Europe’s leaders find no quick response to Trump’s bombshell on Ukraine
Common ground proves elusive, including on sending peacekeepers.
PARIS — A French-led effort by European leaders to present a united front on Ukraine in the face of rising fear over U.S. President Donald Trump's intentions fizzled Monday as they failed to agree on sending troops to police a possible peace deal.
French President Emmanuel Macron had called the emergency meeting in Brussels after European leaders were left reeling by news the U.S. would start negotiations with Russia to end its war on Ukraine, but without inviting any representatives from Europe or from Ukraine.
But after a 3.5-hour huddle at the Elysée presidential palace, the response of leaders to the biggest security calculus shift in decades was underwhelming.
“We realize that such meetings do not end in decisions,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said after the meeting.
Leaders came up with no new joint ideas, squabbled over sending troops to Ukraine, and once again mouthed platitudes on aiding Ukraine and boosting defense spending.
"Today in Paris we reaffirmed that Ukraine deserves peace through strength," said both European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa.
The core dispute was over whether to send troops to Ukraine if there is an agreement to end the war. U.S. President Donald Trump has ruled out both sending U.S. forces and allowing Ukraine to join NATO, meaning that any effort to prevent Russia from attacking Ukraine again would have to be borne by Europeans.
The U.S. sent a questionnaire to European NATO countries asking them to spell out what they would be prepared to offer to enforce a peace agreement, as well as what they would expect from the U.S.
But there was no consensus on the issue.
France, whose president first suggested the idea, and the U.K.'s Keir Starmer both support the idea, although Starmer said that could only happen if the United States also participated in any peacekeeping force.
He insisted on the need for a “U.S. backstop” after peace is secured in Ukraine, in order to “deter Russia from attacking Ukraine again.”
But Poland, a frontline state and close ally of Ukraine, with one of the largest militaries in Europe, demurred.
"We do not anticipate sending Polish soldiers to Ukraine," Tusk said in Warsaw before flying to Paris.
“Poland simply doesn’t have the additional capacity to send troops to Ukraine,” said a senior Polish official who spoke on condition of anonymity, noting the country has long borders with the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad and Russia-allied Belarus, which need to be reinforced with Polish forces. “The French are far away so they can send soldiers to Ukraine; we’re close so we cannot.”
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said after the meeting that any debate on sending peacekeepers to Ukraine was "completely premature" and "highly inappropriate" while the war continued.
Denmark’s Mette Frederiksen said "many, many" things needed to be clarified before troops can be sent to Ukraine.
More money
The leaders did find some common ground on the need for increased defense spending — which has been steadily increasing for a decade.
Starmer acknowledged that “Europeans will have to step up, both in terms of spending and the capabilities that we provide to Ukraine,” while Tusk said U.S.-EU relations on defense were entering “a new stage,” as Europeans realize the need for more spending on defense and greater self-reliance.
“Europe has understood the U.S. message that it has to do more itself," said Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof, adding: “It is all still far too early to make concrete agreements."
The meeting's host, Macron, agreed. "We are convinced that Europeans must invest better, more, and together in their security and defense — both for today and for the future," the French president wrote in a late-night post on X.
Scholz restated his support for the EU proposal to trigger an emergency clause to massively boost defense spending, which von der Leyen backed at last week’s Munich Security Conference. Under the proposal, countries would be able to exempt defense spending from EU debt and deficit limits.
But despite the disquiet verging on panic that reigned at last weekend's Munich Security Summit following a vitriolic attack by U.S. Vice President JD Vance against European democracy, most leaders were reluctant to publicly break with the U.S., which has provided the backbone of the continent's security since 1945.
"There must be no division of security and responsibility between Europe and the United States," Scholz said.
Tusk added: "Someone must also say that it is in the interest of Europe and the U.S. to cooperate as closely as possible."
Цитата:
Is Britain really ready to lead a Ukraine peacekeeping force?
Keir Starmer has made a big offer on European security, but the country’s army is hugely stretched.
LONDON — Britain likes to think of itself as the de facto European leader of NATO.
After all, the U.K. has the second-largest defense budget of any NATO country after the U.S. — and widespread experience in military operations over the last few decades. And London is one of just two European nuclear powers, alongside Paris.
So when Keir Starmer on Monday pledged British peacekeeping troops to support any future Ukraine-Russia peace deal, it will have come as no great surprise to the U.K.'s allies — particularly as U.S. President Donald Trump pushes Europe to take on a much greater role in Ukraine’s security.
Yet Starmer’s projection of confidence belies what is recognized in Whitehall and among Britain’s military chiefs: The British Army is a bit of a mess.
Indeed, Britain’s standing as the strongest European military force in NATO is perhaps more of an indictment of Europe's defense capabilities — than a sign of the U.K.'s own strength.
Defence Secretary John Healey said he discovered upon entering government last year that Britain was not ready to fight a war. "And unless we are ready to fight, we are not in a shape to deter," he said.
A failed consensus
Britain’s share of defense spending as a percentage of GDP fell dramatically after the Cold War ended, and plateaued at the start of the 21st century.
While the precise level has inched up or down since then, Britain proportionally spends around as much on defense now as it did at the beginning of the Iraq War in 2003.
Recent governments have prioritized spending on modern high-tech equipment, while simultaneously cutting troop numbers.
Ex-Prime Minister Boris Johnson argued in 2021 that "the old concepts of fighting big tank battles on European land mass are over," saying "there are other, better things we should be investing in ... in the future combat air system, in cyber — this is how warfare in the future is going to be.”
It's a line that aged fast. Russia invaded Ukraine just a few months later, in what has become a protracted land battle. It was, however, in line with a long-held consensus across the West.
H.R. McMaster, Trump's former national security adviser, told a London event on Monday that "none of our armies are big enough" and that "the U.S. Marine Corps is bigger than the British army."
"We can tell ourselves lies about that, because we have this really nifty kit, and more FPV [First-Person View] drones or something," he said. "But actually, the [victory] often goes to the side with the bigger battalions."
With the very real prospect of British troops now being deployed overseas, even in a peacekeeping capacity, the British government appears aware of the need to urgently boost troop numbers.
Starmer is expected soon to announce a big uptick in defense spending on an accelerated timetable — even as the Treasury pushes government departments across the board to find savings.
Additionally, the British government has already begun to roll out reforms to accelerate lengthy recruitment times for new British Army personnel.
A Ministry of Defence insider, granted anonymity to discuss internal government thinking, said there would be a package of measures announced in the U.K.'s upcoming defense review, due later this spring, on improving benefits for British military personnel in a bid to improve retention.
"The biggest problems we hear from current service-people are around pay, childcare and housing," they said. "Expect to see something on all these areas in the defense review."
Numbers game
These reforms, however, will take years to filter through the system — and may do little to help the government cobble together a potential peacekeeping force in Ukraine.
In January, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said "at least 200,000" peacekeepers would be needed if the war ends at the negotiating table.
If Trump's insistence on no American troops in such a force holds firm, and if Germany and Poland stick to their apparent opposition to deploying troops, Starmer would need to lead the charge.
This may be difficult considering Britain has just 75,000 full-time army personnel — many of whom will be in non-battlefield roles — and around 24,000 in the Army Reserves.
Richard Dannatt, former head of the British army and in post under the last Labour government, told the BBC on Monday that “we haven’t got the numbers and we haven’t got the equipment to put a large force onto the ground for an extended period of time.”
“Now, if Keir Starmer wants to do that, that’s fine, the British army will always stand up to the plate, but here we go again: We’ve got to have the right number of people with the right amount of equipment and the right amount of training, and start to fund that now,” he added.
Starmer's spokesperson refused several times on Monday to answer whether Britain has enough troops to send a significant peacekeeping force to Ukraine.
He added it would be "premature" to discuss the details of any peacekeeping force.
Malcolm Chalmers, deputy director at London's RUSI think tank, said any deal would need to have American involvement — despite what the White House is saying at the moment.
"The PM has said the U.S. is essential to providing a security guarantee to Ukraine," Chalmers pointed out. "If the U.S. provides this, then a U.K. force can be quite small, even if it is there to fight, for its role will be to tripwire American intervention."
But he added: "It is hard to imagine Russia accepting a large force composed mainly of NATO members as part of a deal."
Speaking after a three-hour summit of European leaders Monday evening, Starmer — who heads to Washington for talks with Trump next week — seemed to acknowledge this reality.
“Europe must play its role, and I’m prepared to consider committing British forces on the ground alongside others, if there is a lasting peace agreement,” he said. “But there must be a U.S. backstop, because a U.S. security guarantee is the only way to effectively deter Russia from attacking Ukraine again.”
If that message falls on deaf ears in D.C., Britain’s prime minister may soon have to put his money where his mouth is.
Ask NFL executives their biggest fear, and it has nothing to do with fans, players or TV rights. It's drones — which are hard for authorities to track, and almost impossible to stop if ever unleashed on an open-air stadium.
• Ask U.S. intelligence experts their biggest fears, and you'll inevitably hear dire warnings of drone swarms — domestic or foreign — targeting American soil.
• Probe deeper, and you'll learn that the vast majority of these drones are made by China — and, therefore, conceivably controllable by America's greatest adversary. TikTok is accused of being a security threat — but it can't spy or drop bombs.
Why it matters:
Look at the skies of Syria, Russia — or, many squinted and said, New Jersey — and the future of terrorism and warfare is on vivid display. Drones gather intelligence, guide artillery and shape battle plans.
Between the lines:
The NFL's fear is based on gaps in authority among local, state and federal authorities. A league source calls the lack of coordination is "potentially dangerous and unsustainable."
• "Laws, regulations and enforcement mechanisms have not caught up with the technology and proliferation of these machines," the source said.
• "The general distrust in institutions, and general paranoia about the 'deep state,' makes unidentified flying objects that dwell over our communities particularly menacing. Are we being watched? If so, by whom? And they sound like swarms of insects."
State of play:
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt began her first briefing by confirming something that had long been apparent — last fall's feverish drone spottings in the Northeast were mostly sightings of ... airplanes.
• "After research and study, the drones that were flying over New Jersey in large numbers were authorized to be flown by the FAA for research and various other reasons," she said, citing news she'd been told "directly" by President Trump in the Oval Office, and echoing what the Biden administration had contended.
• The epidemic of coverage tailed off with the Christmas holidays, as people moved on and the planes kept landing. "Many of these drones were also hobbyists — recreational, and private individuals that enjoy flying drones," Leavitt added. "In time, it got worse, due to curiosity. This was not the enemy."
Reality check:
Amid the goofy sightings, the true domestic drone threat is under-discussed, defense executives tell Colin Demarest, author of Axios Future of Defense.
• The Pentagon is spending big to dominate drone defense with drone-neutralizing technology, including "meaningfully improved" protections against small drones.
• Drones' bloody consequences are apparent in the Middle East, where the U.S. Army has deployed drone zappers in a rush to defend troops.
How it works:
Dropping drones is no easy task. It requires spotting, identifying, tracking and intercepting, Colin explains.
• That last part can be accomplished with a multimillion-dollar missile (looking at you, Red Sea), bullets, electronic interference or something as primitive as a net or cage.
• Drone swarms only complicate this: What's a decoy? What's deadly? Who's the target? Which do you shoot?
What to watch:
Jonathan Moneymaker, CEO of BlueHalo, a next-generation defense firm based in Arlington, Virginia, told Colin that as threats escalate from unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), as the FAA calls drones, "our legislation to protect the homeland has not kept pace."
• Moneymaker said there's a critical need to empower local authorities, through the Department of Homeland Security, to deploy countermeasures around airports, power stations, military installations and surrounding communities. "We have the technology to be ready," he said. "We need the legislation to catch up. We will either address this before we suffer a major drone attack in [the U.S.], or we will address it after — but we will address it."
[quote]
Цитата:
Why Boeing's woes could leave Trump waiting for a new Air Force One | REUTERS
Цитата:
Цитата:
Press briefing after Delta
Цитата:
Press briefing after Delta flight flips upside down in Toronto airport crash
Цитата:
How clever designs helped save 80 people after their plane caught fire, lost a wing and skidded down a runway upside down
CNN —
When Delta Flight 4819 from Minneapolis to Toronto landed in a fiery crash that ripped off a wing and rolled the plane upside down, panicked onlookers feared the worst.
But Michael McCormick saw decades of aircraft safety improvements in action. All 80 people on board survived Monday’s crash at Toronto Pearson International Airport.
“That was absolutely phenomenal that you could see an aircraft on its back like that and have people walking away from it,” said McCormick, an associate professor at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University,
“But my second thought was, well, that’s the design. That’s engineering. That’s the years of civil aviation research … that has enabled something like that to happen.”
Fuel tanks are mainly stored in the wings
Fiery aviation disasters of the past have taught experts that jet fuel should be stored primarily in the wings, not directly beneath the passengers.
“Back in the early days of aviation, that was where it was stored – in the belly of the aircraft,” McCormick said.
So when Delta’s Bombardier CRJ900 crash-landed Monday, tipped over and skidded down the runway, its fuel-laden right wing broke off, leaving behind a massive inferno. The plane continued skidding and rolled over.
Ditching potentially explosive fuel is just one reason why wings are designed to rip off upon impact.
“We want to be able to separate the fuel from the passenger compartment, and at the same time, we want to be able to ensure that the fuselage can come to rest in a stable position,” McCormick said.
The plane ended up in a stable position – albeit upside down. But everyone survived, thanks in part to brawny seats that can withstand extreme force.
16G seats are designed for safety – not necessarily comfort
Most modern commercial aircraft are required to have what’s known as 16G seats, meaning they can withstand 16 times the force of gravity, McCormick said.
“You don’t want the seats to either fall apart or come loose in an aircraft accident – even if it’s upside down,” he said.
“So it’s not specifically designed for comfort, it’s designed for durability” in case of an accident, McCormick said. “And you know that if you’ve been in the coach for anything more than a few hours.”
If this crash had occurred a few decades ago, the outcome might have been far more grim, CNN aviation analyst Peter Goelz said.
“What’s changed is that all commercial aircraft have seats that are locked in place on the tracks as part of the fuselage that can withstand up to 16 Gs of impact,” said Goelz, a former managing director of the National Transportation Safety Board.
“That means that in a crash-landing like this, if you’re strapped in correctly, you’re going to survive the impact and have a chance to escape,” he said. “And when you combine that with advances in fire-retardant material … you really have a good chance to make it, if you follow directions.”
Nothing can replace skilled crew members
While high-tech engineering likely helped save lives, “You cannot give enough credit to the cabin crew for the safe evacuation of that aircraft,” McCormick said.
Despite dozens of passengers being strapped in their seats and dangling upside down like bats, the crew managed to evacuate the entire plane in less than 90 seconds.
“Hopefully this will (make) the public be more aware and more grateful for the men and women who serve as flight attendants,” McCormick said. “They are responsible for much more than picking up trash and serving sodas. They’re trained professionals responsible for the safety of the passengers. And they did a phenomenal job.”
_________________
С интересом и понятными ожиданиями, Dimitriy.
Переговоры в Эр-Рияде: шок Зеленского, США и Россия потребуют выборов в Украине. Итоги 18.02
Цитата:
Цитата:
Цитата:
FULL VIDEO: President Trump speaks, signs executive orders from Mar-a-Lago.
Цитата:
Reuters: Prantsusmaa korraldab teise Ukraina kohtumise, Eesti sai kutse
Uudisteagentuuri Reuters allikad teatasid, et Prantsusmaa kavatseb kolmapäeval korraldada veel ühe Ukraina-teemalise kohtumise.
Allikad teatasid, et kutse sai ka Eesti.
(выделено а.п.)
Allikate teatel kutsutakse seekord riigid, mis viimasel kohtumisel kohal polnud.
Kaks diplomaatilist allikat teatasid, et kutsutud riigid on Norra, Kanada, kolm Balti riiki, Tšehhi, Kreeka, Soome, Rumeenia, Rootsi ja Belgia.
Allikad teatasid, et mõned riigid võivad osaleda kohtumisel videosilla teel. Eesti osaleb samuti videosilla vahendusel.
Elysee palee ei vastanud uudisteagentuuri Reuters kommentaaritaotlustele.
Esmaspäeval toimus esimene Pariisi erakorraline kohtumine.
Prantsusmaa president Emmanuel Macron teatas pärast Briti, Saksa, Itaalia, Hispaania, Poola ja Taani valitsusjuhiga peetud kohtumist, et rahuga Ukrainas peavad kaasnema tugevad ja usaldusväärsed julgeolekutagatised.
Paris Summit Chaos, Macron Starmer Isolated; Riyadh Summit: Lavrov No Concessions, Zelensky Must Go.
Цитата:
ANDREI MARTYANOV / RUSSIA - USA TALKS/ UKRAINE WILL LOOK DIFFERENT.
Цитата:
Karen Kwiatkowski : Does Europe Need the US?
Цитата:
Peacemakers Meet in Riyadh / WarMongers meet in Paris
Цитата:
Цитата:
Is Europe Ready to Defend Itself Without U.S. Support?
Цитата:
Why Ukraine Wants an "Army for Europe"
Цитата:
Цитата:
Ukrainan rauhanturvaajien pitäisi tulla globaalin etelän maista, sanoo professori A-studiossa
Yhdysvallat ja Venäjä pohjustivat tänään tiistaina Saudi Arabiassa mahdollisia Ukrainan rauhanneuvotteluja.
…
Venäjän ulkoministeri Sergei Lavrov vahvisti kannan tänään Saudi-Arabiassa järjestetyn Yhdysvaltain ja Venäjän välisen Ukraina-neuvottelun päätteeksi. Venäjä ei hyväksyisi Nato-maista tulevia rauhanturvaajia Ukrainaan, vaikka he toimisivat tehtävässä oman maansa edustajina.
– Nato-maat kattavat vain yhden kahdeksasosan ihmiskunnasta. Sen ulkopuolella on monenlaisia maita, joista joillakin on kykyä osallistua rauhanturvaamiseen, Patomäki sanoo.
Patomäen mukaan Ukrainaan tulisi lähettää 25 000–50 000 rauhanturvaajaa. Hän mainitsee mahdollisiksi rauhanturvaajamaiksi esimerkiksi Indonesian, Kiinan, Intian, Brasilian, Etelä-Afrikan ja joukon muita globaalin etelän maita.
Kaikki Patomäen esimerkkeinä mainitsemat maat kuuluvat niin sanottuun BRICS-maiden ryhmään, johon myös Venäjä kuuluu.
Euroopan hybridiosaamiskeskuksen johtaja Teija Tiilikainen harkitsisi kaksi kertaa BRICS-maiden kutsumista apuun.
– BRICS on vahvasti profiloitunut Kiinan ja Venäjän uutena liittokuntana, hän huomauttaa.
Tiilikainen myös huomauttaa, että mikäli Venäjä esittää vaatimuksia rauhanturvaajista, on oikeudenmukaisen rauhan näkökulmasta reilua, että Ukrainakin saa toivoa siitä, keitä sen rauhaa saa tulla turvaamaan.
...
Цитата:
Herem: on ebaviisakas rääkida rahuvalvajatest, kui sõda Ukrainas alles käib
Viimastel päevadel ringlevad jutud võimalikust Euroopa rahuvalvajate saatmisest Ukrainasse on Ukraina suhtes ebaviisakad, arvestades, et sõda alles täie intensiivsusega käib, ütles endine kaitseväe juhataja Martin Herem.
USA hinnangul peaks Ukrainale rahulepingujärgseid julgeolekugarantiisid pakkuma Euroopa väed, kuid Martin Heremi hinnangul on selles veel väga vara rääkida.
"Ma ei tea rääkida, mis laevalgustused me paneme, kui meil pole majal veel vundamenti. Ma ei näe põhjust sel teema pikalt rääkida või arutada. /.../ Ma pole poliitik ega diplomaat, vaid reservis sõjaväelane. Ma näen seda asja oluliselt teistmoodi. Kõigepealt tuleks sõda võita, ükskõik kuidas me seda võiduks kirjeldame, ja siis võib hakata millestki üldse rääkima," ütles ta "Impulsis".
Heremi sõnul tähendab sõja võitmine seda, kui Ukraina ütleb, et ta on nüüd võitnud.
"Ku palju nad küll maad tagasi saavad, aga näiteks saavad õiguse liituda nende organisatsioonidega, millega tahavad, nad saavad tagasi mingid maad läbi läbirääkimiste, aga mitte nii, et tõmmatakse sealt piir, kus on rindejoon täna. Ma arvan, et paljud ukrainlased võib-olla osa sellest territooriumist, mille nad on kaotanud, ei tahagi tagasi. Aga seda ei saa mitte keegi üle nende peade otsustada," rääkis ta.
Herem lisas, et praeguses olukorras, kus intensiivne sõda käib, on rahuvalvajate saatmisest kohatu rääkida.
"Täna ikkagi lahingutegevus käib. Viimase ööpäevaga püstitas Ukraina (Vene ründedroonide) Shahedide allalaskmise rekordi – minu teada 103. Nii et sõda käib täie intensiivsusega ja meie räägime mingist rahuvalvest. Ausalt öeldes, see tundub isegi ebaviisakas ukrainlaste suhtes rääkida rahuvalvajatest olukorras, kus nemad pingutavad, et kuidagi hakkama saada," ütles Herem.
Välispoliitika eksperdi Kadri Liigi hinnangul on rahuvalvejõududest rääkimine arusaamatu. Liigi sõnul ei ole enesestmõistetav, et Ukrainas USA ja Venemaa läbirääkimiste toel rahu sünnib.
"Ma arvan, et Euroopas päris paljud inimesed millegipärast arvasid, et tuleb Donald Trump ja lepib Vladimir Putiniga kokku rahulepingu ja siis läheb sinna vaja rahuvalvajaid. Mina ei näe seda nii enesestmõistetavana, et seal mingi rahu sünniks. See stsenaarium eeldaks, et Venemaa on pidanud leppima eesmärkidega, mis teda päriselt ei rahulda. Kui Venemaa võiks tahta uuesti rünnata, siis järelikult ta oleks justkui sunnitud ennast pidurdama ja loobuma oma eesmärkidest enne seda rahu sõlmimist. Ma ei ole ka kindel, et Venemaa seda niiviisi näeb," kommenteeris ta.
"Aga see on tõsi, et Euroopa pealinnades käib arutelusid, kas Euroopa saaks Ukrainasse saatma vägesid. Ei räägita tegelikult rahuvalvajatest, vaid heidutusjõust, et kui venelased lähevad nende Euroopa vägedega konflikti, siis sellele järgneb suurem ja võimsam vastus. Aga minu jaoks on natuke selgusetu, kust see suurem ja võimsam vastus peaks tulema. NATO riikides on selleks USA, kes sekkub, kui NATO vägesid on rünnatud. Kui USA ütleb, et ärge meile lootke, siis kust see vastus tuleb. Sest Euroopa riikide enda võimekused on väga piiratud. Selles mõttes kogu see jutt on minu jaoks natukene arusaamatu, toimub natuke mingis virtuaalses reaalsuses. Ja minu meelest on märgiline, et sellised riigid nagu Poola on öelnud, et nemad ei kavatse selles osaleda," lisas Liik.
Euroopa Parlamendi liige Urmas Paet leidis, et võimalike jõudude saatmisest Ukrainasse spekuleeritakse ja räägitakse praegu liiga kõrgel poliitilisel tasemel liiga palju. Riigijuhtide sõnumid ei jäta selles küsimuses ka kuigi ühtset muljet.
"Mis Euroopa ühtsusest me selles konteksis räägime, kui britid ütlevad, et nad on valmis (sõjaväelasi) saatma, Emmanuel Macron kalastas seda juba aasta tagasi, saksalased ütlevad, et mitte mingil juhul, Poola samamoodi pigem mitte, osad ütlevad, et vaatame. Minu meelest seda diskussiooni tuleks praegu hoida kinni. See on tänase seisuga mõttetu jutt ja tekitab Euroopa-siseseid vastuolusid veelgi, mida Putin tahab. Ja kahjuks ka oluline osa Trumpi meeskonnast tahab näha, et Euroopas vastasseisud süvenevad. Neid, kes tahavad täna Euroopale halba, on piisavalt. Nüüd ise Euroopa tähtsad liidrid peaksid leidma endas tarkust, lihtsalt lobisemise faas võiks mööda saada," rääkis Paet.
Välisministeeriumi kantsler Jonatan Vseviov nõustus, et liigset arutelu ja sõnumite avaldamist iga päev poleks vaja. "Parem oleks, kui need arutelud oleks tasakaalukamad, informeeritumad ja ka sellised, kus me elementaarseid mõisteid segamini ei aja. Aga praegu tundub, et ajame," ütles ta.
Ta lisas, et samas peaksid arutelud käima Euroopa julgeoleku tuleviku üle.
"Kui arutelud toimuksid rahulikult – ja kindlasti on kohti, kus need rahulikult toimuvad – ja käsitleksid küsimust, millisena näeme Euroopa julgeoleku tulevikku, Ukraina kohta selles, millist garantiid kujutame ette, et oleksime veenvalt võimelised rajama, siis need on kõik vajalikud ja asjakohased arutelud, mille jaoks pole hilja. Pigem on aeg õige. Millal siis veel?" rääkis Vseviov ja ütles, et kui liitlased midagi koos kokku lepivad, siis Eesti ka neis kokkulepetes osaleb.
Vseviov nõustus Heremiga selles, et praegu peaks rahuvalvajate saatmise asemel olema rõhk tegevustel, millega aidata Ukrainal saavutada jõupositsioon võimalikel tegelikel rahuläbirääkimistel.
Цитата:
Rheinmetalli juht: Euroopa on kõnelustest kõrvalejäämises ise süüdi
Saksamaa relvafirma Rheinmetall juht Armin Papperger ütles, et aastakümneid kestnud ebapiisava kaitserahastuse tõttu on Euroopa ise süüdi selles, et piirkond jäi USA presidendi Donald Trumpi algatatud Ukraina sõja lõpetamise arutamise protsessist välja.
"Kui sa ei investeeri, kui sa ei ole tugev, koheldakse sind nagu last. Viimased 30 aastat on eurooplased väga mugavalt öelnud, et olgu, kulutame protsendi kaitsele, see on hea," rääkis Papperger.
Pappergeri sõnul oli sellise lähenemise tagajärjeks see, et Euroopa riigid jäeti sisuliselt "laste laua taha", samal ajal kui USA ja Venemaa peavad läbirääkimisi Ukraina tuleviku üle.
"Kuni vanemad lõunatavad, peavad lapsed istuma teise laua taha," märkis Papperger
Ametlik statistika näitab, et aastatel 2021–2024 kasvasid EL-i kaitsekulutused kokku rohkem kui 30 protsenti, ulatudes umbes 326 miljardi euroni ehk umbes 1,9 protsendini bloki SKT-st. Samal ajal avaldab Trump NATO liitlastele survet tõsta kaitsekulutusi viie protsendini SKT-st.
Pappergeri avaldus tuleneb Euroopa riigijuhtide murest Trumpi otsuse pärast alustada "viivitamatult" läbirääkimisi Vladimir Putiniga Ukraina sõja lõpetamiseks, kaasamata Kiievit või Euroopa pealinnu.
Keset ebakindlust Euroopa tulevase julgeolekuarhitektuuri üle, ütles Rheinmetalli tegevjuht, et nõudlus relvade järele jääb piirkonnas kõrgeks isegi siis, kui Ukraina ja Venemaa sõlmivad relvarahu.
"Eurooplastel ja ukrainlastel ei ole ladudes midagi," rõhutas Papperger, viidates laskemoona ja sõjatehnika kriitiliselt madalatele laovarudele.
Pärast seda, kui Trump teatas oma rahukõneluste plaanist, alguses Rheinmetalli aktsiad langesid, kuid tõusid hiljem koos teiste Euroopa kaitseettevõtetega. Investorid eeldavad, et Euroopa valitsused peavad USA toetuse vähenemise ohu tõttu sõjalisi kulutusi oluliselt suurendama.
Papperger väljendas kahtlust, et Trumpi algatus viib tegelikult vastasseisu vaibumiseni.
"Isegi kui sõda Ukrainas peatub – kui me arvame, et meil on väga rahulik tulevik, siis ma arvan, et see on ekslik arvamus," ütles Papperger.
Euroopa suurim majandus Saksamaa kulutas mullu kaitsele umbes kaks protsenti oma SKT-st.
Saksamaa tuleviku osas ennustab Papperger, et võib-olla pärast valimisi leevendab uus valitsus kaitsekulutuste suurendamiseks karme eelarvepiiranguid.
"Ma isiklikult usun, et see juhtub ja see juhtub kohe," ütles Papperger.
Rheinmetall, maailma pingete peamisi kasusaajaid, ennustab tulu kiiret kasvu. Papperger ütles ajalehele Financial Times, et ootab järgmise viie aasta jooksul 30–40 miljardi euro suurust aastakäivet, mis on märkimisväärne kasv võrreldes 5,7 miljardi euroga 2021. aastal, enne sõja puhkemist.
Zelensky condemns Trump: Ukraine leader says US President 'is in a disinformation bubble', demanding $500bn minerals 'is not a serious conversation… I won't sell my country', and says Donald has 'helped Putin'
Volodymyr Zelensky has blasted the United States for 'helping' Vladimir Putin 'to come out of isolation', warning that Donald Trump 'is living in a disinformation space' created by Moscow.
The Ukrainian President declared that his country is not for sale, disputing Trump's claims that the US has given Ukraine $500billion and calling the suggestion that Kyiv pay this back with a mineral exploration deal 'not a serious conversation.'
'Look, we all want a victory, and we want Trump to win, and we want Ukraine to win, all of us to succeed,' he said. 'But there is nothing clear here... I am protecting Ukraine. I can't sell it away. I can't sell our state.'
Speaking a day after a watershed meeting between US and Russian officials, which Kyiv was frozen out of, Zelensky added: 'I believe that the United States helped Putin to break out of years of isolation... All of this has no positive impact on Ukraine.'
Trump last night appeared to blame Kyiv for Russia's invasion, using a press conference to dismiss Zelensky's anger at being cut out of the peace talks and criticise him for not making a deal to end the war sooner.
Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov praised the US leader for 'publicly and loudly' blaming the conflict on moves to admit Kyiv into the NATO military alliance, saying 'he is the first... and only Western leader' to do so.
Moscow will have also welcomed Trump's questioning of Zelensky's legitimacy at last night's briefing in Mar-a-Lago, where he suggested it had been 'too long' since Ukraine had held elections for him to have a seat at the negotiating table.
He insisted this point was 'not a demand from Russia' - but the claim came straight out of Moscow's playbook, and failed to mention that Russia's recent election in 2024 was rigged, with Putin's foes killed, jailed or exiled.
Trump went on to falsely claim that the Ukrainian President is only supported by four per cent of Ukrainians.
Responding to theese claims, Zelensky said that the latest poll shows 58 per cent of Ukrainians trust him, adding that any attempt to replace him during the war would fail.
As US special representative Keith Kellogg prepared to begin talks with Kyiv, Zelensky suggested he use the opportunity to tour bombed out cities and speak to Ukrainians about the war.
'Let him talk to the people. Do they trust their own president, or do they trust Putin? Let him ask about Trump, what do people think about Trump after his statements,' Zelensky said.
He suggested that Kellogg tour the capital, '20 to 30 per cent' of which has been destroyed, as 'It is important for him to see for himself what's happening.'
'Then I am ready to go to the frontline with him,' Zelensky said. 'We will go, let him talk to the military.'
He said that Russia remains 'the guilty party,' arguing that world leaders should not 'whitewash' their responsibility for the war.
Speaking to reporters last night, President Trump took aim at Zelensky for raising concerns that his country had not been at the table for talks between Washington and Moscow on Tuesday.
'I think I have the power to end this war, and I think it's going very well. But today, I heard, 'Oh, well, we weren't invited.' Well, you've been there for three years,' he said of Zelensky.
'You should have ended it. You should have never started it. You could have made a deal. I could have made a deal for Ukraine.'
After the meeting between US and Russian officials in Riyadh, Trump said he was 'much more confident' that a peace deal could be struck.
'They were very good,' he said. 'Russia wants to do something. They want to stop the savage barbarianism.'
The stunning claim came as Vladimir Putin's forces launched a blistering aerial attack on the Ukrainian city of Odesa overnight, striking a children's clinic and kindergarten and leaving much of the city without power.
When asked about Trump's comments that Ukraine is responsible for the continuation of the war, a French government spokeswoman said that Paris did not understand the logic behind the US President's remarks.
As fears mount that Washington could force Kyiv into an agreement it doesn't want, Zelensky said yesterday that he will never accept a deal made without Ukraine's input, and hit out at the US and Russia for holding talks 'behind our backs'.
When asked about European countries potentially sending troops to Ukraine, Trump said yesterday: 'If they want to do that, that's great, I'm all for it... I mean, I know France has mentioned it, others have mentioned it, the UK has mentioned it.'
However, he added: 'We won't have to put any over there because, you know, we're very far away.'
Sir Keir Starmer called for the US to provide a 'backstop' for any deal in Ukraine, saying that a security guarantee from Washington would be 'the only way to effectively deter Russia' from rebuilding its forces and launching another attack.
Zelensky earlier slammed Trump's team in Saudi Arabia, saying they had been blinded by Putin's 'pathological liars'.
Referring to the overnight onslaught on Odesa, the Ukrainian leader said: 'Just yesterday, after the infamous meeting in Riyadh, it became known that Russian representatives had once again lied about not allegedly striking the energy sector.
'Almost at the same time, there was another strike, strike drones against electrical transformers.
'And this was in winter, when it was minus six degrees Celsius at night. At least 160,000 Odessans are now without heat and electricity.
'Thirteen schools, a kindergarten, and several hospitals are left without heating and electricity.
'Repair crews are working, all utilities are involved. I am grateful to every rescuer, everyone who helps people.
'We must remember that Russia is ruled by pathological liars, and they cannot be trusted - they must be pressured for the sake of peace.'
Kellogg insisted after arriving by train that he was there to listen on behalf of the Trump government.
'We will listen. We are prepared to provide what is needed,' he said. 'We understand the need for security guarantees. Part of my mission is to listen.
'Then I will go back to the United States, talk to President Trump to make sure we understand.'
He added that 'it is very clear to us the importance of sovereignty of this nation,' and that he would listen to Kyiv's concerns to 'ensure that we get this one right.'
Trump said he will 'probably' meet with Putin this month, with the Kremlin saying this morning that while talks would take time to prepare they could come before the end of the month.
During a visit to Turkey yesterday, Zelensky vowed that Ukraine would not bow to Moscow's demands, even as relations warm between Russia and the US.
'I wonder why they believe Ukraine would accept all these ultimatums now if we refused them at the most difficult moment,' the Ukrainian President said, referring to Kyiv's refusal to bow to Moscow's demands during crisis talks at the start of the war.
Zelensky pointed out that there were 'no agreements with the Russians during the occupation of Kyiv region,' nor during negotiations in Belarus or Turkey.
Moscow at the time called for a reduction in the number of Ukrainian troops, recognition of occupied Ukrainian territories as part of Russia, and the appointment of a pro-Russian government in Kyiv.
'As President of Ukraine, I have never given any guarantees to anyone or confirmed anything. Moreover, I have never intended to accept Russia's ultimatums. And I am not going to,' Zelensky said.
He added that while Ukraine wants the war to end, 'we want it to be fair and that no one decides anything behind our backs.'
Former UK defence secretary Ben Wallace said that the White House has been spouting 'fake news' on Ukraine, and slammed Trump's suggestion that Kyiv is to blame for the war as being one of the Kremlin's 'talking points'.
Jack Lopresti, another ex-Tory MP, who has now joined the army in Ukraine, said the US had been 'taken for fools' by Putin.
'I don't think [Putin] has any interest in peace whatsoever, he's still building up his military, he's upscaled his defence manufacturing and he's just sitting back letting this all unfold,' he told Sky News.
He added that where US leadership lacks, the UK is working 'to get Europe on board and get them to ramp up their defensive and offensive capability.
'We know what happens next, if Putin wins here he will not stop in Ukraine.'
Цитата:
Marco Rubio says Trump is the 'only' leader to make Russia-Ukraine peace deal possible and outlines conditions
Donald Trump is the 'only leader' who can bring about peace between Russia and Ukraine, his secretary of state Marco Rubio said following four hours of historic talks in Saudi Arabia.
U.S. and Russian officials agreed a new four-point plan as they sat down in Riyadh but whether a full deal can materialize remains to be seen amid questions over Ukraine's involvement in the negotiation process.
Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky was furious at being cut out of the first meeting and cancelled his own planned visit to Saudi Arabia on Wednesday.
Rubio, U.S. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, and Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Putin aide Yuri Ushakov at the lavish Diriyah Palace.
It was the first round of talks as the U.S. looks to broker a peace deal to end the war that has been raging since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022.
There was no immediate agreement on when Trump and Putin will meet in person to discuss ending the war.
The breakthrough talks came after Trump spoke with Putin last week as the U.S. moves away from isolating Russia, but Ukrainian officials were not present for the sit-down in the Middle East.
Rubio said that the U.S. and Russians agreed on four principles during their meeting as they start the initial steps toward a deal.
First, he said the U.S. and Moscow will work to reestablish their respective diplomatic missions in each other's countries so they can move forward with more communication.
Second, Rubio said the U.S. will appoint a high-level team to help negotiate, and third, they will begin to discuss geopolitical and economic cooperation that could help resolve the conflict.
Fourth, he said that the five people who were involved in the first meeting will remain engaged, so they know it is moving along 'in a productive way.'
Rubio said they would not pre-negotiate and it would involve 'hard and difficult diplomacy' over a period of time, but he claimed only Trump could facilitate an end to the war.
'The only leader in the world who can make this happen, who can even bring people together to begin to talk about it in a serious way is President Trump,' the secretary of state said.
Rubio also said that 'in order for the conflict to end, everyone involved in that conflict has to be OK with it.'
He noted it has been more than three years since there was any 'regularized' contact between the U.S. and Russia.
Lavrov echoed Rubio's remarks and said that 'the conversation was very useful.'
He added: 'We not only listened, but also heard each other.'
The talks reflected an extraordinary about-face in U.S. foreign policy under President Trump.
It appeared to signal a significant easing of restrictions on Russian diplomatic missions in the U.S. that were imposed by previous administrations.
The two countries have expelled diplomats and limited the appointment of new staff at each other's missions in a series of tit-for-tat measures over the past decade, leaving their respective embassies thinly staffed.
Rubio said those moves had 'really diminished our ability to operate in Moscow' and that Russia would say the same about its mission in Washington.
He said: 'We're going to need to have vibrant diplomatic missions that are able to function normally in order to be able to continue these conduits.'
The secretary of state also suggested if the conflict were to come to an end, there could be 'incredible opportunities that exists to partner with the Russians, geopolitically on issues of common interest and frankly economically.'
It was a stunning suggestion from the former senator who previously described Putin after his invasion in 2022 as an 'expert liar' who wants to capture Kyiv and install a puppet government.
Waltz, Trump's National Security Advisor, said the two sides agreed that there needed to be a permanent end to the war and not a temporary pause.
He said there will be discussion of territory as well as security guarantees which will underlie any talks that they have.
However, Waltz would not say whether the U.S. would agree to Russia retaining any Ukrainian territory it had annexed since it invaded three years ago, only that it was to be discussed.
'What the president did not find acceptable was an endless war in Europe that was literally turning into, has turned into, a meat grinder of people on both sides,' Waltz said.
Speaking after the talks, Russia's deputy foreign minister warned that Russia would not accept European or NATO peacekeepers in Ukraine to police any truce deal, hitting back at a proposal this morning by UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer.
The talks came less than a week after Trump and Putin spoke by phone. The president also spoke with Zelensky by phone, he revealed.
Zelensky signaled Ukraine could see the war coming to an end, but he has been pushing for security guarantees as part of the peace process.
…
After the meeting, the Russians issued their own set of demands as the negotiations move forward.
Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that NATO membership for Ukraine is unacceptable to Moscow.
She added: 'It is worth noting that a refusal to accept Kyiv into NATO is not enough. The alliance must disavow the Bucharest promises of 2008.'
At a summit in the Romanian capital in 2008, NATO declared that both Ukraine and Georgia would join the defense alliance but gave them no plan for how to get there.
While both sides have been laying out their demands, Rubio said on Tuesday that whether or not a peace agreement can ultimately be reached will be determined by whether both sides agree. He did not go into specifics.
He said the meeting was the start of a conversation and set the table for future dialogue, but 'how that turns out will be up to the parties.'
Britain 'ready to send Typhoon fighter jets to police Ukraine's skies' if Russia agrees to end its brutal invasion in peace deal
Britain could send Typhoon fighter jets to police Ukrainian skies as part of a peace deal with Russia, it has been revealed.
Sir Keir Starmer is prepared to send UK troops to the war-torn country as part of efforts to enforce a possible ceasefire.
The Prime Minister put forward the plans ahead of yesterday's talks between the US and Russia, held in Saudia Arabia, over potentially ending the three-year conflict.
Following the meeting, Russia's foreign minister Sergei Lavrov rejected the prospect of international peacekeeping forces in Ukraine as 'completely unacceptable'.
But some have dismissed this as Moscow's opening negotiating position at the beginning of peace talks.
According to The Times, UK ministers have discussed ways of providing security guarantees without the need for large numbers of troops on the ground.
A senior Government source told the newspaper there could be an 'air policing' mission, along with air defence systems to protect jets over Ukrainian skies.
It comes amid concerns that European nations alone would be unable to provide enough troops to patrol Ukraine's 700-mile border with Russia.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has claimed 110,000 foreign troops might be needed to secure peace.
Britain could send Typhoon fighter jets to police Ukrainian skies as part of a peace deal with Russia, it has been revealed
Sir Keir Starmer is prepared to send UK troops to the war-torn country as part of efforts to enforce a possible ceasefire
Ukrainian troops are pictured firing towards Russian positions near Chasiv Yar in the Donetsk region
A British-led air policing mission could be modelled on NATO missions already taking place over the Baltics, with fighter jets potentially based in Poland.
Sir Keir and other senior ministers are adamant that a peace settlement between Ukraine and Russia must come with a US 'backstop'.
Defence Secretary John Healey said yesterday that it was 'only the US who can provide the deterrence' to Russian President Vladimir Putin 'that will prevent him attacking again'.
Mr Healey also dodged on how many troops Britain was willing to commit to a peacekeeping force in Ukraine.
One of his predecessors as defence secretary, former Tory MP Sir Ben Wallace, today hit out at 'fake news' being spouted by the White House over Ukraine.
In a forthright attack on US President Donald Trump's administration, Sir Ben accused Mr Trump of parroting 'Kremlin talking points'.
'I think what President Trump is learning is that if you have no skin in the game you don't get to decide the fate of Ukraine,' he posted on social media.
'I am sure they all enjoyed their 4 hour talks... but they probably shouldn't have wasted their time.'
Defence Secretary John Healey said yesterday that it was 'only the US who can provide the deterrence' to Russian President Vladimir Putin (pictured) 'that will prevent him attacking again'
It came after Mr Trump made an unfounded allegation that Ukraine began the conflict when asked about Kyiv feeling betrayed by being shut out of talks between the US and Russia.
The US President said: 'I hear that they're upset about not having a seat, well, they've had a seat for three years and a long time before that. This could have been settled very easily.'
Mr Trump added: 'You should have never started it. You could have made a deal.'
A Ministry of Defence spokeswoman said: 'As the PM said after Monday's Paris summit, we are still at the early stages of the process.
'But Britain will take a leading role in supporting a lasting peace in Ukraine that safeguards its sovereignty and will deter Putin from further aggression in the future.'
Цитата:
Trump hits back at 'modestly successful comedian' Zelensky for 'talking the US into spending $350bn' and accuses him of 'doing a terrible job' and 'wanting to keep the gravy train going' in extraordinary outburst
Donald Trump has launched an eviscerating attack on Volodymyr Zelensky, calling the Ukrainian leader 'a modestly successful comedian' and 'a dictator without elections' in response to accusations that the US President had fallen for Russian fake news.
'Think of it, a modestly successful comedian, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, talked the United States of America into spending $350 Billion Dollars, to go into a War that couldn't be won, that never had to start, but a War that he, without the US and 'TRUMP,' will never be able to settle,' Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social.
'I love Ukraine, but Zelenskyy has done a terrible job, his Country is shattered, and MILLIONS have unnecessarily died – And so it continues...' he posted.
In what appeared to be a thinly-veiled threat, Trump went on to say that 'Zelensky better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left.'
Doubling down on earlier unfounded claims that Zelensky was only supported by four per cent of Ukrainians, Trump added that the President 'refuses to have Elections' and 'is very low in Ukrainian Polls'.
Vladimir Putin earlier said he will meet Trump and praised him for 'changing his position' when he 'began to receive objective information' - hours after Volodymyr Zelensky accused the US President of falling for Russian disinformation.
The Russian dictator welcomed Tuesday's talks between Russian and American officials in Saudi Arabia, describing them as a 'first step' to restore relations with Washington.
'I was briefed (on the talks). I rate them highly, there is a result,' Putin said at a drone factory in Saint Petersburg, adding: 'In my opinion, we made the first step to restore work in various areas of mutual interests'.
He said that securing a resolution to the conflict is a priority for Russia, but added that his country must build trust with the United States in order to achieve this.
'It is impossible to solve many issues, including the Ukrainian crisis, without increasing the level of trust between Russia and the United States,' Putin said in the televised meeting.
While Trump earlier suggested a face-to-face meeting between Putin and himself could be held before the end of the month, the Russian President said he was not ready to say when talks might take place.
Speaking to reporters in Kyiv earlier today, President Zelensky criticised Washington's thawing of relations with Moscow and pushed back on a number of unfounded claims made by the US president at a press conference last night.
Zelensky said he 'would like Trump's team to be more truthful' in response the US president's striking claims - including the suggestion that Kyiv was to blame for the war, which enters its fourth year next week.
The Ukrainian President disputed Trump's claims that the US has given Ukraine $500billion, calling the suggestion that Kyiv pay this back with a mineral exploration deal 'not a serious conversation.'
'Look, we all want a victory, and we want Trump to win, and we want Ukraine to win, all of us to succeed,' he said. 'But there is nothing clear here... I am protecting Ukraine. I can't sell it away. I can't sell our state.'
Referring to yesterday's US-Russia talks in Riyadh, Zelensky added: 'I believe that the United States helped Putin to break out of years of isolation... All of this has no positive impact on Ukraine.'
Putin said in his comments today that Trump had told him that Ukraine will take part in future talks, adding that there was no need for a 'hysterical' reaction to yesterday's meeting.
'We are not imposing anything on anyone. We are ready, I have already said this a hundred times - if they want, please, let these negotiations take place. And we will be ready to return to the table for negotiations,' he said. 'No one is excluding Ukraine.'
Zelensky said the talks had come as a 'surprise' to Kyiv, with fears there and across Europe that Ukraine is being frozen out of negotiations which could result in it being forced by Washington to accept an unfavourable peace deal.
Moscow will have welcomed Trump's questioning of Zelensky's legitimacy at last night's briefing in Mar-a-Lago, where he suggested it had been 'too long' since Ukraine had held elections for him to have a seat at the negotiating table.
While he insisted this point was 'not a demand from Russia', the claim came straight out of Moscow's playbook, and failed to mention that Russia's recent election in 2024 was rigged, with Putin's foes killed, jailed or exiled.
Trump went on to falsely claim that the Ukrainian President is only supported by four per cent of Ukrainians.
Responding to these claims, Zelensky referred to a poll from the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, which shows that 57 per cent of Ukrainians trust him.
He added that any attempt to replace him during the war would fail.
'Unfortunately, President Trump – I have great respect for him as a leader of a nation that we have great respect for, the American people who always support us – unfortunately lives in this disinformation space,' Zelensky said.
Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov earlier praised Trump for 'publicly and loudly' blaming the conflict on moves to admit Kyiv into the NATO military alliance, saying 'he is the first... and only Western leader' to do so.
Speaking to reporters last night, President Trump took aim at Zelensky for raising concerns that his country had not been at the table for talks between Washington and Moscow on Tuesday.
'I think I have the power to end this war, and I think it's going very well. But today, I heard, 'Oh, well, we weren't invited.' Well, you've been there for three years,' he said of Zelensky.
'You should have ended it. You should have never started it. You could have made a deal. I could have made a deal for Ukraine.'
After the meeting between US and Russian officials in Riyadh, Trump said he was 'much more confident' that a peace deal could be struck.
'They were very good,' he said. 'Russia wants to do something. They want to stop the savage barbarianism.'
The stunning claim came as Vladimir Putin's forces launched a blistering aerial attack on the Ukrainian city of Odesa overnight, striking a children's clinic and kindergarten and leaving much of the city without power.
Responding to Trump's comments today, Germany has emphasised that it was Putin who launched the Ukraine war.
'No one but Putin started or wanted this war in the heart of Europe,' said Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock in a statement, adding that 'we are working with all our strength to further strengthen Ukraine'.
When asked about Trump's comments that Ukraine is responsible for the continuation of the war, a French government spokeswoman said that Paris did not understand the logic behind the US President's remarks.
Former UK defence secretary Ben Wallace said that the White House has been spouting 'fake news' on Ukraine, and slammed Trump's suggestion that Kyiv is to blame for the war as being one of the Kremlin's 'talking points'.
Jack Lopresti, another ex-Tory MP, who has now joined the army in Ukraine, said the US had been 'taken for fools' by Putin.
'I don't think [Putin] has any interest in peace whatsoever, he's still building up his military, he's upscaled his defence manufacturing and he's just sitting back letting this all unfold,' he told Sky News.
He added that where US leadership lacks, the UK is working 'to get Europe on board and get them to ramp up their defensive and offensive capability.
'We know what happens next, if Putin wins here he will not stop in Ukraine.'
Who is waiting to challenge Zelensky if Ukraine calls an election? Potential rivals include oligarch mired in corruption and world champion boxer - after Trump's '4% approval rating' claim sparked fury
Speculation is mounting over who will emerge as a candidate to challenge Volodymyr Zelensky in the next Ukrainian presidential race after Donald Trump controversially declared the embattled nation should press on with elections.
Calling for Ukraine to head to the ballot box even while under martial law, Trump yesterday insisted that his Ukrainian counterpart had lost the support of his people, and claimed: 'He's down at four per cent approval rating'.
The wild statistic was roundly dismissed after a poll conducted by the respected Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) earlier this month reported Zelensky's approval rating stood at 57 per cent.
In retort, Zelensky today declared that Trump had fallen prey to a Russian disinformation campaign as officials from Washington and Moscow met to begin negotiations on a Russia-Ukraine ceasefire - notably in the absence of Ukrainian representatives.
'We have evidence that these figures are being discussed between America and Russia. That is, President Trump... unfortunately lives in this disinformation space,' the Ukrainian President said.
A presidential election was expected to take place in Ukraine in March or April 2024, but it was postponed due to the ongoing war. Under the constitution, Zelensky must stay in office until a new leader is chosen at the ballot box
Ukraine has been under martial law since Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022, with Parliament having extended the measure every 90 days ever since.
The head of Zelensky's 'Servant of the People' party, David Arakhamia, also pointed out that all political parties had agreed the next elections would be six months after martial law is lifted.
In the meantime, a poll conducted by accredited Ukrainian socio-political research body SOCIS in December 2024 revealed the candidates that may emerge to run challenge Zelensky in a future run-off - and assessed their chances.
Valery Zaluzhny
Valery Zaluzhny, 51, is one of the war's most notable figures.
Known as the 'Iron General', he held the position of Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine from July 2021 and was responsible for coordinating Kyiv's war effort until he was dismissed by Zelensky in February 2024.
His accession to the top military position in the country came off the back of a stellar career serving Ukraine's armed forces in various capacities, including as Commander of the 51st Guards Mechanized Brigade from 2009 to 2012, Chief of Staff and First Deputy Commander of the West Operational Command in 2017, and Chief of the Joint Operational Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 2018.
The decision to remove Zaluzhny after almost two years of war last February followed reports the Iron General had fallen out with the President over their differing opinions on how to boost numbers in the army.
Zelensky also reportedly took umbrage with an interview Zaluzhny gave to The Economist in which he declared the fight against Russia had ground to a stalemate - something the Ukrainian President feared could discourage the West from providing more aid.
Following his dismissal, Zaluzhny was appointed as Ukraine's ambassador to the United Kingdom in March 2024.
But he is now seen as a likely frontrunner in a future presidential election.
SOCIS' December 2024 survey of 2000 Ukrainians across Ukrainian controlled-territory found that 36.1 per cent of respondents would vote for the Iron General if presidential elections were held in the near future.
Zaluzhny has not confirmed whether he would run, but told media this week: 'In order to answer this question, let's first get the conditions under which such a question would be absolutely appropriate.
'For now, we have only one task - to survive and preserve our country. And after that, we will think about other things.'
Ukrainian Ambassador to the Uk Valery Zaluzhny
Volodymyr Zelensky
Volodymyr Zelensky, 47, is Ukraine's incumbent president, having assumed office in May 2019.
A former comedian and actor with no prior political experience, he secured a landslide victory in the 2019 presidential election, capturing 73 per cent of the vote against then-President Petro Poroshenko.
His scarcely believable victory was propelled by a strong anti-corruption message, mirroring his role in the popular television series 'Servant of the People,' where he portrayed a teacher who unexpectedly becomes president after a viral rant against corruption.
Zelensky earned a law degree from his hometown Institute of Economics in Kryvyi Rih, but instead chose to pursue a career as an actor and entertainer.
He also founded the production company Kvartal 95 which produced several notable Ukrainian films and TV shows, including the aforementioned series that bolstered his political image.
Since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Zelensky has been internationally recognised for his leadership and resilience. He also remains a popular figure in his native land.
US President Donald Trump's claim this week that Zelensky's domestic approval rating languishes at 4 per cent is wholly untrue - a poll conducted by the respected Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) earlier this month reported his approval rating at 57 per cent.
But SOCIS' poll of voting attitudes conducted in December has Zelensky in second place.
The incumbent president trails his former top general by a significant margin with 24.3 per cent of projected votes versus Zaluzhny's 36.1 per cent.
Republican presidential nominee and former U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy meet at Trump Tower in New York City, U.S., September 27, 2024
Petro Poroshenko
Petro Poroshenko, 59, was Ukraine's fifth president following the breakup of the Soviet Union, elected in summer 2014 months after the outbreak of war in Ukraine's eastern Donbas region.
A Ukrainian oligarch often referred to as the 'Chocolate King' after making a fortune as head of the confectionery company Roshen among other ventures in agriculture and manufacturing, he transitioned from business to politics in the late 1990s and charted a path to the top despite allegations of corruption.
Poroshenko was elected president in June 2014 off the back of the Euromaidan protests against his predecessor Viktor Yanukovych, who in November 2013 backed out of signing an Association Agreement with the EU under pressure from the Kremlin.
Poroshenko's early years as president were characterised by his pro-EU and pro-Western stance along with efforts to strengthen Ukraine's military and bring about democratic reforms.
These came after Russia annexed Crimea and Russian-backed separatists sparked war in the Donbas region - a conflict that ultimately proved to be the prelude to full-scale war in 2022.
But decades of corruption allegations came back to bite the oligarch, who despite being elected president was named in 2015 as a billionaire by Forbes, and he lost the 2019 election to Zelensky.
Now, Poroshenko heads up one of Ukraine's leading opposition parties, EuroSolidarity, and is seen as the third most likely candidate to be elected president in future Ukrainian elections - though he trails Zelensky and Zaluzhny by a huge margin.
SOCIS' December 2024 survey found he would likely earn 9.4 per cent of the votes.
Poroshenko sensationally declared last week that Ukraine was preparing for elections in October - a claim that was immediately shut down by Zelensky's party.
His statement came days after Ukraine's Security Service announced that Kyiv had imposed sanctions on Poroshenko, including asset freezes and a ban on withdrawing capital from Ukraine. Poroshenko claimed the sanctions were politically motivated.
FILE PHOTO: US Vice President Joe Biden, left, and Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko smile at the media during a meeting in Kiev, Ukraine, Monday, Jan. 16, 2017
Yulia Tymoshenko
Yulia Tymoshenko, 64, is one of Ukraine's most enduring political figures, but despite her popularity, she has never managed to claim the presidency.
She is the only woman to have ever served as the country's prime minister, she led the government twice - first in 2005 and again from 2007 to 2010 - and has long been a staunch supporter of Ukraine's integration with Europe.
Tymoshenko began her career as an economist and a notable businesswoman in Ukraine's gas industry, but like many successful businesspeople used her wealth to orchestrate a transition into politics.
She occupied a leading role in Ukraine's Orange Revolution in 2004, a spate of pro-democracy protests which ultimately overturned the election of Viktor Yanukovych amid widespread suspicions of election rigging.
But Yanukovych got his revenge in the 2010 election, beating Tymoshenko to the presidency by just 3.5 percentage points.
In 2014, after spending three years in prison on charges widely seen as being politically motivated under Yanukovych's rule, she ran again but finished a distant second to Petro Poroshenko.
Having stumbled twice at the final hurdle, it seemed Tymoshenko had a strong chance of becoming president ahead of the 2019 elections.
She was long seen as one of the front-running candidates, but was shockingly eliminated in the first round of voting and ultimately finished third behind Poroshenko and Zelensky.
Tymoshenko remains a member of Ukraine's parliament and the leader of the 'Fatherland' (Batkivshchyna) party - though her chances of finally claiming the country's top job appear slimmer than ever.
SOCIS' survey said Tymoshenko could expect to earn just 6 per cent of votes cast in a future presidential election.
Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko speaks during an exclusive interview on latest developments of Russian attacks on Ukraine in Kyiv, Ukraine on March 07, 2022
Ukrainian heavyweight boxing world champion Wladimir Klitschko (R) who joined the Ukrainian Territorial Defence Forces and his brother, Mayor of Kyiv and former heavyweight boxing champion Vitaly Klitschko (L)
Vitaly Klitschko
Of all the names on this list, Vitaly Klitschko is perhaps the most well-known among a Western audience besides incumbent president Zelensky - though not for his political clout.
The current Mayor of Kyiv was a world-renowned boxer, winning multiple world heavyweight championships alongside his brother Wladimir during a period of sibling dominance known as the 'Klitschko era'.
In 2005, Vitaly - still an active heavyweight fighter - began his transition into politics, using his platform to great effect amid his maiden attempt to run in the Kyiv mayoral race.
He narrowly missed out in the 2006 mayoral elections but went on to found a new political party called the Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reform (UDAR) in 2010, all while continuing to fight at the highest level.
Klitschko's final bout came in 2012 - the same year he was elected to the Ukrainian parliament as part of the UDAR party.
He later emerged as a key opposition leader during the Euromaidan protests in 2013–2014, advocating for democratic reforms and closer ties with the European Union.
In May 2014, Klitschko was elected mayor of Kyiv and has earned the enduring support of its residents, winning all subsequent elections.
He has been seen as a resilient leader of the city in the face of Russian aggression following the February 2022 invasion.
But he is also a vocal critic of Zelensky, whom he has accused of displaying 'autocratic' tendencies.
Klitschko's platform and long-term support as mayor could be leveraged in a future presidential bid, but SOCIS' survey found the former boxer would likely only receive 2 per cent of votes in an election.
Other possible candidates in the next Ukrainian presidential election according to SOCIS include independent MP Dmytro Razumkov, Head of the Main Intelligence Directorate of Ukraine Kyrylo Budanov, founder and first commander of the Azov regiment Andriy Biletsky, and European Solidarity MP Oleksy Honcharenko.
_________________
С интересом и понятными ожиданиями, Dimitriy.
Why does Trump seem to hate Ukraine’s president? From refusing to help investigate the Bidens for 'corruption', to the nation's role in Donald's first impeachment... how Zelensky went from hero to zero
Donald Trump's attitude toward Ukraine and President Volodymyr Zelensky has grown increasingly hostile in recent days, sparking concerns Washington may force Kyiv into a crippling capitulation to Moscow.
Earlier this week, Trump dispatched his Secretary of State Marco Rubio to meet Russian delegates in Saudi Arabia to begin ceasefire negotiations in the absence of any Ukrainian representatives.
His Treasury Secretary last week tried to lock Kyiv into a resources-for-security contract that was reportedly more exploitative than the conditions imposed on Germany by Allied powers following the conclusion of World War I.
And now Washington is reportedly refusing to sponsor a UN resolution condemning Russia's invasion of its neighbour on the three-year anniversary of war next week.
There is little doubt that Trump sees the conflict primarily through the lens of American domestic politics and as a distraction from the central focus of his foreign policy agenda - China.
He has framed US aid to Kyiv as a waste of taxpayer money and seems keen to curry favour with the Kremlin, perhaps to facilitate future trade and energy deals with Moscow or disrupt its troubling partnership with Beijing.
But the Trump administration's increasingly dismissive behaviour toward Kyiv amid ceasefire negotiations has left many wondering whether the leader of the free world harbours a personal disdain toward Ukraine.
Trump, who today celebrates one month back in the White House after being inaugurated for his second term, once described Ukraine as 'a corrupt country, full of terrible people', according to his own former envoy to Kyiv.
And his dislike for Zelensky in particular was highlighted yesterday when he launched a scathing attack on his Ukrainian counterpart, labelling him a 'dictator without elections' and blaming him for starting the conflict with Russia.
As one American diplomat recently told the Economist, Trump 'appears to want to get rid of Mr Zelensky, whom he has never liked and who he thinks is difficult.'
Trump's frustrations with Ukraine can be traced back to the early days of his political career when Paul Manafort - the former chairman of Trump's 2016 presidential campaign - became entangled in a Ukrainian corruption scandal.
Prior to joining Trump's operation, Manafort had worked closely with former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who famously backed out of signing an association agreement with the European Union in 2013 under pressure from the Kremlin.
The move triggered the infamous Euromaidan protests in Ukraine which ultimately saw Yanukovych axed from his post.
Amid the wave of pro-European demonstrations, Russia annexed Crimea and backed separatist movements waging war in Ukraine's Eastern Donbas region - the prelude to full-scale invasion in February 2022.
But after Yanukovych fled to Moscow, Ukrainian activists discovered handwritten documents in the former president's party headquarters that allegedly showed millions in undisclosed payments from his government to Manafort, alongside various other journalists, Ukrainian media outlets and lawmakers.
Trump and his allies have long claimed the so-called 'Black Ledger' was nothing more than a ruse formulated by the Democratic party to discredit his campaign.
But the revelation led to Manafort's resignation from Trump's campaign and he was later charged with several counts of money laundering and tax evasion.
The Black Ledger was never used as evidence, but it remains in Ukraine and is treated as a classified document, according to Politico.
Then in 2019 - three years into Trump's first presidential term - the US President shared a now infamous phone call with Zelensky, who at the time had just taken a landslide victory in his own presidential election against Yanukovych's successor, Petro Poroshenko.
This call, described as a 'perfect' interaction by Trump at the time, ultimately led to the US President's first impeachment.
Trump asked his Ukrainian counterpart to open an investigation into Joe Biden and his son Hunter, who was receiving tens of thousands of dollars in monthly payments from Burisma - a large Ukrainian gas company that was under investigation for corruption.
Trump accused the elder Biden - who at the time was Vice President under Barack Obama - of trying to prevent Ukrainian authorities from investigating his son's involvement in alleged corruption by forcing the dismissal of Kyiv's top prosecutor Viktor Shokin.
Biden openly said he'd threatened to withhold aid to Ukraine unless Shokin was fired - though this was done in coordination with the European Union amid claims the prosecutor was himself blocking other corruption investigations.
During the phone call with Zelensky, Trump urged his opposite number to 'get to the bottom of it and figure it out', and subsequently sent his lawyer Rudy Giuliani to exert pressure on officials in Kyiv.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration chose to withhold nearly $400 million in military aid earmarked for supporting Zelensky's forces in their fight against Russian-backed separatists in the Donbas.
The suspicious timing triggered allegations that Trump was trying to leverage Zelensky into a quid pro quo - continued military aid in exchange for a commitment to investigate alleged corruption on behalf of the Biden family.
The Ukrainian President never carried out Trump's request, and the claims Trump had tried to force Kyiv into investigating the Biden family led to his impeachment.
Trump was ultimately cleared of wrongdoing - but the impeachment reportedly deepened his personal animosity toward Zelensky and cemented his view of Ukraine as untrustworthy.
'Trump hates Ukraine,' Lev Parnas, a Soviet-born US businessman who was once a fixer in Ukraine for Trump's lawyer Giuliani, told Politico last year.
'He and people around him believe that Ukraine was the cause of all Trump's problems.'
The US President also long held the belief that it was Ukrainian hackers, not Russia, who were responsible for hacking the Democratic National Committee servers in 2015 and 2016.
His first administration was dogged by claims his victory over Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton was down to Russian election interference.
Now, Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials are being admonished by senior members of Trump's administration for pushing back on the US President's outlandish claims.
Earlier this week Zelensky suggested Trump had been captured by 'Russian disinformation' following the Republican's stinging and inaccurate remarks over the Ukrainian leader's popularity at home.
Hours later, US Vice President J.D. Vance warned Zelensky against issuing more statements, directed at Trump, saying that 'badmouthing' his American counterpart in public would only backfire.
'The idea that Zelensky is going to change the president's mind by badmouthing him in public media... everyone who knows the president will tell you that is an atrocious way to deal with this administration,' said Vance during an exclusive interview with MailOnline in his West Wing office.
Vance went on to say Zelensky had been getting 'bad advice' on how to deal with the new administration and for the past three years had been told he could do nothing wrong.
China flexes its military muscles as warships sail close to Australia in 'unprecedented' move of aggression while Beijing navy chopper buzzes within TEN FEET of Philippines coastguard plane
China has flexed its military muscles after a fleet of warships were spotted close to Australia and a Beijing navy helicopter was seen flying within 10ft of a Philippines coastguard plane.
Chinese warships were discovered just 150 nautical miles east of Sydney, marking the furthest south Beijing's navy has ever ventured along Australia's eastern coastline.
The Australian Navy has since deployed two vessels to shadow the Chinese naval task group, which consists of a frigate, a cruiser, and a supply ship.
The fleet was first detected off Australia's north-east coast a week ago, raising concerns over China's expanding military presence in the Pacific.
A defence expert described the situation as 'unprecedented,' warning that Beijing is increasingly normalising its military reach beyond the first and second Pacific island chains, which stretch from Japan through Indonesia, Guam, and Micronesia.
It comes after China was slammed for its 'dangerous, unprofessional, and reckless' actions after a Chinese navy helicopter flew just 10ft from a Philippine coastguard plane on Tuesday.
'As the Chinese test their ability to project power further south, in addition to east and west, the question becomes how much they can hold at risk - how much they can signal to the Australians that they can threaten them,' Charles Edel, a specialist in Australian security at Washington-based think-tank CSIS, told the FT.
The Australian Defence Ministry confirmed the Chinese ships were operating in international waters, but their presence has been met with suspicion.
China's People's Liberation Army-Navy Jiangkai-class frigate Hengyang, part of a task group operating to the north east of Australia
An aircraft identified by the Philippine Coast Guard as Chinese Navy helicopter (L) flies near the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) plane during an aerial reconnaissance flight at Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea on February 18, 2025
The fleet includes the frigate Hengyang and cruiser Zunyi, both of which belong to the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN).
Defence expert Euan Graham from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) in Canberra warned that China's military actions in the region are becoming increasingly aggressive.
He noted that Beijing has a history of 'unsafe responses' to Australian maritime activity, particularly in contested waters.
The Pentagon has previously warned that China is expanding its naval capabilities far beyond East Asia.
While Beijing insists it has the right to develop its military, regional analysts say the latest deployment is part of a wider effort to challenge Australian and US influence in the Pacific.
Richard McGregor of the Lowy Institute warned the newspaper that the presence of Chinese warships off Australia 'demonstrates consistency' and that the country is continuing to increase its naval patrols in the region.
Chinese naval vessels last visited Sydney in 2019, but that visit was pre-arranged with the Australian government.
In contrast, this latest operation appears to be an independent show of strength from Beijing.
The deployment coincides with a visit from Admiral Samuel Paparo, the head of US Indo-Pacific Command, who recently met with Australian Defence Minister Richard Marles and Foreign Minister Penny Wong.
With tensions rising, Australia and its allies are watching closely as China continues to assert its growing military influence in the Pacific.
The fleet includes the frigate Hengyang and cruiser Zunyi (pictured), both of which belong to the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN)
The Philippines has vowed to file a formal diplomatic protest following the incident
On Tuesday China was blasted after one of its navy choppers was seen flying within 10ft of a Philippine coastguard plane, putting the lives of both the crew and passengers at serious risk.
The encounter occurred over the contested Scarborough Shoal, located in the South China Sea, an area claimed by China but also heavily disputed by the Philippines.
The Philippine coastguard plane, a Cessna, had been flying around 700ft above the water to monitor Chinese vessels in the region when the helicopter swooped in dangerously close to the plane's left wing.
Commodore Jay Tarriela, a spokesman for the Philippine coastguard, called the incident 'extremely dangerous,' noting that the Chinese helicopter came within a mere 10ft of the aircraft, putting its stability at risk.
Tarriela emphasised that this was the first known instance of such a close encounter between a Chinese navy helicopter and a Philippine patrol plane.
The Scarborough Shoal, a chain of reefs and rocks seized by China from the Philippines in 2012, remains a flashpoint in the ongoing territorial dispute.
China claims almost all of the South China Sea, including the Shoal, despite an international court ruling in 2016 declaring its claims to be without legal merit.
In response, Tian Junli, spokesman for China's Southern Theatre Command, accused the Philippine aircraft of 'illegally intruding' into Chinese airspace over Huangyan Island, the Chinese name for Scarborough Shoal.
He insisted that Chinese naval and air units had been dispatched to 'track, monitor, warn, and expel the aircraft' in accordance with Chinese law, claiming that the Philippine actions violated China's sovereignty.
The Philippines has vowed to file a formal diplomatic protest following the incident.
The United States quickly condemned China's actions.
An airman aboard a Philippine Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources plane looks on as a Chinese Navy helicopter flies close by above Scarborough Shoal on February 18, 2025 in the South China Sea
The incident occurred when the Chinese Navy deployed a helicopter to tail the Philippine civilian plane, which was conducting a routine maritime domain awareness flight over Scarborough Shoal, located within the Philippines' exclusive economic zone
The Philippines has been vocal in its opposition to China's increasing assertiveness in the region
MaryKay Carlson, the U.S. Ambassador to Manila, expressed deep concern over the dangerous maneuvers and called on China to cease its 'coercive actions.'
She urged Beijing to resolve its territorial disputes through peaceful means and in line with international law.
This latest incident comes just days after Australia rebuked China for similar 'unsafe' conduct.
In that case, a Chinese fighter jet had reportedly released flares within 30 metres of an Australian surveillance plane over the South China Sea.
The Chinese government responded by accusing the Australian aircraft of 'deliberately intruding' into China's claimed airspace near the Paracel Islands, also contested by Vietnam and Taiwan.
The Philippines has been vocal in its opposition to China's increasing assertiveness in the region.
In December, Manila accused China's coastguard of using water cannons and even sideswiping a Philippine fisheries vessel.
A video released by the Philippine government showed a Chinese coastguard ship directing a powerful jet of water at the BRP Datu Pagbuaya.
Philippine officials, who have strengthened their defense cooperation with the US under President Ferdinand Marcos, have been seeking to secure their maritime interests, including acquiring the US Typhon missile system, which has a range of up to 300 miles.
China has warned that the acquisition of such a system would escalate tensions in the region and risk sparking an 'arms race.'
The tensions in the South China Sea show no signs of abating, as both China and the Philippines, along with their respective allies, continue to challenge each other's influence in the region.
_________________
С интересом и понятными ожиданиями, Dimitriy.
JD Vance slams Europe for chilling speech as he issues final warning to Ukraine as Zelensky ties break
J.D. Vance doubled down as he delivered another stark warning to Europe over censorship.
Taking the stage at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on Thursday morning, Vance opened the three-day event with a rousing speech similar to tone he delivered last week at the Munich Security Conference.
Vance appeared quickly at ease with the friendly crowd as he flashed smiles, pumped his fist and thanked the MAGA-friendly onlookers in a Trumpian fashion.
Mercedes Schlapp, the event's organizer, sat across from Vance as she peppered him with questions about the Ukraine-Russia war, the state of Europe and the flurry of executive actions taken in the administration's first month.
The vice president also launched into a critique of one of America's closest partners.
He noted how the U.S. is losing commonality with some European states over their approach to freedom of speech.
Specifically, Vance talked about restrictive online censorship laws, noting how E.U. support of these measures will alienate them from America while Trump is at the helm.
'We're going to continue to have important alliances with Europe, but I really do think the strength of those alliances is going to depend on whether we take our societies in the right direction,' Vance said.
Vice President J.D. Vance was the first speaker at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on Thursday
'So the point that I try to make to our European friends, and I think that they are friends. I believe that, I know President Trump does, is that friendship is based on shared values.'
The Republican VP continued: 'You do not have shared values if you're jailing people for saying we should close down our border.
'You don't have shared values if you cancel elections because you don't like the result, and that happened in Romania. You don't have shared values if you're so afraid of your own people that you silence them and shut them up.'
The former Ohio senator also talked about how reliant Europe is on the U.S. for defense, and that Americans won't be eager to help defend countries who do not share their values.
'Germany's entire defense is subsidized by the American taxpayer,' Vance noted. 'There are thousands upon thousands of American troops in Germany today.'
'Do you think that the American taxpayer is going to stand for that? If you get thrown in jail in Germany for posting a mean tweet, of course they're not.'
He and Trump are working towards being the most peace-loving administration of modern times, Vance said.
The 40-year-old Republican also teased that he believes peace is closer now in Europe than in any time during Joe Biden's presidency.
'It's going to take a smart statesman to figure this stuff out, but we've got that in the White House, and I really believe that we're on the cusp of peace in Europe for the first time in three years, because we have leadership from the Oval Office, and we haven't had it in four years in this country.'
The VP also vowed that he and Donald Trump will work to deescalate wars around the globe during their next four years in office, calling his boss the 'president of peace.'
'I'll tell you the goals that animate President Trump's policy, it's really simple, he wants the killing to stop,' Vance said of Trump's foreign policy on the European war.
Vance pleaded that a peace deal with Russia and Ukraine would be in all party's interests, particularly because it would benefit Americans, too, he argued.
'It's in the interest of Ukraine, it's in the interest of Europe, but most importantly, peace is in the interest of the American people,' Vance stated. 'And he's going to fight for it for the remainder of his administration, wherever war breaks out.'
'He's going to be the president of peace,' the VP continued.
Vance's remarks critical of Europe Thursday morning were his latest in a string of tough remarks geared towards the U.S.'s allies across the Atlantic Ocean.
Just the day before Vance spoke exclusively to DailyMail.com to warn Ukraine President Volodomyr Zelensky against 'badmouthing' Trump.
Vance shared his pointed message hours after President Zelensky accused Trump of living in a Russian-made 'disinformation space.'
The extraordinary language on both sides comes at a critical time in the war between Ukraine and Russia, and as Trump pushes for a speedy resolution.
Цитата:
US silences Zelensky and CANCELS press conference between him and Trump's envoy after telling Ukrainian president to 'tone down his criticism' of Donald
The White House has cancelled a planned news conference scheduled to follow talks between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and US President Donald Trump's Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg, according to officials in Kyiv.
Zelensky met with Lt. Gen. Kellogg in the Ukrainian capital this afternoon for talks on efforts to end the Russia-Ukraine war, just hours after a White House adviser said Kyiv needed to 'tone down' criticism of Donald Trump amid a major spat between the Ukrainian and American leaders.
When the meeting began, photographers and video journalists were allowed into a room where the two men shook hands before sitting across from each other at a table at the presidential office in Kyiv.
The pair were set to share details of their discussions with the media, but the Ukrainian president's spokesman Serhii Nikiforov said Washington requested that the press conference be cancelled. He did not specify a reason for the request.
Lt. Gen. Kellogg's trip to Kyiv coincided with recent feuding between Trump and Zelensky that has bruised their personal relations and cast further doubt on the future of US support for Ukraine's war effort.
Hours earlier, White House National Security Adviser Mike Waltz said on Fox News that Zelensky must 'tone down' criticism of Trump after the Ukrainian leader said his American counterpart had fallen pray to Russian disinformation.
'Tone it down, take a hard look and sign that deal', Waltz said in reference to a contract Washington has proposed that would see Kyiv hand over vast oil, gas and mineral wealth, supposedly in exchange for security guarantees.
Waltz said the US presented the Ukrainians an 'incredible and historic opportunity' to invest in its economy and natural resources.
'It would be a way for the country to 'really become a partner in Ukraine's future in a way that's sustainable, but also would be I think the best security guarantee they could ever hope for... much more than another pallet of ammunition.'
Zelensky now appears to be playing nice, today saying Ukraine was ready for a strong and useful agreement with the US on investments and security, additionally calling for 'strong ties' with the US following a 'productive meeting' with Kellogg.
But Zelensky last week refused to sign the initial version of the deal amid reports it was more exploitative than the conditions imposed on Germany by Allied powers following the conclusion of World War I.
Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky (L) greets US envoy Keith Kellogg at his offices in Kyiv on February 20, 2025
Waltz's comments came hours after Vice President J.D. Vance warned Zelensky against attacking Trump publicly, telling DailyMail.com exclusively that 'badmouthing' the president in public would only backfire.
'The idea that Zelensky is going to change the president's mind by badmouthing him in public media... everyone who knows the president will tell you that is an atrocious way to deal with this administration,' said Vance during an exclusive interview in his West Wing office.
Hours later, Trump doubled down in his own attacks during a speech in Miami at a Saudi-backed investors conference where he slammed Zelensky as a 'dictator' and a 'comedian' who cratered his country.
And on Thursday at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), Vance stuck up for Trump again, saying his ultimate goal is peace in Europe.
'Peace is in the interest of Russia, in the interest of Ukraine, in the interest of Europe,' Vance stated.
Trump is a 'very good negotiator, very good businessman' and he's a 'smart statesman' to tackle these complex issues, he added.
'I really believe we're on the cusp of peace in Europe for the first time in three years because we have leadership from the Oval Office and we haven't had it for four years in this country.'
The back-and-forth is occurring as US is refusing to co-sponsor a draft UN resolution marking three years since Moscow's invasion of Ukraine that backs Kyiv's territorial integrity and condemns Russian aggression, three diplomatic sources told Reuters.
The White House has told Volodymyr Zelensky (pictured) to 'tone down' the criticism and 'sign that deal' after the Ukrainian president accused Donald Trump of falling for Russian fake news as he voiced outrage over excluding Ukraine from peace talks
White House National Security Adviser Mike Waltz said on Fox News on Thursday that Zelensky must 'tone it down and take a hard look and sign that deal'
Russian President Vladimir Putin (R) points to Chief Justice of Russia Irina Podnosova (L) during the Congress of Judges at the Supreme Court of Russia, February 20, 2025
The step appears to mirror a widening rift between Ukrainian President Zelensky and Trump, who is trying to rapidly end the war in Ukraine and whose team has held talks with Russia without the involvement of Kyiv.
The row is a major political crisis for Ukraine, which has used tens of billions of dollars of US military aid agreed under the previous US administration to weather Russia's invasion and also benefited from diplomatic support.
A peacekeeping plan set to be introduced by Sir Keir Starmer during a Washington visit next week would see Britain and France deploy up to 30,000 troops as part of a peacekeeping force to bolster Ukraine's security, provided the US and other NATO countries provide air cover.
Ukraine's armed forces would patrol a demilitarized zone at the frontline, while Anglo-French troops would be stationed at key infrastructure to deter future Russian attacks, with US fighter jets and missiles on standby as a 'backstop'.
The American backstop would be implemented to ensure 'that 'whatever forces are deployed will not be challenged by Russia,' an official with knowledge of the plan told the Telegraph.
But Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov this morning dismissed the proposal as 'unacceptable' after Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Moscow views the idea of having NATO member troops on the ground in Ukraine as a 'direct threat' to Russian security.
The draft resolution for the UN General Assembly, seen by Reuters, condemns Russian aggression and reaffirms a commitment 'to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognised borders'.
'In previous years, the United States has consistently co-sponsored such resolutions in support of a just peace in Ukraine,' one of the sources, who like the others requested anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, said on Thursday.
The first diplomatic source told Reuters that the resolution was being sponsored by more than 50 countries, declining to identify them.
A spokesperson for the US diplomatic mission to the United Nations in Geneva did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Russia has seized some 20 per cent of Ukraine and is slowly but steadily gaining territory in the east. Moscow said its 'special military operation' responded to an existential threat posed by Kyiv's pursuit of NATO membership. Ukraine and the West call Russia's action an imperialist land grab.
The United States has been a co-sponsor of almost all UN resolutions in support of Ukraine against Russia throughout the biggest conflict on European soil since World War Two.
It was not immediately clear when the deadline to back the draft resolution expires, and Washington could still change its mind.
The UN vote, seen as an important bellwether of global support for Ukraine in the face of the Trump administration seeming shift towards Russia's position in the war, could still go ahead without US backing, but might be less likely to win broad support in the General Assembly.
A second diplomatic source who also requested anonymity said: 'For now, the situation is they (the US) won't sign it.' Efforts are ongoing to seek support from other countries instead, including the Global South, the source added.
It comes after the Kremlin said earlier that it 'absolutely' agrees with Trump after the US president warned Zelensky to 'move fast' to end the conflict in Ukraine.
'[The Trump administration] talk about the need to establish peace as soon as possible and do it through negotiations,' Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists.
'We have also already mentioned that this position is more favourable to us than the previous administration, and that here we absolutely agree with the American administration.'
Peskov went on to hit out at the Biden administration, claiming that the previous team in Washington 'did not declare any goals to initiate a peace process' and spoke 'only about war.'
He also declared that any plan to send European troops to Ukraine as part of a potential peacekeeping mission would be unacceptable for Russia and that it was monitoring such proposals with concern.
Moscow is likely feeling emboldened following Trump's scathing attacks on Zelensky yesterday, in which he called the Ukrainian President a 'terrible' leader, 'a modestly successful comedian' and 'a dictator without elections'.
In what appeared to be a thinly-veiled threat, and a shocking departure from US policy on Ukraine, the President went on to say that 'Zelensky better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left.'
The extraordinary outburst came after Trump suggested yesterday that Ukraine was to blame for Moscow's illegal invasion of the country three years ago.
Speaking today, Peskov reiterated that relations between the US and Russia were on the path to improving and revealed that Moscow had agreed to resume dialogue with Washington on all issues regarding the war in Ukraine.
'It was decided to start resuming Russian-American dialogue on all parameters,' he said, after the two sides held talks in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday.
A possible new prisoner exchange between Russia and the US was on the agenda, he added, as part of Moscow and Washington's agreement to start work on restoring relations at all levels.
As relations between Washington and Kyiv deteriorate, Kyiv's allies have signalled their support of Zelensky, refuting Trump's comments as false and playing into Putin's hands.
Former UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, who ran against Trump in the recent presidential elections before backing his campaign for the White House, spoke out against him on X last night.
Referring to his false remarks that Zelensky is a dictator and claims he should have held an election, despite martial law being in place, she said: 'These are classic Russian talking points. Exactly what Putin wants.'
Last night Sir Keir Starmer telephoned president Zelensky to reiterate the UK's support and likened him to Winston Churchill - who also did not face elections during wartime.
Furious Kremlin says Keir Starmer's plan for 30,000-strong peacekeeping force in Ukraine using British troops is unacceptable and would pose a threat to Russia - after PM backed Zelensky amid row with Trump
An Anglo-French plan to deploy up to 30,000 troops as part of a peacekeeping force to bolster Ukraine's security following an impending ceasefire deal with Russia has been labelled an 'unacceptable, direct threat' by the Kremlin.
Sir Keir Starmer is set to outline a proposal during a visit to Washington next week that would see Britain and France take responsibility for safeguarding Ukraine on the ground, provided the US and other NATO countries provide air cover.
Ukraine's armed forces would patrol a demilitarised zone spanning the length of the frontline, while troops from an Anglo-French 'reassurance force' would be stationed at key infrastructure sites across the country.
The Western troop presence would seek to deter future Russian attacks with US fighter jets and missiles remaining on standby in Eastern Europe as a 'backstop'.
NATO air and naval assets would also perform reconnaissance missions over Ukraine and in the Black Sea.
The American backstop would be implemented to ensure 'that 'whatever forces are deployed will not be challenged by Russia,' an official with knowledge of the plan told the Telegraph.
But Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov this morning dismissed the proposal as 'unacceptable' after Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Moscow views the idea of having NATO member troops on the ground in Ukraine as a 'direct threat' to Russian security.
Starmer reportedly hatched the plan in conjunction with French President Emmanuel Macron amid fears the US under Donald Trump could abandon Ukraine altogether after striking a deal directly with Russia, according to the Telegraph.
It comes as the rift between Washington and Kyiv grows wider, with Trump issuing a scathing attack on Volodymyr Zelensky yesterday in which he made several false statements and labelled his Ukrainian counterpart a 'dictator without elections' - even with Ukraine subject to martial law.
Sir Keir Starmer is set to outline a proposal during a visit to Washington next week that would see Britain and France take responsibility for safeguarding Ukraine on the ground
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's relationship with Donald Trump is souring rapidly
Rescuers of the State Emergency Service work to extinguish a fire in a building after a drone strike in Kharkiv
A Western force of 30,000 troops is far less than the 200,000 Zelensky has previously said would be required by Kyiv to guarantee long-term security.
But it is looking increasingly unlikely that Western nations will commit to stationing a larger force on Ukrainian soil.
The US has effectively ruled out putting boots on the ground in Ukraine altogether as delegates from Washington held preliminary negotiations with their Russian counterparts in Saudi Arabia this week - notably in the absence of Ukrainian representatives.
There is also mounting evidence that Trump is prepared to strike a deal with Putin in short order to bring the conflict to an end, even if the agreement is highly unfavourable for Kyiv.
Last week, Starmer said the UK would continue to support Ukraine indefinitely and confirmed he would be willing to deploy troops to ensure Kyiv's long-term security if needed.
'I feel very deeply the responsibility that comes with potentially putting British servicemen and women in harm's way,' he said.
'But any role in helping to guarantee security is helping to guarantee the security of our continent, and the security of this country.'
He doubled down last night, personally telephoning Zelensky to reiterate the UK's support and likened him to Winston Churchill - who also did not face elections during wartime.
And this morning, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy told the BBC that Britain will stand firm alongside Zelensky's government in light of Trump's shocking comments questioning the legitimacy of the Ukrainian President's authority yesterday.
Ukrainian soldiers of Khartya brigade receive training on shooting drones down in Kharkiv Oblast, Ukraine on February 18, 2025
Russian President Vladimir Putin holds a meeting during a visit to the Radar MMS research and production enterprise, manufacturing air and sea drones, in St. Petersburg, Russia, 19 February 2025
U.S President Donald Trump, listens to a question during a brief press conference following the signing of executive orders at his Mar-a-Lago resort, February 18, 2025
Tracers are seen in the night sky as Ukrainian servicemen fire at the drone during a Russian drone strike, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine February 8, 2025
Zelensky has long ruled out giving up the Ukrainian territories annexed by Russia, whose forces currently control roughly one-fifth of the country.
But it appears that all potential plans to provide Kyiv with security guarantees are now operating on the understanding that Ukraine will have to squander large amounts of its territory as part of a ceasefire deal.
Russia has also stated that Ukraine would have to relinquish control of a small amount of Russian territory its forces managed to seize in Kursk as part of a counteroffensive last year as part of any peace deal.
US Defence Secretary Hegseth openly declared last week at a meeting in Brussels that the prospect of Ukraine regaining its pre-2014 borders as part of a peace deal was 'unrealistic'.
'We want, like you, a sovereign and prosperous Ukraine. But we must start by recognising that returning to Ukraine's pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective,' Hegseth told the meeting of Ukrainian officials and more than 40 allies.
'Chasing this illusionary goal will only prolong the war and cause more suffering,' he added.
Unsurprisingly, this notion was not well received by European politicians, most of whom have spent the past 36 months supporting Ukraine's war effort.
The feeling was perhaps summed up best by former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt, who sarcastically remarked on Hegseth's speech: 'It's certainly an innovative approach to a negotiation - to make very major concessions even before they have started.'
It's not clear exactly how much of its territory Ukraine would be expected to renounce under a Trump-negotiated peace plan, but Washington appears open to freezing the frontline in place.
US Special Presidential Envoy for Ukraine and Russia Keith Kellogg, 80, (pictured with JD Vance) has encouraged Europe to join the conversation about the Ukraine-Russia conflict, but ultimately said they won't have a final say in the resolution
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Polish Defence Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz meet U.S. soldiers as they visit airbase in Powidz, Poland February 15, 2025
Sir Keir Starmer has said the UK is 'ready to play a leading role' in Ukraine's defence and security, including the commitment of £3billion a year until 2030 and willingness to deploy troops to ensure a peace deal is upheld
An explosion of a drone is seen in the sky over the city during a Russian drone strike, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine February 5, 2025
Should the US force Ukraine to give up some or all of the territory annexed by Putin's troops, the next challenge is to ensure that Russia does not simply take up arms again and push for more territory months or years down the line.
For Ukraine, the answer to that question was, until recently, very obvious: NATO membership.
The transatlantic security bloc's famous Article 5 - the cornerstone of its founding treaty in 1949 - stipulates that an armed attack against one or more of its members 'shall be considered an attack against them all'.
But the White House has other ideas.
'The United States does not believe that NATO membership for Ukraine is a realistic outcome of a negotiated settlement,' Hegseth told Ukrainian delegates and European defence chiefs last week.
He later gave a half-hearted caveat, adding that in regard to the likelihood of Ukraine's future NATO membership, 'everything is on the table'.
But NATO operates on a unanimous voting system, meaning that the US can bar Ukraine from joining the bloc even if the other 31 member nations are in favour.
Hegseth also rounded on America's European partners in NATO, declaring the White House would 'no longer tolerate an imbalanced relationship that encourages dependency'.
His comments came days after Trump declared he expects NATO's European nations to boost their defence spending to 5% of GDP as part of their security commitments - more than double what most members are currently paying.
This stance suggests that Ukraine's hopes of joining NATO are effectively dead in the water.
It remains to be seen how Article 5 will be implemented should Anglo-French troops suffer an attack while stationed in Ukraine under the plan Prime Minister Starmer is expected to present in Washington next week.
Цитата:
Defence Secretary compares Zelensky to Churchill as UK and Norway open talks on defence agreement.
Ex-NATO commander says 30,000 Brits a year should be conscripted to boost Britain's depleted Army - as ex-defence chief warns UK is 'massively vulnerable' to a Russian onslaught
A former NATO commander has called for the UK to consider conscripting 30,000 Britons a year in order to boost the country's depleted Armed Forces.
General Sir Richard Shirreff, a retired senior British Army officer, urged the UK and its NATO allies to prepare for war with Russia.
He said that US President Donald Trump's 'betrayal of Ukraine' should fire a 'starting gun' for Western nations in readying themselves for conflict with Vladimir Putin.
The ex-deputy supreme allied commander Europe of NATO piled pressure on Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer to hike defence spending in order to protect British cities.
And he was not alone among Britain's former top brass in issuing a chilling warning about the UK's ability to defend itself from a Russian attack.
General Sir Nick Carter, who served as chief of the defence staff between 2018 and 2021, said the UK's Armed Forces were 'remarkably hollow' after decades of neglect.
He added Britain was 'massively vulnerable' and suggested the country would not be able to withstand a Russian onslaught such as Ukraine has suffered since 2022.
The Labour Government is under huge pressure to raise defence spending, even beyond the 2.5 per cent of GDP that Sir Keir promised before the general election.
The PM is due to visit Mr Trump in Washington DC next week in the wake of the White House telling Europe to take responsibility for its own and Ukraine's defence.
The US President has also appeared to side with Mr Putin - and publicly attacked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky - while beginning peace talks with Moscow.
Sir Richard told Sir Keir he would be 'laughed out of court' by the US President if he didn't use the talks to signal UK defence spending would rise to at least 3 per cent.
He also further outlined his demand for the UK to consider the conscription of around 30,000 Britons a year to boost the size of the British Army to 100,000.
'Where are the air defence missiles defending London, Manchester, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Cardiff, Belfast, other major UK cities?' Sir Richard told The i newspaper.
'Where is the mobilising of the defence industries, the mobilising of the national economy to fight a war?
'This is big stuff. This is really serious. Munich 1938 was a betrayal of Czechoslovakia, but at least it forced Chamberlain to kick off rearmaments.
'Munich 2025 is set to be a betrayal of Ukraine.
'But it should also be firing a starting gun to prepare Britain and NATO for war with Russia, because that ultimately is the only way we are going to maintain peace.'
Sir Richard previously called for Britain to make plans for conscription in a Daily Mail article earlier this week, saying that 'Trump has left us with no other choice'.
His demands for boosted defence spending were echoed by Sir Nick during an appearance on the BBC's Question Time programme last night.
He warned the UK's Armed Forces were 'remarkably hollow' after being whittled down by successive Tory and Labour governments.
'The British Army has given up a huge number of its tanks and artillery pieces to Ukraine and doesn't any longer have enough for what is required,' he said.
'This, to be fair to everybody, has been a process of neglect over a 30-year period. Of course, what has happened in that time is that warfare has also evolved.
'We have these holes that need filling but its also the case that we need to digitise and take account of the digital era we're now in.
'But I think we also need to be clear about how vulnerable our country is - 95 per cent of the UK's data comes through undersea cables, 45 per cent of our gas comes from Norway in undersea pipelines.
'We get 40 per cent of our food via sea, much of our critical national infrastructure is not properly protected by cyber defences.
'We are in a position, I think, where we are massively vulnerable at the moment. Whether we like it or not, that means we're going to have to start protecting ourselves.
'And the sort of onslaught that Ukraine has suffered from the air via drones and missiles over the course of the last three years is unsustainable as far as the UK is concerned.
'We might be able to park a Destroyer in the Thames to protect parts of London, but nothing more than that.'
Цитата:
Donald Trump dismisses Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron because they 'didn't do anything' to end the Ukraine war amid transatlantic spat over Volodymr Zelensky 'dictator' rant
Donald Trump has claimed Sir Keir Starmer 'didn't do anything' to end the Ukraine war - just days before he is due to welcome the Prime Minister to the White House.
The US President lashed out at Sir Keir and France's Emmanuel Macron amid a transatlantic spat over Mr Trump branding Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky a 'dictator'.
Those comments riled both the PM and French President, who hit back at Mr Trump's attack on the Ukrainian President and doubled down on their support for Kyiv
Mr Macron also warned Mr Trump against being 'weak' with Russia's Vladimir Putin, amid fears the US President has sided with Moscow during nascent peace talks.
This comes after the Mr Trump said in an interview with Fox News he didn't think it was 'very important' for Zelensky to be involved in peace talks as 'he's been there for three years' and that he 'makes it very hard to make deals'.
The American President also said Ukrainian leaders 'don't have any cards' in talks aimed at ending the country's war against a Russian invasion.
The French President has beaten Sir Keir in a diplomatic race for a meeting with Mr Trump in Washington DC, following his return to the White House last month.
Mr Macron is expected to fly to America for talks with the US President on Monday, while the PM is set to head to the US later in the week.
But, ahead of their trips to meet Mr Trump, the US President risked a fresh outbreak of tensions with Sir Keir and Mr Macron by slating their approach to Ukraine.
In an interview with Fox News, he said: 'They didn't do anything either [to end the war]. The war's going on, no meetings with Russia, no nothing.
'They haven't done anything. Macron is a friend of mine, and I've met with the Prime Minister, he's a very nice guy... [but] nobody's done anything.
'I've been watching this go on for years and I'm doing it for one reason, I hate the killing. I hate to see those young people killed.'
In further developments:
• Mr Trump renewed his attack on Mr Zelensky and claimed Ukraine was negotiating with 'no cards';
• He claimed Mr Putin 'wants to make a deal' after US and Russian officials met for talks in Saudi Arabia earlier this week;
• Mr Trump appeared to row back previous astonishing remarks in which he falsely blamed Kyiv for having 'started' the conflict;
• The US President said he had 'very good talks with Putin' and 'not such good talks with Ukraine';
• Keith Kellogg, Mr Trump's envoy to Russia and Ukraine, struck a different tone by praising Mr Zelensky as an 'embattled and courageous leader'.
Donald Trump has claimed Sir Keir Starmer 'didn't do anything' to end the Ukraine war - just days before he is due to welcome the Prime Minister to the White House
The US President lashed out at Sir Keir and France's Emmanuel Macron amid a transatlantic spat over Mr Trump branding Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky a 'dictator'
Mr Macron is expected to fly to America for talks with the US President on Monday, while the PM is set to head to the US later in the week
Mr Trump also renewed his attack on Mr Zelensky - who is furious at being sidelined from US talks with Russia - and claimed Ukraine was negotiating with 'no cards'.
'I've been watching for years, and I've been watching him negotiate with no cards,' the US President said.
'He has no cards. And you get sick of it. You just get sick of it. And I've had it. He's been at a meeting for three years, and nothing got done.
'So, I don't think it's very important to be at meetings, to be honest with you. He makes it very hard to make deals.'
Mr Trump also claimed Mr Putin 'wants to make a deal' after US and Russian officials met for talks in Saudi Arabia - without Ukraine's involvement - earlier this week.
But he suggested the Russian President 'doesn't have to make a deal' because he could complete a total invasion of Ukraine 'if he wanted'.
'He wants to make a deal. And he doesn't have to make a deal, because if he wanted, he'd get the whole country,' the US President added.
Mr Trump boasted that Russia 'did not attack' Ukraine during his first spell in power and repeated his claim that the conflict 'shouldn't have started'.
'If I won the election, which I did, it's a war that never, ever would have started,' he said of Mr Putin renewing his invasion of Ukraine in 2022, when Joe Biden was US President.
He added that war-torn Ukraine was 'sort of like Gaza' following the 'demolition of so many of those cities'.
Mr Trump said Russia would 'continue to march through Ukraine' had he not returned to power, and claimed Mr Putin 'hates' Mr Zelensky 'with a tremendous passion'.
Mr Trump also renewed his attack on Mr Zelensky - who is furious at being sidelined from US talks with Russia - and claimed Ukraine was negotiating with 'no cards'
Mr Macron has warned Mr Trump against being 'weak' with Russia's Vladimir Putin, amid fears the US President has sided with Moscow during nascent peace talks
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio (middle left) met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov (far right) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, earlier this week
The US President added he would take a call from Mr Zelensky - who he has labelled a 'modestly successful comedian' - despite their recent angry exchanges.
The Ukrainian leader this week swiped that Mr Trump is 'living in a disinformation space' created by Russia, in response to the US President's attack on him.
In his radio interview, Mr Trump also appeared to move away from his previous astonishing remarks in which he falsely blamed Kyiv for having 'started' the conflict.
'Russia attacked, but there was no reason for them to attack.' Mr Trump said. 'There was no reason that he [Mr Putin] should have attacked.
'That whole thing was was going on for years. There was no reason he was going in. It should have never happened, that war should have never happened.'
He added: 'Every time I say, 'oh, it's not Russia's fault', I always get slammed by the fake news. But I'm telling you, Biden said the wrong things.
'Zelensky said the wrong things. They got attacked by somebody that's much bigger and much stronger, which is a bad thing to do, and you don't do that.
'But Russia could have been talked out of that so easily, that should never have been a war. All those dead people shouldn't be dead.
'And all those cities shouldn't be demolished right now.'
As he met with US governors in the White House today, Mr Trump claimed he had 'very good talks with Putin, and I've had not such good talks with Ukraine'.
The US President astounded European capitals earlier this week with his claims that Ukraine was to blame for the war and Mr Zelensky is a 'dictator without elections'.
In the wake of those comments, Sir Keir rushed to offer his support to the Ukrainian President with a phone call on Wednesday.
The PM gave his backing to Mr Zelensky, who scored a landslide victory in his country's 2019 presidential election, as 'Ukraine's democratically elected leader'.
Sir Keir also said it was 'perfectly reasonable' for Ukraine to suspend elections 'during war time as the UK did during World War Two'.
As he met with US governors in the White House today, Mr Trump claimed he had 'very good talks with Putin, and I've had not such good talks with Ukraine'
Billionaire tech mogul Elon Musk, an ally of Mr Trump, joined attacks on Mr Zelensky by claiming he runs a 'fraud machine feeding off dead bodies of soldiers'
Keith Kellogg, the US President's envoy to Russia and Ukraine, struck a different tone to Mr Trump following a trip to Kyiv
Defence Secretary John Healey also compared Mr Zelensky to Britain's war-time leader Winston Churchill.
'This was a man who, stuck in his country, led his country, and still does. He was elected,' he said.
'He's the elected leader of Ukraine, and he's done what Winston Churchill did in Britain in the Second World War, suspended elections while at war.
'And our job is to stand with the Ukrainians, support the Ukrainians, support them in their fight. And if they choose to talk, support them in the negotiations as well.'
Mr Macron this week warned Mr Trump not to be 'weak in the face of President Putin'.
'It's not you, it's not your trademark, it's not in your interest,' he added. 'How can you then be credible in the face of China if you're weak in the face of Putin?'
Mr Macron also claimed that 'uncertainty' in Russia about Mr Trump's actions was 'good for us and for Ukraine'.
Ahead of his trip to the White House, the French President said he would seek to persuade Mr Trump that US interests and Europeans' interests are the same.
He said he would tell the US President: 'If you let Russia take over Ukraine, it would be unstoppable.'
Billionaire tech mogul Elon Musk, an ally of Mr Trump, yesterday joined attacks on Mr Zelensky by claiming he runs a 'fraud machine feeding off dead bodies of soldiers'.
But Keith Kellogg, the US President's envoy to Russia and Ukraine, struck a different tone today following a trip to Kyiv.
In a post on Mr Musk's social media site X, the retired lieutenant general said he had had a 'long and intense day with the senior leadership of Ukraine'.
This included 'extensive and positive discussions' with Mr Zelensky, who he praised as 'the embattled and courageous leader of a nation at war'.
Luigi Mangione is depicted as a SAINT in sick scene as court hearing is besieged by dozens of fans eager to catch glimpse of insurance boss's 'killer'
An image depicting Mangione in a saint's garb with a halo around his head was featured on a vehicle driving by the Manhattan Supreme Court before his hearing
…
More than $465,000 has been raised for his legal battle on the fundraising site.
'The American private health insurance industry has ruined countless lives by denying people access to basic care and burying families in medical debt,' the December 4 Legal Committee backing the fundraiser said.
'It's no surprise that Luigi's alleged actions are understood and supported by tens of millions of hard-working Americans.'
And Luigi wrote the 262-page document attacking the US healthcare industry, which was found on him when he was arrested.
Mangione allegedly said that companies like UnitedHealthcare, the biggest private health company in the US, had 'gotten too powerful, and they continue to abuse our country for immense profit'.
An internal New York Police Department report obtained by the New York Times said that Mangione 'appeared to view the targeted killing of (UnitedHealthcare's) highest-ranking representative as a symbolic takedown and a direct challenge to its alleged corruption and 'power games'.
Other extremists may view Mangione 'as a martyr and an example to follow', the report stated.
His support is also helped by his good looks, and many of his fans want him released from jail and the charges dropped.
_________________
С интересом и понятными ожиданиями, Dimitriy.
Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky angered Donald Trump so much during the peace talks with Russia that Trump was on the verge of withdrawing American military support from Ukraine, three U.S. officials familiar with the discussions tell Axios.
Why it matters:
The conflict between Trump and Zelensky escalated into a war of words between the two that scared European allies who are worried about emboldening Russian dictator Vladimir Putin and rewarding his brutal expansionism.
• "President Trump is obviously very frustrated right now with President Zelensky," National Security Advisor Mike Waltz said Thursday at the White House press briefing.
The big picture:
Trump and Zelensky have had an awkward relationship ever since Trump was impeached in 2019 for trying to leverage U.S. military aid to the war-torn country in return for Zelensky having Joe Biden's son investigated over his sinecure with a Ukrainian gas company.
• Today, Trump is finding it more difficult than expected to make good on his pledge to quickly implement a deal to end the Russia-Ukraine war.
Zoom in:
Six administration officials tell Axios that during the past nine days there were five incidents that angered Trump, Vice President Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Waltz. Taken together, one administration official said, Zelensky "showed how not to do the 'Art of the Deal' " when it came to courting Trump's support:
•
Feb. 12:
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent met Zelensky in Kyiv to offer a proposal that would give the U.S. access to Ukrainian mineral rights in return for de facto U.S. protection. Trump later told reporters Zelensky was "rude" and delayed his meeting with Bessent because he slept in.
•
Feb. 14:
At the Munich Security Conference, Vance and Rubio met Zelensky to get his approval for the mineral rights deal. But, the officials said, Zelensky surprised the Americans by saying he didn't have the authority to unilaterally approve it without parliament.
•
Feb. 15:
Zelensky publicly rejected the offer at the conference. White House sources noted that his remarks to reporters — that the deal was "not in the interests of a sovereign Ukraine" — were markedly different from more positive-sounding comments he'd made on X the day before.
•
Feb. 18:
As Rubio, Waltz and presidential envoy Steve Witkoff sat down with Russian negotiators in Saudi Arabia to talk peace, Zelensky criticized the meeting for occurring without Ukraine at the table. An angry Trump then lashed out at Zelensky at a Mar-a-Lago press conference, falsely suggesting Zelensky had started the war with Russia and had an approval rating of only 4%.
•
Feb. 19:
Zelensky fired back, saying the U.S. president "lives in a disinformation space." Trump then ratcheted up the pressure by posting on Truth Social that Zelensky, a former actor, was a "modestly successful comedian" who has become a "dictator without elections." Trump has refused to criticize Putin as a dictator.
What they're saying:
Vance told the conservative media outlet The National Pulse on Wednesday that Zelensky should've aired his complaints "in a private discussion with American diplomats … he's attacking the only reason [Ukraine] exists, publicly, right now. And it's disgraceful. And it's not something that is going to move the president of the United States. In fact, it's going to have the opposite effect."
• Three administration sources say Vance's comment about Trump's state of mind was a not-so-veiled threat to walk away from Ukraine.
In the White House's view,
Zelensky grew too accustomed to former President Biden's open-ended support for Ukraine's war effort, the full-throated backing of NATO countries and the positive press that went with it. So he overstepped.
• "Zelensky is an actor who committed a common mistake of theater kids: He started to think he's the character he plays on TV," a White House official involved in the talks said. "Yes, he has been brave and stood up to Russia. But he would be six feet under if it wasn't for the millions we spent, and he needs to exit stage right with all the drama."
• "We created a monster with Zelensky," another official involved in the negotiations said. "And these Trump-deranged Europeans who won't send troops are giving him terrible advice."
• "In the course of a week, Zelensky rebuffed President Trump's treasury secretary, his secretary of state and his vice president, all before moving on to personally insulting President Trump in the press," another administration official said.
• "What did Zelensky think was going to happen?"
What's next:
Despite the mistrust and anger, Trump's team has continued negotiating with Zelensky and a new mineral-rights deal that would be part of a peace agreement is in the offing.
Reality check:
The deal Trump appears to be negotiating could be highly controversial. Based on their public and private statements, Trump's team is expected to pressure Zelensky into giving up Crimea (which Putin seized in 2014) portions of eastern Ukraine and the Azov Coast (occupied in Russia's 2022 invasion).
• The U.S. insistence on claiming a share of Ukraine's mineral rights has been compared to a "mafia shakedown" by liberal critics, who point out that the country would lose land and mineral rights and get little in return.
• "It's a sh*t sandwich," a Trump administration official acknowledged.
• "But Ukraine is going to have to eat it because [Trump] has made clear this is no longer our problem."
Democrats eyeing 2028 split on how to tackle Trump
Top Democrats eyeing runs for the White House in 2028 are divided on how to confront Donald Trump and his mandate: Fight, or moderate.
Why it matters:
Since the election, Democrats are facing an identity crisis: They no longer have a clear one.
• After Trump's surprise victory in 2016, many Democrats moved left and united under a "resistance" banner.
• This time, there's no consensus on strategy — and prominent Democrats already are taking different paths.
Driving the news:
Potential 2028 contenders such as Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and Colorado Gov. Jared Polis have been foremost in touting their bipartisan bonafides, positioning themselves as pragmatic, center-left leaders.
• Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut and Govs. Gavin Newsom of California and JB Pritzker of Illinois have opted for a more aggressive approach — regularly picking fights with the new administration and proposing progressive legislation.
Zoom in:
In recent weeks, Whitmer has touted that she sent National Guard troops to the border to combat illegal immigration, and said she's open to some new tariffs to protect industry.
• She also declined to join a multistate federal lawsuit challenging Trump's push to ban birthright citizenship, even though Michigan's Democratic attorney general is involved in the suit.
• In a much-touted "Road Ahead" speech at the Detroit Auto Show in January, Whitmer said that "in the Whitmer house, compromise was a good thing … "I won't go looking for fights … but I won't back down from them, either."
Whitmer has proposed
a new payroll tax cut for Michiganders and split from some Democrats who've proposed electric vehicle mandates.
• "We don't care what you drive — ICE [internal combustion engines], hybrid, or EV — we just care that it's made right here in Michigan, by Michigan workers," she said.
In his State of the State address,
Colorado's Polis said he hopes Congress can give a pathway to citizenship for some groups of undocumented immigrants.
• But Polis also said he hopes Trump and Congress "work together quickly to secure the border, stop human trafficking and stop the illegal flow of guns and drugs ... We welcome more federal help to detain and deport dangerous criminals."
• Polis also backed Trump's nomination of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to be Health and Human Services secretary.
• Whitmer and Polis have criticized Trump on issues such as how he's approached tariffs — but they're not reflexively against everything he does.
The other side:
Democrats such as Newsom, Pritzker and Murphy have argued that Democrats need to keep up the fight against Trump to protect people from his policies.
• In his State of the State speech Wednesday, Pritzker argued the current moment has disturbing parallels to the rise of Adolf Hitler in Germany. He criticized those Democrats who think Trump will make an exception for those who don't speak up.
• "The seed that grew into a dictatorship in Europe a lifetime ago didn't arrive overnight," he said. "It started with everyday Germans mad about inflation and looking for someone to blame."
• "We don't have kings in America — and I don't intend to bend the knee to one. I am not speaking up in service to my ambitions, but in deference to my obligations."
The day after Trump won
the 2024 election, Newsom called for a special legislative session in California to raise money to prepare to challenge Trump in the courts.
• On Feb. 7, Newsom signed a law allocating $50 million to bolster state and local legal groups preparing to challenge Trump's moves on immigration, the climate and more.
• Newsom added in a signing statement that said, "None of the funding in this bill is intended to be used for immigration-related legal services for noncitizens convicted of serious or violent felonies."
Zoom out:
Other possible 2028 contenders have taken more of a wait-and-see approach — picking a few fights without mounting an all-out resistance.
• This group includes Govs. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, Wes Moore of Maryland and Andy Beshear of Kentucky.
• Shapiro and Beshear have joined lawsuits against the Trump administration, but also have said they're looking to find places of common ground.
• Moore has been critical of Trump's attempt to slash broad parts of the federal government, but he also told CNN recently: "I'm not the leader of the resistance. I'm the governor of Maryland."
Цитата:
Trudeau after Canada win over U.S.: "You can't take our country" or "our game"
Canada beat Team USA 3-2 in an overtime 4 Nations Face-Off Championship Game thriller in Boston on Thursday night, which saw political tensions spill into the arena.
The big picture:
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took a swipe at President Trump's call for Canada's annexation as the 51st U.S. state moments after the win, saying on X: "You can't take our country — and you can't take our game."
• Trump said on Truth Social earlier Thursday he was calling Team USA "to spur them on towards victory tonight against Canada, which with FAR LOWER TAXES AND MUCH STRONGER SECURITY, will someday, maybe soon, become our cherished, and very important, Fifty First State."
Zoom in:
Ahead of the game, U.S. hockey fans booed Canada's national anthem — after Canadian fans booed a rendition of the "Star-Spangled Banner" before Team USA's winning game in Montreal last week.
• And singer Chantal Kreviazuk confirmed to CBC News she changed the lyrics to "O Canada" on Thursday from "True patriot love, in all of us command" to "that only us command" in response to Trump's annexation calls.
...
Цитата:
Trumps Vs Trudeau Trolling War As Canada Trumps U.S. In Ice Hockey | 'You Can't Take Our Country...'
Цитата:
Canada's FULL 4 Nations Face-Off Championship Celebration
Цитата:
USA vs Canada - 4 Nations Face-Off CHAMPIONSHIP Highlights | February 20, 2025🔥
Торговля воздухом с тяжелыми последствиями. Почему начался конфликт между Украиной и США вокруг «сделки по недрам».
Тема с соглашением Украины и США по полезным ископаемым стала причиной острого конфликта Киева и Вашингтона. До сих пор непонятно, будет ли оно подписано. Сигналы поступают очень противоречивые. И последствия могут быть крайне тяжелыми для Украины. Причем как в случае отказа подписать, так и в случае подписания.
Самое поразительное то, что вся эта история была инициирована украинскими властями, а не американцами.
Еще более года назад, столкнувшись со скептицизмом республиканцев относительно продолжения американской помощи Украине, Киев начал активно продвигать в Вашингтоне тему огромных запасов полезных ископаемых в Украине, которые могли бы получить американцы по итогам войны. С подтекстом, что для этого нужно продолжать оказывать поддержку.
Затем пункт о доступе американцев к полезным ископаемым был включен Зеленским в "план победы" и, таким образом "институализирован". "План победы" с темой месторождений президент презентовал и Байдену, и Трампу. Причем последнего, судя по его недавнем заявлениям, он действительно впечатлил. Шутка ли - от Украины можно было получить сотни миллиардов долларов полезных ископаемых, окупив все понесенные расходы Америки.
И потому неудивительно, что вскоре после своей инаугурации Трамп вспомнил об этом плане и поручил подготовить соглашение на полтриллиона долларов.
Однако, буквально сразу, обнаружились две крупных проблемы.
Первая - Трамп видит доступ к полезным ископаемым как компенсацию за уже оказанную американцами помощь. А Зеленский продвигает тему как "залог" под будущую помощь и некие "гарантии безопасности". При этом Трамп и его администрация уже неоднократно заявляли, что не намерены больше тратить деньги на Украину и, тем более, не намерены давать гарантии безопасности, которые, по мнению Вашингтона, должна взять на себя Европа.
Вторая - сомнение в наличие обещанных Зеленским залежей полезных ископаемых в Украине на триллионы долларов. По поводу стоимости богатств украинских недр есть разные оценки. Наиболее популярной из них стала оценка украинского Forbes. В 2023 году он оценил стоимость запасов полезных ископаемых в Украине в 14,8 трлн долларов. Однако, как мы уже писали, эти оценки не учитывают реальную себестоимость добычи полезных ископаемых, конкретные их характеристики. Типичный пример - каменный уголь. По оценкам Forbes, из указанных выше 14,8 трлн долларов, 62% (или более 9 триллионов) это уголь. Однако, даже если формально в недрах Украины и есть залежи угля на такую сумму, на практике это пустые цифры, так как, за редким исключением, разрабатывать эти месторождения при нынешних технологиях и цене на уголь нерентабельно. И большинство шахт в стране на протяжении последних десятилетий были убыточны, а многие и вовсе закрылись.
Примерно та же ситуация, по оценкам специалистов, с литием и не только.
"В Украине нет значительных месторождений редкоземельных металлов, кроме небольших скандиевых рудников, разработка которых нерентабельна. Геологическая служба США, авторитет в этом вопросе, не указывает, что страна имеет какие-либо запасы. Как и любая другая база данных, обычно используемая в горнодобывающем бизнесе", - пишет в Блумберг эксперт по полезным ископаемым Хавьер Блас.
Он допускает, что Трамп мог перепутать «редкоземельные элементы» с гораздо более широкой концепцией "критических минералов". Из последних у Украины есть несколько коммерческих шахт титана и галлия. Но и они не стоят заявленных Трампом 500 миллиардов.
Есть также крупные месторождения железной и марганцевой руды, некоторых других ископаемых, но это явно не то «редкоземельное Эльдорадо», которое было обещано Вашингтону.
Есть ли в Украине залежи полезных ископаемых, о которых ранее заявлял Киев, уже сомневается и Трамп.
"А потом он (Зеленский - Ред.) пытался заключить с нами сделку по редкоземельным металлам. Кто знает, сколько они реально стоят? Кто знает, есть ли они у них вообще?", - заявил вчера президент США.
Как пишет нардеп Алексей Гончаренко, "когда стало ясно, что никаких больших запасов редкоземельных металлов и полезных ископаемых у нас нет, американцы потребовали то, что на самом деле у нас есть. А у нас есть инфраструктура, газотранспортная система, атомные электростанции" (о том, что в американском проекте соглашения были не только полезные ископаемые, но и инфраструктура писали и западные СМИ).
При этом он также говорит, что тема с месторождениями изначально была предложена Зеленским и американцы ранее и не думали в этом направлении.
"Идея о редкоземельных металлах и их торговле - принадлежит Владимиру Александровичу Зеленскому. В Америке подобных разговоров вообще не было! Это наши гениальные умы придумали эту идею, что они ее продадут Дональду Трампу, а он приедет и скажет "окей", - пишет Гончаренко.
Что дальше?
Судя по заявлениям Офиса президента, Киев сейчас пытается убедить США включить в договор некие "гарантии безопасности".
Но если это не получится, либо Вашингтон будет готов дать лишь формальные гарантии, то тогда перед Зеленским будет выбор из двух плохих вариантов.
Первый - подписать явно кабальный договор с США, который передает американцам стратегические активы Украины в счет уже оказанной помощи, ничего не получая взамен. Как выразился один из представителей администрации Трампа, "Украине предлагают съесть "сэндвич с дерьмом", а западные СМИ пишут, что условия сделки даже хуже, чем наложенные репарации на проигравших во Второй мировой войне Германию и Японию. При этом, естественно, договор не будет тайным, с ним ознакомится широкая общественность. Как минимум потому, что он требует ратификации Верховной Радой (без этого он не будет иметь силы).
Второй вариант - не подписывать договор и усугубить конфликт с Трампом с очень высоким риском полного прекращения любой помощи США (включая отключение "Старлинка"). Тем более, что сам Трамп уже прямым текстом заявляет, что Киев "сильно пожалеет", если не подпишет сделку.
Выбор, понятное дело, трудный. А потому Зеленский и тянет с окончательным решением.
Цитата:
Выборы в Украине как условие завершения войны. Является ли это «капитуляцией»?
В последнее время камнем преткновения вокруг мирного урегулирования в Украине внезапно стала тема выборов.
Их требует провести Трамп.
Он и его соратники продвигают такой формат завершения войны: «перемирие-отмена военного положения в Украине-выборы-подписание мирного соглашения».
Украинские власти сразу восприняли идею в штыки, заявляя, что это «кремлевский план развала Украины», что предвыборная кампания сразу перерастет в хаос и гражданскую войну, чем и воспользуется Россия, подчинив себе страну.
В РФ, к слову, довольно позитивно комментируют идею выборов. В основном, в контексте, что это лишит власти Зеленского.
Собственно, на последний момент делает упор и сам президент Украины («Москва хочет меня уничтожить если не физически, то политически»), а также многие западные СМИ.
Наиболее подробно данную тему изложила (https://t.me/stranaua/186507) в день встречи американской и российской делегации в Эр-Рияде журналистка Fox News Джеки Хайнрич со ссылкой на источники.
Она написала, что США и Россия рассматривают выборы в Украине как ключевое условие успеха процесса урегулирования. При этом, по ее данным, Трамп и Путин "считают шансы на переизбрание президента Украины низкими". Кроме того, Трамп "готов принять любой результат выборов", включая возможность избрания пророссийского кандидата, утверждает Хайнрич со ссылкой на «собеседников из Украины». Путин, по словам журналистки, также считает такую вероятность высокой, а также убежден, что "любой другой кандидат, кроме действующего президента Украины, будет более гибким и готовым к переговорам и уступкам". По данным Fox News, стороны обсуждают проведение выборов после прекращения огня, а затем подписание мирного соглашения.
На основе этого и других сообщений в СМИ в Киеве многими и была развита теория о том, что выборы - это «план Кремля», который приведет либо к развалу Украины, либо к ее поглощению Россией.
Но действительно ли это так?
Начнем с того, что схема «перемирие, а потом выборы», не гарантирует подписания мирного соглашения после выборов и вообще не гарантирует достижения чего-либо большего, чем прекращение огня по линии фронта и, возможно, блокирования вступления Украины в НАТО и снятия санкций с РФ (если об этом договорятся США и Россия).
И в недавней истории уже был такой пример.
В начале сентября 2014 года были подписаны первые минские соглашения, объявлено прекращение огня на Донбассе, Верховная Рада, во исполнение договоренностей, приняла закон об особенностях местного самоуправления в отдельных районах Донецкой и Луганской областей, которым им давалась широкая автономия. Ожидалось, что работа над практической реализацией этих норм активизируется после избрания нового парламента. Выборы в него были намечены на конец октября и на них президент Порошенко рассчитывал взять уверенное большинство. Однако, неожиданно, первое место по спискам заняла «партия войны» - «Народный фронт», которая затем начала системно торпедировать минские соглашения (как первые, так и вторые) и, по итогу, они так и не были реализованы.
Что произойдет, если в Украине сейчас будет заключено перемирие и после него объявлены выборы? Победят ли на них «пророссийские силы»?
Отметим, что, судя по опросам, на выборах в парламент могут получить вполне приличный результат силы, которые выступают в защиту русского языка и культуры, за мирное сосуществование с Россией в формате советско-финских отношений после Второй мировой войны. Но это никак не «пророссийские» силы.
Если же говорить о тех политиках, которые открыто поддерживали РФ в нынешней войне и прямо связаны с Кремлем, то они на выборах в Украине ни на какой успех рассчитывать не могут (даже если их и допустят к выборам). За исключением случая, если это будет «контролируемое» голосование по принципу «не важно как голосуют, важно как считают».
Но на данный момент не видно ситуации, при которой Москва сможет получить такой контроль над выборным процессом. Для этого ВСУ должны находится на грани полного разгрома, чего пока не наблюдается.
Если же брать ситуацию без «контролируемого» голосования, то, судя по нынешним опросам, на выборах одержит победу Залужный и его партия.
Пойдет ли он на выполнение «капитулянтских» норм вроде сокращения численности ВСУ даже если они и будут кем-то прописаны в проекте мирного соглашения? Вряд ли.
