NATO

Baltic and Nordic leaders in Denmark’s Copenhagen are meeting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who is on a diplomatic drive trying to cement security guarantees for Kyiv in the event of a peace deal to end Russia’s war in Ukraine.

“The heads of state and government will discuss how the Nordic-Baltic countries can ensure further support for Ukraine on the frontline and in the negotiating room,” Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen’s office said in a statement on Wednesday.

The gathering brings together the leaders of the Nordic-Baltic Eight (NB8) – Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway and Sweden – with Zelenskyy to discuss Ukraine’s future.

Finnish President Alexander Stubb said on Tuesday that progress was being made on security guarantees for Ukraine, but he stressed that such measures would only be implemented after a peace agreement is reached.

“We need to coordinate the security arrangements with the United States, which essentially will provide the backstop for this … We’re focusing on these issues with our chiefs of defence, which are drawing the concrete plans of what this type of operation might look like,” Stubb told reporters.

“We’re making progress on this and hopefully we’ll get a solution soon,” he said, while cautioning that he was not optimistic about a ceasefire or peace agreement with Russia in the near term.

The ‘coalition of the willing’

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said he expected clarity at a summit of Ukraine’s allies on Thursday “or soon after” on what security guarantees Europe can offer Kyiv once the war halts.

“I expect tomorrow, or soon after tomorrow, to have clarity on what collectively we can deliver,” Rutte said at a news conference with Estonian President Alar Karis in Brussels. “That means that we can engage even more intensely, also with the American side, to see what they want to deliver in terms of their participation in security guarantees.”

United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron will co-host Thursday’s mostly virtual meeting of leaders of the so-called “coalition of the willing” – a collection of Western states working on long-term guarantees for Ukraine, and NATO. Zelenskyy moves on to meet Macron tonight in Paris ahead of that summit.

Western officials have said such guarantees are aimed at deterring Russia from launching another war after hostilities end, whether through a ceasefire or a permanent peace deal.

They are expected to centre on continued military support for Kyiv, along with an international force to reassure Ukraine. However, European leaders have made clear that such a force would only be feasible with US participation.

United States President Donald Trump last month promised American involvement, but Washington has yet to spell out what it would contribute. Rutte sought to reassure eastern NATO members that resources for Ukraine’s security guarantees would not come at the expense of the alliance’s own defences.

“We have to prevent spreading our resources too thinly, and this means that we always have to look at what the impact will be on the NATO plans,” he said.

Moscow, meanwhile, rejects the idea of European peacekeeping troops on the ground in Ukraine, and insists that any future settlement must reflect what it calls “new territorial realities”.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told Indonesia’s Kompas newspaper that regions annexed by Russia – Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhia and Kherson – must be “recognized and formalized in an international legal manner” for peace to last.

Trump has suggested any eventual deal would involve Ukraine ceding some territory, but many analysts believe one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s core demands will be Ukrainian recognition of Moscow’s control over the parts of Donbas still under Kyiv’s authority.

Zelenskyy has repeatedly rejected such concessions, warning that losing any territory would embolden Russia to launch new attacks in the future. The Ukrainian constitution also forbids it.

Russia takes more territory in Kherson

As diplomacy continues behind the scenes, Russia’s assault continues to intensify across eastern Ukraine. Its forces claim to have encircled and now captured “about half” of Kupiansk, a strategic city in the northeastern Kharkiv region. Moscow’s Ministry of Defence also claimed its forces had seized the settlement of Fedorivka in Donetsk.

In the skies, Russia launched a sweeping overnight air campaign, striking targets across nine regions. Ukrainian officials said at least four railway workers were injured, while Poland scrambled defence aircraft as explosions echoed near its border.

Ukraine’s emergency services reported that five people were injured and 28 homes damaged in an attack on the Znamianka community in the Kirovohrad region. In Khmelnytskyi, transport services faced “significant schedule disruptions” after strikes damaged residential buildings and triggered fires.

Local authorities said two people were killed in Russian shelling of Polohivskyi district in Zaporizhia, while separate attacks caused deaths in Kherson, Kyiv region and Donetsk. The independent news outlet Kyiv Independent reported at least five civilians killed across the country in the latest wave of strikes.

Russia said it had shot down 158 Ukrainian drones in the past 24 hours, while claiming that Ukrainian attacks across its border killed 12 people and wounded nearly 100 in the past week. In the Belgorod region, Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov said a Ukrainian drone strike injured three people in the village of Proletarsky.

The diplomatic manoeuvring comes as Putin seeks to deepen ties with North Korea and China. His meeting on Wednesday with Kim Jong Un in Beijing, alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping at a grand military parade, underscored the growing partnership between Moscow and Pyongyang.

Trump responded by accusing the three leaders of conspiring against the United States – a claim dismissed by the Kremlin.

The Russian president defends the military campaign in Ukraine, blaming NATO and Western policies for the conflict.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has blamed the West for igniting the war in Ukraine, insisting Moscow’s assault was provoked by years of Western provocations.

Speaking at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in the Chinese city of Tianjin on Monday, Putin accused NATO of destabilising the region and dismissed claims that Russia triggered the war.

“This crisis was not triggered by Russia’s attack on Ukraine, but was a result of a coup in Ukraine, which was supported and provoked by the West,” Putin told the gathering of regional leaders. He was referring to the 2013-14 pro-European uprising that toppled Ukraine’s then-President Viktor Yanukovych.

Russia responded to the revolution by annexing Crimea and backing separatists in eastern Ukraine, leading to a conflict that has left tens of thousands dead and devastated large parts of the country.

Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 escalated the fighting, prompting sweeping sanctions from the United States and the European Union and deepening Russia’s isolation from the West, though not from the rest of the international community.

Putin said Western efforts to draw Ukraine into NATO were a key driver of the war, reiterating that Russia’s security concerns must be addressed before any peace deal can be reached.

“For the Ukrainian settlement to be sustainable and long-term, the root causes of the crisis must be addressed,” he said.

The Russian president highlighted talks he held with US President Donald Trump in August, describing the discussions as “opening a way to peace”. He praised diplomatic efforts from Beijing and New Delhi, saying their proposals could “facilitate the resolution of the Ukrainian crisis”.

Putin met Chinese President Xi Jinping on Sunday to discuss Ukraine and said he would expand on those talks in bilateral meetings with leaders on the sidelines of the summit. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan are also attending.

Moscow and Beijing have promoted the SCO as a counterweight to Western-led alliances, with Putin arguing the world needs a “system that would replace outdated Eurocentric and Euro-Atlantic models”.

Despite repeated calls from Trump for Moscow and Kyiv to negotiate, peace efforts have faltered. Russia has rejected ceasefire proposals and demanded that Ukraine cede more territory, conditions Kyiv has dismissed as unacceptable.

“For the Ukrainian settlement to be sustainable and long-term, the root causes of the crisis must be addressed,” said Putin.

Part of the source of the conflict “lies in the ongoing attempts by the West to bring Ukraine into NATO”, he said.

Putin also held talks with Modi and Erdogan, and is expected to meet Pezeshkian later on Monday as he seeks to bolster diplomatic backing amid the drawn-out conflict.

EXCLUSIVE: Mark Wolters, who runs the successful YouTube channel Wolters World, explained that he felt compelled to provide “honest” advice to travellers after seeing numerous “misleading” blogs and videos

A travel vlogger who’s visited over 80 countries has revealed his favourite destinations. Mark Wolters, the man behind the popular YouTube channel Wolters World, hails from Quincy, Illinois, USA and is on a mission to provide “honest” travel advice to his many followers.

He explained that he was driven to create his videos after noticing many “misleading” blogs and felt it “wasn’t right” for families to “waste their hard earned vacation time”. He previously shared the “least friendly” country he’s visited for tourists. But, in an exclusive interview, he had no hesitation in naming his five favourite countries by continent.

Brazil

Mark explained: “My favorite place to visit in South America is Brazil. I lived there and have family there and it is just such a wonderful place with the food, the nature, and the crazy fun times you can have there.”

Brazil is the largest country in South America and one of the world’s biggest democracies. It boasts diverse landscapes including the Amazon, the world’s largest jungle, and is synonymous with world-class football, being the home of Pelé.

The nation boasts an incredible diversity of wildlife, featuring a staggering 600 mammal species. Rio de Janeiro (pictured above) ranks among its most sought-after tourist hotspots.

France

Mark revealed: “In Europe, it is a toss up between France and Italy. They both have great food and if you speak a bit of the local language you can make so many friends there. So I can never pass up going to either of them.”

Famous for its cuisine and culture, France stands as a significant force globally and maintains membership in NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation). Located in Western Europe, it shares borders with Germany, Belgium, Italy and Spain.

