Vladimir Putin

Subterms

    Latest story

    150 Shares30 Views

    Donald Trump says he is ‘very angry’ with Vladimir Putin over Ukraine

    by

    Donald Trump has said he is “pissed off” with Vladimir Putin over his approach to a ceasefire in Ukraine and threatened to levy tariffs on Moscow’s oil exports if the Russian leader does not agree to a truce within a month.The US president indicated he would levy a 25% or 50% tariff that would affect countries buying Russian oil in a telephone interview with NBC News, during which he also threatened to bomb Iran and did not rule out using force in Greenland.“If Russia and I are unable to make a deal on stopping the bloodshed in Ukraine, and if I think it was Russia’s fault, which it might not be, but if I think it was Russia’s fault, I am going to put secondary tariffs on oil, on all oil coming out of Russia,” Trump said.“That would be that if you buy oil from Russia, you can’t do business in the United States. There will be a 25% tariff on all … on all oil, a 25 to 50-point tariff on all oil.”The abrupt change of direction came after Putin had tried to attack the legitimacy of Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Friday, Trump said. Appearing on Russian television, Putin had suggested Ukraine could be placed under a temporary UN-led government to organise fresh elections before negotiating a peace deal.Trump has previously called the Ukrainian president a dictator, but on Sunday he said: “I was very angry, pissed off” when Putin “started getting into Zelenskyy’s credibility, because that’s not going in the right location, you understand?”He said “new leadership means you’re not gonna have a deal for a long time, right” and that he wanted to exert pressure on the Kremlin, which has thrown up a string of questions about a peace settlement and only agreed to limited maritime and energy ceasefires so far.Trump repeated that “if a deal isn’t made, and if I think it was Russia’s fault, I’m going to put secondary sanctions on Russia”, but then indicated he would quickly back down if there was progress on a ceasefire.“The anger dissipates quickly” if Putin “does the right thing”, Trump said, adding that he expected to talk to his Russian counterpart this week.The US president also used the same short interview to tell Iran that if “they don’t make a deal” to curb their nuclear weapons programme, “there will be bombing. It will be bombing the likes of which they have never seen before”. Officials from both countries were engaged in negotiations, he added.He also mentioned fresh economic sanctions as an alternative. “There’s a chance that, if they don’t make a deal, that I will do secondary tariffs on them,” Trump said. “I am considering putting on secondary tariffs on Iran until such time as a deal is signed.”Secondary tariffs are a novel idea. The US introduced a 25% tariff last week on countries that buy crude oil and liquid fuels from Venezuela, the largest of which is China, after Trump accused the Latin American country of sending criminals and gang members into the US under the cover of migrants.Russian oil exports are already subject to a range of sanctions from the US, UK, EU and other G7 countries, leaving China and India as the two largest buyers, according to the International Energy Agency. What is not yet clear is whether the measures proposed would be effective once they come into force.Finland indicated it may have had a role in Trump’s intervention. A day before the interview, Trump spent time with his Finnish counterpart, Alexander Stubb, at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. The two men had breakfast and lunch and played a round of golf on an unofficial visit, Stubb’s office said.“My message in the conversations I have with the president is that we need a ceasefire, and we need a deadline for the ceasefire, and then we need to pay a price for breaking a ceasefire,” Stubb told the Guardian.“So, number one, we need a ceasefire date, and I would prefer that to be Easter, say, 20 April, when President Trump has been in office for three months. If by then it’s not accepted or is broken by Russia, there needs to be consequences. And those consequences should be sanctions, maximum sanctions, and we continue the pressure up until the 20th and then we’ll see what happens.”During a previous interview with NBC on Saturday, Trump said: “We’ll get Greenland. Yeah, 100%” and argued that while there’s a “good possibility that we could do it without military force … I don’t take anything off the table.”During the election campaign, Trump had said that he could end the Ukraine war within 24 hours, comments he more recently claimed were “a little bit sarcastic”. That has proved elusive and his tactics to force Russia and Ukraine into agreeing a ceasefire have so far been focused on bullying and pressurising Kyiv.Trump and his vice-president, JD Vance, berated Zelenskyy at the Oval Office a month ago, which was followed by Washington cutting off intelligence and military aid. Kyiv then signed up to the principle of a 30-day ceasefire if the Kremlin would reciprocate in return for intelligence and aid being restored.Putin said earlier this month that although he was in favour of a ceasefire, “there are nuances” and any halt in fighting should “remove the root causes of this crisis”, a sweeping but vague demand.The Russian president and his allies have called for the demilitarisation of Ukraine, insisted that the presence of western troops as peacekeepers would be unacceptable and demanded the full annexation of four regions, three of which it only partially occupies.Two people were killed and 25 were injured in and around Ukraine’s second city, Kharkiv, in Russian attacks on Saturday night and Sunday morning. A military hospital was among the buildings struck. Ukraine’s general staff denounced what it said was a “deliberate, targeted shelling”, a rare acknowledgement of military casualties.Trump’s intervention follows a difficult week for the White House, during which senior administration officials were criticised for discussing attacks on Houthi rebels in Yemen on the Signal messaging app, which is not authorised by the Pentagon.The highly sensitive discussion, which included bombing plans, leaked because a journalist from the Atlantic magazine was mistakenly added to the chat by the US national security adviser, Mike Waltz. More

    More stories

    • 238 Shares93 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump is abandoning democracy and freedom. That creates an opening for Europe – and Britain | Jonathan Freedland

