Putin sends Salisbury poisoning spy chief to negotiations while tyrant avoids Zelensky as ceasefire talks begin TODAY
The Russian despot has refused to come to the negotiating table in person as he continues to avoid Volodymyr Zelensky in order to keep up his brutal conflict.
2
2
Putin's latest stunt saw him ignore calls from Zelensky and Donald Trump to personally attend this weeks round of negotiations in Turkey.
Zelensky is said to be in Istanbul for the negotiations but Trump will not attend despite him suggesting he could come.
The list of the Russian delegation taking part was released by the Kremlin last night - with Putin's name a glaring omission.
Instead, GRU military intelligence chief Igor Kostyukov is set to help with the talks for the Kremlin.
Kostyukov has a twisted past after he was sanctioned by Britain and the EU over his team's bid to kill former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Wiltshire as part of the infamous Salisbury attack.
The nerve agent strike was carried out when Kostyukov was deputy head of the GRU.
He was promoted by Putin to a top spy chief shortly afterwards.
Putin's negotiators will also see Vladimir Medinsky, a West-hating aide who denies Ukraine even exists, take part.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
It's been a confusing week - and Trump's been made to look weak
It's been a confusing week. The Monday gathering of European leaders and Ukraine's president with Donald Trump at the White House was highly significant. The leaders went home buoyed in the knowledge that they'd finally convinced the American president not to abandon Europe, and he had committed to provide American "security guarantees" to Ukraine. 0:49 The details were sketchy, and sketched out only a little more through the week - we got some noise about American air cover - but regardless, the presidential commitment represented a clear shift from months of isolationist rhetoric on Ukraine - "it's Europe's problem" and all the rest of it. Yet it was always the case that, beyond that clear achievement for the Europeans, Russia would have a problem with it. Trump's envoy's language last weekend - claiming that Putin had agreed to Europe providing "Article 5-like" guarantees for Ukraine, essentially providing it with a NATO-like collective security blanket - was baffling. 0:50 Russia gives two fingers to the president And throughout this week, Russia's foreign minister Sergei Lavrov has repeatedly and predictably undermined the whole thing, pointing out that Russia would never accept any peace plan that involved any European or NATO troops in Ukraine. "The presence of foreign troops in Ukraine is completely unacceptable for Russia," he said yesterday, echoing similar statements stretching back years. Remember that NATO's "eastern encroachment" was the justification for Russia's "special military operation" - the invasion of Ukraine - in the first place. All this makes Trump look rather weak. It's two fingers to the president, though interestingly, the Russian language has been carefully calibrated not to poke Trump but to mock European leaders instead. That's telling. 4:02 The bilateral meeting hailed by Trump on Monday as agreed and close - "within two weeks" - looks decidedly doubtful. Maybe that's why he went along with Putin's suggestion that there be a bilateral, not including Trump, first. It's easier for the American president to blame someone else if it's not his meeting, and it doesn't happen. NATO defence chiefs met on Wednesday to discuss the details of how the security guarantees - the ones Russia won't accept - will work. European sources at the meeting have told me it was all a great success. And to the comments by Lavrov, a source said: "It's not up to Lavrov to decide on security guarantees. Not up to the one doing the threatening to decide how to deter that threat!" The argument goes that it's not realistic for Russia to say from which countries Ukraine can and cannot host troops. 5:57 Would Trump threaten force? The problem is that if Europe and the White House want Russia to sign up to some sort of peace deal, then it would require agreement from all sides on the security arrangements. The other way to get Russia to heel would be with an overwhelming threat of force. Something from Trump, like: "Vladimir - look what I did to Iran...". But, of course, Iran isn't a nuclear power. Something else bothers me about all this. The core concept of a "security guarantee" is an ironclad obligation to defend Ukraine into the future. Future guarantees would require treaties, not just a loose promise. I don't see Trump's America truly signing up to anything that obliges them to do anything. A layered security guarantee which builds over time is an option, but from a Kremlin perspective, would probably only end up being a repeat of history and allow them another "justification" to push back. Image and reality don't seem to match Among Trump's stream of social media posts this week was an image of him waving his finger at Putin in Alaska. It was one of the few non-effusive images from the summit. He posted it next to an image of former president Richard Nixon confronting Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev - an image that came to reflect American dominance over the Soviet Union. That may be the image Trump wants to portray. But the events of the past week suggest image and reality just don't match. The past 24 hours in Ukraine have been among the most violent to date.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
4chan will refuse to pay daily UK fines, its lawyer tells BBC
