World
U.S. Pressing Tough Demands in Revised Deal for Ukraine’s Minerals
Ukraine on Saturday was seriously considering a revised American proposal for its vast natural resources that contains virtually the same provisions that Kyiv previously rejected as too onerous, according to a draft document of the new proposal.
Some of the terms appear even tougher than in a previous draft.
The proposed agreement would significantly shift onto a mercantile footing the United States’ three-year alliance with Ukraine in the largest war in Europe since World War II. The conflict to date has largely been seen as a struggle to secure Ukraine and the European continent from an authoritarian threat from Russia.
The Trump administration’s terms could also strip Ukraine of funds that are now mostly invested in the country’s military and defense industry, and that could help rebuild the country once the war is over.
The terms of the new proposal, which is dated Feb. 21 and was reviewed by The New York Times, call for Ukraine to relinquish half of its revenues from natural resources, including minerals, gas and oil, as well as earnings from ports and other infrastructure. A similar demand was made in a previous version of the deal, dated Feb. 14 and reviewed by The Times.
Ukraine had been floating the prospect of a partnership with the United States on its valuable natural resources as a way to persuade Mr. Trump to provide additional support for its war effort. President Volodymyr Zelensky had also been seeking security guarantees for Ukraine, a condition that was absent in the first draft agreement presented to him last week, prompting him to decline to sign the deal.
But while the new document calls for a series of commitments from Ukraine it still does not provide any specific commitments in return from the U.S. to help Ukraine sustain its war effort. It says, however, that the United States intends to provide a long-term financial commitment to help Ukraine develop economically.
The new document states that revenues from Ukraine’s resources will be directed to a fund in which the United States holds 100 percent financial interest, and that Ukraine should contribute to the fund until it reaches $500 billion — the amount Mr. Trump has demanded from the war-torn country in exchange for American aid.
That figure far exceeds the country’s actual revenues from resources, which were $1.1 billion last year, and more than four times the value of U.S. aid committed to Ukraine so far. The $500 billion sum was not mentioned in the previous version of the deal, though Mr. Trump had said publicly that was what he wanted.
It is unclear whether Mr. Trump wants it in exchange for past American military and financial assistance, or whether it would also apply to future support.
Ukraine has not said whether it would agree to the deal under the proposed terms. Ruslan Stefanchuk, the speaker of Ukraine’s Parliament, told local media that a government-level group would begin working on the agreement on Monday and that Ukraine wanted to receive specific security guarantees in exchange for access to its resources.
Ukraine has tried to resist a total capitulation to American demands on natural resources, but has faced intense pressure from President Trump, who views access to Ukraine’s vast mineral wealth as necessary repayment for the billions the United States has provided Kyiv for its war against Russia.
The document suggests the United States may send more aid to Ukraine in the future — but at a high price. It states that Ukraine will be required to contribute to the fund a sum equal to twice the amount the United States might give to Ukraine after the deal is signed.
The revised proposal states that the United States could reinvest a portion of the revenue into Ukraine’s postwar reconstruction, including by investing in the development of the country’s subsoil assets and infrastructure.
The new draft agreement also includes provisions for revenues from territories currently occupied by Russia, in the event they were freed: The share of resource revenues contributed to the fund from liberated areas would be 66 percent. Russia currently occupies about a fifth of Ukraine’s territory, including significant portions of the resource-rich Donbas region.
The document reviewed by The Times outlines the establishment of a fund to receive revenues from resource extraction and other sources. A second agreement, described as the Fund Agreement, would be concluded later to work out specific details.
Keith Kellogg, Mr. Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine and Russia, visited Kyiv from Wednesday to Friday and discussed the new proposal with Mr. Zelensky. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent first met with Mr. Zelensky recently to discuss the deal, and more recently Mr. Trump’s commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, became involved the negotiations, according to a person familiarly with the discussion.
A potential deal for Ukraine’s resources has been a major point of dispute in a rapidly deteriorating relationship between Mr. Zelensky and Mr. Trump. Their interactions became acrimonious in the last week as the American president assailed Mr. Zelensky in highly personal terms, calling him “an unelected dictator.”
The Ukrainian president, in turn, said that Mr. Trump was living in a “disinformation web” after Mr. Trump falsely claimed that Ukraine had started the war against Russia.
Mr. Zelensky’s initial hesitancy, and comments that were perceived by Mr. Trump and cabinet officials as public criticism of the president prompted a fierce backlash from the Trump administration. That possibly led to the addition of further demands written into the agreement, according to drafts and people familiar with the discussions of the deal on the Ukrainian side.
