No Ukraine Cease-Fire From Putin
Mr. Trump was full of praise for Mr. Putin and said the two 'made some great progress today,' though 'we didn't get there' to an agreement. He offered no details about the 'progress' and announced no end to hostilities. He said they agreed on many things but not on the biggest areas, which presumably means a cease-fire and any compromises on Mr. Putin's war aims.
There will be some cautionary relief in Europe that Mr. Trump didn't announce a deal with Mr. Putin that he would present to them as a fait accompli. Instead Mr. Trump said he would call European allies and Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky to brief them on what happened in Alaska. There's no deal, he said, until there's a final deal, which suggests he is at least listening to what Ukraine needs to feel secure if an armistice is reached.
Mr. Putin for his part gave nothing away on Ukraine. He offered his familiar line that the 'root causes' of the war must be addressed before it can end. By this he means blaming Ukraine for wanting to determine its own future as part of the European Union with security help from NATO countries.
It was notable that Mr. Putin spent most of his soliloquy in front of the press flattering Mr. Trump, endorsing the U.S. President's view that the war would never have happened if Mr. Trump had been in office in 2022, and extolling the possibilities for U.S.-Russia business ties. With his economy struggling, Mr. Putin wants financial relief.
In that sense the Russian achieved one of his major goals from the summit, which is the start of his rehabilitation as a world leader. The summit ended his isolation from the West, and he gave up nothing for it. He also appears to have gained more time to continue bombing Ukrainian cities and slowly taking more territory.
It isn't clear what Mr. Trump gained. He had told the press that he would be angry if no cease-fire emerged from the parley, but Mr. Trump showed no pique afterward. Perhaps there was some quiet concession Mr. Trump will take back to Ukraine, and if so we will know that soon enough.
If there was nothing but niceties and a Putin stonewall, then Mr. Trump will have to decide if he will follow through on the red lines he has drawn. On Wednesday he had promised 'very severe consequences' if Mr. Putin didn't agree to end the war. Will he now move to impose sanctions on such buyers of Russian oil as China and Turkey as he has India? Or will he agree to a second summit, as Mr. Putin seems to want, in hope that next time will be different?
Mr. Trump's desire to be a peacemaker is laudable, but in Vladimir Putin he is dealing with a hard man who has his eyes fixed on conquering Ukraine sooner or later. Mr. Putin will only bend from that goal if he sees a unified West determined to deny him that victory and willing to impose severe costs if he continues his march of death in Ukraine.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
15 minutes ago
- NDTV
Trump-Zelensky Meet Tomorrow, Europe Plans A Backup To Help Ukraine
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky may not be alone when he reaches Washington on Monday for his meeting with US President Donald Trump, amid global efforts towards bringing an end to the three-year-long Russia-Ukraine war. The Zelensky-Trump meeting follows the US President's Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which was billed as historic by both leaders but failed to come up with any immediate solution to the war. In contrast, this would be Zelensky's first visit to the US since February, when the two leaders had an ugly showdown, with Trump accusing him of being "disrespectful". To save Zelensky from being ambushed by Trump like last time, European leaders are reportedly planning to send a representative to accompany the Ukrainian leader. Finnish President Alexander Stubb or NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte could accompany him, reported Politico. Both Stubb and Rutte maintain a rapport with Trump and act as diplomatic buffers. The idea behind sending one of them, the report said, is to prevent any showdown between Trump and Zelensky and ensure Europe is not left out in their further discussions on Ukraine. European leaders are on edge after Trump's warm reception for Putin in Alaska and are now worried that Zelensky might face a tougher, colder welcome at the White House. Besides, memories of their tense March encounter still linger, and European leaders fear Trump may once again ambush Zelensky with demands for territorial concessions. In Monday's meeting, both Europe and Ukraine would try to ensure that Trump does not agree to Putin's demands, including the accession of any Ukrainian territory. According to a source who spoke to AFP, Trump already backs a Russian proposal for Moscow to seize control of two Ukrainian regions, besides freezing the front line in two other places where Moscow holds only partial control. Reports suggest Trump has informed Zelensky of Russia's proposal to freeze most of the frontlines if he ceded all of Donetsk, but the Ukrainian leader rejected the demand. Following his "very productive" meeting with Putin last Friday, Trump has said that the onus now lies on Zelensky to secure a peace deal. Trump has also reportedly sought a three-way meeting with Putin and Zelensky, but Moscow hasn't publicly committed to any such summit yet.