Boasting legendary sites including the Eiffel Tower, Notre Dame Cathedral, the Louvre Museum, and the Arc de Triomphe, France serves as a European cultural capital and an enormously popular holiday destination.

Italy

A major attraction for visitors and amongst Mark’s top picks, Italy represents another country celebrated for its gastronomy and heritage. Many of history’s most famous artistic figures originated from Italy, including Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo and Caravaggio.

This Southern European country also houses some of the globe’s most recognised monuments, including the Colosseum, Trevi Fountain and the Roman Forum. Beyond the capital, Rome, holidaymakers flock to other remarkable destinations like the stunning cities of Venice and Florence.

Rwanda

Mark explained: “In Africa we love visiting Rwanda. It was such an incredible adventure when we visited the first time. We fell in love with it.”

Rwanda, a landlocked nation in East Africa, is known as the “land of a thousand hills”. It’s a small yet densely populated country that borders Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Home to the Hutu and Tutsi ethnic groups, Rwanda boasts rainforests, majestic mountains, volcanoes, and even the endangered mountain gorilla.

China

Mark said: “In Asia, I think my wife would say Japan, but I loved teaching and traveling in China. So much history and so much food!

China, one of the world’s most populous nations and a leading industrial powerhouse, has a rich history spanning 4,000 years. The modern People’s Republic of China was established in 1949 following the Communist Revolution.

Tourists flock to see the Great Wall of China, the Forbidden City, and the Terracotta Army. Not to mention, it’s famously home to the Giant Panda.

From NATO’s eastern frontier to the energy corridors of the Baltic, the partnership between Poland and the United States has become one of the most strategically consequential alliances of the 21st century. Forged through shared values and hardened by crisis, it’s a relationship that transcends party politics in both nations and speaks to a larger truth—namely, that while alliances can lead to instability and war, as shown by the interlocking obligations before World War I, alliances, whether bilateral or multilateral, can also promote international stability by deterring conflicts, enabling collective defense, and fostering cooperation and trade among member states.

Poland proves the point. Its journey from Soviet satellite to NATO membership in 1999 and European Union accession in 2004, following a decade-long process of integration and negotiation involving extensive political, economic, and legal preparations, is a story of determination and alignment with Western democratic principles. The drive toward NATO membership was reinforced by citizen advocacy and steady diplomacy, with the Polish-American community playing a quiet but influential role in building bridges between Warsaw and Washington. The U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey estimates there are nearly nine million Americans of Polish ancestry, making it one of the largest ethnic groups in the country.

From the outset, Poland understood that sovereignty in the modern era requires not only democratic governance but also a credible place within a collective security framework. Joining NATO was a strategic declaration that Poland’s future was bound to the transatlantic community. And it is precisely through NATO that the U.S.–Polish relationship contributes most visibly to international stability.

Response to Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine

When Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Poland responded with clarity and speed, welcoming millions of Ukrainian refugees, supplying critical military aid, and urging allies to strengthen NATO’s eastern flank. Due to its geographic location bordering Ukraine, Belarus, and the Russian exclave Kaliningrad, Poland took a proactive stance to bolster its defenses and NATO’s regional presence. Poland launched a $2.5 billion national defense initiative called the “East Shield” that was specifically aimed at strengthening the country’s roughly 418-kilometer border with Belarus and 232-kilometer border with Kaliningrad—representing some of the EU’s easternmost external boundaries—which serve as key frontlines for the bloc’s security and border control.

 By shoring up NATO’s credibility and demonstrating readiness to act, Poland helped reduce the risk of wider escalation across Europe.

The U.S.–Poland defense relationship deepened accordingly. American troops are now a permanent presence on Polish soil. The U.S. Army’s V Corps forward command in Poznań, which operates from Camp Kościuszko—named for Tadeuscz Kościuszko, a national hero in both Poland and the U.S.—is responsible for coordinating and overseeing U.S. ground forces deployed in Europe. Missile defense systems such as Aegis Ashore strengthen NATO’s deterrent posture, and joint training exercises have become routine. These measures bind U.S. power to Poland’s geography, creating predictability in Europe’s most volatile region.

Poland’s overall defense spending speaks volumes. It’s approaching five percent of national GDP—more than double NATO’s longstanding benchmark of two percent of GDP for defense expenditures—and Poland’s procurement of Abrams tanks, “shoot-and-scoot” HIMARS rocket systems that are designed for rapid deployment relocation, and F-35 fighter jets ensures interoperability with U.S. forces. As U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth put it during a February 2025 press conference in Warsaw, Poland is a “model ally on the continent, willing to invest not just in their defense, but in our shared defense and defense of the continent.”

Transcending Party Politics

The relationship transcends party politics in both capitals, having remained robust under Republican and Democratic administrations in Washington—Trump, Biden, and now Trump’s second term—as well as across successive Polish governments of differing political orientations. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has reaffirmed that “Poland’s commitment to transatlantic relations and NATO must remain unquestionable,” regardless of political shifts in the U.S.

National security isn’t confined to the battlefield. Poland recognized early on that energy independence is a cornerstone of sovereignty, and it has acted decisively to cut reliance on Russian natural gas. The liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal at Świnoujście, which is named after Polish President Lech Kaczyński, who prioritized energy security, now receives regular LNG shipments from the U.S., while the Baltic Pipe project brings natural gas from Norway and strengthens regional supply diversity. Looking ahead, nuclear energy partnerships with American firms promise long-term stability and reduced dependence on fossil fuels.

This alignment in energy policy enhances Poland’s resilience while advancing broader U.S. goals of promoting secure, market-based energy in Europe. In strategic terms, an LNG tanker docking in Świnoujście is more than commerce. It’s a visible symbol of transatlantic solidarity.

Contrasting Russian Reactions

Russia’s reaction to Poland’s NATO membership stands in striking contrast to its view of Ukraine’s Western aspirations. When Poland joined NATO in 1999, Moscow voiced strong opposition, arguing that NATO’s eastward expansion threatened Russian security. Apart from diplomatic protests and some hostile rhetoric, however, Russia ultimately conceded Poland’s accession as a fait accompli. Moscow maintained cooperative channels with NATO and Poland, even as relations were strained. Poland, with its long history of independence struggles and clear Western orientation, was not seen as part of Russia’s cultural or political sphere. Moreover, by the time Central Europe was firmly integrated into NATO, Russia had little leverage to reverse the process.

Ukraine, however, occupies a different place in Moscow’s worldview. Russia regards Ukraine not only as a strategic buffer on its border but also as central to its own identity and history. Unlike Poland, Ukraine is portrayed in Russian narratives as a “brother nation” whose alignment with the West represents a profound geopolitical and cultural loss. For this reason, Russia tolerated NATO’s enlargement to Poland and the Baltics but drew the line at Ukraine, seeing its aspirations for NATO and EU membership as a direct existential threat, responding with annexation, proxy wars, and, ultimately, full-scale invasion. The contrast underscores the strategic weight of Poland’s alliance with the United States.

For Poland, it’s a relationship rooted in hard history: the loss of independence from 1795 to 1918, when the country was partitioned among Prussia, the Hapsburg monarchy, and Russia; the devastation of Nazi occupation; the long shadow of Soviet domination; and decades of Communist rule. That experience forged a national resolve that sovereignty can never be taken for granted and must be anchored in strong alliances. Today those alliances—most of all with the United States—are essential pillars of stability in Europe.

After a week of high-stakes diplomacy aimed at halting the war in Ukraine, United States President Donald Trump says he is set on arranging a summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Following separate meetings with both leaders, Trump has ruled out sending US troops to Ukraine, but pledged security guarantees to Kyiv and indicated that Washington could provide air support to reinforce a potential deal.

Ukraine, in turn, told reporters at the White House it would obtain US-made weapons purchased by Europeans for an estimated $90bn as part of the effort to bolster its defences.

Which countries are aiding Ukraine?

At least 41 countries have contributed to Ukraine’s war efforts monetarily, either through military, humanitarian or financial assistance, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, a German think tank.

Military assistance includes weapons, equipment and financial aid for the Ukrainian military. Humanitarian relief covers medical, food and other items for civilians, while financial assistance comes in the form of grants, loans and guarantees.

Most contributions to Ukraine have come from NATO, with 29 of its 32 members providing monetary aid, according to the Kiel Institute.

Additionally, 12 non-NATO countries and territories have sent monetary aid to Ukraine. These include Australia, Austria, Cyprus, the Republic of Ireland, Japan, Malta, New Zealand, South Korea, Switzerland, China, Taiwan, and India.

The European Union, through the Commission and Council, has also delivered substantial aid to Ukraine.

How much aid has Ukraine received so far?

So far, Ukraine has received more than 309 billion euros ($360bn) in military, financial, and humanitarian aid, according to the Kiel Institute:

• Military aid – 149.26 billion euros ($174bn – using today’s exchange rate of €1 = $1.17)
• Financial aid – 139.34 billion euros ($163bn)
• Humanitarian aid – 21.04 billion euros ($24bn)

Who are Ukraine’s largest donors?