Two of the people who had the new proposal described to them said that one of the few changes made by the United States that could satisfy Ukraine was the removal of a clause placing the deal under the jurisdiction of a New York court. The provision had raised concerns on the Ukrainian side, because it could weaken Ukraine’s legal standing in case of a dispute.
Whether Ukraine can meet the terms requested by the Trump administration is unclear.
Ukraine is not a major natural resource exporting country, as the most dynamic spheres of its economy have been agriculture, steel and other metal smelting and outsourced programming work for Silicon Valley companies. Revenues from natural resources comprised 2.5 percent of budget revenue last year.
Ukrainian officials and energy experts also say that any new fields would likely take years and significant investment to develop. Much exploration remains to be done to assess the true value of the country’s critical minerals, they say, and administrative and legislative obstacles still hinder foreign investment in the sector.
The Trump administration has suggested that the mere presence of American economic interests in Ukraine would be a security guarantee for Kyiv. Top U.S. cabinet members have pressed Mr. Zelensky to sign the deal in recent days.
“President Zelensky is going to sign that deal, and you will see that in the very short term,” the U.S. national security adviser, Mike Waltz, said on Friday. “And that is good for Ukraine. What better could you have for Ukraine than to be in an economic partnership with the United States?”
Speaking in the Oval Office later Friday, Mr. Trump said, “We’re going to either sign a deal, or there’s going to be a lot of problems with them.”
Maggie Haberman contributed reporting.
World
Burnham on course to become next UK PM with backing of 322 Labour MPs
Veteran politician Andy Burnham has taken another step towards becoming the UK’s next prime minister, after the majority of Labour MPs nominated him to replace Keir Starmer.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The 56-year-old’s Labour leadership bid was backed by 322 Labour MPs on Thursday and he remains the only person to publicly declare themselves a candidate to replace Starmer, who announced he was quitting last month.
Burnham appeared on course to be crowned Labour leader unchallenged on the first day of nominations.
If Burnham reaches at least 323 nominations then it would no longer be mathematically possible for another challenger to get the 81 signatures required to join the race out of the total of 402 Labour MPs.
“It is all starting to feel very real,” Burnham said in a social media video posted shortly after the process opened on Thursday morning.
Nominations close on 16 July. In the absence of a contest, Burnham will be crowned Labour leader and prime minister in waiting at a special conference the following day.
He would then replace Starmer at 10 Downing Street on 20 July after meeting King Charles, becoming Britain’s seventh prime minister in a decade.
“There’s no one else,” one Labour MP told the AFP news agency on condition of anonymity after nominating Burnham.
Armed forces minister Al Carns, thought to be Burnham’s final remaining potential challenger, ruled himself out of the running late on Wednesday.
He had expressed hope a leadership contest would give the party the “opportunity for a proper debate.”
“But months of internal Labour politics isn’t what the country needs right now,” he said.
Burnham, nicknamed the “King of the North” for winning three consecutive Greater Manchester mayoral elections, has vowed to “bring about the biggest rebalancing of power our country has seen.”
His signature proposal is the creation of a “No. 10 North” to coordinate greater devolution, a reference to the UK prime minister’s address at 10 Downing Street.
Burnham has pledged fiscal discipline and to reduce the country’s ballooning welfare bill, having already sought to calm markets by committing to the government’s current borrowing limits.
But he will face the same challenges that buffeted Starmer’s premiership, notably anaemic growth, a cost-of-living squeeze and an unpredictable US president in Donald Trump.
He has also indicated he could stake out a different path to Starmer on Israel, which enjoyed solid backing from the Labour government even as criticism grew of its war in Gaza.
“I am sorry about that,” Burnham told the Guardian newspaper in an interview published on Thursday. “The response has too often not been good enough. We need to do better.”
Starmer, under pressure for months over policy U-turns and questions about his judgement, announced on 22 June that he was resigning after losing the support of Labour MPs.
His move came after Burnham won a by-election that allowed him to return to parliament to launch a widely expected leadership challenge.
On the day Starmer announced his resignation, Burnham was sworn into parliament, becoming an MP again following his stint between 2001-2017.
Roll the dice
Afterwards, some 200 Labour MPs feted Burnham during a group photo in Westminster, in a clear sign that they expect him to take over.
Former health minister Wes Streeting announced he was dropping his intention to run and backing Burnham.
Burnham, seen as slightly to the left of the more centrist Starmer and more charismatic, is Labour’s most popular politician, surveys show.
Many MPs feel he is the party’s best chance of clawing back support from Nigel Farage’s anti-immigrant Reform UK party before the next general election, expected in 2029.
Reform has led Labour in national opinion polls for well over a year, although the gap has narrowed in recent weeks amid questions over Farage’s finances.
