Connect with us

News

US and NATO officials struggle to decipher status of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine

Published

on

US and NATO officials struggle to decipher status of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine

Ukrainian and Russian negotiators have met 4 occasions because the begin of Russia’s invasion.

Russian International Minister Sergey Lavrov weighed in on the potential for Ukraine agreeing to impartial standing throughout a media occasion in Moscow on Saturday.

“After our operation in Ukraine ends, and I hope its ends with a signing of a complete settlement on the problems I discussed — safety points, Ukraine’s impartial standing with the ensures of its safety as (Putin), a few months in the past as I recall, commented at a information convention on our initiative of non-expansion of NATO, he stated we understood each nation wants ensures of its safety,” stated Lavrov.

However particulars on negotiations stay scant with many NATO international locations, together with the US, remaining on the surface wanting in with regards to the secretive talks, with one European protection official calling negotiations “a little bit of a darkish avenue proper now.”

The Biden administration nonetheless sees no indication that Putin is keen or able to deescalate the battle — making it tough for US officers to be optimistic concerning the present state of negotiations, one supply conversant in the state of affairs stated.

However on the identical time, this supply additionally stated that the US just isn’t pressuring Ukraine to just accept or reject particular concessions and isn’t concerned within the negotiation course of.

The US Nationwide Safety Council declined to remark.

Advertisement

Russian calls for

Among the phrases Ukraine has stated it could be keen to think about appear extra possible than others, however on the finish of the day, NATO international locations are nonetheless skeptical of Russia’s engagement.

“It is vitally shut maintain, and nobody actually is aware of what is going on on,” the European protection official stated. “Ukraine’s positions have not modified — ceasefire, withdrawal of troops and safety ensures.”

“Anybody who says they know one thing concerning the standing of the talks, (they) actually do not,” the official added.

Putin laid out a number of points to attain a ceasefire with Ukraine in a Thursday telephone name with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in keeping with Turkish presidential spokesman İbrahim Kalin.

“The primary is Ukraine’s neutrality,” Kalin stated in an interview with the Turkish newspaper Hurriyet revealed Saturday, including that might imply Ukraine agreeing to not develop into a NATO member. “Second, disarmament and mutual safety ensures within the context of the Austrian mannequin. Third, the method that the Russian facet refers to as ‘de-Nazification.’ Fourth, eradicating obstacles to the widespread use of Russian language in Ukraine. It’s understood that some progress has been made within the first 4 articles of the continued negotiations. It’s too early to say that there’s full settlement or that an settlement is about to be signed.”

Advertisement
Kalin stated Putin had further calls for that have been “probably the most tough points” — the popularity of the annexation of Crimea and the 2 so-called republics in Donbas. Kalin stated these closing two points “aren’t acceptable calls for for Ukraine and the worldwide group.”
Why Donbas is at the heart of the Ukraine crisis

“If a degree is reached within the first 4 articles and an settlement is reached, there could be a dialogue on the leaders’ degree concerning the fifth and sixth articles,” Kalin stated within the interview, including that if the negotiations happen, “it could be attainable to succeed in an settlement and finish the warfare.”

US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield on Sunday declined to set phrases on what the US would or wouldn’t settle for when it got here to an settlement between Ukraine and Russia to finish the combating.

“That is for the Ukrainians themselves to resolve what’s an excessive amount of for them. It isn’t our choice on that and we assist their efforts. So I am unable to preview what they are going to find yourself developing of their negotiations with the Russians,” she instructed CNN’s Jake Tapper on “State of the Union.”

Requested by Tapper once more, if the US would acknowledge Crimea or Donbas as part of Russia ought to that be part of the settlement, Thomas-Greenfield once more declined to reply.

“I am unable to say that in the mean time. We definitely haven’t acknowledged the impartial Donbas areas simply declared as impartial. However I am unable to assessment how we are going to reply to a negotiated settlement that the Ukrainians give you the Russians to save lots of the lives of their very own folks.”

The shortage of readability concerning the standing of negotiations is elevating further questions on what Ukraine is keen to conform to and the way Russia’s calls for could be carried out in the event that they finally attain some form of settlement.

