Zelenskyy welcomes European leaders' statement on Ukraine role in peace talks
In a joint statement issued on Saturday night, leaders from the UK, France, Italy, Germany, Poland and Finland, along with the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, stressed that Kyiv must be included in any peace talks with Russia.
The US president and his Russian counterpart are preparing to meet in Alaska on Friday. A White House official said on Saturday night that Trump was open to the inclusion of Zelenskyy in the talks but added that for now the summit remained bilateral.
Russia said on Sunday that one person had been killed and several apartments and an industrial facility had been damaged in a Ukrainian drone attack on the southern Russian region of Saratov. On Saturday, two people died and 16 were injured when a Russian drone hit a minibus in the suburbs of the Ukrainian city of Kherson, said the region's governor, Oleksandr Prokudin. Two others died after a Russian drone struck their car in the Zaporizhzhia region, according to the regional governor, Ivan Fedorov.
In their statement, the European leaders welcomed Trump's attempts to end the war but emphasised that negotiations could only take place in the context of a ceasefire or reduction of hostilities. The statement added: 'Only an approach that combines active diplomacy, support to Ukraine and pressure on the Russian Federation to end their illegal war can succeed.'
On Sunday, Zelenskyy wrote on X: 'The end of the war must be fair, and I am grateful to everyone who stands with Ukraine and our people today for the sake of peace in Ukraine, which is defending the vital security interests of our European nations.
'Ukraine values and fully supports the statement by President Macron, Prime Minister Meloni, Chancellor Merz, Prime Minister Tusk, Prime Minister Starmer, President Ursula von der Leyen, and President Stubb on peace for Ukraine.'
In a Telegram post on Saturday, Zelenskyy had said that any decisions made without Kyiv were 'dead decisions' and '[would] never work'.
The British foreign secretary, David Lammy, and the US vice-president, JD Vance, who is on holiday in the UK, held a meeting with Ukrainian and European partners on Saturday aimed at driving peace in Ukraine.
The meeting took place at Chevening, a country mansion in Kent traditionally used by the foreign secretary. Lammy later posted on X that the UK's support for Ukraine 'remains ironclad as we continue working towards a just and lasting peace'.
If the Trump-Putin summit goes ahead, it will be the first time a US president has met the Russian leader since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The last meeting Putin had with a US president was with Joe Biden in Geneva in June 2021.
Details of a potential deal have not been announced, but Trump said ending the war would involve 'some swapping of territories to the betterment of both', meaning Ukraine could be required to renounce significant parts of its territory.
Sign up to Headlines Europe
A digest of the morning's main headlines from the Europe edition emailed direct to you every week day
after newsletter promotion
Zelenskyy on Saturday stressed that Ukrainians 'will not give up their land to occupiers'.
A European official confirmed that a counterproposal was put forward by European representatives at the Chevening meeting but declined to provide details.
According to a report in the Wall Street Journal, the counterproposal included demands that a ceasefire must take place before any other steps are taken and that any territory exchange must be reciprocal, with firm security guarantees.
It was not clear what, if anything, had been agreed at Chevening, but Zelenskyy called the meeting constructive.
'All our arguments were heard,' he said in his evening address to Ukrainians. 'The path to peace for Ukraine should be determined together and only together with Ukraine. This is [a] key principle.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Forget Trump, Europe must show Putin it's serious about peace in Ukraine – and prepare for war
Europe 's destiny will be in the hands of two, maybe three, men on Friday. Decisions taken between Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump and (perhaps) Volodymyr Zelensky will determine the future of the continent. The outcome can only go Europe 's way if its leaders, who know this, prepare their nations for the possibility of outright war with Moscow. They need to be able to elbow the US aside, and prepare their people for the worst. In the chaotic whirl of events around the announcement of the Putin-Trump summit in Alaska – a state the US actually bought from Russia – the terms of the meeting remain misty and mysterious. Talks about Ukraine, without Ukraine, have been acceptable to Trump, but are not acceptable to Kyiv, or to America's European allies. There have been strong indications from Trump that territorial concessions will inevitably emerge from the talks with Putin. That's why the Europeans and Ukraine want to be in the room, and why Zelensky has said 'no' ahead of time. He's also constitutionally barred from making any such concessions to the Russian invaders. Still, there have been briefings that Zelensky may be 'told' that he'll have to give up the Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia provinces – which would mean his troops falling back from the positions they hold now and giving up on cities such as Kramatorsk. Europe's foreign ministers went into virtual sessions for crisis talks on Monday, and over the weekend, European heads of government issued a statement setting them on a potential collision course with Trump. 'Ukraine has the freedom of choice over its own destiny,' said Keir Starmer along with the leaders of Italy, the EU, Finland, Poland and Germany. 'Meaningful negotiations can only take place in the context of a ceasefire or reduction of hostilities. 