Zelensky wins EU, Nato backing as he seeks place at Trump-Putin talks
Trump, who for weeks had been threatening new sanctions against Russia for failing to halt the war, announced instead on Friday he would meet Putin on August 15 in Alaska.
A White House official said Trump is open to Zelensky attending but preparations are under way for only a bilateral meeting.
Russian strikes injured at least 12 people in Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia region, the country's foreign affairs ministry said on Sunday.
Responding to the strike, Zelensky said: 'That is why sanctions are needed, pressure is needed.'
The Kremlin leader last week ruled out meeting Zelensky, saying conditions for such an encounter were 'unfortunately still far' from being met.
Trump said a potential deal would involve 'some swapping of territories to the betterment of the two (sides)", compounding Ukrainian fears that it may face pressure to surrender land.
Zelensky said any decisions taken without Ukraine will be 'stillborn' and unworkable. On Saturday the leaders of Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Finland and the European Commission said any diplomatic solution must protect the security interests of Ukraine and Europe.
'The US has the power to force Russia to negotiate seriously,' EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said on Sunday.
'Any deal between the US and Russia must have Ukraine and the EU included for it is a matter of Ukraine's and the whole of Europe's security.'
EU foreign ministers will meet on Monday to discuss next steps, she said.
Nato secretary-general Mark Rutte told US network ABC News Friday's summit 'will be about testing Putin, how serious he is on bringing the terrible war to an end'.
He said: 'It will be, of course, about security guarantees, but also about the absolute need to acknowledge Ukraine decides on its own future, that Ukraine has to be a sovereign nation, deciding on its own geopolitical future.'
Russia holds nearly a fifth of the country.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
eNCA
34 minutes ago
- eNCA
Trump deploys National Guard in Washington
WASHINGTON - US President Donald Trump said Monday he will deploy military and federal law enforcement in Washington as he seeks to curb violent crime in the nation's capital. The Republican leader told a White House news conference he plans to place the DC Metropolitan Police under the direct control of the federal government while sending in the National Guard. The overwhelmingly Democratic city faces allegations from Republican politicians that it is overrun by crime, plagued by homelessness and financially mismanaged -- although violent offenses are down. "This is Liberation Day in DC, and we're going to take our capital back," Trump said. Trump -- a convicted felon who has pardoned around 1,500 people involved in the 2021 US Capitol riot in Washington -- has complained that local police and prosecutors aren't tough enough. He has repeatedly threatened a federal takeover of the city of 700,000, saying crime in Washington was "totally out of control." The new approach echoes Trump's immigration policies that have effectively sealed the southern border amid mass deportations while deploying active-duty troops against protesters in Los Angeles. The president told reporters he planned to roll out the policy to other cities, spotlighting problems in New York and Chicago. Unlike the 50 states, Washington operates under a unique relationship with the federal government that limits its autonomy and grants Congress extraordinary control over local matters. Since the mid-1970s, the Home Rule Act has allowed residents to elect a mayor and a city council, although Congress still controls the city's budget. "There's absolutely no need for the National Guard here," Elizabeth Critchley, 62, said at a protest outside the White House. "It's all for show. It's just a big theater." Data from Washington police show significant drops in violent crime between 2023 and 2024, although that was coming off the back of a post-pandemic surge. Crime is 'ending' Trump posted on social media ahead of the news conference that he also wants to tackle homeless encampments, after signing an order last month making it easier to arrest homeless people. Trump ordered homeless people to "move out" of the city in a Truth Social post on Sunday, vowing to "make our Capital safer and more beautiful than it ever was before." He promised individuals "places to stay," but "FAR from the Capital." Trump said criminals would be jailed and that it would all happen "very fast." Federal law enforcement have already increased their presence after a former Department of Government Efficiency staffer was beaten during an attempted carjacking. AFP | Mandel NGAN "Last week my administration surged 500 federal agents into the district including from the FBI, ATF, DEA, Park Police, the US Marshals Service, the Secret Service, and the Department of Homeland Security," Trump said. "You know a lot of nations, they don't have anything like that... They made dozens of arrests." A Gallup poll in October found that 64 percent of Americans believed crime had risen in 2024, although FBI data shows the lowest levels of violent crime nationwide in more than half a century. "Let me be crystal clear -- crime in DC is ending, and it's ending today," said Attorney General Pam Bondi, who was among several cabinet members flanking Trump. Trump called Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser a "good person who has tried" at the weekend but added that she had been given "many chances" to improve living standards. Bowser has not criticized Trump over his threats to stage a federal takeover, insisting instead that she plans to focus on their "shared priorities."
Daily Maverick
4 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
As Trump slaps 30% tariffs on SA, Africa's trade reckoning has arrived
The revival of sweeping US tariffs under President Donald Trump's administration has once again placed developing economies — particularly those in Africa — on the frontlines of a trade war not of their own making. Trump's latest imposition of tariffs on more than 90 countries is not just a reordering of the global trade hierarchy — it's a jarring signal that developing countries can no longer rely on the goodwill of powerful economies to access international markets without political strings attached. Although Africa is not a direct target of the tariffs, South Africa now stands as an explicit casualty. As of 7 August, a 30% tariff on all South African goods entering the US was in effect — two days after President Cyril Ramaphosa reportedly called Trump in a last-minute effort to negotiate. The Presidency issued a statement highlighting ongoing trade dialogue, but the timing of the enforcement — just hours later — laid bare the limitations of diplomatic overtures in an era of economic unilateralism. Make no mistake: this is not just a diplomatic skirmish. It is the opening salvo in a trade war that threatens to destabilise Africa's economic recovery. While Ramaphosa has demonstrated admirable restraint and commitment to dialogue, the Trump administration has chosen economic unilateralism over bilateral engagement. The tariff trap and global trade reordering These tariffs are more than mere economic tools — they are a form of political signalling with deep global consequences. Trump's protectionism undercuts decades of progress in trade liberalisation and reveals a worrying disregard for the multilateral trading system. For South Africa, this represents not just a blow to exports — especially in automotive parts, citrus and wine — but a broader signal of how vulnerable even middle-income African economies remain in global trade diplomacy. Sadly, African states are still rule takers, not rule makers, in international trade talks. The risk of dumping and trade distortion The fallout from this tariff will not be contained within US-SA trade flows. African markets, which often lack robust anti-dumping laws, are likely to face a surge in cheap goods — steel, textiles, electronics — originally destined for the US. Dumping will devastate local industries that are already fragile and undercapitalised. It will also widen Africa's trade deficit and increase unemployment, especially in the manufacturing sector. In some cases, these distortions may trigger retaliatory actions or increased subsidies, raising the spectre of full-blown trade wars among developing economies that can least afford them. It can be argued that many of the support programmes to soften the US tariffs and targeting exporters or specific sectors (automotive, agriculture) may make them 'specific' subsidies, particularly if the support is contingent on export performance or import substitution — and hence not subject to World Trade Organization rules on prohibited or actionable subsidies. In the short term, the South African support strategy is probably permissible, especially under the public interest and development exceptions in World Trade Organization rules — and considering the retaliatory nature of the US tariffs (which itself may breach World Trade Organization norms). But the risk for countervailing measures by countries like the US increases, especially if support remains narrowly targeted to exporters with major price impact in other countries' domestic markets, and if South Africa succeeds in replacing US markets with World Trade Organization members like the EU, Japan, or China. This is a form of economic suffocation that will not be televised, but it will be felt. Ramaphosa's tariff gamble and strategic misalignment Ramaphosa's attempt at quiet diplomacy — both during his May visit to the US and again in the last-minute phone call — reflects South Africa's preference for stability and negotiation. However, such strategies appear tragically mismatched against Trump's zero-sum, populist economics. In the absence of a coherent and reciprocal response from Washington, South Africa's strategy may need to shift from engagement to economic repositioning. To date, Pretoria has pursued selective sectoral lobbying, winning small concessions on seasonal fruit exports, but this has done little to protect the broader economy. It is time South Africa recognises that trade diplomacy with Trump's America may no longer be conducted on traditional terms. Interestingly, Pretoria has condemned the US tariffs as unjust and economically incoherent. Government officials argue the move ignores South Africa's complementary role in US supply chains and the fact that more than 75% of American goods enter South Africa duty free. Ramaphosa's administration had even offered investments and LNG purchases under a proposed bilateral framework agreement, which remains unacknowledged by Washington. In response, South Africa has launched a comprehensive, multi-pronged support strategy aimed at cushioning the economic blow: An export support desk has been created to help South African firms explore new international markets. A competitiveness support programme offers financial aid and equipment to manufacturers hit by tariffs. A Local Production Support Fund has been deployed to incentivise import substitution and protect local industry. Competition law exemptions now allow exporters to collaborate on logistics and cost sharing. Additionally, the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) has been activated to absorb job losses, estimated at up to 100,000, especially in the automotive and agricultural sectors. Unemployment was already at a staggering 32.9% before the tariffs. Automotive exports to the US have since collapsed by more than 80%, with ripple effects expected across the citrus, wine and table grape industries. South Africa's rapid-response strategy is laudable in ambition, but its long-term sustainability remains in question. Globally, such programmes — emergency subsidies, market reorientation initiatives, and support funds — have shown mixed success. Similar export pivot efforts in Latin America and Southeast Asia have often struggled under the weight of slow bureaucratic implementation, limited state capacity to disburse funds efficiently, and over-reliance on uncertain new markets South Africa's response hinges on three critical variables: the agility of state agencies; the effectiveness of business uptake; and the readiness of alternative markets to absorb redirected exports. Any slippage in these areas could render the response insufficient and deepen the crisis. Moreover, such trade support frameworks are financially intensive. Without new revenue streams or international financing, Pretoria's ability to sustain these programmes over the medium term may falter, especially in a fiscally constrained environment. China: Opportunistic ally or economic colonist? Meanwhile, China has wasted no time in offering African nations softer loan terms, lower tariffs and increased trade lines. But we must not romanticise this pivot. As some scholars have warned, China's Belt and Road incentives often come entangled with opaque loan conditions and regulatory conditionalities and debt entanglements. While Beijing may offer a short-term trade parachute, the long-term cost may be strategic dependency. In this geopolitical chessboard, African economies are too often pawns, never players. Geopolitically, South Africa's BRICS+ alignment may also be shaping Washington's posture. Trump's recent remarks at the BRICS+ summit in Rio warned of consequences for countries backing 'anti-American' initiatives. This, combined with ideological differences over racial justice and Israel-Palestine legal disputes, is adding friction to an already fragile diplomatic relationship. AfCFTA: No longer a dream, but an urgent necessity If there's a silver lining to this tariff tsunami, it is the wake-up call it offers to the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). The World Bank has made it clear: AfCFTA has the potential to lift 30 million people out of poverty and increase intra-African trade by more than 80%. Yet, implementation remains painfully slow, stalled by bureaucratic inefficiencies, political inertia and infrastructural gaps. The Trump tariffs must now serve as an economic alarm. Africa can no longer afford to rely on goodwill from the West, nor can it keep putting off the structural integration that AfCFTA promises. It is time to move from intention to execution. A new doctrine for African trade The 30% tariff imposed on South Africa is not an isolated event — it is a glimpse into a future where the Global South must fend for itself. Ramaphosa's call to Trump may have bought a sliver of diplomatic capital, but it also exposed the limits of soft power when faced with hard tariffs. Africa's path forward is clear. It must diversify its trading partners, strengthen intra-African markets, develop robust trade remedy frameworks and reduce its vulnerability to the whims of any single superpower. If Trump's tariffs represent the thunder, then the lightning must be Africa's resolve to trade with itself and chart its own economic course. Anything less would be economic negligence. The unpredictability of Trump's tariff doctrine underlines a broader truth: no African country can afford to hinge its economic future on the benevolence or volatility of a single trading partner. For South Africa, the US remains its second-largest trading partner, with $17.64-billion in bilateral trade in 2023. But such exposure comes with risks, especially when preferential access can be withdrawn overnight. The International Trade Centre and UN Trade and Development have long warned of these vulnerabilities, urging diversification and intra-African trade expansion as long-term solutions. If this trade turbulence does anything, let it be a clarion call to accelerate the building of resilient, intra-continental supply chains, create robust trade remedy institutions and reduce overexposure to foreign economic storms. African countries must learn to trade more with each other and less at the mercy of superpowers with shifting agendas. For Africa, the path forward is not looking outwards for salvation — it is looking inwards for strength. DM
TimesLIVE
6 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
Poland's Tusk has 'many fears and a lot of hope' before Trump-Putin talks
Poland's prime minister Donald Tusk said on Monday he felt a mixture of fear and hope ahead of a Russia-US summit on the war in Ukraine this week, but added that Washington had pledged to consult its European partners before the talks. US President Donald Trump will meet his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Alaska on August 15, and Kyiv fears the two leaders may try to dictate terms for ending the three-and-a-half-year war. 'The American side has promised it will consult with European partners on its position before the meeting in Alaska,' Tusk told a news conference. 'I will wait ... for the effects of the meeting between presidents Trump and Putin — I have many fears and a lot of hope.' He said Trump's recent comments on the war in Ukraine could give the impression the US president was increasingly understanding Ukrainian and European arguments regarding the conflict, but he was not 100% sure that this position would be lasting.