      by

      Thanks to Donald Trump, a vacancy is opening up in the international jobs market. For decades, if not centuries, and always imperfectly, the US offered itself to the world as the guarantor of democracy and the land of the free. Now that it’s pivoting away from that job description, there’s an opportunity for someone else to step in.The evidence that the US is moving, even galloping, away from basic notions of democracy and freedom is piling up. Just because the changes have happened so fast doesn’t make them any less fundamental. We now have a US administration that blithely ignores court rulings, whose officials say out loud “I don’t care what the judges think”. In a matter of weeks, it has become an open question whether the US remains a society governed by the rule of law.In the name of defeating “woke” and diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, even historic efforts to advance civil rights are disdained or banished into the memory hole: this week it emerged that an army webpage celebrating Harry Truman’s 1948 order to integrate the military had disappeared, along with several others honouring distinguished Black soldiers. When asked about it, the press secretary at the Pentagon said: “DEI is dead at the defense department.” As for the Department of Education, this week Trump moved to abolish it altogether.But if the US is being upended by the Trump hurricane, so is everywhere else in its path, including those places that once looked to the US with admiration. We can all see the coercion of Ukraine into accepting a supposed peace that will require it to surrender its territory to Vladimir Putin and its minerals to Trump. Less visible is the way in which the scything of the US federal government by Trump and Elon Musk is aiding Putin’s assault on Ukraine’s most vulnerable people – its children.Among the US projects cut is a state department initiative to collect evidence of Russian war crimes, including the abduction of more than 20,000 Ukrainian children, many of them sent to Russia for forced adoption. Now there are fears that that information, which might have helped find the children and eventually reunite them with their parents, has been lost, destroyed by the Musk chainsaw. Captain America thought he was a superhero; turns out he’s the villain’s accomplice.Now it is those contemptuous of democracy who look to the US for inspiration. This week, Benjamin Netanyahu broke a ceasefire he had agreed with Hamas, resuming devastating airstrikes on Gaza, killing hundreds of Palestinians, in part because he doubtless presumed Trump would give him no grief. But he also sacked the independent-minded head of Israel’s domestic intelligence agency, the Shin Bet, the latest move in his ongoing attempt to remove every legal or constitutional constraint on his power. If that reminds you of someone, there’s good reason. “In America and in Israel, when a strong rightwing leader wins an election, the leftist Deep State weaponizes the justice system to thwart the people’s will,” Netanyahu tweeted on Wednesday. “They won’t win in either place! We stand strong together.” Trump’s authoritarian power grab is providing cover for others to do the same.This new role for the US, as a beacon of anti-democracy, is having some unintended consequences. Canada was on course to elect a Conservative government; now, by way of a backlash, the Liberals under Mark Carney look set to ride an anti-Trump wave to victory. However it operates, Trumpism is becoming a key determinant of politics the world over.Perhaps especially in Britain. For most of the last century, the US has been Britain’s foremost ally. Put more baldly, London has all but relied on Washington for its own defence. Britain’s military and intelligence systems are intricately integrated with those of the US; its nuclear capability is not operationally independent. These last two months, it has become obvious that that is no longer sustainable: Britain cannot rely on a US that behaves more like an enemy than a friend.That, in turn, creates a new political fact – we are in an age of rearmament – that will be the organising principle of Rachel Reeves’s spring statement next week. It will require either deep cuts or new taxes. Trump has scrambled Britain’s finances.By itself, that represents a monumental change. But it won’t end there. Almost everything we do will need to be rethought. Much of that is cause for alarm – how can Nato function when its mightiest member has become an adversary? – but it also creates opportunities for Britain, if we are only willing to seize them.Take, as just one example, Trump’s war on science. The US has long been the world leader in almost every field of research. But Trump and Musk are slashing or closing one research hub after another, whether at the National Institutes of Health or the Environmental Protection Agency, which could lay off thousands of talented scientists. The administration is threatening academic freedom, forcing US universities to bendto Trumpism or lose funding. This week, a French scientist travelling to the US for a conference was denied entry because, according to the French government, his “phone contained exchanges with colleagues and friends in which he expressed a personal opinion on the Trump administration’s research policy”. You read that right: the man was subjected to a random check at the airport, US officials went through his laptop and phone, found private messages speaking ill of the president and sent him back home.This is an opening for Britain, which should be promoting itself as a haven for free, unhindered scientific inquiry. The EU has already spotted the chance, and is devising a plan to lure US scholars. But the UK has the advantage of the English language; it should be first in line. Some see the opportunity, but sadly the UK government is not among them: petitioned to reduce upfront visa costs for overseas scientists, which is an average of 17 times higher than for comparable countries, ministers this week said no.But science is only one area where Britain could be taking up the slack. Trump is silencing the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe: the BBC should be given the relatively modest funds required to step in and do the job instead, thereby boosting British soft power at a stroke.The first step is understanding that the world has changed and that the old shibboleths no longer apply. It’s absurd that Britain, home to Europe’s biggest arms industry, is, thanks to Brexit, shut out of the new €150bn (£125bn) EU defence procurement fund, the latest example of how standing apart from its neighbours amounts to reckless folly in the Trump era.What the moment calls for is great boldness. It means Keir Starmer having the courage to tell the country that everything has changed and that we will have to change, too. Yes, that will involve painful sacrifices to pay for rearmament, and the breaking of political taboos, including listening to the majority of Britons who tell pollsters it’s time we rejoined the EU.It adds up to a vision of a Europe that includes Britain, stepping into the space the US is vacating, guaranteeing and promoting free speech and democratic accountability at the very moment the US is abandoning those ideals. Trump has blasted the door open. All we have to do is walk through it.

      On 30 April, join Jonathan Freedland, Kim Darroch, Devika Bhat and Leslie Vinjamuri as they discuss Trump’s presidency on his 100th day in office, live at Conway Hall London, and live streamed globally. You can book tickets here

      Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist More

    • 163 Shares145 Views

      in US Politics

      French politician jokes US should return Statue of Liberty for siding with ‘tyrants’

      by

      A French European parliament member has quipped that the US should return the Statue of Liberty, which it received as a gift from France about 140 years ago, after Donald Trump’s decision “to side with the tyrants” against Ukraine.Trump’s White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, then responded to Raphaël Glucksmann on Monday by calling him an “unnamed low-level French politician” and saying the US would keep the statue.Taunting France’s conquest by Nazi Germany during the second world war before the allied forces – including the US – then defeated the Nazis, Leavitt added: “It’s only because of America that the French are not speaking German right now.” She also said France “should be very grateful to our great country”.Glucksmann, of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, kicked off the exchange Sunday when – evidently with his tongue in his cheek – he said it appeared to him that the US had come to “despise” the statue as well as what it symbolizes.“So, it will be just fine here at home,” Glucksmann said.Glucksmann also referred to a crackdown on “scientific freedom” in the US in his remarks at a political party convention, first reported by Agence France-Presse.His comments amount to a verbal protest after Trump suspended military aid and intelligence gathering on Ukraine, in an apparent attempt to strong-arm its president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, in the negotiations to end the war started by Russia, which invaded in February 2022.The US president upbraided Zelenskyy during a televised diplomatic meltdown in the Oval Office on 28 February, which caused significant alarm across Europe for appearing to signal that the Trump administration generally favors Russia in the conflict. The US later restored military aid, but on Monday it was reported the US was withdrawing from an international body formed to investigate responsibility for the invasion of Ukraine.Trump and the Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, for whom the US president has repeatedly expressed admiration, are tentatively scheduled to talk on Tuesday over the phone about ending the war in Ukraine.Glucksmann’s remarks additionally nodded to Elon Musk’s brutal staffing and spending cuts to the US federal government, which have affected numerous health and climate research workers. Glucksmann said France could be in a position to benefit if any of the fired workers emigrated.“If you want to fire your best researchers, if you want to fire all the people who, through their freedom and their sense of innovations, their taste for doubt and research, have made your country the world’s leading power, then we’re going to welcome them,” said Glucksmann.“Give us back the Statue of Liberty. We’re going to say to the Americans who have chosen to side with the tyrants, to the Americans who fired researchers for demanding scientific freedom: ‘Give us back the Statue of Liberty.’ We gave it to you as a gift.”France did indeed present the 305ft-tall, 450,000lb Statue of Liberty to the US in Paris on 4 July 1884, the 108th anniversary of the American declaration of independence from the UK. The US needed crucial military aid from France to win its revolutionary war and gain independence from the UK.Nicknamed “Lady Liberty”, the torch-bearing statue – designed by Frédéric Auguste Bartholdi of France – was then installed on an island in New York City’s harbor and dedicated in 1886. There is a smaller copy of the statue on an island in the Seine river in Paris.A bronze plaque on the Statue of Liberty’s pedestal contains the words of a poem titled The New Colossus, which overtly references the large number of immigrants who arrived in the US in the 19th century and partially reads: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore.”Trump has been aggressively pursuing the deportation of immigrants. Recently, his administration deported a Brown University medical professor to Lebanon, despite her having a valid US work visa and a judge’s order not to do so.Prosecutors reportedly alleged that the professor had recently attended the funeral of Hezbollah leader, Hassan Nasrallah, among other things.The US also recently deported to El Salvador more than 250 people whom the White House accused of belonging to Venezuelan and Salvadorian gangs, despite a judge’s order halting the flight.David Smith contributed reporting More

