Trump envoy backs Russia's fears over NATO's eastward push
Listen to article
US President Donald Trump's envoy to Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, said Russia's concern over NATO's eastward expansion was 'fair' and made clear that Washington does not support Ukraine joining the US-led military alliance.
In an interview with local media, Kellogg said Ukraine's accession to NATO was 'not on the table,' aligning with several other member states that reportedly hold the same position.
'We've said that to us, Ukraine coming into NATO is not on the table, and we're not the only country that says that – I could probably give you four other countries,' Kellogg said. 'It takes 32 of the 32 to allow you to come into NATO.'
He remarks that Moscow is seeking a written assurance from the United States that NATO will not expand to include Ukraine or other former Soviet states.
'They're not just talking Ukraine, they're talking the country of Georgia, they're talking Moldova,' Kellogg added.
Kellogg also outlined the next steps in ongoing peace talks between Russia and Ukraine, saying the US would attempt to unify two draft memorandums from both sides into a single document.
Talks are expected to continue Monday in Istanbul, involving national security advisers from Germany, France, Britain, and the United States.
Kellogg described Trump as 'frustrated' with Russia's conduct in the war, particularly over missile strikes on Ukrainian cities.
'He's seen a level of unreasonableness from President Putin,' Kellogg said, noting that Trump urged Ukrainian officials to attend upcoming talks.
Kellogg cited a 'conservative estimate' of 1.2 million dead and injured in the Ukraine conflict from both sides combined.
'That is a stunning number – this is war on an industrial scale,' he said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
2 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Trump gets key wins at Supreme Court on immigration, despite some misgivings
The U.S. Supreme Court swept away this week another obstacle to one of President Donald Trump's most aggressively pursued policies - mass deportation – again showing its willingness to back his hardline approach to immigration. The justices, though, have signaled some reservations with how he is carrying it out. Since Trump returned to the White House in January, the court already has been called upon to intervene on an emergency basis in seven legal fights over his crackdown on immigration. It most recently let Trump's administration end temporary legal status provided to hundreds of thousands of migrants for humanitarian reasons by his Democratic predecessor Joe Biden while legal challenges in two cases play out in lower courts. The Supreme Court on Friday lifted a judge's order that had halted the revocation of immigration 'parole' for more than 500,000 Venezuelan, Cuban, Haitian and Nicaraguan migrants. On May 19, it lifted another judge's order preventing the termination of 'temporary protected status' for more than 300,000 Venezuelan migrants. In some other cases, however, the justices have ruled that the administration must treat migrants fairly, as required under the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of due process. 'This president has been more aggressive than any in modern U.S. history to quickly remove non-citizens from the country,' said Kevin Johnson, an immigration and public interest law expert at the University of California, Davis. No president in modern history 'has been as willing to deport non-citizens without due process,' Johnson added. That dynamic has forced the Supreme Court to police the contours of the administration's actions, if less so the legality of Trump's underlying policies. The court's 6-3 conservative majority includes three justices appointed by Trump during his first term as president. US says it will start revoking visas for Chinese students 'President Trump is acting within his lawful authority to deport illegal aliens and protect the American people. While the Supreme Court has rightfully acknowledged the president's authority in some cases, in others they have invented new due process rights for illegal aliens that will make America less safe. We are confident in the legality of our actions and will continue fighting to keep President Trump's promises,' White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson told Reuters. The justices twice - on April 7 and on May 16 - have placed limits on the administration's attempt to implement Trump's invocation of a 1798 law called the Alien Enemies Act, which historically has been employed only in wartime, to swiftly deport Venezuelan migrants who it has accused of being members of the Tren de Aragua gang. Lawyers and family members of some of the migrants have disputed the gang membership allegation. On May 16, the justices also said a bid by the administration to deport migrants from a detention center in Texas failed basic constitutional requirements. Giving migrants 'notice roughly 24 hours before removal, devoid of information about how to exercise due process rights to contest that removal, surely does not pass muster,' the court stated. Due process generally requires the government to provide notice and an opportunity for a hearing before taking certain adverse actions. The court has not outright barred the administration from pursuing these deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, as the justices have yet to decide the legality of using the law for this purpose. The U.S. government last invoked the Alien Enemies Act during World War Two to intern and deport people of Japanese, German and Italian descent. 