Putin and Trump discussed raising level of representatives at Ukraine talks, Kremlin says
"The idea was discussed that it would be worthwhile to explore the possibility of raising the level of representatives from the Ukrainian and Russian sides—that is, those representatives participating in the mentioned direct negotiations," Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov said in audio remarks posted on the Kremlin's Telegram channel.
Trump held a Monday meeting in Washington with Zelenskiy and other European partners. The U.S. president said it was "very good" and that he had begun arrangements for a meeting between Putin and Zelenskiy after a subsequent call with Putin.
Ushakov in his remarks did not specify what he meant by raising the level at meetings, and did not directly address the possibility of a trilateral meeting between the leaders.
"Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump agreed to maintain close contact with each other on the Ukrainian issue and other pressing topics on the international and bilateral agenda," Ushakov said.
"The conversation was frank and highly constructive in nature."
Trump told Zelenskiy on Monday that the United States would help guarantee Ukraine's security in any deal to end Russia's war, though the extent of any promised assistance was not immediately clear.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
12 minutes ago
- The Independent
New pics of Trump holding court in Oval Office branded ‘embarrassing' as world leaders sit around his desk: ‘Like schoolchildren'
New pictures showing Donald Trump sitting in the Oval Office in front of major world leaders has been criticized as an "embarrassing" power play by the president, in what should have been a display of global unity. Some on social media noted that the set up, with Trump behind the Resolute Desk and his European counterparts on chairs opposite him, presented the president as hosting a bunch of 'unruly schoolchildren.' The president was joined for the photo-op by leaders including British prime minister Sir Keir Starmer, French president Emmanual Macron, German Chancellor Freidrich Merz, Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni and Finnish president Alexander Stubb. Also in attendance were European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky. Another photo showed a smiling Trump posing with a new golf club, gifted to him by Zelensky. However, the meeting of the circled leaders drew the ire of social media users, with some commenting that the staging and White House mantra of of 'peace through strength' was 'deeply disrespectful to U.S. history itself.' 'Permenant peace is never truly obtained through strength. It may hold for a while under pressure, but it won't last,' wrote one user. 'What a breathtakingly rude, narcissistic asshole,' another said. 'Instead of a conference table where everyone can meet equally, Chump lined them up like unruly school children in a row with himself as the authority figure. Chump can just f*** all the way off.' Others questioned how the leaders, who came to Washington D.C. as 'equals' had allowed such a belittling set up. 'Embarrassing,' wrote one user, with another going further, writing 'I cannot believe they let Trump seat them like a bunch of schoolchildren. 'Do none of these 'leaders' have any testosterone whatsoever or PR teams that can approve/reject seating arrangements. Most embarrassing thing I've ever seen for the EU.'
Times
12 minutes ago
- Times
Lithuania plans 30-mile ‘Baltic defence line' against Russian invasion
Lithuania has outlined its plan for a 30-mile-deep ribbon of defences along its borders with Russia and Belarus, including minefields and bridges primed for demolition in the event of an invasion. Alongside Poland, the three Baltic states have begun fortifying their frontiers to deter the Kremlin from considering an attack, supplementing existing metal fences with obstacles and redoubts partially inspired by techniques that the Ukrainians have used to fend off Russian assaults. When it is complete, the 'Baltic defence line' will stretch across large sections of the land perimeter of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, from the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad in the west to the mouth of the River Narva in the east. Although critics sometimes disparagingly liken the project to the ill-fated Maginot Line that France laid down along its border with Germany before the Second World War, local commanders and military analysts say the analogy is misplaced. The intent is not to establish a single physical barrier to stop an invasion but rather to slow down any land-based attack and to 'canalise' the enemy force into areas where it is easier to resist. The Baltic states announced the scheme in January last year, and work started on the first ditches, bunkers and embankments a few months after that. Last summer, Lithuania began setting up 27 'engineering parks' with stores of 'counter-mobility' tools such as razor wire, concrete roadblocks and antitank barriers nicknamed 'hedgehogs' (caltrop-like assemblies of crossed metal beams) and 'dragon's teeth' (concrete pyramids). • Edward Lucas: The six Baltic states that could decide the future of Europe However, an update from the Lithuanian defence ministry has sketched out a more ambitious series of layered fortifications that will stretch far enough inland to cover Vilnius, the capital, which is 20 miles from the Belarusian border. It will take the form of three 'echelons'. The first of these, roughly three miles in depth, will start with an anti-tank ditch next to the border fence, followed by an embankment, strips of dragon's teeth and minefields, and then two layers of strongpoints for defending infantry. Dovile Sakaliene, the defence minister, has previously indicated that it is likely to include anti-personnel mines after Lithuania and several other Nato members on the eastern flank withdrew from the Ottawa convention, which prohibits the weapons. Further back, in the second and third echelons, bridges will be prepared for demolition, and there will be further lines of infantry positions. There is also a plan to fell trees along the roads leading to towns and cities, presumably to make it easier to destroy any invading Russian armour. At the same time, Lithuania said it had placed a €10 million order for anti-tank mines, on top of previous deals to buy 85,000 of the mines for a total of €50 million. It has also replenished its stock of 155mm artillery shells, ordered 44 state-of-the-art Leopard 2A8 battle tanks from Germany, and taken delivery of €6 million worth of Israeli-made Spike LR2 anti-tank missiles. Last month, Sakaliene suggested that she would be prepared to ask Nato's international air-policing mission in the Baltic states to destroy drones that encroach on her country's airspace from Belarus after at least two such incidents in the preceding weeks. Lithuania can field about 23,000 professional soldiers and a further 104,000 reservists. It is modernising its equipment with a defence budget that has risen to 5.5 per cent of national GDP, one of the highest levels in Nato. Germany is also upgrading its multinational Nato battlegroup stationed at Rukla, about 40 miles northwest of Vilnius, to a full 5,000-strong armoured brigade. However, war games conducted last year suggested that these forces might struggle to hold their own against a large-scale Russian invasion until the rest of Nato could deliver meaningful reinforcements, particularly if Russia were to seize the Suwalki gap, a section of the Lithuanian-Polish border that is the alliance's only land bridge to the Baltic states. This means that the ability to slow and 'shape' any Russian offensive through the defence line could be decisive in buying more time. Poland and the Baltic states are seeking European Union funding for these projects, arguing that they will serve to protect the entire bloc.
Sky News
12 minutes ago
- Sky News
What would US-backed security guarantees for Ukraine look like?
Promises of security guarantees for Ukraine have been lauded as "game-changing" and "historic" in the hope of bringing an end to the war with Russia. As all eyes moved from Donald Trump's summit with Vladimir Putin in Alaska to talks with Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Washington, the White House claimed Russia has agreed to the US providing 'NATO-style protection' when the fighting ends. Although there has been no confirmation from the Kremlin, Ukraine, the UK, and other Western allies say details of a post-war security agreement will be finalised in the coming days. What has been said so far? Security guarantees have long been talked about as a way of ensuring peace in Ukraine when fighting comes to an end. Since March, when the UK and France spearheaded a largely European 'coalition of the willing' and potential peacekeeping force, many have claimed it would be ineffective without American backing. The US has repeatedly refused to be drawn on its involvement - until now. Two days after Mr Putin travelled to Alaska for talks with the Trump team, US special envoy Steve Witkoff claimed Russia had agreed to Ukrainian security guarantees. He claimed that during the summit, the Kremlin had conceded the US "could offer Article-5 like protection", which he described as "game-changing". Article 5 is one of the founding principles of NATO and states that an attack on any of its 32 member states is considered an attack on them all. This was bolstered by the US president himself after he met his Ukrainian counterpart in Washington on Monday. He said the pair had "discussed security guarantees", which would be "provided by the various European countries" - "with coordination with the United States of America". Writing on X the following day, the Ukrainian leader said the "concrete content" of the security agreement would be "formalised on paper within the next 10 days". US reports say security agreement talks will be headed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. 5:57 What would security guarantees look like? Very few details have emerged so far, despite the series of high-profile meetings. Speaking to Fox News on Tuesday, Mr Trump said European nations are going to "frontload" the security agreement with soldiers. "They want to have boots on the ground", he told the broadcaster, referring to the UK, France, and Germany in particular. He insisted the US would not send ground troops, adding: "You have my assurance and I'm president." Sir Keir Starmer said the coalition of the willing is "preparing for the deployment of a reassurance force" in the event of "hostilities ending". This was the original basis for the coalition - soldiers from various European and allied nations placed strategically across Ukraine to deter Russia from launching future attacks. But troops alone are unlikely to be enough of a deterrent for Vladimir Putin, military analyst Sean Bell says. "This is all about credibility and I don't think boots on the ground is a credible answer," he tells Sky News. Stationing soldiers along Ukraine's 1,000-mile border with Russia would require around 100,000 soldiers at a time, which would have to be trained, deployed, and rotated, requiring 300,000 in total. The entire UK Army would only make up 10% of that, with France likely able to contribute a further 10%, Bell says. Several European nations would feel unable to sacrifice any troops for an umbrella force due to their proximity to Ukraine and risk of further Russian aggression. "You're not even close to getting the numbers you need," Bell adds. "And even if you could, putting all of NATO's frontline forces in one country facing Russia would be really dangerous - and leave China, North Korea, Iran, or Russia free to do whatever they wanted." History of failed security agreements in Ukraine Current proposals for Ukrainian security guarantees are far from the first. In December 1994, Ukraine signed the Budapest Memorandum alongside the UK, US, and Russia. The Ukrainians agreed to give up their Soviet-inherited nuclear weapons in exchange for recognition of their sovereignty and a place on the UN's Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Twenty years later in 2014, however, Russia violated the terms with its illegal annexation of Crimea and the war between Russian-backed separatists and Ukrainian in the Donbas region. Similarly, the Minsk Agreements of 2014 and 2015 were designed to bring an end to the Donbas war. Mediated by France and Germany, they promised a ceasefire, withdrawal of weapons, and local elections in the separatist-occupied Donbas, but were repeatedly violated and failed to result in lasting peace. 'Article 5-like protection' When Mr Witkoff first mentioned security guarantees again, he described them as "Article 5-like" or "NATO-style". Article 5 is one of the founding principles of NATO and states that an attack on any of its 32 member states is considered an attack on them all. It has only ever been invoked once since its inception in 1949 - by the US in response to the 9/11 attacks of 2001. Russia has repeatedly insisted Ukraine should not be allowed to join NATO and cited the risk of it happening among its original reasons for attacking Kyiv in 2022. NATO general-secretary Mark Rutte has said Ukrainian membership is not on the table, but that an alternative "Article 5-type" arrangement could be viable. The alliance's military leaders are due to meet on Wednesday to discuss options. It is not clear how such a special security agreement and formal NATO membership would differ. Bell says that negotiations on this - and any surrendering of Ukrainian territory - will be the two most difficult in ending the war. But he stresses they are both key in providing the "flesh on the bones" to what the coalition of the willing has offered so far. "It will be about trying to find things that make the Western commitment to the security of Ukraine enduring," Bell adds. US airpower, intelligence and a better Ukrainian military Other potential options for a security agreement include air support, a no-maritime zone, intelligence sharing, and military supplies. Imposing either a no-fly over Ukraine or no-maritime zone across the Black Sea would "play to NATO's strengths" - as US air and naval capabilities alone far outstrip Russia's, Bell says. Sharing American intelligence with Kyiv to warn of any future Russian aggression would also be a "massive strength" to any potential deterrence force, he adds. Ukraine is already offering to buy an extra $90bn (£66.6bn) in US weapons with the help of European funds, Mr Zelenskyy said this week. And any security agreement would likely extend to other military equipment, logistics, and training to help Ukraine better defend itself years down the line, Bell says. "At first it would need credible Western support, but over time, you would hope the international community makes sure Ukraine can build its own indigenous capability. "Because while there's a lot of focus on Ukraine at the moment, in five years' time, there will be different governments and different priorities - so that has to endure."