The US has committed the largest amount of aid to Ukraine, providing 114.64 billion euros ($134bn) between January 24, 2022 and June 30, 2025, of which:

• Military aid – 64.6 billion euros ($75bn)
• Financial aid – 46.6 billion euros ($54bn)
• Humanitarian aid – 3.4 billion euros ($4bn)

The EU (Commission and Council) is the second biggest donor at 63.19 billion euros ($74bn), followed by Germany (21.29 billion euros or $25bn), the UK (18.6 billion euros or $21bn) and Japan (13.57 billion euros or $15bn).

How much aid has been pledged v allocated?

According to the Kiel Institute, European countries have collectively allocated 167.4 billion euros ($195bn) to the war in Ukraine, more than the 114.6 billion euros ($134bn) allocated by the US.

Allocated aid refers to funds or resources that have actually been set aside, delivered, or officially committed for use by Ukraine.

It is different from pledged aid, which is money or equipment promised by a country but not yet delivered or officially set aside.

In total, Europe as a whole has committed 257.4 billion euros ($300bn) and the US 119 billion euros ($139bn).

US aid to Ukraine plummets under Trump

Days before Trump took office, the Biden administration gave one final injection of military support to Ukraine with a weapons package of $500m on January 9.

Following the start of the Trump administration’s second term in office, aid to Ukraine has plummeted, with Washington suspending all support, including weapons, in March after a tense meeting with Zelenskyy at the White House.

Trump made claims that the US has given Ukraine more than $300bn in wartime aid. That number has been contested by Ukraine and its supporters, despite the US being the single largest donor country.

What weapons has Ukraine received?

Ukraine has received various weapons systems from its allies, including armoured vehicles, artillery, aircraft, air defence systems, drones, missiles, and a wide range of support equipment.

According to the Kiel Institute, Poland has supplied its neighbour with the largest number of tanks, totaling 354, while the US leads in providing infantry fighting vehicles (305), howitzers (201), air defence systems (18), and HIMARS rocket launchers (41).

The HIMARS, capable of striking targets just a few metres (feet) wide from nearly 80km (50 miles) away, gave Ukraine a vital long-range precision strike capability that slowed Russian advances early in the war.

NATO defence spending

In a news briefing, the White House said the US could help coordinate a security guarantee for Ukraine. However, Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has ruled out the deployment of troops from NATO countries to help secure a peace deal.

In June, NATO leaders signed a deal to increase defence spending, which is to be achieved over the next 10 years, and is a jump worth hundreds of billions of dollars a year from the current goal of 2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) to 5 percent.

Currently, 23 of the 32 member countries have met this target, with the alliance as a whole spending 2.61 percent of its combined GDP on defence last year.

NATO countries bordering Russia, such as Estonia and Lithuania, have significantly increased their defence spending – from less than 1 percent of their GDP just 10 years ago.

Dutch defence minister announces details of support for Poland as Polish authorities accuse Russia of ‘provocation’ after drone crash.

Dutch Defence Minister Ruben Brekelmans has said his country is sending 300 troops and Patriot air defence missile systems to Poland to “defend NATO territory, protect supply to Ukraine, and deter Russian aggression”.

The Netherlands’ announcement on Wednesday came as Polish officials said that an object that fell in a cornfield in Poland’s east on Tuesday night may have been a Russian version of the Shahed drone.

The explosion from the drone broke windows in several houses in the village of Osiny, near Poland’s border with Ukraine, but no injuries were reported, according to an official cited by Poland’s state news agency PAP.

Brekelmans told Dutch public broadcaster NOS on Wednesday that the military support to Poland came alongside other countries providing similar assistance to the NATO-member country, which borders Ukraine.

Brekelmans emphasised that the Patriot systems would be operating in Poland, and the accompanying 300 troops did not mean the Netherlands was putting troops on the ground in Ukraine.

Germany deployed five Eurofighter combat aircraft to Poland earlier this month, according to a German air force spokesman cited by Germany’s DPA news agency. The Kyiv Independent news outlet reported the fighter jets were deployed ahead of joint Russian-Belarusian military drills.

Germany also sent five Eurofighter jets and an estimated 270 soldiers to Romania, DPA reported on Wednesday.

Two of the Eurofighter jets in Romania were mobilised for the first time on Tuesday night, in response to Russian air strikes near Ukraine’s border with Romania, DPA said.

The jets, which took off from a Romanian military airbase, returned without incident, DPA added.

Polish Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of National Defence Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz accused Russia of “provocation”, noting the drone incident within Poland’s borders on Tuesday came “at a special moment, when there are ongoing discussions about peace” in Ukraine, Polskie Radio reported.

Several European leaders accompanied Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to the White House on Monday, where one of the main topics of discussion was European countries providing post-war security guarantees to Ukraine as part of discussions around ending the Russia-Ukraine war.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned on Wednesday that attempting to implement security issues relating to Ukraine without Moscow’s involvement was a “road to nowhere”.

“We cannot agree with the fact that now it is proposed to resolve questions of security, collective security, without the Russian Federation. This will not work,” Lavrov said.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov says discussing Ukraine security issues without Russia is a ‘road to nowhere’.

Russia has warned that attempting to resolve security issues relating to Ukraine without the participation of Moscow is a “road to nowhere”, days after European leaders met US President Donald Trump to discuss security guarantees for Kyiv.

“We cannot agree with the fact that now it is proposed to resolve questions of security, collective security, without the Russian Federation. This will not work,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Wednesday.

“I am sure that in the West and above all in the United States they understand perfectly well that seriously discussing security issues without the Russian Federation is a utopia; it’s a road to nowhere.”

The minister’s comments come two days after US President Donald Trump hosted Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy alongside prominent European leaders at the White House, and days after Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Trump is trying to steer Putin and Zelenskyy towards a settlement more than three years after Russia invaded its neighbour, but major obstacles remain.

The Russian official said any summit between Putin and Zelenskyy “must be prepared in the most meticulous way” so the meeting does not lead to a “deterioration” of the situation around the conflict.

Lavrov also accused European leaders of making “clumsy attempts” to change the US president’s position on Ukraine.

“We have only seen aggressive escalation of the situation and rather clumsy attempts to change the position of the US president,” he said, referring to Monday’s meeting.

“We did not hear any constructive ideas from the Europeans there,” Lavrov added.

NATO talks

NATO military chiefs are due to meet on Wednesday to discuss the details of potential security guarantees for Ukraine amid efforts to broker a ceasefire to Russia’s offensive.

NATO’s Military Committee said that 32 defence chiefs from across the alliance would hold a video conference.

US General Alexus Grynkewich, who oversees NATO’s operations in Europe, will also take part in the talks.

Kyiv’s European allies are looking to set up a force that could backstop any peace agreement, and a coalition of 30 countries, including European nations, Japan and Australia, have signed up to support the initiative.

Military chiefs are considering how that security force might work. The role that the US might play is unclear. Trump on Tuesday ruled out sending US troops to help defend Ukraine against Russia.

Russia has repeatedly said that it would not accept NATO troops in Ukraine.

When United States President Donald Trump invited his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelenskyy for talks at the White House on Monday, the European leaders rushed to Washington, DC to stand alongside Zelenskyy in a show of support.

The last meeting between Trump and Zelenskyy, held in February at the Oval Office, did not go down well for the Ukrainian leader. He was publicly berated and blamed for the Ukraine war – which was actually started by Russia in February 2022.

The European leaders wanted to ensure Kyiv’s interests were taken into consideration days after Trump rolled out a red-carpet welcome to Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska talks.

And much to their relief, the fraught issue of Ukraine’s security guarantees did emerge as one of the key talking points in the White House talks. Trump, who has ruled out NATO membership for Kyiv, offered a US role in the security of Ukraine.

While the specifics of the security guarantees have not been revealed, Trump added that European countries would be the “first line of defence”.

Here is more about Ukraine’s security guarantee, what the US role would be, and how would it be different from NATO security?

What has Trump said?

“When it comes to security, there’s going to be a lot of help,” Trump told reporters on Monday, referring to the US role in Ukraine’s security.

Trump added that European countries would be involved in providing these security guarantees.

“We have people waiting in another room, right now, they’re all here from Europe,” Trump said during a summit at the White House attended by Zelenskyy and a group of European allies. “Biggest people in Europe. And they want to give protection. They feel very strongly about it, and we’ll help them out with that.”

“They are a first line of defence because they’re there, but we’ll help them out,” Trump said.

In an interview with Fox News on Tuesday, the US president said European ground troops could be part of security guarantees but ruled out deployment of US ground troops to Ukraine.

“When it comes to security, they’re willing to put people on the ground,” he told Fox News, referring to European allies whom he met in the White House on Monday.

“We’re willing to help them with things, especially, probably, if you talk about by air, because no one has the kind of stuff we have, really, they don’t,” Trump said.

Ukraine has been seeking NATO membership to boost its security against Russian aggression, but the Trump administration has ruled that out, calling it “unrealistic”. On Tuesday he reiterated Ukraine won’t be able to join NATO.

Trump had been asking Europe to take the front seat in providing security guarantees for Ukraine.

The European leaders who attended the summit on Monday included French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Finnish President Alexander Stubb, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte.

Marina Miron, a postdoctoral researcher at the defence studies department at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera that Trump’s language was notably ambiguous during the summit because neither the US nor the Trump administration is genuinely willing to become directly involved.

What has Zelenskyy said?

In a post on X recapping his meeting with Trump, Zelenskyy wrote that security issues are “a key issue, a starting point towards ending the war.”

“We appreciate the important signal from the United States regarding its readiness to support and be part of these guarantees,” Zelenskyy wrote. However, he did not specify what these guarantees would be.

When a reporter asked Zelenskyy what security guarantees Ukraine needs, he responded, saying, “Everything.”

Later, Zelenskyy told reporters that the guarantees would be “formalised on paper within the next week to 10 days.”

“There will be discussions, and we are preparing the relevant formats,” he later wrote in a post on X, adding that “national security advisors are also in constant contact now.”

Separately, the Ukrainian leader added that Ukraine would buy US weapons worth $90bn.

What could the security guarantees for Ukraine include?

“Ukraine wants a lot, but how much of those security guarantees that Ukraine envisages it will get is another question,” said Miron.

She said that even the Ukrainian side has not spelled out exactly what security guarantees it requires, and details such as the number of troops required have not been specified.

Keir Giles, a Eurasia expert at the think tank Chatham House told Al Jazeera that support for Ukraine could take many forms, ranging from written promises — which risk being as ineffective as the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, when Russia pledged to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty but ultimately did not — to the actual deployment of Western troops to deter further Russian aggression.

One possible way security guarantees could be provided to Ukraine would be if Ukraine’s allies provided on-ground peacekeeping forces in Ukraine to supplement the Ukrainian army.

Giles said that this option has been, until now, consistently ruled out by the US, and by European states without US backing.

In March, Starmer declared that a “coalition of the willing” would come together to draw up a peace plan to end the war in Ukraine. This coalition, a temporary group of volunteer countries, would provide security guarantees to ensure the end of the war in Ukraine.

However, Starmer did not specify whether the coalition would continue to provide security guarantees after the war ended, or whether member states would put boots on the ground in Ukraine.

Russia cited Kyiv’s NATO ambitions and NATO enlargement in Eastern Europe as one of the key reasons for launching its war on Ukraine.

Since the Russian invasion, Kyiv has been pushing to be granted NATO membership, which would offer it security under Article 5 of the 32-member alliance. Under Article 5, if one or more NATO members are subjected to an armed attack, it will be regarded as an attack against all members.

Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, told the news agency CNN that Russia had agreed to allow the US and Europe to “effectively offer Article 5-like language to cover a security guarantee” to Ukraine.

However, Ukraine’s NATO membership is currently on hold. Before the summit on Monday, Trump said there will be “no going into NATO by Ukraine” as part of a ceasefire agreement.

Miron said that Trump is likely to push for a peace deal, signalling to Ukraine that regaining lost territories militarily is unlikely.

Hence, Ukraine faces a tough choice: “Either they keep on fighting or they accept things as they are, and if they keep on fighting, the chances are that they will lose even more. From my understanding, if Ukraine continues fighting, they are not going to be counting on US support,” Miron from King’s College said.

She added that if Russia resumes aggression in Ukraine, it’s uncertain whether NATO members would intervene, as NATO currently appears unwilling to get directly involved or confront Russia.

Meanwhile, Starmer will host a virtual meeting of the coalition of the willing on Tuesday.

What’s next?

There are still no signs of a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine.

After the White House summit on Monday, Trump said he spoke to Putin and is making arrangements for a meeting between Putin and Zelenskyy. Zelenskyy said he is ready” to meet the Russian leader one-on-one.

In a Truth Social post where he laid out this plan, Trump said that after the bilateral meeting between the Ukrainian and Russian leaders, there will be a trilateral meeting between Putin, Zelenskyy and Trump.

STRICKEN Ukraine will be forced to surrender large swathes of its eastern territory and forget about ever joining Nato under peace terms haggled by Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.

The war-torn country’s desire to join the European Union is also in doubt after the two superpower presidents held controversial talks in Alaska on Friday.

8

8

8

Ukraine would be outlawed from joining the Western defence alliance, but have its redrawn borders underwritten by its US and European allies in the terms suggested by the White House.

Allies have offered “ironclad” security assurances to protect Ukraine from future Russian aggression if a peace deal can be forged.

But it would stop short of Nato Article 5 status, which sees members of the alliance leap to the aid of any member that is attacked.

Ukraine’s desire to join Nato has been blamed as a root cause of President Putin’s invasion.

He has insisted “Nyet” — Russian for “No” — over the proposal.

But the future security of Ukraine is the number one condition of its president, Volodymyr Zelensky.

British and other European troops could be committed to police the peace, with President Trump finally conceding the Americans would play a vital role in the future defence of Ukraine.

Last night, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz publicly stated: “The good news is that America is ready to participate in such security guarantees and is not leaving it to the Europeans alone.”

And PM Sir Keir Starmer said Mr Trump’s “leadership in pursuit of an end to the killing” should be commended.

Calls for an immediate ceasefire were dropped by world leaders yesterday, after Mr Trump announced he was instead pursuing a more stable and lasting “peace deal”.

Plans haggled at Friday’s face-to-face summit are being circulated by the Americans after the US President and the Kremlin tyrant met each other in Anchorage, Alaska, for more than three hours.

The Sun has been told a surrender deal would see Ukraine forced to reject Nato membership and other “multinational deals”.

Negotiations would also begin about ceding control of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Eastern Ukraine which are, in part, heavily occupied by Russian troops.

There was confusion last night over whether the talks would focus on territory currently held by the Kremlin invaders, or whether the wider regions were on the table.

Yesterday, EU leaders insisted: “Russia cannot have a veto against Ukraine’s pathway to EU and Nato.”

However, that does not rule out Mr Zelensky deciding to withdraw Ukraine’s stated aim to join both alliances as part of the wider deal.

He will fly to Washington DC on Monday to meet with President Trump at the White House — six months after their disastrous Oval Office bust up, which saw the leader of the free world savage Mr Zelensky live on TV.

8

Russia has long claimed Donetsk and Luhansk are more loyal to Moscow than Kyiv, while Mr Zelensky has publicly ruled out giving up the land.

However, he is under massive pressure to concede and end the bloody three-and-a-half year conflict, which has seen more than a million deaths.

European leaders were locked in talks with the White House this weekend, as the world scrambled to catch up with what Mr Trump had offered Mr Putin to end the war.

Last night, UK government sources said the PM was playing a key role in selling the terms of the deal to wider Western allies in a series of calls following the talks between the Americans and Russians.

I welcome the openness of the United States, alongside Europe, to provide robust security guarantees to Ukraine as part of any deal. This is important progress and will be crucial in deterring Putin from coming back for more

Sir Keir Starmer’s statement

President Trump yesterday insisted it is time for Mr Zelensky to choose whether to agree with the terms of the deal — as the pair prepared to meet tomorrow.

The White House has also offered to play host to a trilateral summit between the Russians and Ukrainians if the deal is within reach.

Speaking following Friday’s talks, where he met with his Russian counterpart for the first time in six years, President Trump insisted it was “a great and very successful day in Alaska!”

He wrote on his Truth Social website: “The meeting with President Vladimir Putin of Russia went very well, as did a late night phone call with President Zelensky of Ukraine, and various European Leaders, including the highly respected Secretary General of Nato.

8

8

“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. President Zelensky will be coming to D.C., the Oval Office, on Monday afternoon. If all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin.

“Potentially, millions of people’s lives will be saved. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

Last night, President Putin also welcomed progress made at the talks, after leaving the summit without taking questions from hundreds of assembled journalists.

In a televised address released by the Kremlin, he said: “The conversation was very frank, substantive, and, in my opinion, brings us closer to the necessary decisions.”

He added: “We have not had direct negotiations of this kind at this level for a long time. We had the opportunity to calmly and in detail reiterate our position.”

We are clear that Ukraine must have ironclad security guarantees to effectively defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. No limitations should be placed on Ukraine’s armed forces or on its cooperation with third countries. Russia cannot have a veto against Ukraine‘s pathway to EU and NATO

European statement

In a long statement, President Zelensky welcomed the offer of security guarantees outlined by Mr Trump, in a tentative sign he may be willing to sign up to the terms.

