Chairman of Mejlis of Crimean Tatar People: Trump is testing Ukraine with messages about territorial concessions
Source: Chubarov in a comment to the Radio Liberty project Crimea.Realities
Quote: "Trump and his entourage ended up in a trap entirely of their own fault. Just recall the stream of friendly messages towards Putin and Russia that they voiced long before any negotiations began. So Moscow realised it… the full imperial essence of Russia came out into the open. Now, it seems to me – and here I move on to assumptions – the Trump administration is testing the Ukrainian leadership and political class by spreading various messages on the topic of territorial concessions by Ukraine, supposedly necessary to end the Russo-Ukrainian war and achieve lasting peace."
Details: Chubarov stressed that Ukraine must maintain a categorical rejection of any, even hypothetical, proposals of territorial concessions in exchange for peace.
Quote: "Because it is clear that in such a case there would be neither peace nor a future for the Ukrainian state. Meanwhile, since such provocations will continue, the Ukrainian authorities and politicians should respond firmly in every case when real political figures are behind them."
Details: Chubarov reiterated that the Mejlis rejects any form of recognition of Russian control over Crimea – both de facto and de jure.
Quote: "Our position, which is fully based on international law and entirely in line with Ukraine's national legislation, is as follows: Crimea is the homeland of the indigenous Crimean Tatar people and an integral part of Ukraine. Accordingly, no one and under no circumstances may decide the fate of Crimea except the Ukrainian state and the Crimean Tatar people."
Background:
On 17 April, negotiations took place in Paris involving Ukraine, the United States, France, the United Kingdom and Germany on ending the Russo-Ukrainian war. The next round of talks is scheduled for this week in London.
US President Donald Trump expressed hope that Ukraine and Russia would reach an agreement soon, after which both countries would "start to do big business with the United States of America".
The Wall Street Journal reported that Ukraine is under pressure to respond this week to a range of proposals from the Trump administration on how to end the war in Ukraine. These include the potential US recognition of Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014 and excluding Kyiv from joining NATO.
Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
a few seconds ago
- CNN
Not so easy: The perils and pitfalls in providing Ukraine with security guarantees
Security guarantees have become a central focus in discussions about a peace deal for Ukraine, with the country's President Volodymyr Zelensky saying at the White House Monday that they are the 'key issue, a starting point for ending the war.' Zelensky knows that in the long run, Russia's superior numbers and weaponry will grind down Ukrainian resistance. So he has long insisted that any agreement must provide Ukraine with promises that the US and Europe will prevent the Russians from resuming their assault in a year or two. Here's what to know about this crucial part of any deal to end the war in Ukraine. First, this is uncharted territory: the 'Coalition of the Willing,' a group of key Ukrainian allies, is still working out what it can realistically offer. The purpose is clear enough: to deter the Russians from fresh attacks on Ukraine in years to come. The shape is less clear, but there will likely be a plan to put forces on the ground and support Ukraine from the sea and in the air. There would also be help in rebuilding the Ukrainian military, now exhausted by more than three years of war. Indeed, Zelensky has argued that a strong Ukrainian military is itself one security guarantee. French President Emmanuel Macron stressed the allies' support for 'a robust Ukrainian army, one that can resist any attempted attack and deter it, and therefore no limitations in numbers, capabilities, weapons.' Earlier this year, the UK and France came up with the concept of a multinational force that UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said would 'deploy following a ceasefire to deter Russian aggression for years to come.' Initially, there was talk of the two countries leading a contingent of some 30,000 troops that would be deployed in Ukraine. That has given way to discussions about a smaller deterrent force on the ground and more of a 'security umbrella' provided by its allies, that would include sea, air and training elements. Some 30 countries have signed up to the coalition. But what they would each be prepared to contribute is as yet unclear. Countries like Germany and Italy are reluctant to commit ground troops; Australia and Canada may be more willing. The coalition would provide 'reassurance forces at sea, in the air, and on land that the allies are ready to provide to Ukraine,' Macron said on Monday. He added: 'We're going to need to help Ukraine with boots on the ground, to make sure that there is no intrusion from Russia in the future.' However, there is no chance of this prospective force being deployed in and around Ukraine before hostilities cease, and that gives the Kremlin what some analysts call a powerful veto. Zelensky said Tuesday: 'We are already working on the concrete content of the security guarantees,' a process that will continue at a high temp in the coming weeks. But here's the problem. A fully-fledged assurance force fanning out across a 1,000- kilometer (600-mile) front line would require far more than 100,000 troops, a huge stretch for European armies which have shrunk since the end of the Cold War. In the 1990s, for example, a 60,000-strong NATO corps was deployed on a much smaller front line in the Bosnian war. Now add logistics, rotations and a command structure to what must be figured out. And rules of engagement in the event of ceasefire violations, which would have to be agreed by all governments with troops on the ground. 