One Labour MP, who asked not to be named, said the party was right to “roll the dice” on Burnham, saying “he couldn’t be worse than Starmer.”
“I hope he’s a breath of fresh air,” the lawmaker told AFP.
World
AI notetakers promise easy meeting recaps, but some professionals question their use
NEW YORK (AP) — Launching an artificial intelligence tool to take notes and summarize important information from a virtual meeting can be alluring. Seconds after one of the agents attends an hour-long video conference, it can deliver a recap of key points and outline a to-do list for all the participants.
But the way popular AI notetakers accomplish those tasks makes some people avoid using them. The technology turns everything said during meetings into data. Confidential personnel information, corporate strategies, trade secrets and remarks that could later be seen as incriminating — all of it could end up in the wrong hands.
“There are huge risks to the organization on AI notetakers,” Amy Dufrane, the chief executive of human resources training and certification provider HRCI, said. “I don’t think companies should use it at all.”
An AI notetaker is a software application or device that uses artificial intelligence, speech recognition and large language models to record, transcribe and summarize conversations. The tools are intended to save time and improve participation, but professionals in a number of fields say there are reasons to be wary.
This article is part of AP’s Be Well coverage, focusing on wellness, fitness, diet and mental health. Read more Be Well.
Chief among them is uncertainty about where the collected data is stored and for how long. Privacy advocates worry the companies behind the AI notetakers are creating voiceprints without consent. Voiceprints — a type of biometric profile similar to a fingerprint but tuned to the unique intonations and characteristics of one’s voice — can be used to access restricted or confidential information, including the contents of bank accounts.
Some tech companies resell data from the notetaking tools they created or use confidential meeting transcripts and recordings to train their AI models. There’s also the risk that conversations between an attorney and client could become fair game in legal proceedings; a New York federal judge in February ordered a criminal defendant to provide prosecutors with documents he created for his lawyers because it already had been shared with a third party, which was Anthropic’s Claude.
“People who use AI notetakers, they don’t always know where the data goes,” said Justin Daniels, an Atlanta-based corporate attorney at law firm Baker Donelson. “And in my context, if the data goes anywhere else and they’re not aware of it, that attorney-client-privileged conversation may not be attorney-client-privileged anymore.”
Here are some tips on the etiquette of kicking an AI notetaker out of a meeting, the risks of using one and how to protect yourself.
The first step when you join a meeting is check for bots
When you join a meeting, make it a habit to check whether an AI notetaker is present. It might appear as a meeting attendee, often labeled as an AI notetaker, or a pop-up message on the screen informing participants the meeting is being recorded. The latter could signal the presence of an AI notetaker.
Virtual meeting platforms such as Zoom and Google Meet let users know when recording is underway, but some meeting software does not make it clear when a notetaker is present, according to Thorin Klosowski, the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s senior security and privacy analyst.
Participants also may use personal notetaking devices that are separate from the meeting platform, in which case the other attendees wouldn’t necessarily know a discussion was being recorded and transcribed.
“You hope the other person would tell you that they’re doing that,” Klosowski said. “Asking everyone for consent before doing a sensitive meeting would be the most polite approach to take.”
If you’re unsure whether someone has deployed an AI notetaker, you can ask. You can also state at the beginning that a meeting is not authorized for recording.
A polite way to establish such a boundary is to say, “Our company policy is that this meeting cannot be recorded,” Dufrane suggested. This relieves the employee, such as a salesperson who wants to make a good impression, of having to be the “bad guy,” putting the onus on the company instead, she said.
Another option is to allow the notetaker for part of the gathering but turn if off at the end to dedicate time for more delicate topics.
“I won’t start talking about anything substantive until it’s shut off, because I just don’t want to take the risk,” Daniels said.
Assert your privacy rights to protect voiceprints
Many AI notetakers determine unique acoustic signatures, or voiceprints, for each speaker in the room, said Chris Pluymers, associate attorney at The Dillon Law Group in East Lansing, Michigan. That’s how the companies distinguish one speaker from another, labeling them with monikers “Speaker 1” or “Speaker 2.”
One way voiceprints are used is to verify the identities of bank account holders over the phone. If bad actors got ahold of a person’s vocal signature, they could use it to access files, commit fraud or take over accounts, he said.
Laws in some states govern how voiceprints can be created and stored and provide rights that individuals can assert to object to the use of an AI notetaker during meetings they attend.
In Illinois, voiceprints are considered biometric identifiers, similar to fingerprints, and are covered under the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act, which requires written notice and informed consent before an AI notetaker or other agent collects voiceprints. The law also mandates a documented data retention schedule and destruction policy, Pluymers said. But most companies using the tools have none of those systems in place, Pluymers said.
