What We Know About How the 4-Day India and Pakistan Clashes Unfolded
It quickly escalated into four nights of clashes in which the two countries hit deeper into each other's territory than at any time in half a century, and that was unprecedented in how the use of new-generation technology created a dizzying escalation in the skies.
While the damage on both sides will take weeks and months to tally, particularly in a space of media blackouts and extreme disinformation, here is what we know about how the clashes played out.
The First Shots
In its opening round of airstrikes, in the pre-dawn hours on Wednesday, India struck targets deeper inside the enemy territory than it had in decades, and by all accounts had hit close enough to facilities associated with terrorist groups that it could claim victory.
But it quickly became clear that it had not been a clean strike, but more of a protracted dogfight between the two air forces — both sides with their jets in the sky going at each other, with the boundary between them as a line that neither crossed. And India lost aircraft in the exchanges, including at least two of its most advanced fighter jets.
The Escalations
On the second day, as a diplomatic push for an off-ramp intensified, India said it had thwarted a Pakistani attempt overnight to hit military targets across over a dozen border cities and towns. In response, it had taken the kind of action that analysts say almost always escalates a conflict: It struck sensitive military targets, particularly air defense systems in the Pakistani city of Lahore.
'A move like that is quite strident and would have concerned Pakistani forces, because in other contexts, taking out air defenses is a prelude to more serious action,' said Kim Heriot-Darragh, a strategic and defense analyst at the Australia India Institute. 'You'd knock out defenses to open a corridor through which aircraft could fly and strike their actual target.'
Diplomats and analysts are uncertain about just how the events of early Thursday morning played out, but it is clear that something major had changed and was seen as an important shift in the pattern of escalation. Whether Pakistan was using a mass of drone incursions and missiles to actually try to hit India's military sites or just to warn India and probe its air-defense systems for something bigger later is still unclear.
Pakistan's astonishing official response — a complete denial that it had done anything on the second night — left two explanations for the events: that it was just a probing mission that Pakistan did not want to distract from the actual retaliation that was coming, or that it was an initial retaliation that had not succeeded.
But India nonetheless took the opportunity to actually damage crucial Pakistani military sites, and with that all bets were off. Pakistan vowed it would retaliate. The only way the escalation could be arrested was the way it had always been: with an outside power stepping in to tell both sides to knock it off.
Alarm Over Strategic Sites
On the nights of Friday and Saturday, the situation escalated rapidly to an air war with few holds barred, but in which ground forces had not been moved.
Pakistan launched a massive campaign of drone and missile strikes, targeting military bases across several Indian cities — this time with clear acknowledgment from the Indian side that not only there was damage to some bases and equipment, but also that it had lost security personnel.
There was clear evidence that India had also managed to create damage on the Pakistani side, targeting air fields and more defense systems, and also striking near one of Pakistan's crucial strategic headquarters.
What alarmed the United States, and intensified the diplomatic push for the cease-fire that was announced late on Saturday, was not only that the two sides were increasing strikes to sensitive sites but also just what the next step in a rapid escalation ladder for two alarmed nuclear powers could mean.
What Is Ahead
While the scores are still being tallied, and damage assessed, the four days may have fundamentally changed the reality of conflict in this part of the world toward noncontact warfare: barrages from a distance until the very last stages of battle, but still leading to escalation and the potential loss of restraint.
The abundance of new-generation technology, particularly cheap drones and loitering munitions, might initially suggest more precision targeting and less human cost. But in this latest India-Pakistan conflict, those technologies still prompted a cycle of escalation that led to concerns that the use of nuclear weapons could be put on the table.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
2 hours ago
- CBS News
Full transcript: Secretary of State Marco Rubio on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," Aug. 17, 2025
The following is the full transcript of an interview with Secretary of State Marco Rubio that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on Aug. 17, 2025. MARGARET BRENNAN: We begin with Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, who attended those talks in Anchorage. Good morning to you, Mr. Secretary. SECRETARY OF STATE MARCO RUBIO: Good morning. Thank you. MARGARET BRENNAN: Vladimir Putin did not give President Trump the ceasefire he sought. And now Putin says the root causes of the conflict have to be resolved in a peace agreement. Isn't the root cause the fact that Russia invaded in the first place? SEC. RUBIO: Well, ultimately, yeah. But I mean, what he means by root causes is this long historical complaints that we've heard repeatedly. This is not a new argument, he's been making this for a long time, and it's the argument that it's Western encroachment. I don't want to get into- it's just so long. But the bottom line is that all of- you know, we're not going to focus on all of that stuff. We're going to focus on this: are they going to stop fighting or not? And what it's going to take to stop the fighting. And what it's going to take to stop the fighting, if we're being honest and serious here, is both sides are going to have to give, and both sides should expect to get something from this. And that's a very difficult thing to do. It's very difficult because Ukraine obviously feels, you know, harmed, and rightfully so, because they were invaded. And the Russian side, because they feel like they got momentum in the battlefield, and frankly, don't care, don't seem to care very much about how many Russian soldiers die in this endeavor. They just churn through it. So I think what the President deserves a lot of credit for is the amount of time and energy that his administration is placing on reaching a peace agreement for a war that's not a war that started under him. It's half, you know, it's on the other side of the world. That said, I mean, it's relevant to us. But there are a lot of other issues he could be focused on. So tomorrow, we'll be meeting with President Zelenskyy. We'll be meeting with European leaders. We just met with Putin. He's dedicated a lot of time and energy because he has made it a priority of his administration to stop or end war- stop wars or prevent them. And right now, this is the biggest war going on in the world. It's the biggest war in Europe since World War Two. We're going to continue to do everything we can to reach an agreement that ends the dying and the killing and the suffering that's going on right now. MARGARET BRENNAN: You know this well, how long these kind of diplomatic negotiations often take. President Trump was telling European leaders what was discussed was Putin demanding control of Donetsk, a region in the east that his forces do not fully hold, and the UK estimates that taking that full area could be as long as another four years. Putin also is demanding Russian be an official language in Ukraine, and something regarding Russian Orthodox churches. Did the U.S. accept all of what Putin laid out at that table? SEC. RUBIO: The United States is not in a position to accept anything or reject anything, because ultimately, it's up to the Ukrainians. They're the ones that Russia has to make peace with, Ukraine with Russia-- MARGARET BRENNAN: --Well, the President said he did come to some agreement-- SEC. RUBIO: --It's up to the Ukrainians to make these conditions. Well, the agreements were that we were going to try to do things like, for example, get a leader- a leaders meeting. We have to make enough progress so that we can sit down President Zelensky and President Zelensky and President Putin in the same place, which is what President Zelensky has been asking for, and reach a final agreement that ends this war. Now, there were some concepts and ideas discussed that we know the Ukrainians could be very supportive of in that meeting. I don't think it's- we're not going to negotiate this in the media. I understand that everybody wants to know what happened. But ultimately, there are things that were discussed as part of this meeting that are potentials for breakthroughs, that are potentials for progress. We'll be discussing that more in depth tomorrow, with our European allies, with the Ukrainians that are coming over. We'll be discussing all of these things, because ultimately, we do need to find areas where we're making progress and try to begin to narrow the gap between the two sides. But there's a reason why this war has been going on for three and a half years, and that is, when it comes to the big issues here, there are still some big differences between both sides. Let's see how much progress we can continue to make. It's- it's- it's not been easy, but it's something the President's made a priority. Peace. And he deserves a lot of credit for that. MARGARET BRENNAN: But ultimately, if- if Vladimir Putin is going to be offered land that he has not seized yet, but negotiates his way into, doesn't this set a dangerous precedent that the United States now accepts this concept that it is okay to seize land by force? SEC. RUBIO: Well, Putin has already seized land by force, and that, in and of itself, is not a positive precedent. This whole war is a negative precedent-- MARGARET BRENNAN: -- Are you demanding withdrawal?-- SEC. RUBIO: --precedent. Well, again, here's the- in order to have a deal here to end- to reach the end of this conflict, both sides are going to have to make concessions. That's just the facts-- [CROSSTALK] MARGARET BRENNAN: But does that mean accepting-- SEC. RUBIO: --in any negotiation-- MARGARET BRENNAN: --where Russian forces are now? SEC. RUBIO: No, no, but, if- But this is not about acceptance. This is about what Ukraine can accept. And what Russia can accept. They both have to accept it, otherwise there won't be a peace deal. Okay. If there aren't concessions, if one side gets everything they want, that's called surrender. That's called the end of the war through surrender. And that's not what we're close to doing, because neither side here is on the verge of surrender or anything close to it. So in order for there to be a peace deal, this is just a fact, we may not like it, it may not be pleasant, it may be distasteful, but in order for there to be an end of the war, there are things Russia wants that it cannot get, and there are things Ukraine wants that it's not going to get. Both sides are going to have to give up something in order to get to the table, in order to make this happen. That's- that's just the way it is. And I mean, the sooner we accept that, that's the reality. Now, what those things are is going to be up to both sides. There's no conditions that can be imposed on Ukraine. They're going to have to accept things, but they're going to have to get things too. And so, for example, Ukraine is a sovereign country. They have a right, like every sovereign country does in the world, to have- to enter into security alliances with other countries to prevent an invasion in the future, to prevent threats to their national security. That's not an unreasonable request. That's something needs to be worked on. Territories will have to be discussed. It's just a fact, and there are things that maybe Russia is holding now that they're going to have to give up. Who knows? The point is, we need to create a scenario where that becomes possible, and that's why this has been so hard, because neither side, up to now, has been willing to give on some of these things. But we'll see if that's possible. It may not be, but we're going to try, and we're going to do everything we can to try to achieve a peace. MARGARET BRENNAN: I understand you, you can't get into specifics in a public conversation, but we're looking at Russian troops and strikes intensifying. Did you hear anything from Vladimir Putin that indicated he is willing to make a single concession? SEC. RUBIO: Well, I think there are a couple. I mean, there were- not enough for Ukraine, if not we would be announcing a peace deal this morning, right? But- but certainly, there are some things we notice changes. There are some changes that I think are possible. I think there's some concepts that were discussed that could potentially lead to something. But again, all these things have to be verifiable. We- it isn't real until it's real. I mean, you- one thing is what you say you might be willing to consider, another thing is your willingness to do it. And it always becomes a trade off in all of this. But you talk about the intensifying strikes on the Russian side, yeah, I mean, they're a full-time war machine. I mean, that's what's happening. The Russian economy has basically been turned into a full-time wartime economy. They have a lot of people. It's a big country. It's not just large geographically. It has huge populations. It continues to churn through people. You know, they lost- 20,000 Russian soldiers were killed last month, in July, in this war. That just tells you the price they're willing to pay. Not saying any of this is admirable, I'm saying that this is the reality of the war that we're facing. It's become attrition, in some ways. It's a meat grinder, and they just have more meat to grind. MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, let me ask you about the security bit you just mentioned there, because Italy's Prime Minister says that President Trump revived the idea of security guarantees inspired by NATO's Article Five and a collective security clause that would involve the United States. How does that work? Are these U.S. troops? Are these U.S. monitors? SEC. RUBIO: Well, what we're going to be working on. That's why- that's one of the reasons why, you know, I talked yesterday to all the national security advisors, a bunch of them from the different European countries, or European leaders coming here tomorrow, heads of state coming tomorrow, along with President Zelensky, to discuss this in more detail. I mean, the constructs of something like this needs to be built out once it- concept is one thing. The reality, you know, how it's built and how it would work, is another. But those are the kinds of talks that we're going to be having with them, along with some of the other issues that are at play. But, that-that is one of the-if you were to break this thing down, I mean, there are, obviously, there needs to be an agreement on territories and where the lines are going to be drawn. That's not going to be very easy. That's going to be tough. I think there has to be some discussion about security guarantees for Ukraine, because they don't want this war to–none of us want to see this war in the future. They're a sovereign country. They have a right to have security agreements with other countries and security alliances with other countries. And then there's the whole issue of reconstruction– MARGARET BRENNAN: -- Including the United States?-- SEC. RUBIO: -- How do you rebuild the country? Well, potentially, like I said, that's what we're going to be having a conversation about, and that's what we're going to be meeting. That's why they're all coming here tomorrow, and-and that's why we've been talking on the phone for the last 48 hours with them, and even leading up to it throughout the week there were various meetings just to sort of build out some of these ideas. So all of these right now are ideas, they are concepts that require some more specificity. We'll need to work with our partners to see what that looks like. And I think that's an area where potential progress is real, but that alone won't be enough. There's a bunch of other things that have to be worked through here. MARGARET BRENNAN Yea, well, Russia claims it has rescued 700,000 children. I know you know that the warrant out for Vladimir Putin's arrest is for the state-sponsored abduction of kids. I've seen estimates there are something like 30,000 Ukrainian children who have been abducted. Is the United States demanding, or at least, even just as a statement of goodwill here, that Russia return these children? SEC. RUBIO: Yeah, I mean, we've repeatedly raised that issue on- in every forum possible, and those have also been, by the way, topics of discussion, not just in our meetings with the Ukrainians, but in the negotiations and talks that were going on between Ukraine and Russia at the technical level. These talks were going on in Turkey, as an example. Turkey over the last few months-- MARGARET BRENNAN: --Yeah, nothing so far from the Russians -- SEC. RUBIO: --that's been a topic of discussion as well -- SEC. RUBIO: Well, it's unfortunate. Children should be returned to their families. We- on that position, I don't think there's any ambiguity on our side. And they shouldn't even be, you know, a bargaining chip in regards to a broader negotiation. But it's just one more element of how tragic this war is. After three and a half years, this war is getting worse. It's not getting better. You've made the point about the uptick in strikes. This is a war. It's going to get worse. It's not going to get better, and that's why the President is investing so much time in bringing this to an end. And, by the way, everyone is begging us to be involved in this. The Europeans want us involved. The Ukrainians want us involved. Obviously, the Russians want us involved because the President is the only leader in the world- if this is possible, he's the only one that can help make it happen. MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, he's got the leverage over Vladimir Putin if he wanted to crush his economy or at least do more damage to it, but you have held off on those secondary sanctions. President Trump told Fox News his advice to President Zelensky is make a deal, Russia's a very big power and they're not. You know there is concern from the Europeans that President Zelenskyy is going to be bullied into signing something away. That's why you have these European leaders coming as back up tomorrow. Can you reassure them? SEC. RUBIO: No, it isn't. That's not why they're coming as back- that's not true. No but that's not, why, that's not true. They're not coming here tomorrow to keep Zelensky from being bullied. They're not coming- in fact -- [CROSSTALK] MARGARET BRENNAN: Well that February Oval Office meeting in front of television cameras, where President Zelenskyy was dressed down -- SEC. RUBIO: -- Do you know how many meetings we've had since then? MARGARET BRENNAN: Oh, no, I know. And I was just up in Alaska -- SEC. RUBIO: Yeah, but we've had a bunch of meetings since then. MARGARET BRENNAN: -- watching the one with Vladimir Putin where a red carpet was rolled out for the Russian leader. It was very different-- SEC. RUBIO: -- No, but it wasn't Zelenskyy. We've had more meetings, we've had, we've had, we've had one meeting with Putin and like a dozen meetings with Zelenskyy. So that, but that's not true. They're not coming here tomorrow to keep Zelenskyy from being bullied. They're coming here tomorrow because we've been working with the Europeans. We talked to them last week. There were meetings in the UK over the following, the previous weekend -- MARGARET BRENNAN: -- And they said the President Trump was going to demand a ceasefire -- SEC. RUBIO: -- The President's talked to these leaders as early as Thursday. No, no, but you said that they're coming here tomorrow to keep Zelenskyy from being bullied. They're not coming here tomorrow- this is such a stupid media narrative that they're coming here tomorrow because the- Trump is going to bully Zelenskyy into a bad deal. We've been working with these people for weeks, for weeks on this stuff. They're coming here tomorrow because they chose to come here tomorrow. We invited them to come. We invited them to come. The President invited them to come. MARGARET BRENNAN: But the President told those European leaders last week that he wanted a cease fire. The President went on television, said he would walk out of the meeting if Vladimir Putin didn't agree with him. He said there would be severe consequences if he didn't agree to one. He said he'd walk out in two minutes. He spent three hours talking to Vladimir Putin, and he did not get one,so-- SEC. RUBIO: --Because obviously something, things happen during that meeting, well, because obviously things,look our goal here is not to stage some production for the world to say, oh how dramatic he walked out. Our goal here is to have a peace agreement to end this war. Okay? And obviously we felt, and I agreed, that there was enough progress, not a lot of progress, but enough progress made in those talks to allow us to move to the next phase. If not, we wouldn't be having Zelenskyy flying all the way over here. We wouldn't be having all the Europeans coming all the way over here. Now understand, and take with a grain of salt, I'm not saying we're on the verge of a peace deal, but I am saying that we saw movement, enough movement to justify a follow up meeting with Zelensky and the Europeans, enough movement for us to dedicate even more time to this. You talk about the sanctions. Look, at the end of the day, if peace is not going to be possible here, and this is just going to continue on as a war, people will continue to die by the thousands, the President has that option to then come in and impose new sanctions. But if he did this now, the moment the President puts those additional sanctions, that's the end of the talks. You've basically locked in at least another year to year and a half of war and death and destruction. We may unfortunately wind up there, but we don't want to wind up there. We want to wind up with a peace deal that ends this war so Ukraine can go on with the rest of their lives and rebuild their country and be assured that this is never going to happen again. That's the goal here. We're going to do everything possible to make that happen if it's doable. It will require both sides to make concessions. It will require both sides to get things they're asking for. That's how these deals are made, whether we like it or not. MARGARET BRENNAN: Before I let you go, quickly, why did the State Department just announced that they're halting visitor visas for all Gazans coming here for medical aid? Why would some of these kids, for example, who are coming to hospitals for treatment be a threat? SEC. RUBIO: Well, first of all, it's not just kids, it's a bunch of adults that are accompanying them. Second, we had outreach from multiple congressional offices asking questions about it, and so we're going to reevaluate how those visas are being granted, not just to the children, but how those visas are being granted to the people who are accompanying them. And by the way, to some of the organizations that are facilitating it. There is evidence, it's been presented to us by numerous congressional offices, that some of the organizations bragging about and involved in acquiring these visas have strong links to terrorist groups like Hamas. And so we are not going to be in partnership with groups that are friendly with Hamas. So we need to- we're going to pause those visas. There was just a small number of them issued to children, but they come with adults accompanying them, obviously, and we are going to pause this program and reevaluate how those visas are being vetted and what relationship, if any, has there been by these organizations to the- to the process of acquiring those visas. We're not going to be in partnership with groups that have links or sympathies towards Hamas. MARGARET BRENNAN: Secretary of State, Marco Rubio. We have to leave it there for this morning. Thank you for joining us. SEC. RUBIO: Thank you. MARGARET BRENNAN: 'Face the Nation' will be back in one minute. Stay with us.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Serbian leader vows tough response to protesters following riots
President Aleksandar Vucic has announced tough measures against anti-government protesters following days of riots in the streets of Serbia that have challenged his increasingly autocratic rule in the Balkan country. In one of his frequent TV addresses to the public, Mr Vucic accused the anti-government demonstrators of 'pure terrorism' and re-iterated his claims that months of persistent protests against his rule have been orchestrated in the West and aimed at destroying Serbia. 'Our country is in grave danger, they have jeopardised all our values, normal life, each individual,' Mr Vucic said, alleging an elaborate scheme that would eventually install 'anarcho-leftist' authorities in the future. He did not offer any concrete evidence for his claims. 'Unless we undertake tougher steps it is a question of days when they (protesters) will kill someone,' Mr Vucic said. 'I am saying this for history.' The stern warnings came after five consecutive nights of clashes between the protesters on one side and police and Mr Vucic's loyalists on the other. Angry protesters on Saturday evening torched Mr Vucic's governing Serbian Progressive Party offices in a town in western Serbia, and of other ruling coalition allies. The demonstrators on Saturday evening also clashed with police in Belgrade, the capital, and in the northern city of Novi Sad. Riot officers used tear gas against demonstrators who hurled stun grenades, flares and bottles at them. Mr Vucic did not specify what will be the state response that he said would come within a week. But he stressed that a state of emergency is not imminent. Scores of people already have been detained and injured in the past days while police have faced accusations of excessive force and arbitrary detentions of protesters. 'You will witness the determination of the state of Serbia,' Mr Vucic said. 'We will use everything at our disposal to restore peace and order in the country.' The clashes this week marked a major escalation following more than nine months of largely peaceful demonstrations that started after a concrete canopy collapsed at a train station in Serbia's north, killing 16 people. Many in Serbia blamed the tragedy on alleged widespread corruption in state-run infrastructure projects that they say fuelled poor renovation work. The Serbian president has faced accusations of stifling democratic freedoms while allowing organised crime and corruption to flourish. He has denied this. Serbia is formally seeking EU membership, but Mr Vucic has maintained strong ties with Russia and China. On Sunday, he praised Russia's backing for his government against what he called a 'coloured revolution' against his government.