He wrote: “A real peace must be achieved, one that will be lasting, not just another pause between Russian invasions. Killings must stop as soon as possible, the fire must cease both on the battlefield and in the sky, as well as against our port infrastructure.

“All Ukrainian prisoners of war and civilians must be released, and the children abducted by Russia must be returned.

“Thousands of our people remain in captivity — they all must be brought home. Pressure on Russia must be maintained while the aggression and occupation continue.”

He went on: “In my conversation with President Trump, I said that sanctions should be strengthened if there is no trilateral meeting or if Russia tries to evade an honest end to the war. Sanctions are an effective tool.

“Security must be guaranteed reliably and in the long term, with involvement of Europe and the US.

“All issues important to Ukraine must be discussed with Ukraine’s participation, and no issue, particularly territorial ones, can be decided without Ukraine. I thank our partners who are helping.”

Yesterday the PM was taking part in a round of behind the scenes diplomacy, speaking to the White House and European capitals.

He heaped praise on Mr Trump, saying his “efforts have brought us closer than ever before to ending Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine”.

He went on: “His leadership in pursuit of an end to the killing should be commended.”

But the PM warned: “While progress has been made, the next step must be further talks involving President Zelensky.

8

The path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without him. I spoke to President Zelensky, President Trump and other European partners, and we all stand ready to support this next phase.

“I welcome the openness of the United States, alongside Europe, to provide robust security guarantees to Ukraine as part of any deal.

“This is important progress and will be crucial in deterring Putin from coming back for more.

“In the meantime, until he stops his barbaric assault, we will keep tightening the screws on his war machine with even more sanctions, which have already had a punishing impact on the Russian economy and its people. Our unwavering support for Ukraine will continue as long as it takes.”

In a joint statement, Sir Keir and European leaders including France’s Emmanuel Macron and Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, said: “We are clear Ukraine must have ironclad security guarantees to effectively defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

“No limitations should be placed on Ukraine’s armed forces or on its cooperation with third countries.

Russia cannot have a veto against Ukraine‘s pathway to EU and Nato.

8

Priti: Trump was right to set up meeting

By Sophia Sleigh

DONALD Trump was right to bring Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table on Friday, says Dame Priti Patel.

The Shadow Foreign Secretary gave her support to the US President’s efforts — while adding that Britain must keep up “tightening the screws” on the Russian tyrant’s regime.

The Tory grandee told The Sun on Sunday: “It is right President Trump has brought Putin to the negotiating table.

“And we support his efforts in ending Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine.

“Now is the time for the Euro-Atlantic partnership to be stronger than ever in supporting Ukraine, and forcing Putin to end his barbaric war.

“The British government must lead the charge, as we have done, in keeping pressure on Putin through sanctions — and demonstrate we can lead efforts to support Ukraine, and tighten the screws on Russia.”

But others had concerns that no ceasefire had been reached yesterday — even with Mr Trump having warned Putin of “severe consequences” if fighting did not stop.

Former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith said: “Trump has to tell him to agree to a ceasefire or he will up the ante on sanctions, secondary sanctions and weapons to Ukraine. Putin has to fear what Trump can do — more than his own generals and politicians who would come after him.”

He added that Trump “must understand who Putin is, a KGB man who has one purpose in life — to recreate the Soviet Union”.

Former PM Boris Johnson also said that Trump was right to make a move as Putin was weaker than he seemed owing to the war’s damage to Russia’s economy.

Most Labour MPs remained quiet on the talks. Crossbench peer and intelligence expert Lord Peter Ricketts said they were a “clear win” for Putin.

WASHINGTON — President Trump said Monday that he expected to determine mere moments into his meeting with Russian leader Vladimir Putin this week whether it would be possible to work out a deal to halt the war in Ukraine.

“At the end of that meeting, probably the first two minutes, I’ll know exactly whether or not a deal can be made,” Trump said at a White House press conference that he called to announce plans for a federal takeover of Washington’s police force to help combat crime.

He said he thought Friday’s sitdown with Putin in Alaska would be “really a feel-out meeting.” Trump added that “it’ll be good, but it might be bad” and predicted he may say, “lots of luck, keep fighting. Or I may say, we can make a deal.”

Putin wants to lock in Russia’s gains since invading Ukraine in February 2022 as Trump presses for a ceasefire that has remained out of reach. Trump’s eagerness to reach a deal has raised fears in Ukraine and Europe about such an agreement favoring Russia, without sufficient input from Ukraine. Trump has alternately harshly criticized both leaders after promising — and so far failing — to swiftly end the conflict.

The Trump-Putin meeting so far isn’t going to include Zelensky

Trump on Monday ducked repeated chances to say that he would push for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to take part in his discussions with Putin, and was especially dismissive of Zelensky and his need to be part of an effort to seek peace.

He said the Ukrainian president had been to “a lot of meetings” without managing to halt a war that Russia started. Trump also noted that Zelensky had been in power for the duration of the war and said “nothing happened” during that time. He contrasted that with Putin, who has wielded power in Russia for decades.

Trump said that, after his meeting with Putin, “The next meeting will be with Zelensky and Putin” but it could also be a meeting with “Putin and Zelensky and me.”

European allies have pushed for Ukraine’s involvement, fearful that discussions could otherwise favor Moscow.

To that point, Trump said he would call Zelensky and European leaders after his discussion with Putin to “tell them what kind of a deal — I’m not going to make a deal. It’s not up to me to make a deal.”

Trump spent the early part of his administration decrying Zelensky, even suggesting he was a dictator because his country has not held elections during the war. Zelensky was hounded out of the Oval Office in February after Trump and Vice President JD Vance suggested he hadn’t been grateful enough for U.S. support.

Trump’s up and down relations with Putin

More recently, Trump has expressed frustration with Putin that Russia hasn’t appeared to take a push for a ceasefire more seriously, and softened his tone toward Zelensky. His comments Monday suggested he might have had another change of heart.

“President Putin invited me to get involved,” Trump said. He noted that he thought it was “very respectful” that Putin is coming to the U.S. for Friday’s meeting, instead of insisting that Trump go to Russia.

“I’d like to see a ceasefire. I’d like to see the best deal that can be made for both parties,” Trump said.

The president repeated that any major agreement could involve land swaps, without elaborating. He had threatened Moscow with more economic sanctions if more isn’t done to work toward a ceasefire, but suggested Monday that, should Friday’s meeting be successful, he could see a day when the U.S. and Russia normalize trade relations.

Putin is expected to be unwavering in his demands to keep all the territory his forces now occupy and to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, with the long-term aim of returning it to Moscow’s sphere of influence.

Zelensky insists he will never consent to any formal Russian annexation of Ukrainian territory or give up a bid for NATO membership.

Putin believes he has the advantage on the ground as Ukrainian forces struggle to hold back Russian advances along the 600-mile front. On the front lines, few Ukrainian soldiers believe there’s an end in sight to the war.

Europeans will prepare with a virtual meeting on Ukraine this week

With the Europeans and Ukrainians so far not invited to the summit, Germany sought to prepare by inviting Trump, Zelensky, the NATO chief and several other European leaders for a virtual meeting on Wednesday.

The German chancellery said the talks would seek additional ways to pressure Russia and prepare for peace negotiations and “related issues of territorial claims and security.”

Steffen Meyer, spokesperson for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, said the German government “has always emphasized that borders must not be shifted by force” and that Ukraine should decide its own fate “independently and autonomously.”

Earlier, a Ukrainian drone attack killed one person and wounded two others in a region some 260 miles east of Moscow.

Russia’s Defense Ministry said its air defenses intercepted and destroyed a total of 39 Ukrainian drones overnight and Monday morning over several Russian regions as well as over the Crimean Peninsula, which Russia annexed in 2014.

Weissert writes for the Associated Press.

Russia is no longer bound by a moratorium on the deployment of short- and medium-range nuclear missiles, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has said, with former President Dmitry Medvedev blaming NATO’s “anti-Russian policy” and warning that Moscow will take “further steps” in response.

Medvedev, who has engaged in a war of words on social media with United States President Donald Trump, made his latest broadside after the Foreign Ministry’s announcement on Monday.

“The Russian Foreign Ministry’s statement on the withdrawal of the moratorium on the deployment of medium- and short-range missiles is the result of NATO countries’ anti-Russian policy,” Medvedev posted in English on the X social media platform.

“This is a new reality all our opponents will have to reckon with. Expect further steps,” he said.

Medvedev, who serves as the deputy head of Russia’s powerful Security Council and has made several hawkish comments on Russia’s nuclear capabilities in recent years, did not elaborate on what “further steps” may entail.