“In the world of AI, the world of data and privacy, the world of biometric identification, I don’t think you can have such a lax approach to it,” Pluymers said. “I think getting out ahead of it is crucial.”
Under the Illinois law, employees can say they don’t want to attend a meeting with an AI notetaker until they have assurances of where and why the data is being stored, and when it will be deleted, Pluymers said. They can also ask if there is a policy and written consent form to sign.
If an AI notetaker shows up at a meeting unexpectedly, a participant could say, “I prefer we keep this meeting without AI recording or transcript tools and I’d be happy to take my own notes and share a recap if that’s helpful,” Pluymers suggested. “Just being warm and genuine about it and asking them to respect your wishes.”
Know where your data goes
When working with AI notetaking apps, find out whether the companies that built them retain recordings, transcripts or metadata indefinitely or use them to train AI models, said Danielle Kays, a partner at Fisher Phillips who represents businesses on privacy and employment law matters.
“If there is some sort of speaker ID or voice recognition, really understand what that is and how it works,” Kays said.
Even when content is deleted, metadata about meetings can remain stored with the vendor, meaning sensitive business information could influence how the model behaves and in some cases could be memorized or reproduced, she said.
AI notetakers generate text, and that’s easier for outsiders to search through than video or audio files, according to EFF.
“Storing a bunch of video isn’t easy, it’s costly and hard to look through, but text is much easier to search and cheaper to store,” said Klosowski of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
___
Share your stories and questions about workplace wellness at [email protected]. Follow AP’s Be Well coverage, focusing on wellness, fitness, diet and mental health at https://apnews.com/hub/be-well
World
Argentinian flight instructor jumps to death from plane, 22-year-old student forced to land alone
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A flight instructor jumped to his death out of a small aircraft over Argentina, forcing the student pilot he was teaching to land the plane herself.
Leandro Andrés Bertazzo, 42, was on board a two-seat Cessna 150G on Saturday when he made the decision to jump out over the province of Córdoba, according to CNN, which cited its Argentinian affiliate TN.
“He made this tragic decision on board an aircraft with another person by his side,” Eduardo Álvarez, director of the Flying Parrot Córdoba flying school where Bertazzo worked, told TN. “It’s impossible to think about it or understand it, but the human mind is so complex.”
An undated photo of Leandro Andrés Bertazzo, a 42-year-old pilot who jumped to his death from a plane on Saturday, July 4 in Argentina. (Instagram/Leandro Bertazzo)
PILOT DECLARES MAYDAY BEFORE SEAPLANE COMES DOWN IN NEW YORK CITY’S EAST RIVER
Rosario, the 22-year-old student, later told authorities that Bertazzo told her, “You know what you have to do, carry on,” before taking off his gear, opening the door and leaping out, according to Álvarez.
Opening the door of a plane midair is incredibly difficult. Álvarez said it would be akin to trying to open the door of a car traveling 124 miles per hour.
Cessna 150m FRA150M climbing out after take-off with flaps deployed and hills behind. (aviation-images.com/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)
FRANTIC SEARCH UNDERWAY FOR CREW AFTER BOEING 737 WRECKAGE FOUND BY OFFICIALS
Álvarez said that Rosario managed to land the plane safely, despite being in “complete shock.” There was no damage to the plane, according to TN.
Álvarez noted that Bertazzo had gone on a flight with another student earlier in the day.
A view from the main road of the flight school Bertazzo worked at, Flying Parrot Córdoba. (Google Maps)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Álvarez also told TN that Bertazzo had visited a psychiatric institute, something that was only known by his family prior to his death.
Prosecutors in Córdoba will lead the investigation into Bertazzo’s death. The plane he jumped from is now in police custody.
-
Technology3 minutes agoGoogle turns old phones into cloud servers
-
Business10 minutes agoWaymo is starting robotaxi service in San Diego
-
Entertainment13 minutes ago‘Children of Blood and Bone’ author won’t see film after feud with star Amandla Stenberg
-
Lifestyle18 minutes agoAfter her son’s death, she found a new purpose. ‘He’s whispering: Mom, this is your path’
-
Politics25 minutes agoIran ceasefire is ‘over,’ Trump says, and orders additional strikes
-
Science28 minutes agoDiarrhea-causing cyclosporiasis exceeds 1,000 cases in U.S. What Californians should know
-
Sports33 minutes agoArthur Fery’s fairy-tale Wimbledon run puts British wild card on brink of history
-
World43 minutes agoBurnham on course to become next UK PM with backing of 322 Labour MPs