German defence minister: not considering sending Taurus missiles to Ukraine
BERLIN, June 12 (Reuters) - German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius said on Thursday that Germany is not considering delivering Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine despite Kyiv's repeated requests.
Although Germany is one of Ukraine's main military backers, Berlin has never supplied Taurus missiles, which have a range in excess of 300 miles (480 km).
Answering a journalist's question during his fifth visit to Kyiv since the start of the war, Pistorius said, "Since you asked me whether we are considering this, my answer is no."
In the same news conference, the minister said his country's military support for Ukraine had reached 7 billion euros ($8.12 billion) this year and a further 1.9 billion euros were pending parliamentary approval.
($1 = 0.8621 euros)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
4 hours ago
- Reuters
South African assets sink on risk aversion after Israel's strike on Iran
JOHANNESBURG, June 13 (Reuters) - South Africa's rand and government bonds fell steeply in early trade on Friday, after Israeli military strikes on Iran drove investors toward safe havens. At 0657 GMT, the risk-sensitive rand traded at 18.04 against the dollar , 1.6% weaker than Thursday's close. The rand had been on a strong run for weeks, helped by local coalition partners resolving a budget dispute, talk of a lower inflation target and strong precious metal prices. The escalation in hostilities in the Middle East - a major oil-producing region - adds a fresh layer of uncertainty for financial markets at a time of pressure on the global economy from U.S. President Donald Trump's erratic trade policies. No major domestic data releases are due on Friday, but next week local consumer inflation (ZACPIY=ECI), opens new tab and retail sales (ZARET=ECI), opens new tab figures will be published. The yield on South Africa's benchmark 2035 government bond was up 16.5 basis points to 10.25%.
The Herald Scotland
5 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Grand Coalition between SNP and Labour may become inevitable
'Brandmauer' though, I can tell you, is German for 'firewall', and in political terms it is shorthand for the Grand Coalition between the centre-left SPD and the centre-right CDU/CSU. We have seen this Grand Coalition between Germany's main parties three times now – twice under Angela Merkel, and now again under new Chancellor Friedrich Merz. The purpose of the Brandmauer is to lock out a force considered by the mainstream parties to be so undesirable that the political nuclear button must be pressed. In 2005, under Ms Merkel, the imperative was to neuter the PDS – the successor to the Communist rulers of East Germany. Now, two decades on, the Brandmauer protects against Alice Weidel's AFD. The Grand Coalition under Angela Merkel continued under new Chancellor Friedrich Merz The Grand Coalition is now so normal in Germany that it has its own portmanteau – the Groko (Große Koalition). Before it happened, though, it would generally have been considered unthinkable. Not worth writing about, talking about or thinking about. Closer to home, we have seen a similar situation in Ireland. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael may be ideologically similar, but as the parties on opposite sides of the Irish Civil War, the antipathy from that island's troubled history runs deep. The very notion of a Grand Coalition was ridiculous until a force so ostensibly menacing, in the form of Sinn Féin, became so strong that a momentous response was required. The 2020 and 2024 general elections, both three horse races, resulted in an Irish firewall to lock out Sinn Féin. This is the new normal in Ireland. Here in Scotland, don't bother asking a politician from our two established mainstream parties – the SNP and Labour – about a Grand Coalition. At least, not in public, where you'll be laughed out of court. But discuss it with some of them in private, as I have on several occasions over the last six-or-so months, and they will offer a much more open and thoughtful retort. They can read opinion polls just like anyone else. For much of the time since Labour's Westminster election victory, as its support has plummeted, the party looked so weak, and the SNP looked so comparatively strong, that the latter would not require the former, finding an adequate partner instead in the Liberal Democrats or its ex-spouse, the Greens. Read more from Andy Maciver Last week's Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election, though, has shone a different light on the range of possible outcomes after May 2026's election. Labour, after its victory, is understandably buoyant. Much as Labour types will tell you that they knew they would win and it was the result of a master strategy unbeknownst to anyone, the reality is that this was a wafer-thin win in a genuine three-way fight. We should not underplay it; Labour significantly outperformed its national poll rating and clearly ran an impressive ground campaign. However, nor should we overplay it, since the party lost two per cent of its vote share from the previous election, in 2021. This point was made by our national polling guru, Sir John Curtice, as he simultaneously dampened Labour's spirits and rubbed salt in the SNP's wounds (the nationalists shipped a whopping 17 per cent of its 2021 vote share, and underperformed its already diminished national polling share). In Sir John's view, clearly, Labour won the battle but Reform may justifiably feel it is winning the war. Illustrating the point, Sir John crunched some numbers based on what pollsters term 'uniform swing' – in other words, if all the parties had risen and fallen across the country by the same proportion as they did in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse, what would the outcome be? The answer? A composition of seats in the Scottish Parliament which would constitute the