logo
From lithium to rare earths: Europe's strategy to power its future energy

From lithium to rare earths: Europe's strategy to power its future energy

Euronews3 days ago

The European Union will extend the temporary protection granted to Ukrainian refugees until March 2027 as it paves the way for a "gradual return and sustainable reintegration" in the country once Russia's invasion comes to an end, a prospect that remains distant and precarious as Moscow stalls the negotiations promoted by the United States.
It marks the first time that Brussels presents a detailed roadmap for Ukrainians to either go home after the war or stay in the bloc on a long-term basis.
An estimated 4.3 million Ukrainians left their country and relocated across the EU in what is considered the largest refugee crisis since World War II.
"Since 2022, we have provided protection for those fleeing Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine, and we continue to do so," said Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission.
"And together with Ukraine, we pave the way for people to be able to return and rebuild their homes once it is safe."
Under the Commission's plan, unveiled on Wednesday afternoon, the bloc will continue the path charted in the early days of the war, when member states rapidly agreed to activate the Temporary Protection Directive to provide hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians fleeing Russia's war with immediate legal shelter.
The directive has the benefit of bypassing the traditionally cumbersome asylum to fast-track access to residence permits, the labour market, social welfare, medical treatment and the education system. The law asks governments to reduce formalities "to a minimum" due to the urgency of attending a "mass influx" of refugees.
With no end in sight to Russia's war, the directive has been repeatedly extended to ensure legal certainty for Ukrainians. The Commission proposes a new prolongation until 4 March 2027, which member states are certain to approve in the coming weeks.
At the same time, Brussels charts what it calls a "coordinated transition out of temporary protection" to lay the groundwork for the eventual day when the invasion ends and refugees face a real choice between staying in the bloc or going back to Ukraine.
The cessation of hostilities, however, does not automatically imply the return of all those who escaped the violence. The recent case of Syria after the fall of Bashar al-Assad demonstrates the complexity of managing a post-war reality.
Many parts of Ukraine, including entire cities and communities, have been devastated by incessant Russian bombardment. The World Bank estimates the country's recovery and reconstruction will cost €506 billion over the next decade, a colossal bill that Kyiv and its allies hope to partially offset by leveraging Russia's frozen sovereign assets.
But besides foreign donations and investment, Ukraine will need people to help rebuild its battered economy and infrastructure. According to Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernysho, who joined the Commission's presentation, an additional four million workers might be required to double the country's GDP over a 10-year period.
"It is a fact that we need more people (to come) back to Ukraine, of course, under the condition is stable and the war is over," Chernysho said.
"Only a strong economy can pave the way to the future success of Ukraine and successful integration in the European Union. That's why it's so important to us."
Mindful of the balancing act, the Commission recommends that member states prepare for two main scenarios.
On the one hand, the possibility that some Ukrainians will wish to remain in the EU countries where they have integrated themselves. This should be done through legal avenues, such as long-term residence permits, student visas and the regular migration status, to replace the ongoing temporary protection. The switch will depend on national legislation and might be done before the directive expires.
On the other hand, the possibility that some refugees will opt to go back to Ukraine. This should be done through "voluntary return programmes" – as opposed to any form of forced deportations – and "exploratory visits" to help Ukrainians travel home, meet their families and assess the circumstances on the ground.
Additionally, the new plan promotes the establishment of so-called "Unity Hubs" to inform refugees about the two options – integration and return – and foster connections among Ukrainians living abroad. The roadmap also foresees the appointment of a special envoy to oversee the transition at the political level.
The Commission insists that any movement should take place "once the necessary conditions are met" – that is, once a just and lasting peace is achieved. The temporary protection could be suspended if a deal is struck before March 2027.
"When the time comes to end temporary protection, we'll also have to be mindful of Ukraine's absorption capacity. We cannot do everything from one day to another," said Magnus Brunner, the Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration.
"We're therefore asking member states to put in place voluntary return programmes to allow a staggered and organised return to Ukraine."
Although the reception of Ukrainian refugees enjoys enduring support among member states, the question of funding has at times caused friction. Since the start of the war, the EU budget has doled out €15 billion in emergency assistance. But for some nations in Ukraine's periphery, the help has fallen short of their needs.
Last year, Germany, Poland and the Czech Republic called on Brussels to provide fresh cash to alleviate their "strained" capacities and the "uneven" burden-sharing. The three countries host about 50% of all displaced Ukrainians in the bloc.
