&w=3840&q=100)
'He could get offended': Putin halts forum to take Donald Trump's call
Russian President Vladimir Putin abruptly left a plenary session at the 'Strong Ideas for a New Time' forum in Moscow on Thursday to take a phone direct call from US President Donald Trump, marking their sixth publicly disclosed conversation since Trump returned to the White House.
Apologising to the audience, Putin said, 'Please, don't be angry. I understand that we could talk more, but it's so awkward to make [Trump] wait, he could get offended.'
The phone call between the two leaders covered a range of global issues, including the Ukraine conflict and tensions with Iran, the Kremlin confirmed.
Ukraine conflict: Russia firm on objectives
'Russia will not back down,' Ushakov said, echoing Putin's insistence that Russia seeks to address what it sees as existential threats stemming from Ukraine's bid to join NATO. According to Putin, any future peace settlement must include Ukraine abandoning its NATO aspirations and acknowledging Russia's territorial claims.
The US President, on his part, urged Putin to halt the war in Ukraine that has entered its third year. However, Ushakov clarified that a truce was not on the table unless Russia's strategic objectives were met.
Weapons to Ukraine paused by US
The call came a day after the Pentagon confirmed that certain US military shipments to Ukraine had been paused pending a review of available stockpiles. The withheld items include air defence missiles and precision-guided artillery, Associated Press reported.
Although the suspension of arms deliveries has sparked concern in Kyiv, Ushakov said the topic did not come up during the Trump-Putin call. Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in Denmark that he hoped to speak with Trump in the coming days about the development.
'I hope that maybe tomorrow, or close days, these days, I will speak about it with President Trump,' Zelenskyy said, as quoted by Associated Press. Commenting on the Trump-Putin dialogue, he added, 'I'm not sure that they have a lot of common ideas... because they are very different people.'
Iran and West Asia also discussed
The leaders also discussed the situation in Iran following the US airstrikes on June 22 that targeted three locations in the country. Putin emphasised the need to resolve international disputes through diplomacy.
'Putin stressed the importance of resolving all disputes, disagreements and conflict matters exclusively via political and diplomatic channels,' said Ushakov.
The conversation comes amid heightened tensions in West Asia and increased international focus on nuclear issues related to Iran.
Russia claims full control over Luhansk
Leonid Pasechnik, the Russian-appointed governor of Ukraine's Luhansk region, claimed on Thursday that the area was now fully under Russian control. 'Just a couple of days ago, I received a report that the territory of the Luhansk People's Republic has been 100 per cent liberated,' Pasechnik said, as quoted by news agency ANI.
Earlier, on June 21, Putin had said that Moscow does not seek Ukraine's unconditional surrender but demands recognition of 'realities on the ground'. Speaking at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum, he said, 'We are not seeking the surrender of Ukraine... we insist on recognition of the realities that have developed.'
Reiterating his stance, Putin added, 'I have said many times that I consider Russians and Ukrainians to be one people… In this sense, all of Ukraine is ours.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
32 minutes ago
- India Today
Trump team to deny hearings in new bid to keep migrants detained, memo shows
The Trump administration is launching a new effort to keep immigrants who entered the US illegally detained by denying them bond hearings, an internal memo showed, a change that could further swell the numbers of those guidance by the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a portion of which Reuters reviewed, could be applied to millions of people who crossed the border illegally and are contesting their Donald Trump has vowed mass deportations, which he says are needed after high levels of illegal immigration under his predecessor, Democrat Joe Biden. Congress passed a spending law this month that provides funding to detain at least 100,000 people, a steep increase over the record 58,000 in custody by late Washington Post first reported the new ICE policy limiting bond hearing eligibility, citing a July 8 memo by its acting director, Todd guidance shared with Reuters called for ICE to interpret several immigration law provisions as "prohibitions on release" after an arrest, adding the shift in policy was "likely to be litigated."It encouraged ICE prosecutors "to make alternative arguments in support of continued detention" during immigration court new policy appeared to reverse legal standards governing detention for decades, said Tom Jawetz, a former homeland security official in the Biden administration, calling it "a radical departure that could explode the detention population."The US Department of Homeland Security and ICE did not immediately respond to requests for comment.- EndsTune InMust Watch IN THIS STORY#Donald Trump
Time of India
33 minutes ago
- Time of India
Why Supreme Court's approval of 1,400 US Education Department layoffs is called 'willfully blind' and 'naive'
US Education Department layoffs: Why Supreme Court's decision to allow 1,400 cuts is 'willfully blind' and 'naive,' judges warn US Education Department layoffs 2025: The US Supreme Court has allowed President Trump to proceed with his plan to lay off nearly 1,400 employees from the US Department of Education, effectively enabling a large-scale downsizing of the agency. This ruling reverses a preliminary injunction issued by Boston's Judge Myong Joun, who had blocked the layoffs, citing concerns that the cuts would cripple the department's operations. The decision has sparked sharp criticism from three liberal justices, who dissented, branding the Supreme Court's ruling as "willfully blind" and "naive." The dissenters argue that the ruling threatens the constitutional principle of separation of powers by allowing the executive branch to effectively dismantle a federal agency by firing its employees. Supreme Court backs Trump's plan despite legal challenges The Supreme Court's order permits the Trump administration to move forward with the mass layoffs, pausing Judge Joun's injunction that had prevented the terminations. The Education Department staff affected by the layoffs had been on paid leave since March, according to the American Federation of Government Employees Local 252. Without the injunction, these employees would have been terminated in early June. The case involves two consolidated lawsuits, one filed by several school districts in Massachusetts and education groups including the American Federation of Teachers, and another by a coalition of 21 Democratic attorneys general. Both suits argue that the layoffs amount to an illegal closure of the Education Department, leaving it unable to fulfil its statutory duties such as supporting special education, distributing financial aid, and enforcing civil rights laws. In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan, wrote that the majority was "either willfully blind to the implications of its ruling or naive," warning of a "grave" threat to the US Constitution's separation of powers, as reported by the Associated Press. Department of Education response and ongoing disputes Education Secretary Linda McMahon criticised the delay caused by the lower court's injunction and welcomed the Supreme Court's intervention, calling it "a shame" it took the highest court to confirm the president's authority over federal staffing and agency operations, as reported by the Associated Press. Meanwhile, more than 20 US states have filed lawsuits against the administration over billions of dollars in frozen education funding that support after-school care, summer programmes and other initiatives. The department has indicated it is "actively assessing how to reintegrate" the affected employees, requesting updates on their employment status to ensure a smooth return to duty if possible. Summary of key details Issue Detail Number of layoffs Nearly 1,400 employees Initial court action Judge Myong Joun issued an injunction blocking layoffs Supreme Court ruling Allowed layoffs to proceed in a 6–3 decision Dissenting justices Sotomayor, Jackson, Kagan Lawsuits Filed by Massachusetts school districts, education groups, and 21 Democratic attorneys general Department duties affected Special education, financial aid distribution, civil rights enforcement Employee status On paid leave since March; no full return to work during injunction The Supreme Court ruling thus permits the Trump administration's controversial downsizing plan to continue despite ongoing legal challenges and warnings from dissenting justices about the potential damage to the Education Department's capacity and constitutional governance. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Mint
36 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump's copper tariff: Twisted logic won't help re-industrialize America
US President Donald Trump's proposed 50% tariff on copper imports is emblematic of his administration's incoherent approach to economic policy: Soaked in nostalgia for America's industrial past, it pursues strategies that will make it harder for US manufacturers to succeed now and in the future. Trump noted that copper 'is necessary for Semiconductors, Aircraft, Ships, Ammunition, Data Centers, Lithium-ion Batteries, Radar Systems, Missile Defense Systems, and even, Hypersonic Weapons, of which we are building many." So why would you then want to raise taxes on copper? Increasing the price Americans pay for copper makes the US a less desirable location for building aircraft, ceding advantage to competing producers in Europe, Brazil and Canada. It makes it harder to establish a domestic semiconductor manufacturing industry. It exacerbates the already dire state of the US shipbuilding industry, which is wholly reliant on protectionist policies. Also Read: Copper offers India a glowing hot opportunity: Now for a strategy The strategic value of copper might be a basis for protectionism if the US were getting its copper from hostile or unstable countries. But copper is not a rare earth mineral for which the US must rely on Chinese suppliers, nor is it like oil in the pre-fracking era, when the US had to import it from questionable regimes in the Middle East. The majority of US copper imports come from Chile, and the next two major suppliers are Canada and Peru. Meanwhile, America also has a robust domestic copper industry, which accounts for about half the copper used in the US. The majority of this copper comes from the swing state of Arizona, which may offer a narrow partisan rationale for copper protectionism. But there is no strategic problem with importing copper from friendly countries in the Western Hemisphere— and every reason to worry that deliberately raising the price of a widely used production input will hamper US competitiveness in crucial industries. This is, unfortunately, not an unusual consequence of Trump's trade policy: By applying taxes on intermediate goods, he is encouraging the US to specialize in resource extraction and primary commodities at the expense of complicated manufactured goods. Also Read: American puzzle: Trump's tariffs have resulted in an inflation paradox 'Industrial policy' functions by moving a nation's economy up the value chain. In the early days of the American Republic, for example, Alexander Hamilton worried that the US would continue to be a de facto economic colony of Europe. As a sparsely populated nation with abundant natural resources, a totally unregulated market might have caused America to specialize in exporting raw materials to Europe, which would in turn export manufactured goods back to America. As an alternative, he proposed protective tariffs to promote the growth of US industry. Trump borrows his own tariffs from the Hamiltonian tradition, but completely misses the larger logic of the programme and the altered nature of the modern economy. Over time, as the world has become richer and shipping has become cheaper, the cutting edge of manufacturing has become increasingly complicated. These days it's common to assemble a finished product from parts made in countries all around the world, with each part itself containing a staggering array of raw materials. Countries get richer by specializing at the more complex end of the spectrum. To the extent that you can boost US natural-resource production by eliminating low-benefit regulatory barriers, that's a win. But boosting the US copper-extraction industry at the expense of US copper-using industries is a recipe for de-industrialization. And much the same applies to Trump's obsession with protectionism for industries like steel and aluminium. For the US to be a manufacturing powerhouse, its industries need access to the cheapest possible inputs. Also Read: Chinese history shows how a closed economy could squander a nation's greatness It's also worth considering that even though 19th-century pro-industrialization politicians favoured tariffs, Trump is likely overrating their importance in promoting the growth of factories. One important manufacturing input, after all, is workers. The kind of quasi-open borders of the Gilded Age would probably not be a major boost to US manufacturing today. But a serious industrial policy would consider the case for a visa programme for skilled workers with experience in fields such as semiconductors, batteries and shipbuilding. At a minimum, the goal should be to avoid actions that make things worse. Copper is important because it's used to make other stuff. The goal of US trade policy, not to say industrial policy, should be to help America become a better place to make stuff that the world wants. Trump's nostalgia economics is pushing the US further from that goal. ©Bloomberg The author is a columnist for Bloomberg Opinion.
