Melania Trump sends letter to Putin about abducted children
President Trump hand-delivered the letter to Putin during their summit talks in Alaska, the officials told Reuters. Slovenian-born Melania Trump was not on the trip to Alaska.
The officials would not divulge the contents of the letter other than to say it mentioned the abductions of children resulting from the war in Ukraine.
The existence of the letter was not previously reported.
Russia's seizure of Ukrainian children has been a deeply sensitive one for Ukraine.
Ukraine has called the abductions of tens of thousands of its children taken to Russia or Russian-occupied territory without the consent of family or guardians a war crime that meets the U.N. treaty definition of genocide.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy conveyed his gratitude to the first lady on his call with Trump on Saturday, Ukraine's foreign minister said.
'This is a true act of humanism,' Andrii Sybiha added on X.
Previously Moscow has said it has been protecting vulnerable children from a war zone.
The United Nations Human Rights Office has said Russia has inflicted suffering on millions of Ukrainian children and violated their rights since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Trump and Putin met for nearly three hours at a U.S. military base in Anchorage without reaching a ceasefire deal in the war in Ukraine - REUTERS
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
10 minutes ago
- New Straits Times
Trump's data war risks creating false calm
POLITICAL pressure on government statisticians and private forecasters risks sending markets down a rabbit hole, which could suppress volatility today but lead to seismic reality checks in the future. United States President Donald Trump has side-swiped both private and public sector economists this month, firing the Bureau of Labour Statistics (BLS) boss for what he described as "rigged" jobs data and then lambasting Goldman Sachs for tariff-related research he didn't agree with. These moves seem alarming, even if there are some mitigating factors. Trump is hardly the first person to criticise BLS payrolls data. It has been under scrutiny for years, not because of fears of bias, but because of low survey response rates and delays, which have often resulted in large changes to past data. The most recent report contained one of the biggest downward revisions in decades. The BLS can argue that it has suffered from years of underfunding, but it's still not a good look. What's more, similar questions about data collection have been lobbed at the BLS regarding its compilation of monthly consumer and producer price reports, which are critical now in assessing the impact of Trump's tariff rises on inflation. These statistics, along with the US employment report, are the most important monthly updates for financial markets, mainly because they play a pivotal role in Federal Reserve thinking, given its dual mandate to maintain maximum employment and stable prices. Trump last week appointed Heritage Foundation economist E.J. Antoni — a contributor to the controversial Project 2025 wishlist of policies for a second Trump term — to run the BLS. Antoni recently suggested suspending the monthly payrolls report until data problems were fixed, which could result in long data gaps at a critical moment for the US economy, monetary policy and markets. Importantly though, the White House and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent have pushed back on that idea. But then came last Tuesday's attack on Goldman boss David Solomon, with calls for him to appoint a new chief economist following the release of a report on Sunday by his colleague Jan Hatzius. The report estimated US consumers had so far borne less than a quarter of the cost of tariffs but could see that rise to two-thirds over time. This may simply be nothing more than Trump complaining about a forecast he doesn't like, but it's still a move that risks tinkering with one of the most basic market tenets: the plurality of views. There's an obvious concern that — intentionally or not — these public attacks could cause economic data, research and forecasts to become more pro-government or lead to self-censorship by those keen to avoid seeing their business or careers damaged by presidential opprobrium. To its credit, Goldman said it would keep doing its job regardless of the political pressure. But it would hardly say otherwise. Perhaps more telling was the lack of public outcry from other economists who might reasonably be concerned that Trump's attacks on unflattering forecasts represent a worrying trend for their profession and market transparency overall. Of course, they or their institutions may simply have thought it best to stay quiet, assuming the issue would blow over soon. Does any of this matter long term? To be sure, economic forecasting can hardly be held up as a sacred cow if accuracy is what matters. A University of California, Berkeley study late last year looked at more than 16,000 forecasts by banks and large firms and concluded that while 53 per cent of forecasters were confident in their predictions, they were correct only 23 per cent of the time. Of course, if there were a consensus that official data was likely to be biased to flatter the government, then the process of forecasting those official numbers may just be to mechanically move in that direction. But that would undoubtedly create confusion. To better capture what's really going on, investors may be more inclined to commission private economic data. If political bias in official data and forecasting were to emerge in the current environment, one might expect to see firmer job creation and softer inflation readouts. That could keep markets calm in the short term. But any weakness in the real economy would emerge eventually, likely resulting in a rude awakening for many, no matter what the official data says.
The Star
40 minutes ago
- The Star
Factbox-What does Ukraine's constitution say about territorial changes?