Last week, Trump said that he had ordered two US nuclear submarines to be repositioned to “the appropriate regions” in response to Medvedev’s remarks about the risk of war between Washington and Moscow.

The Russian Foreign Ministry’s statement on the withdrawal of the moratorium on the deployment of medium- and short-range missiles is the result of NATO countries’ anti-Russian policy.
This is a new reality all our opponents will have to reckon with. Expect further steps.

— Dmitry Medvedev (@MedvedevRussiaE) August 4, 2025

In its statement, Russia’s Foreign Ministry said the developing situation in Europe and the Asia Pacific prompted its reassessment on the deployment of short- and medium-range missiles.

“Since the situation is developing towards the actual deployment of US-made land-based medium- and short-range missiles in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region, the Russian Foreign Ministry notes that the conditions for maintaining a unilateral moratorium on the deployment of similar weapons have disappeared,” the ministry said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said last year that Moscow may have to respond to what they described as provocations by the US and NATO by lifting restrictions on missile deployment.

Lavrov told Russia’s state news agency RIA Novosti in December that Moscow’s unilateral moratorium on the deployment of such missiles was “practically no longer viable and will have to be abandoned”.

“The United States arrogantly ignored warnings from Russia and China and, in practice, moved on to deploying weapons of this class in various regions of the world,” Lavrov told the news agency.

The US withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty in 2019, under the first Trump administration, citing Russian non-compliance, but Moscow had said that it would not deploy such weapons provided that Washington did not do so.

The INF treaty, signed in 1987 by Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and US President Ronald Reagan, had eliminated an entire class of weapons: ground-launched nuclear missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500km (311 to 3,418 miles).

In its first public reaction to Trump’s comments on the repositioning of US submarines, the Kremlin on Monday played down the remarks and said it was not looking to get into a public spat with the US president.

“In this case, it is obvious that American submarines are already on combat duty. This is an ongoing process, that’s the first thing,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.

“But in general, of course, we would not want to get involved in such a controversy and would not want to comment on it in any way,” he said.

“Of course, we believe that everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric,” he added.

The episode comes at a delicate moment, with Trump threatening to impose new sanctions on Russia and buyers of its oil, including India and China, unless President Vladimir Putin agrees by Friday to a ceasefire in Moscow’s war on Ukraine.

Putin said last week that peace talks had made some positive progress but that Russia had the momentum in its war against Ukraine, signalling no shift in his position despite the looming deadline.

July 28 (UPI) — NATO aircraft were scrambled Sunday night to respond to a Russian attack on Ukraine, the Polish military said Monday.

“Polish and allied quick reaction aircraft were scrambled, and ground-based air defense and radar reconnaissance systems reached the highest state of readiness,” Poland’s Operational Command of the Armed Forces said in a statement.

“These actions are preventive in nature and are aimed at securing airspace and protecting citizens, especially in areas adjacent to the threatened region.”

A few hours later, it issued a statement that the aircraft had concluded their deployment, adding that “no violations of Polish airspace were observed.”

Swedish fighter jets stationed in Poland were among the aircraft scrambled, it said.

The Ukrainian Air Force said in a statement on Telegram on Monday that Russia launched 324 drones and seven missiles overnight, resulting in 311 of the attacks being either shot down or suppressed by electronic warfare.

“There were confirmed impacts of two missiles of various types and 15 strike UAVs at three locations,” it said.

Andriy Yermak, head of Ukraine’s Office of the President, said in a statement on X that some of the Russian aerial strikes hit civilian infrastructure, including in the capital Kyiv.

“He wants nothing but war and Ukraine’s defeat,” he said, referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin. “But defeat is not an option.”

“Russia and its satellites are also testing NATO’s response,” he added. “Drones entering the airspace of the Baltic states are signals that must not be ignored.”

Speaking alongside NATO chief, US president says ‘billions’ dollars worth of weapons will be sent to NATO, which will coordinate distribution.

United States President Donald Trump has confirmed the US will send Ukraine more weapons and has threatened to levy steep tariffs on Russia amid his growing frustration over Russia’s refusal to negotiate an end to the Russia-Ukraine war.

Speaking at the White House on Monday during a meeting with NATO chief Mark Rutte, Trump said the US would be sending “billions” of dollars in military equipment, including Patriot air defence systems and other missiles. These weapons, said Trump, will be paid for by NATO members.

“In a nutshell, we’re going to make top-of-the-line weapons, and they’ll be sent to NATO,” said Trump.

He added that if Russian President Vladimir Putin fails to sign a peace deal with Ukraine, he will impose “very severe tariffs” in 50 days, including secondary tariffs of 100 percent.

Trump took office with a promise to end the Russia-Ukraine war within 24 hours, and Putin’s refusal to ink a peace agreement has increasingly frustrated the US president.

While Russia has agreed to brief pauses in fighting, it has refused to accept an unconditional 30-day ceasefire, saying that the proposal would give Kyiv a chance to remobilise its troops and rearm.

That has strained the close relationship between Putin and Trump, who last week accused the Russian leader of throwing a lot of “b******” at the US.

Rutte commended Trump’s announcement, saying: “It will mean that Ukraine can get its hands on really massive numbers of military equipment, both for air defence, but also missiles, ammunition, etc.

“If I was Vladimir Putin today, and hear you speaking about what you were planning to do in 50 days, and this announcement, I would reconsider whether I should not take negotiations about Ukraine more seriously than I was doing at the moment.”

Trump said he would be pulling Patriot air defence systems from around the world to be sold to NATO countries and distributed by the defence bloc, but he did not say whether the US would also be sending long-range rockets and other offensive weapons.

During the press conference, Trump repeatedly expressed his frustration with Putin.

“My conversations with him are always very pleasant … I go home, I tell the first lady: ‘I spoke to Vladimir today, we had a wonderful conversation’. She said: ‘Oh, really, another city was just hit’.”

Trump said that, unlike his predecessors, he wasn’t “fooled” by Putin but that ultimately, talk doesn’t talk. It’s got to be action … He knows the deal. He knows what a fair deal is.”

Melinda Haring, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center, said Trump’s about-face came after months of Putin’s continued onslaught.

“Trump gave Putin six months. He stuck his neck out, and he said that he was going to make peace. And he also felt like Putin was stringing him along. In addition to those reasons, there were people that were close to the president showing him pictures of Ukraine, of the cities and children that are being harmed every single night,” she said.

In Kyiv, Ukrainians are cautiously viewing the announcement as a strong message of support, despite the many unknown details.

“If Patriot batteries really do make their way to Ukraine, then that is going to go a long way to protecting the skies over this country, as it tries to endure almost nightly massive barrages of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and drones,” said Al Jazeera’s Rory Challands.

The Kremlin responded by noting that the West had long provided weapons and equipment to Ukraine and said dialogue remained important to Moscow.

But within Russian society, the US-NATO announcement was greeted with disappointment, said Al Jazeera’s Yulia Shapovalova.

“There were hopes when Donald Trump came into power that the conflict would end. People saw that Trump had some steps to bring peace to Ukraine to help finish this conflict, but now he’s kind of lost his patience,” she said. “Pro-war sources say: ‘You see, we told you that Russia didn’t have to trust Donald Trump because he was not Russia’s friend.’”

BRITAIN faces war with Russia within the next five years, the previous head of the British Army has warned.

Former Chief of the General Staff General Sir Patrick Sanders, 59, said the UK must accept that armed conflict with Vladimir Putin by 2030 is a “realistic possibility”.

2

Gen Sir Patrick, who retired from the military last year, cautioned that the Army is currently too small to survive more than the first few months of such a war.

And he added that he did not know how many more “signals” ministers needed to realise it must strengthen the nation’s defences.

He said: “If Russia stops fighting in Ukraine, you get to a position where within a matter of months they will have the capability to conduct a limited attack on a Nato member that we will be responsible for supporting, and that happens by 2030.

“I don’t know what more signals we need for us to realise that if we don’t act now and we don’t act in the next five years to increase our resilience … I don’t know what more is needed.”

The former rifleman fell out of favour with the Government while leading the Army for being seen as too outspoken against troop cuts.

It was announced under the previous government that the Army would be reduced from just over 80,000 personnel as of October 2020 to 72,500 by 2025.

Gen Sir Patrick said: “At the moment, the British Army is too small to survive more than the first few months of an intensive engagement, and we’re going to need more.

“Now the first place you go to are the reserves, but the reserves are also too small.

“Thirty thousand reserves still only takes you to an army of 100,000.

“You know, I joined an Army in the Cold War that was about 140,000 regulars, and on top of that, a much larger reserve.”

Gen Sir Patrick said he was disappointed the Strategic Defence Review published last month “didn’t touch on this at all”.

Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves last month committed to the defence budget rising to 2.6 per cent of the UK’s GDP by April 2027.

