Japanese PM calls on Russia to take constructive action on ceasefire
Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has called on Russia to take constructive action to bring about a comprehensive ceasefire and secure a just and lasting peace.
Source: Embassy of Japan in Ukraine on X
Quote: "Prime Minister of Japan Shigeru Ishiba has published a written address to the 'Virtual Meeting of the Leaders of the Coalition of the Willing on Ukraine', organised today by the United Kingdom and France with the participation of President Zelenskyy.
In his address, Ishiba strongly urges Russia to take constructive steps towards a comprehensive ceasefire and a just and lasting peace."
Details: The embassy noted that since the peace to be achieved in Ukraine could impact global security, the Japanese prime minister has emphasised the need for international cooperation and reaffirmed Japan's readiness to contribute further to strengthening Ukraine's economic and social stability.
He also expressed his "firm hope" that the 10 May meeting of the coalition of the willing will mark another step towards the ultimate goal of a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.
Background:
Following their summit on 10 May, the coalition of the willing has demanded that Russia agree to an unconditional ceasefire for 30 days starting 12 May.
The EU and the US plan to tighten sanctions against Russia if Putin rejects the ceasefire.
Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
24 minutes ago
- The Hill
Hegseth takes fire from Republicans at heated Senate hearing
Republican senators came out firing during Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's hearing on Wednesday before the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on armed forces. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) immediately pressed Hegseth over the Russia-Ukraine war, with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) driving home the point later in the hearing; Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the top Senate appropriator, scolded the Pentagon's delays with budget information; and Sen. Lisa Murkowski closed out the hearing by questioning the administration's focus on Greenland in its Arctic strategy. McConnell, one of three Republicans who opposed Hegseth's confirmation, gaveled in the hearing by calling out the Trump administration for what he views as a flat base-line defense budget. He then launched into strong warnings against the U.S. cozying up to Russia in its bid to end its war in Ukraine. McConnell said Washington's allies are 'wondering whether we're in the middle of brokering what appears to be allowing the Russians to define victory. I think victory is defined by the people who have to live there — the Ukrainians.' The former Senate majority leader who now chairs the subcommittee, McConnell asked Hegseth which side he wanted to win the war. The Defense chief said the Trump administration wanted the killing to end but would not choose a side. 'America's reputation is on the line,' McConnell said. 'Will we defend Democratic allies against authoritarian aggressors?' Later in the hearing, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked Hegseth and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. Dan 'Razin' Caine Caine if Russian President Vladimir Putin is going to stop at Ukraine. 'I don't believe he is,' Caine replied. Hegseth, meanwhile, said it 'remains to be seen. Graham fired back, referring to his previous allusion to appeasement of Adolph Hitler: 'Well, he says he's not. This is the '30s all over. It doesn't remain to be seen.' The line of questioning laid bare the ideological divide within the GOP as to how the U.S. should confront Russia, seen by defense hawks as a global threat that must be countered with military assistance to prop up Ukraine and assert U.S. force in the European theater. But many in the Trump administration, including Hegseth, have taken a more ambivalent tone, arguing for an America First approach that could see American troops rotated out of bases in Europe and an end to the flow of military aid from Washington to Kyiv. 'We don't want a headline at the end of this conflict that says Russia wins and America loses,' McConnell told Hegseth. The hearing had a far more adversarial tone compared to Hegseth's appearance before the House Appropriations defense subcommittee a day prior, in which the Pentagon chief emerged largely unscathed, particularly at the hands of GOP members. Democratic and Republican senators grilled Hegseth over a sparsely outlined defense budget for next fiscal year, echoing rare bipartisan criticism during the House hearing. Collins reprimanded the Pentagon for being 'unacceptably slow' in submitting a detailed Pentagon spending request for the fiscal year 2026. Congress is waiting on the information as the GOP struggles to agree on Trump's reconciliation package. She also told Hegseth that Trump's budget request represented a reduction in buying power compared to the 2025 military budget, when inflation is taken into account, but suggested the Senate might correct that. McConnell earlier was also critical of the administration's defense spending plan, pushing back at Hegseth's argument that the U.S. would be making the largest investment in the military in 20 years via Trump's reconciliation package. McConnell said putting funneling defense dollars into that package while declining to increase military spending in the regular budget 'may well end up functioning as a shell game to avoid making the most significant annual investments that we spent years urging the Biden administration to make.' There was also no shortage of criticism from the panel's Democrats. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), bashed the Pentagon for cutting military medical research while spending $45 million for a grand military parade marking the Army's 250th birthday, set for Saturday 'This is not consistent with what the men and women in uniform deserve,' Durbin said. Others, including Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) berated Hegseth for the Trump administration's decision to send National Guard troops and active-duty Marines into Los Angeles this week, calling the actions a wildly out-of-proportion response to sometimes violent protests against Trump's escalating immigration crackdowns. 'Threatening to use our own troops on our own citizens at such scale is unprecedented, it is unconstitutional, and it is downright un-American,' Murray said, noting that the actions were undermining the readiness of the U.S. military. Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) pressed Hegseth to reveal the cost or timeline of refurbishing Trump's luxury jet from the Qatari government, meant to become Air Force One. 'You have signed a contract with a company to reconfigure the Qatari aircraft. What is the price of that contract?' Reed asked. Hegseth replied that the information 'cannot be revealed in this setting,' prompting Reed to fire back. 'Why can't it be revealed? This is the appropriation committee of the United States Senate. We appropriate the money that you will spend,' Reed said.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Zelensky urges 'stronger' EU sanctions on Russia, lower oil price cap
President Volodymyr Zelensky on June 11 called on the European Union to impose tougher sanctions against Russia, arguing that stronger financial pressure is necessary to curb Moscow's war effort. Speaking at the Ukraine-Southeast Europe Summit in Odesa, Zelensky said the upcoming 18th EU sanctions package "could be stronger," especially in targeting Russian oil tankers and the financial sector. He urged the EU to further reduce the price cap on Russian oil exports. "A ceiling of $45 per barrel of oil is better than $60, that's clear, that's true. But real peace will come with a ceiling of $30," he said. "That's the level that will really change the mindset in Moscow." After the 17th package of sanctions against Russia took effect on May 20, Ukraine's allies announced the following day that another round of restrictions was already in the works. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced on June 10 that the EU is considering lowering the oil price cap from $60 to $45 per barrel — a measure that will be discussed at the upcoming G7 summit in Canada on June 15–17. The Kremlin's budget is increasingly strained by soaring military expenditures, with Russia's Finance Ministry relying heavily on energy revenues to fund the war against Ukraine. The push for tighter sanctions comes as Russia continues to reject ceasefire proposals and presses forward with military operations. Zelensky warned that Odesa remains one of Russia's "main targets," with plans to push beyond it toward the borders with Romania and Moldova. "Russia wants to destroy it, as it has done with countless cities and villages in the occupied territories," he said. "Russian military plans point to this region — Odesa — and then to the border with Moldova and Romania." Odesa is a major port city in southern Ukraine, located on the northwestern coast of the Black Sea. The president warned of possible destabilization efforts in the broader region, comparing the Kremlin's strategy to its previous interference in the Balkans. "We saw this before in the Balkans, where Russia intensified interethnic friction, carried out sabotage, and even attempted coups," Zelensky said. The Odesa summit was attended by several southeastern European leaders, including Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic and Romania's newly elected President Nicusor Dan. Vucic's trip marked his first official visit to Ukraine since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion. Read also: Ukrainian drones strike targets in Russia, including gunpowder plant, General Staff says We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Harvard Business Review
44 minutes ago
- Harvard Business Review
Five Ways Companies Learn to Thrive in an Unpredictable World
