Stocks surged on hopes of an imminent Ukraine war ceasefire

 

·         Nobel Peace Prize Aspirant Trump will meet Putin on August 15 to start the negotiation process; Putin may have the last laugh for the ROEU

·         Ukraine may have to surrender mineral-rich Eastern Ukraine to Russia, which may also form a de facto JV with the US/Trump for REE exploration & processing; China may join later

·         The US/EU/NATO/UN will not recognize ROEU (Russia-Occupied Eastern Ukraine) officially, but practically, it will be a Russian territory

·         Now the key question is whether Ukraine will approve the deal or Trump/NATO will force it to accept the same?

On late Friday, August 8, 2025, U.S. President Trump announced officially that he is scheduled to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin on August 15, 2025, in Alaska to discuss a potential ceasefire in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. The summit, announced by Trump on Truth Social, marks the first in-person meeting between the two leaders since Trump’s return to the White House in January 2025 and Putin’s first U.S. visit in a decade. The talks aim to address the conflict that began with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, which has caused tens of thousands of deaths and displaced millions.

Trump’s potential meeting with Putin was in progress for the last few days and well anticipated by the market and on Friday, August 8, 2025, soon after the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace treaty brokered by Trump, he announced in his Truth: “The highly anticipated meeting between myself, as President of the United States of America, and President Vladimir Putin, of Russia, will take place next Friday, August 15, 2025, in the Great State of Alaska. Further details to follow; Thank you for your attention to this matter!

Trump has expressed optimism about nearing a ceasefire, suggesting a deal might involve “swapping” territories, potentially ceding parts of Ukraine’s eastern regions (Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson) and Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014, to Moscow. However, Ukraine, led by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has historically rejected territorial concessions, and any such move would be politically challenging for Kyiv.

Alaska was chosen for its proximity to Russia (88 km across the Bering Strait) and because the U.S. is not a member of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which issued an arrest warrant for Putin over alleged war crimes. This avoids legal complications for Putin’s travel. Alaska’s historical ties to Russia, from its 1867 purchase, and its strategic Arctic position also make it symbolically and logistically significant.

Negotiations and Challenges: Recent reports indicate Russia proposed a ceasefire that would solidify its control over occupied Ukrainian territories, a plan criticized as a major concession for Ukraine. Zelenskyy, absent from the Alaska summit, has pushed for a trilateral meeting and emphasized that any territorial changes require a Ukrainian referendum under the constitution. European allies are also excluded, raising concerns about decisions being made without Kyiv’s direct input, reminiscent of historical agreements like the 1945 Yalta Conference.

Trump’s Strategy: Trump has oscillated between praising Putin and expressing frustration over Russia’s continued attacks, recently imposing a 50% tariff on Indian goods for buying Russian oil. He set an August 8 deadline for Russia to agree to a ceasefire, threatening secondary sanctions on countries trading with Moscow, though it’s unclear if these will be enforced post-summit. Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, held constructive talks with Putin in Moscow, signaling progress.

A deal heavily favoring Russia could embolden further aggression, with some comparing it to a “Russian diplomatic victory.” Ukraine’s exclusion from direct talks and the lack of European involvement raise fears of an imposed solution. Experts suggest Trump should include Ukraine and European allies post-summit and maintain military support to deter Russia long-term. Trump’s push for peace through ultimatums and others are skeptical of Russia’s intentions. The summit is seen as a high-stakes move, with potential to either de-escalate the conflict or lock in Russian gains, depending on the terms. The absence of Zelenskyy and European leaders underscores tensions in the negotiation process, and Ukraine’s firm stance against territorial losses suggests a challenging road ahead.

Putin’s Calls with Modi and Xi coincide with Trump’s Truth for the Ukraine war summit:

U.S. President Donald Trump announced on August 8, 2025, via Truth Social that he will meet Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on August 15, 2025, to discuss a potential ceasefire in the Russia-Ukraine war. This announcement came shortly after Putin held phone calls with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping on August 8, 2025, where he briefed them on his recent discussions with Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, regarding the Ukraine conflict.

Putin’s conversations with Modi and Xi were part of a broader diplomatic outreach to key allies ahead of the Alaska summit. The Kremlin confirmed Putin discussed his meeting with Witkoff, indicating these calls were to update leaders of major Russian partners (both India and China are significant buyers of Russian oil) on potential peace talks. Xi expressed support for a “long-term solution” to the Ukraine conflict, while Modi reaffirmed the India-Russia “Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership” and invited Putin to India later in 2025.

