Rubio calls Russian counterpart to discuss outcome of negotiations between Ukraine, Moscow
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Saturday (May 17, 2025) called his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, to discuss the outcome of Friday's direct negotiations between delegations of Kyiv and Moscow in Istanbul.
In the first ever direct talks in three years, Russian and Ukrainian delegation at their meeting lasting less than two hours agreed to swap 1,000 prisoners of war from each side and draft their respective proposals for a ceasefire to end the fighting which has entered into its fourth year.
At Friday's talks, Ukraine demanded a direct meeting between Volodymyr Zelenskyy and President Vladimir Putin.
'Marco Rubio welcomed the agreements reached on the exchange of prisoners of war and the intention of each side to prepare its own proposals outlining the conditions necessary for a ceasefire.
"He reaffirmed Washington's readiness to continue supporting efforts towards a negotiated settlement,' a Russian Foreign Ministry statement posted on its web portal said.
'From his side, Minister Lavrov acknowledged the constructive role played by the United States in encouraging Kiev to finally accept President Vladimir Putin's proposal to resume negotiations in Istanbul. He reiterated Moscow's willingness to continue working with US colleagues in this context.' the Foreign Ministry said in its readout.
According to the Russian Foreign Ministry, Mr. Lavrov and Mr. Rubio also touched on a number of other international and regional issues. The sides exchanged views on the continuation of Russian-American contacts.
Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov did not rule out a meeting between President Putin and Mr. Zelenskyy once ''agreements were ready'.
However, diplomats and experts opine that given the huge gap between the Russian and Ukrainian stands, a solution could be possible only after a meeting of President Trump and Putin, which itself requires a thorough groundwork.
Probably, Mr. Rubio's call to his counterpart on Saturday indicates that both Moscow and Washington are working on an early US-Russian summit.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
21 minutes ago
- India Today
Bros again? Elon Musk's posts spark buzz of 'big, beautiful' patch up with Trump
Months of bromance, a surprise resignation, social media rant, public fiery fallout and regret: Elon Musk's relationship with Donald Trump has been nothing short of a Bollywood drama. The duo once appeared inseparable, sharing stages at public events, Oval Office meetings, and joint press conferences. Then came Musk's shock resignation, and with it, an all-out public fallout. What followed was a no-holds-bar attack from both sides, with people and even Musk's father hoping that the frenemies would soon be back regret some of my posts on Donald Trump," said Musk in a humble post on Wednesday after a week of public rants against 'One Big Beautiful Bill'. Though unanticipated, Musk's walk-back didn't come out of nowhere. In recent days, he's been aligning with the Trump administration's stance on the violent protests in Los Angeles, publicly supporting the crackdown while dialling back his earlier attacks."This is not ok," Musk wrote on X just days after calling for Trump's impeachment and denouncing his signature legislation as a 'disgusting abomination.' MUSK DROPPED HINTS Before today's post, Musk softened his stance on Trump, deleted harsh criticisms, reshared US President's posts and re-followed key allies. He reshared posts from Vance, who declared that the 'president will not tolerate rioting and violence,' and included American flag emojis in his also went on a spree to delete his previous posts critical of Trump. In a now-deleted X post, Musk wrote: 'Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!'Musk also deleted a post promising to apologise only 'as soon as there is a full dump of the Epstein files.' In another post, Trump had expressed support for Trump's impeachment. When a user suggested to replace him with Vance, Musk replied 'Yes.'These posts disappeared gradually, some overnight with the links to these post now showing a message that says, "Nothing to see here."Apart from deleting these posts, he re-followed Stephen Miller, Trump's deputy chief of staff, after unfollowing him during their feud last NOT INTERESTED?On Friday, he told ABC News' Jonathan Karl that he was "not particularly" interested in talking with Musk."You mean the man who has lost his mind?" he Friday evening, Trump told reporters, "I'm not thinking about Elon Musk. I just wish him well."Earlier, Trump warned Musk of "very serious consequences" if the tech billionaire follows through on funding primary challengers against sitting Republican have to pay very serious consequences if he does that," Trump said while speaking to NBC News, adding that he has no intentions of reconciliation with the SpaceX CEO.
