Nordic-Baltic leaders say they remain steadfast in support of Ukraine
The leaders of Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, and Sweden said in a statement that achieving peace between Ukraine and Russia requires a ceasefire and security guarantees for Ukraine.
"We welcome President Trump's statement that the U.S. is prepared to participate in security guarantees. No limitations should be placed on Ukraine's armed forces or on its cooperation with other countries," the statement said.
Trump has said that he had agreed with Putin that a peace deal should be sought without the prior ceasefire that Ukraine and its European allies, until now with U.S. support, have demanded.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
9 minutes ago
- Reuters
Outline emerges of Putin's offer to end his war in Ukraine
LONDON, Aug 16 (Reuters) - Russia would relinquish tiny pockets of occupied Ukraine and Kyiv would cede swathes of its eastern land which Moscow has been unable to capture, under peace proposals discussed by Russia's Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump at their Alaska summit, sources briefed on Moscow's thinking said. The account emerged the day after Trump and Putin met at an airforce base in Alaska, the first encounter between a U.S. president and the Kremlin chief since before the start of the Ukraine conflict. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy is due to travel to Washington on Monday to discuss with Trump a possible settlement of the full-scale war, which Putin launched in February 2022. Although the summit failed to secure the ceasefire he said he had wanted, Trump said in an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity that he and Putin had discussed land transfers and security guarantees for Ukraine, and had "largely agreed". "I think we're pretty close to a deal," he said, adding: "Ukraine has to agree to it. Maybe they'll say 'no'." The two sources, who requested anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, said their knowledge of Putin's proposals was mostly based on discussions between leaders in Europe, the U.S. and Ukraine, and noted it was not complete. Trump briefed Zelenskiy and European leaders on his summit discussions early on Saturday. It was not immediately clear if the proposals by Putin were an opening gambit to serve as a starting point for negotiations or more like a final offer that was not subject to discussion. At face value, at least some of the demands would present huge challenges for Ukraine's leadership to accept. Putin's offer ruled out a ceasefire until a comprehensive deal is reached, blocking a key demand of Zelenskiy, whose country is hit daily by Russian drones and ballistic missiles. Under the proposed Russian deal, Kyiv would fully withdraw from the eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions in return for a Russian pledge to freeze the front lines in the southern regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, the sources said. Ukraine has already rejected any retreat from Ukrainian land such as the Donetsk region, where its troops are dug in and which Kyiv says serves as a crucial defensive structure to prevent Russian attacks deeper into its territory. Russia would be prepared to return comparatively small tracts of Ukrainian land it has occupied in the northern Sumy and northeastern Kharkiv regions, the sources said. Russia holds pockets of the Sumy and Kharkiv regions that total around 440 square km, according to Ukraine's Deep State battlefield mapping project. Ukraine controls around 6,600 square km of Donbas, which comprises the Donetsk and Luhansk regions and is claimed by Russia. Although the Americans have not spelled this out, the sources said they knew Russia's leader was also seeking - at the very least - formal recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea, which Moscow seized from Ukraine in 2014. It was not clear if that meant recognition by the U.S. government or, for instance, all Western powers and Ukraine. Kyiv and its European allies reject formal recognition of Moscow's rule in the peninsula. They said Putin would also expect the lifting of at least some of the array of sanctions on Russia. However, they could not say if this applied to U.S. as well as European sanctions. Trump said on Friday he did not immediately need to consider retaliatory tariffs on countries such as China for buying Russian oil - which is subject to a range of Western sanctions - but might have to "in two or three weeks." Ukraine would also be barred from joining the NATO military alliance, though Putin seemed to be open to Ukraine receiving some kind of security guarantees, the sources said. However, they added that it was unclear what this meant in practice. European leaders said Trump had discussed security guarantees for Ukraine during their conversation on Saturday and also broached an idea for an "Article 5"-style guarantee outside the NATO military alliance. NATO regards any attack launched on one of its 32 members as an attack on all under its Article 5 clause. Joining the Atlantic alliance is a strategic objective for Kyiv that is enshrined in the country's constitution. Russia would also demand official status for the Russian language inside parts of, or across, Ukraine, as well as the right of the Russian Orthodox Church to operate freely, the sources said. Ukraine's security agency accuses the Moscow-linked church of abetting Russia's war on Ukraine by spreading pro-Russian propaganda and housing spies, something denied by the church which says it has cut canonical ties with Moscow. Ukraine has passed a law banning Russia-linked religious organisations, of which it considers the church to be one. However, it has not yet started enforcing the ban.
