G7 - Trump walks out, Starmer holds his breath
👉Listen to Politics at Sam and Anne's on your podcast app👈
Sky News' Sam Coates and Politico's Anne McElvoy serve up their essential guide to the day in British politics.
President Donald Trump has made a hasty exit from the G7 conference in Canada, leaving questions about collective diplomacy and his promise to bring peace to an increasingly violent Middle East.
The White House insists his return is to deal with "important matters", while Mr Trump himself has hinted his swift exit is for something "big".
How will Keir Starmer and allies navigate talks following the US president's departure?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
14 minutes ago
- The Independent
Jack Straw: The world hasn't felt this dangerous since the Cuban missile crisis
I have been frequently asked in the last few days whether I could recall a time as dangerous as this feels today. Yes, the Cuban missile crisis of October 1962. That was terrifying for the whole world, as the two major superpowers, the US and the Soviet Union, faced off. I was scared stiff. After 13 days, when the world really did appear to hold its breath, the crisis was resolved by diplomatic means. And so to the question today and the threat of this sparking a nuclear armageddon we live in fear of – existential or otherwise. Violence is literally chaos. Wars rarely go according to plan. History shows us that a relatively prosaic error by one commander on the ground can sometimes spark a conflagration. Thus, nothing is certain about the Iran - Israel conflict right now. Could Pakistan – and other countries in the region – come out actively to support Iran in its struggle with Israel, as was reported yesterday? Frankly, I see little prospect of Pakistan, or other key Muslim countries, or Russia or China, getting involved militarily in this conflict. Suggestions on Monday that Pakistan could use its nuclear arsenal against Israel if the latter uses nuclear weapons against Iran came not from any official Pakistani spokesperson, but from a General Mohsen Rezaee of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps in a TV interview in Tehran. These suggestions have not been confirmed by any official Pakistani source. The odds of Israel using nuclear weapons against Iran are long, to non-existent. It is almost certain that Donald Trump would veto such a move, and the Israelis have such an upper hand in the conflict that they would not need to contemplate this. Iran itself is close to being able to produce a nuclear weapon, but it has not yet done so. On Sunday, Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian was reported as telling his cabinet, 'We expect Muslim and [Middle East] regional countries to adopt a clear, firm, and effective position against the aggression of the Zionists and their supporters'. But even if there were such a crazy attack by Israel, would Pakistan join in? Almost certainly not. Pakistan is Iran's neighbour, but relations between the two countries have in recent times been far from easy, and Pakistan's military leaders would be taking leave of their senses to use nuclear weapons in support of Iran. The US, a major financial backer, would be strongly opposed, and so would China, Pakistan's most important and long-standing ally. Sadly, however, for the beleaguered Iranian president, all that Iran's erstwhile allies, like Russia and China, have done so far is to issue formulaic statements condemning Israel's aggression. Yes, countries in the region have expressed mounting concern and have called for restraint, but no more. In Lebanon, the secretary general of Hezbollah, Naim Qassem, has declared his 'support [for] the Islamic Republic of Iran in its rights and position, and in all the steps and measures it takes to defend itself and its choices'. To my mind's eye, what is striking is that no action in support of Iran has followed. Hezbollah plainly do not wish to get involved. Before he was ousted last December, Syrian president Bashar al-Assad could have proved a formidable ally of Iran, but his regime is no more. Hamas is but a shadow of what it was. Indeed, only the Houthis in Yemen appear so far to be willing to take concrete military action in support of Iran, though the damage they could do, not least to impede shipping in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, could be serious with a spike in oil prices. Where else could we feel the sharp end of an attack? Britain does have two important military bases in its 'sovereign areas' in Cyprus; there's also a UK Naval Support Facility in Bahrain. The UK also has a military presence in other Middle East nations like Saudi Arabia, Oman, and the UAE. These could be attacked by Iran or its proxies with the idea of dragging the UK directly into the war. I am sure adequate steps are being taken to increase security at each base, and it's also hard to see what advantage Iran would gain from any attack. One of the many fascinations about Iran (and I confess, I am addicted, for which there is no known cure) is that although those who speak out too far can easily end up in Tehran's notorious Evin Prison, there are still quite a variety of views being reported in the Iranian press, or being published by courageous bloggers. While Iranian papers carried entirely predictable denunciations of the 'Zionist entity' – hardliners cannot bring themselves to use the word 'Israel' – and of its allies, including the US, France, Germany, and the UK, there is something more curious happening that is worth noting. There is a really very surprising public debate that is being had alongside this rhetoric, discussing whether Iran should continue negotiations with the United States on a new nuclear deal. To the moderate newspaper, Arman-e Melli, talks with the US would be 'a sign of strength'; even the conservative paper, Jomhouri-e Eslami, has urged that talks with the US should be maintained. However, whether any proposed talks or deals by the Trump administration would play out is still debatable. What's different – and more concerning – about the current conflict from the one back in 1962 is that neither the US nor the Soviet Union were committed to eliminating the other nation. Since the early 1990s, Iran's religious and military leaders have fomented a visceral, irrational hatred even for the idea of Israel. Israel's foundation in 1948 was controversial – but so have plenty of other nations too. Israel is recognised by the UN in just the same way as Iran. It's a tragedy for the Iranian people that they are now paying a high price for this mad conceit of their supreme leader that denies the right of a fellow member of the UN to exist. Israel will be able to delay Iran's nuclear weapons programme, but military action alone will not wipe out the accumulated knowledge and skills of Iran's nuclear scientists. The only way to achieve that would be by a new nuclear deal, with intrusive inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The great irony is that it was what the previous nuclear deal – the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action – achieved. It was Benjamin Netanyahu who reportedly persuaded Donald Trump in 2018 to pull out of the agreement, and the Iranian hardliners (always opposed to a deal) got to work on enriching uranium to levels needed for a nuclear bomb.
The Independent
17 minutes ago
- The Independent
Congress should be ashamed over helping Trump cutting foreign aid, activists say
The US Congress should be ashamed by its role in helping Donald Trump claw back billions of dollars in foreign aid funding already allocated to projects around the world, activists have said. The House of Representatives recently narrowly voted through a request to claw back $9.4 billion (£7bn) of funds – known as rescissions – with $8bn of that coming from foreign aid. It is the first step to making these cuts permanent. Programmes operating in 14 African countries have told The Independent they have been denied ring-fenced funding since Trump re-entered the White House in January and issued executive orders to slash aid spending, something HIV advocacy group, the Aids Vaccine Advocacy Coalition (AVAC) has claimed was 'illegal' and 'immoral'. Each year, US legislators vote through a budget setting out what the government must spend on different activities. By not spending money already allocated by Congress on foreign aid projects, Trump had been acted beyond the powers of the presidency, said Prof Lawrence Gostin, a law professor at Georgetown University. A federal judge ruled in Marc h that Trump had overstepped in withholding funds and that his government owed aid recipients money for work done in the first few weeks of his presidency, before contracts were cancelled. That case is currently being appealed by the government. 'The president has no power to unilaterally withhold funding already allocated by Congress,' he said. However, using a 'rare vote of Congress to rescind the funds it has already allocated' allows Trump to withhold the promised money legally. 'And to its shame, the House of Representatives has done just that,' Prof Gostin said. The package of cuts must now go to the Senate for a vote before becoming law. It has been suggested that he Senate will pick up the bill next month, but may try to tweak the contents. Thursday's vote was a, 'pretty clear example that [lawmakers] are happy to roll over and give the president what he wants,' said Mitchell Warren, executive director of AVAC which sued the government. 'They still acted illegally and immorally,' Mr Warren claimed. 'This process does not change that'. Until it was allowed to expire at the end of March, the US President's Emergency Plan for Aids Relief (Pepfar), which forms the backbone of the world's HIV response, set out in law that 10 per cent of its funds must be spent on orphans and vulnerable children. But since January, projects across Sub-Saharan Africa have not seen any of the promised funds, The Independent has learned, leaving vulnerable children without vital services to prevent HIV, access nutrition and report sexual violence. It's one example of the cuts which look set to become permanent, through claw backs of existing funds and a new budget proposed this month. Based on Trump's proposed budget for next year, the majority of specialised support for orphans and vulnerable children (OVC) aside from basic medical treatment, are likely to be permanently excluded from receiving future US funds. These wider support services have been shown to protect children from contracting HIV and successfully link HIV-positive children to treatment. Project Hope in Namibia, which linked children in rural communities with HIV treatment and prevention, is another programme to have its OVC funding under Pepfar withheld since January. Early data showed children with HIV enrolled in Project Hope Namibia's programme were more likely to have the levels of virus in their blood brought down to undetectable levels – 96 per cent in January compared with 85 per cent the previous September. Suppressing the virus means they won't get sick or be able to infect others. 'They don't understand those programmes are lifesaving,' Leila Nimatallah, vice president of US advocacy group First Focus on Children, said. More than half of children with untreated HIV will die before their second birthday. 'Illegal and immoral' A State Department official said Pepfar continued to support 'lifesaving HIV testing, care and treatment' including for orphans and vulnerable children, but that all other services are currently being reviewed. But that's not how people working on the ground see things playing out. 'We will expect children to be dying who are not supposed to be dying,' said Desmond Otieno, project coordinator at HIV service the Integrated Development Facility in Kenya. The US has withheld money previously promised to IDF Kenya for services including medication counselling and psychological support since Trump took office, and the facility has already recorded deaths of children who were no longer able to access medication. 'That is the most outrageous [thing]' Mr Otieno said. The State Department spokesperson added that all foreign assistance programmes 'should be reduced over time' as they achieve their mission and move countries 'toward self-reliance". Project Hope in Namibia says its plan to make sure its services could be maintained by the local government by 2028 had been scuppered by the programmes abrupt ending, however. The process of transferring responsibility over including training up local staff will now be a lot harder, achieving exactly the opposite of this goal. Ms Nimatallah said she was calling on the Senate to 'reject this cruel rescissions package'. 'By passing this bill, Congress is taking back funding that it had already appropriated for the prevention of suffering and death of children under five from dirty water, infectious disease, and malnutrition,' she said, as well as funds 'set aside to protect Aids orphans from hunger and sex trafficking. 'The long and short of it is that the United States has turned its back on these children that it has promised to care for'.
BBC News
18 minutes ago
- BBC News
Trump's order to leave Tehran adds to fear as Iranians share 'last photo of home'
Many Iranians have reacted with fear and dismay at Donald Trump's instruction to "immediately evacuate Tehran". The capital's almost 10 million residents have now been left to decide whether to shelter in their homes - bracing themselves for what could come next - or attempt to join the heavy traffic leaving the country's Trump made his comments just moments before cutting short his trip to the G7 in Canada, leaving many wondering if this could mean a further escalation in the conflict between Israel and Iran was of those deciding to leave Tehran are posting images of their homes online, a poignant trend in Persian-language social media for those leaving their city behind. Follow live updates on this storyWhat are Trump's options as tensions escalate?'Don't let beautiful Tehran become Gaza': Iranians tell of shock and confusionLyse Doucet: Where is Israel's operation heading? BBC journalists are currently unable to report in Iran due to restrictions by the Iranian government. However, BBC Persian and other BBC correspondents have received messages from people affected. They have also conducted interviews and monitored social media to gather people's stories. Many fear speaking to media could put them at risk inside Iran, so real names have not been Iranians had already taken the decision to leave well before Israel issued the first evacuation order for parts of Tehran on resident, Arash, set off from Tehran at about 08:45 on Monday, driving through the town of Qazvin, in north-western Iran.A journey that would typically last an hour-and-a-half took him nearly five hours."Many, especially those who live abroad, are trying to leave the country," he said. Many more Iranians living in Tehran have decided to leave since Monday, braving traffic jams of up to 14 hours and fuel queues to flee - unsure if their homes will still be standing when they is expected that even more will attempt to make the arduous journey out of Tehran following Trump's comments. Posting on social media, one resident wrote: "I packed up keepsakes from loved ones and necessities, watered my plants, and hit the road. Leaving home is unbearably hard when you don't know if you'll ever return."Another said: "My home has never felt this sad. I don't know if I'll ever come back."One user posted a picture of a workspace, with a computer and headphones, and wrote: "I said goodbye to the things I worked so hard to earn... I hope they'll still be here when I return."Another added: "I said goodbye in silence, hoping to return one day to my beautiful safe haven." 'Where would I go?' Others in Iran's largest city feel the evacuation orders are simply impossible to has decided to stay in Tehran, despite becoming increasingly afraid. "Ever since Trump urged people to leave last night, it seems like many more are fleeing."She says the roads are "overflowing" and "the traffic is a nightmare". Narges sees no point in trying to leave and being trapped on the strikes in Tehran on Iran's state broadcaster on Monday served as a reminder of the risk she is taking. She lives near the headquarters. "It was terrifying, and so close," she said. Some residents have decided to stay put because of elderly parents, young children, pets, medical needs, or simply lack of woman told BBC Persian she was pregnant and had a young daughter: "Everything I've built is here… where would I go?"Another said she was single and did not want to risk undertaking the 800km journey to her family in Shiraz alone. And a woman who said she was 40 years old and had two small children told the BBC she was "not going anywhere"."If everything is going to be ruined, then I'd rather my kids and I go with our home - because I don't have the strength to start over again." Trump's evacuation comments in the early hours of Tuesday were reportedly followed by explosions and heavy air defence fire in Tehran. Iran launched two waves of missiles in response to the Israeli attacks, setting off air raid alerts in parts of central and northern Air Force One after leaving the G7, Trump told reporters that he wasn't flying back to Washington just to broker a ceasefire – he wanted something "better than a ceasefire"."A real end," he said, which might include "a complete give-up".Israel launched a surprise attack on nuclear infrastructure, scientists and military commanders on Friday last week. Israel's strikes on Tehran have killed at least 224 people, according to Iranian state media. Tehran's retaliatory missile strikes against Israeli cities have claimed at least 24 lives, Israeli officials say. Civilians on both sides have been killed in the exchange of strikes, with both Iran and Israel accusing each other of targeting residential areas. Additional reporting by Fiona Nimoni
