US halts some weapons shipments to Ukraine, White House says
The decision was taken "to put America's interests first" and followed a Department of Defense review of US "military support and assistance to other countries", White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said on Tuesday.
The US has sent tens of billions of dollars in military aid to Ukraine since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022, leading some in the Trump administration to voice concerns that US stockpiles are too low.
The Ukrainian government has not commented on the announcement. US officials did not immediately say which shipments were being halted.
Air defence missiles and precision munitions are understood to be among the weapons affected, according to the Reuters news agency.
A US official said the move was based on concerns about US military stockpiles falling too low, the BBC's US media partner CBS News has reported.
The Department of Defense "continues to provide the President with robust options to continue military aid to Ukraine... At the same time, the Department is rigorously examining and adapting its approach to achieving this objective while also preserving U.S. forces' readiness for Administration defense priorities," Elbridge Colby, the US Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, said.
"The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned - just ask Iran," Kelly added, referring to US strikes at three Iranian nuclear sites last month.
The decision comes shortly after US President Donald Trump met with his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky at the Nato summit in the Netherlands last week.
On that occasion, Trump said US officials "are going to see if we can make some of them available" when asked about providing extra Patriot anti-missile systems to Ukraine.
Referring to his conversation with Zelensky, Trump said: "We had a little rough sometimes, but he couldn't have been nicer."
The two had a heated confrontation in the Oval Office in March this year. Afterwards, Trump said he was pausing military aid to Ukraine that had been earmarked by the previous Biden administration. It also said it would pause intelligence sharing with Ukraine.
Both pauses were subsequently lifted.
In late April, the US and Ukraine signed a deal that would give the US access to Ukraine's mineral reserves in exchange for military assistance.
The US military aid suspension comes as Russia stepped up its war against Ukraine.
Over the weekend, Russia launched one of its largest aerial attacks on Ukraine since the start of the war, using more than 500 different types of weapons, including drones, ballistic and cruise missiles.
On Tuesday, three people were killed in a Ukrainian attack on a Russian factory in Izhevsk, more than 1,000km (620 miles) from the border with Ukraine.
Moscow currently controls about 20% of Ukrainian territory, including the Crimea peninsula annexed in 2014.
'They took shrapnel from my heart' – the magnets saving lives in Ukraine
'Mariupol is diseased': Residents deny Russian claims occupied city returning to normal
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Inquiry hears of older people ‘cull' as Matt Hancock defends care home policies
Care home deaths felt like a 'cull of older people who could no longer contribute to the society', the UK Covid-19 inquiry has heard as Matt Hancock defended his handling of an 'impossible' situation. There were tense exchanges as the former health secretary returned to give evidence to the wide-ranging probe, this time focused on the adult social care sector. Mr Hancock, who resigned from government in 2021 after admitting to breaking social distancing guidance by having an affair with a colleague, responded to an accusation he had 'blatantly lied about the situation with care homes'. At a Downing Street press conference on May 15 2020, Mr Hancock said: 'Right from the start, we've tried to throw a protective ring around our care homes.' Bereaved families have previously called the phrase a 'sickening lie' and a 'joke'. The inquiry has heard there were more than 43,000 deaths involving the virus in care homes across the UK between March 2020 and July 2022, and a civil servant was quoted earlier this week describing the toll as a 'generational slaughter within care homes'. On Wednesday, remarks were read to the inquiry from an anonymous witness, who accused Mr Hancock of not being heartfelt or having a proper understanding of the situation care homes were in during the pandemic. Counsel to the inquiry Jacqueline Carey KC, who gave no further information on the person's identity or their role, said: 'One person in particular said 'He (Mr Hancock) blatantly lied about the situation with care homes, there was no blanket of protection. We were left to sail our own ships. He wasn't heartfelt. He had no understanding or appreciation of the challenges care homes face, pandemic or not, it felt like we were the sacrifice, a cull of older people who could no longer contribute to the society'.' Mr Hancock said he felt it was 'not helpful' for the inquiry to 'exchange brickbats' – a term used to describe a verbal attack. He added: 'I've been through everything that we did as a department, a big team effort, and we were all pulling as hard as we possibly could to save lives – that's what I meant by saying that we tried to throw a protective ring around. 