Category: 2. World

By Steve Holland, Andrew Osborn and Tom Balmforth
WASHINGTON/MOSCOW/KYIV (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday that Ukraine should make a deal to end the war with Russia because “Russia is a very big power, and they’re not”, after a summit where Vladimir Putin was reported to have demanded more Ukrainian land.

After the two leaders met in Alaska on Friday, Trump told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy that Putin had offered to freeze most front lines if Kyiv ceded all of Donetsk, the industrial region that is one of Moscow’s main targets, a source familiar with the matter said.

Trump also said he agreed with Putin that a peace deal should be sought without the prior ceasefire that Ukraine and its European allies, until now with U.S. support, have demanded.

Zelenskiy said he would meet Trump in Washington on Monday, while Kyiv’s European allies welcomed Trump’s efforts but vowed to back Ukraine and tighten sanctions on Russia. 

Trump’s meeting with Putin, the first U.S.-Russia summit since Moscow launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, lasted just three hours.

“It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up,” Trump posted on Truth Social.

RUSSIA LIKELY TO WELCOME TRUMP’S COMMENTS

His various comments on the meeting mostly aligned with the public positions of Moscow, which says it wants a full settlement – not a pause – but that this will be complex because positions are “diametrically opposed”. 

Russia has been gradually advancing for months. The war – the deadliest in Europe for 80 years – has killed or wounded well over a million people from both sides, including thousands of mostly Ukrainian civilians, according to analysts.

Before the summit, Trump had said he would not be happy unless a ceasefire was agreed on. But afterwards he said that, after Monday’s talks with Zelenskiy, “if all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin”.

Those talks will evoke memories of a meeting in the White House Oval Office in February, where Trump and Vice President JD Vance gave Zelenskiy a brutal public dressing-down.

Putin signalled no movement in Russia’s long-held demands, which also include a veto on Kyiv’s desired membership in the NATO alliance. He made no mention in public of meeting Zelenskiy, which the Ukrainian leader said he was willing to do. Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov said a three-way summit had not been discussed.

In an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, Trump signalled that he and Putin had discussed land transfers and security guarantees for Ukraine, and had “largely agreed”.

“I think we’re pretty close to a deal,” he said, adding: “Ukraine has to agree to it. Maybe they’ll say ‘no’.”

Asked what he would advise Zelenskiy to do, Trump said: “Gotta make a deal.”

“Look, Russia is a very big power, and they’re not,” he added.

NEED FOR SECURITY GUARANTEES FOR UKRAINE

Zelenskiy has consistently said he cannot concede territory without changes to Ukraine’s constitution, and Kyiv sees Donetsk’s “fortress cities” such as Sloviansk and Kramatorsk as a bulwark against Russian advances into even more regions.  

Zelenskiy has also insisted on security guarantees, to deter Russia from invading again. He said he and Trump had discussed “positive signals” on the U.S. taking part, and that Ukraine needed a lasting peace, not “just another pause” between Russian invasions.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney welcomed what he described as Trump’s openness to providing security guarantees to Ukraine under a peace deal. He said security guarantees were “essential to any just and lasting peace.”

Putin, who has opposed involving foreign ground forces, said he agreed with Trump that Ukraine’s security must be “ensured”.

“I would like to hope that the understanding we have reached will allow us to get closer to that goal and open the way to peace in Ukraine,” Putin told a briefing on Friday with Trump.

For Putin, just sitting down with Trump represented a victory. He had been ostracised by Western leaders since the start of the war, and just a week earlier had faced a threat of new sanctions from Trump.

‘1-0 FOR PUTIN’

Trump spoke to European leaders after returning to Washington. Several stressed the need to keep pressure on Russia.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said an end to the war was closer than ever, thanks to Trump, but added: “… until (Putin) stops his barbaric assault, we will keep tightening the screws on his war machine with even more sanctions.”

A statement from European leaders said, “Ukraine must have ironclad security guarantees” and no limits should be placed on its armed forces or right to seek NATO membership as Russia has sought.

Some European politicians and commentators were scathing about the summit.

“Putin got his red carpet treatment with Trump, while Trump got nothing,” Wolfgang Ischinger, former German ambassador to Washington, posted on X.

Both Russia and Ukraine carried out overnight air attacks, a daily occurrence, while fighting raged on the front.

Trump told Fox he would postpone imposing tariffs on China for buying Russian oil, but he might have to “think about it” in two or three weeks.

He ended his remarks after the summit by telling Putin: “We’ll speak to you very soon and probably see you again very soon.”

“Next time in Moscow,” a smiling Putin responded in English.

