This article originally appeared in Canadian Affairs.
By Khanh Vu Duc, August 19, 2025
When Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin strode onto a stage in Alaska on Aug. 15 beneath a banner proclaiming “Pursuing Peace,” they cast themselves as architects of a historic moment.
Yet their talks on ending the war in Ukraine delivered little substance. The parties announced no ceasefire, undertook no Russian withdrawal, and agreed on no framework. The Alaska meeting offered only narrative power: confirmation that Moscow has re-entered the Great Power club, sitting across from Washington, while Kyiv watches from the wings.
The real hazard now is the gradual slide toward a “frozen peace”: an unofficial division of Ukraine, front lines left to harden, and Russian control over Crimea and the east silently accepted as irreversible. The historical echo of the 1953 Korean Armistice is unavoidable. Hostilities may subside, but lines drawn “temporarily” have a habit of solidifying into new geopolitical facts.
From Moscow’s perspective, such a result is close to optimal — avoiding further battlefield losses while claiming diplomatic credibility. Putin can present himself as the architect of peace to a weary public. For Trump, meanwhile, Alaska provided the optics of action and the politics of finality: a signal to American voters that the days of “blank-cheque” support for Ukraine may be ending.
But the absence of a genuine, enforceable ceasefire risks not peace, but an emboldened Russia and a dangerous erosion of the international norms on which Canada’s own security depends. A settlement that effectively validates territorial conquest by force would undermine a core principle of Canadian foreign policy — that borders cannot be changed at gunpoint.
This is not simply an abstract concern: NATO unity is already fraying thanks to Trump’s threats not to protect member states that fail to meet funding obligations, and the erosion of collective deterrence in Europe could have consequences for Canada’s own Northern and Atlantic security posture.
Ottawa also faces a real risk of strategic marginalization. If the United States moves forward with a peace plan negotiated largely on a bilateral, leader-to-leader basis, Canada’s ability to shape reconstruction, legal accountability, or future security guarantees could be sharply reduced. For a country that has always depended on the predictability of rules, not the whims of strongmen, this would be a real strategic loss.
Canada must now move with clarity and conviction. Public recommitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is essential — not as rhetoric, but as a signal, to allies and adversaries alike, of unwavering principles.
Even as formal institutions strain under geopolitical pressure, Ottawa must reinforce that message through NATO, the G7 and the United Nations, reminding the world that this is not simply a regional quarrel but a struggle over the future of international order.
At home and abroad, Canada also needs to sustain the narrative battle. Putin understands symbolism; sharing a stage with Trump under a peace banner while conceding nothing served his purposes well. Ottawa must respond by reminding global audiences why Ukraine matters — because to accept aggression unchallenged is to invite its return elsewhere.
Finally, even if formally excluded from the Washington-Moscow channel, Canada must position itself to influence whatever mechanism emerges next — whether a contact group, coalition-of-the-willing or reconstruction consortium. Decisions made in the coming months will shape the security architecture of Europe for years to come. To protect its interests, Canada must be in the room — not standing politely outside the door.
The Alaska meeting may not have produced peace, but it has clarified the stakes. In a world drifting back toward Great Power deal-making, Canada cannot afford to stand silently by the frozen front. If the order that has kept this country safe is to survive, Ottawa must neither avert its gaze nor soften its voice.
Macdonald-Laurier Institute Contributor Khanh Vu Duc is an Ottawa-based lawyer, essayist and commentator on international affairs. He has appeared on BBC News, Radio Free Asia, Voice of America (Vietnamese), and Asia Sentinel (English).