'Of course, it wasn't perfect. It was impossible – it was an unprecedented pandemic, and the context was exceptionally difficult. 'What I care about is the substance of what we did, the protections that we put in place, and most importantly, what we can do in the future to ensure that the options available are better than they were last time.' He said the emphasis was on ''tried' – it was not possible to protect as much as I would have wanted'. He added that he and others were 'trying to do everything that we possibly could' in 'bleak circumstances' at a time when 'I also had (former government adviser) Dominic Cummings and a load of people causing all sorts of problems for me, and I had Covid'. Elsewhere in his evidence, Mr Hancock – who said one of his own relatives died in a care home but did not give further details – acknowledged the policy around discharging patients from hospital into care homes early in the pandemic was an 'incredibly contentious issue'. When the pandemic hit in early 2020, hospital patients were rapidly discharged into care homes in a bid to free up beds and prevent the NHS from becoming overwhelmed. However, there was no policy in place requiring patients to be tested before admission, or for asymptomatic patients to isolate, until mid-April. This was despite growing awareness of the risks of people without Covid-19 symptoms being able to spread the virus. The High Court ruled in 2022 that government policies on discharging hospital patients into care homes at the start of the pandemic were 'unlawful'. While the judges said it was necessary to discharge patients 'to preserve the capacity of the NHS', they found it was 'irrational' for the Government not to have advised that asymptomatic patients should isolate from existing residents for 14 days after admission. Asked about the policy, Mr Hancock said there were no good options, adding: 'It's the least-worst decision that could have been taken at the time.' Pressed further, he said he had both agreed with and defended the decision at the time. He added that 'nobody has yet provided me with an alternative that was available at the time that would have saved more lives.' He said while the policy had been a government decision, it had been 'driven' by then-NHS chief executive Sir Simon Stevens, now Lord Stevens. The inquiry heard Mr Hancock said in his witness statement that NHS England had 'insisted' on the policy, and while he did not take the decision himself, he took responsibility for it as then-health secretary. Asked about March 17 2020 when NHS bosses were instructed to begin the discharge process, Mr Hancock said officials were 'pushing very hard' to get more PPE (personal protective equipment) into care homes. He said not advising care homes to isolate returning residents without symptoms was a 'mistake', but it was in line with clinical guidance at the time. In 2023, appearing for a separate module of the inquiry, Mr Hancock admitted the so-called protective ring he said had been put around care homes early in the pandemic was not an unbroken one, and said he understood the strength of feeling people have on the issue. Mr Hancock's statement, referred to during Wednesday's hearing, said while there had been 'widespread concern' that patients being discharged from hospital were the main source of infection in care homes, 'we learned in the summer of 2020 that staff movement between care homes was the main source of transmission'. He told the inquiry he had wanted to bring in a ban on staff movement between care homes but that being unable to secure funding from the Treasury to compensate affected workers was a 'killer blocker' so it did not happen. Nicola Brook, a solicitor representing more than 7,000 families from Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice UK (CBFFJ), said Mr Hancock's claim that the discharge policy had been the least-worst decision available was 'an insult to the memory of each and every person who died'. The CBFFJ group has written to inquiry chairwoman Baroness Heather Hallett, to express their concern at some 'key decision-makers' not expected to be called in this module, including former prime minister Boris Johnson and Lord Stevens. Outlining the state of the adult social care sector at the outbreak of the pandemic, Mr Hancock said it 'was badly in need of, and remains badly in need of, reform', but rejected the suggestion of it being a 'Cinderella service to the NHS'. He said pandemic contingency plans, prepared by local authorities for adult social care, had been 'as good as useless' at the time, and described a 'hodge podge of accountability' between local councils and government departments. He claimed the situation has 'got worse not better' for care homes in the event of another pandemic hitting, and suggested a series of recommendations, including having isolation facilities in care homes and ensuring a stockpile of personal protective equipment (PPE). Hearings for module six of the inquiry, focused on the effect the pandemic had on both the publicly and privately funded adult social care sector across the UK, are expected to run until the end of July.