    • 238 Shares114 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘I escaped one gulag only to end up in another’: Russian asylum seekers face Ice detention in the US

      by

      For most of the four years of Joe Biden was in office, citizens of Russia and other post-Soviet states seeking asylum in the US were generally released into the country while they awaited hearings on their claim in immigration court.But since last summer, many have been detained upon entering the US, and some of them have been held for more than a year, lawyers, activists and detainees say. Some children have been separated from their parents.“My Russian clients tell me, ‘Now our prison is 80% Russian, the remaining 20% are from rotating nationalities who stay for a while,’” said immigration attorney Julia Nikolaev, who has been advocating for detainees’ rights alongside representatives of the Russian opposition. “Only Russians and a few other post-Soviet nationals remain in detention until their final hearings.”Alexei Demin, a 62-year-old former naval officer from Moscow, was detained in July of last year.In the last 20 years, Demin rarely missed an anti-Vladimir Putin protest in the Russian capital. He had become concerned almost immediately after Putin, a former KGB agent, rose to power, he said. For years, he criticized Putin’s regime on Facebook, and he was detained twice at protests. Still, he never imagined that he would end up fleeing his homeland for fear that Putin’s regime would imprison him. Or that he would end up imprisoned in the US.When Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine in 2022, a colleague asked Demin why he wasn’t enlisting to fight. He replied: “If I go, it will be on Ukraine’s side.” Soon, as the crackdown on dissent in Russia intensified amid the war, Demin and his wife, like many others who had long openly opposed Putin, fled to the US to seek political asylum. For years, Russians have been among the top five nationalities granted asylum.The couple arrived in the US in the summer of 2024, after securing an appointment through CBP One, the app launched by the Biden administration (and since then shut down by Donald Trump) allowing asylum applicants to schedule to meet with immigration officials. At their appointment, Demin and his wife were detained, separated and sent to detention centers in different states. They haven’t seen each other since.His predicament, Demin said, was “a trap and a blatant injustice”.“This is how the US treats people who protest against Russia’s policies,” he said in a call from a detention center in Virginia in January.US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) does not release public data on the number of people from post-Soviet countries it holds in detention. But Nikolaev said that law enforcement officials have privately acknowledged to her that asylum seekers from those countries are being held longer.Other activists say they have seen similar patterns. The non-profit Russian America for Democracy in Russia (RADR) has played an active role in assisting detainees in immigration detention centers, finding lawyers and working with the government officials.Dmitry Valuev, president of RADR, said it was an issue that affected not only Russians, but also citizens of several other post-Soviet countries.There have been reports that some immigrants arriving from post-Soviet states are facing increased scrutiny over fears they are connected to Islamist terrorist organizations. It’s unclear what prompted US authorities to keep the Russian asylum seekers in detention. One theory is that immigration officials are targeting Russians and other post-Soviet nationals as spies.Eric Rubin, former US ambassador to Bulgaria who also served as a deputy chief of mission at the US embassy in Moscow, said that the complicated history of US-Russia diplomacy can hurt Russian asylum applicants.“When you meet Russians in the United States, obviously you need to wonder whether some of them are actually working for Russian intelligence. Some of them are, most of them are not,” said Rubin.Nikolaev isn’t so sure. “Russian spies can enter the country with European passports, visas and all the right documents,” she said.Nikolaev in January took her concerns to US government officials, alongside Ilya Yashin, a leading Russian opposition figure. They met with officials at the national security council, who requested a list of separated families, Nikolaev said.The Department of Homeland Security, Ice and the national security council did not respond to repeated questions about detention policies or the specific cases outlined in this article.In a statement, the White House said that the duration of cases varies based on legal proceedings and any protections sought. The White House also said there had been “zero instances of children from any of the countries you mentioned being separated from their families by US immigration authorities in this entire fiscal year”.View image in fullscreenBut Galina Kaplunova, 26, an illustrator and anti-Putin activist, was detained and separated from her child and mother at the US border last August.In the summer of 2024, Kaplunova’s husband, a Kremlin supporter, had threatened to take her child away and report her to the police for her political activism, Kaplunova said. A native of St Petersburg, she had been detained multiple times at protests and had volunteered in opposition leaders’ campaign offices. Two days after her husband made the threat, Kaplunova, her four-year-old son and her mother fled to the US.At the US border with Mexico, Ice agents separated Kaplunova from her son, she said. He was placed in foster care, while she and her mother were sent to different detention centers in separate states.After being separated, her son was placed with a Mexican American family, she said. He didn’t speak English, so communicated with them through Google Translate.“I fled Russia so they wouldn’t take my child or jail me. But the US did,” she said.About two months after being detained and separated, Kaplunova was released and reunited with her son, she said. It was a miracle, she said.Now Kaplunova and her son now live in California. Her mother is still detained. Her son is afraid of being abandoned. Whenever she tries to discuss his time in foster care, he simply says he doesn’t remember it.“It’s as if he erased that part of his life so he wouldn’t have to remember it,” she said.He learned some English in foster care, but refuses to speak it with his mother.“Maybe he associates English with something bad, something negative,” she said.Valuev, the president of RADR, said that long periods of detention can hurt applicants’ asylum cases. Hiring a lawyer from within a detention center is nearly impossible due to the lack of internet access, he said. “Detainees are given a list of contacts, but most of these numbers don’t answer the phone,” he said.Additionally, many detainees have no access to materials for their asylum cases because their documents were stored on computers and phones that were confiscated.Vladislav Krasnov, a protest organizer and activist from Moscow, said he spent 444 days in a Louisiana detention center. Krasnov fled Russia in 2022 after Putin announced a draft. He crossed the border with the CBP One appointment and was swiftly detained. Now free, he is still waiting for a court hearing to review his asylum case.Reflecting on his experience, he said he was shocked by the welcome he got in the United States. “I escaped one gulag only to end up in another,” Krasnov said.He was also angry at Russian opposition leaders for not paying attention to his plight until recently.“Last summer, I watched Yulia Navalnaya hugging Biden in the Oval Office. Then she talked on the phone with [Kamala] Harris, and Harris declared that America supports people fighting for Russia’s freedom. To put it mildly, I had a complete breakdown at that moment, sitting in detention,” Krasnov said.About 300 detainees from Russia and other post-Soviet countries filed a lawsuit last November, calling their detention discriminatory, and demanding freedom for people they argue were held without a justification. A federal judge ruled in February that the court lacked the jurisdiction to review the detention policy and dismissed the case.View image in fullscreenAmong those mentioned in the lawsuit was Polina Guseva, a political activist and volunteer on the team of the late Russian dissident Alexei Navalny. Guseva arrived in the US in July 2024, applied for asylum and was sent to a detention center. She said Ice officers at the Louisiana detention facility where she’s being held “openly say that Russians are not being released”.Still, she does not regret coming to the US, she said, adding safety concerns in Russia left her with no other choice.“Two thoughts help me a lot. First, better to be here than to be raped with a dumbbell in a Russian prison,” Guseva said. “And second, my friend Daniil Kholodny is still in prison in Russia. He was the technical director of the Navalny Live YouTube channel. He was tried alongside Alexei Navalny in his last trial and sentenced to eight years. He has been imprisoned for more than two years now. If he can hold on, why shouldn’t I?”Alexei Demin, the former naval officer and longtime protester, was supposed to have his first asylum court hearing reviewing his asylum case in early February, but the hearing was rescheduled to mid-April because of the judge’s sickness. By that time, he will have been in detention for more than 300 days. More