'The force deployed would need to be credible to Moscow and the coalition resolved to act decisively in the event of a breach of the ceasefire,' according to a report by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). More feasible, according to military analysts, might be a deterrent force of some 10,000 troops, a sort of warning to Russia that any resumption of attacks would come with a price tag. This force would be in Ukraine but not necessarily close to the front lines. 'Its deterrence effect on Russian forces would mostly be achieved by its very presence since its capability for high-intensity combat operations would be limited,' IISS says of this option. Not really. There's been a weapons pipeline – from both Europe and the US – throughout the war, as well as considerable intelligence sharing. And during the Biden administration there was plenty of talk about Ukraine's pathway to either full NATO membership or some affiliated status. But that prospect vanished when Trump returned to office. Over the weekend Trump reiterated that Ukraine would not be allowed to join the US-led security alliance – in line with a key Russian demand. Before Russia's full invasion, there was a civilian monitoring mission run by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe that tracked violations along the frontline in eastern Ukraine. But it was in no way equipped to offer security assurances and was often ignored by both sides. That's the elephant in the room. It's only in the last few days that US President Donald Trump has come round to the idea of the US being involved in offering Ukraine security guarantees. Previously he and other members of the administration had said bluntly that it was the Europeans' responsibility. Trump was vague about the nature of the commitment in the White House talks Monday. He suggested in a post on Truth Social that guarantees 'would be provided by the various European Countries, with a co-ordination with the United States of America.' But Trump on Tuesday rejected the prospect of US troops being deployed to Ukrainian soil. 'What it will exactly mean – US involvement – that will be discussed in the coming days,' said NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in an interview with Fox News. But Rutte described any U.S. involvement as a 'breakthrough,' which it is – because the Russians were never going to take seriously the idea of a European assurance force without the US underwriting it. The US has important capabilities the Europeans don't – its intelligence gathering and the ability to suppress enemy air defenses at scale are just two examples. But the Trump administration is going to be wary of any US role that might lead to an escalation. In a word, no. On Monday, it repeated its insistence there could be no troops from any NATO country on Ukrainian soil. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova rejected 'any scenario that envisages the appearance in Ukraine of a military contingent with the participation of NATO countries.' Moscow has also insisted that any peace settlement include limits on the numbers and capabilities of Ukraine's military. It says it too deserves security guarantees and has always claimed that NATO's eastward expansion is one of the the root causes of the conflict. That's at odds with Trump's insistence that at the Alaska summit that 'Putin agreed that Russia would accept security guarantees for Ukraine. And this is one of the key points that we need to consider.' The question is whether Putin can be persuaded to allow Ukraine to have any sort of security guarantees in exchange for locking in Russian battlefield gains and – for example – recognition of Russian sovereignty of Crimea. There's another risk. Russia might be tempted to test the resolve of any assurance force by devising some pretext for renewed military action. In turn this could play into Putin's greatest ambition: splitting the transatlantic alliance, with the US unwilling to follow through on security guarantees to which the Europeans have committed themselves. There is more discussion now about part of the security guarantee coming in the form of air cover for Ukraine, a little like the no-fly zones over Iraq back in the 1990s that were designed to prevent attacks by Saddam Hussein's forces on minorities. 'The greatest deterrent effect would be achieved by placing not only ground but also combat air elements within Ukraine,' says IISS. More airpower could be stationed in Poland and Romania. Such a presence would provide surveillance and reconnaissance but would struggle to maintain air superiority if challenged by the Russians. And there would be a risk of rapid escalation if, for example, fighter jets engaged in aerial combat. What's more, says one observer, airpower and ground troops are like eggs and bacon – the chicken is involved, the pig is committed. And the Ukrainians want commitment, not involvement.
