
Europe stresses need to protect Ukrainian interests
But they have stressed the need to keep pressure on Moscow and protect Ukrainian and European security interests.
Trump plans to meet Putin in Alaska on August 15, saying the parties, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, were close to a deal that could resolve the three-and-a-half-year conflict.
Details of the potential deal have yet to be announced, but Trump said it would involve "some swapping of territories to the betterment of both".
It could require Ukraine to surrender significant parts of its territory, an outcome Zelenskyy and his European allies say would only encourage Russian aggression.
US Vice President JD Vance met British Foreign Secretary David Lammy, and representatives of Ukraine and European allies on Saturday at Chevening House, a country mansion southeast of London, to discuss Trump's push for peace.
A joint statement from the French, Italian, German, Polish, British and Finnish leaders and the president of the European Commission welcomed Trump's efforts, while stressing the need to maintain support for Ukraine and pressure on Russia.
"We share the conviction that a diplomatic solution must protect Ukraine's and Europe's vital security interests," they said.
"We agree that these vital interests include the need for robust and credible security guarantees that enable Ukraine to effectively defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity," the statement said, while adding: "The path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine."
The leaders also said "they remain committed to the principle that international borders must not be changed by force," and added: "The current line of contact should be the starting point of negotiations."
They said negotiations could only take place in the context of a ceasefire or reduction of hostilities.
Zelenskyy's chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, who took part in the talks with European leaders and US officials, said Ukraine was grateful for their constructive approach.
"A ceasefire is necessary - but the front line is not a border," Yermak said on X, reiterating Kyiv's position that it will reject any territorial concessions to Russia.
Yermak also thanked Vance for "respecting all points of views" and his efforts toward a "reliable peace."
A European official confirmed a counterproposal was put forward by European representatives at the Chevening meeting but declined to provide details.
The Wall Street Journal said European officials had presented a counterproposal that included demands that a ceasefire must take place before any other steps are taken and that any territory exchange must be reciprocal, with firm security guarantees.
"You can't start a process by ceding territory in the middle of fighting," it quoted one European negotiator as saying.
A US official said hours-long meetings at Chevening "produced significant progress toward President Trump's goal of bringing an end to the war in Ukraine, ahead of President Trump and President Putin's upcoming meeting in Alaska."
The White House did not immediately respond when asked about the European counterproposals.
British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron spoke and pledged to find a "just and lasting peace" in Ukraine and "unwavering support" for Zelenskyy while welcoming Trump's efforts to end the fighting, a Downing Street spokesperson said.
It was not clear what, if anything, had been agreed at Chevening, but Zelenskyy earlier called the meeting constructive.
"The path to peace for Ukraine should be determined together and only together with Ukraine, this is key principle," he said in his evening address to Ukrainians.
NBC News cited an unnamed US official as saying that the Trump administration was considering inviting Zelenskyy to join the US and Russian presidents at their Alaska meeting.
A Trump spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment on this, and Russian and Ukrainian officials could not immediately be reached for comment.
Macron stressed the need for Ukraine to play a role in any negotiations.
"Ukraine's future cannot be decided without the Ukrainians, who have been fighting for their freedom and security for over three years now," he wrote on X after what he said were calls with Zelenskyy, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Starmer.
"Europeans will also necessarily be part of the solution, as their own security is at stake."
'CLEAR STEPS NEEDED'
Zelenskyy has made a flurry of calls with Ukraine's allies since Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff's visit to Moscow on Wednesday which Trump described as having achieved "great progress".
Ukraine and the European Union have pushed back on proposals that they view as ceding too much to Putin, whose troops invaded Ukraine in February 2022, citing what Moscow called threats to Russia's security from a Ukrainian pivot towards the West.
Kyiv and its Western allies say the invasion is an imperial-style land grab.
Moscow has previously claimed four Ukrainian regions - Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson - as well as the Black Sea peninsula of Crimea, which was annexed in 2014.
Russian forces do not fully control all the territory in the four regions and Russia has demanded that Ukraine pull out its troops from the parts that they still control.
Ukraine says its troops still have a small foothold in Russia's Kursk region a year after they crossed the border to try to gain leverage in any negotiations. Russia said it had expelled Ukrainian troops from Kursk in April.
Tatiana Stanovaya, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, said the current peace push was the first "more or less realistic" attempt to stop the war but she remained sceptical about the agreements being implemented.
"There is virtually no doubt that the new commitments could be devastating for Ukraine," she said.
Fierce fighting is raging along the more than 1000km front line in eastern and southern Ukraine, where Russian forces hold around a fifth of the country's territory.
Russian troops are slowly advancing in Ukraine's east, but their summer offensive has so far failed to achieve a major breakthrough, Ukrainian military analysts say.
Ukrainians remain defiant.
"Not a single serviceman will agree to cede territory, to pull out troops from Ukrainian territories," Olesia Petritska, 51, told Reuters as she gestured to hundreds of small Ukrainian flags in the Kyiv central square commemorating fallen soldiers.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Scoop
7 hours ago
- Scoop
Occupation And Slaughter: Netanyahu And Taking Over Gaza
To say that Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, had lost the plot is to assume he ever had one. With a dearth of ideas as to how to come up with a 'final solution' to the Palestinian problem, he has received a majority approval from his cabinet colleagues to take over Gaza City. It took a late-night meeting with the security cabinet lasting some ten hours. A statement released on the morning of August 8 from his office mentioned a five-point plan intended to defeat Hamas and conclude the war. None of this is an improved version of what has come before: the intended disarming of Hamas, the return of all hostages, demilitarising the Gaza Strip, assuming security control of the territory and creating 'an alternative civil administration that is neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority'. There is also not much difference here from recent proposals made by the French President Emmanuel Macron, UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, with one fundamental difference: the Israelis want no current Palestinian representative authority to govern the people they so loathe. What all the proposals share is a core belief that the Palestinians be reduced to subordinate status, forever policed and monitored by watchful authorities. Their representatives are to be vetted by the Israelis and any number of international partners. Genuine sovereignty can sod off. The Israeli military has announced that it 'will prepare to take control of Gaza City while providing humanitarian aid to the civilian population outside the combat zones'. Little change then given the current model of aid distribution that features daily massacres of the desperate and the starving overseen by trigger itchy personnel from both the IDF and the obscenely named Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. OHCHR, the United Nations human rights office, claims that at least 1,373 Palestinians seeking food have been killed since May 27, 859 in proximity of the GHF's distribution points. Another 514 have perished along the routes traversed by food convoys. The UN Human Rights chief Volker Türk has done his best to reiterate a certain ghastly obviousness in the plan. The military takeover 'runs contrary to the ruling of the International Court of Justice that Israel bring its occupation to an end as soon as possible, to the realisation of the agreed two-State solution and to the right of Palestinians to self-determination.' The takeover would entail further escalation, resulting in 'more massive forced displacement, more killing, more unbearable suffering, senseless destruction and atrocity crimes.' The IDF's chief of staff, Lt. General Eyal Zamier, is not a fan of the plan, concerned that it would do more to imperil the surviving Israeli hostages held in the Strip. The New York Times reports that the country's military leadership would prefer a fresh ceasefire, with the IDF suffering from the effects of attrition from the conflict. The head of Israel's National Security Council, Tzachi Hanegbi, is in furious agreement: such an operation would further endanger the surviving Israeli hostages. Mossad's director, David Barnea, also adds his name to the list of sceptics. Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid did not shy away from excoriating the cabinet decision, something he called 'a disaster' that would breed further disasters. The far-right figures of Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich had 'dragged' the Prime Minister into a strategy that would lead to the death of the hostages and Israeli troops while costing billions to the Israeli taxpayer. An announcement from Hamas proved suitably contemptuous of the latest Netanyahu gambit. 'We warn the criminal occupation that this criminal adventure will cost it dearly. It will not be a walk in the park. Our people and their resistance are resilient to defeat or surrender, and Netanyahu's plans, ambitions, and delusions will fail miserably.' The group also thought it fitting to name the United States as 'fully responsible for the occupation's crimes, due to its political cover and direct military support for its aggression.' In a turn up for the books for those opposing Netanyahu's blood-soaked adventurism, some of Israel's closest allies are going beyond muttering criticism. Modest as it is, Germany has announced that weapons exports to Israel for use in the Strip had been suspended 'until further notice'. (Between 2020 and 2024, the country accounted for a third of Israel's arms imports.) A statement from German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, while acknowledging the usual proviso that Israel had 'the right to defend itself against Hamas terrorism,' expressed concern that 'even tougher military action by the Israeli army in the Gaza Strip' undermined prospects for releasing the hostages and pursuing negotiations for a ceasefire. Merz further warned that Israel 'not take any further steps toward annexing the West Bank.' For his part, Starmer called Israel's 'decision to further escalate its offensive in Gaza […] wrong, and we urge it to reconsider immediately. This action will do nothing to bring an end to this conflict or to help secure the release of the hostages. It will only bring more bloodshed.' Türk, if somewhat hollowly, demands an end to the war in Gaza with a rosy vision: an arrangement where Israelis and Palestinians are 'allowed to live side by side in peace.' Admirable as this aspiration is, optimistic in its transcendence, it misunderstands the currency of hate and vengeance currently traded in Netanyahu's cabinet and swathes of the Israeli populace. This is not a matter of side by side, but above and below, living in a state of permanent conflict, suppression and suspicion.


NZ Herald
11 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Behind Europe's flurry of hard diplomacy was belief US had abandoned efforts to push for peace
Together, these moves amounted to a declaration of independence from the Trump Administration on a major strategic issue that the Europeans have long tried to approach in tandem. Interviews with a dozen officials and diplomats revealed a frantic and at times unco-ordinated push for peace after years of debate, propelled by the conclusion they could no longer wait for the United States to lead or restrain Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister. A key part of the diplomatic effort was an eight-point plan developed quietly by British officials over the past six months and circulated among Europeans on July 29 by Jonathan Powell, Starmer's national security adviser and a veteran mediator. Powell was an architect of the Good Friday Agreement, which ended decades of bloody conflict in Northern Ireland, and has advised on several conflicts since. A day after Powell began circulating the British plan, 22 Arab nations signed onto a declaration that mirrored its main goals at a United Nations conference co-hosted by Macron and the Saudis. The declaration, which reflected a concerted French and Saudi diplomatic effort over several months, included for the first time a demand from the Arab League that Hamas disarm and give up power in Gaza. After months of incremental actions, Europe's diplomatic surge reflected the global outrage over the carnage in the enclave, but also an attempt to present Israel with a transformative show of will from Arab nations that might unlock peace negotiations. Officials familiar with the deliberations in all three countries said the flurry of activity was driven by evidence of widespread malnutrition and starvation in Gaza, growing demands from constituents for action, and a conclusion that the US had abandoned its efforts to push for peace or curtail Israeli military action. It is unclear whether the diplomacy will make any difference on the ground. Since Hamas killed about 1200 people and took 250 others hostage on October 7, 2023, more than 60,000 Palestinians have been killed in the Israeli offensive, according to Gaza health officials, who do not distinguish between civilians and combatants. But a senior adviser to Macron on the Middle East, who asked not to be identified to discuss private diplomacy, was blunt: We had to act. On Friday, Netanyahu effectively rebuffed Europe's calls for peace when his security Cabinet approved an expansion of the war in Gaza. His decision to escalate the war prompted even Merz, a strong supporter of Israel, to suspend any shipments of German arms that could be used in Gaza. 'Waiting to die' It was mid-July when Starmer, his Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, and their aides realised that their long-running debate over recognising a Palestinian state had reached a tipping point. For months, they had insisted that the time wasn't right. In the year since Starmer's Labour Party took office, they had denounced Israel's bombardment of Gaza, imposed sanctions on two far-right Israeli ministers and demanded more aid be allowed into the territory. But as late as July 16, Lammy maintained to frustrated Labour MPs that recognising Palestine was not the same as establishing a viable state for Palestinians alongside Israel. 'I actually want to see two states,' Lammy, who travelled twice to the Israeli-occupied West Bank before becoming Foreign Secretary, said during a committee hearing. He suggested that recognising Palestine at that moment would be more of 'a symbolic thing'. The calculus changed quickly. On July 18, Israel announced an expansion of settlements in the West Bank, a move the British Government denounced as a 'flagrant breach of international law' that would critically undermine any chance of a two-state peace. The next day, the news media published pictures of starving children in Gaza, their bones protruding from emaciated bodies. It was a one-two punch, according to two senior British officials. The situation on the ground was rapidly deteriorating. Public pressure on Starmer was growing. On July 23, Sarah Champion, a Labour MP, received a call from a friend in Gaza who was struggling to find food. 'My family and friends are just waiting to die now,' she said her friend told her. The next morning, Champion sent WhatsApp messages and emails to her colleagues, asking them to sign a letter calling on the Prime Minister to recognise Palestine. In the end, more than 255 signed. One card to play Macron's announcement came late on July 24. 'Peace is possible,' he wrote on social media, sharing a letter to Mahmoud Abbas, the President of the Palestinian Authority. His language reflected the pressure he felt to move quickly: 'It is urgent to implement the only viable solution to fulfil the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people'. Macron had been signalling for weeks that he wanted to make the announcement, but at times appeared hesitant. A British official said Britain had discussed a joint recognition of Palestine, but Macron made his announcement without telling it, either. After almost two years of war, French diplomats were frustrated by Israel's refusal to curb its military action or to plan for the post-war stabilisation of Gaza. Macron had lost patience with President Donald Trump, who no longer seemed to support a two-state solution and appeared uninterested in pressuring Netanyahu. The French President wanted momentum in the quest for peace, in part to support moderate Arab states that also want progress toward a Palestinian state. With France being the only nuclear power in the European Union, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council and home to both the largest Jewish and the largest Muslim communities in Western Europe, Macron knew recognition of Palestine would resonate with many other nations. 'France had basically one card to play,' said Rym Momtaz, an expert in French foreign policy at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 'Recognition of a Palestinian state.' French President Emmanuel Macron had lost patience with US President Donald Trump, who no longer seemed to support a two-state solution and appeared uninterested in pressuring Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu. Photo / Ludovic Marin, AFP 'Real starvation stuff' Given its Nazi history and its status as one of Israel's most important allies, Germany had always been unlikely to recognise a Palestinian state before it was established. But Merz was determined to be a part of the diplomatic efforts. A day after Macron's announcement, the German Chancellor, the French President and Starmer issued a joint statement calling for an end to the war, the release of hostages, the disarmament of Hamas, a massive influx of aid, and a halt to any Israeli plans to annex more territory. The trio held a call the following morning. They agreed the situation was 'appalling', according to a British written summary of the meeting. Food was trickling into Gaza, but not fast enough. There was no prospect of a ceasefire. The three nations — known as the E3 — have more influence when they are aligned. Their unity also gives them political cover domestically. So Germany has not criticised either France or Britain on their decisions to recognise a Palestinian state, in part, a senior German official said, because it needs E3 unity to help manage its own sharp domestic critics on Gaza. On July 27, Merz spoke with Netanyahu directly. The chancellor left the call frustrated, according to a person familiar with the conversation, who spoke anonymously, after the Israeli Prime Minister insisted during the call that there was no starvation in Gaza and that Hamas was stealing the ample food being delivered. The next day, Merz and Macron called in to a meeting between Trump and Starmer in Scotland. The Europeans urged Trump to pressure Netanyahu to allow more aid into Gaza, according to an official who spoke on condition of anonymity. After the meeting, Trump acknowledged the dire situation. 'That's real starvation stuff, I see it, and you can't fake that,' Trump told reporters. 'We have to get the kids fed.' A unity conference The day after Trump left Britain, Starmer made it official. Britain would recognise Palestine unless Israel moved swiftly to end the war and embark on a path towards a permanent peace. Lammy echoed his boss in a speech at the United Nations. 