Будет ли у России механизм заставить Украину подписать такое соглашение вопреки желанию Киева? Только начиная новую войну, к которой ВСУ будут готовы гораздо лучше подготовлены, чем к вторжению 2022 года. И война эта будет идти примерно в том же в формате, что и атака российских войск на север Харьковской области в мае 2024 года – с небольшим продвижением, которое было быстро остановлено.
Наконец, совершенно непонятно почему выборы после прекращения огня должны обязательно привести к «смуте и к гражданской войне» в Украине? Ситуация в стране сейчас более контролируемая, чем в 2014 году, когда относительно спокойно прошли и выборы президента, и выборы в парламент.
Итого, если предложенная Трампом сделка по схеме «перемирие-выборы-мирное соглашение» будет запущена, то произойдет только несколько событий.
Первое – прекращение огня по линии фронта. Главная сложность с этим сейчас, как мы уже писали – вопрос Курского плацдарма. Путин вряд ли согласится на перемирие, при котором ВСУ останутся в Курской области и будет требовать их вывода оттуда как условие согласия на прекращение огня. Зеленский хочет обменять Курский плацдарм на часть захваченной украинской территории, но на это Кремль, скорее всего, не пойдет, так как российские войска сейчас постепенно вытесняют ВСУ из Курской области и потому могут вернуть контроль над этой территорией и без каких-либо разменов. Если вопрос Курской области будет решен, то и вопрос о прекращении огня решится намного быстрее.
Второе – вероятно, США предпримет ряд действий навстречу России в рамках НАТО: проведет решение о непринятии в Альянс Украины, выведет часть американских войск из Европы.
Третье – с России после прекращения огня снимут американские санкции (или частично, или все).
Четвертое – в Украине пройдут выборы, после которых, возможно, сменится власть.
Все остальное (в первую очередь - подписание полноценного мирного соглашения между Украиной и Россией с урегулированием всего спектра отношений; гарантии безопасности для Украины; введение миротворцев и т.д.) также возможно, но абсолютно не гарантировано.
И, по большому счету, подобная схема «сделки» может быть выгодна всем.
Сделка выгодна Трампу – потому что гарантирует быстрый результат в виде прекращения огня, которое (если решится вопрос по Курской области) может быть достигнуто уже в ближайшие месяцы.
Сделка выгодна России – потому что оставляет за ней уже захваченные территории Украины, блокирует вступление Киева в НАТО, снимает санкции. И это максимально хорошие условия, на которые может рассчитывать Москва в нынешней ситуации, когда ВСУ далеки от разгрома, а достижение перелома в войне будет стоит РФ сверхусилий (мобилизация, еще большее увеличение военных расходов, еще большие жертвы и т.д.).
Сделка выгодна Украине – потому что позволяет закончить войну без передачи контроля РФ над еще не захваченными территориями (Херсон, Запорожье), а также без сокращения и разоружения армии. И это максимально хорошие условия, на который может рассчитывать Киев в нынешней ситуации, когда стабильность западной поддержки под вопросом, на фронте владеет инициативой российская армия, а долгая война с огромными жертвами может привести к полному истощению Украины с угрозой краха украинской государственности. При том, что Запад не готов давать требуемые Киевом гарантии безопасности Украине, опасаясь прямой войны с РФ.
Кто окажется в проигрыше от этой сделки?
Во-первых, силы по обе стороны линии фонта и на Западе, которые зарабатывают на войне огромные деньги и хотели бы, чтоб этот «праздник» для них был вечный.
Во-вторых, Зеленский, который может проиграть выборы и лишится власти. Но судьба Украины не может и не должна зависеть от фамилии человека, который занимает пост президента.
Wygra kto się nie boi wojen. Tak rozumieć trzeba Jałtę. Wysyłać wojsko na Ukrainę, czy nie?
Zimno wszystkim zrobiło się na samą myśl, że trzeba wysłać wojsko na Ukrainę. Słusznie. To ogromne ryzyko. Ale bieg zdarzeń jest tak szybki, że może się okazać, iż jeszcze większym ryzykiem będzie odmowa Polski zaangażowania na Ukrainie.
Dzisiaj zdecydowanie więcej wskazań jest za tym, aby czekać i nie wysyłać naszych żołnierzy do strzeżenia planowanej linii demarkacyjnej na Ukrainie. Choćby z tego względu, że nic konkretnego nie wiadomo w tej sprawie. Nie wiadomo na kogo można liczyć i ile tego wojska tam będzie. Opowieści, że planowany korpus będzie liczył około 30 tys. ludzi nie brzmią poważnie. Siły międzynarodowe, aby były tam czynnikiem odstraszającym, muszą być znacznie liczniejsze. A ponadto każdy wysyłający kraj musi mieć dodatkowo wiele tysięcy czynnego wojska w służbie, choćby tylko po to, aby zapewnić rotację dla kontyngentu wysłanego na Ukrainę. Nie mówiąc już o odwodach potrzebnych na sytuacje kryzysowe, czyli te, gdy Rosja naruszy warunki pokoju.
I to jest ważny powód do wstrzemięźliwości, bo wiadomo, że żaden z dużych krajów europejskich nie ma takich zasobów. Wielkie i bogate kraje – Wielka Brytania i Włochy – są w stanie wysłać jednorazowo po kilka tysięcy ludzi. W tym zakresie Polska ma również ograniczone możliwości, niezależnie od tego, że musimy pilnować kilkuset kilometrów własnych granic z Białorusią i Rosją, plus strzec Przesmyku Suwalskiego. Mniejsze kraje mogą wysłać po kilkuset ludzi, a nawet ledwie kilkudziesięcioosobowe kontyngenty. Największy i najbogatszy kraj Unii, czyli Niemcy, zostawmy na koniec, jako przykład nędzy i rozpaczy w jakiej znajdują się Siły Zbrojne państw europejskich. RFN w ślimaczym tempie kompletuje brygadę, która ma stacjonować na Litwie w ramach nałożonych na Berlin obowiązków sojuszniczych. Końca nie widać tej niemieckiej mitręgi, więc jest jasne, że nie można liczyć na poważny udział Bundeswehry w pilnowaniu linii demarkacyjnej.
Ważniejsza jest walka z Kaczyńskim niż Putinem
Przesądzającą dzisiaj sprawą jest totalna niechęć społeczeństwa polskiego do udziału w tej operacji. Znane już są badania, które pokazują ogromną dysproporcję między przeciwnikami a zwolennikami zaangażowania. Na razie nic tutaj się nie zmieni, choćby z tego powodu, że trwa kampania wyborcza. A najważniejsze jest to, że Polska jest rozdarta zimną wojną domową. Nie sposób sobie wyobrazić porozumienie rządu i opozycji w tak kluczowej sprawie. Zresztą nie widać, szczególnie po stronie rządzących, najmniejszych prób osiągnięcia konsensusu. Nadal priorytetem Donalda Tuska jest zniszczenie Jarosława Kaczyńskiego, a nie obrona Polski przed Władimirem Putinem.
Zaangażowanie Tuska w tę sprawę jest też jednym z czynników demobilizujących społeczeństwo polskie wobec zagrożeń ze wschodu. Bowiem jednego dnia premier wzywa do jedności sił politycznych, drugiego uruchamia coraz ostrzejsze szykany wobec opozycji, a trzeciego wyzywa ją do ruskich agentów. Dzieje się to w sytuacji, gdy większość opinii publicznej pamięta zaangażowanie Tuska w reset, co sprawia, że inne ostrzeżenia – te realne – zaczynają być odbierane jako propaganda i są lekceważone. Na dodatek Tusk obraża ludzi, na których dzisiaj powinien chuchać i dmuchać. W wojsku i służbach mundurowych jest zauważalna nadreprezentacja ludzi głosujących na prawicę. Tak na PiS, jak i na Konfederację. Jakoś tak wyszło, że zwolennicy liberalizmu i lewicy nie garną się szczególnie ochoczo do służby w wojsku. Oczywiście są i tacy, ale chodzi o proporcje. Żołnierze i funkcjonariusze już słyszeli od Tuska i innych polityków PO oraz jego zwolenników, że są mordercami, bo pilnowali granicy przed inwazją nasłanych imigrantów. Teraz słyszą, że są zwolennikami ruskich agentów. Dlaczego zatem mieliby ufać władzy, która ich obraża i nie szanuje?
Rosyjskie ataki i prowokacje
W przypadku polskiej obecności na Ukrainie trzeba odnotować ważną rzecz. Polski kontyngent będzie szczególnie narażony na rosyjskie prowokacje, a nawet ataki. Powodów jest kilka. Jeden to autentyczna rosyjska nienawiść do Polaków. Drugi ważniejszy – chęć testowania jedności sił koalicyjnych. Inna może być reakcja, gdy Rosjanie ostrzelają Brytyjczyków, Francuzów, względnie Niemców. A inna, gdy zaatakują przedstawicieli mniejszych krajów, szczególnie tych z tzw. „nowej” Europy. Nie da się przy tym ukryć, że wbrew górnolotnym frazesem, w oczach polityków z Berlina, Paryża i Brukseli jesteśmy Europejczykami drugiej kategorii. Zatem nie jest pewne, czy może oczekiwać adekwatnego wsparcia i solidarności w razie ataku na naszych żołnierzy.
Ale może jednak trzeba będzie jechać. Racje za tym dzisiaj są dużo słabsze, lecz historia gna tak szybko, że i to może się zmienić. Co wtedy, gdy będą do naszych strzelać? Najlepiej odpowiedzieć tym samymi i to ze zdwojoną siła. Choćby po to, abyśmy byli traktowani jako nieprzewidywalni. Może zresztą to się opłacić, bo wystraszeni naszą determinacją „przywódcy” europejscy szybko odeślą polski kontyngent do domu, aby tylko Rosja się nie denerwowała.
W każdym razie nie można zastrzegać się, że „nigdy nie”, bo dzisiaj nie wiemy, co przyniesie jutro. Ale pewne rzeczy już widać. Trzymanie się z boku oznacza rezygnację z marzeń o znaczeniu Polski w regionie. Dzisiaj fakt naszych ogromnych wydatków na zbrojenie oraz budowa coraz większej armii budzą zainteresowanie i autentyczny szacunek wielu obserwatorów w świecie. To może mieć pozytywny wpływ na rozwój naszego kraju. Ale co z dużej armii, skoro siedzi ona jak mysz pod miotłą, gdy kontyngenty na Ukrainę wyślą mniejsze kraje? W tym małe i frontowe, takie jak Estonia i Litwa. Trochę będzie tak jak z prestiżem Czech po 1938 r., bo był to kraj, który wydawał wielkie pieniądze na swoje wojsko, ale tylko po to, aby skapitulować. Wbrew temu, co twierdzą nasi ćwierćinteligenccy „geopolitycy” i „realiści” Czesi nie są dumni, ani zadowoleni z tamtych wydarzeń. Jest to nieustanne źródło ich upokorzenia i braku wiary we własne możliwości. Co też ma znaczenie praktyczne, bo dzisiaj Czechy są już tylko niemiecką montownią, a Polska – mimo naszej dramatycznej historii – dościga ich pod względem wskaźników gospodarczych.
Strach przed wojną rozzuchwala Rosję
Groźniejszą konsekwencję zaniechania może być rozzuchwalenie Rosji. Kreml zauważy strach naszego społeczeństwa przed wojną. Oczywiście ten strach jest uzasadniony, ale nie może paraliżować woli obrony Polski. Rosyjski sposób myślenia znakomicie oddał dobrze znający ten kraj poeta - Jacek Kaczmarski w piosence, właśnie o Jałcie:
Komu zależy na pokoju, Ten zawsze cofnie się przed gwałtem – Wygra, kto się nie boi wojen I tak rozumieć trzeba Jałtę.
Jaki nas czeka los, gdy Putin uzna, że tak bardzo boimy się wojny, że nie będziemy zdolni do oporu? Tak o całym Zachodzie, w tym Polsce, myśli się w Moskwie. Myślą, że jesteśmy zdemoralizowanymi sybarytami i tchórzliwymi pacyfistami. Słabość prowokuje agresję. Prowokują ją także błędne diagnozy, co jest przecież źródłem nieszczęść Ukrainy, bo Putin uznał, że jej mieszkańcy nie będą bronić niepodległości. W błędzie jest ten, kto uważa, że to trzyletnie doświadczenie sprawiło, iż Rosjanie zaczęli z szacunkiem myśleć o woli walki społeczeństw Zachodu. Nie ma najmniejszych znaków, aby zaszła taka zmiana w myśleniu Rosjan.
Na wiadomość o możliwym udziale Wojska Polskiego w misji stabilizacyjnej (czy jak ona tam będzie się nazywała) w polskich mediach społecznościowych wybuchła niemalże panika. Przerażeni ludzie pisali tym, którzy popierali ten pomysł, aby chętni sami tam jechali. Względnie wysłali swoje dzieci. Coś jest na rzeczy, bo wielu zwolenników polskiego zaangażowania to przedstawiciele elit, którzy nie dali się do tej pory poznać, jako ludzie zaangażowani osobiście w sprawy obronności kraju. Choćby przez fakt odbycia służby wojskowej. Ale też nie trzeba uciekać się do tego rodzaju argumentacji. Są sposoby, aby stworzyć odpowiedni kontyngent – gdy już dojrzeje do tego czas.
Po pierwsze, w Wojsku Polskim jest dużo ludzi, którzy lubią ryzyko i żołnierskie rzemiosło. Po drugie, wszystkie analogiczne działania WP łączyły się z dodatkową gratyfikacją. Dotyczyło to nie tylko misji w Iraku i Afganistanie, ale też służby na granicy. Chętnych więc nie powinno zabraknąć. Ale na razie to pieśń przyszłości, bardzo niepewnej i oby jak najdalszej.
Цитата:
Record number of Finnish reservists ready for Ukraine peacekeeping
A record number of Finnish reservists have volunteered for international peacekeeping missions, with many expressing readiness to join a potential operation in Ukraine. The Finnish Reservists’ Association has reported the highest level of interest in 20 years, with over 3,000 reservists applying for military crisis management roles in 2024.
The possibility of sending European peacekeepers to Ukraine gained traction after Emmanuel Macron proposed the idea in January.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy has indicated that securing the extensive front line would require around 100,000 troops, though initial plans from European partners suggest a force of 25,000 to 30,000.
While discussions on peacekeeping remain speculative, Finland has established procedures for participating in United Nations-led operations. Any Finnish involvement would likely consist of volunteer reservists and a limited number of permanent Defence Forces personnel.
Minna Nenonen, Executive Director of the Finnish Reservists’ Association, confirmed that the organisation would support a government decision on deployment if one is made. "We trust that whatever our leadership decides is best, the association will support that decision," she said.
The Finnish government has not made any commitments, but it has not ruled out participation. Security experts caution that any mission would require careful planning, as Russia has rejected the presence of Nato troops in Ukraine and could test the resolve of peacekeepers.
Finland has been a strong supporter of Ukraine since Russia’s full-scale invasion. In April 2024, it signed a ten-year security cooperation agreement with Ukraine and has since provided 27 military aid packages worth nearly €200 million.
Уровень доступа: Вы не можете начинать темы, Вы не можете отвечать на сообщения, Вы не можете редактировать свои сообщения, Вы не можете удалять свои сообщения, Вы не можете голосовать в опросах
Владимир Нерюев, заместитель генерального директора коммуникационного агентства Аура поделился мнением, какие изменения произошли или произойдут в профессии PR-специалиста.
Генеральный директор агентства мобильного маркетинга Mobisharks (входит в ГК Kokoc Group) — об эффективном мобильном маркетинге и примерах успешных стратегий.
За последние пару лет реклама банков изменилась. Появились новые сюжеты и герои. Реклама по-прежнему — не только инструмент продвижения услуг, но и способ формирования доверия к финансовым организациям. Главный тренд, который отмечают эксперты,— переход от сухого перечисления выгод к эмоционально окрашенным коммуникациям.
Антитрендами наружной рекламы в текущем году стали прямолинейность и чрезмерная перегруженность сообщений. Наружная реклама продолжает показывать рост: число рекламных конструкций за последний год увеличилось более чем на 2 тысячи.
В компании Sellty спрогнозировали развитие рынка электронной коммерции в сегменте СМБ на ближайший год. По оценке основателя Sellty Марии Бар-Бирюковой, число собственных интернет-магазинов среднего, малого и микробизнеса продолжит расти и увеличится минимум на 40% до конца 2025 года. Компании будут и дальше развиваться на маркетплейсах, но станут чаще комбинировать несколько каналов продаж.
Чего не хватает радио, чтобы увеличить свою долю на рекламном рынке? Аудиопиратство: угроза или возможности для отрасли? Каковы первые результаты общероссийской кампании по продвижению индустриального радиоплеера? Эти и другие вопросы были рассмотрены на конференции «Радио в глобальной медиаконкуренции», спикерами и участниками которой стали эксперты ГПМ Радио.
Деловая программа 28-й международной специализированной выставки технологий и услуг для производителей и заказчиков рекламы «Реклама-2021» открылась десятым юбилейным форумом «Матрица рекламы». Его организовали КВК «Империя» и «Экспоцентр».
28 марта в Центральном доме художника состоялась 25-ая выставка маркетинговых коммуникаций «Дизайн и реклама NEXT». Одним из самых ярких её событий стал День социальной рекламы, который организовала Ассоциация директоров по коммуникациям и корпоративным медиа России (АКМР) совместно с АНО «Лаборатория социальной рекламы» и оргкомитетом LIME.
На VII Международном форуме «Матрица рекламы», прошедшем в ЦВК «Экспоцентр» в рамках международной выставки «Реклама-2018», большой интерес у профессиональной аудитории вызвала VI Конференция «Интернет-реклама».
RSS