Latest news with #US-Ukraine
Time of India
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Vance and Zelenskyy share smiles in Rome after explosive White House clash
US Vice President JD Vance and Ukranian President Zelenskyy met in Rome for the first time since their fiery Oval Office clash in February. On X, Vance emphasised shared US-Ukraine goals of peace and posted a smiling photo with Zelenskyy. The Ukrainian leader thanked the US, discussed failed Istanbul talks, and reaffirmed his commitment to real diplomacy. Talks covered ceasefire, sanctions, trade, defense, and more. The meeting follows their tense public exchange and Trump's strong backing of Vance. Show more Show less
Yahoo
13-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Ukrainian Parliament approves amendments to Budget Code to launch minerals deal with US
The Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian Parliament) has supported, as a basis, the draft law amending the Budget Code to implement the agreement on minerals deals between Ukraine and the United States. Source: Yaroslav Zhelezniak, First Deputy Head of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Taxation and Customs Policy Details: A total of 286 MPs voted in favour of the draft law No. 13256 in the first reading. Amendments to the Budget Code are needed to fill the US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, established under a bilateral agreement. Ukraine's contribution to this fund will be formed from 50% of the revenues received after the agreement enters into force from: royalties for the extraction of oil, gas, gas condensate and other minerals from new licences; issuing new special permits for mineral use; selling the state share of production under new production sharing agreements. These funds will be credited to a special fund of the state budget, from where, at the decision of the main spending unit (likely the Ministry of Economy), they will be transferred to the Reconstruction Fund. Roksolana Pidlasa, Chair of the Verkhovna Rada Budget Committee, said that if the agreement were to be in effect from 2019, Ukraine's contribution to the fund could amount to more than UAH 3 billion (approx. US$72.38 million) over five years. Background: On 1 May, Ukraine's Economy Minister Yuliia Svyrydenko and US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent signed the minerals deal. "Together with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, I have signed the agreement on the establishment of the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund," Svyrydenko wrote. The Ministry of Economy of Ukraine had published the text of a memorandum with the United States on the completion of a formal agreement on economic partnership and a Reconstruction Investment Fund. The text was published on the website of the Ministry of Economy. It states that the agreement will provide for the creation of an investment fund for Ukraine's reconstruction. On 8 May, the Verkhovna Rada voted to ratify the agreement on establishing a joint investment fund between Ukraine and the United States. All 338 MPs voted in favour, with none of them abstaining or voting against ratification. On 12 May, Zelenskyy signed the ratification of the mineral agreement with the United States. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
Yahoo
12-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Ukrainian Parliament to consider draft law amending Budget Code to implement minerals deal with US
The Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian Parliament) Budget Committee plans to consider a draft law on amendments to Ukraine's Budget Code in order to implement the minerals agreement with the US. The law is required for the operation of the US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund. Source: UNN news agency, citing MP Yaroslav Zhelezniak Details: The Budget Committee plans to consider the draft law on 13 May. After that, it will likely be discussed in the parliamentary chamber, Zhelezniak said. Quote from Zhelezniak: "In addition to the ratification itself, a draft law must be adopted (at least) amending the Budget Code in order to implement the agreement between Ukraine and the United States on establishing the US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund (No. 13256). The budget committee will consider this tomorrow morning, and it will most likely be approved by the Verkhovna Rada tomorrow." The draft law and an alternative draft law are set to be discussed at the committee meeting at 10:00. Background: On 12 May, Ukraine completed the ratification of the agreement on the establishment of the US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund. The law establishing the US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund was returned with the signature of the Ukrainian president, completing the formal ratification procedure. The Verkhovna Rada voted on 8 May to ratify the minerals deal with the United States and establish the US-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund. A total of 338 MPs voted in favour, none voted against, and there were no abstentions. The minerals deal was signed on 1 May by Ukraine's Minister of Economy, Yuliia Svyrydenko, and the US Treasury Secretary. "Together with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, I have signed the agreement on the establishment of the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund," Svyrydenko said. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
Yahoo
08-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
US-China trade talks will be more of a 'touch gloves moment'
President Trump announced a trade deal with the United Kingdom at a press conference held in the White House's Oval Office on Thursday. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will be meeting with Chinese officials over the weekend to enter trade negotiations ahead of Trump's visit to the Middle East next week. Pangaea Policy Founder Terry Haines joins Yahoo Finance hosts Brad Smith and Madison Mills to elaborate more on the geopolitical and economic security assurances these trade talks represent. For more expert insight and the latest market action, click here. just want to continue where we left off and and get your reaction to what you're hearing from President Trump. And some of the companies that this also brings into the throws. Everything from aviation to to toys. Sure. Uh, good morning. And you had your priorities in order by cutting me off. So no worries. The, um, just a couple of things. One is that, you know, the for markets, the fact of the deal is the most important thing here. And I think you're seeing that in the markets reaction, generally speaking. Secondly, uh, you're seeing the, the confirmation of a mantra that Scott Besons been putting out there for some time now, that, you know, economic security is geopolitical security. Geopolitical security is economic security for the United States. You're seeing that as well. Um, you know, and and between that and the US-Ukraine deal, I think what you're seeing is a, a renewed commitment by the United States, uh, to the UK and Europe frankly. And, uh, you know, it'll be more difficult for the EU than it is for the United States for them to come up with a deal due to how, uh, how rickety that quasi federation is and being able to to do anything positive. Um, and finally, uh, it says good things about the, about the prospect for a China deal, uh, but markets are reading way too much into the China deal. This is going to be a process, going to take a very long time. Um, I think those tariffs are not coming down substantially for quite some time, unless they have a really good meeting in Switzerland this weekend, which I think is going to be much more of a touch gloves moment. Well, I want to get your reaction to the market action that we're seeing. Stocks nearing session highs here. You've got your NASDAQ up over 1.5% at the moment after the president said, you better go out and buy stocks now when speaking to investors. Terry, I know that you are not a Wall Street analyst, but if clients are calling you today to ask you if these policies mean they should be buying into a rally, what would you say? Well, I'm not, yeah, I'm not a fundamental analyst as you properly point out, Mandy. The uh, and don't want to be. Uh, but you know, the fundamental point is here is, you know, will the deal stick? Well, the things that the president said, uh, today, and I think the things that Lord Mandelson had to say, the UK ambassador also, are very important here because, uh, two things. One is I think that, I'm not going to endorse the president's statements, but I think you can count on the president's statements as being broadly true and representative of what this government intends to do. Uh, secondly, I want to point out something that Lord Mandelson said because I thought was very important, um, that they view this as a process, as a movie where, where tariffs continue to come down over time. Uh, that's something I have, uh, I have a point I have made to markets repeatedly over the past couple of months. And uh, and the president agreed with Lord Mandelson's point. Uh, so what you can expect from these continued negotiations, frankly, is the tariffs continue to come down. So there's a couple of broad positives there. Our business is able to continue to spend at the same propensity that they were prior to liberation day, prior to the likelihood of tariffs being put on the table. And then, of course, what they saw later on with, uh, pause for 90 days, are they able to continue to spend confidently in order to make sure that they're kind of upholding the, not just market, but economically they're continuing to employ, they're continuing to have their own larger purchase patterns, especially if they know that the consumer isn't entirely certain about the economic standing right now. Sure. Uh, the, you know, the direction of travel here is very good, firstly. Uh, secondly, uh, can they have more, more confidence today that in and how this, uh, the tariff matter and broader economic policies are going to get resolved by the United States government. They can. Uh, thirdly, you know, the uh, a lot of suspending guidance and the like has to do with, uh, has to do with companies lawyering up with potential litigation as much as anything else. Uh, so I think the conclusion that companies will, uh, will make is that, you know, if they've suspended guidance, for example, um, and outlook, that they probably ought to keep suspending a little bit longer. I mean, that's instinct on my part, backward experience more than anything else, but, um, it's that there will continue to be uncertainty. Uh, the uncertainty is probably peaked and is on its way down though. And Terry, I want to end with you in terms of my questions for you on China specifically. I know that you mentioned it a bit earlier, but just curious if investors can anticipate, and when can investors anticipate getting a headline rate number that is lower than the 145% tariff that's currently in place. Um, I think that's not likely to be anytime soon. Um, you know, I look at the Switzerland meetings this weekend as mostly touch gloves and, and, and not much more than that. Uh, the reason has a lot more to do with China's government than it does with the United States. What you're seeing from the United States government is, uh, you know, it's kind of improvisational. The ability to improvise and the ability to make decisions very quickly and move forward. Uh, that is not a characteristic of China's government, whether it be the structure or the individuals involved. Uh, number one. Number two, there's a situation here where, you know, the strategies and tactics that China's used with the West and the United States in particular for 20 years or more, uh, has been to basically wait everybody out, uh, snarl and growl when it's appropriate, be friendly when it's appropriate, but always to wait things out. Uh, that's been successful for them. It is going to take some time for them to reach a different conclusion. And this is not just about the economics, this is about geopolitics. This is about getting China to engage geopolitically to turn down the temperature with its client states and Russia and Iran, those proxies, uh, as well as kind of rationalize things in the South China Sea. That's not going to be a quick negotiation. 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
Yahoo
08-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
The establishment strikes back
Reports of the GOP establishment's death have been somewhat exaggerated. In his second term, President Donald Trump has filled his administration with many hard-line ideologues, personal loyalists, and more recent converts to his cause — spurring many to conclude that this was a fully MAGA White House. But, going against that trend, certain establishment figures continue to hold key administration posts — and their importance and influence have risen in recent weeks, as they've won internal battles and steered Trump's policies in their preferred direction. Take Scott Bessent, a financier close to Wall Street who Trump named Treasury secretary. During and immediately after Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs, which made little rational sense, Bessent often appeared hapless and at a loss. But Bessent eventually convinced Trump to pause many of the tariffs and has since clearly taken the lead in the administration's trade negotiations — sidelining hardliners like Peter Navarro, at least for now. He even took on Elon Musk and won, getting Trump to retract an acting IRS commissioner appointment that Musk had sneaked through without Bessent's knowledge. Or take Marco Rubio, a more traditional GOP hawk Trump named secretary of state. The knives were out for Rubio from the start, with much of Washington joking about how he'd inevitably be fired. He too seemed hapless at first as Musk took a wrecking ball to USAID, real estate developer Steve Witkoff took over key foreign negotiations, and Vice President JD Vance gleefully helped scuttle a minerals deal with Ukraine that Rubio had championed — a deal that was, effectively, the hawks' effort to win Trump over on a more supportive posture toward Ukraine. But last week, when Trump suddenly needed an interim national security adviser, he turned to Rubio, giving him now two of the administration's most prominent foreign policy jobs. Rubio also recently got White House permission to fire Pete Marocco, the hardliner who carried out the USAID cuts (in what a Politico source called 'the first MAGA world killing from inside the White House'). And that US-Ukraine minerals deal? It was just finalized. The dynamic is broader than Bessent and Rubio. In contrast to many policy areas where the hardliners are clearly ascendant — immigration, the 'anti-wokeness' culture war, Trump's retribution agenda — there's something more akin to a tug of war on economic and foreign policy, with dueling factions seeking Trump's favor. Trump himself doesn't yet appear to be ready for a 'full MAGA' administration on these fronts. At times, he favors disruption and drama — but at other times, when he decides things have gotten too messy, he returns to establishment figures like Rubio and Bessent to help clean things up. The establishment pushback isn't happening quite the same way as in Trump's first administration, when his position as leader of the GOP seemed more tenuous. Back then, you had incidents such as National Economic Council chair Gary Cohn physically taking trade papers off Trump's desk to prevent him signing them and causing a crisis. This time around, Trump signed the papers on 'Liberation Day' and caused the crisis. Yet a similar situation unfolded, in which Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick reportedly waited until anti-trade hardliner Peter Navarro was sidelined in a meeting far from the Oval Office, then made a beeline for Trump to urge him to lift some of the tariffs — and succeeded. There's an important difference in those two anecdotes. Cohn took a decision out of Trump's hands, because he didn't believe he could be trusted to make good decisions. Bessent and Lutnick, however, fully accepted that Trump was the decider — and instead focused on convincing him to make what they thought was a better choice. A similar shift has occurred on foreign policy. In Trump's first term, establishment hawk officials like John Bolton often seemed to be focused on carrying out their own preferred policy rather than Trump's. Top Defense Department officials and generals, meanwhile, repeatedly slow-walked and stymied Trump's efforts to withdraw troops from Syria and Afghanistan. Rubio, in contrast, has tried to make it very clear that he's a team player — by, for instance, helping execute very harsh immigration policies like deporting people to an El Salvador prison and revoking the visas of foreign students criticizing Israel. When Trump criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, so did Rubio. Yet the big blowup with Vance and Zelenskyy in February was not actually followed by a total US-Ukraine breach, as many in the MAGA base wanted (and as many US allies feared). The minerals deal was revived, and Trump has taken a more critical line toward Putin in recent weeks, giving the Russian president some of the blame for prolonging the war as a peace deal remains elusive. Now, it would be too much to characterize any of this as a GOP establishment victory. Trump has already moved policy far away from their preferences with regards to tariffs and Russia and Ukraine, and he could at any point bring the chaos back. What it does show, though, is that the establishment has a pulse — and can still convince Trump that going full MAGA is a mistake. At least sometimes.
