# In Ankara, Trump Reaches Out to Zelensky and Shuts the Door on Putin

> The White House confirmed on July 5, 2026 that Donald Trump will meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Ankara, on the sidelines

- Author: Maxime Marquette
- Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co)
- Section: Analysis
- Published: 2026-07-06
- Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/a-ankara-trump-tend-la-main-a-zelensky-et-referme-la-porte-a-poutine

## Introduction: a summit that reeks of gunpowder and diplomacy

### A meeting announced at the worst possible moment for Moscow

The **White House** confirmed on **July 5, 2026** that **Donald Trump** will meet Ukrainian President **Volodymyr Zelensky** in **Ankara**, on the sidelines of the **NATO** summit scheduled for **July 7 and 8**. Deputy White House press secretary **Anna Kelly** confirmed that the American president will also cross paths with Syrian transitional president **Ahmed al-Sharaa** during the same trip, a diplomatic double-header that speaks volumes about the ambition behind this journey. This summit, the **36th** in the history of the **Alliance** and the second hosted by **Turkey** since **Istanbul** in **2004**, is being held at the presidential complex in **Beştepe**, under the chairmanship of Secretary General **Mark Rutte**.

The timing is no accident. On the eve of this bilateral meeting, **Trump** is first set to see Turkish President **Recep Tayyip Erdogan** on Tuesday evening, ahead of the NATO leaders' dinner. It is within this three-step sequence — **Erdogan**, then **Zelensky**, then **al-Sharaa** — that a piece of the geopolitical balance of **summer 2026** is being decided, spanning the **war in Ukraine**, Syria's reshuffling, and Turkey's repositioning within the **Atlantic Alliance**.

### An 85-minute call that shifted the tone

The weekend before the summit, an **85-minute** phone call took place between Trump and Zelensky on America's Independence Day, followed by a separate exchange with **Vladimir Putin**. **Zelensky** called the exchange **"a real chance to end this war,"** adding that **"America's resolve is decisive."** A senior American official indicated that **Trump** plans to call **Putin** back after his meeting with **Zelensky** in **Ankara**, in a calculated pressure play.

This sandwich diplomacy — talk to Kyiv, talk to Moscow, come back to Kyiv — reflects a familiar Trump method: keep every option open while projecting the appearance of control. *I'll say it plainly: this diplomatic gymnastics both irritates and reassures me in equal measure. It irritates because it treats a war of Russian aggression like a real-estate negotiation. It reassures because, for once in months, the Western agenda seems to be moving rather than stalling. I'll take the compromise on style if the substance delivers a real ceasefire.*

## The Ankara summit: a military showcase and a credibility test for NATO

### 70 billion euros, and aid that can't stay on paper

According to several Turkish outlets, **NATO** is preparing to announce nearly **70 billion euros** in military aid to **Kyiv** for **2026**, a sum that, if fully confirmed, would mark one of the **Alliance's** most substantial commitments since Russia's invasion began. The summit is also expected to unveil **joint defense projects**, including **joint weapons production** involving European countries and **Canada**.

**Thirty-two NATO leaders**, along with partners from the **Gulf** and the **Indo-Pacific**, are expected in **Beştepe**. This expanded format illustrates a reality **Western doctrine** must fully embrace: defending **Ukraine** is no longer a purely European matter — it has become a credibility test for the entire free world against the **authoritarian axis** formed by **Russia**, **China**, **Iran**, and **North Korea**.

### Erdogan, the awkward but useful host

Turkey occupies a singular position: a NATO member that keeps channels open with Moscow while hosting this pivotal summit. **Foreign Policy** summed up the mood in one word: **"angsty,"** given how visible the fault lines within the **Alliance** remain, between the firm posture of the **Baltic states** and Scandinavia and Ankara's more cautious realpolitik. The **Boston Globe** notes that **Erdogan's** personal ties to **Trump** give **Turkey** a rare diplomatic edge in this context.

*You can criticize Erdogan on plenty of fronts, but give him this: hosting this summit at the exact moment Trump is trying to talk to both Zelensky and Putin is a shrewd diplomatic play. The West needs this kind of platform, imperfect as it is, to keep dialogue open without ever legitimizing Russian aggression.*

## Zelensky in Ankara: the diplomacy of courage, not comfort

### A president who gives no ground on substance

For more than **four years**, **Volodymyr Zelensky** has turned every foreign trip into a chance to restate a truth too often forgotten in some weary Western circles: **Ukraine** is fighting for its survival, not for a comfortable territorial compromise. His presence in **Ankara**, amid American-Turkish wrangling over fighter jets, must not obscure the essential point: every day of war costs **Ukrainian lives**.

Ukrainian outlet **UNN** reports that the meeting between **Trump** and **Zelensky** in **Ankara** is seen in **Kyiv** as a chance to lock in military support before the fall, traditionally a harder season for Ukraine's energy infrastructure.

### The red line that does not move

Despite diplomatic pressure, **Kyiv** holds a consistent line: no territorial concession imposed from outside. This is a point on which **Zelensky** refuses to bend, and rightly so. Giving ground on this principle would reward **aggression** — a precedent neither **Ukraine** nor the **West** can afford to set in front of **Moscow**, **Beijing**, or **Tehran**, all of whom are watching this outcome closely.

*Zelensky remains, in my eyes, the clearest embodiment of political courage of this decade. He didn't flee in 2022, and he isn't fleeing in 2026. You can debate his tactical choices, never his courage. He's a hero, full stop, and I'll never apologize for saying it that bluntly.*

## Trump, the one military file where he earns credit

### A posture that, on this specific file, serves the West

Credit should be given where it's due. On the strictly military front, **Donald Trump** is this time pushing for a tangible strengthening of the **Western defense** apparatus against **Russia**, insisting that arms deliveries to **Ukraine** continue while keeping pressure on Russian diplomacy. If confirmed by actions in **Ankara**, this orientation is a positive signal for NATO's **collective deterrence**.

The **joint arms-production projects** floated for the summit, involving American, European, and Canadian defense industries, strengthen the **Alliance's** ability to sustain a prolonged war effort without relying solely on existing stockpiles. This is exactly the kind of structural decision that has been missing for far too long.

### The flip side still needs watching

That said, caution is warranted: **Trump** has also sent contradictory signals in recent months, torn between eagerness to strike a quick **peace deal** and displayed firmness toward **Moscow**. The consistency of his **Ukraine policy** will depend on actions taken in **Ankara**, not just announcements.

*Let me be honest: I don't place blind trust in Trump on this file. But I also reject the bad faith of those who deny any credit to an American administration that, for now, keeps the architecture of military support to Ukraine standing. Judge by the actions, not by personal dislike.*

## Syria, the trip's second diplomatic front

### Al-Sharaa, an unexpected but necessary interlocutor

The planned meeting with **Ahmed al-Sharaa**, Syria's transitional president, shows the scope of the American agenda in **Ankara**. **Post-Assad Syria** remains a fragile project, where **Iranian influence** and residual pro-Russian networks continue to weigh on regional stability. That **Washington** chose this moment to open direct dialogue with **Damascus** signals a desire to build a regional architecture less favorable to **Tehran** and **Moscow**.

This choice is not trivial in the broader context of **Western doctrine**: every setback for **Iranian influence** in the **Levant** is a strategic gain for the entire Western camp and for the security of **Israel**, an indispensable ally in a region where the **Tehran-Moscow-Beijing** axis is constantly seeking to expand its reach.

### A diplomacy of simultaneity

By packing **Erdogan**, **Zelensky**, and **al-Sharaa** into a single trip, **Trump** is betting on simultaneity to maximize the media and diplomatic impact of his stop in **Ankara**. It's a risky method — spreading focus can hurt the depth of each file — but it does demonstrate a capacity for multiple action that an isolated **Moscow** can no longer claim.