Trump’s announcement followed these calls, suggesting a coordinated diplomatic push. He described the meeting as “highly anticipated” and indicated progress toward a ceasefire, potentially involving territorial swaps, though details remain vague. The timing aligns with Trump’s August 8 deadline for Russia to agree to a peace deal or face secondary sanctions on countries like India and China for purchasing Russian oil.

Trump’s imposition of a 50% tariff on Indian goods (25% already in effect from August 7) with an additional 25% starting August 27) for buying Russian oil; this has strained U.S.-India relations, adding pressure on Modi’s stance. Similarly, Trump hinted at potential tariffs on China, indicating a broader strategy to economically isolate Russia. The sequence of events—Putin’s calls with Modi and Xi, followed by Trump’s summit announcement—indicates a complex diplomatic maneuver. Trump’s approach seems to leverage economic pressure (tariffs) and direct talks to push for a Ukraine ceasefire, while Putin is rallying support from non-Western allies. However, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s exclusion from the Alaska talks and his insistence that “any decision made without Ukraine will never work” highlight potential friction.

Russia accelerates Ukraine special military operation after Trump 2.0 in anticipation of a favorable ceasefire deal including the grabbing of natural resource-rich (rare earth materials) Eastern Ukraine, which was simply not possible under Biden. Russian forces have slowly expanded the amount of territory they control over 2024, mostly in the east of Ukraine, and have continued their recent barrage of air strikes on Kyiv and other cities. In eastern Ukraine, Russia consolidated its hold significantly. It has been trying to gain full control of the two regions along with two more - Zaporizhzhia and Kherson. Overall, Russia has intensified its effort to control as much of Eastern Ukraine, bordering with itself not only to make a security buffer zone between it and Ukraine for the perceived threat of any NATO aggression through Ukraine in the future, but also to control natural resources including substantial rare earth materials in Eastern Ukraine.

Russia-Ukraine war, now in its fourth year since the full-scale (‘Special Military Operation’) invasion began on February 24, 2022. Russian forces have gradually expanded their control, particularly in eastern Ukraine’s Luhansk and Donetsk regions, part of the Donbas, and have recently intensified drone and missile attacks on cities like Kyiv and Kharkiv ahead of a NATO summit in the Netherlands. Despite slow advances, such as a 40km push toward Pokrovsk over a year, the front line has remained largely static for two years, with Russia relying on manpower, losing at least 45,000 troops in the past year, while Ukraine counters with innovative drone and ground tactics.

In May 2024, Russia launched an incursion north of Kharkiv, seizing villages during a period when U.S. weapon supplies were stalled, though Ukrainian forces later held firm. Ukraine’s surprise August 2024 attack was into Russia’s Kursk region, capturing over 1,200 sq. km initially, though Russia claims to have recaptured most by June 2025, with Ukraine still holding 90 sq. km. This has led to Zelensky suggesting a territory swap as part of peace talks, a proposal complicated by Trump’s view that Ukraine may not reclaim pre-2014 borders.

Ceasefire negotiations, driven by the U.S. since Trump’s inauguration, have been tense, marked by a February 2025 White House epic clash (public drama) where Trump criticized Zelensky for delaying talks and gambling with WW-III. A key development is the April 30, 2025, U.S.-Ukraine deal to share profits from future mineral and energy reserves, aiming to fund Ukraine’s defense and recovery, with the Donbas highlighted for its coal and iron under Russian control. The war’s toll includes an estimated 165,000-235,000 Russian and 43,000 Ukrainian military deaths, though the latter figure is likely underreported.

As of August 8, 2025, the control of natural resources and rare earth materials in Ukraine by the United States and Russia reflects a complex interplay of ongoing conflict and geopolitical strategy. Russia currently occupies almost 20% of Ukrainian territory, including key eastern regions like Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and parts of Kherson, as well as Crimea, which it annexed in 2014. These areas are rich in critical minerals, including rare earth elements (REEs) such as lithium, graphite, titanium, and uranium, which are vital for technology, defense, and green energy sectors.