'It is with the hand of history on our shoulders that His Majesty's Government therefore intends to recognise the State of Palestine,' he said. He received a standing ovation. Canada joined Britain and France soon after. Starmer's announcement surprised the Germans. They already viewed Macron's announcement as counterproductive, hardening Israel's tone and Hamas' stance in ceasefire negotiations in Qatar, which had collapsed. That same day, Powell began sharing drafts of the British plan with the allies in the hopes of seizing a moment when heightened global outrage was being met with new examples of political will. Powell and others in the British Government had been working on the plan for months and had struggled to get Arab leaders to sign on. Now, along with France and Germany, they tried again. It was unclear to the diplomats whether Trump would support the plan, which incorporated some of the same ideas that officials in foreign capitals had proposed in the past to no avail. According to two European officials, it called for: A technocratic Palestinian government for Gaza linked to a reformed Palestinian Authority; An international security force; A full withdrawal by Israel; US-led monitoring of the ceasefire; Ultimately two independent states. The British plan also presented an 'annex of implementation' with a timeline that included the previously scheduled UN conference, sponsored by France and Saudi Arabia, aimed at reviving efforts towards a two-state solution. The plan envisioned Arab commitments at the conference and an eventual ceasefire in Gaza, culminating in a Saudi- and French-led peace plan for two states at the UN General Assembly in September. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had long said he wanted the kingdom to normalise relations with Israel but insisted that the war with Gaza needed to be resolved first and that there be concrete progress toward a Palestinian state. Despite asking several times, French officials said they were unable to determine whether the US still supported a two-state, Israeli-Palestinian peace. Secretary of State Marco Rubio reacted with fury to the idea of the conference, calling it 'ill-timed' and 'a publicity stunt'. The Europeans pushed hard ahead, despite the criticism. Starmer made calls to several Arab leaders, seeking support for the road map outlined in Powell's document, including the disarmament of Hamas and the creation of a potential UN-led force to keep the peace after the war ended. Macron and Merz had similar discussions. The conference's final declaration surprised many veterans of Mideast diplomacy. 'Hamas must end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority, with international engagement and support,' the document said, the first time such a call had been made collectively by all the Arab nations. The declaration also welcomed the idea of 'a temporary international stabilisation mission' in Gaza that would operate at the direction of the UN. In another era, under a different Israeli government, the declaration might have been embraced by Israel as an off-ramp from almost two years of brutal war. It might also have been a moment for the US to assert its leverage as Israel's closest ally and the historic guarantor of its security. However, Trump has shown little interest in pressuring Netanyahu to restrain his military or to wind down the war. The President has not objected publicly to the Israeli decision to take over Gaza City. Instead, Israel and the US both rejected the UN declaration. Diplomats in Britain, France and Germany, many of whom had worked for years towards peace between Israel and Palestinians, expressed frustration at the lack of engagement by Trump, perhaps the only person in the world with the ability to push the Israeli Prime Minister to change course. They acknowledged that Netanyahu's actions in recent days are evidence that American power is necessary to make a real difference on the ground in the conflict. Still, several said that while they had known Netanyahu was likely to dismiss the idea, they had to try. The alternative, they said, was to simply walk away — a choice few were willing to make. This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Written by: Michael D. Shear, Steven Erlanger and Roger Cohen ©2025 THE NEW YORK TIMES


NZ Herald
11 hours ago
- NZ Herald
FBI moves to dispatch 120 agents to streets of US capital as Trump vows crackdown on crime
And it comes as Trump is publicly portraying the city as rampant with violent crime - even as the mayor refutes that characterisation, pointing to police data showing a drop in violent crime. Last week, Trump ordered federal law enforcement agents from several agencies to be deployed on city streets and called for more juveniles to be charged in the adult justice system. Staffing assignments this weekend reveal for the first time how many new FBI resources the Trump Administration could divert to local crime and the frustration it has caused within the bureau. In recent days, the Administration has authorised up to 120 agents, largely from the FBI's Washington field office, to work overnight shifts for at least one week alongside DC police and other federal law enforcement officers in the capital, according to the people familiar with those efforts. FBI agents generally do not have authority to make traffic stops, and the people said the agents' roles could include supporting the other agencies during traffic stops. The FBI also is dispatching agents from outside DC, including Philadelphia, to help with the surge of federal law enforcement in the district, according to multiple people familiar with the plans. Federal land is scattered across Washington, and local enforcement often works alongside federal law enforcement to patrol