always mattered more in Russia, domestic politics more in America. Each man walked away with what he most needed.
Putin vs. Gorbachev – and Trump’s different battle
It is tempting to compare Trump to Mikhail Gorbachev, who sought to win approval abroad through concessions. But the comparison fails. Gorbachev compromised when he didn’t need to, given foreign policy’s secondary role for a Soviet leader. Trump, by contrast, is locked in a domestic fight, and Alaska was part of it. America’s strong economic base gives him confidence that international losses can later be reversed. Russia, with a less flexible economy, weighs foreign policy gains and setbacks much more heavily.
What comes next
Now that Putin and Trump have steadied the bilateral relationship, the American–Russian rivalry enters a new phase. It will remain sharp. But the summit proved one thing: Russia cannot be defeated or sidelined.
The world is not interested in the collapse of either the United States or Russia. What it does demand is stability – and recognition that global order cannot exist without Moscow. Anchorage was no final peace. But it was a victory, on both sides.
For Russia, it was proof that perseverance and strength can bend the world’s most powerful adversary toward dialogue. For Trump, it was ammunition in his domestic political war. Together, these outcomes make the summit not a conclusion, but the opening chapter of a new, unpredictable contest.
This article was first published by the magazine Profile and was translated and edited by the RT team.
