NATO Ambassador: Trump will ‘trust but verify' Putin in Alaska
On CNN's State of the Union with Dana Bash, Whitaker reassured that, if the world leaders reach a deal, there will need to be some verification from Russia and Ukraine that they are taking action towards peace, rather than simply debating peace.
'In any situation with competing national interests, whether it's the United States, Ukraine, Russia or any of our allies, you just can't take people at their face value, you're gonna look at their actions,' he said.
Putin is set to meet with Trump in Alaska on Friday to negotiate ceasefire terms. The Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has not yet been invited, but the White House and Whitaker said it is a possibility.
'The President remains open to a trilateral summit with both leaders,' a senior White House official told NewsNation's Libbey Dean Saturday.
Putin last week presented the Trump administration with a peace deal, asking for land concessions in Eastern Ukraine.
However, Zelensky adamantly opposed such a deal, posting on X, 'Any decisions that are against us, any decisions that are without Ukraine, are at the same time decisions against peace. They will not achieve anything.'
Trump promised to end the 3-year-long Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours during his presidential campaign, but negotiations have been more complex than expected for the president.
'That is one of the things that President Trump has mentioned is that he would have a good conversation with Vladimir Putin and that night, rockets and drones would attack the major cities in Ukraine, so it's going to be about actions,' said Whitaker.
Trump initially imposed an Aug. 8 deadline for a ceasefire, threatening to impose additional sanctions on Russia, but there have been no signs that Moscow has reigned in the fighting.
On July 10, tensions ramped up after Putin launched massive attacks on Ukraine's capital, Kyiv, in retaliation against Trump's criticism of him.
'We get a lot of bulls‑‑‑ thrown at us by Putin, if you want to know the truth,' Trump said during a Cabinet meeting in July. 'He's very nice to us all the time, but it turns out to be meaningless.'
Trump has bragged about his peace negotiating skills this week as he brokered a deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan, who have been long-time foes. The president enacted other peace deals with world leaders in the last months.
Whitaker mentioned those saying that 'Whether it's India-Pakistan, whether it's the Congo and Rwanda, or all the other peace deals that President Trump has been able to negotiate, there is always a verification.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump nominates Bureau of Statistics critic to lead agency after previous head fired over bleak report
The Trump administration has nominated economist Dr. E.J. Antoni to be the next Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, after the president alarmed observers by firing the previous chief at the beginning of the month over his anger at a poor July jobs report. 'I am pleased to announce that I am nominating Highly Respected Economist, Dr. E.J. Antoni, as the next Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics,' Trump wrote on Truth Social, nodding towards the previous firing. 'Our Economy is booming, and E.J. will ensure that the Numbers released are HONEST and ACCURATE. I know E.J. Antoni will do an incredible job in this new role. Congratulations E.J.!' Antoni currently serves as chief economist at the conservative Heritage Foundation, a think tank closely aligned with the administration. He was a contributor to the group's Project 2025, a controversial blueprint document outlining many of the moves the Trump administration has taken in office. The economist was reportedly among a handful of candidates under discussion after Trump removed Erika McEntarfer, whom he accused of using 'phony' numbers in the July jobs report that showed private companies adding just 73,000 positions, below projections. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon pushed for Antoni's nomination shortly after McEntarfer was fired. 'E.J. Antoni as the new head of Bureau of Labor Statistics—that's what we're pushing. He's the guy that almost single-handedly took it down by going through their numbers,' Bannon said on his podcast. Antoni, who will face Senate confirmation, wrote on X last week that the bureau, part of the Labor Department, needed to revise its methods to 'rebuild the trust that has been lost over the last several years.' The bureau conducts wide-ranging surveys of American households and business and its statistics are an important benchmark for the wider economy, impacting everything from investment returns to pension payments. 'If the administration undermines the quality of economic statistics, it would make it impossible for our tax laws to work as Congress intended,' Greg Leiserson, a senior fellow at the Tax Law Center at NYU Law, told the Wall Street Journal after McEntarfer got the axe. Administration officials argue the bureau has become unreliable. "You want to be able to have somewhat reliable numbers,' Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told CBS News earlier this month. 'There are always revisions, but sometimes you see these revisions go in really extreme ways.' Former officials said revisions to the bureau's data, which triggered furor from the administration, are in fact a regular part of the process, and that the commissioner has little direct role within the agency's information gathering. 'The commissioner doesn't do anything to collect the numbers,' William Beach, nominated to serve the position during the first Trump administration, recently told CNN. 'The commissioner doesn't see the numbers until Wednesday before they're published.' The questions surrounding the BLS are part of larger concerns over the Trump economy, including continued uncertainty over the impact of his often-revised tariff plan, which most recently included another 90-day pause for tariff hikes on China. A Times of London/YouGov poll from earlier this month found that 48 percent of Americans graded Trump's job performance over the first six months of his administration as poor, compared to 21 percent who rated it excellent, 16 percent who rated it good and 11 percent who rated it as fair. Four in 10 Americans said that Trump's tariffs will make the country poorer and stifle economic growth.
San Francisco Chronicle
8 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Republicans, Democrats alike exhort Trump: Keep security pact with Australia and UK alive
WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. lawmakers from both parties are urging the Trump administration to maintain a three-way security partnership designed to supply Australia with nuclear-powered submarines — a plea that comes as the Pentagon reviews the agreement and considers the questions it has raised about the American industrial infrastructure's shipbuilding capabilities. Two weeks ago, the Defense Department announced it would review AUKUS, the 4-year-old pact signed by the Biden administration with Australia and the United Kingdom. The announcement means the Republican administration is looking closely at a partnership that many believe is critical to the U.S. strategy to push back China's influence in the Indo-Pacific. The review is expected to be completed in the fall. 'AUKUS is essential to strengthening deterrence in the Indo-Pacific and advancing the undersea capabilities that will be central to ensuring peace and stability," Republican Rep. John Moolenaar of Michigan and Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois wrote in a July 22 letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Moolenaar chairs the House panel on China and Krishnamoorthi is its top Democrat. The review comes as the Trump administration works to rebalance its global security concerns while struggling with a hollowed-out industrial base that has hamstrung U.S. capabilities to build enough warships. The review is being led by Elbridge Colby, the No. 3 Pentagon official, who has expressed skepticism about the partnership. 'If we can produce the attack submarines in sufficient number and sufficient speed, then great. But if we can't, that becomes a very difficult problem," Colby said during his confirmation hearing in March. 'This is getting back to restoring our defense industrial capacity so that we don't have to face these awful choices but rather can be in a position where we can produce not only for ourselves, but for our allies." US cannot build enough ships As part of the $269 billion AUKUS partnership, the United States will sell three to five Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines to Australia, with the first delivery scheduled as soon as 2032. The U.S. and the U.K. would help Australia design and build another three to five attack submarines to form an eight-boat force for Australia. A March report by the Congressional Research Service warned that the lack of U.S. shipbuilding capacities, including workforce shortage and insufficient supply chains, is jeopardizing the much-celebrated partnership. If the U.S. should sell the vessels to Australia, the U.S. Navy would have a shortage of attack submarines for two decades, the report said. The Navy has been ordering two boats per year in the last decade, but U.S. shipyards have been only producing 1.2 Virginia-class subs a year since 2022, the report said. 'The delivery pace is not where it needs to be" to make good on the first pillar of AUKUS, Admiral Daryl Caudle, nominee for the Chief of Naval Operations, told the Senate Armed Services Committee last month. Australia has invested $1 billion in the U.S. submarine industrial base, with another $1 billion to be paid before the end of this year. It has agreed to contribute a total of $3 billion to uplift the U.S. submarine base, and it has sent both industry personnel to train at U.S. shipyards and naval personnel for submarine training in the United States. "Australia was clear that we would make a proportionate contribution to the United States industrial base,' an Australian defense spokesperson said in July. 'Australia's contribution is about accelerating U.S. production rates and maintenance to enable the delivery of Australia's future Virginia-class submarines.' The three nations have also jointly tested communication capabilities with underwater autonomous systems, Australia's defense ministry said on July 23. Per the partnership, the countries will co-develop other advanced technologies, from undersea to hypersonic capabilities. At the recent Aspen Security Forum, Kevin Rudd, the Australian ambassador to the United States, said his country is committed to increasing defense spending to support its first nuclear-powered sub program, which would also provide 'massively expensive full maintenance repair facilities" for the U.S. Indo-Pacific fleet based in Western Australia. Rudd expressed confidence that the two governments 'will work our way through this stuff.' AUKUS called 'crucial to American deterrence' Bruce Jones, senior fellow with the Strobe Talbott Center for Security, Strategy and Technology, told The Associated Press that the partnership, by positioning subs in Western Australia, is helping arm the undersea space that is 'really crucial to American deterrence and defense options in the Western Pacific.' 'The right answer is not to be content with the current pace of submarine building. It's to increase the pace," Jones said. Jennifer Parker, who has served more than 20 years with the Royal Australian Navy and founded Barrier Strategic Advisory, said it should not be a zero-sum game. 'You might sell one submarine to Australia, so you have one less submarine on paper. But in terms of the access, you have the theater of choice from operating from Australia, from being able to maintain your submarines from Australia," Parker said. 'This is not a deal that just benefits Australia." Defense policy is one of the few areas where Republican lawmakers have pushed back against the Trump administration, but their resolve is being tested with the Pentagon's review of AUKUS. So far, they have joined their Democratic colleagues in voicing support for the partnership. They said the U.S. submarine industry is rebounding with congressional appropriations totaling $10 billion since 2018 to ensure the U.S. will have enough ships to allow for sales to Australia. "There is a little bit of mystification about the analysis done at the Pentagon,' Kaine said, adding that 'maybe (what) the analysis will say is: We believe this is a good thing.'
San Francisco Chronicle
8 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Can San Francisco avoid Trump's ire after National Guard deployments in D.C. and L.A.?
Once again, President Donald Trump has brought his campaign of retribution against liberal jurisdictions to the streets of a major American city, ordering hundreds of National Guard troops to deploy to another Democratic stronghold. And once again, the city in question is not San Francisco, a past Trump target that has so far avoided the kind of direct clash with his administration that previously played out in Los Angeles and is now unfolding in Washington. Trump announced Monday that he was temporarily placing the D.C. police department under federal control and sending 800 National Guard troops to the nation's capital. Those extraordinary steps were necessary because of 'violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals' that have overrun the city, Trump said, even though official statistics show violent crime in Washington is down. The president put other cities on notice, warning that New York, Chicago, Baltimore and Oakland could also see National Guard deployments over crime concerns. He did not mention San Francisco, a famously liberal sanctuary city that was panned by Trump last year as 'not even livable.' It's not as if San Francisco is flying under Trump's radar entirely. He has promoted the unlikely idea of reopening Alcatraz as a federal prison, and immigration agents have detained people in the city as they've sought to carry out Trump's mass deportation plans. San Francisco has also repeatedly fought Trump administration policies in court. But when it comes to Trump sending military forces to what he views as lawless cities led astray by Democratic politicians, San Francisco and its mayor, Daniel Lurie, do not appear to be top of mind for the president — at least not for now. Some political observers say that's a testament to how well Lurie and other moderate Democrats are running the city, while others warn that Trump could easily turn his ire on the city at a moment's notice. Jay Cheng, executive director of the moderate political group Neighbors for a Better San Francisco, sees political vindication in the fact that Trump didn't invoke San Francisco when he previously sent National Guard troops to Los Angeles or when he announced the actions in Washington on Monday. Cheng said San Francisco voters have shown in electing Lurie, District Attorney Brooke Jenkins and a moderate Board of Supervisors majority that they're focused on improving police staffing, reducing crime, shutting down drug markets and making the city function more efficiently. 'In San Francisco, we're showing that Democratic leaders can successfully govern a city,' Cheng said. 'He's not mentioning us because we're not a good example for his narrative, because we have Democrats that are doing a great job around public safety.' State Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, had a more blunt assessment of Trump's treatment of New York, Chicago, Baltimore, Oakland and Washington. All of those cities have Black mayors and large Black populations, Wiener noted, calling it 'straight up Donald Trump's alley and straight out of his racist playbook.' Wiener doubted that Trump was taking note of any specific political changes in San Francisco when thinking about where he wanted to send the National Guard. 'Donald Trump has taken many swings at San Francisco over the years — just ask Nancy Pelosi,' Wiener said. 'The other thing is, when it comes to Trump, the eye of Sauron is going to look wherever it's going to look,' Wiener said. 'If he's going after Oakland, Baltimore, Chicago, New York and L.A. today, he's going to go after other cities tomorrow.' Since he became San Francisco mayor in January, Lurie has carefully avoided even uttering Trump's name in public in an attempt to avoid drawing too much attention from a vengeful president with a reputation for being unpredictable. He's seen little evidence that his approach is unpopular: In fact, 50% of respondents in a recent Chronicle poll said the mayor was right to prioritize local issues. Lurie's office had no comment Monday. Former Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf said Monday that she has 'great compassion for the mayors who are struggling with the right thing to do in Trump's second term,' pointing to the decisive conservative control of the U.S. Supreme Court and the Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress. Schaff had a widely-publicized clash with Trump during his first term in 2018, when she as Oakland mayor issued a public warning about an imminent immigration sweep. Trump called her action a 'disgrace' and urged his attorney general to consider prosecuting Schaaf. In direct response to Schaaf, a Republican Congressman introduced unsuccessful legislation that would have imposed criminal penalties — and possible jailtime — against local officials who made similar disclosures. Schaaf said she thinks it's 'wise' for mayors to focus on what they were elected to do, unless they find themselves directly in the crosshairs of the White House, which is the situation that she thinks she faced in Oakland seven years ago. 'I really did not want to be sucked into a national debate when I was elected to run the city, to keep people safe,' Schaaf said. 'It doesn't surprise me that Mayor Lurie is focused on what he was elected to do and not allowing himself to be distracted, because Trump hasn't called out San Francisco in this way.' Barbara Lee, Oakland's current mayor, responded Monday to Trump's comments about her city by calling them inaccurate and 'an attempt to score cheap political points by tearing down communities he doesn't understand.' Schaaf told the Chronicle that she has 'a lot of respect and faith' that Lee will 'do what is right for her values and the values of Oakland.' And while Trump isn't talking much about San Francisco now, that could change under the wrong circumstances, said Jeff Cretan, who was a spokesperson for former Mayor London Breed. A high-profile violent incident during an immigration action or protest in San Francisco could quickly result in Trump setting his sights on the city, Cretan said. 'I don't want to see something horrible happen, but that could change things,' he said. 'Sometimes those moments are what galvanize people … Those bigger, symbolic things that resonate with people more often are what draw a lot of the attention.' Lurie has clearly indicated his desire to avoid such a scenario. In June, after Trump first sent National Guard troops to Los Angeles, a reporter asked Lurie if he anticipated something similar happening in San Francisco, where protests had already erupted. Lurie said he was focused on 'keeping San Franciscans safe.' 'We have this under control,' he said.