Zelenksky stated Saturday there have been “compromises” his nation couldn’t make in negotiations with Putin.

“Any compromises associated to our territorial integrity and our sovereignty and the Ukrainian folks have spoken about it, they haven’t greeted Russian troopers with a bunch of flowers, they’ve greeted them with bravery, they’ve greeted them with weapons of their fingers,” he instructed CNN’s Zakaria when requested concerning the Russian calls for.

Advertisement

“You can not simply make a president of one other nation to acknowledge something by means of pressure,” he added.

Many particulars of Russia’s calls for, whether or not Ukraine would settle for them and the way Ukraine would even implement them stay unclear, a senior NATO official stated. That features what it could imply for Ukraine to undertake a “impartial” standing with the West — a chance that one congressional supply instructed CNN has brought about heartburn for US officers.

“Does that imply they forswear NATO? Does that imply they forswear the (European Union)? Can they not have another exterior help?” the NATO official stated. “My sense is it may be a really complicated negotiation.”

Neutrality coverage

A European diplomat instructed CNN final week that if Ukraine have been to undertake a neutrality coverage and in addition demilitarize, it could successfully be a give up — calling such a transfer “Moscow-style neutrality.”

Advertisement

The Kremlin has floated the notion that Kyiv may undertake a Swedish or Austrian neutrality coverage. Nonetheless, a Swedish diplomat dismissed the notion of Swedish neutrality, saying the concept that their nation is impartial just isn’t true and makes an attempt to attempt to body it as such are according to longstanding Russian efforts to misrepresent Sweden’s nationwide safety coverage.

Nordic countries wonder if they are next on Putin's list

“Each time the time period ‘Austrian neutrality’ comes up, it must be remembered that this can be a mannequin of an armed neutrality. This type of neutrality does not imply {that a} nation lies down its arms and hopes that no person assaults it. It is a neutrality the place a rustic — at the least in concept — is armed and able to defend itself towards all overseas belligerents,” stated Martin Weiss, Austria’s ambassador to the US.

The NATO official added that it’s unclear what sort of settlement Russia and Ukraine would possibly come to concerning the territory Russia has taken management of since invading on February 24. The official stated the “hope” expressed by each Russian and Ukrainian officers in current days seems to be belied by the truth that “some fairly clear variations stay” between the events.

“I feel we simply must be aware that the Russians virtually definitely will search to proceed to resupply and can most likely proceed to combat, up till the time that issues are agreed,” the official stated. “Regardless of the resolution, if there’s diplomatic decision and there is an settlement, it must be clear and binding. And it must be monitorable. … Individuals will likely be wanting to make sure that the Russians finish the warfare conclusively. And there is not some lingering menace that is still.”

Whereas the supply conversant in the Biden administration’s view of the talks instructed CNN that a number of the phrases Ukraine has stated it could be keen to think about appear extra possible than others, the supply additionally indicated that the US will likely be cautious of Russia’s intentions till Putin exhibits some indicators that he’s able to deescalate.

CNN’s Kylie Atwood, Jennifer Hansler and Jasmine Wright contributed to this report

Advertisement

News

Space engine start-up in talks for new capital after funding crunch

Published

on

Space engine start-up in talks for new capital after funding crunch

A British technology start-up which had promised to build the world’s first space plane is in last-ditch talks to secure new financing after two of its backers wrote down the value of their investment.

Reaction Engines, which was founded in 1989, is in detailed talks with the UAE-backed Strategic Development Fund (SDF), one of its existing shareholders, about a new injection of capital, according to two people familiar with the situation. The SDF led a £40mn funding round in January last year. 

The British start-up is also backed by several aerospace giants, including BAE Systems and Rolls-Royce, as well as financial investors Artemis and Schroders.

Reaction has previously raised more than £150mn and grew its commercial revenues by more than 400 per cent last year. The company, however, warned earlier this year that it would need to raise additional financing. It has this weekend lined up PwC, the accountancy firm, to act as administrator if the funding talks collapse.

