View from Russia: Moscow celebrates Trump-Putin call as step towards normalising relations
Donald Trump's phone call with Vladimir Putin has been hailed by politicians and commentators in Moscow as a success, and a step towards normalising relations between the two superpowers.
The leaders spoke for 90 minutes on Wednesday in a call the Kremlin described as 'very important', discussing a path to peace in the war in Ukraine.
Dmitriy Peskov, Putin's spokesman, said: 'The current (US) administration, as we understand it, holds the view that everything should be done to stop the war and achieve peace.'
Leonid Slutsky, the head of the international committee at the Russian State Duma, said the phone call 'has broken through the anti-Russian blockade of the West and launched the process of defrosting Russian-American contacts'.
It was noted that the two leaders had invited each other to visit their countries. However, they are more likely to meet in a third country, such as Saudi Arabia.
Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chairman of Russia's powerful security council, argued the call proved that any Western hopes of defeating Russia would never be achieved.
'There is not and cannot be a main country and a senior ruler of the planet,' Medvedev said. 'This lesson should be learned by the arrogant American elites.'
Medvedev, the Kremlin's hawkish mouthpiece, blamed Joe Biden's administration for leading the world to the 'brink of apocalypse'.
It was the US who unilaterally decided to be the 'country-in-chief on our planet' and began a 'hybrid war against our people', he added.
Medvedev, a former president of Russia, said none of the US leaders of the past tried to sanction Soviet leaders during crises and that they 'kept lines of communication open'.
He added: 'It is impossible to bring us to our knees. And the sooner our opponents realise this, the better.'
Vladimir Solovyov, Putin's chief propagandist on Russian TV, also celebrated the call during his show on Wednesday, saying it ended the 'narrative' about Russian isolation.
Opening the programme, Solovyov said Mr Trump did not mention anything about Russia being aggressive, provocative, or unjust. He added the US president did not mention 'anything scary or anything about military criminals', and that he spoke very respectfully and calmly.
Russia-US relations hit rock bottom in 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine, and the US implemented economic and personal sanctions in response to Russia's actions. Mr Biden refused to talk with Putin, saying he had 'no good reason' to.
Peskov, however, noted that the Trump settlement's future is unclear unless the 'first results of the joint work' are seen.
On Thursday, Sergei Naryshkin, the head of Russia's foreign intelligence service, said the work would be continued at the level of the heads of the state agencies, including law enforcement and special services.
'The order has been given,' Naryshkin said.
On Wednesday, Russia released an American schoolteacher, Marc Fogel, who had spent three years in custody. The White House said that, in exchange, it would release Alexander Vinnik, a Russian Bitcoin criminal.
According to reports, the prisoner swap included three other people who Belarus must free.
It has been described by analysts as a goodwill gesture, laying the ground for cooperation.
The excitement in the parliament and the media was not shared by Mikhail Zvinchuk, a pro-war blogger known as Rybar, who is wanted in the US with a $10 million reward for his capture.
Zvinchuk pointed out that the sides' positions are different, and it is too early to be confident about the meeting between the leaders.