U.S.-Russia’s Ukraine Control: All about Natural Resources, including REE

Russia’s control extends over significant deposits, notably in Donetsk and Luhansk, where about 40% of Ukraine’s metal resources, including REEs, are located. The Shevchenko Field in Donetsk and Kruta Balka in Zaporizhzhia hold substantial lithium reserves, estimated at 500,000 metric tons, one of Europe’s largest untapped sources. Graphite reserves, comprising 20% of global resources, are also concentrated in these regions. By occupying these resource-rich areas, Russia has disrupted Ukraine’s mining sector, controlling an estimated $12.5 trillion in mineral wealth, including 56% of Ukraine’s hard coal reserves and significant gas fields. This strengthens Russia’s position in global supply chains, particularly as it seeks to maintain energy dominance in Europe.

Recent proposals from Putin, ahead of the August 15 Alaska summit with Trump, suggest Russia might offer U.S. companies access to these minerals as part of a ceasefire deal, aiming to weaken China’s monopoly (70% of global REE production) and bolster economic ties with the U.S. But eventually, both Russia and the U.S. will have to deliver most of these raw REEs to China for final processing, at least for the next few years until the U.S. and Russia develop their own REEs processing capabilities.

U.S. Involvement: Mineral Deal

On May 1, 2025, the U.S. and Ukraine signed an agreement granting the U.S. preferential access to Ukraine’s mineral resources, including REEs, in exchange for continued support against Russia. This deal establishes a joint U.S.-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, funded by 50% of royalties from state-owned resource projects, though it lacks specific security guarantees for Ukraine. The focus is on untapped reserves in areas still under Kyiv’s control, such as titanium in the northwest and lithium in the central Kirovohrad region. The U.S. deal excludes resources in Russian-occupied zones, limiting its scope. Trump’s initial demand for $500 billion in mineral rights was scaled back, reflecting Ukraine’s resistance and the practical challenges of accessing occupied territories.

The U.S. seeks to reduce its 70% reliance on Chinese REE imports, driven by Trump’s push to secure domestic and allied supplies. However, experts note that Ukraine’s REE deposits, while promising, are largely unminable due to war damage, outdated infrastructure, and lack of commercial operations, with extraction potentially taking 15 years or more. Thus, both the U.S. and Russia have to take the help of Chinese expertise to produce & process these untapped REEs, which explains the recent ‘romance’ between the U.S. (Trump 2.0) and China. Trump is now planning to form a virtual JV with China and Russia to secure REEs. The U.S. may have to allow/deliver these REEs to China to process for secure access to the same.

The Ukraine war has halted mining in occupied areas, with Russia’s advances disrupting supply chains. Ukraine closed its last coking coal mine near Pokrovsk in January 2025 as Russian forces closed in. Geologists and analysts question the viability of Ukraine’s REE reserves, citing outdated Soviet-era data and the dominance of unprocessable minerals like britholite. Some see the U.S. deal as political theater rather than a feasible economic strategy. The Alaska summit’s focus on a ceasefire involving territorial swaps could shift resource control further toward Russia, complicating U.S. plans. Ukraine’s insistence on a referendum for any territorial concessions adds uncertainty.

Beyond Russia's stated security concerns and opposition to NATO expansion in Ukraine, the control of rare earth materials and natural resources could be a significant, though less publicized, factor in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. Ukraine is estimated to hold $12.5 trillion in mineral wealth, including rare earth elements (REEs) like lithium, graphite, titanium, and uranium, critical for technology, defense, and green energy. Russia’s occupied regions, such as Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, and Crimea, contain about 40% of Ukraine’s metal resources, including Europe’s largest lithium deposits (500,000 metric tons) and significant graphite reserves (20% of global supply). Russia’s control over these areas since 2014 and its 2022 invasion could be aimed at securing this economic/REE leverage.

Russia, alongside China (which controls ~70% of global REE production and ~90% processing), may seek to counter Western dependence on Chinese minerals. By occupying Ukraine’s resource-rich territories, Russia could disrupt supply chains, force international companies to negotiate with Moscow, or even offer access to the U.S. as part of a ceasefire deal, as hinted in recent summit talks. This aligns with Russia’s strategy to maintain energy and mineral dominance, especially as European reliance on Russian gas wanes.

The U.S. deal with Ukraine on May 1, 2025, granting preferential access to its REEs in exchange for support, may have intensified Russia’s resolve. This agreement, targeting untapped reserves in Kyiv-controlled areas, threatens Russia’s regional economic influence. Securing Ukraine’s resources could prevent the U.S. and its allies from reducing their 70% reliance on Chinese imports, giving Russia a bargaining chip in global trade negotiations. Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, which holds substantial gas fields and titanium deposits, suggests a pattern of resource-driven aggression. The escalation into eastern Ukraine, rich in coal and REEs, supports the theory that economic gain complements the perceived security narratives.