(Additional reporting by Kanishka Singh, Trevor Hunnicutt, Jeff Mason, Lidia Kelly, Jasper Ward, Costas Pitas, Ismail Shakil, Bhargav Acharya, Alan Charlish, Yuliia Dysa, Pavel Polityuk, Gwladys Fouche, Dave Graham, Paul Sandle, Joshua McElwee, Andreas Rinke, Felix Light and Moscow bureau; Writing by Kevin Liffey, Andy Sullivan, Mark Trevelyan, Joseph Ax and James Oliphant; Editing by Raju Gopalakrishnan, Gareth Jones and Cynthia Osterman)

Disclaimer: This report is auto generated from the Reuters news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.

A cross-party group of MPs has written to the government urging them to bring sick and injured children from Gaza to the UK “without delay” for treatment.

In a letter to senior ministers, 96 MPs stressed children are at risk of imminent death and any barriers to their evacuation should be lifted.

They warn the healthcare system in the Gaza Strip has been “decimated” and have requested a timeline of evacuations, as well as adequate funding.

More than 50,000 children have been killed or injured since the war in Gaza begun in October 2023, according to the UN charity Unicef.

The letter, co-ordinated by the Labour MP and GP Dr Simon Opher, said essential infrastructure in Gaza has been destroyed, and a long “blockade” of food, water and medical supplies and the ongoing violence has led to a medical and humanitarian catastrophe of “horrific proportion”.

Addressing the Health, Home and Foreign secretaries, the letter’s signatories said they were working with medical charity Medecins sans Frontieres (Doctors without Borders, also known as MSF) to speed up the process of bringing children with trauma injuries or serious existing conditions to the UK.

In the letter, the MPs say evacuations must be “solely based on clinical necessity and individual case assessment”, without regard to political, reputational, or financial interests.

The letter also calls for children and their families to have the option of claiming asylum, or resettling, in the UK once treatment is completed.

Previously, the Home Office had said that biometric checks would be carried out before children and carers travel – but in the letter MPs questioned the practicality of such checks in advance of evacuation.

Earlier this month the government said plans to evacuate seriously ill or injured children from Gaza and bring them to the UK for medical treatment were being carried out “at pace”.

No figure has been put on the number to be evacuated but it is estimated to be around a few hundred.

Since the start of the war, the UK has provided funds so that injured Gazans can be treated by hospitals in the region, and has also been working with Jordan to airdrop aid into the territory and has demanded Israel allow more aid to enter via land routes.

A government spokesperson said: “We are accelerating plans to evacuate children from Gaza who require urgent medical care, including bringing them to the UK for specialist treatment where that is the best option for their care”.

A cross-party “taskforce” is working to pull the scheme together, they added.

Liz Harding of MSF UK told the BBC she welcomed the letter.

The UK must “urgently act on its commitment by creating a dedicated, publicly funded pathway based on clinical need, not bureaucracy,” she said.

She added the UK’s biometrics visa requirements must be waived.

“Every delay costs lives”.

Some other countries have already been evacuating people from Gaza for medical treatment.

On Saturday, authorities in Italy said a 20-year-old Gazan woman who had been brought to Pisa for treatment had died in hospital. Marah Abu Zuhri, who was severely emaciated, was flown to Italy on Wednesday but died two days later.

Italy has transferred more than 180 children and adults out of the Strip since the start of the war.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) launched a campaign in Gaza in response to the Hamas attack on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.

Israel has faced mounting criticism over the 22-month-long war with Hamas, with UN-backed experts warning of widespread famine unfolding in the besieged territory.

On Tuesday members of an international group of former leaders known as “The Elders” for the first time called the war in Gaza an “unfolding genocide” and blamed Israel for causing famine among its population.

Israel strongly rejects the accusations, saying its forces target terrorists and never civilians, and claims that Hamas is responsible for the suffering in Gaza.

More than 60,000 people have since been killed in Gaza, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

Getty Images

Getty Images

Getty Images

Israel is moving one (big) step closer to annexing Gaza

It would be an understatement to suggest that the current Israeli government has lost the plot. What it is plotting can only bring disaster to the Palestinians in Gaza, probably on Israel as well, and on the chances of bringing this horrific war to an end any time soon.

After an all-night meeting last week, the Cabinet decided, in a symbolic move, that by Oct. 7 this year, the Israeli army will take over the entire Gaza Strip. This includes taking control of Gaza City, where hundreds of thousands of Palestinians have been trapped for many months, suffering from acute shortages of food, drinking water and medical aid, and living in constant fear of the next Israeli military assault.

The many hours it took the Israeli Cabinet to reach this decision might suggest to some that there were deep divisions among the decision makers. This is hardly the case. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was determined to gain approval for the proposal, come what may. The only robust resistance came from Eyal Zamir, chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, who tried to talk some sense into those around the table regarding the horrendous implications of such a decision for the military, the hostages still held by Hamas, and the country’s standing in the world.

But in a Cabinet stuffed with extremists, sycophants who would have no political existence without Netanyahu, and those who are too afraid to challenge him, the go-ahead for the plan was a formality.