'The outcome of the possible negotiations will be determined by the sides' capabilities to continue the combat operations,' said Zvinchuk.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
6 minutes ago
UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Norway sanction 2 far-right Israeli Cabinet ministers
JERUSALEM -- Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Norway said Tuesday they have imposed sanctions on two far-right Israeli government ministers for allegedly 'inciting extremist violence' against Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich face asset freezes and travel bans from the five countries. The ministers are champions of expanding Israeli settlements in the West Bank. The decision by Western governments friendly to Israel was a sharp rebuke of Israel's settlement policies in the West Bank and of settler violence, which has spiked since Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, attack ignited the war in the Gaza Strip. The five countries' foreign ministers said in a joint statement that Ben-Gvir and Smotrich 'have incited extremist violence and serious abuses of Palestinian human rights. Extremist rhetoric advocating the forced displacement of Palestinians and the creation of new Israeli settlements is appalling and dangerous.' Israel's Foreign Ministry said earlier it had been informed of the sanctions. Smotrich, the country's finance minister, wrote on social media that he found out that Britain had decided to sanction him for obstructing the viability of a Palestinian state. 'We are determined to continue building,' he said. 'We overcame Pharoah, we'll overcome Starmer's Wall.' Ben-Gvir, the national security minister, wrote on social media. Israel's Foreign Minister Gideon Saar called the move 'outrageous.' He said he had discussed it with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and they would meet next week to discuss Israel's response. The Biden administration took the rare step of sanctioning radical Israeli settlers implicated in violence in the occupied West Bank — sanctions that were then lifted by President Donald Trump. Eitay Mack, an Israeli human rights lawyer who spent years campaigning for the sanctions on Smotrich and Ben-Gvir — along with violent West Bank settlers — described the move as 'historic.' 'It means the wall of immunity that Israeli politicians had has been broken," he said. 'It's unbelievable that it took so long for Western governments to sanction Israeli politicians, and the fact that it's being done while Trump is president is quite amazing,' said Mack. "It is a message to Netanyahu himself that he could be next." Israel captured the West Bank along with east Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip in the 1967 Mideast war. The Palestinians want those territories for their hoped-for future state. Settlement growth and construction have been promoted by successive Israeli governments stretching back decades, but it has exploded under Netanyahu's far-right coalition, which has settlers in key Cabinet posts. There are now well over 100 settlements and 500,000 Israeli settlers sprawling across the territory from north to south — a reality, rights groups say, dimming any hopes for an eventual two-state solution.
Atlantic
8 minutes ago
- Atlantic
This Is Not What the National Guard Is For
Donald Trump just did what no other president has ever done in the context of urban unrest: He sent federal troops to a state without a request from the governor. By federalizing California National Guard members on Saturday, the president abrogated Governor Gavin Newsom's authority over his own Guard. During both previous instances of a presidential order to deploy National Guardsmen to American cities—the Los Angeles riots in 1992 and the Hurricane Katrina response in 2005—the state's governor was overseeing a public-safety apparatus that had been overwhelmed. Trump, seizing on unlawful behavior that included vandalism, violence, and refusing to disperse during protests against ICE raids in L.A., announced that 2,000 reservists would be deployed to the city, unilaterally and contra Newsom's advice. Trump's decision—to exercise his Title 10 authority to federalize the National Guard under his command—was not based on a careful assessment of the operational needs on the streets of Los Angeles. Even if the White House's escalating rhetoric and threats of full military deployment were justified by circumstances that merited overruling a governor, the notion that the armed services will stop protests and quiet widespread outrage about Trump's immigration-enforcement policies in California is naive and flawed. Implicated in Trump's decision was a lot of prior controversy—immigration and deportation, ICE raids, tension between blue states and the White House, a personal beef with Newsom—but the president's assertion that a troop presence is the answer to public unrest is particularly dubious. Historically, these deployments have proved of limited value even when the president and governor agree on goals. Sending in the military as a hostile force is a recipe for trouble. During the 1992 L.A. riots, after four white police officers were acquitted of assaulting Rodney King, 63 people were killed amid widespread arson and looting as rioting spread through the city. In 2005, Hurricane Katrina killed nearly 1,000 people in Louisiana and left New Orleans with no functioning government