by Courtney Rickert McCaffrey and Oliver Jones Geopolitics, and how to manage its potentially seismic risks, is an increasingly pressing concern for business leaders. References to geopolitics and political risk in corporate public documents skyrocketed 600% three years ago and remain three to four times higher than before 2022. And it's not just talk: Political risk—the decisions, events, and conditions that might affect the performance of a company, market, or economy—is having a material impact. The recent tariff announcements caused widespread disruption worldwide. While the scale and scope of these promised tariffs took many observers and markets by surprise, the underlying forces propelling the tariff agenda are both long-standing and global, contributing to this heightened emphasis on political risk appearing in corporate documents. Shaping Supply Chains Sixty percent of more than 1,000 global executives surveyed in EY-Parthenon's Geostrategy in Practice 2025 report said political risk harms their operations and supply chains. (These executives lead companies with more than $500 million in annual revenue, representing more than 20 sectors, including consumer and retail, advanced manufacturing and industrial products, life sciences, and technology.) Such supply chain impacts are unsurprising, given recent headline-making policymaker priorities. Governments worldwide have implemented industrial policies and trade protectionism around critical products and strategic sectors. There's also been greater use of sanctions and anti-sanctions policies and a flurry of regulatory activity, particularly around sustainability and artificial intelligence (AI). In response, most companies are taking strategic action. All executives surveyed said geopolitics had driven strategic changes at their companies, especially for supply chains. Nearly all (94%) said they had invested more time and resources in geostrategy over the past two years, and almost as many (93%) plan to invest more. The percentage of companies taking action across multiple levels of their organizations is also rising—from 24% in 2021 to 37% in 2025. But there is more work to be done. One-third of global executives say they were surprised by most or all political risks that affected their companies in the past two years, 77% of them at least half the time. So how do executives better prepare for future geopolitical and tariff shocks? Becoming a Geostrategist Leading the field in preparing for unexpected political risk are a group of companies EY-Parthenon classifies as 'Geostrategists.' These companies are those taking the most proactive and comprehensive actions to strategically manage geopolitical risk. They operate across all sectors but are concentrated in the retail, power and utilities, real estate and construction, and telecommunications and media industries. Since 2021, Geostrategists have increased in number by 50%. EY-Parthenon teams identified five habits common to successful Geostrategists: 1. They adapt supply chains to geopolitical realities. Geostrategists are more likely than other organizations to have altered their supply chains in response to political risks in the past two years, so they can more effectively manage geopolitical risks, remain resilient, and adapt to the increasingly complex global landscape. One manufacturing company surveyed maps its entire supply chain to identify pockets of risk and, when finding high risk, considers finding new suppliers or redesigning its products. And a life sciences company reconfigured its supply chain after finding vulnerabilities. 2. They build political risk analysis into investment decisions. Integrating political risk as they determine their investments helps Geostrategists enhance M&A success, optimize growth strategies, and save time and resources amid geopolitical uncertainties and macroeconomic challenges. For example, all Geostrategists conduct political risk due diligence when evaluating a potential transaction. 3. They prepare for the unexpected. Geostrategists are more likely to have invested in identifying and monitoring political risk and to use political risk scenario planning to design and test strategy. These strategies help prepare them for unexpected events, such as conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East. 4. They regularly engage their boards on geostrategy. Geostrategists' boards are increasingly focused on geostrategy, with 85% incorporating political risk into future-oriented strategic decisions, including M&A and market entry. In 2025, 76% of boards took action on political risk—up from 26% in 2021. 5. They have the right roles at the geostrategy table. Geostrategists are more likely to have cross-functional and collaborative governance teams. In 2021, a function or business unit was the body most likely to have responsibility for geopolitics (52%). In 2025, it is a committee (52%, up from 39%). The number of executives involved has almost doubled, with the general counsel and chief compliance officer increasingly sharing responsibility with the chief risk officer. Geostrategy for Competitive Advantage It is not easy to become a Geostrategist. It requires investments in capabilities and is never 'finished.' But benchmarking against the habits of Geostrategists can help companies identify where to invest for resilience and growth—so they can anticipate and respond to political risk and seize potential opportunities more effectively than their peers.