A lawyer representing the online message board 4chan says it won't pay a proposed fine by the UK's media regulator as it enforces the Online Safety to Preston Byrne, managing partner of law firm Byrne & Storm, Ofcom has provisionally decided to impose a £20,000 fine "with daily penalties thereafter" for as long as the site fails to comply with its request."Ofcom's notices create no legal obligations in the United States," he told the BBC, adding he believed the regulator's investigation was part of an "illegal campaign of harassment" against US tech has declined to comment while its investigation continues. "4chan has broken no laws in the United States - my client will not pay any penalty," Mr Byrne began investigating 4chan over whether it was complying with its obligations under the UK's Online Safety in August, it said it had issued 4chan with "a provisional notice of contravention" for failing to comply with two requests for said its investigation would examine whether the message board was complying with the act, including requirements to protect its users from illegal content.4chan has often been at the heart of online controversies in its 22 years, including misogynistic campaigns and conspiracy are anonymous, which can often lead to extreme content being posted. 'First Amendment rights' In a statement posted on X, law firms Byrne & Storm and Coleman Law said 4chan was a US company incorporated in the US, and therefore protected against the UK law."American businesses do not surrender their First Amendment rights because a foreign bureaucrat sends them an email," they wrote."Under settled principles of US law, American courts will not enforce foreign penal fines or censorship codes. "If necessary, we will seek appropriate relief in US federal court to confirm these principles."They said authorities in the US had been "briefed" on their response to Ofcom's statement concludes by calling on the Trump administration to invoke all diplomatic and legal levers to protect American businesses from "extraterritorial censorship mandates".Ofcom has previously said the Online Safety Act only requires services to take action to protect users based in the UK. UK backs down Some American politicians - particularly the Trump administration, its allies and officials - have pushed back against what they regard as overreach in the regulation of US tech firms by the UK and EU. A perceived impact of the Online Safety Act on free speech has been a particular concern, but other laws have also been the source of 19 August, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said the UK had withdrawn its controversial demand for a "backdoor" in an Apple data protection system - saying she worked with the President and Vice President to get the UK to abandon its days later, US Federal Trade Commission chairman Andrew Ferguson warned big tech firms they could be violating US law if they weakened privacy and data security requirements by complying with international laws such as the Online Safety Act."Foreign governments seeking to limit free expression or weaken data security in the United States might count on the fact that companies have an incentive to simplify their operations and legal compliance measures by applying uniform policies across jurisdictions," he 4chan does successfully fight the fine in the US courts, Ofcom may have other options."Enforcing against an offshore provider is tricky," Emma Drake, partner of online safety and privacy at law firm Bird and Bird, told the BBC. "Ofcom can instead ask a court to order other services to disrupt a provider's UK business, such as requiring a service's removal from search results or blocking of UK payments."If Ofcom doesn't think this will be enough to prevent significant harm, it can even ask that ISPs be ordered to block UK access." Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the world's top tech stories and trends. Outside the UK? Sign up here.
Metro
2 hours ago
- Metro
Trump administration reviewing 55,000,000 foreigners with visas for deportations
The Trump administration has started to review all 55million legal immigrants who hold US visas to see if they should be deported. US visa holders including tourists from around the world are under 'continuous vetting' for violations that could led to deportations, said the State Department on Thursday. 'We review all available information as part of our vetting, including law enforcement or immigration records or any other information that comes to light after visa issuance indicating a potential ineligibility,' stated the department said. The State Department is prepared to revoke visas of any individuals who have violated their terms. Officials are searching for visa holders who have exceeded their allowed stay, have committed criminal offenses, posed a threat to safety, and been involved in or support terrorist groups. The review includes looking at visa holders' law enforcement and immigration records in their mother countries, and even watching their social media accounts. Earlier this year, applicants were required to set their social media accounts to public when going for a visa interview. It is part of the Trump administration's push to heighten requirements and restrictions on applicants. Officials are using new tools to compile data on applicants of all statuses, including screening their social media profiles. 'As part of the Trump Administration's commitment to protect US national security and public safety, since Inauguration Day the State Department has revoked more than twice as many visas, including nearly four times as many student visas, as during the same time period last year,' the State Department said. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: Vladimir Putin 'reveals his three demands' that will end Russia's invasion of Ukraine MORE: Mystery as six people found dead at a dairy MORE: Mum-of-three who ran Burger King restaurant all by herself gets fired