While Russia frames the never-ending Ukraine war as a response to NATO’s eastward push, the timing of intensified resource exploitation in occupied zones, such as coal mining near Pokrovsk until its closure in January 2025. However, the ongoing war damaged and outdated infrastructure limits immediate REE extraction, suggesting long-term control might be the goal rather than short-term.

Russia’s actions are less about NATO and more about controlling Ukraine’s mineral treasure; Russia always maintains that Eastern Ukraine was a part & parcel of the former USSR led by Russia. Ukraine inherited some nuclear arsenal of the USSR/Russia during disintegration, which it finally handed over to Russia under the US mediation in exchange for a security guarantee from NATO.

Ukraine-Russia geopolitics

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Ukraine inherited the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal, comprising approximately 1,900 strategic warheads, 176 intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and 44 strategic bombers, along with an estimated 2,800 to 4,200 tactical nuclear warheads. This arsenal, originally stationed on Ukrainian soil by the Soviet Union to target the West, posed a complex challenge for the newly independent state. Ukraine lacked operational control over these weapons, as Russia retained the launch codes and control systems, and maintaining them was financially and technically unfeasible, especially given the economic turmoil following the Chernobyl disaster in 1986.

In the early 1990s, Ukraine committed to a non-nuclear status, as outlined in its 1990 Declaration of State Sovereignty, which pledged not to accept, produce, or acquire nuclear weapons. International pressure, particularly from the United States, and the need for economic support pushed Ukraine toward denuclearization. Negotiations began with the 1992 Lisbon Protocol, where Ukraine, along with Belarus and Kazakhstan, agreed to join the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and return nuclear weapons to Russia, a process facilitated under the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I).

The critical turning point came with the Trilateral Statement, signed on January 14, 1994, in Moscow by U.S. President Bill Clinton, Russian President Boris Yeltsin, and Ukrainian President Leonid Kravchuk. This agreement committed Ukraine to transfer all nuclear warheads to Russia for elimination in exchange for security assurances, economic compensation for the highly enriched uranium (valued for nuclear reactor fuel), and U.S. assistance via the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction program to dismantle missiles, silos, and infrastructure.

The process culminated in the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, signed on December 5, 1994, by the U.S., Russia, and the U.K., with France and China later providing similar assurances. Under this memorandum, the signatories pledged to respect Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty, and existing borders, refrain from the threat or use of force, and provide assistance if Ukraine faced aggression involving nuclear weapons—though the term "assurances" was used instead of "guarantees," lacking a binding enforcement mechanism.

Ukraine fulfilled its obligations, transferring the last nuclear warheads to Russia by June 1, 1996, and eliminating its final strategic delivery vehicle in 2001. However, the security assurances proved hollow when Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 and launched a full-scale invasion in 2022, actions widely seen as violations of the memorandum. This has led to debates in Ukraine about whether retaining nuclear weapons might have deterred Russian aggression, though experts note the practical and diplomatic costs—such as international isolation and resource demands—would have been significant. The U.S. mediation, while successful in achieving denuclearization, is now criticized for offering assurances without enforceable commitments, leaving Ukraine vulnerable in the face of Russia’s actions.

Why did Russia/Putin target Ukraine from 2014?

Fast forward, Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine, marked by the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the full-scale invasion beginning February 24, 2022, stems from a combination of strategic, political, and economic factors, as articulated by President Vladimir Putin and analyzed by geopolitical experts.

Security Concerns and NATO Membership & Expansion: Putin has consistently cited the eastward expansion of NATO as an existential threat to Russia, arguing that Ukraine’s potential NATO membership would bring military infrastructure close to Russia’s borders. The 2008 NATO summit decision to consider Ukraine and Georgia for membership, coupled with Ukraine’s growing alignment with the West after the 2014 Euromaidan uprising, heightened these fears. Russia views potential NATO’s presence around it as a direct challenge to its sphere of influence.

Preserving Regional Influence: Ukraine’s pivot toward the European Union (EU) and away from Russia’s orbit; accelerated by the 2014 ousting of pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych, threatened Russia’s historical dominance in the post-Soviet space; Controlling Ukraine, a buffer state with deep cultural and economic ties to Russia, is seen as essential to maintaining Moscow’s geopolitical clout. Russia always wants to maintain a pro-Russian government (political leader) in Ukraine, and now Trump 2.0 is also stressing that indirectly, asking Zelenskyy to go for the general election immediately in the aftermath of the full destruction of the country.

Nationalist and Historical Narrative: Putin has repeatedly framed Ukraine as an inseparable part of Russia, echoing Soviet and imperial histories. In his 2021 essay "On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians" and pre-invasion speeches, he denied Ukraine’s legitimacy as a sovereign nation, claiming it as part of a greater Russian civilization. The aggression is partly driven by a desire to reclaim this perceived lost territory. Putin, a former KGB head, basically questioned the wisdom of his predecessors like Gorbachev and Yeltsin to sell the country (USSR) to the US/NATO.

Control of Natural Resources: Ukraine’s vast natural resource wealth, including rare earth elements (REEs) like lithium and graphite (estimated at $12.5 trillion), offers economic incentives. Russia’s occupation of resource-rich regions like Donbas and Crimea since 2014 suggests a strategy to secure these assets, potentially as leverage in global trade or to counter Western reliance on Chinese minerals.

Domestic Political Compulsion: The Ukraine conflict (war) bolsters Putin’s image as a strong leader amid domestic challenges, such as economic stagnation and declining approval ratings. Rallying nationalist sentiment around the "protection" of Russian-speaking populations in eastern Ukraine and Crimea helps consolidate his power. Russia’s nominal GDP grew from ~$0.3T in 2000 to $2.29T in 2013 (before Ukraine conflict started), but declined from 2014 (Crimea invasion) and now stands around $2.17T in 2024, while CPI index soared by almost 625% between 2000 and 2024; currency (RUB) slide against USD from ~24 in 2000 to an all-time low ~114 in May’24 and now ~80; thus Trump termed Russia a ‘dead economy’ along with India. Putin’s Ukraine war is aiming at boosting nationalist image despite ‘unjustified’ American/Western sanctions. The Russian defense industry is also facing intense competition from ‘all-weather friend’ China.

Despite these motives, Western analysts and Ukrainian officials argue that Russia’s actions are preemptive and aggressive, not defensive, given that Ukraine posed no imminent military threat. The failure of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum’s security assurances, which Ukraine relied on after denuclearizing, has been cited as a pretext, though Putin’s rejection of Ukraine’s sovereignty remains the core driver. Recent X posts reflect a mix of views, with some attributing the aggression to NATO provocation and others to Putin’s imperial ambitions, though evidence supports a multifaceted strategy rather than a single cause.

Increasing NATO expansion around Russia and Eastern Europe is a security threat to Putin:

Russia, spanning Eastern Europe and North Asia, shares land borders with 14 countries, several of which are NATO members or influenced by its expansion, and also known US allies. The following overview outlines Russia's map and the surrounding NATO-influenced countries, reflecting the geopolitical context shaped by NATO's growth since 1949.

Russia’s Borders and NATO/EU Presence:

·         Northern and Northwestern Borders: Russia borders Norway (NATO member since 1949) and Finland (joined NATO in April 2023). Finland’s accession, prompted by Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, more than doubled Russia’s NATO border to approximately 1,584 miles, particularly affecting the Arctic and Baltic Sea regions. Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania (all NATO members since 2004, former Soviet states) also share borders, bringing NATO’s presence to Russia’s northwest, with Estonia just 150 km from St. Petersburg.

·         Western Border: Poland (NATO since 1999) and Lithuania form part of Russia’s western frontier, with the Kaliningrad exclave (a Russian territory) sandwiched between them, hosting Russian military assets close to NATO lines. Belarus, a Russian ally, borders Poland, Lithuania, and Latvia, amplifying Russia’s military reach toward NATO.

·         Southwestern Border: No direct NATO members border Russia here, but Ukraine, a non-NATO country heavily influenced by Western support since 2014, lies adjacent. Romania and Slovakia (both NATO since 2004 and 2004, respectively) are nearby, influencing the Black Sea region.

·         Southern Borders: Georgia and Azerbaijan, not NATO members, border Russia’s Caucasus region. Georgia has aspired to join NATO since 2008, especially after Russia’s 2008 conflict there, while Azerbaijan maintains a neutral stance amid Russian and Western influence; but Trump is now a good friend of Azerbaijan and also Armenia after ending the 35-year-long bloody war between the two nations in Central Asia.

·         Eastern Borders: China, Mongolia, and North Korea border Russia’s vast Asian expanse, none of which is NATO-influenced, and also China’s growing partnership with Russia counters Western pressure.