Mint
22 minutes ago
- Mint
MAGA's remaking of universities could have dire consequences
'THIS IS an economic revolution and we will win." Donald Trump's line on tariffs sounds like something from Robespierre or Engels. And as any revolutionary knows, to sweep away the old order it is not enough just to raise import duties. You also have to seize and refashion the institutions that control the culture. In America that means wresting control of Ivy League universities which play an outsize role in forming the elite (including Mr Trump's cabinet). The MAGA plan to remake the Ivies could have terrible consequences for higher education, for innovation, for economic growth and even for what sort of country America is. And it is only just beginning. The target has been exquisitely chosen. Over the past decade elite universities have lost the bipartisan support they used to enjoy. This was partly their own fault. In too many cases they succumbed to faddish groupthink about oppression, became scared of their student-customers and turned away speakers in the name of safety. At the same time, American politics became more polarised by educational achievement. Kamala Harris lost the popular vote in the 2024 presidential election. But she won Americans with post-graduate degrees by 20 points. This combination left the academy vulnerable. But the most substantive change has been within the Republican Party. Conservatives considered elite universities to be hostile territory even before William F. Buckley published 'God and Man at Yale" in 1951. Yet they also respected the basic compact that exists between universities and the federal government: that taxpayers fund scientific research and provide grants for students from poor families, and in return, universities do world-changing research. Some of the researchers may have views that irk the White House of the day. Many are foreigners. But their work ends up benefiting America. That is why, in 1962, the government funded a particle accelerator, even though some people who would use it had long hair and hated American foreign policy. And why, later that decade, researchers at American universities invented the internet, with military funding. This deal has been the source of military as well as economic power. It has contributed to almost every technological leap that has boosted output, from the internet to mRNA vaccines and GLP-1 agonists to artificial intelligence. It has made America a magnet for talented, ambitious people from around the world. It is this compact—not bringing car factories back to the rust belt—that is the key to America's prosperity. And now the Trump administration wants to tear it up. His government has used federal grants to take revenge on universities: the presidents of Princeton and Cornell criticised the government and promptly had over $1bn in grants cancelled or frozen. It has arrested foreign students who have criticised the conduct of Israel's war in Gaza. It has threatened to increase the tax on endowments: J.D. Vance (Yale Law School) has proposed raising it on large endowments from 1.4% to 35%. What it wants in return varies. Sometimes it is to eradicate the woke-mind virus. Sometimes it is to eradicate antisemitism. It always involves a double standard on free speech, according to which you can complain about cancel culture and then cheer on the deportation of a foreign student for publishing an op-ed in a college newspaper. This suggests that, as with any revolution, it is about who has power and control. So far, universities have tried to lie flat and hope Mr Trump leaves them alone, just like many of the big law firms that the president has targeted. The Ivy presidents meet every month or so, but have yet to come up with a common approach. Meanwhile, Harvard is changing the leadership of its Middle East studies centre and Columbia is on its third president in a year. This strategy is unlikely to work. The MAGA vanguard cannot believe how quickly the Ivies have capitulated. The Ivies also underestimate the fervour of the revolutionaries they are up against. Some of them don't just want to tax Harvard—they want to burn it down. Resisting the administration's assault requires courage. Harvard's endowment is about the same size as the sovereign-wealth fund of the oil-rich sultanate of Oman, which should buy some bravery. But that mooted tax could shrink it quickly. Harvard receives over $1bn in grants each year. Columbia's annual budget is $6bn; it receives $1.3bn in grants. Other elite universities are less fortunate. If even the Ivies cannot stand up to bullying, there is not much hope for elite public universities, which are just as dependent on research funding and do not have vast endowments to absorb government pressure. How, then, should universities respond? Some things that their presidents want to do anyway, such as adopting codes protecting free speech on campus, cutting administrative staff, banning the use of 'diversity" statements in hiring and ensuring more diverse viewpoints among academics, accord with the views of many Republicans (and this newspaper). But the universities should draw a clear line: even if it means losing government funding, what they teach and research is for them to decide. Like Ike This principle is one reason why America became the world's most innovative economy over the past 70 years, and why Russia and China did not. Yet even that undersells its value. Free inquiry is one of the cornerstones of American liberty, along with the freedom to criticise the president without fear of retribution. True conservatives have always known this. 'The free university", said Dwight Eisenhower in his farewell presidential address in 1961, has been 'the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery". Eisenhower, who was president of Columbia before he was president of the United States, warned that when universities become dependent on government grants, the government can control scholarship. For a long time that warning seemed a bit hysterical. America never had a president willing to exert such authority over colleges. Now it does. Subscribers to The Economist can sign up to our Opinion newsletter, which brings together the best of our leaders, columns, guest essays and reader correspondence.
Mint
27 minutes ago
- Mint
Newark Airport incident: Indian man tried to enter US ‘illegally without valid visa', India raises issue with US
India has officially raised concerns with the United States over an incident involving an Indian man who was reportedly handcuffed and treated like a criminal at Newark Airport, PTI reported citing sources on Wednesday. 'The Indian Consulate in New York has ascertained that the man hailing from Haryana had entered the US illegally without a valid visa and was being deported back to India as per a court order,' they told PTI. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) raised the matter with the US embassy in New Delhi, the sources said. Videos of the Indian youth being pinned to the ground by US authorities at the Newark airport have gone viral. 'The Indian embassy in Washington DC and the Indian Consulate in New York have also been in touch with the US authorities to ascertain the details in the case,' the sources said. Our Consulate in New York has ascertained that the individual who belongs to Haryana had entered the United States illegally without a valid visa and was being deported back to India as per a court order, they said, PTI reported. During his transit in Newark, on finding his behaviour not conducive for travel, he was restrained and admitted to a medical facility, they said. Once he is fit to travel, the individual will be deported to India, the sources told PTI. Our Consulate in New York continues to remain engaged with the US authorities on this matter, they added. The incident of the Indian man, being "handcuffed and allegedly treated like a criminal" was filmed by an Indian-American, Kunal Jain, who said he felt 'helpless and heartbroken'. I felt helpless and heartbroken watching these young people being treated like criminals. Jain said in a post that these young people arrive in the US and for some reason, they are unable to explain the purpose of their visit to the immigration authorities and are sent back on the same day tied up like criminals. (With inputs from agencies) Key Takeaways The importance of understanding immigration regulations for travelers. The potential for diplomatic repercussions arising from individual incidents. The role of consulates in supporting citizens abroad during legal and immigration issues.
