Russia and Ukraine to hold first peace talks in seven weeks
MOSCOW (Reuters) -Russian negotiators flew to Turkey to hold peace talks with Ukraine on Wednesday, the Kremlin said, before what will be the first direct discussions between the warring sides in more than seven weeks.
Russia played down expectations of any breakthrough at the meeting, which Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said this week should focus in part on preparing a summit between himself and President Vladimir Putin.
"Naturally, no one expects an easy road. Naturally, this will be a very difficult conversation. The projects (of the two sides) are diametrically opposed," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.
Previous talks in Istanbul on May 16 and June 2 led to the exchange of thousands of prisoners of war and the remains of dead soldiers. But those meetings lasted less than three hours in total and made no breakthrough towards a ceasefire or a settlement to end almost three and a half years of war.
U.S. President Donald Trump last week threatened heavy new sanctions on Russia and countries that buy its exports unless a peace deal was reached within 50 days.
But three sources close to the Kremlin told Reuters that Putin, unfazed by Trump's ultimatum, would keep on fighting in Ukraine until the West engaged on his terms for peace, and that his territorial demands may widen as Russian forces advance.
On Wednesday, Russia said its forces had captured the settlement of Varachyne in Ukraine's Sumy region, where Putin has ordered his troops to create a buffer zone after Ukraine mounted a shock incursion into Russia last year and held onto a chunk of its territory for months. Reuters could not independently confirm the battlefield report.
In recent weeks, Russian forces have launched some of their heaviest air attacks of the war, focusing especially on the Ukrainian capital Kyiv.
Ukraine has hit back with attacks of its own, and last month inflicted serious damage on Russia's nuclear-capable strategic bomber fleet by smuggling drones close to air bases deep inside the country.
CONFLICTING DEMANDS
Zelenskiy said earlier this week that the agenda for talks was clear: the return of prisoners of war and of children abducted by Russia, and the preparation of a meeting between himself and Putin.
Putin turned down a previous challenge from Zelenskiy to meet him in person and has said he does not see him as a legitimate leader because Ukraine, which is under martial law, did not hold new elections when Zelenskiy's five-year mandate expired last year. Russia also denies abducting children.
The Kremlin said this week it was unrealistic to expect "miracles" from the talks.
At the last meeting on June 2, Russia handed Ukraine a memorandum setting out its key demands, including: full withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from four regions of the country that Russia has claimed as its own; limits on the size of Ukraine's military; enhanced rights for Russian-speakers in Ukraine; and acceptance by Kyiv of neutral status, outside NATO or any other alliance.
Ukraine sees those terms as tantamount to surrender, and Zelenskiy described the Russian stance as an ultimatum.
Ukraine wants an immediate ceasefire, reparations, international security guarantees and no restrictions on its military strength.
(Reporting by Dmitry Antonov in Moscow and Mark Trevelyan in London; Editing by Toby Chopra)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
3 hours ago
- The Star
Analysis-World Court climate opinion turns up the legal heat on governments
THE HAGUE (Reuters) -A landmark opinion delivered by the United Nations' highest court last week that governments must protect the climate is already being cited in courtrooms, as lawyers say it strengthens the legal arguments in suits against countries and companies. The International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court, last Wednesday laid out the duty of states to limit harm from greenhouse gases and to regulate private industry. It said failure to reduce emissions could be an internationally wrongful act and, found that treaties such as the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change should be considered legally binding. While not specifically naming the United States, the court said countries that were not part of the United Nations climate treaty must still protect the climate as a matter of human rights law and customary international law. Only a day after the World Court opinion, lawyers for a windfarm distributed copies of it to the seven judges of the Irish Supreme Court on the final day of hearings ona case about whether planning permits for turbines should prioritise climate concerns over rural vistas. It is not clear when the Irish court will deliver its ruling. Lawyer Alan Roberts, for Coolglass Wind Farm, said the opinion would boost his client's argument that Ireland's climate obligations must be taken into account when considering domestic law. Although also not legally binding, the ICJ's opinion has legal weight, provided that national courts accept as a legal benchmark for their deliberations, which U.N. states typically do. The United States, where nearly two-thirds of all climate litigation cases are ongoing, is increasingly likely to be an exception as it has always been ambivalent about the significance of ICJ opinions for domestic courts. Compounding that, under U.S. President Donald Trump, the country has been tearing up all climate regulations. Not all U.S. states are sceptical about climate change, however, and lawyers said they still expected the opinion to be cited in U.S. cases. In Europe, where lawyers say the ICJ opinion is likely to have its greatest impact on upcoming climate cases, recent instances of governments respecting the court's rulings include Britain's decision late last year to reopen negotiations to return the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean to Mauritius. That followed a 2019 ICJ opinion that London should cede control. BONAIRE VERSUS THE NETHERLANDS Turning to environmental cases, in a Dutch civil case due to be heard in October - Bonaire versus The Netherlands - Greenpeace Netherlands and eight people from the Dutch territory of Bonaire, a low-lying island in the Caribbean, will argue that the Netherlands' climate plan is insufficient to protect the island against rising sea levels. The World Court said countries' national climate plans must be "stringent" and aligned to the Paris Agreement aim to limit warming to 1.5 Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) above the pre-industrial average. The court also said countries must take responsibility for a country's fair share of historical emissions. In hearings last December at the ICJ that led to last week's opinion, many wealthy countries, including Norway, Saudi Arabia, and The United States argued national climate plans were non-binding. "The court has said (...) that's not correct," said Lucy Maxwell, co-director of the Climate Litigation Network. In the Bonaire case, the Dutch government is arguing that having a climate plan is sufficient. The plaintiffs argue it would not meet the 1.5C threshold and the Netherlands must do its fair share to keep global warming below that, Louise Fournier, legal counsel for Greenpeace International, said. "This is definitely going to help there," Fourniersaid of the ICJ opinion in the Bonaire case. 