Sky News first reported that PwC had been put on standby. The accountancy firm, which has not yet been formally appointed, declined to comment on Saturday. Reaction also declined to comment. 

Advertisement

Other existing investors are monitoring the situation, said one of the people close to the talks. 

Artemis and Schroders both announced last week that they had significantly written down the value of their stakes in Reaction. Artemis cut the value of its 2.3 per cent holding by 75 per cent. Artemis Alpha Trust, the fund that manages the London-based fund manager’s stake, now values it at £1.2mn, compared with £6.4mn in April. 

Reaction has in recent years focused on developing a hybrid jet and rocket engine, known as Sabre. The innovative engine was originally planned to power Skylon, a space aircraft also designed by Reaction.

Key to Sabre’s development is Reaction’s groundbreaking pre-cooling technology which prevents engines from overheating and could lead to hypersonic space planes. The company is part of a UK-led military project aiming to make hypersonic flight a reality. At hypersonic speeds, the temperature generated inside a conventional gas turbine would start to melt components unless they were cooled in some way.

More recently the company has focused its attention on developing nearer-term aerospace and commercial applications for its pre-cooling technology. It signed an agreement with US industrial group Honeywell to collaborate on the development of thermal management technologies to help reduce aircraft emissions. 

Advertisement

Reaction is chaired by Philip Dunne, a former UK defence minister. It has been led by Mark Thomas, who was previously at Rolls-Royce. 

Continue Reading

News

Former US President Trump hints at support for Florida ballot measure legalising recreational marijuana – Times of India

Published

on

Former US President Trump hints at support for Florida ballot measure legalising recreational marijuana – Times of India
Former President Trump has suggested he might support a Florida ballot measure to legalise recreational marijuana for adults, known as Amendment 3, reported the Hill.
Trump, a Florida resident, emphasised the importance of this measure being appropriately managed by the state Legislature to avoid public consumption issues.
Emphasis on responsible legislation
“In Florida, like so many other States that have already given their approval, personal amounts of marijuana will be legalised for adults with Amendment 3,” Trump said in a post on his Truth Social site.“Whether people like it or not, this will happen through the approval of the Voters, so it should be done correctly.”

Trump avoided stating his voting intention or openly backing marijuana legalisation but stressed that responsible legislation is necessary to avoid public nuisances. He pointed to the need for laws that prevent marijuana use in public areas to keep public spaces free from the smell of marijuana, similar to the issues observed in other cities.
“The state Legislature needs to responsibly create laws that prohibit marijuana consumption in public spaces so we do not smell marijuana everywhere we go, like we do in many of the Democrat-run Cities,” said Trump.
Concerns over inconsistent marijuana laws
He also highlighted the inconsistency of criminalising marijuana possession in Florida when it is legal in many other states. Trump emphasised that law enforcement resources and lives should not be wasted on arresting adults for possessing small amounts of marijuana.
“We do not need to ruin lives & waste Taxpayer Dollars arresting adults with personal amounts of it on them, and no one should grieve a loved one because they died from fentanyl-laced marijuana,” he added.
Impact on voter mobilisation and Republican division
Trump’s comments follow recent efforts by Democrats to attract younger voters in Florida, focusing on issues like abortion and marijuana legalisation. These issues have mobilised younger voters in other regions, as seen in Ohio, and Democrats hope for a similar impact in Florida.
Democrats are targeting the fall ballot measures, aiming to increase voter turnout and gain the support of younger voters, a group with which Trump has faced challenges.
Earlier in the year, the Department of Justice made a significant move toward reclassifying marijuana as a less dangerous drug. If this reclassification is approved, marijuana will be downgraded to a Schedule III drug.
Despite the trend toward normalisation and Trump’s comments, some Republicans remain opposed to legalising recreational marijuana. Sen Rick Scott has publicly stated his intention to vote against the measure. He cited personal family experience with addiction as a key reason for his opposition.
“My brother, who died at 67 in April, began smoking marijuana as a teenager and led a life of addiction,” Scott said.