Following a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in May, Ursula von der Leyen announced €3 billion to support Ukrainian refugees and the EU's migration reform. A further €1 billion will be allocated to the same end. Future costs will have to be addressed by the next seven-year budget, which has not yet been presented.
Geopolitical tensions and conflicts, such as those in Ukraine, made the EU realise how vulnerable it is in relying on just one or even a few countries for key resources.
As was the case with Russian gas, the same logic applies to these so-called critical materials, natural resources that are essential to the economy.
The EU now wants to be more self-sufficient, boosting its domestic raw material capacity and diversifying supply sources. But how and at what price? That's the focus of this episode of Europeans' Stories.
The European Union needs critical raw materials for its Green Deal climate neutral goals – the Digital transition, security and defence, and space and innovation industries.
The EU has identified 34 critical raw materials, including lithium, cobalt, rare earth elements and magnesium.
But many have high-risk supply chains. For example, 63% of the world's cobalt is mined in the Democratic Republic of Congo and 100% of the rare earths used for permanent magnets are refined in China.
In 2024, the EU passed the Critical Raw Materials Act to boost domestic strategic raw material capacity.
The Act says that by 2030 Europe must mine 10% of annual EU needs, process 40% and recycle 25%. No more than 65% of annual EU needs for each strategic raw material should come from a single third country.
Mining is deeply embedded in the history of the Ore Mountains, stretching along the Czech-German border. Here, tin and tungsten reserves were exploited from the Middle Ages through to the 1990s, when they became unprofitable. Today, only a museum remains, but the energy transition is opening up new possibilities.
Lithium is a crucial element for battery production, and experts estimate that between three and five percent of the world's lithium reserves can be found under the Czech town of Cínovec.
Geomet, a private company with state participation, is working to create what it says will be an environmentally friendly production chain. It's one of the 47 Strategic Projects selected by the European Commission to boost domestic strategic raw material capacity.
'We're going to mine almost 3 million tonnes of the ore per year and we will produce about 30,000 tonnes of final product per year,' says Tomáš Vrbický, a geologist who works for Geomet.
The company plans to not just mine the ore but also to produce lithium carbonate, a key ingredient used in the battery industry. It's rare for a company to finalise the whole process internally, without resorting to third countries. But there will be many challenges and it'll cost more.
By 2030 Europe aims to mine 10% of its annual needs, process 40% and recycle 25%.
Starý Jaromír, Head of Department from the Czech Geological Survey, doubts these targets could be met in such a short time.
'This objective is not realistic, because some of the European Union's critical raw materials are not found on the European continent and are not currently mined. At present it is impossible to say that some of the critical raw materials will be handled in quantities of up to 10% of European consumption.'
When asked if the need for critical raw materials is making Europe forget the pollution that comes with mining, geologist Gabriel Zbyněk from the Czech Geological Survey replied that mining methods, as well as European legislation, have progressed concerning how mining is supervised and controlled today, and adds: 'In the EU we really need these raw materials. And it's probably a little hypocritical to say we don't need any mining here, and if it's going to be mined anywhere else in the world and in a way we don't care about. Especially when it's not 'in our backyard''.
All mineral extraction involves a degree of pollution. It may not be entirely avoidable, but it can be minimised. Europe's challenge is finding the right balance between the need for a less polluting and socially fair industry, and the higher costs that this entails.
The European Commission announced the selection of 13 projects focused on critical raw materials in countries outside the EU on Wednesday.
The move is part of the implementation of the Critical Raw Materials Act, an EU law that came into force in May 2024, aimed at diversifying the sources of raw material extraction.
The projects aim to reduce dependency on single suppliers, such as China and the US.
They also seek to enhance overall economic security amid geopolitical events, including commercial tensions between the EU and China and the tariffs on steel and aluminium imposed by US President Donald Trump.
The Commission wants to develop 60 such projects before 2030, with the goal of strengthening the bloc's industrial competitiveness, particularly in sectors such as electric mobility, renewable energy, defence, and aerospace.
"Today's list of 13 Strategic Projects across the world will help to reduce Europe's dependencies, contribute to our economic security while creating growth, jobs and export opportunities in the countries concerned," EU Commissioner for industrial strategy Stéphane Séjourné said during the announcement.
These initiatives focus on both extraction and processing of key resources.
Graphite supply is being advanced through projects in Ukraine, Norway, Greenland, Madagascar, and Kazakhstan, while nickel and cobalt production is being addressed in Canada, Brazil, and Zambia.
The Jadar project in Serbia targets lithium and boron, and rare earth elements are being sourced from initiatives in Malawi and South Africa.
Additional efforts include copper extraction in Norway, tungsten mining in the United Kingdom, and nickel processing in New Caledonia.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ukraine: Kharkiv hit by massive Russian aerial attack
Ukraine: Kharkiv hit by massive Russian aerial attack

Euronews

time4 hours ago

  • Euronews

Ukraine: Kharkiv hit by massive Russian aerial attack

The US administration has appointed Lt. Gen. Alexus G. Grynkewich as both the next top US general in Europe as well as the SACEUR. The appointment by Trump will be especially welcomed following media reports in recent months that the US was considering relinquishing the role of SACUER which has always been appointed by a US president to NATO. "It's a very important decision and there is relief from NATO's point of view as it's a positive sign of American engagement and staffing," a US-based source familiar with the issue told Euronews. US Army General Dwight D. Eisenhower was NATO's first SACEUR in 1951, and the role has remained with the US ever since. 'Upon completion of national confirmation processes, Grynkewich will take up his appointment as the successor to General Christopher G. Cavoli, United States Army, at a change of command ceremony at the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe in Mons, Belgium, expected in the summer of 2025,' a statement from NATO read. Meanwhile, NATO defence ministers agreed to a significant surge in defence capability targets for each country, as well as moving to spending 5% of GDP on defence. They've agreed that 3.5% of GDP would be used for 'core defence spending' - such as heavy weapons, tanks, air defence. Meanwhile 1.5% of GDP per year will be spent on defence- and security-related areas such as infrastructure, surveillance, and cyber. However, the full list of flexibility has not yet been negotiated. 'These targets describe exactly what capabilities Allies need to invest in over the coming years,' NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte told journalists. The US has been pushing NATO allies to dramatically increase spending, and expects to see 'credible progress' immediately, according to US Ambassador to NATO Mathew Whitaker. 'The threats facing NATO are growing and our adversaries are certainly not waiting for us to re-arm or be ready for them to make the first move," 'We would prefer our Allies move out urgently on reaching the 5%,' he told journalists in a briefing on the margins of the meetings. Ambassador Whitaker also said the US is 'counting on Europe' to the lead in providing Ukraine with the 'resources necessary to reach a durable peace' on the continent. Mark Rutte reiterated NATO's recent warnings that Russia could strike NATO territory within the next couple of years. 'If we don't act now, the next three years, we are fine, but we have to start now, because otherwise, from three, four or five years from now, we are really under threat," he said, adding: "I really mean this. Then you have to get your Russian language course out, or go to New Zealand.' 'It's good to have continuity about the US in NATO, but with Ukraine it's a different story. I just don't think Trump really cares about Ukraine," the US-based source told Euronews. 'Trump just doesn't care about Europe – it doesn't make him richer or help him politically,' the source said. Referring to the forthcoming NATO summit taking place next month in The Hague, the source said the presence of Ukraine at the summit "will likely be scaled back", since the US will say, "they're not members' so they don't need to be there". A large Russian attack with drones and missiles has hit Ukraine's eastern city of Kharkiv on Saturday, killing at least three people and injuring 21, local officials said. The barrage — the latest in near daily widescale attacks — included aerial glide bombs that have become part of a fierce Russian onslaught in the three-year-war . The intensity of the Russian attacks on Ukraine over the past weeks has further dampened hopes that the warring sides could reach a peace deal anytime soon — especially after Kyiv recently embarrassed the Kremlin with a surprise drone attack on military air bases deep inside Russia. According to Ukraine's Air Force, Russia struck with 215 missiles and drones overnight, and Ukrainian air defenses shot down and neutralised 87 drones and seven missiles. Several other areas in Ukraine were also hit, including the regions of Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk, Odesa, and the city of Ternopil, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said in a post on X. 'To put an end to Russia's killing and destruction, more pressure on Moscow is required, as are more steps to strengthen Ukraine,' he said. Kharkiv's mayor Ihor Terekhov said the attack also damaged 18 apartment buildings and 13 private homes. Terekhov said it was 'the most powerful attack' on the city since the full-scale invasion in 2022. Kharkiv's regional governor Oleh Syniehubov said two districts in the city were struck with three missiles, five aerial glide bombs and 48 drones. Among the injured were two children, a month and a half year old baby boy and a 14-year old girl, he added. The attack on Kharkiv comes one day after Russia launched one of the fiercest missile and drone barrages on Ukraine, striking six Ukrainian territories and killing at least killing at least six people and injuring about 80. Among the dead were three emergency responders in Kyiv, one person in Lutsk and two people in Chernihiv. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Air Force said it shot down a Russian Su-35 fighter jet on the Kursk front inside Russia, the Ukrainian daily Ukrainskaia Pravda reported. No more details were given immediately. U.S. President Donald Trump said this week that his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, told him Moscow would respond to Ukraine's attack on Russian military airfields last Sunday with "Operation Spiderweb" In a new statement bound to cause offense in Kyiv and amongst its allies, Trump told journalists on board Air Force One on Friday evening local time when asked about "Operation Spiderweb": "They gave Putin a reason to go in and bomb the hell out of them last night. That's the thing I didn't like about it. When I saw it I said 'Here we go, now it's going to be a strike'." The European Union is readying a new round of sanctions against Russia to pile extra pressure on the Kremlin and pressure it to agree to a 30-day unconditional ceasefire in Ukraine, a step that Western allies consider indispensable for serious peace negotiations. Ursula von der Leyen has already provided an outline of what that package, the 18th since February 2022, is supposed to target: Russia's financial sector, the "shadow fleet" and the Nord Stream pipelines, which are currently non-operational. On top of that, the president of the European Commission has pitched a downward revision of the price cap on Russian oil to further squeeze profits from worldwide sales, a crucial cash flow to sustain the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. "We need a real ceasefire, we need Russia at the negotiating table, and we need to end this war. Pressure works, as the Kremlin understands nothing else," von der Leyen said earlier this week after meeting with US Senator Lindsey Graham. But there's a catch: unlike other sanctions the bloc has imposed on Russia, such as the multiple export and import bans, the price cap has a political and practical dimension that exceeds the institutional sphere of Brussels and stretches across the ocean. More specifically, to Washington, DC. The price cap on Russian oil was introduced in December 2022 by the Group of Seven (G7) under the initiative of the Joe Biden administration. It was hailed as an ingenious, ground-breaking mechanism to mobilise the collective power of Western allies and cripple Russia's high-intensity war machine. As part of the plan, the G7, together with Australia, passed laws prohibiting their domestic companies from providing services, such as insurance, financing and flagging, to Russian tankers that sold seaborne crude oil above a predetermined price. The secret lay in market power: for decades, Western firms, particularly British ones, have dominated the sector of Protection and Indemnity (P&I), a type of insurance that gives shipowners broad protection and allows them to cover potentially huge costs from any accidental harm caused to the crew, their property or the environment. Due to the inherent risks of moving oil in high waters, P&I is today considered the norm in maritime trade and a must-have to be accepted in a foreign port. By leveraging their leading firms, the G7 intended to create an extraterritorial effect that would cap the price of Russian oil not only within their jurisdictions but all around the world. Following intense behind-the-scenes talks, the cap was set at $60 per barrel, a compromise between hard-line and cautious member states. The strategy only worked up to a point however. Although the price of Russian Urals oil gradually decreased, it consistently remained above the $60 mark, often exceeding the $70 threshold. The blatant circumvention was attributed to the "shadow fleet" that Russia deployed at high sea. These tankers are so old and poorly kept that they fall outside P&I standards and rely on alternative, obscure insurance systems that escape G7 surveillance. By the time the cap entered into force, Moscow "had spent months building a 'shadow fleet' of tankers, finding new buyers like India and China, and creating new payment systems, to the point that its oil does not need to be greatly discounted to sell," Luis Caricano, a professor at the London School of Economics, wrote in a recent analysis. "What should have been a blow became a manageable problem," Caricano said. With few sectors in the Russian economy left to sanction, Brussels has turned its sight to the cap as a means to tighten the screws on the Kremlin and secure a ceasefire in Ukraine. The Commission has reportedly pitched a revision between $50 and $45 per barrel, which the UK and Canada are believed to support. However, the US has so far refrained from endorsing a lower price cap, raising the stakes ahead of crunch talks at the G7 summit in Alberta, scheduled for mid-June. Now, a tough question emerges: Can the EU dare, and afford, to go it alone? In the strictest legalistic sense, the EU could, indeed, establish a lower price cap on its own. After all, the G7, as an organisation, lacks regulatory powers: each ally amends its laws individually to fulfil a collective mission. In this case, the EU introduced new legislation to prohibit EU companies – rather than, say, American or British companies – from servicing Russian tankers that bypassed the $60-per-barrel cap. Similarly, the bloc could now change the text to adjust that prohibition to a tighter price without waiting for other allies to reciprocate. Here appears the first roadblock: any change to sanctions must be approved by a unanimous vote among member states. It is highly unlikely that all 27 countries would choose to move forward with a lower cap without having an explicit guarantee that Washington will follow suit. Hungary, in particular, has fully aligned itself with the Trump administration and could veto any proposal opposed by the White House. Even if the bloc managed to overcome internal differences and agreed to a lower cap on its own, more formidable obstacles could impede its success. The bloc's revised cap would have to co-exist with America's existing cap. This means that one side of the Atlantic Ocean would apply a $50-per-barrel limit while the other side would apply a $60-per-barrel limit, creating a cacophony for all actors involved. "Different price caps across G7 countries could confuse maritime service providers and weaken overall enforcement," Petras Katinas, an energy analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), told Euronews. "A solo move by the EU could cause friction within the Price Cap Coalition, damaging trust and coordination, both of which are crucial for keeping pressure on Russian oil revenues," Katinas added, warning the project could be rendered "largely symbolic". The legislative chaos would immediately benefit the Kremlin, which has long sought to exploit loopholes to evade and undermine international sanctions. Moscow, though, would also face hurdles: the continued crackdown on "shadow fleet" vessels has forced the country to increase its reliance on G7 insurance, which, in theory, could make it easier for the EU to apply the revised measure. "If the EU alone decides to tighten the screws on the cap, it's an additional constraint on Russia's oil exports but not as tight as with a whole of G7 approach," said Elisabetta Cornago, a senior researcher at the Centre for European Reform (CER). Besides practical snags and legal matters, there is geopolitics to consider. One of the reasons why the G7 initiative has fallen short of expectations is that, as the name suggests, it has remained a G7-exclusive plan. Countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa have refused to play along and join the coalition. China and India openly buy Russian crude oil, sometimes to refine it and resell it under a different label. Having the EU and the US go separate ways would further destabilise the Western alliance and create the impression of a transatlantic break-up. But for many, that is already a reality: the "Coalition of the Willing", born after Donald Trump unilaterally launched negotiations with Vladimir Putin, bears testament to the political divide. "The price cap was a G7 + EU initiative, and so in its current form, I do not see any pathway in which the EU could adjust the cap without the support of the broader coalition, including the US," said Ben McWilliams, an affiliate fellow with Bruegel. "That said, the EU is free to implement whatever measures it wants on its own domestic ships and insurance companies, which it could likely encourage the UK to join," McWilliams added. "So the EU can still move ahead – it would just need to be under a different institutional format than currently exists."

European Commission goes on the offensive against NGO accusations
European Commission goes on the offensive against NGO accusations

Euronews

time5 hours ago

  • Euronews

European Commission goes on the offensive against NGO accusations

The European commission on Saturday denied German media reports that it had signed 'secret contracts' with environmental NGOs to promote the bloc's climate policy. 'Contrary to media allegations, there are no secret contracts between the European Commission and NGOs,' a commission spokesperson told Euronews. 'The Commission exercises a high degree of transparency when it comes to providing funding to NGOs. The commission's denial comes after German newspaper Welt Am Sonntag claimed that the EU's Executive arm had allegedly secretly paid environmental NGOs up to €700,000 to promote the bloc's climate policy. The paper said it got hold of 'secret contracts' from 2022, which involved well-known NGOs like 'ClientEarth,' and 'Friends of the Earth.' In the Welt Am Sonntag claims, the former allegedly 'received €350,000 'and was supposed to 'entangle German coal-fired power plants in court cases in order to increase the operators' financial and legal risk,' the paper said. The paper also reported that EC officials commissioned the latter to fight against the Mercosur free trade agreement between Europe and South America – 'even though colleagues in their own house were pushing it forward at the same time,' the paper reported. In its statement to Euronews on Saturday, the European Commission underlined that 'NGOs play a crucial role in shaping, monitoring, and enforcing legislation. NGOs also remain fully autonomous and free to establish their own views on all policy matters.' The German report comes at a time when the issue of NGO funding has become an extremely divisive political issue in Brussels. The conservative European People's Party (EPP) has claimed that the Commission instructed NGOs to lobby members of the parliament to further specific policies within the Green Deal, a central political agenda of president Ursula von der Leyen's first term between 2019 and 2024. MEP Monika Hohlmeier (Germany/EPP), told Euronews back in January that her concerns were raised when she examined some 30 funding contracts from 2022 and 2023, as part of the parliament's annual scrutiny of EU budget spending. In January, Budget Commissioner Piotr Serafin conceded that some financing from the EU's €5.4 billion environmental programme LIFE may have been inappropriate. 'I have to admit that it was inappropriate for some services in the Commission to enter into agreements that oblige NGOs to lobby members of the European Parliament specifically,' he said. But he also defended the role of NGOs in EU policy making. In April, the European Court of Auditors (ECA) also concluded following a lengthy probe that the Commission's funding of NGOs was 'opaque' and exposed the executive to 'reputational risk.' But the court did not find any breach of EU values from NGOs. To overcome ambiguities, the European Commission issued clear guidance last year to streamline how it provides funding to NGOs. On Saturday, the commission spokesperson told Euronews that EU funding to NGOs was provided 'based on grant agreements, which are complemented by work programmes whose preparation falls under the responsibility of NGOs.' 'As per the guidance, the Commission has instructed its services not to sign off on work programmes if those contain overly specific activities directed at EU institutions or their representatives,' the EC statement added. The institution will take 'further measures,' the spokesperson said, to strengthen transparency and include appropriate safeguards. 'We have been working closely with the European Parliament and the European Court of Auditors to improve this transparency even further. Information on recipients of EU funding, including the names of recipients and amounts, is publicly available on the Commission´s Financial Transparency System website,' the statement said. Argentine President Javier Milei has met with Pope Leo XIV in the Vatican on Saturday, where they discussed the importance of urgent efforts towards achieving peace. The Pope and Milei also spoke about bilateral relations, as well as "matters of common interest, such as social-economic progress, the fight against poverty, and the commitment to social cohesion," a statement by the Holy See Press Office noted. After his meeting with the pope, the Argentine President met with the Vatican Secretary of State cardinal Pietro Parolin, accompanied by the Under-Secretary for Relations with States, Reverend Msgr. Mirosław Wachowski. Milei arrived in Rome on Friday, the first stop of his 10-day European tour, where he attended the signing of a natural gas export deal, local media reported. The event was also attended by Italy's Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who hosted the Argentine president for a private dinner afterwards. Shortly after his meeting with Pope Leo XIV, Milei departed for Spain, to attend the Madrid Economic Forum. After Spain, the Argentine president will also visit France, and will end his trip in Israel, where he will receive an award in recognition of his support of Israel in a ceremony at the Knesset on 11 June.

Russia, Ukraine trade accusations over delaying POW swap
Russia, Ukraine trade accusations over delaying POW swap

LeMonde

time6 hours ago

  • LeMonde

Russia, Ukraine trade accusations over delaying POW swap

A large-scale prisoner exchange between Russia and Ukraine – the only concrete outcome of peace talks – was in doubt Saturday, June 7 after Moscow and Kyiv accused each other of delaying and thwarting the swap. The hold-up to an exchange that both sides said would take place this weekend came hours Moscow's army launched a barrage of missiles, drones and bombs across Ukraine. At talks in Istanbul on Monday, Kyiv and Moscow agreed to release all wounded soldiers and those aged under-25 that had been captured – more than 1,000 people on each side. Russia said it would also hand back 6,000 killed Ukrainian soldiers. Moscow on Saturday accused Ukraine of not turning up to collect the dead bodies and not agreeing on a date to swap the captured soldiers, while Kyiv said Russia was playing "dirty games" by not sticking to the agreed parameters for the exchange. "The Ukrainian side has unexpectedly postponed for an indefinite period, both the acceptance of the bodies and the exchange of prisoners of war," Russia's top negotiator Vladimir Medinsky said on social media. A defense ministry spokesperson said "the Ukrainian side is still refraining from setting a date" for the first stage of the POW swap. 'Dirty games' The exchange was set to be the largest of the war, topping last month's 1,000-for-1,000 swap that was agreed at a first round of talks in Istanbul. After the Istanbul talks, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said it would take place this weekend, while Russia said it was ready for Saturday, Sunday or Monday. Responding to Russia's accusations, Ukraine's Coordination Headquarters for the Treatment of Prisoners of War said no date had been agreed for the return of bodies. It also said a list of names Russia said would be released did not match the terms of the agreement. "Unfortunately, instead of constructive dialogue, we are again faced with manipulations," it said in a statement on social media. "We call on the Russian side to stop playing dirty games and return to constructive work to bring people back to both sides and to clearly implement the agreement in the coming days," it added. The spat came hours after Russia launched a massive aerial attack across Ukraine, heavily targeting the city of Kharkiv. At least eight people were killed in the overnight barrage and frontline shelling in total, officials said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store