'URGENT AND EXISTENTIAL THREAT' The ICJ opinion said climate change was an "urgent and existential threat," citing decades of peer-reviewed research, even as scepticism has mounted in some quarters, led by the United States. A document seen by Reuters shows the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency may question the research behind mainstream climate science and is poised to revoke its scientific determination that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health. Jonathan Martel of the U.S. law firm Arnold and Porter represents industry clients on environmental issues. He raised the prospect of possible legal challenges to the EPA's regulatory changes given that an international court has treated the science of climate change as unequivocal and settled. "This might create a further obstacle for those who would advocate against regulatory action based on scientific uncertainty regarding the existence of climate change caused by anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases," he said. The U.S. EPA changes would affect the agency's regulations on tailpipe emissions from vehicles that run on fossil fuel. Legal teams are reviewing the impact of the ruling on litigation against the companies that produce fossil fuel, as well as on the governments that regulate them. TheWorld Courtsaid that states could be held liable for the activities of private actors under their control, specifically mentioning the licensing and subsidising of fossil fuel production. Notre Affaire à Tous, a French NGO whose case against TotalEnergies is due to be heard in January 2026, expected the advisory opinion to strengthen its arguments. "This opinion will strongly reinforce our case because it mentions (...) that providing new licences to new oil and gas projects may be a constitutional and international wrongful act," said Paul Mougeolle, senior counsel for Notre Affaire à Tous. TotalEnergies did not respond to a request for comment. (Reporting by Stephanie van den Berg and Alison Withers, additional reporting by Valerie Volcovici from Washington; editing by Barbara Lewis)
Malay Mail
4 hours ago
- Malay Mail
New Zealand moves to end same-day registration, ban prisoner voting; attorney general warns of rights impact
WELLINGTON, July 29 — The New Zealand government today introduced a law that will prevent people from enrolling to vote on election day and bar prisoners from casting their ballot while in jail, in a move critics say could reduce voter participation. The proposed law, which passed its first of three readings in parliament on Tuesday, will allow people to enrol to vote only up to 13 days before an election. Currently potential voters can enrol up to and on election day. The law will also ban all prisoners from voting and require voting to open 12 days ahead of the official election day. 'This bill overhauls a number of outdated and unsustainable electoral laws. The package of amendments will strengthen the system, helping to deliver timely election results, manage the costs, clarify rules and provide more efficient services to voters,' said Minister of Justice Paul Goldsmith, who proposed the bill. However, a report by Attorney General Judith Collins concluded that the bill 'appears to be inconsistent' with the country's Bill of Rights, including the right to freedom of expression and the right to vote. The changes are, in part, prompted by delays in results at the 2023 election, when it took nearly three weeks before an official result was released due to the high number of special votes. Special votes are cast by New Zealanders living or travelling overseas, voting outside their constituency or newly enrolled. The Attorney General's report, which was released publicly on Friday, said in the last election special votes included over 97,000 people who registered for the first time during the voting period, and nearly 134,000 people who changed electoral districts during the voting period. 'This gives some indication of the number of people who may be affected,' said Collins, who is a member of the ruling party. Duncan Webb, a lawmaker from the opposition Labour Party opposing the bill, on Tuesday called it 'a dark day for democracy'. 'Politicians should be making it easier for people to vote, not harder. It's how we make sure that everybody's voice is heard, that everyone gets a say,' he said. — Reuters
The Sun
5 hours ago
- The Sun
Kazakhstan approved to export coal to EU via Russian ports
ALMATY: Kazakhstan has received approval from the European Union to export coal through Russian ports, despite ongoing sanctions against Moscow over its invasion of Ukraine. The Central Asian nation, the EU's largest trading partner in the region, relies heavily on Russian transit routes due to its landlocked geography. The Kazakh trade ministry confirmed the development, stating, 'the European side introduced amendments providing for an exception to the ban on transactions with certain Russian ports for the transit of Kazakh coal.' The EU's latest sanctions package includes this exemption, ensuring continued coal shipments from Kazakhstan, which supplied 6.5% of the bloc's imports in early 2025. The waiver applies under strict conditions: the coal must originate solely from Kazakhstan, must not be owned by sanctioned entities, and Russian ports can only serve as transit points. The European Commission had previously hinted at such an exception in March, recognizing Kazakhstan's role as the fifth-largest coal supplier to the EU. Since Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the EU has sought stronger energy ties with Kazakhstan while maintaining sanctions on Russian resources. However, Kazakhstan remains a close ally of Russia, sharing a 7,500-kilometre border. Western nations accuse Astana of facilitating sanctions evasion, a claim the Kazakh government denies. - AFP