The Cabinet set out what it called five principles for expanding the military campaign in Gaza: disarming Hamas; the return of all hostages, both living and deceased; the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip; Israeli security control of the Gaza Strip; and the establishment of an alternative civilian government that involves neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority.

In reality, these can hardly be described as “principles” but instead simply repeat the Cabinet’s existing objectives; some of which were set early in this war, others added as it became apparent that the level of destruction Israeli authorities were inflicting on Gaza required that they at least pretend that they do not intend to remain in Gaza for the long term. 

In a Cabinet stuffed with extremists, sycophants who would have no political existence without Netanyahu, and those who are too afraid to challenge him, the go-ahead for the plan was a formality.

Yossi Mekelberg

So far, Israel might have reduced the military capabilities of Hamas but it has not eliminated the organization. Instead, it has simply inflicted immense misery and suffering upon the Palestinian people and deepened the divisions within Israel itself, while compromising the reputation of the country to the extent that it will now take a very long time for it to be salvaged. And for this Israeli government, any mention of efforts to secure the release of the remaining hostages is mere lip service.

Why Netanyahu should continue to believe that what Israel has failed to achieve in more than 22 months of war, despite infinitely superior military capabilities operating with little-to-no consideration for the lives or well-being of civilians, will nonetheless eventually lead to ultimate victory over Hamas beggars belief.

The obvious ulterior motives of Israel’s prime minister are becoming ever more apparent as he not only ignores the recommendations of the head of his army but, astonishingly, also a letter signed by some 600 retired senior security officials, including former army and intelligence agency chiefs, who wrote to US President Donald Trump urging him to put pressure on Israeli authorities to end the war in Gaza immediately.

It is also telling that in their despair, these people, all of whom served their country loyally for decades, should send their plea to the American president and not their own prime minister, in whose integrity and judgment they have completely lost trust.

Those who signed that letter are not wrong to have lost faith in Netanyahu’s conduct of this war; his latest decision, which to all intents and purposes means occupation of the Gaza Strip in its entirety, was taken either because he is biding his time to satisfy the messianic ultranationalists within his coalition government, or is gambling that by entering Gaza City he will be able to defeat Hamas and release the hostages, which could put him in a position to call an early general election and perhaps win it.

The former scenario is pure, cynical opportunism. The latter reflects cynicism and delusion in equal measure. Regardless of the motivation, the outcome will be yet more suffering and bloodshed.

Moreover, it was reported that during last week’s Cabinet meeting, Gen. Zamir warned that this course of action was as good as giving up on those hostages still thought to be alive. In light of the fact that it was mainly diplomacy that achieved the prior release of some hostages, it is impossible to contradict his warning. 

For a long time now, this war has no longer been about defeating Hamas or rescuing the hostages … it has purely been about rescuing Netanyahu’s declining political career and saving him from a possible jail sentence.

Yossi Mekelberg

In an effort to cool the inevitable roasting his country would receive from the international community upon learning of his plan, Netanyahu refrained from describing the objective of the military operation as an “occupation” and opted instead to use the word “takeover.”

After more than 22 months of mass killings and destruction inflicted by Israel in Gaza, however, his decision was still viewed as a step too far by countries around the globe, including close friends and allies, who condemned it in no uncertain terms.

The UK’s prime minister, Keir Starmer, instantly condemned the Israeli security Cabinet’s decision as “wrong” and urged its members to immediately reconsider as “it will only bring more bloodshed.”

In an unprecedented move, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz announced that his government would no longer approve the sale of military equipment to Israel if it might be used in Gaza.

It would be naive not to believe that one of the calculations made by the Israeli government in formulating its plan was that the threat of a large-scale military operation would result in many residents of Gaza City fleeing to other parts of the tiny territory, and perhaps eventually leaving it.

This would only add to the extreme woes of the Palestinian population, many of them young children, who have been displaced several times in the past two years with no access to food or clean water, and are suffering from malnutrition and even starvation.

Moreover, war in urban areas not only means the likelihood of many civilian casualties, it also means further deployment in such an environment of already exhausted Israeli troops who have been on active service on the front lines for nearly two years, with all the likely effects this might have on their judgment. It is a recipe for disaster.

For a long time now, this war has no longer been about defeating Hamas or rescuing the hostages. Instead, it has purely been about rescuing Netanyahu’s declining political career and saving him from a possible jail sentence for corruption. In service of that, he will stop at nothing.

• Yossi Mekelberg is professor of international relations and an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House.

X: @YMekelberg

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect Arab News’ point-of-view

Key Facts

This is a developing story.

Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said she wanted to consider “political pressure, sanctions, whether against settlers, Ministers, or even Israel as a whole”, referring to trade or research sanctions. File
| Photo Credit: Reuters

Russia’s reaction to Donald Trump’s summit with Vladimir Putin in Alaska has been nothing short of jubilant, with Moscow celebrating the fact that the Russian leader met his US counterpart without making concessions and now faces no sanctions despite rejecting Trump’s ceasefire demands.