Continue Reading

News

Big Oil calls on Kamala Harris to come clean on her energy and climate plans

Published

on

Big Oil calls on Kamala Harris to come clean on her energy and climate plans

Unlock the US Election Countdown newsletter for free

The US oil industry and Republicans are demanding Kamala Harris clarify her energy and climate policy, as the Democratic candidate tries to please her progressive base without alienating voters in shale areas like Pennsylvania, a crucial swing state.

On Thursday, the vice-president said she no longer supported a ban on fracking, the technology that unleashed the shale revolution. But Harris’s reversal has not quelled attacks from Donald Trump or US executives that she would damage the country’s oil and gas sector.

The heads of the US’s two biggest oil lobby groups said the Democratic candidate must also say whether she would keep or end a pause on federal approvals for new liquefied natural gas plants, and whether she supported curbs on drilling imposed by the Biden administration.

Advertisement

“Based on what we know of her past positions, the bills that she has sponsored, and her past statements she’s taken a pretty aggressively anti-energy and anti-oil and gas industry stand,” said Anne Bradbury, head of the American Exploration and Production Council.

“These are significant and major policy questions that impact every American family and business, and which voters deserve to understand better when making their choice in November,” she said.

Mike Sommers, chief executive of the American Petroleum Institute, Big Oil’s most powerful lobby group, said Harris should say whether she would stick with Biden administration policies that had unleashed “a regulatory onslaught the likes of which this industry has never seen”.

Trump, the Republican candidate, has accused Harris of plotting a “war on American energy” and has repeatedly blamed her and President Joe Biden for high fuel costs in recent years.

On Thursday, he vowed to scrap Biden administration policies that “distort energy markets”. The former president has called climate change a hoax and his advisers have said he would gut Biden’s signature climate legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act.

Advertisement

The debate over Harris’s energy policy comes as she and Trump court blue-collar workers in Pennsylvania, a huge shale gas producer that employs 72,000 workers — a potentially decisive voting group in a state Biden won narrowly in 2020.

Harris said in 2019 that she supported a fracking ban but told CNN on Thursday she had ditched that position and the US could have “a thriving clean energy economy without banning fracking”.

US oil and gas production has reached a record high under Biden, even as clean energy capacity has expanded rapidly.

But gas executives in particular have been alarmed at a federal pause on building new LNG export plants, which supply customers from Europe to Asia, saying the policy will stymie further US shale output.

Toby Rice, chief executive of Pennsylvania-based EQT, the US’s largest natural gas producer, said Harris should lift the restrictions, which he argued would compromise energy security.

Advertisement

“Ignoring her anti-fracking statement four years ago for a second, can we talk about the recent LNG Pause that was put in place this year?”, he said. “This is a policy that has received massive criticism from all sides — our allies, industry and environmental champions . . . a step backwards for climate and American energy security.”

While Biden put climate at the centre of his and Harris’s 2020 White House campaign, Harris has been largely silent, and made only a passing reference to climate change in her speech at the Democratic convention.

“It looks like the Harris campaign has concluded that it’s safer to avoid antagonising producers or climate activists by skirting these issues entirely,” said Kevin Book, managing director of ClearView Energy Partners.

Climate-focused voters are less vexed than energy executives by the lack of explicit policy from Harris.

“Let’s be clear: the most important climate policy right now is defeating Donald Trump in November,” said Cassidy DiPaola of Fossil Free Media, a non-profit organisation. “All the wonky policy details in the world won’t matter if climate deniers control the White House.”

Advertisement

Last week the political arms of the League of Conservation Voters, Climate Power and the Environmental Defense Fund unveiled a $55mn advertising campaign backing Harris in swing states, focused on economic rather than climate issues.

In contrast, Trump has courted oil bosses who are backing his pledge to slash regulation and scrap clean energy subsidies. His campaign received nearly $14mn from the industry in June, according to OpenSecrets, almost double his oil haul in May.

Additional reporting by Sam Learner

Climate Capital

Where climate change meets business, markets and politics. Explore the FT’s coverage here.

Are you curious about the FT’s environmental sustainability commitments? Find out more about our science-based targets here

Advertisement

   

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending