US politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump signs executive order rebranding Pentagon as Department of War

      by

      Donald Trump signed an executive order on Friday to rebrand the Department of Defense as the Department of War, a callback to the department’s original name used from 1789 to 1947.The directive will make Department of War the secondary title, and is a way to get around the need for congressional approval to formally rename a federal agency, an administration official said.“We won the first world war, we won the second world war, we won everything before that and in between,” Trump said at the signing. “And then we decided to go woke and we changed the name to the Department of Defense.”The administration has already begun implementing the symbolic changes: visitors to the Pentagon’s defense.gov website are now automatically redirected to war.gov.The move comes days after a deadly US navy airstrike killed 11 people on a small boat in international waters, which the military said involved a drug vessel operated by the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. Some legal experts questioned whether the strike was lawful under international law.The combination of aggressive military action and symbolic rebranding goes in contrast with Trump’s repeated claims to be “the anti-war president” who campaigned on promises to end conflicts and avoid new wars. Trump said during the signing of the order that his focus on strength and trade has improved America’s position in the world..Trump has argued the original name better reflects military victories and honestly represents what the department does. The rebrand would reverse the 1947 name change made as part of postwar reforms that emphasized defense over warfare.Seven US warships and one nuclear-powered fast-attack submarine were reported to be heading for the Caribbean following Monday’s strike, another layer in the measures Trump has taken to combat what he claims is the threat from Tren de Aragua.Congressional approval would ultimately be required for any permanent name change, though the House member Greg Steube from Florida and the senator Mike Lee from Utah, both Republicans, introduced legislation to make the switch official.“We’re going to go on offense, not just on defense. Maximum lethality, not tepid legality. Violent effect, not politically correct,” the secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, said in the Oval Office. “We’re going to raise up warriors, not just defenders. So this war department, Mr President, just like America is back.” More

    • 163 Shares71 Views

      in US Politics

      Two teenagers arrested for murder of US congressional intern hit by stray bullets

      by

      Two teenagers were arrested Friday on murder charges in the killing of a congressional intern who was struck by stray bullets during a shooting in Washington DC – a crime that Donald Trump cited in deploying national guard troops in the US capital during the presidential administration’s law enforcement intervention there.Eric Tarpinian-Jachym, 21, of Granby, Massachusetts, was fatally shot on the night of 30 June near Washington’s Mount Vernon Square. Both suspects in his killing – Kelvin Thomas Jr and Jailen Lucas – are 17 years old, but are being charged as adults with first-degree murder while armed, according to US attorney Jeanine Pirro.Police were searching for a third suspect whose name and age weren’t immediately released.Tarpinian-Jachym was an “innocent bystander” who wasn’t an intended target of the gunfire, Pirro said at a news conference where she was flanked by the Washington DC mayor Muriel Bowser and the city’s police chief.“Eric didn’t deserve to be gunned down and the system failed him – the system that felt that juveniles needed to be coddled,” Pirro said. “This killing underscores why we need the authority to prosecute these younger kids, because they’re not kids. They’re criminals.”Tarpinian-Jachym was a rising senior at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. He was in Washington to work as a summer intern in the office of Republican congressman Ron Estes of Kansas.In July, the House observed a moment of silence after Estes paid tribute to Tarpinian-Jachym, calling him “a dedicated, and thoughtful and kind person who loved our country”.“We will never forget his presence and kindness in my office,” Estes said. “Those he met in his short term in my office will not forget him, either.”Trump mentioned Tarpinian-Jachym’s killing – but not his name – during an 11 August news conference where he announced the federal intervention in the District of Columbia.“Any level of gun violence in our city is unacceptable,” Bowser said.The suspects, both DC residents, exited a vehicle at an intersection and shot at two people riding bikes, including a 16-year-old male who was wounded, according to Kevin Kentish, a Washington DC metropolitan police department (MPD) commander.Tarpinian-Jachym was struck by four shots. A woman who wasn’t a target was also shot, but survived, according to Kentish. Surveillance video helped investigators identify the three suspects, he said.Online court records didn’t immediately identify attorneys for the suspects.Pamela Smith, the MPD chief, said she and Pirro spoke to Tarpinian-Jachym’s mother on Friday.“Eric came to our city with a bright future ahead of him,” Smith said. “He deserved an opportunity to return home safely to his family, but was senselessly taken from his loved ones.” More

    • 175 Shares117 Views

      in US Politics

      Why is much of the media ignoring questions about Trump’s health? | Margaret Sullivan

      by

      Prestigious news organizations gave scant attention when, for several days recently, Donald Trump faded from public view. Other than some social media posts and some blurry golf-course images, the normally ubiquitous president seemed almost to disappear.But most of Big Journalism gave that subject a pass.Given Trump’s obvious health problems – swollen ankles, an uneven gait, bruised hands and instances of verbal confusion – the media silence struck a lot of people as hypocrisy.“Why are the biggest newsrooms silent?” demanded John Passantino, who writes for the media newsletter Status. “No front-page write ups. No broadcast packages.” Trump’s health problems and near disappearance “barely registered in mainstream coverage”.By contrast, the media went overboard with unrelenting coverage of Joe Biden’s old age, but it came late. Almost all of it followed the then president’s shockingly weak debate appearance during his 2024 re-election campaign.There was plenty of finger-pointing – even a bestselling book by two media bigwigs – about the failures to report Biden’s decline earlier and about the White House’s efforts to obscure it.This time, over the Labor Day weekend, wild rumors swirled on social media that Trump had died, or had suffered a debilitating stroke or a series of them. The much-read Drudge Report published a story with this headline: PRESIDENT HEALTH CRISIS DEEPENS.Nevertheless, JD Vance seemed to target big media.“If the media you consumed told you that Donald Trump was on his deathbed because he didn’t do a press conference for three days, imagine what else they’re lying to you about,” Vance posted on X.That translated, for the gullible, into the usual trashing of the mainstream press, a regular talking point from Magaworld.In fact, big journalism was guilty of nothing of the sort; if anything, they took Trump’s disappearance too lightly.As is often the case with Trump and his allies, there’s a lot of projection going on.“Imagine what else they’re lying to you about” is something that might, much more accurately, be said about Trump and his minions on any number of subjects.Trump joined in, too. “It’s fake news – it’s so fake. That’s why the media has so little credibility,” he responded to a Fox News question that conveniently set up this round of media-bashing. (“How did you find out over the weekend that you were dead?” asked Peter Doocy at a briefing after Trump re-emerged.)Nonsense, of course. Most of the mainstream media was overly cautious, if anything, in approaching the topic.When the New York Times did get around to covering the issue, the paper took up the topic obliquely – focusing primarily on the false rumors of Trump’s death and then, much lower in a long story, addressing the paucity of information about his actual health. The headline: President Trump Is Alive. The Internet was Convinced Otherwise.The story puts in historical context the tendency of White House staffs to obscure the physical problems of American presidents – from Woodrow Wilson’s stroke to John F Kennedy’s chronic back pain. Eventually, it makes the point that “justifiable concerns and questions about Mr Trump’s health have often been met with obfuscation or minimal explanation from the people around him”.(The White House in July explained Trump’s bruising and swelling as chronic venous insufficiency, but downplayed the condition as benign and common for older people; his doctor pronounced him in excellent health.)Even after an assassination attempt on Trump last year, no medical briefings were held. And, to my recollection, there was precious little investigative follow-up on that.Yet, amid all of this, the White House press secretary claimed that Trump has been “completely transparent about his health with the public, unlike his predecessor”.As usual, in Trumpworld, a lie outpaces the truth, and everything is Biden’s fault.So what does responsible media coverage of this topic look like? The question evokes the Goldilocks fairy tale: what’s too hot? What’s too cold? And what’s just right?“Evidence-based assessments of a president’s health are absolutely fair game” for journalists, Bill Grueskin of Columbia Journalism School told Associated Press media reporter David Bauder.And when someone as omnipresent in the media as Trump drops out of view for days? That’s fair game, too.With Trump now in his 80th year – he turned 79 in June – these questions are not going away. Rampant speculation certainly isn’t the answer, but it tends to flood in when there is a vacuum of real information.The unquestioning acceptance of White House reassurance isn’t the answer either.In good journalism, “just right” is founded on skepticism and addressed by persistence – by doggedly digging out the facts and presenting them forthrightly.

      Margaret Sullivan is a Guardian US columnist writing on media, politics and culture More

    • 175 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      RFK Jr’s anti-science agenda will be catastrophic for the United States | Moustafa Bayoumi

      by

      Things seem to be going well at the CDC, the federal agency charged with protecting US public health. By “well” I mean terrible, thanks to the leadership of the health and human services secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr. Not only is the agency in complete disarray under his leadership, but the secretary’s fringe agenda is now also putting the lives of everyone in the country at risk.Let me recount a few of Kennedy’s stellar accomplishments. He is, after all, a man labeled “a crown jewel of this administration” by Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff. In June, Kennedy fired all 17 members of the CDC’s advisory committee on immunization practices (ACIP), a panel that has long developed scientifically based recommendations on the use of vaccines. Kennedy dropped them like a hot beaker and replaced them with new members, several of whom share his anti-vaccine views and half-baked skepticism of the most common mRNA Covid-19 vaccines.Covid is still with us, unfortunately, and the vaccines are helping us survive a dangerous reality. In fact, 14,660 people have died of Covid as an underlying or contributing cause so far this year alone. Yet, at his Senate hearing on Thursday, Kennedy was asked by Senator Jeff Merkley if he accepted the statistic that a million Americans had died of Covid since the outbreak began. “I don’t know how many died,” Kennedy responded. Meanwhile, the CDC’s own website, an agency he’s responsible for, tabulates the number of deaths as 1,234,371. At the same hearing, Kennedy also said he agreed with the statement made by one of his appointees to ACIP that “mRNA vaccines cause serious harm, including death, especially among young people”. Never mind that numerous studies have repeatedly shown the vaccines to be safe and effective.That’s not all. Getting that Covid booster shot will probably become significantly harder in the future. In late August, the Food and Drug Administration, also overseen by Kennedy, approved some updated Covid vaccines, but at the same time severely restricted who would be authorized to receive boosters. Last year, anyone over the age of six months was eligible. But this year, you must be over 65 years of age or have an underlying health condition that increases the risk of severe Covid-19 infection.We should have seen something like this coming. In May, Kennedy took the unprecedented unilateral move to remove Covid-19 booster shots from its recommended immunization schedule for pregnant women and healthy children. “Our healthcare system is now solidly anti-children and anti-science,” Fatima Khan, co-founder of the Protect Their Future group, which advocates for vaccine access for children, told CNN.Booster shots will still be available, Kennedy says. But what he’s not saying is that they will probably be a lot harder to find and afford. Private insurance companies generally base their decisions on covering the costs of vaccines by following government recommendations, and many states limit which vaccines pharmacists can administer based on those same recommendations. (California, Oregon and Washington recently announced an alliance to safeguard vaccine access.)The long and the short of it is that Kennedy is behind “a deliberate effort to weaken America’s public-health system and vaccine protections”. This is what Susan Monarez wrote in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. Monarez served as the director of the CDC for a whole 29 days before she was ousted from her position. (Jim O’Neil, Monarez’s replacement, is unsurprisingly a Trump loyalist with no medical or scientific background.) The ACIP is scheduled to meet later this month, and will discuss among other topics the Covid-19 vaccines. Monarez wrote that in August she was told to “preapprove the recommendations” to be made by ACIP. She refused. In another statement made through her lawyers, she said she would not “rubberstamp unscientific, reckless directives and fire dedicated health experts”.Kennedy, of course, has done all those things. He fired 2,400 workers (about 18% of the CDC workforce), later rehiring about 700 people. He has “severely weakened programs designed to protect Americans from cancer, heart attacks, strokes, lead poisoning, injury, violence and more”, according to nine previous directors of the CDC who sounded the alarm about Kennedy’s leadership in the New York Times. He downplayed the use of highly effective vaccines during the largest single measles epidemic in 25 years in this country while cheering on the use of home remedies such as cod liver oil or vitamins.It’s all so ideological and irresponsible, leading predictably to horrible consequences. There have been three confirmed deaths from the measles outbreak, but they are not the only victims. Our collective trust in the government is perhaps the main casualty. After Monarez was fired, four senior officials of the CDC resigned in protest at the politicization of the agency. More than 1,000 past and present workers of the Department of Health and Human Services signed a letter demanding his resignation and stating that “Secretary Kennedy’s actions are compromising the health of this nation”. We’re now living through a battle between sane scientists and zealous anti-vaxxers, and nobody knows who will win.What do anti-vaxxers and the rightwing get out of such politicization of public health? They live in the same country as the rest of us, after all. Do they feel somehow healthier knowing that Joseph Ladapo, Florida’s surgeon general, aims to end childhood vaccination against preventable diseases such as measles, mumps, chickenpox, polio and hepatitis? I certainly don’t. Routine childhood vaccinations prevented about 508m cases of illness in the US between 1994 and 2023. And he’s getting rid of them? Madness.Ladapo claims that “what you put into your body is because of your relationship with your body and your God”. OK. Fine. But none of us lives entirely alone, and your health affects my health, and vice versa. Living together means taking care of ourselves but also each other for our individual and collective wellbeing. It’s not rocket science. But it must be based on science.The right wing sees it otherwise. To them, the government response to Covid in particular and public health in general is leading us straight to “a regime of suppression, censorship, and coercion reminiscent of the power systems and governance that were previously condemned”. The result? “Human rights and individual freedom, as under previous fascist regimes, will lose,” according to David Bell of the Brownstone Institute, a thinktank established to oppose Covid-19 restrictions.But this seems a lot more like projection than any semblance to reality. Recent scholarship tends to point in the opposite direction, showing how social instability from the world’s last major pandemic before Covid, the 1918 global influenza pandemic, helped pave the way for the rise of the Nazi party in Germany and the Fascist party in Italy. One study found that “Mussolini’s newspaper tended to blame ‘others’ for the pandemic … and portrayed themselves as the voice of the common people against an out-of-touch ‘elite.’” Sounds familiar.Kennedy’s anti-science anti-vax agenda could have catastrophic health outcomes across the nation, helping fuel the rise of an even more extreme rightwing politics in the future. Could that result be what this government is even counting on? The idea sounds too far-fetched to be true, but I would also like to be alive when I’m proven wrong.

      Moustafa Bayoumi is a Guardian US columnist More

    • 200 Shares58 Views

      in US Politics

      Why Trump is targeting Boston and its Democratic mayor as part of his ‘immigration enforcement blitz’

      by

      Tensions between Michelle Wu, the mayor of Boston, and the Trump administration have been escalating in recent months over the administration’s aggressive immigration policies, with reports now signaling the possibility of a federal immigration enforcement surge in the city.The friction came to a head last week when the Trump administration reportedly began preparing an “immigration enforcement blitz” for Boston in the coming weeks, according to Politico.The report, which cited unnamed current and former administration officials, prompted a swift rebuke from Wu, who has in recent months become a vocal defender of sanctuary laws and immigrant protections.“Unlike the Trump administration, Boston follows the law – city, state and federal,” Wu said in a statement. “We are the safest major city in the country because all of our community members know that they are part of how we keep the entire community safe. Stop attacking cities to hide your administration’s failures.”This standoff has been steadily building since March when Wu testified before Congress alongside three other Democratic mayors to defend their cities’ immigration policies – specifically so-called sanctuary city laws that limit state and local law enforcement cooperation with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice).Supporters of the laws, including local leaders and police chiefs in jurisdictions that have them, argue that these measures can help build trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement. Some studies have found that crime rates tend to be lower in sanctuary counties compared with those without such protections.Critics of these policies claim that sanctuary laws undermine federal law enforcement’s ability to arrest and deport individuals with criminal records.So-called “sanctuary cities” have become a central target of this Trump administration, as it pushes for mass deportations as part of its crackdown on immigration. In June, Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, sent letters to 32 US mayors, including Wu, demanding they end their sanctuary policies or face cuts to federal funding and possible legal consequences.Wu then issued a staunch defense of Boston’s policies in a letter to Bondi and in a subsequent press conference.“The City of Boston is the safest major city in America,” she wrote. “Our progress is the result of decades of community policing and partnership between local law enforcement and community leaders, who share a commitment to making Boston a safe and welcoming home for everyone.”The progress, Wu said, was in part a result of the city’s local laws, including the Boston Trust Act, which prohibits local police from engaging with federal immigration enforcement unless there is a criminal warrant and is “fully consistent with federal law”.“On behalf of the people of Boston, and in solidarity with the cities and communities targeted by this federal administration for our refusal to bow down to unconstitutional threats and unlawful coercion, we affirm our support for each other and for our democracy,” she wrote.After Wu’s remarks, the acting Ice director, Todd Lyons, said that the agency intended to “flood the zone, especially in sanctuary jurisdictions”.“Now you’re going to see more Ice agents come to Boston to make sure that we take these public threats out that she wants to let go back in the communities,” he said, vowing to make “America safe”.Patricia Hyde, Boston’s acting Ice field office director, echoed Lyons’s sentiment, warning that Ice was “not backing down” and that “the men and women with Ice, unlike Mayor Wu”, took an oath that they swore to uphold “to protect the cities and communities where we work and where we live, and that’s what we’re gonna do, despite the obstacles”.Wu fired back on social media and said she took an oath to uphold the US constitution, noting that she was sworn in with her hand on a 1782 Aitken Bible “also known as the Bible of the Revolution”.As the threat of federal actions looms, Wu said last week that her administration was actively preparing for the possibility of a federal national guard deployment. Such a move would mirror recent actions by the Trump administration in both Washington DC and Los Angeles.The administration sent national guard troops to Washington DC last month under the pretext of combating a supposed surge in violent crime – a claim that stands in contrast to the city’s current crime data. Earlier this summer, the administration also sent thousands of national guard troops to Los Angeles during protests against the administration’s immigration crackdown, a move a federal judge recently ruled as unlawful.“We are following what’s happening in other cities around the country very closely,” Wu told GBH’s Boston Public Radio last week. “Unfortunately, we have seen what it would look like if that should come to pass, and that this federal administration is willing to go beyond the bounds of constitutional authority and federal law.”Wu also said her administration was reviewing relevant legal precedents and working “very closely” with community members “to ensure people know what’s happening and that this is not something that is needed or wanted or legally sound”.She added that “in this moment, however we got here, every mayor of every major city is having to take preparations for the national guard coming in against their will”.Wu’s comments come as leaders in other Democratic-led cities around the country are also bracing for the possibility of national guard deployments or Ice surges in their communities.The Trump administration announced plans this week to ramp up immigration crackdowns and deploy federal agents to Chicago, sparking strong backlash from local leaders.On Thursday, JB Pritzker, the Illinois governor, said he had been informed that expanded Ice operations would begin in and around Chicago this weekend, according to ABC News Chicago.Pritzker said earlier this week that he was “deeply concerned“ that Ice would target Mexican Independence Day celebrations on Saturday. So far, one independence day parade in North Chicago has been postponed. More

    • 238 Shares58 Views

      in US Politics

      The cat mayoral race: meet 11 runners and riders in the US’s most furious – and furriest – election

      by

      In Somerville, Massachusetts, a community bike path has, in recent months, become a hotly contested political constituency. A cat with a distinctive black smudge on her nose, Berry, had been sighted on the path by a number of concerned neighbours, who reported her missing. But she wasn’t actually anywhere she shouldn’t have been – Berry is an outdoor cat who lives in the area – so her family put up a poster dubbing her the bike path’s “mayor” to let neighbours know not to worry. It wasn’t long though before things got out of hand. How come Berry got to be mayor, asked other pet owners?A heated election is now under way. There have been dirty tactics (at one point, Berry’s campaign sign was stolen), scandal (candidates were outraged when a local vet claimed to be “sponsoring” the race), and even death: Pirate, the candidate whose family took it upon themselves to set up the online ballot, died unexpectedly, mid-race. Voting (for Somerville locals only) ends on 5 September – and with 73 pets currently in the running, there’s plenty of choice. So who are the runners and riders?The incumbent: BerryView image in fullscreen“Make cats outside again,” reads Berry’s sign campaigning for re-election. The current mayor is a three-year-old black and white cat who can be found on the bike path “daily, when I’m not visiting my humans”, the literature says. She has a dedicated team of humans around her: seven-year-old chief of staff Amias and five-year-old chief canvasser Emmeline; as well as campaign manager Mallory, a 39-year-old scientist. Her team claims she has improved community morale and should she be elected, will “unite the community under cat supremacy”.The challenger: Orange CatView image in fullscreenOrange Cat is a seven-year-old ginger tom, whose owner, 42-year-old comedian Janet, says he is “pro-democracy and pro-free and fair elections” and is also “against rats”. His solution to Somerville’s rat problem is simple: he will “eat them”.The fan favourite: MinervaView image in fullscreenThe simplest – and most intriguing – sign to have appeared along the bike path features a one-word slogan: “CRIME”. This provocative message has won nine-year-old Minerva many supporters online – despite the fact that, as an indoor cat, she has never been seen on the bike path. “Her minions monitor the path for her,” say her owners. “CRIME” remains her sole policy.The bike-hater: CartwheelView image in fullscreenPerhaps controversially for a cat who wishes to be in charge of a cycle lane, six-year-old Cartwheel’s campaign has decreed that, “like all things starting with ‘B’ (buses, basketballs, brooms), bikes are scary, and there should be fewer of them on the bike path”. Cartwheel’s owner, 15-year-old Susan, says he is an advocate of “safe outside time for all cats”, and wears a harness and lead to venture out. In fact, he runs a harness lending library for other local cats and can also do tricks, such as using buttons to demand things from his humans.The duo: Clementine and NixView image in fullscreenTwo-year-old siblings Clementine and Nix are running for mayor and vice-mayor respectively. Their owner Lily, 11, says the pair’s goals are lengthy: “Catnip will be planted along the bike path”, “If a cat is napping they must not be disturbed” and “No one is allowed to pet a cat without the cat’s permission” are just some of the rules the pair would like to implement, should they be elected.The baby: ErnieView image in fullscreenAt just four months old, black kitten Ernie is the youngest candidate in the race. Though he hasn’t yet visited the bike path, his owners say his policies include “adopt, don’t shop”, “free kibble” and “universal pet health insurance”.The climate activist: HugoView image in fullscreenHugo, who was taken in by 61-year-old retiree Jenny, in January, is probably “about a year” old – but as a rescue cat, even he can’t be sure. Jenny says he has “a huge brain” and is “constantly trying to understand how things work” and would apply this to addressing the climate crisis so it’s never too hot for him and other cats to go outside.The one who is not a cat: PicositaView image in fullscreenAlthough the majority of mayoral candidates are cats, it wasn’t long before dogs began planting campaign signs, too. If elected, three-year-old chihuahua Picosita, who lives along the bike path, “will fight for bunnies, birds, and all the small neighbours who can’t bark for themselves”, her owner, 31-year-old data analyst Valerie, says. “Tired of fat cat politicians?” reads her poster. “I’m all ears.”The one who is not a cat or a dog: NagiView image in fullscreenSeven-year-old Nagi is the only tortoise on the ballot: His owner, 24-year-old Trader Joe’s crew member, Shay routinely travels along the bike path with Nagi in his pocket. Nagi’s policies, says Shay, are “centred on waste management” because he has “accidentally nibbled on some trash before.”The nepo-baby: KorbenView image in fullscreenPolitics runs in the family of five-year-old Korben Dallas, whose owner, Jake Wilson, is in the running to be Somerville’s human mayor. Wilson and Dallas have matching campaign posters: while Wilson runs on “Leadership. Values. Action”, Dallas’s slogan is: “Naps. Tuna. Pets”. Dallas’s owners, 14-year-old Ingrid and 11-year-old Margot, regularly use the bike path and report back to him (as he is an indoor cat) and say he is keen to put a speed limit on the community path, enforce the state-wide ban on motorised vehicles on bikeways and to deal with the rodent problems.The one who isn’t actually running for mayor: WasilView image in fullscreenFive-year-old Wasil doesn’t venture outside himself, but lives in an apartment overlooking the bike path – so runs “a 9-to-5 surveillance operation” from his window perch, according to his owners. He is not actually running for mayor, but has put himself forward for a newly created position: attorney general. Here, his focus would be on “keeping the streets safe “ as he has an excellent vantage point “for spotting both birds and wrongdoing”. His owners say he also wants to put an end to “body-shaming” as everyone who walks past his window says “Whoa, he’s so big!” More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Macron says 26 nations ready to provide postwar military backing to Ukraine

      by

      Twenty-six nations have pledged to provide postwar security guarantees to Ukraine, including an international force on land and sea and in the air, Emmanuel Macron said after a summit at which European leaders sought to pin down Donald Trump on the level of support he is willing to give Kyiv.“The day the conflict stops, the security guarantees will be deployed,” the French president told a press conference at the Élysée Palace in Paris, standing alongside Volodymyr Zelenskyy.After the summit, Macron told reporters: “We have today 26 countries who have formally committed – some others have not yet taken a position – to deploy a ‘reassurance force’ troops in Ukraine, or be present on the ground, in the sea or in the air.”The troops would not be deployed “on the frontline” but aim to “prevent any new major aggression”, Macron said.Macron initially said the 26 nations – which he did not name – would deploy to Ukraine. But he later said some countries would provide guarantees while remaining outside Ukraine, for example by helping to train and equip Kyiv’s forces. He did not say how many troops would be involved in the guarantees.The Ukrainian president hailed the move. “I think that today, for the first time in a long time, this is the first such serious concrete step,” he said.US contributions to the guarantees would be finalised in the coming days, Macron said.On Friday, a spokesperson for the Kremlin said that western countries “cannot” provide security guarantees for Ukraine, according to remarks reported by Russian state media.“This cannot be a guarantee of security for Ukraine that would suit our country,” Dmitry Peskov told state news agency RIA Novosti.Thursday’s meeting of 35 leaders from the “coalition of the willing” – of mainly European countries – was intended to finalise security guarantees and ask the US president for the backing that Europeans say is vital to make such guarantees viable.Many European countries including Germany, Spain and Italy have refused so far to provide troop commitments. A German spokesperson said: “The focus should be on financing, arming and training the Ukrainian armed forces,” a formula that is not vastly different from what Europe is now providing.Alarmed European leaders travelled to the White House in the wake of the August Alaska summit between Trump and Vladimir Putin fearing that the US president may be about to force Volodymyr Zelenskyy into a humiliating surrender, including loss of territory.View image in fullscreenTrump responded to the European lobbying by claiming he had won the Russian leader’s agreement to hold direct talks with the Ukrainian president, but Russia rejected any such commitment and largely maintained its demand for the surrender of Ukrainian territory and a commitment that Ukraine will never join Nato.Trump had set a deadline of 1 September for a meeting between Putin and Zelenskyy, but Trump is known to set deadlines that he then ignores.“We had a great relationship,” Trump said of Putin in an interview with the rightwing news website The Daily Caller. He said he was now very disappointed in the Russian president: “Thousands of people are dying; it’s a senseless war.”Europe has been desperate to ensure Trump does not wash his hands of the war, but it has been unable to convert Trump’s stated frustration with Putin into a plan to try to strangle the Russian economy.Macron in Paris sought to give the impression that Europe, unlike Russia, stuck to its commitments. He said: “The contributions that were prepared, documented and confirmed at the level of defence ministers under the strictest secrecy allow us to say: this work is complete and will now be politically approved.”Europe has been hoping for months that Trump would activate long-promised sweeping economic sanctions on countries that import Russian oil. The 50% tariffs that the US imposed on India, partly for importing Russian oil, appear to have driven the traditionally non-aligned Narendra Modi, the Indian prime minister, closer into the arms of China and Russia.Stung by his diplomatic failure so far, Trump has given the impression of wanting to focus on domestic policy, including crime and the economy.The US was represented at the Paris talks by Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, who also met Zelenskyy separately.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionView image in fullscreenAfter the summit, Starmer’s office said it was necessary “to go even further to apply pressure on Putin to secure a cessation of hostilities.”“The prime minister said Putin could not be trusted as he continued to delay peace talks and simultaneously carry out egregious attacks on Ukraine,” No 10 added.Russia has said it will not tolerate European troops in postwar Ukraine.The coalition of the willing includes about 30 nations backing Ukraine, mainly European but also Canada, Australia and Japan. It has met repeatedly at military and political level but not published any detailed plan of action, reflecting internal divisions and uncertainty about the nature of the US contribution.In a breakthrough of sorts, the plan for Europeans to buy US arms for use in Ukraine has started to bear fruit. On 28 August, the US state department announced the delivery of 3,350 ERAM long-range cruise missiles to Ukraine, worth $825m (£615m, €705m).The funding came from Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and the US, but the financial contribution of each country was not disclosed. The ERAM missiles have a range similar to that of the Franco-British Scalp-EG missiles, which Ukraine fired at occupied Crimea and the Russian region of Kursk.Zelenskyy said he had not seen “any signs from Russia that they want to end the war”.The Nato secretary general, Mark Rutte, said it was not for Putin to decide if European troops would be stationed inside Ukraine. He said: “I think we really have to stop making Putin too powerful.”The German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, described Putin as the most severe war criminal of our time.On Wednesday in Beijing, Putin attended a military parade alongside Xi Jinping and hailed Russian forces’ progress in Ukraine, saying troops were advancing on “all fronts”.But there are signs that sanctions are finally taking a toll on the Russian economy after two years of high growth fuelled by defence spending.The Sberbank chief, German Gref, one of Russia’s most powerful bankers, warned on Thursday that the economy was stagnating and that unless the central bank cut interest rates then the country would fall into recession.Russia’s war economy grew at 4.1% in 2023 and 4.3% in 2024 but it is slowing sharply under the weight of high interest rates required to dampen inflation. More