The Wire
15 minutes ago
- The Wire
Gandhi's Religion and the RSS
As people like Ram Madhav speak half-truths, let's recall the fundamental difference between Gandhi's Hinduism and the RSS's Hindutva. A half-truth is as bad as a lie, perhaps worse, because it helps the propagandist weave a false narrative that looks like the truth. We have over the past few years seen how half-truths are used as raw material to wrap lies in the tempting colours of legitimacy. Ram Madhav, a more refined Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) ideologue than the typical apologists, said this Independence Day that Mahatma Gandhi's concept of 'Ram Rajya' was abandoned in favour of Jawaharlal Nehru's European vision of a modern nation-state. Unlike other propagandists, Madhav sugar-coated the message, saying, 'Gandhi wanted independent India to be a Ram Rajya, which was the true democracy for him. Writing in Young Indian in 1929, he explained, 'By Ram Rajya I do not mean Hindu Raj. I mean Ram Raj, the kingdom of God … I acknowledge no other God than the one God of Truth and righteousness. Whether Ram of my imagination ever lived on this earth, the ancient ideal of the Ramayana is undoubtedly one of true democracy in which the meanest citizen could be sure of swift justice without an elaborate and costly procedure.' Madhav argued that Nehru gave up these ideals and what we got in place of a 'resurgent nation' is Nehru's ambition of a 'nation in the making'. He concluded his article by saying, 'A decade of Modi has seen efforts at building Atmanirbhar Bharat … a self-confident, self-respecting and self-made Bharat, true self-rule.' Therein lies the rub; and the bane of half-truth. 'A regime where the meanest citizen could be sure of swift justice…' Where did the RSS see this sacred principle of democracy under the Modi-Shah duopoly? 'Truth and righteousness…' Ram Madhav, are you serious? Gandhi said truth is the sovereign principle. Please don't take Gandhi's name while extolling lesser mortals. Gandhi could take bullets on his chest but could not digest lies. Let's not drift into the discourse about the kind of politics that was responsible for the birth of his assassin. Let's not debate today what Gandhi would have done in the face of vicious divisive politics. But let's remind ourselves of the fundamental difference between Gandhi's Hinduism and the RSS's Hindutva. Gandhi said, 'Nothing in the religious scriptures which is manifestly contrary to universal truths and morals can stand.' When asked about the flaws and infirmities in religious doctrines, he unambiguously declared, 'All that is printed in the name of scriptures need not be taken as the word of God or the inspired word.' What's the message? That a bigoted mind is not allowed to discuss Gandhi! Muddled narratives Can the biggest democratic nation be afraid of the weak and vulnerable individuals who seek refuge in other countries for survival? Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced from the ramparts of the Red Fort on Independence Day that India was facing a sinister conspiracy to change the country's demography. He described it as 'a serious concern and a challenge' and said, ' Ek naye sankat ke beej boye ja rahe hain ('Seeds of a new crisis are being sown').' How can a nation aspiring to be ' Vishwaguru ' express fears of infiltrators on such an important occasion as its Independence Day? Are we so fragile that the prime minister, not a sub-inspector, is so worried about the ghuspaithiya? What's new about infiltrators? This has been the Sangh parivar 's plank for decades. What's new is that the problem has apparently become so big in this regime that the prime minister is alerting the nation to the lurking peril of demographic change. If the menace has indeed acquired dreadful proportions, the first logical step is to sack defence minister Rajnath Singh and home minister Amit Shah. These two ministers have obviously failed. What a slide! Shah used to tell people and parliament that 'Aliya, Maliya and Jamaliya' crossed India's border at will and beheaded our citizens during the Manmohan Singh regime. Now, he boasted, no such ghuspaithiya dared to enter Indian territory. The reality is entirely different. The ghuspaithiya are giving nightmares to the Vishwaguru. The prime minister himself said infiltrators are posing a huge threat to our women and snatching jobs from our youth. What sissies! China must be chuckling to itself. Tharoor, a mirage A simplistic analysis of an enigma like Shashi Tharoor will always lead political observers to the wrong conclusions. While many in the Congress view his political stance with deep suspicion, some in the BJP look at it with hope. The intellectually challenged TV anchors have already started seeing him as a Modi bhakt. But Tharoor is too much of a Nehruvian to digest the Sangh parivar worldview. It is difficult to accept that he is itching to join the Modi government. That's simplistic. What Tharoor might be doing is to carve out an image of himself as a statesman who is not a blind follower of any leader and is not bound by lesser