surrender

Officials announced Thursday that Los Angeles County has automated the process of notifying law enforcement agencies when people who violate restraining orders fail to comply with judges’ orders to hand their guns over to authorities.

Previously, court clerks had to identify which of the county’s 88 law enforcement agencies to notify about a firearm relinquishment by looking up addresses for the accused, which could take multiple days, Presiding Judge Sergio C. Tapia II of the L.A. County Superior Court said during a news conference.

Now, “notices are sent within minutes” to the appropriate agencies, Tapia said.

“This new system represents a step forward in ensuring timely, consistent and efficient communication between the court and law enforcement,” he said, “helping to remove firearms from individuals who are legally prohibited from possessing them.”

According to a news release, the court launched the platform, which the Judicial Council of California funded with a $4.12 million grant in conjunction with the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department and district attorney’s office, and the L.A. Police Department and city attorney’s office.

The court also rolled out a new portal for law enforcement that “streamlines interagency communications by providing justice partners with a centralized list of relevant cases for review” and allows agencies “to view all firearm relinquishment restraining order violations within their jurisdiction,” according to the release.

The new digital approach “represents a major enhancement in public safety,” Luna said.

“Each of those firearms,” he said, “represents a potential tragedy prevented or a domestic violence situation that did not escalate, a life that was not lost to gun violence.”

GREENBELT, Md. — John Bolton arrived at a federal courthouse Friday to surrender to authorities and make his first court appearance on charges accusing the former Trump administration national security adviser of storing top secret records at home and sharing with relatives diary-like notes that contained classified information.

The 18-count federal indictment Thursday also suggests classified information was exposed when operatives believed to be linked to the Iranian government hacked Bolton’s email account and gained access to sensitive material he had shared. A Bolton representative told the FBI in 2021 that his emails had been hacked, prosecutors say, but did not reveal that Bolton had shared classified information through the account or that the hackers had possession of government secrets.

The closely watched case centers on a longtime fixture in Republican foreign policy circles who became known for his hawkish views on American power and who served for more than a year in Trump’s first administration before being fired in 2019. He later published a book highly critical of Trump.

The third case against a Trump adversary in the past month will unfold against the backdrop of concerns that the Justice Department is pursuing the Republican president’s political enemies while at the same time sparing his allies from scrutiny.

“Now, I have become the latest target in weaponizing the Justice Department to charge those he deems to be his enemies with charges that were declined before or distort the facts,” Bolton said in a statement.

Even so, the indictment is significantly more detailed in its allegations than earlier cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Unlike in those cases filed by a hastily appointed U.S. attorney, Bolton’s indictment was signed by career national security prosecutors. While the Bolton investigation burst into public view in August when the FBI searched his home in Maryland and his office in Washington, the inquiry was well underway by the time Trump had taken office in January.

Sharing of classified secrets

The indictment filed in federal court in Greenbelt, Maryland, alleges that between 2018 and this past August, Bolton shared with two relatives more than 1,000 pages of information about his day-to-day activities in government.

The material included “diary-like” entries with information classified as high as top secret that he had learned from meetings with other U.S. government officials, from intelligence briefings or talks with foreign leaders, according to the indictment. After sending one document, Bolton wrote in a message to his relatives, “None of which we talk about!!!” In response, one of his relatives wrote, “Shhhhh,” prosecutors said.

The indictment says that among the material shared was information about foreign adversaries that in some cases revealed details about sources and methods used by the government to collect intelligence.

The two family members were not identified in court papers, but a person familiar with the case, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss nonpublic details, identified them as Bolton’s wife and daughter.

The indictment also suggests Bolton was aware of the impropriety of sharing classified information with people not authorized to receive it, citing an April news media interview in which he chastised Trump administration officials for using Signal to discuss sensitive military details. Though the anecdote is meant by prosecutors to show Bolton understood proper protocol for government secrets, Bolton’s legal team may also point to it to argue a double standard in enforcement because the Justice Department is not known to have opened any investigation into the Signal episode.

Bolton’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, said in a statement that the “underlying facts in this case were investigated and resolved years ago.”

He said the charges stem from portions of Bolton’s personal diaries over his 45-year career in government and included unclassified information that was shared only with his immediate family and was known to the FBI as far back as 2021.