*I'll stay cautious on Syria: I don't claim to master every intricacy of this complex political transition. What I do know is that every gesture that pulls Damascus further from Iran's orbit deserves to be noted, even if it will take months to judge its real weight.*

## Russia, the great absentee and the great loser of the summit

### Putin watches from afar as the West regroups

While Trump multiplies his meetings in Ankara, **Vladimir Putin** stays on the sidelines of a summit reshaping Western military alliances. This absence is not a strategic choice on his part: it is the direct consequence of four years of aggression that have isolated Russia from nearly every Western multilateral institution.

The Kremlin nonetheless keeps hoping for a scenario in which Washington would impose unilateral concessions on Kyiv. This reading, largely disproven by recent events in Ankara, shows just how trapped Moscow remains in its own propaganda about the balance of power.

### Isolation that has yet to translate into de-escalation

Diplomatic isolation does not mean military retreat. Russian bombing of Ukrainian infrastructure continues unabated, proof that Putin's isolation on the international stage has, for now, no tangible deterrent effect on the ground.

*We need to stop believing that Russia's diplomatic isolation will, by itself, stop the bombs. It won't, it never has. Only sustained military and economic pressure can bend a regime that has made war its mode of governance.*

## The US Congress, an internal check on Trump's generosity toward Ankara

### A bipartisan opposition complicating the Turkish agenda

While the Ukraine file moves forward, the Turkish leg of the summit remains bogged down on the American legislative front. Lawmakers from both parties, led notably by Republican Senator **Jim Risch**, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, firmly oppose any reintegration of **Turkey** into the **F-35** program as long as **Ankara** keeps its Russian **S-400** systems, according to the **Associated Press**.

This congressional pushback reflects a structural tension in American foreign policy under Trump: the executive branch wants to move quickly on Turkish files for geopolitical and personal reasons, while the legislature imposes a strict legal framework, notably via the **CAATSA** law, which remains in force.

### A test for the strength of America's checks and balances

This tug-of-war between the White House and Congress over the Turkish file shows that American institutions, despite legitimate criticism of other aspects of the Trump presidency, continue to function as genuine checks on national-security matters.

*Irony of fate: it may be Congress, not the White House, that prevents a risky strategic concession to Turkey. Proof that American democracy, gaping flaws under this administration notwithstanding, still holds mechanisms of resistance worth applauding.*

## Western rearmament, the indispensable backdrop of the summit

### Deterrence that must become permanent, not situational

The Ankara summit fits within a broader dynamic of **Western rearmament** launched since Russia's 2022 invasion. The 70 billion euros announced for Ukraine represent only a fraction of a global effort that must now become structural rather than reactive. NATO can no longer afford to operate in permanent crisis mode without ever building a durable defense industrial base.

The joint-production projects discussed in Ankara point in that direction: they aim to reduce the Alliance's dependence on fragile supply chains, an issue that has become glaring since the war in Ukraine exposed the limits of Western munitions stockpiles.

### A lesson learned at too high a price

It took four years of war in Ukraine, hundreds of thousands of casualties, and a colossal economic bill for the West to finally accept what the Baltic and Polish states had been repeating for years: deterrence is built before the crisis, not during it.

*I can't help but think of all those warnings ignored for years by a Western Europe too confident in perpetual peace. We are collectively paying today for that strategic naivety. Let's hope the lesson finally sticks for good.*

## China watches, Iran calculates, North Korea arms up

### An authoritarian axis tracking every Western move in Ankara

This summit isn't only about Washington, Kyiv, and Moscow. Beijing, Tehran, and Pyongyang are watching closely how solid the Western response proves to be, because every sign of weakness or division within NATO feeds their own strategic calculations, whether on Taiwan, Iran's nuclear program, or North Korean ballistic provocations.

**China** remains, in this equation, the most structurally significant long-term threat to the West. Its indirect economic support for Russia, through trade and technology exchanges, allows Moscow to sustain its war effort despite Western sanctions. It's a fact too many Western commentators still downplay.