these and surrounding areas. The US Park Police and Secret Service - which have more experience patrolling streets - typically do this work, not the FBI. The Secret Service and the US Secret Service Uniformed Division have also been directed to launch special patrols in DC, according to a White House official. The Trump Administration has not asked the DC police department - the chief law enforcement agency responsible for policing local crime - on how best to deploy these federal resources, according to a senior official with the department. Because DC is not a state, the federal government has unique authority to exert control over the city - even amid objections from the residents and locally elected government. The Home Rule Act of 1973 gave DC residents the ability to elect their own mayor and council members. A federal takeover of the DC police force would be an extraordinary assertion of power in a place where local leaders have few avenues to resist federal encroachment. 'Agents from the FBI Washington field office continue to participate in the increased federal law enforcement presence in DC, which includes assisting our law enforcement partners,' the FBI said. Trump has been ramping up his criticisms on the capital in recent days. Last week, the President posted on social media a photo of a former US Doge Service staffer who was injured in an attempted carjacking. Soon after the attack, DC police arrested a 15-year-old boy and girl from Maryland and charged them with unarmed carjacking. 'I'm going to make our Capital safer and more beautiful than it ever was before,' Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. 'It's all going to happen very fast, just like the Border.' In a different social media post, Trump said the White House news conference tomorrow NZT will be about the city's cleanliness, its physical renovation, and its general condition. 'The Mayor of DC, Muriel Bowser, is a good person who has tried, but she has been given many chances, and the Crime Numbers get worse, and the City only gets dirtier and less attractive,' Trump said in the post. Bowser (Democrat) has been pushing back against Trump's characterisation of the city she leads, pointing out on MSNBC that crime rates have been dropping. In DC, violent crime is down by 26% compared with this time in 2024, according to DC police data. Homicides are down by 12%. DC police have made about 900 juvenile arrests this year - almost 20% fewer than during the same time frame last year. About 200 of those charges are for violent crimes and at least four dozen are for carjacking. 'If the priority is to show force in an American city, we know he can do that here,' Bowser, who said she last spoke to Trump a few weeks ago, said on MSNBC. 'But it won't be because there's a spike in crime.' The reassignment of FBI agents has further demoralised some agents in the Washington field office, who believe they have little expertise or training in thwarting carjackers and were already angered by a spate of firings inside the agency that they deemed were unwarranted. Last week, the Trump Administration ousted with no explanation FBI personnel across the country, including the head of the Washington field office. In 2020, the first Trump Administration dispatched FBI agents, mostly from the Washington field office, to respond to the racial justice protests that June in the city. The Trump Administration had wanted a federal presence in the streets as a deterrent to rioters or protesters who might try to vandalise federal property. Several agents were captured in a photograph taking a knee in what was viewed as a gesture of solidarity to protesters marching against racial injustice - an image that went viral and fuelled accusations from conservatives that the bureau harbours a liberal agenda. People familiar with the FBI have said agents are not trained for riot control and were placed in an untenable position as they knelt down, trying to defuse a tense situation. In the first months of the current Trump Administration, officials reassigned several of those agents who were captured in that photo from nearly five years ago. 'If DC doesn't get its act together, and quickly, we will have no choice but to take Federal control of the City, and run this City how it should be run, and put criminals on notice that they're not going to get away with it anymore,' Trump wrote on social media last week in a post that included a bloody image of the injured former Doge staffer. This northern spring, Trump ordered the creation of the 'DC Safe and Beautiful Task Force', a vehicle for his long-held fixations on quality-of-life issues in the city, including homeless encampments and graffiti. Today, homeless advocates and DC residents criticised Trump's threats to remove homeless people from DC as inhumane, costly, and impractical. 'That money could be better spent getting folks housing and support' Jesse Rabinowitz, campaign and communications director at the National Homelessness Law Centre, said of the federal law enforcement presence in the district. Deborah Goosby, a 67-year-old homeless woman, sat in her usual spot greeting shoppers outside a DC grocery store. 'That's never going to happen,' she said after hearing that Trump wanted to send people experiencing homelessness far from the nation's capital. 'They can't make me leave.'