most explosive and chaotic result in the history of Holyrood. The SNP would win the election handsomely, but only after the loss of a quarter of its MSPs, returning 48. Reform would come a clear second, with 32 seats. In third would be Labour, down from its current 24 to 18, based on the loss of vote share despite its by-election triumph. The Tories would be next on 16, with the Greens on 10 and the Liberal Democrats on five. In order to function in an orderly way with a Parliamentary majority, a government needs at least 65 seats – 17 seats more than the SNP would have. Many might consider the Greens to be First Minister John Swinney's most natural ally, but with 10 seats they would remain well short. Even adding five from the Lib Dems, another party with whom Mr Swinney has a productive and comfortable relationship, would be insufficient. On the other side of the Parliamentary chamber sit two parties with whom the SNP would not, under any circumstances, be prepared to enter an agreement, formal or informal. With 48 seats between them, the Conservatives and Reform UK would be considered 'uncoalitionable'. Read more from Andy Maciver: That leaves Labour. With its 18 seats, together with the SNP's 48, a 66-seat government carries a majority of one in the Holyrood chamber. There is much water to flow under the bridge, and too many caveats to mention. This was a by-election, and therefore a poor predictor of behaviour at a general election. We are still nearly a year from the election, and much can, and probably will, change during that time. Moreover, the Scottish territory is, if anything, more complex than those which existed in Germany and Ireland, because of the lingering independence debate, on either side of which sit the SNP and the Labour Party. However, the most important similarity is the one which may be present; the perceived need to place a firewall around a political party considered to be beyond the pale. In a parliament composed similarly to the one we have today, a grand coalition is unthinkable. In one which includes a relatively small number of Reform MSPs it is improbable. But in a parliament of the sort extrapolated by Sir John last week, a grand coalition is neither unthinkable nor improbable. It is inevitable. Andy Maciver is Founding Director of Message Matters, and co-host of the Holyrood Sources podcast.
Scottish Sun
6 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Israel v Iran LIVE: Middle East braced for all-out war as Tehran's nuke sites hit by missiles & top generals killed
FIRE & FURY Israel v Iran LIVE: Middle East braced for all-out war as Tehran's nuke sites hit by missiles & top generals killed THE Middle East stands on the brink of all-out war after Israel unleashed a massive wave of missile strikes on Iranian soil. Israeli forces targeted Tehran's nuclear facilities and killed top military and scientific figures in a lightning offensive dubbed Operation Rising Lion. 3 Smoke rises up after an explosion in Tehran, Iran on Friday Credit: AP 3 Smoke rises from a damaged building in the aftermath of Israeli strikes Credit: Reuters 3 A building in Tehran hit in an Israeli strike on the Iranian capital early in the morning Credit: AFP In a ferocious show of force, around 200 Israeli fighter jets roared across Iranian skies early Friday, dropping 330 munitions on 100 high-value targets, including uranium enrichment plants and key command centres. The Israeli military called the blitz a 'pre-emptive, precise, combined offensive based on high-quality intelligence' and confirmed it had struck nuclear and missile sites across the country. The IDF said in a statement: 'Dozens of IAF jets completed the first stage that included strikes on dozens of military targets, including nuclear targets in different areas of Iran.' Iran has vowed "severe punishment", calling the strikes a 'cowardly' act of aggression as fears mount of a devastating counterstrike. In a fiery statement, Tehran said the assault 'shows why Iran insists on enrichment, nuclear technology, and missile power,' framing the attack as proof of its need for deterrence. A 'special state of emergency' is now in effect in Israel. Air raid sirens blared across the country in the early hours, with residents jolted awake by alerts warning of an imminent missile and drone attack. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the assault vital to "roll back the Iranian threat to Israel's very survival", vowing the campaign would last 'as many days as it takes to remove the threat.' He accused Tehran of advancing toward a nuclear weapon, claiming Iran had enriched enough uranium for 'nine atom bombs.' 'In recent months, Iran has taken steps that it has never taken before – steps to weaponize this enriched uranium,' Netanyahu said. 'This is a clear and present danger to Israel's very survival.' Explosions rocked military sites northeast of Tehran, including the Mahalati complex. Revolutionary Guard commander Hossein Salami, top nuclear scientist Fereydoun Abbasi, theoretical physicist Dr Mohammed Mehdi Tehranchi, and Major General Gholam Ali Rashid were among those killed. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei accused Israel of targeting residential areas, saying: 'In the enemy's attacks, a number of commanders and scientists were martyred. 'Their successors and colleagues will immediately continue their duties.' The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed the Natanz nuclear facility was struck and said it was in contact with Iranian officials regarding radiation concerns. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio insisted Washington was not involved, though he said 'necessary steps' were being taken to protect American personnel in the region. 'Let me be clear: Iran should not target US interests or personnel,' Rubio warned. He backed Israel's right to self-defence, saying it 'believes the strikes are necessary.' Stay up to date with the latest on Israel vs Iran with The Sun's live blog