“The meeting proved that negotiations are possible without preconditions,” wrote former president Dmitry Medvedev on Telegram. He added that the summit showed that talks could continue as Russia wages war in Ukraine.

Trump entered the high-stakes summit warning, “I won’t be happy if I walk away without some form of a ceasefire,” and threatening “severe consequences” if Moscow refused to cooperate.

But after a three-hour meeting with the Russian side that yielded no tangible results, Trump shelved his threats and instead insisted that the meeting was “extremely productive,” even as Putin clung to his maximalist demands for ending the war and announced no concessions on the battlefield, where Russian forces are consolidating key gains in eastern Ukraine.

Putin on Friday demanded Ukraine withdraw from Donetsk and Luhansk as a condition for ending the war, but offered Trump a freeze along the remaining frontline, two sources with direct knowledge of the talks told the Guardian.

Although Luhansk is almost entirely under Russian control, Ukraine still holds key parts of Donetsk, including the cities of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk and heavily fortified positions whose defence has cost tens of thousands of lives.

Putin told Trump that in exchange for Donetsk and Luhansk, he would halt further advances and freeze the frontline in the southern Ukrainian region of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, where Russian forces occupy significant areas.

Ukrainian president Volodomyr Zelenskyy has consistently rejected giving up territory and, on Saturday, European allies reaffirmed that Ukraine’s borders must not be altered through force.

On Saturday morning, Trump also publicly dropped plans for an immediate ceasefire he had himself championed for months, instead embracing Putin’s preferred path to ending the war: pushing through a far-reaching agreement before halting any fighting.

“It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up,” Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social.

All in all, the view from Moscow is that Putin appears to have gained the upper hand.

“Putin gave Trump nothing, but still got everything he wanted. Trump finally listened to his demands,” said a member of the Russian foreign policy establishment, speaking on condition of anonymity.

In his remarks after the meeting in Alaska, Putin gave little indication of softening his stance, repeating that Moscow wanted the “root causes” of the conflict addressed – Kremlin shorthand for demands to demilitarise Ukraine, restrict its domestic politics and block its path to Nato.

No economic incentives offered by Trump’s team seemed to sway Putin – the economic delegations meeting was even scrapped – with observers stressing he would always prioritise the war in Ukraine over whatever financial gains peace might unlock.

Trump admitted there were still “one or two pretty significant items” left to resolve with Putin, but most worryingly for Kyiv, he ramped up pressure on Volodymyr Zelenskyy, telling Fox News host Sean Hannity: “Now, it’s really up to President Zelenskyy to get it done.”

These comments were quickly seized upon in Moscow.

“Both sides directly placed responsibility for achieving future results in negotiations on ending military actions on Kyiv and Europe,” Medvedev, now the deputy chair of Russia’s security council, wrote.

Tatiana Stanovaya, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Centre, said: “Trump now appears to be shifting much of the responsibility on to Kyiv and Europe. Ukraine is likely to face increased pressure from the US to begin substantive discussions of Putin’s conditions.”

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

She added that Trump was “once again clearly charmed and impressed by his interlocutor”, referring to the warm body language and effusive compliments the US president directed at Putin.

The key question is how far Trump will press Zelenskyy, who is set to meet him in Washington on Monday, to accept a deal on Putin’s terms and whether European allies can once again steer Trump on to a different course.

“Trump clearly did not fully accept the settlement plan that Putin is promoting,” cautioned Stanovaya.

For now, though, confidence runs high in Moscow.

“The tasks of the special military operation will be accomplished either by military or diplomatic means,” wrote senior Russian lawmaker Andrei Klishas on Telegram.

Unfazed by Trump, officials close to Putin felt free to contradict him outright. Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov, who attended the Alaska meeting with the US leader, said no talks had taken place about a three-way summit between Putin, Zelenskyy and Trump, directly rebutting Trump’s claim to reporters that a meeting was in the works.

Russian state media and the Kremlin elite were already in high spirits as Trump rolled out the red carpet and treated Putin as an equal, despite the Russian leader being wanted by The Hague for war crimes.

“Western media are on the verge of completely losing it,” wrote foreign ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova as Putin landed in Alaska.

“For three years they told everyone Russia was isolated and today they saw a beautiful red carpet laid out for the Russian president in the US,” she added.

On Saturday morning, Russia’s flagship Channel One morning news bulletin highlighted the pomp of the summit, its international visibility, and the warm welcome for Putin, a striking contrast to his isolation by western leaders since the 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

“The red carpet and handshakes … are in all global publications and TV channels,” a presenter cheered, noting it was the first time Trump had met a visiting leader at the airport.