and little law enforcement. In each case, National Guard deployment was essentially a response to the incapacity of the local police force—either because the cops had become the focus of hostility or because they simply could not meet the demands of the crisis. And in both instances, the governor requested the federal intervention. David Frum: For Trump, this is a dress rehearsal One key lesson of the L.A. deployment was that a failure to define command-and-control responsibilities resulted in operational problems and delays. The National Guard under Governor Pete Wilson's authority was supposed to protect first responders (especially firefighters) and emergency work crews trying to fix critical infrastructure. Trained to help with crowd control, these troops also supported police patrols—to protect shopping centers from looting, for example. The soldiers' initial deployment was slow, and they were not fully prepared for the mission. But in the days that followed, the rioting subsided and the National Guard was able to perform much of its mission and provide relief to the overstretched police forces. By then, however, Wilson had lost confidence in the National Guard's leadership and was unnerved by the scale of disorder. He asked the White House for help, and President George H. W. Bush sent in 3,500 federalized troops. Despite deploying in a less demanding situation, these federalized soldiers were unable to provide the effective support required on the ground. In the end, the state Guard proved the more flexible and adaptable force. The new military task force formed by the federal deployment never satisfactorily resolved issues with its mission, its communications, and its rules of engagement. The problems of this uneasy collaboration with local and state police agencies filtered down, hampering the street-level response. The events of L.A. in 1992—and the explicit lessons that state, federal, and military authorities took from them—are why, until now, the task of dealing with civil unrest or natural disasters has remained largely with the National Guard acting under state jurisdiction. The National Guard has also been integrated into homeland-security efforts on the same basis. If one Guard force encounters a situation that exceeds its capacity, it can turn to another state's Guard under mutual-aid agreements. Mutual aid does not seem to have been on Trump's mind last weekend. The National Guard exists to provide governors with additional power to protect their citizens, and to do so in support of local first responders. Trump's hasty federalization of troops is unwise and unhelpful, before we even consider what malign political motive may lie behind the order. Right now, the Pentagon appears not even to have arranged sleeping arrangements for its troops, let alone determined the rules of engagement on the streets; the San Francisco Chronicle reports that the deployment was so 'wildly underprepared' that troops are sleeping in cramped quarters on the floor. At best, this deployment will be completely unnecessary. At worst, it will be deeply counterproductive. But Trump's motive is transparent—and he will surely engineer an occasion to keep escalating his power plays, until they seem normal.
Hamilton Spectator
9 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
One year from World Cup opener, FIFA leaves questions unanswered on tickets and security
NEW YORK (AP) — A year from the largest World Cup ever, there has been no announcement on general ticket sales, prices for most seats, location of a draw or security arrangements as FIFA has mostly avoided disclosing details of an event set for 16 stadiums across the United States, Mexico and Canada. There is uncertainty about whether fans from some nations will be welcome — 11 of the venues are located in the U.S., where all matches will be played from the quarterfinals on. Security is a concern, too. At the last major soccer tournament in the U.S., the 2024 Copa America final at Miami Gardens, Florida, started 82 minutes late after spectators breached security gates. 'That was certainly a reminder and a wake-up call if anybody needed it that those types of things are going to be used in terms of the ultimate assessment of whether this World Cup is successful,' said former U.S. defender Alexi Lalas, now Fox's lead soccer analyst. U.S. President Donald Trump's travel ban on citizens from 12 nations exempted athletes, coaches, staff and relatives while not mentioning fans. Vice President JD Vance made what could be interpreted as a warning on May 6. 'Of course everybody is welcome to come and see this incredible event. I know we'll have visitors probably from close to 100 countries. We want them to come. We want them to celebrate. We want them to watch the game,' he said. 'But when the time is up they'll have to go home. Otherwise they'll have to talk to Secretary Noem,' he added, speaking alongside Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem. Back in U.S. for first time in 32 years The 1994 World Cup sparked the launch of Major League Soccer with 12 teams in 1996, and $50 million in World Cup profits seeded the U.S. Soccer Foundation, tasked with developing the sport's growth. MLS now has 30 teams, plays in 22 soccer specific stadiums and has club academies to grow the sport and improve talent. Next year's tournament will include 104 games , up from 64 from 1998 through 2022, and the 11 U.S. stadiums are all NFL homes with lucrative luxury suites and club seating. It also will be the first World Cup run by FIFA without a local organizing committee. 