'The path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine. We remain committed to the principle that international borders must not be changed by force. The current line of contact should be the starting point of negotiations.' OK – fine. Finer still is that Europe and the UK have rushed to increase defence spending, and underwritten arms sales from the US to Ukraine. They have generally understood that the US is now an unreliable ally when it comes to Russia and Ukraine, since Trump has lost no opportunity to enfeeble Kyiv and to strengthen the Kremlin's hand. There should be no expectation that Trump will take the side of democratic pro-Western Ukraine over the dictator Putin on Friday – and the Europeans know that. That why they're working very hard to make sure that Zelensky is at the summit too – and that he's reinforced with the full force of European diplomacy if he's allowed to attend. But it is military force that Europe needs to be able to show – not just as US taxpayer subsidies to European security are cut back by Trump, but right now. According to an analysis by the Kiel Institute, the 'production of land forces' by Europe and the UK must increase by at least 300 per cent, and probably by six times, to match current Russian military expenditure and production. 'Europe needs to shift its societal debate from fiscal numbers to actual military capabilities needed, ie, how to purchase and produce what is actually needed to be successful on the modern battlefield and how to ensure timely delivery with concrete targets for closing critical capability gaps,' the report said. In the language of old-fashioned telegrams spoofed by Evelyn Waugh in Scoop – 'Europe is unwarwise'. It is not that politicians across the continent don't understand this. It is that the populations they rely on to elect them don't quite comprehend, as yet, the danger they are in. Polling undertaken in June by the European Council on Foreign Relations found that, in a survey of European nations, less than a third (27 per cent) of 18- to 29-year-olds favoured the introduction of compulsory military service. The most support, among those surveyed, was in France (62 per cent), Germany (53 per cent), and Poland (51 per cent). Hungary, where the government has taken a soft line on Putin, sits at 32 per cent, Spain at 37 per cent, and the UK at 37 per cent. Frontline states like Sweden have launched public awareness campaigns on how to respond to a Russian attack. Finland has a population of just over 5.6 million (smaller than London's). It can mobilise 280,000 trained soldiers rapidly, and is estimated to be able to field 900,000 in extremis. Britain's forces could muster 180,000 – at a pinch. In June, the authors of the National Security Strategy said that Britain must prepare for a 'wartime' scenario. But while the UK, alongside France, is leading the 'coalition of the willing' in Europe – by increasing defence spending, and lately by reinforcing Zelensky's position ahead of the Alaska summit – the message has not yet got through to Britons. 'The politicians have been saying all the right things – but we need a sustained campaign for the wider public to get it,' a government insider told The Independent.
The Sun
24 minutes ago
- The Sun
Raging Russia accuses Britain of trying to SABOTAGE Trump & Putin talks after Starmer warns Don ‘don't trust' Vlad
RUSSIA has accused Britain of trying to sabotage the Ukraine peace talks set to be held between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. The world's eyes will be on Alaska on Friday as both leaders prepare to meet for the historic summit that could mark the beginning of the end of the Russian invasion. 7 7 7 7 But the Kremlin has hit out at Britain, accusing it of trying to disrupt the peace talks after Sir Keir Starmer warned the Russian leader cannot be "trusted". The Russian embassy in London slammed No10 and said: "We note the ongoing attempts by London and some of its partners to disrupt a peace resolution of the conflict by eliminating its root causes. "This is clearly demonstrated by the statements and activity developed by the British leadership in the run-up to the Russian-American summit in Alaska." Sir Keir Starmer backed Trump's plans but urged to be more caution. The PM's official spokesman said: "Never trust President Putin as far as you could throw him, but we obviously will support Ukraine. "Any ceasefire cannot just be an opportunity for President Putin to go away, re-arm, restrengthen, and then go again." Trump said on August 8 that he hopes to hold a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on August 15. Washington and Moscow are said to be eyeing a deal to put an end to the bloody conflict in Ukraine - but it may not be all good news for Kyiv. Trump told reporters in The White House that Zelensky is "going to have to get ready to sign something" in order to bring peace to his nation. Top diplomats from the US and Russia and currently working on an agreement to finalise post-war territories, senior officials told Bloomberg. Could wanted war criminal Putin be ARRESTED when he meets Trump? How Vlad will use loophole to escape cuffs in Alaska Sources said Trump's team is trying to get Ukraine and its European allies on board to get a peace deal that would see Kyiv make some concessions. One major sticking point for Moscow is the annexation of Ukrainian territory - one of Putin's long-term demands. Zelensky has been adamant that Ukraine will not accept any further annexation of its land. Although he suggested Russia could be allowed to retain some of the land it has taken. Moscow is likely to demand that Ukraine cede its entire eastern Donbas area to Russia, as well as Crimea - which Moscow annexed in 2014. This means Ukrainian troops will need to withdraw from the territory of Donetsk and Luhansk - the regions still being held by Kyiv. In return, Moscow would stop its offensive in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions of Ukraine along the current battlelines, according to the officials. Kyiv risks being presented with a take-it-or-leave-it offer during the high-stakes meeting. 