“Like many public officials throughout history,” Lowell said, “Bolton kept diaries — that is not a crime.” He said Bolton “did not unlawfully share or store any information.”

Controversy over a book

Bolton suggested the criminal case was an outgrowth of an unsuccessful Justice Department effort after he left government to block the publication of his 2020 book “The Room Where It Happened,” which portrayed Trump as grossly misinformed about foreign policy.

The Trump administration asserted that Bolton’s manuscript contained classified information that could harm national security if exposed. Bolton’s lawyers have said he moved forward with the book after a White House National Security Council official, with whom Bolton had worked for months, said the manuscript no longer had classified information.

In 2018, Bolton was appointed to serve as Trump’s third national security adviser. His brief tenure was characterized by disputes with the president over North Korea, Iran and Ukraine. Those rifts ultimately led to Bolton’s departure.

Bolton subsequently criticized Trump’s approach to foreign policy and government in his book, including by alleging that Trump directly tied providing military aid to Ukraine to that country’s willingness to conduct investigations into Joe Biden, who was soon to be Trump’s Democratic 2020 election rival, and members of Biden’s family.

Trump responded by slamming Bolton as a “washed-up guy” and a “crazy” warmonger who would have led the country into “World War Six.”

Tucker and Richer write for the Associated Press. Durkin Richer reported from Washington.

Antifascist campaign group Hope Not Hate condemns speeches at Saturday’s rally in London as ‘extremely disturbing’.

Britain will “never surrender” to far-right protesters who use the national flag as cover for violence and intimidation, United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer says after violent scenes at one of the country’s largest far-right demonstrations in decades.

More than 110,000 people marched through central London on Saturday in a protest against immigration led by far-right activist Tommy Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon. Some attending the Unite the Kingdom rally clashed with police. Twenty-six officers were injured, and at least 24 people were arrested, according to the Metropolitan Police.

In his first public comments since the rally, Starmer said on Sunday that peaceful protest was a fundamental value in Britain, but he condemned assaults on police officers and intimidation against marginalised communities.

“People have a right to peaceful protest. It is core to our country’s values,” he said. “But we will not stand for assaults on police officers doing their job or for people feeling intimidated on our streets because of their background or the colour of their skin.”

He added: “Britain is a nation proudly built on tolerance, diversity and respect. Our flag represents our diverse country, and we will never surrender it to those that use it as a symbol of violence, fear and division.”

Islam is the ‘real enemy’

Saturday’s protest was marked by nationalist symbols, scuffles and inflammatory speeches. Footage showed police on horseback pelted with bottles while baton charges were used to push back Robinson supporters and allow about 5,000 counterdemonstrators to leave the Whitehall area of central London safely.

A stage was erected for speeches from a lineup of far-right figures. Leading the charge was Robinson, who told the crowd: “It’s not just Britain that is being invaded. It’s not just Britain that is being raped.”

“Every single Western nation faces the same problem: An orchestrated, organised invasion and replacement of European citizens is happening,” he added.

International speakers included French politician Eric Zemmour, who echoed the views put forward by Robinson. “We are both subject to the same process of the great replacement of our European peoples by peoples coming from the south and of Muslim culture,” he said, citing the great replacement conspiracy theory that white Europeans are being deliberately replaced by people from other ethnicities.

“You and we are being colonised by our former colonies,” Zemmour added.

Similarly, Belgian far-right politician Filip Dewinter declared: “It has to be clear that Islam is our real enemy. We have to get rid of Islam. Islam does not belong in Europe, and Islam does not belong in the UK.”

Other speakers included Danish People’s Party leader Morten Messerschmidt, German Alternative for Germany MP Petr Bystron and Polish politician Dominik Tarczynski.

Tesla CEO and X Chairman Elon Musk also made an appearance by videolink, telling protesters the UK needed an “urgent change in government” and warning them to “fight back” or “die”.

Police, government and antifascist groups condemn violence

The rally came amid a wave of far-right violence in recent months, including arson attacks on hotels housing asylum seekers.

Experts said these incidents, fuelled by conspiracy theories, xenophobia and online disinformation, have intensified concerns over the rise of far-right movements across Britain and Europe, which often spill over into rioting and violence.

Assistant Metropolitan Police Commissioner Matt Twist said the violence directed at officers was “wholly unacceptable”. He added: “There is no doubt that many came to exercise their lawful right to protest, but there were many who came intent on violence.”

British Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood also condemned the violence, warning that anyone taking part in criminal acts would “face the full force of the law”.

Starmer’s remarks followed calls from the antifascist group Hope Not Hate and several MPs urging the government to act against the surge in far-right mobilisation. Hope Not Hate described the protest as “extremely disturbing”.

“While the turnout was significantly smaller than the millions claimed by Lennon and his supporters, it appears to be the largest far-right demonstration ever seen in Britain,” the group said.

“For anyone worried about the rise of far-right activism and the normalisation of viciously anti-migrant, anti-Muslim sentiment, it could be a sign of dark times to come,” it added.

The summer rain in Mexico City has been driving Meme del Real crazy. “This season of permanent torrential downpour gets to a point where you’re like, ‘Enough,’ he says with a sigh. “There’s people who really enjoy it, but I’m done. It’s too much introspection to be in here all day, to not be able to go outside. It forces you to try other things, to find a conversation within that rather than a resistance.”

Surrender has been a big theme lately in the life of the longtime vocalist and keyboardist of legendary Mexican alt-rock group Café Tacvba. Del Real — a Swiss Army Knife of a musician who has produced for the likes of Julieta Venegas and Natalia Lafourcade, among others — has been unpacking his life after a recent move back to the Mexican capital, after five years in the idyllic Valle de Bravo. About two hours away from CDMX, the lakeside town became his district of solitude.

It was in this escape from city life that the singer-songwriter was able to be quiet enough to tap into something beyond himself. With his own studio, a broad space overlooking a forest, he had the mental space to look inward. Perhaps more importantly, he gave himself permission to welcome the inspiration that arrived without him seeking it.

“It’s not that I went to this place and said, ‘OK, now I’m going to find inspiration.’ It was more of a tension within myself that naturally unraveled,” says Meme of his “Walden” moment. “From that exercise of exploring old songs and ideas in process, something started to bloom within me in a way that had never happened before. It was a moment that invited me into a solitary process that I hadn’t undertaken with any formality or intention. If these songs have anything to do with where I was physically at the time, I do think that distance I had from everything manifested itself as music.”

The songs on Del Real’s first solo album — the title yet to be revealed — plumb the depths of silence and sonic expansion. He is unpretentious in his experiments and unafraid to get playful. “Tumbos” is a warbling electronic love song intercepted at times by plinking bachata strings. Del Real swelters on futuristic bolero “Incomprensible,” which takes the old-school Cuban torch-song genre and pitches its emblematic guitar to psychedelic new heights. Atmosphere is everything here: Two of the soon-to-be-released tracks border on ambient, zeroing in on the sounds of church bells and chirping birds and the expansive feeling of mushrooms blooming across a forest floor.

These little mountains of fire blaze with a gentle heat emanating from Del Real’s voice. Die-hards and casual fans of Café Tacvba have heard “Eres” at least in passing, a smash from the group’s 2003 album, “Cuatro Caminos,” that features Del Real on lead vocals. He’s still singing about love: Careening norteña-inspired “Embeces” sees Del Real’s voice soar over warbled trumpets, and lead single “Princesa” layers cinematic orchestration with trip-hop beats and sweltering lyrics about failed promises and proclamations of loyalty.

For those who can’t get enough, Del Real is set to preview some of the new music with a special performance on Sept. 2 at the Grammy Museum.

“These songs arrived, and I couldn’t look the other way. It was an instinct that was stronger than me, a now-or-never moment,” says Del Real. “I’ve found that every unknown and every challenge has left me with a lesson. When I’m onstage [with Café Tacvba], I play and sing, but I also love to dance and express myself with my body. Before we can play, when we’re children, we hear a rhythm and dance. It doesn’t matter if you look ridiculous, but you made something. It’s better to make a fool of yourself and experiment rather than not live what you’re feeling.”

De Los spoke with Del Real over Zoom from Mexico City as he’s settling into a number of beginnings: a new home, a new daily rhythm and his first solo project, which is out next month.

There are so many places where artists go to isolate and channel, but you weren’t looking for that at all. Listening to the album, I heard the parallels between the songs and the space that natural environments bring. There are two tracks that border on ambient, focusing on the sounds of a church bell and a small sound that grows into an encompassing roar.
The creative act is intuitive and spontaneous, and I think it makes a symmetry with the cycles and forms of nature. Having such a tangible way to witness creation left a deep impression on me, to be in such an exuberant forest coexisting with so much.