principles such as party discipline. His political and intellectual acrobatics are designed to create a higher pedestal for himself, not for an ideological crossover. Tharoor is neither a Jyotiraditya Scindia, a power-hungry elite, nor an M.J. Akbar, an opportunist who sullied his ideology. But the flamboyant MP from Kerala likes to play his cards with absolute freedom, in the process deepening the confusion about his motives. On August 16, the day of Janamashtami, he posted videos explaining the attributes of a true leader. When he says a true leader should be able to assess the real potential of his team members and empower them, a simplistic analysis will suggest he is taking a jibe at Rahul Gandhi. But he also says in the same message that a true leader must possess moral strength, personal integrity and the capacity to deliver justice. Praise for Modi? Certainly not. He is obviously trying to push for greater space within the Congress, not aspiring to nestle into Modi's lap. A day before, on August 15, he delivered a message for Independence Day, possibly presuming that the nation was eagerly waiting for his guidance. Tharoor's problem is his overweening ambition, not instincts of betrayal. He explained what freedom means today; stressing on the vitality of the liberty to think, speak, dissent and imagine. He sought dignity for every citizen, irrespective of caste, religion and region. He also talked of equality, pluralism and fraternity. These are binding commitments, he insisted. That will certainly leave the Sangh parivar's ears burning. Rubbing the message in, Tharoor contended that independence is more than national pride and India should be a leader not only in ambition, but in conscience as well. The context was clear: Modi's apathy on genocide in Gaza. Patriotism is not conformity, he thundered, sending out a clear message that he can't transform into a mute follower of any autocratic boss. Long ago, in one of his books, India, Tharoor had said, 'The singular thing about India is that you can only speak of it in the plural.' Rejecting the anti-minority philosophy of the Sangh parivar, he wrote, 'An India that denies itself to some Indians could end up being denied to all Indians.' Modi-Shah don't live in an ivory tower. They would know Tharoor inside out. But what's the problem in fishing in troubled waters? A Congress leader whose fierce ambitions make the top leadership uncomfortable should have enough fuel to stay afloat. Isn't an enemy's enemy a friend? Sanjay K. Jha is a political commentator. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments. Advertisement
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
15 minutes ago
- First Post
'Stop the killing': Zelensky says Putin ‘complicating the situation' by refusing ceasefire as Trump pushes for deal
Zelensky on Saturday accused Russia of obstructing peace efforts by rejecting calls for a ceasefire, saying President Vladimir Putin was 'complicating the situation." Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelenskyy said he told Donald Trump and European leaders that the Vladimir Putin doesn't "want peace" Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Saturday accused Russia of blocking peace efforts by refusing to agree to a ceasefire, more than three years into the war, saying Russian President Vladimir Putin is 'complicating the situation.' 'We see that Russia rebuffs numerous calls for a ceasefire and has not yet determined when it will stop the killing. This complicates the situation,' Zelensky wrote in a post on X. Slamming Moscow for lacking 'the will to carry out a simple order to stop the strikes,' he added, 'it may take a lot of effort to get Russia to have the will to implement far greater — peaceful coexistence with its neighbours for decades.' He stressed that 'Stopping the killing is a key element of stopping the war.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD His remarks were accompanied by a joint document from the leaders of eight Nordic-Baltic nations — Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, and Sweden — reaffirming their support for Kyiv and backing US President Donald Trump's mediation efforts. 'We welcome President Trump's statement that the U.S. is prepared to participate in security guarantees. No limitations should be placed on Ukraine's armed forces or on its cooperation with other countries,' the statement said. Zelensky's Washington visit Zelensky confirmed he will meet President Trump on Monday (Aug 18), calling it an important opportunity to clarify 'all the details and determine which steps are necessary and will work.' The announcement followed Trump's summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Anchorage, Alaska, on Friday (Aug 15). Despite the high stakes, the three-hour meeting failed to secure a ceasefire. At a press conference afterwards, Trump summed it up bluntly: 'No deal until there's a deal.' Although the summit ended without an agreement, both leaders described their talks as 'very productive.' Their joint press conference concluded without taking questions from reporters.