CBS News
21 minutes ago
- CBS News
Wisconsin Supreme Court's liberal majority strikes down 176-year-old abortion ban
The Wisconsin Supreme Court's liberal majority struck down the state's 176-year-old abortion ban on Wednesday, ruling 4-3 that it was superseded by a newer state law that criminalizes abortions only after a fetus can survive outside the womb. State lawmakers adopted the ban in 1849, making it a felony when anyone other than the mother "intentionally destroys the life of an unborn child." It was in effect until 1973, when the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion nationwide nullified it. Legislators never officially repealed the ban, however, and conservatives argued that the U.S. Supreme Court's 2022 decision to overturn Roe reactivated it. Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, filed a lawsuit that year arguing that the ban was trumped by abortion restrictions legislators enacted during the nearly half-century that Roe was in effect. Kaul specifically cited a 1985 law that essentially permits abortions until viability. Some babies can survive with medical help after 21 weeks of gestation. Sheboygan County District Attorney Joel Urmanski, a Republican, defended the ban in court, arguing that the 1849 ban could coexist with the newer abortion restrictions, just as different penalties for the same crime coexist. Dane County Circuit Judge Diane Schlipper ruled in 2023 that the 1849 ban outlaws feticide — which she defined as the killing of a fetus without the mother's consent — but not consensual abortions. Abortions have been available in the state since that ruling but the state Supreme Court decision gives providers and patients more certainty that abortions will remain legal in Wisconsin. Urmanski asked the state Supreme Court to overturn Schlipper's ruling without waiting for a decision from a lower appellate court. It was expected as soon as the justices took the case that they would overturn the ban. Liberals hold a 4-3 majority on the court and one of them, Janet Protasiewicz, openly stated on the campaign trail that she supports abortion rights. Democratic-backed Susan Crawford defeated conservative Brad Schimel for an open seat on the court in April, ensuring liberals will maintain their 4-3 edge until at least 2028. Crawford has not been sworn in yet and was not part of Wednesday's ruling. She'll play pivotal role, though, in a separate Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin lawsuit challenging the 1849 ban's constitutionality. The high court decided last year to take that case. It's still pending.
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Florian Wirtz, Trent Alexander-Arnold, Matheus Cunha: Every major deal of summer transfer window so far
The second summer transfer window has opened as clubs across Europe work on huge deals ahead of the new season. Chelsea have done so with the signing of Liam Delap, while Manchester City have strengthened with Rayan Ait-Nouri, Tijjani Reijnders and Rayan Cherki. Advertisement On the continent, Real Madrid completed the signing of Trent Alexander-Arnold from Liverpool, and paid a fee to the Premier League champions to ensure that he was on the plane to the United States for the Club World Cup. Bayern Munich did similar with Bayer Leverkusen centre-back Jonathan Tah, who arrives to provide fresh impetus to Vincent Kompany's backline, while selling Mathys Tel permanently to Tottenham. In the Premier League, Ruben Amorim's rebuild at Manchester United is already underway with the signing of Wolves forward Matheus Cunha, while Liverpool have now completed the £116million arrival of Florian Wirtz to add to Jeremie Frimpong, Giorgi Mamardashvili and Armin Pecsi, Here, Standard Sport lays out every major