Zelenskyy to visit Berlin for meetings ahead of Trump-Putin summit
Merz has convened a series of virtual meetings on Wednesday in an attempt to have the voice of European and Ukraine's leaders heard ahead of a summit that they have been sidelined from.
Zelenskyy is due to meet with European leaders first, to prepare for a virtual call with U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance about an hour later. A call between leaders involved in the 'coalition of the willing' countries prepared to help police any future peace agreement will take place last.
Trump has said he wants to see whether Putin is serious about ending the war, now in its fourth year. Trump has disappointed allies in Europe by saying Ukraine will have to give up some Russian-held territory. He also said Russia must accept land swaps, although it was unclear what Putin might be expected to surrender.
The Europeans and Ukraine are wary that Putin, who has waged the biggest land war in Europe since 1945 and used Russia's energy might to try to intimidate the EU, might secure favorable concessions and set the outlines of a peace deal without them.
European countries' overarching fear is that Putin will set his sights on one of them next if he wins in Ukraine.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Forward
19 minutes ago
- Japan Forward
80 Years After the Atomic Bombings, Reconciling Idealism and Reality
As we mark the 80th anniversary of the atomic bombings against Japan, discussions on the significance of nuclear weapons have also taken place in the United States' capital. In contrast to Japan's idealistic call for their abolition, the prevailing American stance remains focused on the effect of nuclear weapons to deter wars. The most notable commentary came from George Will, a prominent conservative political commentator, as the anniversary of the August 6 US atomic bombing of Hiroshima approached. In his commentary published in The Washington Post , Will argued that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki "effectively ended 'the first modern conflict in which far more civilians were killed than combatants.'" This, he suggested, however, was a sign of "moral regression." As an example of this decline, he pointed to the killing of 100,000 civilians on a single night in the Tokyo air raids, just five months before the two atomic bombings. But on the question of whether dropping the atomic bomb was justified, Will quoted Paul Tibbets, the pilot of the plane that bombed Hiroshima. "I hoped until the very end that Japan would surrender," Tibbets said. By doing so, the author conveyed a view largely in line with the US consensus that the bombs were used to end the war with Japan sooner. Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park, where many gathered on the morning of August 6 to honor the victims and pray for peace. (©Sankei by Kotaro Hikono) On this point, Will drew on an article by renowned British historian Antony Beevor published this summer in a major American foreign affairs magazine. Beevor wrote that Japan's military government was "prepared to sacrifice millions of Japanese civilians by forcing them to resist an Allied invasion." Atomic bombings, therefore, he argued, were carried out to prevent such losses. What further drew attention in Will's commentary was his concern that there could be a third use of nuclear weapons, eight decades following Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He reminded that it would not be that challenging for even a poor nation to develop nuclear weapons if determined. Will also noted that the declining reliability of the American "nuclear umbrella" could provide a similar incentive "to nations from South Korea to Poland." Meanwhile, as these fundamental debates over nuclear weapons were unfolding, developments in real-world international security also warranted attention. On August 1, President Donald Trump announced that he had ordered two US Navy nuclear submarines to be "positioned in appropriate regions" in anticipation of a potential attack on Russia. It was a move that could have been seen as an expression of the Trump administration's "peace through strength" policy in response to repeated Russian nuclear provocations. US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin (©Getty via Kyodo) Reacting to the US proposal for further economic sanctions against Moscow over its refusal to negotiate a ceasefire in Ukraine, former Russian President and current Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev, warned, "President Trump should remember the 'Dead Hand.'" The "Dead Hand" refers to the Russian military's automatic nuclear retaliation system. Trump saw these remarks as a nuclear threat against the US and ordered the deployment of two nuclear submarines in response. "Just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that. Words are very important and can often lead to unintended consequences. I hope this will not be one of those instances," the President later explained. The exchanges between Washington and Moscow highlight the reality that nuclear weapons continue to serve as tools of deterrence and intimidation within the foreign policies and international security strategies of both nations. This stands in stark contrast to the idealistic view held by some in Japan, who advocate for the complete abolition of all nuclear weapons. Author: Yoshihisa Komori, Associate Correspondent in Washington, The Sankei Shimbun ( Read this in Japanese )
Toronto Star
30 minutes ago
- Toronto Star
Zelenskyy to meet with UK's Starmer as Europe braces for Trump-Putin summit
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is expected to welcome Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in London Thursday morning, the latest meeting between the Ukrainian leader and the head of a European country as the continent braces for a critical U.S.-Russia summit in Alaska on Friday. Zelenskyy's trip to the British capital comes a day after he took part in virtual meetings from Berlin with U.S. President Donald Trump and the leaders of several European countries. Those leaders said Trump had assured them he would make a priority of trying to achieve a ceasefire in Ukraine when he meets with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday in Anchorage.
Vancouver Sun
30 minutes ago
- Vancouver Sun
Canadians are torn about whether to put their elbows up or down in U.S. trade war: poll
OTTAWA — Canadians are split on whether Canada should go into trade negotiations with the U.S. with elbows up or down when it comes to retaliatory tariffs, according to a new poll. The Leger/Postmedia poll suggests that 45 per cent of Canadians still believe Canada's position vis-à-vis U.S. President Donald Trump should be 'elbows up.' That means that Canada should impose counter-tariffs on all new U.S. border levies, even if it risks further retaliation from the Trump administration. But on the other hand, 41 per cent of respondents said they'd prefer Canada's response be 'measured' and focus more on getting a new trade deal even if it includes some tariffs on Canadian goods. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. The split among Canadians puts Prime Minister Mark Carney in somewhat of an 'awkward position' as he must navigate conflicting views on how to deal with an erratic and unpredictable Trump administration, said Leger executive vice-president Andrew Enns. On the one hand are those who still believe in the 'eye for an eye' approach with the U.S., and on the other hand is the growing number of Canadians who favour a slightly more conciliatory and measured approach. 'I think there's been a bit of a tempering, a bit of a diminishment of the 'elbows up' aggressive approach. It's still very present, and you know, not to be ignored,' Enns said. 'But I certainly would say that there's a stronger sort of view now starting to show up in Canadian opinion that says, 'Well hold on here, maybe we ought to think this through, let's not be hasty.' The new survey is in stark contrast to polling just six months ago, when a substantial 73 per cent of respondents told Leger they supported dollar-for-dollar retaliatory tariffs against any U.S. border levy on Canadian goods. For Enns, it means many Canadians — and particularly Gen Xers and Boomers over 55 years old who expressed particularly fierce Canadian patriotism earlier this year — are having a moment of 'sober second thought' as the trade war with the U.S. drags on. The shift in public sentiment could also be a reflection of the change in tone from Carney himself. During the Liberal leadership race in February, Carney said he supported suggestions of dollar-for-dollar retaliatory tariffs. But since becoming prime minister, he has not retaliated to any of Trump's new tariffs on such key Canadian sectors as steel, aluminum and automobiles. In fact, he suggested last week that Canada may remove some tariffs on U.S. imports if it's beneficial to Canadian industry. 'When we first started to feel the brunt of President Trump's trade aggression, you know, Canadians were much more bullish, much more aggressive in terms of retaliation,' Enns noted. 'The temperature has come down and you've got maybe a bit of sober second thought from Canadians saying that we have to figure out a way out of this and it's not going to be with ah 'I hit you, you hit me, I hit you back' kind of thing.' Canadians, however, aren't overwhelmingly supportive of opening specific industries to American competition. Roughly half the respondents said they were willing to allow American-owned airlines to fly domestic routes in Canada or authorize U.S. telecommunication companies to operate on Canadian soil. Even fewer (33 per cent) are willing to loosen supply management rules protecting the Canadian dairy industry to let in more U.S. products. 'I would not say there's a groundswell of support and a sort of blank cheque for Carney, for the prime minister, to open up negotiations on these things,' Enns said. 'But it is kind of interesting that there's about half the population that, all things equal, think 'I'm open to hearing what that would look like'.' Carney's Liberals also appear to have peaked in their popularity with Canadians this summer, the poll suggests. After months of rising support since the April 28 election, the Liberals' popularity dipped for the first time, dropping two points to 46 per cent since July 7, the poll says. But Carney's party still holds a significant lead over Pierre Poilievre's Conservatives (36 per cent) and the NDP, led by interim head Don Davies (six per cent), who both saw their parties' support increase by one point over the past month. Total satisfaction in the Carney government also dipped slightly by one point though it remains high at 54 per cent. Enns says it's too early to say Carney's honeymoon with Canadians is over, although the data suggest the prime minister may have found his popularity ceiling. 'We may have seen the high watermark for Liberal support, and as we head into the fall and some of these issues start to become more pointed… I would imagine that would be an interesting juncture for the government,' Enns said. 'It wouldn't surprise me to see a very gradual narrowing of that gap' between Liberals and Conservatives come the fall, he added. The polling firm Leger surveyed 1,617 respondents as part of an online survey conducted between Aug. 1-4. Online surveys cannot be assigned a margin of error because they do not use random sampling of the population. National Post cnardi@ Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our politics newsletter, First Reading, here .