Miami Herald
a few seconds ago
- Miami Herald
Trump approval is at second-term low, with shift among Latinos, new poll finds
President Donald Trump's approval rating now stands at a second-term low, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos survey. This decline is fueled in part by waning support from Hispanic voters, a demographic that helped propel Trump to victory in the 2024 election. The poll arrives during a packed summer for Trump, marked by his signing of a sweeping tax-and-spending package, his nationwide crackdown on immigration, and ongoing diplomatic efforts to resolve the Russia-Ukraine war. It also comes after Trump announced new tariffs on dozens of countries and as labor market conditions have worsened, leading Trump to fire the Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner. Conducted over six days in August, the poll found 40% of respondents approve of Trump's job performance so far. This figure, while the lowest recorded since Trump's inauguration, is unchanged from July. But it is down 7 points from January, when a record-high 47% of Americans approved of Trump. By comparison, at the same point during his first term, Trump's approval rating was slightly lower: 35%. In August 2021, former President Joe Biden's rating hovered around 50%. Trump's recent drop in support has been borne out by other recent polls. A July Gallup survey found Trump's overall approval rating had slipped to a record low, while also dropping on key issues. The survey — which sampled 4,446 U.S. adults with a margin of error of about 2 percentage points — also found Trump's approval rating has fallen among Hispanics. About one-third of Hispanic respondents, 32%, said they approved of Trump's job performance, on par with a previous low recorded this year. By comparison, the president's approval rating among Hispanic adults stood at 34% in April and 37% in January, marking a 5-point decline, according to The Hill. In the 2024 presidential election, 46% of Hispanic voters backed the Republican president, up from the 32% he won in 2020. Additionally, the survey found that 54% of respondents believe Trump is 'too closely aligned with Russia.' It comes after he held a diplomatic summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Anchorage, Alaska, on Aug. 15. Three days later, Trump hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy — and other European leaders — at the White House to discuss terms for ending the war. Further, 42% of respondents said they approved of the president's handling of crime. In early August, Trump federalized the Washington, D.C., police department and deployed the National Guard to the capital in an attempt to crack down on crime. It echoed tactics used to quell protests in Los Angeles earlier this summer. An additional 43% of respondents said they backed Trump's immigration policy. Since taking office, Trump has dramatically reduced southern border crossings and ramped up deportations. On every issue, the vast majority of support for Trump came from Republicans.
New York Post
a few seconds ago
- New York Post
Fox News anchor Bret Baier ticketed for distracted driving amid Trump DC crackdown: ‘Didn't know there was paparazzi'
Not even Fox News anchors are immune from President Trump's law and order push in Washington, DC. 'Special Report' host and Fox News chief political anchor Bret Baier was spotted by an eagle-eyed cop picking up his phone while driving in the capital's tony Georgetown neighborhood Saturday. 'I picked up my ringing phone as I drove past an officer while driving my wife's car in Georgetown,' Baier confessed on X Tuesday after video of the traffic stop circulated on social media. 'He pointed to have me pull over — I did. He was very professional. I had to dig for the registration card. Got a ticket and left. I didn't know there was paparazzi,' added Baier, who punctuated his post with an eye-roll emoji. 3 Bret Baier was seen respectfully interacting with a cop after getting pulled over. Instagram/@mollaanbabbingtoncompass 3 Bret Baier scored a high-profile interview with President Trump last week. Getty Images Video captured by Mollaan Babbington Group, a real estate firm in DC, showed the moment Baier was pulled over in a white Mercedes-Benz G-Class, also known as a G-Wagon. In DC, as in many municipalities and states, it is illegal to use a cellphone to text or call while driving unless the device has hands-free functionality. When reached for comment, a Fox News spokesperson directed The Post to Baier's social media statement. 3 The Fox News anchor was driving his wife Amy's car when he got pulled over. REUTERS Baier's run-in with the law came one day after he traveled on Air Force One to Anchorage, Alaska to cover Trump's highly-anticipated summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The 55-year-old interviewed Trump on the way to the summit — and golfed with the president and special envoy Steve Witkoff at Trump's northern Virginia course the same day as his traffic stop. Starting Aug. 7, Trump began deploying federal law enforcement to the streets of DC in response to a series of high-profile crimes in which public servants were victimized — most notably former Department of Government Efficiency worker Edward Coristine, who was left blooded by juveniles after he intervened to prevent a carjacking early on Aug. 3. On Aug. 11, Trump deployed the DC National Guard and federalized the DC Metropolitan Police Department for 30 days. Since the crackdown began, local cops and feds have arrested hundreds of criminal suspects, including 52 collared Monday night, according to data from the Trump administration. The latest arrests included a suspected MS-13 gang member, per Attorney General Pam Bondi. The DC Police Union claimed Monday that since Trump's Aug. 11 order, crime has plunged 8% overall, including an 83% decline in carjacking and a 46% drop in robberies. Trump indicated earlier this month he would likely ask Congress to extend federal control of the MPD beyond the minimum 30 days.