deal of the summer so far. Signed, sealed: Florian Wirtz (Liverpool FC via Getty Images) July July 1 Habib Diarra - Strasbourg to Sunderland, £30m Advertisement Sebastiaan Bornauw - Wolfsburg to Leeds, £5.1m Kepa Arrizabalaga - Chelsea to Arsenal, £5m Jorgen Strand Larsen - Celta Vigo to Wolves, £23m Zepiqueno Redmond - Feyenoord to Aston Villa, Free Ansu Fati - Barcelona to Monaco, Loan Olivier Giroud - LAFC to Lille, Free James Beadle - Brighton to Birmingham, Loan Nathan Bishop - Sunderland to AFC Wimbledon, Undisclosed Delano McCoy-Splatt - Fulham to AFC Wimbledon, Free June June 1 Matheus Cunha - Wolves to Manchester United, £62.5m June 2 Dario Essugo - Sporting to Chelsea, £18m Romelle Donovan - Birmingham to Brentford, Undisclosed June 3 Caoimhin Kelleher - Liverpool to Brentford, £12.5m Advertisement Mark Flekken - Brentford to Bayer Leverkusen, £8m June 4 Liam Delap - Ipswich to Chelsea, £30m James Ball - AFC Wimbledon to Swindon, Free June 5 Nuno Tavares - Arsenal to Lazio, Undisclosed Antonio Cordero - Malaga to Newcastle, Undisclosed June 6 Jorginho - Arsenal to Flamengo, Free Lloyd Kelly - Newcastle to Juventus, £20m Thierry Small - Charlton to Preston, Free Sonny Carey - Blackpool to Charlton, Free Jean-Clair Todibo - Nice to West Ham, Undisclosed June 9 Rayan Ait-Nouri - Wolves to Manchester City, £31m Mamadou Sarr - Strasbourg to Chelsea, £12m Marquinhos - Arsenal to Cruzeiro, Undisclosed June 10 Marcus Bettinelli - Chelsea to Manchester City, Undisclosed Advertisement Rayan Cherki - Lyon to Manchester City, £30.45m Kieran Tierney - Arsenal to Celtic, Free Jobe Bellingham - Sunderland to Borussia Dortmund, £31m June 11 Tijjani Reijnders - AC Milan to Manchester City, £46.5m June 12 Leroy Sane - Bayern Munich to Galatasaray, Free June 15 Mathys Tel - Bayern Munich to Tottenham, £30m June 16 Adrien Truffert - Rennes to Bournemouth, £14.4m June 20 Florian Wirtz - Bayer Leverkusen to Liverpool, £116m Fer Lopez - Celta Viga to Wolves, £19m June 23 Alistair Smith - Lincoln to AFC Wimbledon, Free Dominic Ball - Leyton Orient to Cambridge, Free Romoney Crichlow - Bradford to Barnet, Free Advertisement Nat Phillips - Liverpool to West Brom, Undisclosed Walter Benitez - PSV to Crystal Palace, Free Jaka Bijol - Udinese to Leeds, £15m Murphy Cooper - QPR to Barnsley, Loan June 24 Damola Ajayi - Tottenham to Doncaster, Loan Killian Cahill - Brighton to Leyton Orient, Free Kyle Cameron - Notts County to Bromley, Free Max Crocombe - Burton to Millwall, Free Sean Grehan - Crystal Palace to Doncaster, Undisclosed Andrew Omobamidele - Nottingham Forest to Strasbourg, Undisclosed June 25 Max Weiss - Karlsruhe to Burnley, £4.3m Max Aarons - Bournemouth to Rangers, Loan Scott High - Huddersfield to Barnet, Free George Honeyman - Millwall to Blackpool, Free Advertisement Joe Lumley - Southampton to Bristol City, Free June 26 Milos Kerkez - Bournemouth to Liverpool, £40m Axel Tuanzebe - Ipswich to Burnley, Free Josh Coburn - Middlesbrough to Millwall, Undisclosed Joe McDonnell - Eastleigh to AFC Wimbledon, Free Paul Onuachu - Southampton to Trabzonspor. Undisclosed June 27 Demetri Mitchell - Exeter to Leyton Orient, Undisclosed Dan Agyei - Leyton Orient to Kocaelispor, Free June 28 Kwame Poku - Peterborough to QPR, Undisclosed Paul Pogba - Unattached to Monaco, Free June 30 Callum Osmand - Fulham to Celtic, Undisclosed Jayden Sweeney - Leyton Orient to Grimsby, Free May May 14 Eric Dier - Bayern Munich to AS Monaco, Free Advertisement May 20 Bashir Humphreys - Chelsea to Burnley, Undisclosed May 28 Michael Kayode - Fiorentina to Brentford, Undisclosed May 30 Jeremie Frimpong - Bayer Leverkusen to Liverpool, £29.5m Trent Alexander-Arnold - Liverpool to Real Madrid, Free May 31 Carlos Alcaraz - Flamengo to Everton, Undisclosed