And PM Sir Keir Starmer pledged the UK would spend 5 per cent of GDP on national security within 10 years, with 3.5 per cent of that amount going to core defence matters.

But Sir Gen Patrick said that during his time at the head of the Army there had been unsuccessful “conversations” with the government about building bomb shelters for civilians and underground command centres for the military to prepare for an attack.

He said: “It always came down to a conversation of it being too costly and not a high enough priority and the threat didn’t feel sufficiently imminent or serious to make it worth it.

“Finland has bomb shelters for 4.5 million people. It can survive as a government and as a society under direct missile and air attacks from Russia. We don’t have that.”

Despite the biggest threat coming from Russia, Gen Sir Patrick also warned that Iran could act through proxies “to attack British interests in the UK”.

2

WASHINGTON — The United States is selling weapons to its NATO allies in Europe so they can provide them to Ukraine as it struggles to fend off a recent escalation in Russia’s drone and missile attacks, President Trump and his chief diplomat said.

“We’re sending weapons to NATO, and NATO is paying for those weapons, 100%,” Trump said in an interview with NBC late Thursday. “So what we’re doing is, the weapons that are going out are going to NATO, and then NATO is going to be giving those weapons [to Ukraine], and NATO is paying for those weapons.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Friday that some of the U.S.-made weapons that Ukraine is seeking are deployed with NATO allies in Europe. Those weapons could be transferred to Ukraine, with European countries buying replacements from the U.S., he said.

“It’s a lot faster to move something, for example, from Germany to Ukraine than it is to order it from a [U.S.] factory and get it there,” Rubio told reporters during a visit to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Ukraine badly needs more U.S.-made Patriot air defense systems to stop Russian ballistic and cruise missiles. Trump’s Republican administration has given conflicting signals about its readiness to provide more vital military aid to Ukraine after its more than three years of fighting Russia’s invasion.

After a pause in some weapons shipments, Trump said he would keep sending defensive weapons to Ukraine. U.S. officials said this week that 155 mm munitions and precision-guided rockets were on their way.

Ukraine is seeking more coveted Patriot air defense systems

Germany, Spain and other European countries possess Patriot missile systems, and some have placed orders for more, Rubio said.

The U.S. is encouraging its NATO allies “to provide those weapons, systems, the defensive systems that Ukraine seeks … since they have them in their stocks, and then we can enter into financial agreements with them, with us, where they can purchase the replacements,” Rubio said.

Ukraine has asked foreign countries to supply it with an additional 10 Patriot systems and missiles, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Thursday. Germany is ready to provide two systems, and Norway has agreed to supply one, he said.

Russia has recently sought to overwhelm Ukraine’s air defenses by launching major aerial attacks. Earlier this week, Russia fired more than 700 attack and decoy drones at Ukraine, topping previous nightly barrages for the third time in two weeks.

At the same time, Russia’s bigger army is pressing hard on parts of the 620-mile front line, where thousands of soldiers on both sides have died since the Kremlin ordered the invasion of neighboring Ukraine in February 2022.

Impact of the latest Russian attacks

In the latest attacks, a Russian drone barrage targeted the center of Kharkiv just before dawn Friday, injuring nine people and damaging a maternity hospital in Ukraine’s second-largest city, officials said.

Mothers with newborns were being evacuated to a different medical facility, Kharkiv Mayor Ihor Terekhov wrote on Telegram. He didn’t say whether anyone at the hospital was among the injured.

Also, a daytime drone attack on the southern city of Odesa injured nine people.

“There is no silence in Ukraine,” Zelensky said after the Kharkiv bombardment. Kyiv, the Ukrainian capital, has endured repeated and intensifying drone attacks in recent weeks, as have many other regions of the country, mostly at night.

June brought the highest monthly civilian casualties of the last three years, with 232 people killed and 1,343 wounded, the U.N. human rights mission in Ukraine said Thursday. Russia launched 10 times more drones and missiles in June than in the same month last year, it said.

Other weapons sought by Ukraine

Zelensky urged Ukraine’s Western partners to quickly enact pledges of help they made at an international meeting in Rome on Thursday.

Ukraine also needs more interceptor drones to bring down Russian-made Shahed drones, he said, adding Moscow plans to manufacture up to 1,000 drones a day.

Zelensky said Thursday that talks with Trump have been “very constructive.”

After repeated Russian drone and missile onslaughts in Kyiv, authorities announced Friday they are establishing a comprehensive drone interception system under a project called Clear Sky.

The project includes a $6.2-million investment in interceptor drones, operator training and new mobile response units, according to the head of the Kyiv Military Administration.

Zelensky appealed to foreign partners to help Ukraine accelerate the production of the newly developed interceptor drones, which have proved successful against Shaheds.

“We found a solution, as a country, scientists and engineers found a solution. That’s the key,” he said. “We need financing. And then, we will intercept.”

Associated Press writer Matthew Lee contributed to this report from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

MOSCOW — President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin discussed Iran, Ukraine and other issues by phone on Thursday, the Kremlin said, in their sixth publicly disclosed chat since Trump returned to the White House.

While discussing the situation around Iran, Putin emphasized the need to resolve all issues by political and diplomatic means, said Yuri Ushakov, his foreign affairs advisor.

The United States struck three sites in Iran on June 22, inserting itself into Israel’s war aimed at destroying Tehran’s nuclear program.

On the conflict in Ukraine, Ushakov said Trump emphasized his push for a quick halt to the fighting, and Putin voiced Moscow’s readiness to pursue talks with Kyiv.

At the same time, the Russian leader emphasized that Moscow will seek to achieve its goals in Ukraine and remove the “root causes” of the conflict, Ushakov said.

Putin has argued he sent troops into Ukraine in February 2022 to fend off a threat to Russia posed by Ukraine’s push to join NATO and protect Russian speakers in Ukraine — arguments rejected by Kyiv and its allies. He insisted that any prospective peace deal must see Ukraine abandon its NATO bid and recognize Russia’s territorial gains.

Thursday’s call follows the Pentagon’s confirmation that it’s pausing shipment of some weapons to Ukraine as it reviews U.S. military stockpiles. The weapons being held up for Ukraine include air defense missiles, precision-guided artillery and other equipment.

The details on the weapons in some of the paused deliveries were confirmed by a U.S. official and former national security official familiar with the matter. They both requested anonymity to discuss what is being held up as the Pentagon has yet to provide details.

Ushakov said a suspension of some U.S. weapons shipments to Ukraine wasn’t discussed in the Trump-Putin call.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in Denmark after meeting with major European Union backers that he may talk to Trump in the coming days about the suspension of U.S. weapons deliveries.

“I hope that maybe tomorrow, or close days, these days, I will speak about it with President Trump,” he said.

Asked about his expectations from the Trump-Putin call, he said that “I’m not sure that they have a lot of common ideas, common topics to talk [about], because they are very different people.”

The previous publicly known call between Trump and Putin came June 14, a day after Israel attacked Iran.

The resumed contacts between Trump and Putin appeared to reflect both leaders’ interest in mending U.S.-Russian ties that have plummeted to their lowest point since the Cold War amid the conflict in Ukraine.

On Tuesday, Putin and French President Emmanuel Macron held their first direct telephone call in almost three years.

Isachenkov writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Aamer Madhani in Washington and Lorne Cook in Aarhus, Denmark, contributed to this report.

Missiles for Patriot air defence systems and Hellfire missiles are among items being held back, according to US media.

The United States says it is halting some weapons deliveries to Kyiv that were promised under the Biden administration, as Russia intensifies its attacks on Ukraine.

The Biden-era pledges, which included various munitions to bolster Ukraine’s defences, are now under review as the Pentagon reassesses current inventory levels. The move could signal a shift in priorities under President Donald Trump, who has pressed for a more restrained global military posture.

“This decision was made to put America’s interests first following a review of our nation’s military support and assistance to other countries across the globe,” said White House spokesperson Anna Kelly in a statement on Tuesday.

The internal assessment by the Pentagon found some stockpiles “too low” to justify immediate transfer to Ukraine, said a US official who spoke on condition of anonymity, according to Politico, which first reported the halt of military aid.

“America’s military has never been more ready and more capable,” said Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell, noting a major tax and defence spending bill in Congress would help modernise systems for long-term deterrence.

Politico and other US media reported that missiles for Patriot air defence systems, precision artillery and Hellfire missiles are among the items being held back.

Russia intensifies assault

The delay comes at a precarious moment for Ukraine, as Russia intensifies its aerial bombardment in one of the heaviest phases of the war. Hopes for a ceasefire – long championed by Trump – have faded further, with talks between Kyiv and Moscow stalled.

Since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, the US has provided more than $66bn in weapons and security assistance to Ukraine.