7 Zelensky has told European leaders they must reject any settlement proposals by the US that demand Ukraine give up further land. Trump announced on Friday that the only way to resolve the issues is for both sides to accept losses of land. He said: "It's complicated, actually. Nothing is easy. It's very complicated. "We're going to get some switched. There'll be some swapping of territories to the betterment of both." The MAGA prez said he would try to return territory to Ukraine. Don added: "Russia has occupied a big portion of Ukraine. They've occupied some very prime territory. "We're going to try and get some of that territory back for Ukraine." Putin, who has consistently rejected calls for a ceasefire, said that he wants peace but that his demands for ending his invasion were "unchanged". Slave to one's habits Zelensky has warned that Putin has no intention of seeking peace. He claimed Putin would try to fool Trump and continue waging his bloody war against Ukraine. The embattled president said: "[Putin] is definitely not preparing for a ceasefire or an end to the war. "He is determined only to present a meeting with America as his personal victory and then continue acting exactly as before. 'The Russians simply want to buy time, not end the war. Zelensky said that Putin was redeploying troops and forces "in ways that suggest preparations for new offensive operations. 'If someone is preparing for peace, this is not what he does.' Igor Novikov, Zelensky's ex-adviser, spoke to The Sun about the Putin and Trump meeting on US soil. 7 7 He said: "Trump understands that he needs to put enough sanction pressure and military pressure on Russia for them to consider ending this war. "But at the same time, Putin tries to manipulate and charm him, massage his ego into a position where Russia wins time and the US moves further away from helping Ukraine. "Whatever they decide upon. It won't be taken for granted by the Ukrainian people." Zelensky was initially thought to be a possible third member around the table at Friday's superpower summit. The first announcements from the White House suggested Putin would meet Trump, followed by a three-way meeting between Trump, Putin and Zelensky. But that was swiftly shut down by the Kremlin, and an aide denied it had ever been agreed to on the Russian side. Could Putin be arrested in Alaska? By Patrick Harrington, Foreign news reporter VLADIMIR Putin will jet to Alaska for a historic summit with President Trump on Friday to seek an end to the war- but he does so as a wanted international criminal. The International Criminal Court (ICC) slapped him with an arrest warrant in 2023 over allegations of war crimes - so the "billion-dollar question" is: can Putin be cuffed in Alaska? Putin would in theory be nabbed if he were to visit any of 125 countries around the world - including the UK, France, Germany and Canada. But the US the is among the minority of countries which does not recognise the rule of the ICC. It sit among the ranks of Russia, China, Pakistan and a handful of others in disregarding the framework. This means that, unlike most nations, the US "is not bound to arrest Putin". So the Kremlin can be confident that their leader will be leaving the Arctic state in his own plane - and trotting the globe without any threat of repercussions. The US president also dismissed claims that next week's historic summit hinges on a three-way meeting with Volodymyr Zelensky. Asked if Putin needed to meet Zelensky in order to meet him, Trump clarified: "No, he doesn't." Despite that, the White House is preparing for a possible trilateral summit. Over the weekend, a source briefed on the internal talks told The Sun: "It's being discussed." A meeting with Putin and Trump will come after weeks of constant barbs being fired at the Russian tyrant by America's leader. Trump has expressed frustration with Putin, questioning whether the Russian leader really wants peace with Ukraine. Putin has snubbed peace for months and is instead steadily increasing his overnight bombing raids - which could soon hit 1,000 drones and missiles a day. Just days ago, 31 people died including five children after the Russians fired an Iskander missile into a residential tower block in Kyiv. Why is meeting being held in Alaska? Russia expert Colonel Hamish de-Bretton Gordon said there are a few other reasons Putin is likely chuffed with Alaska as the meeting point. He said: "President Putin is absolutely fixated about his own security, and his desire not to wander out of friendly airspace. "There's not much of that to Alaska - would only be in international airspace for a few miles." It also means Russian power is making a return to the territory once owned by the Tsardom of Russia. Putin's distant predecessor Tsar Alexander II sold it to America in 1867 for $7.2 million — or two cents per acre. And the Great State of Alaska is also a very long way away from Europe, and all the pesky diplomats who have got under Putin's skin. The choice of location for meetings between rival superpowers carries enormous significance. Many times, the charged encounters have been backdropped by Washington or Moscow - as well as Geneva, Vienna and even a Soviet cruise ship. But Alaskan officials are delighted that their icy land will for the first time host a superpower summit. Its geographical location automatically makes it a logical option, placed as it is directly between the US and the expanse of eastern Russia. You can even see Russian territory while standing on Alaskan soil - if you stand on the island of Little Diomede and look out to Big Diomede.