'The Supreme Court has in several cases reaffirmed some basic principles of constitutional law (including that) the due process clause applies to all people on U.S. soil,' said Elora Mukherjee, director of Columbia Law School's immigrants' rights clinic. Even for alleged gang members, Mukherjee said, the court 'has been extremely clear that they are entitled to notice before they can be summarily deported from the United States.' A wrongly deported man In a separate case, the court on April 10 ordered the administration to facilitate the release from custody in El Salvador of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran migrant who was living in Maryland. The administration has acknowledged that Abrego Garcia was wrongly deported to El Salvador. The administration has yet to return Abrego Garcia to the United States, which according to some critics amounts to defiance of the Supreme Court. The administration deported on March 15 more than 200 people to El Salvador, where they were detained in the country's massive anti-terrorism prison under a deal in which the United States is paying President Nayib Bukele's government $6 million. Ilya Somin, a constitutional law professor at George Mason University, said the Supreme Court overall has tried to curb the administration's 'more extreme and most blatantly illegal policies' without abandoning its traditional deference to presidential authority on immigration issues. 'I think they have made a solid effort to strike a balance,' said Somin, referring to the Alien Enemies Act and Abrego Garcia cases. 'But I still think there is excessive deference, and a tolerance for things that would not be permitted outside the immigration field.' That deference was on display over the past two weeks with the court's decisions letting Trump terminate the grants of temporary protected status and humanitarian parole previously given to migrants. Such consequential orders were issued without the court offering any reasoning, Mukherjee noted. 'Collectively, those two decisions strip immigration status and legal protections in the United States from more than 800,000 people. And the decisions are devastating for the lives of those who are affected,' Mukherjee said. 'Those individuals could be subject to deportations, family separation, losing their jobs, and if they're deported, possibly even losing their lives.' Travel ban ruling Trump also pursued restrictive immigration policies in his first term as president, from 2017-2021. The Supreme Court gave Trump a major victory in 2018, upholding his travel ban targeting people from several Muslim-majority countries. In 2020, the court blocked Trump's bid to end a program that protects from deportation hundreds of thousands of migrants - often called 'Dreamers' - who entered the United States illegally as children. Other major immigration-related cases are currently pending before the justices, including Trump's effort to broadly enforce his January executive order to restrict birthright citizenship - a directive at odds with the longstanding interpretation of the Constitution as conferring citizenship on virtually every baby born on U.S. soil. The court heard arguments in that case on May 15 and has not yet rendered a decision. Another case concerns the administration's efforts to increase the practice of deporting migrants to countries other than their own, including to places such as war-torn South Sudan. Boston-based U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy required that migrants destined for so-called 'third countries' be notified and given a meaningful chance to seek legal relief by showing the harms they may face by being send there. Murphy on May 21 ruled that the administration had violated his court order by attempting to deport migrants to South Sudan. They are now being held at a military base in Djibouti. The administration on May 27 asked the justices to lift Murphy's order because it said the third-country process is needed to remove migrants who commit crimes because their countries of origin are often unwilling to take them back. Johnson predicted that the Supreme Court will side with the migrants in this dispute. 'I think that the court will enforce the due process rights of a non-citizen before removal to a third country,' Johnson said.