Telegraph
9 minutes ago
- Telegraph
‘British women and girls are paying the price for Labour's lax immigration laws'
Most European countries use detention centres but Britain puts undocumented men in accommodation while British families struggle under taxes
Telegraph
9 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Rayner accuses Farage of fuelling revenge porn culture
Angela Rayner has claimed Nigel Farage would open the floodgates to revenge porn and 'fail a generation of young women' by scrapping online safety laws. In a direct attack on the Reform leader, the Deputy Prime Minister warned that removing protections would enable 'a vile, misogynistic culture on social media'. Her broadside reflects how Labour strategists are convinced Mr Farage has misread the public mood and that voters support more regulation of the internet. Reform hit back on Saturday, saying it would 'always prioritise prosecuting abuse but will never let women's safety be hijacked to justify censorship'. Laila Cunningham, a party councillor, said Ms Rayner could not 'claim to protect women while placing unvetted illegal migrant men' in communities. The row erupted amid controversy over the application of the Online Safety Act and concerns that the enforcement of it is impinging on free speech. Initially passed by the Tories, the legislation is designed to protect children in particular from freely accessing harmful material like extreme pornography. It requires websites to block access to adult content with strict age verification checks, such as artificial intelligence (AI) face scans or by demanding people's bank account details. But ministers are concerned it is being enforced 'over-zealously' by firms, with examples of blocked content including a Commons debate on grooming gangs. The controversy has prompted Reform to pledge that Mr Farage would repeal the legislation, warning it is turning Britain into 'a borderline dystopian state'. Shortly after the act came into force last month, the Reform leader said: 'It begins to look as though state suppression of genuine free speech may be upon us already.' Ms Rayner said the move would lead to a rise in instances of 'intimate image abuse' online, which is more commonly referred to as revenge porn and can include uploading images online, as well as sharing them by text and email or even showing another person an image. 'Intimate image abuse is a devastating crime and contributes to a vile misogynistic culture on social media that we know translates into physical spaces too,' Ms Rayner said. 'Nigel Farage risks failing a generation of young women with his dangerous and irresponsible plans to scrap online safety laws. 'Scrapping safeguards and having no viable alternative plan in place to halt the floodgates of abuse that could open is an appalling dereliction of duty. 'It's time for Farage to tell women and girls across Britain how he would keep them safe online.' The row between the pair could foreshadow a future election campaign, were Sir Keir Starmer to step down and be replaced by his deputy. Ms Rayner has long been rumoured to be on leadership manoeuvres and her high-profile attack on Mr Farage will be seen as a further burnishing of her credentials. Reform has led in every opinion poll since the beginning of May and has an eight point cushion over Labour according to the latest YouGov survey. The meteoric rise of Mr Farage's party has unnerved Downing Street and Labour MPs, many of whom sit on wafer thin majorities in the Red Wall. Labour strategists think he has made a mistake by attacking the Online Safety Act, with a recent poll showing seven in 10 voters back age verification checks on porn. The Deputy Prime Minister led the attack after Peter Kyle sparked controversy by suggesting that Mr Farage was on the side of sex offenders such as Jimmy Savile. The Science Secretary faced widespread criticism and calls to apologise over the slur, which the Reform leader described as 'absolutely disgusting'. Joining the attack on the Reform leader, Jess Phillips, the Safeguarding Minister, claimed Mr Farage was 'happy for online spaces to remain a wild west'. 'Nigel Farage's Reform have shown they have a total disregard for the abuse, hatred, and vile criminality millions of women face online,' she said. 'Reform have no idea and simply don't care about the grave damage their decisions could have.' 'Women are more unsafe than ever' Cllr Cunningham, a former prosecutor who has been tipped to run for London Mayor, challenged Ms Phillips to a debate on women's safety. She said that 'women are more unsafe than ever before thanks to Labour' and accused the Safeguarding Minister of 'wilfully deceiving voters on this issue'. Ministers had shown they will 'take more steps to monitor your social media posts than they will to monitor the unvetted men they house at your expense', she added. Writing for The Telegraph, she said: 'Labour are attacking Reform for pledging to scrap the Online Safety Act as if that legislation is the last line of defence for women. It isn't. 'It's a cover for censorship and an excuse to hand unelected regulators sweeping powers to silence views they don't like, while doing nothing about the real crimes happening on our streets. 'You don't protect women by silencing speech. You protect them by securing borders, enforcing the law, and locking up actual criminals.' Online laws are a force for good, and for parents' peace of mind By Emily Darlington MP Picture this. Your teenage daughter gets her first mobile phone for her birthday. She's excited about the prospect of messaging her friends, sharing funny videos, posting about the day out she's had with her friends or family. Instead, she's randomly contacted by someone on social media who says they're a friend of a friend. They speak, friendly at first. But the conversation turns. The person starts using sexually explicit language. They ask your daughter to take revealing pictures. She doesn't know what to do. She feels pressure. This person threatens your daughter. If she doesn't share these images, they will tell her family something egregious that will embarrass her. She feels scared, even ashamed. She obliges. These photos are now in the hands of a predator. Who knows what they will do with them? Who knows who this manipulative figure really is? These exploitative crimes are on the rise – with 14 per cent of young women having experienced threats, or actual sharing, of intimate images. It's just one of the many emerging threats against daughters, sisters, and mothers across our country - and it's not just women and girls, with young men being victimised by online predators too. Social media and other online spaces have evolved quicker than legislators across the world have been able to act. Labour has brought in new online laws to protect women and children online. The tide is changing. But there's a new threat in the joint effort in tackling these heinous crimes… Nigel Farage. There had been a political – and indeed public – consensus that social media has become a wild west. A space for violence, misogyny, the promotion of terrorism – and an open forum for predators. That's why it'll send shivers down the spines of parents that Farage and his Reform party want to scrap the new safeguards that have recently been put in place. They shamefully haven't put forward any plan as to how to how they'll replace the vital new protections this Act provides. It's profoundly irresponsible and frankly, profoundly unpatriotic. It could put millions of young people at risk of becoming the next victims, put them in danger of being radicalised, and being exposed to extreme hatred. Enough is enough. This is a test for Reform. In an age where technology should be harnessed for good, we have a choice. We can look forward and ensure that protections are in place for everyone to use the internet in a safe and enjoyable way. Or we can surrender in the way that Farage is choosing. That would mean predators are emboldened to prey on the unsuspecting. It could damage a whole generation and change lives for good. Of course the new online laws are a change. There's no denying that. But they're a force for good, and for parents' peace of mind. That's why it's vital we confront Reform on this. Protecting the citizens of Britain is the first duty of any government. Reform won't even do that. They're not safe for our children - and they're not fit to govern.