The Guardian
24 minutes ago
- The Guardian
UFC landed a $7.7bn deal with Paramount. But is Dana White's Trump bond a liability?
Forget for a moment the stereotype that MMA athletes and their fans are All-American bar fighters. The MMA community is far more diverse and far more cerebral than the casual onlooker realizes. Has Dana White forgotten that? The UFC president has long sought to expand the sport's appeal to as many demographics as possible. But in the past few years, he has bet big on a tight affiliation with Donald Trump, who has been perfectly content to revel in the adulation of one segment of the population while heaping scorn upon all others. White has campaigned for Trump, welcomed him to several UFC events and hasn't immediately smacked down the notion of holding a UFC card at the White House. On the surface, that might seem logical. MMA culture is intertwined with bro culture, and bros are considered the antithesis of 'woke' liberalism. But it's not that simple. Consider a startling fact: while Maga champions an 'America First' ideology, the UFC is a paragon of globalism. Of the 11 reigning UFC champions, only one is American – Kayla Harrison, thriving in an organization White once insisted would exclude women. Both Australia and Georgia (the country) boast twice as many champions as the UFC's home country. The only belt firmly held by US fighters is the unofficial 'BMF' (Baddest Motherfucker) belt. White invented this to reward charismatic fighters who put on great shows. While it's a clever way to encourage personality and panache, it also seems like a DEI program to ensure US fighters remain prominent in the UFC pantheon. So the UFC roster is more global than ever. But UFC fighters have never fit neatly into categories. This diversity was a hallmark of the reality show that broke the UFC into the mainstream, The Ultimate Fighter. The casts included cerebral chess players, devout Christians and someone who brought a compass to ensure that his bed would face north, and another who fled the show to reassure his girlfriend that rumors she saw online weren't true. And the UFC evolved in ways that might be considered 'progressive.' Cain Velasquez didn't lose any noticeable fan support in 2010 when he sported a 'Brown Pride' tattoo across his chest and admitted that his father had immigrated illegally. (Velasquez has since been sentenced to prison for issues unrelated to immigration.) After opposing the idea of female fighters for many years, White threw open the Octagon door to Ronda Rousey in a 2013 bout against Liz Carmouche, who was openly gay. White strongly supported Carmouche and even gave an impassioned plea to legalize gay marriage wherever it wasn't already recognized – a position he stated well before a series of landmark US supreme court decisions upheld that right. Four years later, UFC fighter Jessica Andrade proposed to her girlfriend in her postfight interview in the Octagon. While the UFC sold Pride Month gear and gave proceeds to an LGBTQIA+ organization in Nevada, outspoken Trump supporter Colby Covington emerged as one of the sport's biggest villains. Still, the UFC's primary demographic of young adult men proved to be a decisive force for Trump's return to the presidency. This group overlaps significantly with the audience for UFC commentator Joe Rogan's popular podcast, and Rogan – who felt ostracized by the left after touting scientifically unsound Covid treatments – endorsed Trump last year. But that was November. Fast forward to this summer, and this demographic has veered sharply against Trump. Rogan himself has broken with the president over tariffs, deportations and the Epstein files. Last month, Rogan told podcast guest James Talarico, a Texas Democrat, that he should run for the White House. There's a case to be made that if the Kamala Harris campaign had managed to get her on Rogan's podcast last fall, we would have a different president today. Such changes shouldn't be a surprise. Rogan himself is always on the lookout for new ideas – if anything, he's a little too receptive to some schools of thought and doesn't push back or check facts. While older Americans are prone to adopting a party and sticking with it come hell or high water, Gen Z is fiercely independent politically. They're also more diverse than previous generations, more likely to be non-white, LGBTQ+ or any other group that may feel aggrieved by Trump's actions since reclaiming the presidency. Younger generations are also much more receptive to socialism than prior ones – after all, young men made enough of a fuss over Bernie Sanders to warrant the term 'Bernie Bros.' So Maga's place in 'bro culture' – and those who are MMA fans – is by no means secure. And one day, Donald Trump will be out of office. We've already seen that US conservatives are eager to abandon one trend for another. Today's Maga supporters had a decidedly different message when the Tea Party reigned supreme. Two decades after calling