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Saudi Arabia and Qatar to fund salaries of Syrian state workers
Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud attends a press conference with Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad Hassan al-Shibani (not pictured), in Damascus, Syria May 31, REUTERS Listen to article Saudi Arabia to provide financial support with Qatar to Syria's state employees, Saudi foreign minister says Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al-Saud said on Saturday that the kingdom will jointly offer with Qatar financial support to state employees in Syria. "The kingdom will provide with Qatar joint financial support to state employees in Syria," Bin Farhan said during a press conference with his Syrian counterpart Asaad al-Shibani in Damascus. He did not provide details on the size of the financial support to be provided by Riyadh and Doha. However, it echoes a similar move by Qatar to bankroll Syria's public sector. His visit comes few weeks after the US made a surprise announcement on lifting sanctions on Syria's Islamist-led government which overthrew former leader Bashar al-Assad in December. US President Donald Trump made the decision during his recent visit to the Middle East and said it was at the behest of Saudi Arabia's crown prince, whose country was a main advocate for the lifting of sanctions. The European Union also recently lifted economic sanctions on Syria. Bin Farhan referred to his country's role in helping to lift economic sanctions on Syria, saying that Saudi Arabia would continue to be one of the main backers to Syria on its path to reconstruction and economic recovery. He said he was being accompanied by a high-level economic delegation from the kingdom to "hold talks [with the Syrian side] to bolster aspects of cooperation in various fields". Several visits would then follow in the coming days by Saudi businessmen to Syria to discuss investments in energy, agriculture, infrastructure and other sectors, he said. The Syrian leadership is seeking to strengthen ties with Arab and Western leaders following the fall of Assad at the hands of Ahmed al-Sharaa's Sunni Islamist group, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. It hopes a flow of aid and investments by Gulf neighbors following the lifting of economic sanctions would help it rebuild a state shattered by conflict. Syria's Sharaa is set to visit Kuwait on Sunday upon an invitation by Kuwait's Emir Sheikh Meshal al-Ahmad al-Sabah, Syrian state news agency SANA reported, citing a source in the Syrian president's office. Sharaa is set to discuss joint cooperation in various economic and political aspects in his first official visit to Kuwait, the source said.
Express Tribune
6 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Senator Mushahid meets Russian FM, lauds Moscow's 'positive neutrality'
Listen to article Senator Mushahid Hussain Sayed met Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Moscow on Saturday, thanking Russia for its 'positive neutrality' during the recent tensions between India and Pakistan. The 40-minute meeting, held before the start of the high-level forum, was part of a broader interaction with five prominent Asian leaders from China, Turkiye, South Korea, and Cambodia. Senator Mushahid was the only guest from Pakistan, specially invited by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the ruling United Russia party to deliver a keynote address at the forum. Lavrov reaffirmed Russia's foreign policy stance of promoting regional peace, security, and stability. Senator Mushahid appreciated Russia's approach, particularly its balanced response during Indo-Pak tensions, and praised President Putin's Eurasian Security Initiative, describing it as rooted in the principle of 'indivisible security'—a concept also echoed in China's Global Security Initiative. Speaking to Russian media, Senator Mushahid commended the warmth of Russian-Pakistani ties and reiterated Islamabad's support for a multipolar regional order. 'Russia and China, led by President Putin and President Xi Jinping, are building a peaceful and prosperous Eurasia—and Pakistan stands ready to be an equal partner in that journey,' he said. At the Eurasian Forum, attended by over 100 delegates from 25 countries, Foreign Minister Lavrov delivered a hard-hitting policy speech critical of Western alliances in Asia. He directly addressed concerns over India's participation in US-led groupings. Lavrov denounced the Indo-Pacific Strategy, saying, 'This Indo-Pacific had never existed—NATO made up this term to drag India into their anti-China schemes.' His remarks were seen as a rebuke to India's growing role in the QUAD alliance, which includes the United States, Japan, and Australia. Lavrov added that while Indian officials claimed their role in QUAD was purely economic, joint military drills among QUAD nations told a different story. 'In practice, however, QUAD nations are already endeavouring—with notable persistence—to organise joint naval exercises,' he said. The comment drew an uncomfortable silence from the 12-member Indian delegation, including three BJP parliamentarians, present at the forum. Lavrov accused NATO of attempting a return to Afghanistan, warning, 'Four years after their ignominious retreat, NATO is once again seeking new points of entry into Afghanistan.' Senator Mushahid, during his media interactions, voiced full support for Eurasian cooperation and denounced military blocs like the QUAD and the so-called 'Asian NATO' as destabilising ventures. He emphasised Pakistan's commitment to diplomacy, the UN Charter, and regional trust-building. The forum concluded with a strong call from Asian and Eurasian representatives to move away from military containment and towards inclusive, rules-based regional cooperation.