'The legacy initiative of 2026 is around how we ensure that soccer is everywhere in this county,' U.S. Soccer Federation CEO JT Batson said. 'How do we ensure that every American can walk, ride their bike or take public transit to a safe place to play soccer? How do we make it to where every school in America has soccer accessible to their students? And how do we make it to wherever every American can truly see themselves in the game?' Interest in soccer has vastly increased in the U.S., with England's Premier League averaging 510,000 viewers per match window on NBC's networks last season and the European Champions League final drawing more than 2 million viewers in each of the past five years on CBS. However, CBS broadcast just 26 of 189 Champions League matches on TV in 2024-25 and streamed the rest. MLS drew about 12.2 million fans last year, second to 14.7 million in 2023-24 for the Premier League's 20 teams, but MLS has largely disappeared from broadcast TV since starting a 10-year contract with Apple TV+ in 2023 . Apple spokesman Sam Citron said the company does not release viewer figures. In a fractured television landscape, different deals were negotiated by FIFA, UEFA, MLS, the NWSL, the USSF and the five major European leagues. 'You basically have over 2,800 game windows per season aired in the United States and so that requires distribution largely on streaming platforms like Paramount+ or ESPN+, but it's difficult for new fan adoption and it makes reach kind of challenging,' said Gerry Cardinale, managing partner of RedBird Capital Partners, which holds controlling interests in AC Milan and Toulouse and owns a non-controlling stake of Fenway Sports Group, parent of Liverpool. 'Kids today are getting weaned on Premier League football and Serie A football, and when you watch that as a product, it's hard for MLS to compete.' 1994 World Cup set attendance record The 1994 World Cup, a 24-nation tournament, drew a record 3.58 million fans for 52 matches. Ticket prices ranged from $25-$75 for most first round games and $180-$475 for the final at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California. FIFA, which has about 800 people working at an office in Coral Gables, Florida, says it will announce information on general tickets in the third quarter. It wouldn't say whether prices will be fixed or variable. Hospitality packages are available on FIFA's website through On Location. For the eight matches at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey, including the final on July 19, prices range from $25,800 to $73,200 per person. Variable ticket pricing possible FIFA appears to be using variable pricing for this year's Club World Cup , played at 12 U.S. stadiums from June 14 to July 13, and some prices repeatedly have been slashed. Marriott Bonvoy, a U.S. Soccer Federation partner, has been offering free tickets to some of its elite members. Asked about Club World Cup ticket sales and team base camp arrangements, Manolo Zubiria, the World Cup's chief tournament officer, hung up four minutes and five questions into a telephone interview with The Associated Press. Brendan O'Connell, the publicist who arranged the interview, wrote in an email to the AP: 'The guest was not prepared for those questions.' FIFA's media relations staff would not make FIFA president Gianni Infantino available to discuss the tournament. Ahead of the 1994 World Cup, FIFA announced in May 1992 the draw would take place at Las Vegas on Dec. 18 or 19, 1993. FIFA has not revealed plans for this year's draw but appears to be planning for Las Vegas on Dec. 5. Regular ticket sales began in February 1993 for the U.S. soccer family and general first- and second-round sales started that June. Fans submitted lottery applications in October 1993 for games from the quarterfinals on. Teams could train away from World Cup cities While not detailing ticketing plans for next year's tournament, FIFA is spreading it beyond the host cites and lists about 60 possible base camps for teams to use, paired with hotels. Some are fancy — The Greenbrier Resort in White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia — and some more Spartan — the Courtyard by Marriott Mesa at Wrigleyville West in Arizona. Thousands of arrangements must be coordinated. Major League Baseball is drawing up its schedule to ensure that the four teams whose ballparks share parking lots with World Cup stadiums — in Arlington, Texas; Kansas City, Missouri; Philadelphia; and Seattle — won't play home games on the dates of tournament matches. Boris Gartner, CEO of La Liga North America, a joint venture of the Spanish soccer league and Relevent Sports, said the 2026 World Cup should be viewed as just another step in the sport's long-term growth in the United States. 'If you have a clear understanding of the market and the audience, a clear understanding of the value that these properties bring to media companies, and you mix content with a commercial strategy, with the right media distribution strategy, this is something that will continue to grow over the next two decades,' he said. 'If more people are watching the NWSL, more people are going to be interested in soccer that could potentially end up watching a Bundesliga game or La Liga game.' ___ AP soccer:
