India, Aug. 18 -- The Alaska summit between American President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin may have ended inconclusively, but it clearly indicated that if the Ukraine war ends during Trump's presidency, Ukraine will likely have to sacrifice a part of its territory. The usual aggression that Trump displays when meeting other world leaders was hardly present when he met Putin; if anything, there was a great deal of chemistry between them. In the run-up to the summit, Trump had warned of "severe consequences" if Putin continued the Ukraine war after the summit, but that appears to be an empty threat now. As a matter of fact, Trump seems to have gone in the opposite direction. After the summit, Trump agreed with Putin that the best way to end the war was through a peace settlement - not a ceasefire, which Ukraine, Europe, and even the US had preferred prior to the summit, but not Russia. The apparent rapport between the two leaders and Trump's reversal on the ceasefire issue suggest that Trump is likely to, going forward, show more understanding of the Russian position than the Ukrainian one. Apart from the growing certainty, underscored by this summit, that the war is likely to end on Russia's terms, the rest is just noise and drama - including, it seems, Trump's recent threat to impose an additional 25% duty on Indian goods for buying Russian oil. A key reason Russia is unlikely to give up the captured Ukrainian territory is not only its military strength but also that, under Trump, Washington lacks the political will to enforce such a change. Even if the US had the political will to do so, as it did under the Biden administration, it might still have been unable to dislodge Russia from the occupied territories. At best, the US could have made it tough for Russia to hold onto the captured territory and generally made life difficult for Moscow. Trump is not keen on doing so; he appears to have decided to abandon Ukraine. America's lack of commitment to this war is hardly born out of a realistic assessment of the balance of forces on the battlefield or due to Russian staying power in the occupied territories; it is simply a function of Trump's personal proclivities. Trump is simply not convinced of the need to push back against Russia because he doesn't believe in that cause: He wants a great power rapprochement with Russia. Trump's war termination talks with Russia without Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky at the table, America's reduced military assistance to Ukraine, and the summit with Putin are all part of the American president's attempts at controlling the narrative, something Trump enjoys immensely. Europe is deeply worried but has limited capacity to help Ukraine. Its security predicament stems from its deep reliance on American security guarantees. If it doesn't have the wherewithal to look after its own security, its ability to help Ukraine without the US is far less certain. Notwithstanding Europe's good intentions and its constant assurances to Ukraine, it will eventually have to swallow the bitter pill and walk the line dictated by Washington. Good intentions are not enough to win wars. Russia is now acting from a position of strength - militarily, diplomatically and geopolitically. The Alaska summit has further strengthened Moscow's position regarding the war. By agreeing to a peace settlement to end the war, as opposed to a ceasefire, Trump has effectively agreed to the Russian position. Even if we are not sure what Trump has in mind when he refers to a peace settlement, we do know what Putin means by it. The Russian view of a settlement has the following four key elements. One, international legal recognition of Crimea, captured in 2014, as part of Russia, as well as Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions; two, Ukraine must become neutral, outside any military alliance, host no foreign forces, and make a commitment not to acquire nuclear weapons; three, major limits on Ukraine's armed forces; four, ending the sanctions on Russia. Even if Russia is able to get some, if not all, of these demands met - which doesn't seem impossible at this point- it is likely to walk away from this war victorious. Russia is on its way back into the ranks of great powers and the global balance of power, and Putin has much to thank Trump for creating that shift. Even though Ukraine is the most important, and aggrieved, party in this conflict, unfortunately, it appears to be the least consequential one at the negotiating table, at least for the moment. It neither has the military power to push back against Russia on its own nor does it have the geopolitical standing to convince Trump to come to its aid. Kyiv's best friends, the European States, are finding it harder to do for Ukraine any more than what they are already doing. Ukraine's fate is a grave wake-up call for small and medium powers worldwide, especially those bordering ambitious great powers. If so, the eventual outcomes of the Ukraine war are broadly clear; unless of course, there are major shifts in geopolitics in the months to come. We are likely to witness a great power detente between the US and Russia. The chemistry between the two leaders left us in no doubt that the world is headed that way. Such a US-Russia detente will leave Europe insecure, which will seek to build its defence outside of Nato. Ukraine is caught between having to make concessions it detests and being embroiled in a long war with Russia without any US military assistance. It can afford neither, nor can it avoid a choice....