    • 113 Shares115 Views

      in US Politics

      Ukraine ceasefire plans moving to operational phase, Starmer says

      by

      Keir Starmer has called for the “guns to fall silent in Ukraine” and said military powers will meet next week as plans to secure a peace deal move to an “operational phase”.The UK prime minister said Vladimir Putin’s “yes, but” approach to a proposed ceasefire was not good enough, and the Russian president would have to negotiate “sooner or later”.He accused Putin of trying to delay peace, and said it must become a reality after more than three years of war.Starmer was speaking at a press conference in Downing Street after a virtual meeting of the “coalition of the willing”, including the European Commission, European nations, Nato, Canada, Ukraine, Australia and New Zealand on Saturday morning.The meeting was addressed by Starmer, the French president, Emmanuel Macron, the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and the Nato secretary general, Mark Rutte.Starmer told journalists: “Sooner or later Putin will have to come to the table. So this is the moment. Let the guns fall silent, let the barbaric attacks on Ukraine once and for all stop, and agree to a ceasefire now.”He added: “Now is the time to engage in discussion on a mechanism to manage and monitor a full ceasefire, and agree to serious negotiations towards not just a pause, but a lasting peace, backed by strong security arrangements through our coalition of the willing.”He said the meeting had led to “new commitments”, including on the wider defence and security of Europe.“We won’t sit back and wait for Putin to act,” he said. “Instead we will keep pushing forward, so the group I convened today is more important than ever.”He added: “We agreed we will keep increasing the pressure on Russia, keep the military aid flowing to Ukraine, and keep tightening the restrictions on Russia’s economy to weaken Putin’s war machine and bring him to the table.“And we agreed to accelerate our practical work to support a potential deal. So we will now move into an operational phase.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOf the military meeting on Thursday, he said it would lead to “strong and robust plans … to swing in behind a peace deal and guarantee Ukraine’s future security”.Starmer had earlier called Ukraine and Zelenskyy the “party of peace”.He said Donald Trump was “absolutely committed to the lasting peace that is needed in Ukraine, and everything he’s doing is geared towards that end”.He told journalists Europe needed to improve its own defence and security, and said the UK was talking to the US on a daily basis about the war.Kyiv has already accepted plans for an immediate 30-day ceasefire but, on Thursday, Putin set out sweeping conditions that he wanted to be met before Russia would agree. They include a guarantee that Ukraine would not rearm or mobilise during the truce.Starmer said: “Volodymyr had committed to a 30-day unconditional ceasefire, but Putin is trying to delay, saying there must be a painstaking study before a ceasefire can take place. Well the world needs action, not a study, not empty words and conditions.”On Saturday, Zelenskyy posted on X that Russian forces were building up along the eastern border of Ukraine, which could signal an attack on the Sumy region.He said: “The buildup of Russian forces indicates that Moscow intends to keep ignoring diplomacy. It is clear that Russia is prolonging the war.”The Ukrainian president said his forces were still fighting in Russia’s Kursk region, and were not facing an encirclement, despite claims by his Russian and US counterparts.Starmer said: “President Trump has offered Putin the way forward to a lasting peace. Now we must make this a reality. So this is the moment to keep driving towards the outcome that we want to see, to end the killing, a just and lasting peace in Ukraine, and lasting security for all of us.” More

    • 138 Shares82 Views

      in US Politics

      Republican Russophilia: how Trump Putin-ised a party of cold war hawks

      by

      In speech that ran for 100 minutes there was one moment when Donald Trump drew more applause from Democrats than Republicans. As the president told Congress last week how the US had sent billions of dollars in military aid to Ukraine, his political opponents clapped and unfurled a Ukrainian flag – while his own party sat in stony silence.It was a telling insight into Republicans’ transformation, in the space of a generation, from a party of cold war hawks to one of “America first” isolationists. Where Trump has led, many Republicans have obediently followed, all the way into the embrace of the Russian president, Vladimir Putin – with huge implications for the global democratic order.“The reversal is dramatic and the willingness of the Republican party to go along with it continues to be breathtaking,” said Charlie Sykes, a political commentator and author of How the Right Lost Its Mind. “At least for a while it appeared that Republicans were still going to be supportive of Ukraine. But now that Trump has completely reversed our foreign policy there seems to be very little pushback.”Last month, Trump set up a peace process that began with the US and Russia’s top diplomats meeting in Saudi Arabia – with no seat at the table for Ukrainian officials. He branded Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, a “dictator”, a term he has never applied to the authoritarian Putin.Along with Vice-President JD Vance, he berated Zelenskyy in the Oval Office, a spectacle that prompted the Democratic senator Elissa Slotkin to observe that Ronald Reagan, a Republican president who was an inveterate foe of Soviet aggression, “must be rolling over in his grave”. Trump suspended offensive cyber operations against Russia and paused military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine until it agreed to a 30-day ceasefire.The Oval Office shakedown shocked the world but there was strikingly little criticism from Republicans. The secretary of state, Marco Rubio, sank into a couch and said nothing as the shouting raged around him. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who had previously been supportive of Zelenskyy, even suggested that the Ukrainian president should resign.Speaking at a Center for American Progress thinktank event in Washington this week, Patrick Gaspard, a former Obama administration official, said: “What you fundamentally believe matters little if you’re acting against those beliefs.“It was astonishing to see Republican leaders who on a Monday were praising Zelenskyy and by the Tuesday were removing any reference to him from their websites. It’s an extraordinary thing to see people who used to be pretty serious on this issue, like Lindsey Graham, suddenly saying the things.”Meanwhile, other Russia hawks such as the former vice-president Mike Pence, Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger have been sidelined. Republicans who were not shy about countering Trump’s foreign policy ideas during his first term are now standing by him – in public at least.Max Boot, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations thinktank and author of Reagan: His Life and Legend, said: “Absent Trump, I don’t think you would see this reorientation of the Republican party. Even with Trump a lot of Republicans, especially on Capitol Hill, are very uneasy about it and don’t like what Trump is doing but they’re afraid to speak out.”View image in fullscreenOthers suggest that loyalty to or fear of Trump may not be the only explanation. Younger Republicans are questioning the legitimacy of institutions such as Nato and the United Nations and following far-right influencers such as Tucker Carlson, who interviewed Putin in Russia last year and claimed that Moscow was “so much nicer than any city in my country”.Critics say Trump, Carlson and the “Make America great again” movement see in Russia an idealised version of white Christian nationalism, in contrast to the “woke” values of western Europe. Putin has mocked the US embassy for flying a rainbow flag and suggested that transgenderism is “on the verge of a crime against humanity”.From this perspective, the struggle is no longer capitalism against communism but rather woke against unwoke. In various speeches Putin has railed against the west’s “obsessive emphasis on race”, “modern cancel culture” and “reverse racism”. He said of the west: “They invented five or six genders: transformers, trans – you see, I do not even understand what it is.”All are familiar talking points from the Maga playbook. Indeed, last year, on the rightwing strategist Steven Bannon’s War Room podcast, the Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene said: “Let’s talk about what this really is, Steve: this is a war against Christianity. The Ukrainian government is attacking Christians; the Ukrainian government is executing priests. Russia is not doing that; they’re not attacking Christianity. As a matter of fact, they seem to be protecting it.”Bannon has made no secret of his desire to bring down the European Union and “globalist” forces. Joel Rubin, a former deputy assistant secretary of state under Barack Obama, draws a comparison with conservative “red” states and liberal “blue” states within the US. “Let’s make it real American tangible,” he said. “Russia is a red state and France and England and Nato – they’re blue states.”During the cold war, it was hardline anti-communism that was core to the Republican brand. Reagan branded the Soviet Union as the “evil empire” and stepped up US military spending. But when Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in the Soviet Union in 1985, relations improved.Reagan and Gorbachev held several summits that led to key arms control agreements. Reagan’s successor, George HW Bush, worked closely with Gorbachev and, later, Boris Yeltsin as the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, encouraging a transition to democracy and capitalism.View image in fullscreenEarly in Republican George W Bush’s presidency, he had a relatively positive relationship with Putin, memorably saying he had “looked into Putin’s soul” and found him trustworthy. The two cooperated on counter-terrorism following the 9/11 attacks but tensions grew over the Iraq war and US support for Georgia and Ukraine.By 2008, when Russia invaded Georgia, relations had significantly deteriorated. Obama, a Democrat, initially pursued a “reset” policy with Russia, aiming to improve relations, but tensions resurfaced after Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 and supported separatists in eastern Ukraine. In response, Obama imposed sanctions on Russia and expelled diplomats.Russia launched an aggressive effort to interfere in the 2016 presidential election on Trump’s behalf, according to a later Senate intelligence committee report, which found extensive evidence of contacts between the Trump campaign advisers and Kremlin officials and other Russians.Trump vehemently denied collusion even as his administration imposed sanctions on Russia. At a joint press conference in Helsinki in 2018, Trump sided with the Russian president over his own intelligence agencies. He has remained unwilling to criticise Putin, even after Russia invaded Ukraine and after the opposition activist Alexei Navalny died in prison.The Putin-isation of the Republican party should perhaps not be overstated. Older senators such as Mitch McConnell, who is retiring at the next election, Thom Tillis and Roger Wicker remain staunchly supportive of Ukraine.Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center thinktank in Washington, said: “I push back against the idea that Republicans have become entranced with Putin because there’s not evidence for that. There is evidence that Republicans have become tired of the fight in Ukraine. These things are not the same.”However, the balance appears to be shifting as the cold war fades into memory. About 41% of Republicans view Russia as either “friendly” or an “ally”, according to a CBS News/YouGov poll released earlier this month. And just 27% of Republicans agree with the statement that Trump is too close to Moscow, according to a Reuters/Ipsos survey.View image in fullscreenAdam Smith, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives’ armed services committee, told the Guardian of the “Make American great again” movement: “They have definitely shown a sympathy for Vladimir Putin’s autocratic, ‘traditional’ values, which are very troubling if you care about the problems of bigotry and discrimination. There is growing sympathy and the wing of the Republican party that’s against that is getting weaker while the other wing is getting stronger.”He added: “They believe that they’re going to promote ‘traditional values’ and they see Putin as an ideological ally in that. I still think it is a minority within the Republican party but Trump’s the president. He’s the leader of that party and they’re adhering to him. Trump has an enormous amount of sympathy for that worldview and more and more of them are drifting in that direction.”Bill Galston, a former policy adviser to Bill Clinton, said: “The Republican party during the cold war was anti-communist and from their standpoint, once communism disappeared, their major motive for opposing Russia did as well.“The fact that Russia is a rightwing autocracy doesn’t particularly trouble them. To the extent that Putin has refashioned himself as a traditionalist culture warrior, he’s actually making an affirmative appeal to what the Republican party has become.” More

    • 175 Shares116 Views

      in US Politics

      Wednesday briefing: Will Kyiv’s commitment to a ceasefire appease Trump – and pressure Putin?

      by

      Good morning. Just 11 days after Donald Trump kicked Volodymyr Zelenskyy out of the White House for being insufficiently grateful, negotiations over a ceasefire in Ukraine have taken on a new complexion again.After day-long talks in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, officials from Kyiv and Washington declared that they had agreed on an immediate 30-day ceasefire plan and called on Russia to do the same. The United States will now lift restrictions on military aid and intelligence sharing. And the deal to give the United States a 50% stake in revenues from Ukrainian minerals is back on the table.Ukraine is still a long way from a durable, secure peace, and in one sense the success of yesterday’s talks was predicated on a grim recognition – unlikely to be articulated – of how thoroughly Trump has sold out Zelenskyy and Ukraine. But it is also true that Moscow’s actions will now be judged against an unambiguous backdrop. Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, is expected to see Vladimir Putin in Moscow in the coming days – and, as Volodymyr Zelenskyy said yesterday, “Russia must show its readiness to end the war or continue the war. It is time for the full truth.”Today’s newsletter explains what happened at the talks, and what might happen next. Here are the headlines.Five big stories

      Trump tariffs | Donald Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminum imports took effect on Wednesday “with no exceptions or exemptions”, as his campaign to reorder global trade norms in favour of the US stepped up. In chaotic developments on Wednesday, the US threatened to double tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminium but then reversed course.

      UK news | A BBC presenter whose family were murdered by a misogynist with a crossbow has said he hopes women can be inspired by how his daughter ended her relationship with her killer. On the day that Kyle Clifford was sentenced to a whole-life order for the triple murder last year, John Hunt described the former soldier as a psychopath disguised as an ordinary human being.

      North Sea collision | A 59-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter in connection with the shipping collision in the North Sea. Humberside police said they had opened a criminal investigation into the collision, in which one seaman is believed to have died.

      Phillipines | The former Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte has left Manila on a plane headed to The Hague, hours after he was served with an arrest warrant from the international criminal court over the killings resulting from his “war on drugs”.

      Climate crisis | Climate whiplash is already hitting major cities around the world, bringing deadly swings between extreme wet and dry weather as the climate crisis intensifies, a report has revealed. Dozens more cities, including Lucknow, Madrid and Riyadh, have suffered a climate “flip” in the last 20 years.
      In depth: Is this really an end to the White House’s ‘Mean Girls’ view of the Ukraine crisis?View image in fullscreenOne measure of the public shift in tone between Ukraine and the United States came in US secretary of state Marco Rubio’s comments after the talks in Jeddah yesterday. Previously, he has attacked Zelenskyy over the notorious Oval Office meeting, saying that “he found every opportunity to try to ‘Ukraine-splain’ on every issue”. Yesterday, he said: “What’s back on track here hopefully is peace. This is not Mean Girls.”That represents a significant success for Ukraine – but it has come at a cost. Here’s what emerged from the talks, and where it leaves the key players.Jeddah talks | Success for Ukraine – but significant concessionsUkraine went into the talks saying that it was ready to consider a ceasefire in the air and at sea, but not on the ground – arguing that a full ceasefire without more permanent guarantees would simply allow Russia to regroup. It also said that any ceasefire would have to include security guarantees.By that measure, Kyiv made significant concessions yesterday. A joint statement from Ukraine and the United States said that “Ukraine expressed readiness to accept the U.S. proposal to enact an immediate, interim 30-day cease-fire”, including on the ground, if Russia would make the same commitment.And there was no mention of security guarantees in the joint statement: while US national security adviser Michael Waltz said that “we … got into substantive details on how this war is going to permanently end, what type of guarantees they’re going to have for their long term security and prosperity”, that may simply be a reference to the minerals deal which now appears to be back on the table.But Ukraine made real progress – securing an immediate end to the suspension of intelligence sharing and military assistance, and extracting Rubio’s recognition that Russia now has to take its own steps toward peace. Perhaps just as significant is the possibility that Trump will be better disposed toward Kyiv, at least for now. He has said that he is now open to Zelenskyy returning to the White House, and said of a ceasefire: “Ukraine has agreed to it. Hopefully President Putin will agree to that also.”Pressure on Russia | A new equation for Putin to resolveThe phrase used by Marco Rubio, and repeated by Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron, was that “the ball is now in Russia’s court”. Donald Trump had his own corny analogy, saying that he would speak to Vladimir Putin about the ceasefire proposal this week and adding: “It takes two to tango”.But in its first substantive responses to the developments from Jeddah, Moscow did not present itself as an enthusiastic dance partner this morning. Foreign minister Sergei Lavrov was reported by Russian news agencies to have said that Russia will not make compromises that would “jeopardise people’s lives”. And Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said: “The shaping of the position of the Russian Federation does not take place abroad due to some agreements or efforts of some parties.”Russia has always had its own conditions attached to any steps towards peace. In this piece, Dan Sabbagh explains that while Russia has been talking about a ceasefire, it has said that it must be accompanied by elections in Ukraine.Kyiv will now hope that yesterday’s developments have sufficiently soothed Trump’s irritation with Zelenskyy that he will now look more sceptically at Russian claims that it is Ukraine that is blocking a ceasefire. They do appear to have removed some of the ambiguity around which side is holding up that process.While Russia has made no serious moves to show that its position is held in good faith, Vladimir Putin must now decide whether the favourable position he now holds with Trump will come under threat if he obstructs the proposals that have emerged from Jeddah – or whether he cares. Russia may also calculate that it can feint towards a ceasefire while making additional demands and continuing to attack Ukraine – and still persuade the White House that it wants peace.European reaction | Key questions over any international forceMeanwhile, in Paris, military chiefs of staff from more than 30 European and Nato countries held talks on an international security force. French president Emmanuel Macron, who addressed the meeting, said that “it was the moment for Europe to exert its full weight, for Ukraine and for itself”. Defence ministers from the five leading military powers in Europe – the UK, France, Germany, Italy and Poland – will hold further talks today.Paris also said that any security guarantees “should not be separated from Nato and its capabilities” and should be “credible and long-term”. But the Associated Press reported that there is no definitive plan for military options yet. Here are some of the key questions that remain unanswered: Would the force be “peacekeepers”, intended to monitor breaches of the ceasefire and keep the two sides apart; a “tripwire”, a small force whose sheer presence would create a threat of escalation in the event of a Russian advance; or a much larger “deterrent”? This post by the leading defence analyst Lawrence Freedman sets out the case for each; there is little sense that Nato countries have the will or capacity for a full-scale deterrent force. Can the US be persuaded to guarantee the kind of “backstop” – a commitment to US military action if a tripwire force came under attack – to deter Russia from a new offensive? Trump has offered little comfort on this point so far. In this piece, the International Crisis Group argues that it is counterproductive for Ukraine and Europe to pursue this idea, but the reference to Nato’s role may suggest that it is still theoretically in play. Would Russia sign up to any deal involving European troops on the ground in Ukraine? Moscow has emphatically refused to countenance such an arrangement, a point reiterated by Lavrov this morning; Trump has claimed, with little evidence, that Putin is prepared to consider the idea. In this piece on the security analysis site War on the Rocks, Jack Watling and Michael Kofman argue that the most important thing is that no peace deal excludes the possibility, even if it is not explicitly endorsed.Military exchanges | Frantic attempts to maximise leverage for talksBoth sides are still seeking leverage in anticipation of ceasefire negotiations. Ukraine launched drone attacks on 10 Russian regions including Moscow yesterday, the biggest such operation it has conducted since the start of the war. Andriy Kovalenko, a Ukrainian national security council official, said that “this is an additional signal to Putin that he should also be interested in a ceasefire in the air”.But – despite Ukraine’s formidable drone production capacity, with the country’s armed forces expecting to buy 4.5m drones from domestic suppliers this year – such attacks are always likely to be confined to psychological operations rather than a route to significant tactical advantages.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionRussia, meanwhile, has continued with aggressive ground operations. A situation report from the Institute for the Study of War published on Monday set out the recent success of Russian and North Korean forces taking back Russian territory in Kursk oblast, and the most recent reports suggest that Ukrainian forces are now under threat in the village of Sudzha, their last significant foothold.But the ISW also notes that in most areas within Ukraine, Russia has failed to make significant recent gains. If the land offensive within Ukraine remains at an impasse, the Kremlin has dramatically stepped up aerial attacks, with massive ballistic missile and drone strikes aimed at critical infrastructure last week. In the aftermath of that attack, Trump said that he was considering new sanctions on Russia. None have yet come into force.What else we’ve been readingView image in fullscreen

      Anastacia talks to Paula Cocozza about her life, from mutilating her sister’s dolls, to chart-topping success and her “toxic titties” – despite overcoming breast cancer twice, she’s lost none of the exuberance that propelled her musical success. Toby Moses, head of newsletters

      After the arrest of Rodrigo Duterte yesterday, it’s worth going back to coverage of the horrors exacted by his “war on drugs” in the Philippines. This wrenching 2018 piece by his biographer Jonathan Miller tells the story of one family that lost a father and child in the crackdown. Archie

      David Squires is in typically excellent form skewering the Fifa president’s transparent attempt to cosy up to the new king in the White House. The combo of Donald Trump and Gianni Infantino is a truly horrifying glimpse at the world we live in. Toby

      Marina Hyde ponders the reaction of a Southampton fan in 2009 to the subsequent rise of Rupert Lowe: “In 16 years’ time, the richest man in the world – who’s the unofficial vice-president to Donald Trump, yes, the one off the US Apprentice – will say that Rupert Lowe should be prime minister of the United Kingdom.” Rupert Lowe?! RUPERT LOWE?!?!?! I honestly think the resultant psychiatric eruption would blow the roof off the mall.” This is correct. Archie

      What happens when gen Z and millennials swap jeans? It’s the question everyone’s asking, and luckily we have the answer, with Emma Loffhagen trading trousers with her older colleague, our fashion editor Morwenna Ferrier: “After a few hours of wearing them, I’ve never known comfort like it. I’m just not sure it’s very dignified to be aggressively on trend at my age.” Toby
      SportView image in fullscreenFootball | Gianluigi Donnarumma saved two penalties as PSG beat Liverpool 4-1 in a shootout to send the Paris side through to the quarter-finals. Darwin Nunez and Curtis Jones were both denied from the spot after PSG won the second leg 1-0.Horse racing | Jeremy Scott’s mare Golden Ace emerged as one of the most unexpected of all Champion Hurdle winners on day one of the Cheltenham festival. Golden Ace, a 25-1 shot, won after 2023 and 2024 champions Constitution Hill and State Man were fallers.Football | Manchester United have confirmed their intention to build a new 100,000-capacity stadium in the Old Trafford area, leaving their home of 115 years. Officials claim that the project, which United co-owner Jim Ratcliffe compared to the Eiffel Tower, will create as many as 92,000 jobs and 17,000 new homes in Greater Manchester.The front pagesView image in fullscreenThe Guardian leads with “US says ‘ball in Russia’s court’ as Ukraine agrees 30-day ceasefire”. The deal dominated UK headlines on Wednesday with the Times running with “Kyiv open to ceasefire as Trump restarts aid,” the i with “Ceasefire in Ukraine – if Putin agrees,” and the Daily Mail “Ukraine agrees ceasefire deal.” “Putin told to agree Ukraine ceasefire,” was the take IN the Telegraph.“Trump ratchets up Canada trade war with 50% aluminium and steel tariffs,” writes the Financial Times. The Express follows the latest on the crossbow killer with the headline: “‘I am so proud of all my girls’”. The Mirror runs with “Jail … then hell” and the Metro: “‘They’ll roll out the red carpet in hell’”.Today in FocusView image in fullscreenCan Canada’s ‘rockstar banker’ PM take on Trump and win?The former governor of the Bank of England has a new role – saving his country from becoming America’s 51st state. Leyland Cecco reportsCartoon of the day | Rebecca HendinView image in fullscreenThe UpsideA bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all badView image in fullscreenThe Guardianas del Conchalito are a group of women who ignored calls to “get back to the kitchen” to create a sustainable shellfish project in Mexico. In 2017, the women were hanging out in La Paz, in the Mexican state of Baja California, and gazing at a polluted mangrove plantation. Drug dealers and tourism were ruining the area, and illegal fishing was depleting the shellfish population. “The mangroves were dying, the trash was everywhere,” Graciela “Chela” Olachea, told the Guardian’s Joanna Moorhead. The women cleaned up the mangrove and sought out funders to help make it sustainable, turning the Guardianas del Conchalito into a legally recognised community cooperative that pays members a living wage. But the project hasn’t only transformed the mangroves, it’s transformed thewomen’s lives. As Guardianas member Rosa María Hale Romero put it: “I used to ask my husband’s permission if I wanted to leave the house. Now if I go out, I just tell him: ‘I’ll be back.’ And instead of me serving him, he brings me my coffee.”Bored at work?And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow.

      Quick crossword

      Cryptic crossword

      Wordiply More

    • 175 Shares116 Views

      in US Politics

      A Trump-Putin pact is emerging – and Europe is its target | Rafael Behr

      by

      A prime time current affairs programme; a discussion about Donald Trump’s handling of the war in Ukraine. “He’s doing excellent things,” says a firebrand politician on the panel, before listing White House actions that have belittled Volodymyr Zelenskyy and weakened his battlefield position – military aid suspended; satellite communications obstructed; intelligence withheld. “Do we support this?” It is a rhetorical question.“We support it all. Absolutely,” the celebrity host responds. “We are thrilled by everything Trump is doing.”Such approval might not be out of place on polemical rightwing channels in the US, but these exchanges weren’t broadcast to American audiences. The show’s anchor is Olga Skabeyeva, one of Vladimir Putin’s most dependable propagandists. To hear the highest pitch of praise for Trump’s bullying of Ukraine you need to watch Russia’s state-controlled Channel One.This being a Kremlin script, the enthusiasm was soon leavened with suspicion. For now the pressure on Kyiv is great, Skabeyeva continued, but what will the Americans want in return?It is a good question, although that doesn’t mean there is an answer. It is a mistake to project coherence on to the erratic moves of an overgrown toddler-tyrant. Illusory patterns might be traced in the chaos, the way faces can be found in drifting clouds if you stare hard enough. But Trump does have predictable tastes and grudges. He loves money and status. He hates obstacles to the acquisition of those things. He is well disposed to Russia, seeing it as the kind of place where good deals can be done. He is hostile to the upkeep of Ukrainian independence, which he sees as a bad use of US treasure, wheedled out of Joe Biden (withering disdain) by the crafty Zelenskyy (deep dislike).These petty prejudices are strongly enough held to sway US foreign policy in a Kremlin-friendly direction without the additional requirement of a strategy. There is plenty for Putin to work with.When Russian and US delegations met in Saudi Arabia last month to discuss a resolution to the war in Ukraine, the most revealing feature of the conversation was the exclusion of any Ukrainians.Less discussed, but still significant, was the inclusion in Putin’s delegation of Kirill Dmitriev, an alumnus of Stanford University, McKinsey and Goldman Sachs, now head of the Russian state investment fund. His pitch was that US businesses have foregone billions of dollars in profits by quitting Russia. Sanctions against Moscow are presented as another way that Ukraine and its European accomplices are ripping off America. Shortly after the Saudi meeting, Dmitriev was formally appointed Putin’s “special representative for investment and economic partnership with overseas countries”, with a mandate covering deals with the US.The proposed model, unnamed but also unhidden, is partition. Washington gets access to Ukrainian mineral resources. Moscow gets a fat slice of Ukraine. Russia and America reset diplomatic relations and renew commercial ties without any of the old fuss around rule of law and human rights – an oligarch entente.There are many reasons to recoil from such a deal. It would be a cynical betrayal of Ukraine and a renunciation of the transatlantic alliance. It would reward a dictator’s rapacious territorial aggression. It would embolden him to violate the sovereignty of other neighbouring countries, whose western orientation Russia has never stopped resenting since they escaped Soviet vassalage. It would license similar ambitions wherever authoritarian regimes fancy unilaterally redrawing disputed borders.But none of those objections move Trump. Not long ago they might have found a voice in the Republican party establishment. But the Maga personality cult appears to have deactivated the GOP’s capacity for foresight, erased its memory and dissolved its conscience.Instead of applying a corrective lens to Trump’s venal myopia, America’s former cold warriors add their own distorting filters to the White House’s pro-Russia tilt. One common rationalisation is to cast it as a tactical play in a great game with the ultimate goal of isolating and containing China. Advocates of this manoeuvre seem not to have considered the possibility that Beijing is the obvious beneficiary from sabotage of the international legal apparatus that Washington built. China will gladly fill any void left by America’s retreat into narcissistic commercial protectionism.Meanwhile, the evangelical Christian side of the US right finds inspiration in examples of reactionary dogmas of the Russian Orthodox church wired into laws of authoritarian repression. Putin has proscribed “LGBT extremism” and, late last year, “child-free propaganda” – anything that discourages women from fulfilling their patriotic duty to breed new citizens.This ideological affinity is cherished also by Russian nationalist commentators. They welcome the Trump regime as a powerful ally in global resistance to the effeminate moral degeneracy emanating from the continent they call “Gayrope”.Hostility to Europe, and the EU in particular, is where the various strands of a potential Maga-Putin front come together. The Russian and US presidents share a venomous resentment of the soft power that Brussels wields through the aggregation of many national markets into one trading bloc.From Trump’s point of view, the EU is a wicked cartel, denying US farms and businesses their inalienable right to sell to millions of European consumers. For Putin, it is an enemy apparatus, part of the post-cold war western expansion that locked Russia out of its natural sphere of influence.For both men, the idea of pooling sovereignty among democratic nations for mutual economic advantage is incomprehensible. To negotiate as equals with the EU – a flimsy paper entity without any tank divisions to call its own – is absurd and abhorrent. Their answer to soft power is to confront it with the hard stuff, connive in its dismemberment and share the spoils.This is the subtext of negotiations to end the war that Putin started and that Trump wants to end without regard for justice. They are rehearsing a shared agenda through the proxy of partitioning Ukraine, exploring the scope of a partnership that has a deeper foundation than America’s former allies want to admit. It might not come to fruition. Trump is easily distracted, but also easily bought and Russia has put a predatory joint venture on the table. Europe is the prey.

      Rafael Behr is a Guardian columnist More

    • 263 Shares102 Views

      in US Politics

      The Guardian view on Nigel Farage: not even Donald Trump is as damaging to Reform as its own leader | Editorial

      by

      One constant of British political life is that Nigel Farage never stays out of the spotlight for long. Having built a political career on railing against the establishment – while, paradoxically, embedding himself within it – Mr Farage finds himself embroiled in yet another melodrama. This time, however, the threat comes not from the usual suspects – remainers, the BBC or “woke” elites – but from his own side.The affair revolves around Rupert Lowe, a little‑known businessman, elected as one of Reform UK’s five MPs in 2024 under Mr Farage’s leadership. That should have been the beginning of a forgettable contribution to British public life. Yet, thanks to the intervention of Elon Musk – the world’s richest man and Donald Trump’s “government efficiency” tsar – Mr Lowe has a starring role in Mr Farage’s latest soap opera.Earlier this year the tech billionaire was so annoyed by Mr Farage’s decision to distance himself from the imprisoned far-right agitator Tommy Robinson that he touted Mr Lowe as a possible replacement. Relations between Mr Farage and Mr Lowe have deteriorated since. Their feud burst out into the open this month, culminating this weekend with Reform UK alleging misconduct by Mr Lowe, which he denies. Mr Lowe, who has been suspended from the party and lost its whip in parliament, derides it as a vanity project driven by one man’s ego. He has threatened to sue Reform UK for libel.Mr Farage’s reaction, however, is telling. For all his bravado about free speech, the moment a rival emerges – however minor – his instinct seems to be to cut them down. This is not the first time. His political parties – Ukip, the Brexit party, Reform UK – have operated more like personality cults than democratic organs, and loyalty to the leader has eclipsed ideological purity. Challenging Mr Farage doesn’t end well for those who dare. The difference this time is that Mr Musk’s intervention gives the affair an absurdly transatlantic flavour.This illuminates a larger problem. If Mr Farage’s goal is to broaden his electoral appeal, association with Trumpism is a hindrance, not a help. While Mr Trump retains a firm grip on the Republican party, the US president remains deeply unpopular in Britain, where even Tories see him as a liability. The perception that Mr Farage is too close to Mr Trump and too sympathetic to Vladimir Putin is hurting him in the polls. The opportunist in Mr Farage knows this. His strategy has been to present himself as the plebeian face of rightwing populism – foregrounding his love of pints over his attendance at Mar-a-Lago banquets. Yet the contradictions are piling up.Mr Farage seeks to appear an insurgent, yet he operates like an autocrat. He wants to court the support of Trumpian figures, yet he knows their influence is more likely to repel than to attract British voters. He wants Reform UK to grow – but only under him. For all the bluster, this latest episode only highlights that Mr Farage, like Mr Trump, has always been far better at breaking things than building them. That ought to be a warning to mainstream parties seeking to emulate Trumpian talking points around cutting foreign aid or sacking bureaucrats – especially with an upcoming byelection in a Labour stronghold. If Reform UK eventually ends up on the scrapheap of history, it won’t be because of Mr Lowe or Mr Musk, or even Mr Trump. It will be because, in the end, Mr Farage is his own biggest problem.

      Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More