### One lesson matters: Western cohesion deters

Every NATO summit that produces concrete commitments, like the one hoped for in Ankara, sends a clear signal to this authoritarian axis: the Western fatigue promised for years by Kremlin propagandists has not materialized.

*I've said it for months in this column: China, not Russia, remains the West's true long-term strategic adversary. Moscow is the immediate, bloody problem; Beijing is the generational challenge. Both demand constant vigilance.*

## What Ukraine concretely expects from this summit

### Deliveries, not just promises

For Kyiv, the value of this summit will not be measured by speeches but by the actual delivery of air-defense systems, munitions, and military financing. Ukrainian officials have learned, over years of war, to tell spectacular announcements apart from commitments actually honored.

The 70 billion euros floated will have to translate into precise delivery schedules, or else they will remain a mere line in a final communiqué, like so many before them since 2022.

### A legitimate expectation after four years of war

After more than four years of resistance, Ukraine has earned the right to demand clarity rather than vague diplomatic formulas. Every month of delayed deliveries translates concretely into civilian lives lost under Russian bombardment.

*It bears repeating endlessly: words do not protect anyone from Russian ballistic missiles. Only air-defense systems delivered on time save lives in Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Odesa. Everything else is diplomatic theater, necessary as it may be to preserve Western unity.*

## Lessons from the Turkish file for NATO unity

### An unpredictable but indispensable ally

The Turkish case demonstrates an unavoidable reality of the Atlantic Alliance: it must work with members whose interests sometimes diverge without ever yielding on the fundamental principles of collective security. Ankara's stance on the S-400s illustrates this permanent tension between alliance solidarity and national sovereignty.

The potential compromise floated in several outlets — reselling the Russian systems to a third country rather than returning them to Moscow — shows that a diplomatic solution remains achievable without sacrificing American security requirements around F-35 technology.

### An Alliance that must learn to manage its internal contradictions

NATO in 2026 is no longer the homogeneous Alliance of the Cold War. It must now manage members with radically different economic, political, and strategic profiles, while maintaining enough cohesion to face the Russian threat.

*I genuinely believe this internal diversity, often presented as a weakness, can become a strength if managed well. An Alliance of thirty-two different voices that still reaches consensus on Ukraine sends a stronger signal than a monolithic bloc that would crumble at the first disagreement.*

## The weeks ahead: between hope and skepticism

### A decisive fall for negotiations

After the Ankara summit, attention will shift to the follow-up on the Trump-Putin call announced for the coming days. Ukrainian officials remain cautious: nothing guarantees this diplomatic sequence will lead to concrete progress before fall, historically a pivotal period in the conflict given the winter energy stakes.

Skepticism remains the rule in Kyiv, where officials have learned not to overinterpret every American diplomatic gesture after several cycles of failed negotiations since the war began.

### Strategic patience as the only realistic option

In this context, strategic patience remains the only reasonable stance for Ukraine and its Western allies: keep strengthening military capacity while staying open to any serious diplomatic progress, without ever lowering the guard.

*I'll stay skeptical until I see a ceasefire hold for more than a few days. Recent history of this conflict is littered with broken promises. But I also refuse total cynicism: every open diplomatic channel, however imperfect, beats silence.*

## Why this summit matters beyond Ukraine

### A precedent for every threatened democracy

The outcome of the Ankara summit reaches far beyond the bilateral Russo-Ukrainian frame. It sets a precedent for every democracy facing territorial aggression, from Taiwan against China to the Baltic states against a potential future Russian escalation. A West able to sustain its support for Ukraine over time sends a credible deterrence message to every authoritarian regime tempted by expansionism.

Conversely, a gradual abandonment of the Ukrainian file, under the pretext of diplomatic or electoral fatigue, would validate the theory that Western democracies lack strategic staying power against patient, determined adversaries.

### The West cannot afford another failure

This may be the most important lesson of this summit: in Ankara, the West is gambling a piece of its strategic credibility for decades to come, well beyond the Ukrainian file alone.

*This is why I refuse to treat this summit as just another diplomatic event. It's a collective character test for the West. Succeeding in Ankara sends a message to Beijing, Tehran, and Pyongyang. Failing hands them a free victory.*

## The human cost no one should forget

### Numbers beyond diplomatic comprehension

While delegations negotiate in **Ankara**, a study cited by **ABC News** puts Ukrainian casualties since the start of the Russian invasion between **525,000 and 625,000**, including **125,000 to 150,000 killed**. These chilling figures remind us that every summit, every phone call, every official statement plays out against a backdrop of human carnage that diplomatic tables can never fully capture.

The city of **Kostiantynivka**, in **Donetsk**, illustrates this daily price: Ukrainian soldiers there are pushing back Russian assaults one at a time, in ruins turned into a permanent battlefield, while the world's cameras turn toward the plush halls of **Ankara**.

### Never separate diplomacy from the ground

This may be the most dangerous trap of this kind of summit: letting people believe that high-level diplomacy moves forward independently of the daily sacrifice of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians. Both realities are inseparable, and no agreement signed in **Ankara** will be worth anything if it ignores the price paid on the ground by the **Ukrainian army**.

Every negotiation must be measured against this standard: how many additional lives will be spared if the deal holds, how many will be lost if it fails. That is the only metric that truly matters for the families of **Kyiv**, **Kharkiv**, and **Donetsk**.

*I refuse to let this summit become a public-relations exercise disconnected from the blood spilled. Diplomats have the luxury of Ankara's air-conditioned halls; Ukrainian soldiers have only mud, drones, and fear. Let's always keep that hierarchy of priorities in mind.*

## Conclusion: between clear-eyed judgment and resolve

### A pivotal moment demanding consistency

The **Ankara** summit, with its multiple bilateral meetings and its military-aid announcements, illustrates a simple truth: the **war in Ukraine** remains, in this summer of **2026**, the primary credibility test for the **Western security architecture**. **Trump**, **Zelensky**, **Erdogan**, and **al-Sharaa** each embody a different facet of this pivotal moment, where personal calculations, national interests, and global geopolitical stakes intertwine.

### Vigilance remains the only valid watchword

No summit, however ambitious, will end four years of war overnight. But every commitment kept, every delivery made, every diplomatic channel kept open brings **Ukraine** a little closer to a just peace rather than a disguised capitulation. That is the nuance that must guide our reading of the coming days in **Ankara**.

*I'll close as I opened this column: with cautious confidence in Ukrainian courage and lingering wariness of the calculations coming out of Washington and Moscow. History will judge this summit by its results, not its official photos.*

**By Maxime Marquette, columnist**

## Columnist's transparency note

### Editorial stance

I am not a journalist but a **columnist and analyst**. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies.

I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. **I claim analytical clarity**, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events.

### Method and sources

This text keeps the basic distinction between **verified facts and interpretive analysis**. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under **Sources**, never here.

**Primary source families** used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies.

**Secondary source families**: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations.

When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under **Sources**.

### Nature of the analysis

The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a **critical, contextual synthesis** based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted.

My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors.

This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text.

## Sources

### Primary sources

- CNBC — Trump to meet Ukraine's Zelenskyy and Syria's al-Sharaa at NATO summit, July 5, 2026

- The Epoch Times — Trump to travel to Turkey for NATO summit: what to know, July 2026

- Associated Press — Trump, NATO summit, Iran, Turkey, Erdogan, July 2026

### Secondary sources

- UNN — Trump to meet with Zelenskyy during NATO summit in Turkey, July 5, 2026

- RTÉ — Trump-Putin-Zelensky calls, July 5, 2026

- Foreign Policy — Angsty in Ankara, July 2, 2026

- Boston Globe — Erdogan ties give Turkey edge at NATO summit, July 3, 2026

- Wikipedia — 2026 Ankara NATO summit

---

Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/a-ankara-trump-tend-la-main-a-zelensky-et-referme-la-porte-a-poutine