How was making this solo record different from making a Café Tacvba record?
I have a certain experience of creation with the band — of making an album, a project, a video, a tour, a spectacle — but these songs manifested themselves almost like they rose out of the floor to meet me. At my old house, the studio I made was surrounded by a massive forest. I really felt like I was yet another element of nature in that cycle of life that I had to live there. Something bloomed in that moment for me. More than the result, the experience itself for me was its own project, and it’s been so personally valuable to me that anything that comes of that is a consequence, an extra gift. The process was transformative, like nature itself, something that couldn’t be controlled or manipulated.

I love that you describe the songs as arriving; that’s very different than creating with the intention of connecting to a muse. To your point about movement, there’s so much of it here: bachata, cumbia, electronic music … so much to dance to.
Everything you describe came about very organically. My dad was a musician, and he devoted his life to music. At home, my mom and dad and siblings and I all grew up hearing a lot of music across genres. I got very familiar. Watching my dad [on the trumpet] with his orchestra play at parties, specifically all of these formal Latin American genres to dance to …

When I started making the songs, the genres rose out pretty organically. If it came out sounding like Ministry or a norteña or a bolero or disco or punk, then that’s what it was. If creating doesn’t have that playful factor, if it doesn’t translate honesty, then it becomes so intellectualized. I think it’s a balance between spontaneity, a game between the organic, the intellectual, the conceptual. When I listened to all the songs, I really didn’t know if it was an album. I approached Gustavo Santaolalla [Godfather of Latin rock] to get his feedback, and that’s when it became clear to me that something was happening.

The songs were there, as I built them there in this place I described to you, like beyond just composing on guitar, piano and making a demo, it was like, “Well, what if I add something else?” I started experimenting, and before I knew it, there were already quite robust and complex arrangements in most of them. But another thing is that, when I [would] bring a demo to [Café Tacvba], I [would] sing it, and that [was] it. But in this case, the same thing. Gustavo told me, “Hey, one of the things that’s interesting is the way you’re singing … What’s happening on a vocal level, that seems to me to be revealing a very clear picture of you at this moment.” So, nothing, it stayed that way.

When I was trying to find the throughline here, I was thinking about the subject matter: There’s a lot of love and yearning here. Would you consider yourself a romantic?
Based on some interviews I’ve been doing, they haven’t asked me this question, but the term “romantic” has come up. And it’s not that I’ve thought about it or assumed it, but I think that if romantic means, in my case, finding a translation of what I feel and what I reflect on and resonating well with it, then yes.

I’ve also found myself — who hasn’t in these times? — being attentive and reflecting on the issues that are happening around the world, all the horrors of certain situations and in certain regions. But I definitely find that there is beauty in human relationships or in personal relationships, in relationships with your personal, universal, cosmic or internal ecosystem, with paradoxes, with what is opposed. I don’t know if that’s romantic, but that’s it. Even at the end of the world, in the midst of so much horror, love and beauty are the things that give us the desire to want to go on, right?

This album is so sonically forward-thinking, and I’d say it’s aligned to the current zeitgeist of genre mixing. Where do you situate it?
I am also very attracted to the way in which I don’t understand much of what is happening with these new generations and all the music, all the art and creation that is taking place. It seems that, as in other eras, attention was focused on the situations that were happening around them, socially and politically, and there was a lot of talk about it and criticism was made. Today, it seems that this generation is not observing that, but I have discovered in my theory that discourse is more powerful precisely because it is not talked about directly, but rather it is talked about as, “I am going to have a good time and enjoy it because this is coming to an end … I have no choice but to take what I have and what I can do and what I can experience with my gang, with my people, and with this global digital community.”

I find that very powerful and very sad at the same time. I mean, it’s very sad to think that there is a generation that sees the world as ending. That’s my take on it — that there’s little hope, that everything is so complex that it’s better not to look at that. “Just look at what’s in front of me, because I’m young and because if I don’t take advantage of my youth to have a good time right now, I don’t know if I’ll make it to the next stage. Or I don’t see how.”

In our time, at least in my time, I think there was more. The outlook was clearer. You could see further ahead.

This interview was conducted in Spanish, translated, edited and condensed for clarity.

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.