News24
5 hours ago
- News24
Starmer to join European leaders accompanying Zelensky to US for Ukraine talks with Trump
European leaders, including British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and French President Emmanuel Macron, are joining Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Washington to discuss a peace agreement with US President Donald Trump. Trump dropped his ceasefire push after the Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, instead expressing support for a plan allowing Russia to retain control of parts of Ukraine, which Zelensky rejected. Zelensky's upcoming White House talks with Trump will focus on securing peace amid the protracted conflict, following tension-filled past interactions and diverging views on handling Russia's aggression. European leaders, including UK PM Keir Starmer, will join Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during his visit to Washington on Monday, seeking an end to Moscow's invasion, after US President Donald Trump dropped his push for a ceasefire following an Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Securing a ceasefire in Ukraine, more than three years after the Kremlin ordered the invasion, had been one of Trump's core demands before the summit, to which Ukraine and its European allies were not invited. But after the meeting yielded no breakthrough, Trump ruled out an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine – a move that would appear to favour Putin, who has long argued for negotiations on a final peace deal. Meanwhile, Downing Street confirmed on Sunday that British Prime Minister Keir Starmer would also be joining European leaders accompanying Zelensky on Monday for talks with Trump at the White House. 'The Prime Minister, with other European leaders, stands ready to support this next phase of further talks,' the statement read, released ahead of a video meeting with Ukraine and its backers on Sunday. Ukraine and its European allies have criticised Putin's stance as a way to buy time and press Russia's battlefield advances. Among the leaders heading to Washington on Monday to try and bend Trump's ear on the matter, are German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Ahead of the visit, Von der Leyen said on X (Twitter) she would welcome Zelensky for a meeting in Brussels on Sunday, which other European leaders would join by video, before accompanying the Ukrainian leader on his US trip at his 'request' and with 'other European leaders'. BREAKING: Sir Keir Starmer confirmed to join Zelenskyy and other European leaders in Washington 📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 and YouTube — Sky News (@SkyNews) August 17, 2025 The German government, which confirmed Merz was going, said it would try to emphasise 'interest in a swift peace agreement in Ukraine'. Trump had briefed Zelensky and European leaders on his flight back from Alaska to Washington, saying afterwards that 'it was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a peace agreement which would end the war'. Ceasefire agreements 'often times do not hold up', Trump argued on his Truth Social platform. But Zelensky has appeared unconvinced by the change of tack, saying on Saturday that it 'complicates the situation'. If Moscow lacks 'the will to carry out a simple order to stop the strikes, it may take a lot of effort to get Russia to have the will to implement (something) far greater – peaceful coexistence with its neighbours for decades', he said on social media. European leaders for their part have expressed unease over Trump's outreach to Putin from the outset. 'Harsh reality' Trump expressed support during his call with Zelensky and European leaders for a proposal by Putin to take full control of two eastern Ukrainian regions that Russia largely controls, in exchange for freezing the frontline in two others, an official briefed on the talks told AFP. Putin 'de facto demands that Ukraine leave Donbas', an area consisting of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions in eastern Ukraine, the source said. In exchange, Russian forces would halt their offensive in the Black Sea port region of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia in southern Ukraine, where the main cities are still under Ukrainian control. Several months into its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia in September 2022 claimed to have annexed all four Ukrainian regions even though its troops still do not fully control any of them. 'The Ukrainian president refused to leave Donbas,' the source said. Trump notably also said the United States was prepared to provide Ukraine security guarantees, an assurance Merz hailed as 'significant progress'. But there was a scathing assessment of the summit outcome from the European Union's top diplomat Kaja Kallas, who accused Putin of seeking to 'drag out negotiations' with no commitment to end the bloodshed. 'The harsh reality is that Russia has no intention of ending this war any time soon,' Kallas said. Zelensky back in White House The diplomatic focus now switches to Zelensky's talks at the White House on Monday with the European leaders in tow. The Ukrainian president's last Oval Office visit in February ended in an extraordinary shouting match, with Trump and Vice President JD Vance publicly berating Zelensky for not showing enough gratitude for US aid. In an interview with broadcaster Fox News after his sit-down with Putin, Trump had suggested that the onus was now on Zelensky to secure a peace deal as they work towards an eventual trilateral summit with Putin. 'It's really up to President Zelensky to get it done,' Trump said. Meanwhile, the conflict in Ukraine rages on, with both Kyiv and Moscow launching attack drones at each other on Sunday. In his post-summit statement in Alaska, Putin had warned Ukraine and European countries not to engage in any 'behind-the-scenes intrigues' that could disrupt what he called 'this emerging progress'.
