US envoy explains what he would like to see ahead of Trump-Zelensky meeting
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
UK sanctions crypto exchange tied to Russian ruble stablecoin
The UK sanctioned a Kyrgyzstan-based bank and crypto exchange on Wednesday, citing their support for A7A5, a stablecoin backed by the Russian ruble. A7A5 has been used to evade sanctions that the US and UK imposed on Russia after it invaded Ukraine in 2022, according to crypto forensics firms TRM Labs and Elliptic. 'If the Kremlin thinks they can hide their desperate attempts to soften the blow of our sanctions by laundering transactions through dodgy crypto networks — they are sorely mistaken,' UK Sanctions Minister Stephen Doughty said in a statement. 'These sanctions keep up the pressure on Putin at a critical time and crack down on the illicit networks being used to funnel money into his war chest.' The UK sanctioned Capital Bank, a Kyrgyzstan-based bank, and cryptocurrency exchange Grinex, which crypto tracing firm TRM Labs has described as a 'successor platform' to Garantex, a previously-sanctioned Russian exchange. It also sanctioned Meer, a centralised crypto exchange registered on December 9, 2024 — the same day that Grinex and A7A5 were established, according to TRM. The ruble-pegged A7A5 is issued by Kyrgyzstani company Old Vector and designed to facilitate the recovery of assets belonging to Garantex customers, according to TRM. About $26 million in Tether's stablecoin USDT on Garantex was frozen after officials in the US, Germany, and Finland seized the exchange's primary domain in March. (UK officials did not accuse Tether of aiding in Russian sanctions evasion in their Wednesday notice. But US authorities opened an investigation into the company last year for possible violations of sanctions and anti-money laundering rules, according to a Wall Street Journal report. CEO Paolo Ardoino accused the newspaper of 'regurgitating old noise.') 'Former Garantex customers were credited with A7A5 in amounts equivalent to their frozen balances, which could then be traded or redeemed on [Grinex],' TRM wrote in its August 4 report. In late June, crypto forensics firm Elliptic said over $1 billion was being transferred through A7A5 daily, with the aggregate value of the stablecoin's transfers topping $41 billion. A7A5 is a yield-bearing stablecoin, paying holders 50% of the interest earned on the bank deposits that back it, according to its documentation. It is available on Ethereum and TRON. 'We are creating not just a ruble stablecoin, but a tool that gives the market the opportunity to safely enter the ruble and USDT, as well as an alternative to USDT that is not subject to sanctions risks,' the team behind A7A5 has said, according to Elliptic, which did not provide a source for the quote. The stablecoin's developers did not immediately respond to DL News' request for comment submitted through the A7A5 website on Wednesday. Its X account did not appear to address Wednesday's sanctions. 'A7A5 is a fully regulated token that has been issued in accordance with Kyrgyzstan's new legislation, providing an unparalleled level of trust and security for investors,' its website states. In addition to Grinex and Meer, it is also available on sanctioned peer-to-peer exchange Bitpapa; Ethereum-based decentralised exchanges Uniswap and Curve; and a purpose-built DEX dubbed A7A5 DEX. As of late June, the stablecoin had seen $8.5 billion in exchange volume, a figure that does not include volume on peer-to-peer exchanges or over-the-counter brokers. Of that volume, 61% was used to move in and out of rubles; the remainder was used to move in and out of USDT. Last week, the US sanctioned Garantex Europe OU, Grinex, and six associated companies. Last year, Russian finance minister Anton Siluanov said the country was using Bitcoin and digital currencies with international trade partners in an effort to counter Western sanctions. Russia's experimentation with cryptocurrency follows years of limits on its financial activities abroad. In 2014, the US and other European countries imposed sanctions on Russian companies and individuals after President Vladimir Putin ordered the annexation of Crimea, a region of Ukraine. In 2022, the US and other countries increased Russian sanctions after Putin's broader invasion of Ukraine. Aleks Gilbert is DL News' New York-based DeFi correspondent. Got a tip? Email at aleks@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
16 minutes ago
Trump's met with Putin and Zelenskyy. What's next for Russia-Ukraine peace talks?
As the dust settles from President Donald Trump's recent rapid-fire diplomacy on the Russia-Ukraine war, attention turns to what's next in peace negotiations. Trump sounded positive on Monday as he met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders at the White House, just two days after his summit with Russia's Vladimir Putin in Alaska. "I think President Putin will make peace. I think President Zelensky will make peace. We'll see if they can get along," Trump said. The president committed to helping European partners provide security guarantees for Ukraine, and said he was beginning to arrange a bilateral meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin. But Russia has poured cold water on some of those highlights. Moscow has not confirmed that Putin will sit down with Zelenskyy and is demanding to be a part of any discussion on security guarantees. Here are some key questions moving forward. Will there actually be a Putin-Zelenskyy summit, or a trilateral meeting? President Trump first pushed for a trilateral meeting between Putin, Zelenskyy and himself before shifting to proposing a bilateral meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin. When asked about the change on Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told ABC News Senior Political Correspondent Rachel Scott that a meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin would need to happen ahead of any possible trilateral meeting because of "areas of disagreement" between the two countries. Leavitt also said that Putin "promised" to meet with Zelenskyy in the coming weeks but the Kremlin hasn't confirmed that. Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, instead, has seemed to only downplay prospects of a summit between the two leaders in the near future. "We are ready for any format," Lavrov said at a news conference in Moscow on Wednesday. "But when it comes to high-level meetings, it is necessary to prepare them in the most thorough way at all previous stages, so that the summits do not lead to a worsening of the situation, but rather mark the end of the negotiations that we are ready to continue." According to Lavrov, Putin "proposed that negotiations [with Ukraine] not just be continued but also a higher level of delegations be considered" in a phone call with Trump. The White House was asked on Tuesday where a possible meeting between Putin and Zelenskyy would take place, and specifically whether Budapest, Hungary, was an option as has been reported. Leavitt said they would "provide details as soon as we can." As for a trilateral meeting, Leavitt said it would happen "if necessary" following direct talks between Putin and Zelenskyy. Trump, during an interview on "Fox & Friends" on Tuesday left open the possibility that Putin may not want to make a deal. "I think Putin is tired of it. I think they're all tired of it. But you never know," Trump said. "We're going to find out about President Putin in the next couple of weeks. That I can tell you." What would security guarantees look like? President Trump on Monday pledged "very good protection" for Ukraine, and said that Putin said Russia would accept security guarantees for Ukraine -- a key demand of Zelenskyy's in any peace agreement. European leaders at the White House on Monday pressed for protections similar to Article 5 mutual defense obligations under NATO. Ukraine has pushed to become a member of the alliance, which Russia and Trump have rejected. Since Monday, Trump has ruled out U.S. boots on the ground in Ukraine in a peacekeeping role. Instead, he's floated the possibility of U.S. air support for Kyiv and helping Europe coordinate security guarantees. According to the White House, Trump has instructed his national security team team to come up with a "framework for these security guarantees that can be acceptable to help ensure a lasting peace and end this war." NATO defense officials, including U.S. military officials, held a virtual meeting on Wednesday to discuss security guarantees for Ukraine. Russia, meanwhile, said any talks without them are on a "road to nowhere." "We cannot accept the proposal to address security and collective security issues without Russia's involvement. This will not work. We have repeatedly explained that Russia does not exaggerate its interests, but we will firmly and decisively protect our legitimate interests," Lavrov said. Russia said it "has not heard any constructive ideas from European leaders on how to resolve the situation in Ukraine in the context of their visit to Washington, and is witnessing an aggressive escalation of the situation." Instead, Lavrov said on Wednesday Ukraine should pursue a route that includes all permanent members of the United Nations Security Council -- which includes the Russian Federation and China. What about 'territory' sticking points? President Trump, as he gathered with Zelenskyy and European leaders at the White House, said they needed to "discuss the possible exchanges of territory taking into consideration the current line of contact." Trump has talked about land "swapping" but it's unclear what Russia would offer Ukraine in return to keeping some of the Ukrainian territory its gained since its invasion. Since February 2022, Russia has gained about 20% of Ukraine's land. But NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said territory swaps weren't discussed during Monday's session. "We have not discussed that today, because everybody is clear, including the president, that when it comes to territory, that is the Ukrainian president, who has discussed this in the trilateral and then probably more conversations after that, with the Russian leadership," Rutte said. Moscow has set its sights on the Donbas region, including Donetsk -- which is said to be rich in mineral resources and serves as the industrial heart of Ukraine. Zelenskyy has long opposed surrendering sovereign territory to Russia, saying the nation's constitution forbids it. Zelenskyy said Ukraine must be the decision-maker regarding its territory.
Forbes
16 minutes ago
- Forbes
Nexstar And Tegna Announce Merger Plan: What To Look For Next
Another day, another major media merger. The Nexstar Media Group, already the largest owner of broadcast television stations in the U.S., announced yesterday that they will be purchasing Tegna, Inc. for $6.2 billion. There are a few key areas to look for the next set of developments, from regulatory changes to sports rights shifts to a further rethinking of the broadcast network and affiliate relationships. These aren't companies that galvanize public attention quite like the owners of the major networks and studios, but there are a lot of interesting moving parts here. Nexstar is a network owner itself, having taken control of The CW from Paramount in 2022. It owns a lesser-known and lightly rated cable news network, NewsNation, whose main claim to fame is a high-profile former CNN anchor Chris Cuomo, as well as a pair of 'diginets,' or multicast networks, which deliver a heavy dose of nostalgic TV library content (what we used to call 're-runs'). It also owns The Hill, a well-respected and insider-sourced outlet focused on national politics. For Tegna, the Nexstar purchase would end a rather tortured corporate journey over the last few years. The legacy media publisher and broadcaster Gannett spun off its stations into what became Tegna in 2015. Five years later a battle for control began, ultimately culminating in 2022 in an attempt to merge Tegna with a private equity firm named Standard General. That deal generated a lot of political heat and was effectively rejected by the Biden Administration Federal Communications Commission, leaving Tegna on its own until the Nexstar announcement. Nexstar's justifications for making the deal are a mix of the usual M&A suspects, including gaining scale in TV station coverage areas and revenues, and driving synergies of roughly $300 million – read cost cutting – from the combined companies. The markets have rendered a muted and not surprising reaction to the deal, with a very slight decline in stock price for the acquiring Nexstar and very slight increase for Tegna, both pretty typical. The bigger questions as usual are what comes next for the deal participants and the broader market. What comes out of the regulatory sausage-making? If Nexstar purchases Tegna it would likely exceed the existing nationwide cap on the percentage of U.S. households that one TV station ownership group can reach. I'm not going to share the complex and arcane methodology which is used to calculate this cap. Suffice to say we're dealing with legal distinctions between UHF and VHF stations. Try asking anyone under 50 what those even mean. This cap, which has been loosened over the years, has historically been seen as critical to control the concentration in the over the air broadcasting and to preserve as best as possible the fidelity to coverage of local news and information. But broadcasting industry has thirsted for decades to lift the cap and has been stymied by the widely held legal interpretation that it such a move requires congressional not merely FCC action. Given a Trump Administration that has regularly dared courts to stop it from enacting controversial and seemingly illegal changes to longstanding rules, I don't think anyone can rule out the possibility that legal and regulatory restrictions get pushed aside here. And who better to benefit than a Texas-based broadcaster? But with the Trump Administration, one hand can giveth while the other taketh away. With Nexstar owning a national cable news network and a publication that focuses its coverage on the government, would anyone be surprised if the FCC imposes conditions on a Nexstar-Tegna deal that give the Trump Administration an ongoing oversight of the 'fairness' of the Nexstar news publications? This was at the very center of the Skydance-Paramount FCC approval and while there is little of the animosity evident here as we saw between Trump and CBS News, the temptation to further squeeze any opposing viewpoints – hi there Chris Cuomo – may be too great for the Trump Administration to avoid. Will more sports migrate back to local broadcast stations? Although the sports media marketplace continues its seemingly endless growth trajectory, the regional sports network (RSN) market has been reeling for some time. Cord-cutting has significantly eaten into multichannel subscribers and sub fees for extremely expensive RSNs. And fewer subs generally means more challenged ratings and ad revenues as well. Sinclair's foray into this market, ultimately leading to the bankruptcy of Diamond Sports, has only been the most obvious difficulty. The loss for RSNs has led to some often-spectacular gains for local broadcasters and for teams themselves in just the last two years. The Phoenix Suns moved their games from Bally Sports to Gray TV's local stations and saw ratings rise 95% and even saw the pregame show ratings up 183%. Early in the last hockey season, Florida Panthers reported an increase of over 150% in their ratings as the games moved from Bally Sports Florida to the local Scripps stations (admittedly winning the Stanley Cup helped). Similar successes came to broadcasts of teams such the Utah Jazz and the Dallas Mavericks. All of this benefits the team owners who crave fan attention, engagement, and attendant revenues. Given how little other than sports is a dependable ratings-grabber for any broadcasters, it would not surprise me at all to see a deal like this accelerate the competition for more local sports rights to shift to broadcasting. Will we see more wars between major networks and affiliates? It's a distant memory in broadcasting that networks paid significant compensation to local independently owned stations for the 'right' to have their programming carried by local stations for networks to sell the national ad spots. Today it's a world where networks are constantly coming back to their local affiliates to pony up for their share of the massive money national networks spend on sports rights such as the NFL. But it's not an easy lift for many broadcasters to make those national payments in a generally declining linear TV marketplace. Back in 2018 in Boston, NBC and its local independent NBC station failed to reach an agreement to renew its affiliation agreement, and NBC's owner Comcast created its own local affiliate on a different station. If a more powerful Nexstar balks at paying the affiliate fees required from its network partners such as NBC, ABC, CBS, and Fox, might any of those networks simply take matters into their own hands by seeking to partner with local cable operators and bypass their prior affiliates? It's a vastly unpredictable world ahead for all.