NATO Expansion and Influenced Countries:

·         Historical Growth: NATO began with 12 members in 1949, expanding eastward post-Cold War. The 1999 wave included Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, followed by the 2004 wave, adding Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia—many former Soviet or Warsaw Pact states. Later additions include Albania and Croatia (2009), Montenegro (2017), North Macedonia (2020), and Sweden (2024), driven by Russia’s actions in Ukraine.

·         Influenced Non-Members: Ukraine and Georgia are key NATO aspirants, with Ukraine’s alignment intensifying since 2014 and Sweden’s recent membership reflecting a shift triggered by Russia’s aggression. Moldova, though neutral, faces growing Western influence, potentially aligning with NATO amid regional tensions.

·         Russian Perspective: Putin has long viewed NATO’s eastward shift as encirclement, citing the 1990s verbal US promise (disputed) not to expand eastward. The addition of Finland and Sweden, plus Ukraine’s NATO aspirations, is seen as a direct threat, fueling the narrative behind the 2014 Crimea annexation and 2022 invasion.

Putin’s perceived NATO phobia: The world needs another security alliance like BRICS

NATO’s reach now encircles much of Russia’s western and northern borders, with countries like Ukraine and Georgia acting as buffers. This NATO expansion has escalated tensions. The strategic placement of NATO troops and bases, especially near the Baltic States and Finland, underscores a heightened standoff, with Russia countering by bolstering its military presence, including nuclear capabilities in Kaliningrad. This dynamic reflects a complex interplay of security concerns, historical rivalries, and resource interests, with NATO’s expansion reshaping the geopolitical landscape around Russia. Putin himself offered Obama (jokingly or seriously) that Russia should also be included in NATO at some point in time, considering NATO’s continued Eastward expansion.

Putin’s public stance, especially after 2007’s Munich Security Conference speech, has been one of opposition to NATO expansion, viewing it as a threat to Russian security. The 2021 Russian ultimatum to NATO, demanding a halt to eastward expansion, further contradicts the idea of a serious offer to join. While Russia participated in NATO’s Partnership for Peace program in 1994, and the NATO-Russia Council was established in 2002 to foster dialogue, these were cooperative frameworks.

The world needs another NATO alternative security pact in the form of BRICS; adhering NATO principle of not launching any war with each other and any attack on any member would be seen as an attack on the whole group. BRICS-like security pack involving Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa along with other interested countries, would have resulted in no NATO phobia in the mind of Putin and ensured good relations with neighbouring states, most of which were part & parcel of the USSR.

What’s next for the Ukraine war?

Ahead of a potential Ukraine air warfare ceasefire, drone warfare intensified by both Russia and Ukraine; overall, Ukraine is now on the back foot. Russian President Putin has reportedly informed the Trump administration that he would agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine in exchange for Kyiv ceding Eastern Ukraine to Moscow. According to the WSJ report, Putin submitted his proposal, which requires global recognition of Russia's control over the eastern part of Ukraine, during his meeting with US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff on Wednesday, August 6, 2025. Putin is said to have asked that Ukraine withdraw forces from the whole Donetsk region and hand over Donetsk, Lugansk and Crimea to Russia. But European officials expressed "serious reservations" about Russia's plan.

Ukrainian President Zelensky stated on Sunday, August 10, 2025,  that the resolution of the war with Russia "must be fair" following the announcement of a meeting between U.S. President Trump and Russian President Putin scheduled for next week. Zelensky emphasized that it is unclear whether Ukrainian officials will attend, though reports suggest the U.S. is considering inviting him. He expressed gratitude for support from European allies, who insist any peace plan must include a ceasefire, protect Ukraine’s and Europe’s security interests with "robust and credible" guarantees for Kyiv, and uphold Ukraine’s "freedom of choice over its destiny." While welcoming Trump’s efforts, Zelensky stressed the necessity of Kyiv’s inclusion in negotiations. According to the WSJ report, European diplomats insisted that Ukraine and its European allies must be included in peace negotiations and that the European Union could host future talks. In addition, the Italian government allegedly believes the EU must continue supporting the Trump administration's efforts to achieve peace.

Meanwhile, the US Vice President Vance announced on Sunday, August 10, 2025, that the U.S. is actively working to arrange a meeting between Ukrainian President Zelensky and Russian President Putin. However, Vance indicated that scheduling this meeting before Putin’s planned August 15 summit with U.S. President Trump in Alaska would not be productive. Vance said he spoke to the Ukrainian government earlier Sunday but that Trump will have to "force President Putin and President Zelensky to sit down, to figure out their differences."

Vance also declined to comment on his ambitions for the 2028 presidential election and rumors that he might choose Secretary of State Marco Rubio as his running mate. "If we do a good job, the politics will take care of itself," Vance said, adding that it is "too early to think" that far ahead.

Conclusions

On August 15, 2025, Putin may officially submit his written proposal for the Ukraine war permanent ceasefire (end) plan, emphasizing his wish list of taking control of Eastern Ukraine, including Crimea; no NATO membership of Ukraine; no further NATO expansion in Eastern Europe and a security guarantee for Russia from NATO/US. Putin and Trump may also announce at least a temporary (30 days) Ukraine war ceasefire or only air warfare ceasefire (as both Russia and Ukraine/US need time to manufacture drones, missiles etc, while China is the main supplier of basic raw materials-REEs for both sides to produce such weapons). Trump will then officially hand over Putin’s Ukraine proposal to Zelenskyy and also talk with him and his European/NATO counterparts. The back-and-forth Ukraine ceasefire talks and final deal should be completed by September, so that Noble Peace Prize Aspirant Trump may get the same on October 10, 2025.

Putin may have the last laugh in the Ukraine war

Russian asset or sympathizer, Trump may propose swapping of lands, war prisoners, etc and ensure 50:50 JV with Russia to explore/produce/process REEs in Eastern Ukraine, which Putin seeks to control entirely. The US will provide security assurance to both Russia and Ukraine; Crimea may officially become Russian territory along with part of East Ukraine (Donetsk).

The US and NATO leaders are preparing the world for Putin’s de facto win and the grabbing of Eastern Ukraine:

As per influential US Senator and a close Trump ally, Lindsay Graham, Trump may ensure a permanent ceasefire deal between Russia and Ukraine that would likely involve territorial swaps, aligning with Trump’s comments about land exchanges. He stated, "Ukraine is not going to evict every Russian, and Russia is not going to Kyiv, so there will be some land swaps at the end." However, he emphasized that any deal must include robust security guarantees to prevent future Russian aggression, proposing European forces as "tripwires" and continued U.S. military support. Graham also expressed support for Trump’s planned August 15 Alaska summit with Putin, hoping Zelenskyy could be involved, marking a complete shift from his 2023 stance against conceding territory to aggressors.

Graham advocated Trump’s stance to ensure territorial control of Eastern Ukraine including Crimea with Russia with a mineral deal for the US, proving a face-saving exit for Putin with a stern warning about any 3^rd attempt on Ukraine or any similar attempt to any other neighbouring country. The US will treat Eastern Ukraine as Equivalent to China’s Taiwan and ensure full security for Ukraine even without NATO membership; Ukraine may be taken as a member state by the EU in the future.

The NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has made several notable comments regarding the Ukraine war ceasefire. On August 10, Rutte described the upcoming August 15 Alaska summit between U.S. President Trump and Russian President Putin as a critical test of Putin’s seriousness in ending the war; it’s just the start of the bigger negotiation process. He stated, "He [Putin] is still the main threat to the Western alliance," and praised Trump for breaking the diplomatic deadlock in February 2025 by initiating dialogue with Putin. Rutte emphasized that while the Friday meeting would focus on testing Putin’s intent, it would not finalize any deal, and Ukraine must be involved in subsequent peace talks concerning territories and security guarantees. He noted, "Ukraine will have to be, and will be, involved," addressing concerns about Kyiv’s exclusion, and affirmed NATO’s coordination of lethal weapons delivery to Ukraine to ensure it remains strong for negotiations.

Rutte reiterated the summit’s purpose as testing Putin’s commitment to peace, saying, "Next Friday will be important because it will be about testing Putin, how serious he is on bringing this terrible war to an end." He expressed confidence in Trump’s intent to end the loss of life and damage in Ukraine, acknowledging Russia’s factual control of some Ukrainian territory as a negotiation point, though not legally recognizing it. Rutte stressed Ukraine’s sovereign right to decide its future, rejecting any Russian say in its geopolitical status or NATO’s eastern flank presence. He dismissed fears of rewarding Russia, citing Trump’s pressure tactics like tariffs on India and increased weapon supplies as evidence of a balanced approach.

Rutte also acknowledged that Ukraine has to give Eastern Ukraine to Russia for the permanent ceasefire/peace deal in return for full NATO assurance, security, sovereignty and peace. The NATO/EU/US will recognize swapped/surrendered Eastern Ukraine to Russia as ‘[De-facto’ or ‘occupied Eastern Ukraine’ by Russia just like ‘Occupied Kashmir’ or POK (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) or Akshay Chin (China occupied Kashmir/Ladakh region) to India or Taiwan to China. Theoretically, Ukraine, the EU, the US, NATO and even the UN will not recognize Russia-occupied Eastern Ukraine and continue to show Eastern Ukraine as a part of Ukraine in their official map, but practically it will be a permanent Russian territory.

Market Wrap

Wall Street surged mid-Friday, August 8, 2025, on hopes of an imminent Ukraine war ceasefire after Trump indicated her would meet Putin in the coming days and some ‘swapping of land’ would happen for a permanent Ukraine war ceasefire. The S&P 500 rose 0.8%, the Nasdaq-100 surged almost 1% to mark a record closing high for the second straight day, and the Dow (DJ-30) gained 206 points. Techs led the rally, led by Apple following its announcement of a $600 billion US investment plan, boosting the tech-heavy Nasdaq on hopes of favorable Trump policy. Tesla gained despite disbanding its Dojo team, and Intel rose after its CEO reaffirmed board support despite Trump’s calls for his resignation. For the week, the S&P 500 climbed 2.4%, the Dow rose 1.4%, and the Nasdaq surged 3.9% on hopes of less hawkish Trump tariffs and Fed monetary policy, coupled with hopes of an imminent Ukraine war ceasefire.

On the weekend, the US Treasury Secretary Bessent said the U.S. aims to wrap up trade negotiations with remaining countries by late October, and in the longer term (after 2029; Trump 2.0), US tariff rate may be lowered in the trade deficit will also get lower.

Techs may retreat as there was an FT report on the weekend, indicating Nvidia and AMD have agreed to share 15% of revenues from certain chip sales in China with the U.S. government, in exchange for export licenses for Nvidia’s H20 and AMD’s MI308 chips. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang met with Trump last week. In a statement, Nvidia noted: “We follow the rules the U.S. government sets for our participation in worldwide markets.”

Weekly Technical outlook: DJ-30, NQ-100, SPX-500 and Gold

Looking ahead, whatever may be the narrative, technically Dow Future (CMP: 44800) now has to sustain over 45000 for a further rally towards 45300*/45800* and only sustaining above 45800, may further rally to 46100/46500-47100/47200 in the coming days; otherwise sustaining below 44950, DJ-30 may again fall to 44200/43900-43400/42400 and 41700/41200-40700/39900 in the coming days.

Similarly, NQ-100 Future (23800) now has to sustain over 24200 for a further rally to 24300/24450-24700/25000 in the coming days; otherwise, sustaining below 24150/24000-23750/22900, NQ-100 may again fall to 22400/22200-21900/20900-20700/20200 and 19890/18300-17400/16400in the coming days.

Looking ahead, whatever may be the fundamental narrative, technically SPX-500 (CMP: 6400) now has to sustain over 6600 for a further rally to 6800/7000-7500/8300 in the coming days; otherwise, sustaining below 6550/6500-6450-6375/6300-6250/6200, SPX-500may again fall to 6000/5800-5600/5300 in the coming days.

Technically Gold (CMP: 3400) has to sustain over 3405-3425 for a further rally to 3450/3475-3495/3505*, and even 3525/3555 in the coming days; otherwise sustaining below 3400-3360, Gold may again fall to 3340/3320-3300*/3280 and 3255*/3225*-3200/3165* and further to 3130/3115*-3075/3015-2990/2975-2960*/2900* and 2800/2750 in the coming days.

Disclaimer:  I am an NSE-certified Level-2 market professional (Financial Analyst- Fundamental + Technical) and not a SEBI/SEC-registered investment advisor. The article is purely educational and not a proxy for any trading/investment signal/advice.  I am a professional analyst, signal provider, and content writer with over ten years of experience. All views expressed in the blog are strictly personal and may not align with any organization with, I may be associated.

If you want to support independent & professional market analytics, you may contribute to my PayPal A/C: asisjpg@gmail.com

For any professional consultation about the financial market (EQ/COMM/FX), investment, trading ideas, and real-time, professional-grade perfect signals, please DM: ashishghoshjpg@gmail.com or ping me at Telegram id: asisjpg