logo
Defence secretary warns this is 'the critical year' for Ukraine - as £450m in funding allocated

Defence secretary warns this is 'the critical year' for Ukraine - as £450m in funding allocated

Yahoo11-04-2025

The defence secretary has said that 2025 is "the critical year" for Ukraine as he confirmed £450m in funding for a military support package.
The funding includes £350m from this year's previously announced pot of £4.5bn in financial support, while the rest of the cash is being provided by Norway via the UK-led International Fund for Ukraine.
The money will fund repairs to and maintenance of UK-provided materials and equipment already given to Ukraine, as well as radar systems, anti-tank mines and hundreds of thousands of drones.
Follow the latest on the war in Ukraine here
It was announced on Friday by Defence Secretary John Healey, who is in Brussels chairing a meeting of the Ukraine Contact Group alongside his German counterpart Boris Pistorius.
The group is an alliance of about 50 countries - all 32 NATO member states, including the US, and about 20 other nations - that has been supporting Ukraine by sending military equipment there since April 2022, a few weeks after Russia launched its full-scale invasion.
Speaking at the start of the meeting of 50 nations supporting Ukraine against Russia's invasion, Mr Healey warned: "2025 is the critical year for the war in Ukraine, and this is the critical moment.
"A moment for our defence industries to step up, and they are; a moment for our militaries to step up, and they are; a moment for our governments to step up, and they are.
"Together, we are sending a signal to Russia and we are saying to Ukraine that we stand with you in the fight and we will stand with you in the peace."
'Coalition of the willing' planning continues
The meeting comes one day after the UK defence secretary and his French counterpart Sebastien Lecornu led 30 defence ministers from the "coalition of the willing" in Brussels.
The group, which does not include the US, discussed operational plans on Thursday afternoon for a multinational peacekeeping force in Ukraine.
It looked at each nation's capabilities and how they could be best used to support Ukraine's long-term defence and security as part of what the Ministry of Defence called a "reassurance force".
UK and French military chiefs discussed planning with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his military chiefs in Kyiv last weekend.
Peace negotiations are ongoing between the US and Russia, however, US officials appear to be growing increasingly impatient with the lack of progress after Donald Trump publicly suggested a month ago that Vladimir Putin wants to end the war.
Last Tuesday, the Kremlin described the latest US peace proposal as unacceptable in its current form because it does not solve the "root causes" of the conflict.
Read more:Two Chinese citizens 'fighting for Russia' captured in Ukraine
Mr Putin wants to dismantle Ukraine as an independent, functioning state and has demanded Kyiv recognise Moscow's annexation of Crimea and other partly occupied areas and pull its forces out, as well as a pledge for Ukraine to never join NATO and to demilitarise.
US secretary of state Marco Rubio said on Friday that Mr Trump is not "going to fall into the trap of endless negotiations" with Moscow.
Despite the apparent impasse in talks, the coalition of the willing is continuing with its plans for when peace is agreed.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump says he would bomb Iran again ‘without question' over uranium enrichment
Trump says he would bomb Iran again ‘without question' over uranium enrichment

Politico

time28 minutes ago

  • Politico

Trump says he would bomb Iran again ‘without question' over uranium enrichment

President Donald Trump said on Friday he would bomb Iran again 'without question' if intelligence suggests Iran continues to have the ability to enrich uranium. The president was asked by a reporter at a Friday press briefing if he would bomb Iran again if the country can enrich uranium 'to a level that concerns you,' even as he and his administration have maintained that an offensive strike by the U.S. last weekend obliterated three Iranian nuclear sites. However, questions remain over whether Iran moved their stockpile of enriched uranium prior to the strike, and whether centrifuges remain intact at nuclear sites, POLITICO reported. 'Once those bombs got dropped, the war was over,' Trump said Friday. The comments were part of an over hourlong press conference where Trump touted various 'tremendous victories' of his administration, including this week's NATO summit and several Friday Supreme Court decisions in his favor. 'We've had a big week, we've had a lot of victories this week,' Trump said. 'The war was a tremendous victory. We've been talking about this for 30 years, about Iran being nuclear, and all I said is it will not be nuclear.' Immediately after the conference, Trump took to Truth Social to condemn Ayatollah Ali Khamenei for suggesting Iran won the war. 'As a man of great faith, he is not supposed to lie,' Trump wrote. 'His Country was decimated, his three evil Nuclear Sites were OBLITERATED, and I knew EXACTLY where he was sheltered, and would not let Israel, or the U.S. Armed Forces, by far the Greatest and Most Powerful in the World, terminate his life.'

Seven Democrats vote for GOP resolution condemning LA protests
Seven Democrats vote for GOP resolution condemning LA protests

The Hill

time28 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Seven Democrats vote for GOP resolution condemning LA protests

Seven House Democrats on Friday voted in favor of a GOP-led resolution to condemn anti-immigration enforcement protests in Los Angeles, siding with Republicans on demonstrations that became a flashpoint in President Trump's immigration crackdown. The seven defectors are all moderate Democrats in swing districts. They include two California Democrats, Reps. Jim Costa and Adam Gray, who are both located in the agricultural Central Valley. Reps. Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.), Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), Donald Davis (D-N.C.), Laura Gillen (D-N.Y.), and Jared Golden (D-Maine) also voted for the resolution. Cuellar, who represents a district on the southern border, has also been notably outspoken in urging Democrats to respond to immigration issues. Gray, who won election in November by fewer than 200 votes, told The Sacramento Bee that the resolution was 'far from perfect.' 'Messaging bills like this have no real force of law and simply express the sentiments of Congress— including the sentiment included in today's resolution that Congress is grateful for the first responders and public safety officers who keep us safe day in and day out,' he said. He also condemned Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in California as 'terror-inducing.' The resolution was introduced and cosponsored by nine California Republicans representing districts across the state. It described the protests as escalating into 'violent riots' with 'acts of arson, widespread looting, property destruction, and vandalism' and condemned acts of violence against law enforcement. The resolution also castigated local leaders, including Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), for failing to control what it called the 'rapidly escalating disorder.' Protests in Los Angeles began earlier this month in response to federal immigration raids on a series of local businesses. Trump responded by calling in the National Guard, and later Marines, to the Southern California city to restore order. The mobilization prompted condemnation from Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass (D), and other local officials, who said that they had a handle on the situation. Newsom and Bass have charged that Trump's move only served to inflame protests. The Los Angeles Police Department made over 500 arrests over the course of the demonstrations, which were largely confined to a few blocks near federal buildings downtown. House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) urged her members to vote against the measure Friday morning, calling it a 'partisan resolution to score political points.'

Congo and Rwanda sign a U.S.-mediated peace deal aimed at ending decades of bloody conflict
Congo and Rwanda sign a U.S.-mediated peace deal aimed at ending decades of bloody conflict

Los Angeles Times

time30 minutes ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Congo and Rwanda sign a U.S.-mediated peace deal aimed at ending decades of bloody conflict

WASHINGTON — The Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda on Friday signed a peace deal facilitated by the U.S. to help end the decades-long deadly fighting in eastern Congo while helping the U.S. government and American companies gain access to critical minerals in the region. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called it 'an important moment after 30 years of war.' Earlier, President Trump said at a news conference that he was able to broker a deal for 'one of the worst wars anyone's ever seen.' 'I was able to get them together and sell it,' Trump said. 'And not only that, we're getting for the United States a lot of the mineral rights from the Congo.' The deal has been touted as an important step toward peace in the Central African nation of Congo, where conflict with more than 100 armed groups, the most potent backed by Rwanda, has killed millions since the 1990s. It's also at the heart of Trump's push to gain access to critical minerals needed for much of the world's technology at a time when the United States and China are actively competing for influence in Africa. Analysts see the deal as a major turning point but don't believe it will quickly end the fighting. The agreement involves provisions on territorial integrity and a prohibition of hostilities as well as the disengagement, disarmament and conditional integration of non-state armed groups. The Rwanda-backed M23 rebel group is the most prominent armed group in the conflict, and its major advance early this year left bodies on the streets. With 7 million people displaced in Congo, the United Nations has called it 'one of the most protracted, complex, serious humanitarian crises on Earth.' Congo hopes the U.S. will provide it with the security support needed to fight the rebels and possibly get them to withdraw from the key cities of Goma and Bukavu, and from the entire region where Rwanda is estimated to have up to 4,000 troops. Rwanda has said that it's defending its territorial interests and not supporting M23. M23 rebels have suggested that the agreement won't be binding on them. The rebel group hasn't been directly involved in the planned peace deal, although it has been part of other ongoing peace talks. Corneille Nangaa, leader of the Congo River Alliance — known by its French acronym AFC — which includes M23, told the Associated Press in March that direct peace talks with Congo can only be held if the country acknowledges their grievances and that 'anything regarding us which are done without us, it's against us.' An M23 spokesman, Oscar Balinda, also echoed those thoughts in an interview with the AP this week, saying the U.S.-facilitated deal doesn't concern the rebels. Rwanda has also been accused of exploiting eastern Congo's minerals, a trend analysts say might make it difficult for Rwanda not to be involved in any way in the region. Critical minerals are used in smartphones, advanced fighter jets and much more. A team of U.N. experts alleged in a December report that 'fraudulent extraction, trade and export to Rwanda of (Congo) minerals benefited both AFC/M23 and the Rwandan economy.' Rwanda has denied any involvement in Congo's minerals. The deal is also at the heart of the U.S. government's push to counter China in Africa. Chinese companies have been for many years one of the key players in Congo's minerals sector. Chinese cobalt refineries, which account for a majority of the global supply, rely heavily on Congo. Analysts say the U.S. government's commitment might depend on how much access it has to the minerals being discussed under separate negotiations between the American and Congolese governments. The mostly untapped minerals are estimated to be worth as much as $24 trillion by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Christian Moleka, a political scientist at the Congolese think tank Dypol, called the deal a 'major turning point' in the decades-long conflict, but that the signing could 'in no way eliminate all the issues of the conflict.' 'The current draft agreement ignores war crimes and justice for victims by imposing a partnership between the victim and the aggressor,' he said. 'This seems like a trigger-happy proposition and cannot establish lasting peace without justice and reparation.' In Congo's North Kivu province, the hardest hit by the fighting, some believe that the peace deal will help resolve the violence, but warn justice must still be served for an enduring peace to take hold. 'I don't think the Americans should be trusted 100%,' said Hope Muhinuka, an activist from the province. 'It is up to us to capitalize on all we have now as an opportunity.' The conflict can be traced to the aftermath of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, where Hutu militias killed between 500,000 and 1 million ethnic Tutsi, as well as moderate Hutus and Twa, Indigenous people. When Tutsi-led forces fought back, nearly 2 million Hutus crossed into Congo, fearing reprisals. Rwandan authorities have accused the Hutus who fled of participating in the genocide and alleged that elements of the Congolese army protected them. They have argued that the militias formed by a small fraction of the Hutus are a threat to Rwanda's Tutsi population. Asadu and Lee write for the Associated Press. Asadu reported from Dakar, Senegal. AP writers Ellen Knickmeyer in Washington, Edith M. Lederer at the United Nations, Justin Kabumba in Goma, Congo, and Ignatius Ssuuna in Kigali, Rwanda, contributed to this report.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store