Democrats 'traitors' for opposing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, they excommunicated the entire Bush family. Trump's popularity may well be on the slide too. His approval rating has tanked, and his mutable responses to the Jeffrey Epstein saga have fractured his base. The UFC may well be losing as many fans as its attracts by aligning itself with Trump. The UFC, meanwhile, is still a strong brand but perhaps not the hot property it was a few years ago. Last week's Disney earnings report made a brief reference to 'lower Ultimate Fighting Championship pay-per-view fees due to lower average buys per event.' The fight game tends to be cyclical, driven by big personalities like Rousey, Jon Jones and Conor McGregor, all of whom have either left the sport or gone through a prolonged period of inactivity. It's tough to imagine current light heavyweight champion Magomed Ankalaev reaching the level of fame of Forrest Griffin, Rampage Jackson or Chuck Liddell. While we can't really quantify the impact of the Trump lovefest on the UFC's popularity, the organization clearly can't afford to alienate the 60% or so of the population that disapproves of Trump's presidency thus far. Sign up to The Recap The best of our sports journalism from the past seven days and a heads-up on the weekend's action after newsletter promotion Perhaps this is one reason why the UFC has just opted for a new media deal that breaks from their pay-per-view model in order to get wider exposure. 'This shift in distribution strategy will unlock greater accessibility and discoverability for sports fans,' said the press release announcing the seven-year, $7.7bn deal. Some fight cards will be on network TV, and others will be free to subscribers of their streaming partner. That streaming partner, though, is Paramount, which has also drawn the ire of many US viewers through a series of moves that appear to be a capitulation to the president's desire to control the media. First, Paramount settled a lawsuit over the editing of a Kamala Harris interview, a lawsuit deemed by many legal scholars as rather simple for Paramount to win, at the same time that the media conglomerate sought government approval for a merger. Second, after TV host Stephen Colbert criticized his parent company for settling the suit, Paramount announced that his show will end in 2026, ostensibly for financial reasons even though it is the highest-rated late-night show. (Fox News Channel claims its show Gutfeld! has higher ratings, but it airs earlier than the traditional late-night window that starts at 11.30pm Eastern time.) Still, the decision to move away from the pay-per-view model can only be seen as a sign that the UFC feels the need to make its big tent a bit bigger as it faces the difficult challenge of keeping US fans interested in a sport in which American athletes are far from dominant. Typically, US sports broadcasters gravitate to events in which US athletes are faring well, which is why Olympic coverage focuses far more attention on swimming and snowboarding than, say, table tennis or biathlon. White and Trump were always an odd match. Trump was involved with Affliction, a rival MMA organization of the late 2000s that White fought with the venom of the Trump administration's attacks on Harvard and the media. Trump has ridiculed veterans, dating back to when he said he didn't consider John McCain a war hero because he likes 'people who weren't captured' and continuing with Ice arrests of veterans in his second term and a recent awkward moment in which he turned attention to himself at a ceremony honoring Purple Heart recipients; White and the UFC are staunch supporters of the Wounded Warrior Project and other veterans' groups. White is an affable philanthropist; Trump used funds from his own foundation on a portrait of himself and his presidential campaign. We probably won't see White publicly repudiate Trump, a move that wouldn't sit well with a sizable portion of UFC's audience. But over the years, White has shrewdly expanded the UFC fanbase, and he would dearly love for his sport to be the biggest in the world. White has already pronounced that his involvement with politics ends with Trump, telling The New Yorker last year that: 'I'm never fucking doing this again. I want nothing to do with this shit. It's gross. It's disgusting. I want nothing to do with politics.' White has changed his mind about many things over the years. He brought in Kimbo Slice not long after denigrating his fighting skills. He brought women into the cage. But those moves were driven by popular uprisings, and White is almost always willing to give fans what they want. While much of the country watches in horror as Medicaid is slashed, Gaza's suffering gets worse by the week, the economy teeters on the brink, and the White House is in crisis mode trying to deflect from the Epstein case, the clamor to make White reassert his position at Trump's side will surely be muted.