Throughout the war, Washington has also urged its allies to supply air defence systems, particularly Patriot missile batteries. However, many NATO members remain reluctant to give up the systems, particularly countries in Eastern Europe that are wary of Russia.

Trump, who met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during last week’s NATO summit, acknowledged Ukraine’s request for more Patriots.

“They do want to have the antimissile missiles, OK, as they call them – the Patriots,” Trump said. “We’re going to see if we can make some available. We need them, too. We’re supplying them to Israel, and they’re very effective. Hard to believe how effective.”

Elbridge Colby, undersecretary for policy at the US Department of Defense, said the administration was exploring ways to balance continued support for Ukraine with readiness at home.

“The department is rigorously examining and adapting its approach,” Colby said, “while preserving US forces’ readiness for current defence priorities.”

Describing Israel and Iran fighting each other at his NATO pre-summit news conference in The Hague this week, US President Donald Trump drew an analogy with children fighting in a schoolyard, who eventually had to be separated.

“Daddy has to sometimes use strong language,” Mark Rutte, NATO secretary-general, chimed in.

Asked about the comment after the summit, Trump said: “No, he likes me. I think he likes me. If he doesn’t I’ll let you know. I’ll come back and hit him hard, OK? He did it very affectionately. Hey Daddy. You’re my Daddy.”

The White House decided Rutte was flattering the US president, and made a reel of Trump’s visit to the Netherlands, set to the music of Usher’s Hey Daddy.

Rutte’s flattery of Trump didn’t stop there. On tackling the Russia-Ukraine war, Rutte told reporters before the NATO summit: “When he came in office, he started the dialogue with President Putin, and I always thought that was crucial. And there’s only one leader who could break the deadlock originally, and it had to be the American president, because he is the most powerful leader in the world.”

But how sincere are world leaders’ statements about Donald Trump? Do they genuinely serve to improve bilateral relations and does flattery work?

Who has handled Trump well and what have the results been?

Neither Rutte, nor any other European leader, engaged in any kind of dialogue with Russian President Vladimir Putin for a long time after the summer of 2022, the year of his invasion of Ukraine, believing it pointless.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz was severely criticised as “defeatist” for phoning Putin last November, while Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Slovakia’s Robert Fico, the only European leaders to have visited the Kremlin during the war, have been viewed as openly collaborationist.

Yet when Trump started talks with Putin, many Europeans paid him the same compliment as Rutte when they made their inaugural visits to the White House after he took office in January.

Keir Starmer, UK

“Thank you for changing the conversation to bring about the possibility that now we can have a peace deal, and we will work with you,” said the United Kingdom’s prime minister, Keir Starmer, in the Oval Office in February.

Starmer pulled a few rabbits out of hats. Knowing Trump’s fondness for the notion of hereditary power, he drew from his jacket a letter from King Charles III containing an invitation for an unprecedented second state visit to Windsor Castle.

Trump was momentarily speechless. “Your country is a fantastic country, and it will be our honour to be there, thank you,” Trump said when he’d gathered himself.

Starmer and Trump exchanged a few handshakes while speaking and Starmer repeatedly touched Trump’s shoulder in a sign of affection.

But did all this flattery have much effect? Trump announced he was freezing military aid to Ukraine the following month, much to the outrage of the UK, along with Nordic and Baltic countries.

Giorgia Meloni, Italy

Both Starmer and Italy’s prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, identified Ukraine as a key issue for Trump, who has made it clear he wants to win the Nobel Peace Prize by ending international conflicts. So far, he has claimed credit for ending this month’s “12-Day War” between Israel and Iran, preventing nuclear war following the May 7 air battle between India and Pakistan, and overseeing a peace deal between the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda.

Meloni, therefore, tried a similarly flattering approach to Trump. “Together we have been defending the freedom of Ukraine. Together we can build a just and lasting peace. We support your efforts, Donald,” she said during her White House visit in April.

Meloni astutely punched all of Trump’s hot-button issues in her opening remarks, saying Italy had policies to combat Fentanyl, an addictive painkiller that Trump has blamed Canada and Mexico for allowing into the country, to invest $10bn in the US economy and to control undocumented immigration.

She even adapted Trump’s slogan, Make America Great Again, to Europe. “The goal for me is to Make the West Great Again. I think we can do it together,” Meloni said to a beaming Trump.

None of this has translated into a state visit by Trump to Rome, a move which would cement Meloni’s position as a major European leader, however.

Mark Carney, Canada

Meanwhile, newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney was both flattering and firm with Trump last month. He complimented Trump on being “a transformational president” who had sided “with the American worker”, but also shut down Trump’s territorial ambition to annex Canada as the 51st US state. “It’s not for sale, won’t be for sale ever,” Mark Carney said.

Relations seemed to have taken a turn for the better following Trump’s friction with Carney’s predecessor, Justin Trudeau. Trump called him “very dishonest and weak” at the 2018 G7 summit in Canada before storming off early.

But Carney may not have had much effect at all. On Friday, Trump ended trade talks with Canada and threatened to impose additional tariffs on exports over Canada’s new digital services tax.

Which meetings have gone less well?

Emmanuel Macron, France

There was little warmth in Trump’s White House meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron in February.

Braced for confrontation with a leader who claims to lead Europe in strategic thought, Trump spoke from lengthy, defensive, scripted remarks which attempted to justify his Ukraine policy.

Macron preached that peace in Ukraine must not mean surrender – a sentiment shared by many European leaders, but not expressed to Trump. Trump was cordial with Macron, but not affectionate.

Meanwhile, France is holding out on any sort of capitulation to Trump in European Union trade talks. Other members of the EU want to settle for an “asymmetric” trade deal that might benefit the US more than the EU, just to get it done.

What’s more, following the G7 meeting in Canada two weeks ago, it was clear no love was lost between the two leaders: Trump called Macron “publicity seeking” in a social media post on June 17.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Ukraine

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was mauled by Trump and Vice President J D Vance on February 28, when he went to the White House to sign a mineral rights agreement he hoped would bring US military aid.

He and Vance clashed over direct talks with Russia over Ukraine’s head, and Vance lambasted Zelenskyy for failing to show enough “gratitude” to the US.

“You’re playing with millions of people’s lives. You’re gambling with World War Three,” said Trump.

However, Zelenskyy and Trump appeared to have patched things up a little when they held an impromptu meeting while attending the funeral of Pope Francis at the Vatican in April. A White House spokesperson described the encounter as “very productive”.

Cyril Ramaphosa, South Africa

Last month, Trump ambushed South African President Cyril Ramaphosa at the White House when he played him a video of a South African opposition party rally in favour of evicting white farmers. Trump accused South Africa of carrying out a “genocide” against white farmers.

Ramaphosa was visibly discomfited, but he patiently explained that under a parliamentary system, different viewpoints are expressed, which don’t represent government policy, and that South Africa is a violent country where most victims of violence are Black.

“You are a partner of South Africa and as a partner you are raising concerns which we are willing to talk to you about,” Ramaphosa said, calming Trump a little.

Trump was sidetracked into talking about a Jumbo Jet that Qatar had gifted him during his Middle Eastern tour. “I’m sorry I don’t have a plane to give you,” said Ramaphosa, as if to make a virtue of his absence of flattery.

Does flattery work with Trump?

Some experts believe that flattery may help to prevent confrontation with Trump. Some observers have argued it helps “to contain the American president’s impulses”.

But flattery does little to change actual US policy. Rutte and other NATO leaders failed to draw the US back into the Contact Group helping Ukraine with weapons.

“A summit dedicated to the sole aim of making Trump feel good is one with very limited aims indeed. All it does is push the difficult decisions forward for another day,” wrote Andrew Gawthorpe, a lecturer in history and international studies at Leiden University, the Netherlands, in The Conversation, a UK publication.

Those who do have good relations with Trump don’t necessarily come away with the things they want, either. Starmer’s US-UK trade deal keeps tariffs in place for British companies exporting to the US, albeit lower ones than Trump had been threatening. Meloni is still waiting for Trump to bestow her a visit.

Respectful firmness, on the other hand, does seem to work.

Trump has dropped his campaign to redraw US borders by absorbing Canada and Greenland, which is owned by Denmark. Carney’s firmness helped, because it carried a sense of finality. Carney had just won an election and Trump acknowledged “it was probably one of the greatest comebacks in the history of politics. Maybe even greater than mine.”

Denmark has been similarly firm. Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has said existing agreements with the US already allow it to station military bases there, while Greenlanders don’t want to be colonised by Americans.

Trump’s attempts to embarrass Zelenskyy and Ramaphosa also backfired. Europe has stepped in to make up the shortfall in US military aid to Ukraine, casting the US as a fickle ally. Trump’s “white genocide” video did little to convince Americans that South Africa was committing a genocide against Dutch Boers, and his offer of asylum to a number of them has been roundly criticised in the US.