A drone view shows the ruins of residential buildings in the abandoned town of Marinka (Maryinka), which was destroyed in the course of Russia-Ukraine conflict in the Donetsk region, a Russian-controlled area of Ukraine, August 7, 2025. REUTERS/Alexander Ermochenko/File Photo KYIV (Reuters) -Territorial questions are certain to be a key area of focus when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and European leaders meet U.S. President Donald Trump for talks on Monday to map out a possible peace deal to end Russia's war in Ukraine. Russia occupies around a fifth of Ukraine and the U.S. president has said "land-swapping" and changes to territory will be crucial for any settlement. Two sources briefed on Russian thinking said on Saturday that Putin and Trump have discussed a proposal requiring Ukraine to fully withdraw troops from the Ukrainian-controlled parts of the eastern Donetsk region. UKRAINE'S CONSTITUTION ON THE ISSUE OF TERRITORY Any changes to Ukraine's territory would have to be settled in Ukraine by a referendum, according to the country's constitution. "Issues of altering the territory of Ukraine are resolved exclusively by an All-Ukrainian referendum," Article 73 says. The question can be put to a referendum by popular initiative if the signatures of three million eligible Ukrainian voters are gathered from at least two thirds of the country's regions, it says. UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT STANCE Ukraine, like its European allies, strongly opposes the idea of legally recognising any Ukrainian territory as Russian. But it has tacitly acknowledged it will almost certainly have to accept some de facto territorial losses. Zelenskiy has said talks to end the war should take the current front line as their starting point and cannot begin by Kyiv having to withdraw its troops from parts of its own sovereign territory that Russia does not control. He has said he does not have a mandate to give away any of the country's territory, and that tracts of state land cannot be traded around as if they were his private property. Zelenskiy has also said that if Kyiv withdrew troops from the heavily fortified eastern Donetsk region, it would open up Ukraine to the threat of Russian advances deeper into less well-defended Ukrainian territory. TRUMP'S STANCE The U.S. president has publicly criticized Zelenskiy for saying he could not violate the constitution by agreeing to give away territory. "I was a little bothered by the fact that Zelenskiy was saying: 'Well, I have to get constitutional approval'. I mean, he has got approval to go into war, kill everybody but he needs approval to do a land swap. Because there will be some land swapping going on", he told the press on August 11. UKRAINIANS' VIEW A clear majority of Ukrainians want a negotiated settlement, according to opinion polls, but they also oppose recognising Ukrainian land as Russian. The Kyiv International Institute of Sociology says that an opinion poll it conducted in June showed that 68% of those questioned oppose the idea of officially recognising "some parts" of occupied land as Russian, while 24% are open to this. The same survey showed that 78% are against the idea of giving up on land that Kyiv's troops still control. The pollster did not survey opinions in areas occupied by Russia. (Reporting by Yuliia DysaWriting by Tom BalmforthEditing by Frances Kerry)
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
Bosnia's Serb Republic PM resigns to form wider coalition
SARAJEVO (Reuters) -The prime minister of Bosnia's autonomous Serb Republic (RS) said on Monday he would resign from his position, as part of a plan by his Serb ruling party to form a government based on a wider coalition with more decision-making power. Announcing his move, Radovan Viskovic added he would retain his other senior political roles until the Serb-dominated RS region reached its "ultimate goal" and seceded from Bosnia. "I will continue to hold important positions, ...I am staying in the SNSD party (The Alliance of Independent Social Democrats) until we accomplish our ultimate goal and that is the state of Republika Srpska," Viskovic said, appearing at a press conference along with top party officials. The crisis sparked by Bosnia's Serb separatist push amounts to one of the biggest threats to peace in the Balkans since the wars that followed Yugoslavia's collapse, pitting the RS government's allies Russia and Serbia against the U.S. and European Union. RS makes up Bosnia and Herzegovina along with the Federation shared by Bosniaks and Croats under the Dayton peace accords that ended a 1992-95 conflict that killed about 100,000 people and displaced around two million. The initiative to form a new regional government was launched after the RS nationalist president Milorad Dodik was sentenced to one year in prison and banned from politics for six years for defying the decisions of an international peace envoy and the constitutional court. Dodik was stripped of office by the election commission earlier this month after an appeals court upheld the first-instance verdict, a decision Dodik immediately rejected, saying it violated the Serb Republic constitution. He was allowed to replace a jail term with a fine under Bosnian law. Over the past decade, Dodik has strongly advocated the secession of the Serb region from Bosnia and its unification with Serbia. Dodik had invited the opposition to join his ruling coalition in a new government of national unity but the main opposition parties dismissed his calls. "We want the RS government to gain a new democratic legitimacy, to be able to respond with its composition to all challenges that are before us," Dodik said at the same news conference on Monday. He fell short of disclosing which parties would join a new government or who would lead it. Independent legal experts said that a prime minister proposed by a president who was stripped of office by the country's top election authority would be illegal. The Russian-backed Serb leader announced a referendum on whether he should leave office or not at the end of September. Pending the referendum outcome, there could be a new referendum on the independence of the Serb Republic, said Dodik. (Reporting by Daria Sito-Sucic, Editing by William Maclean)
