Pace of Ukraine talks hinges on efforts of Kyiv, Washington, Kremlin says
The pace of talks to resolve the war in Ukraine depends on Kyiv's position, the effectiveness of US mediation and the situation on the ground, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in remarks televised on Sunday (Jun 29).
Five months into US President Donald Trump's term, there is no clear end to the war Russia launched in February 2022 against its smaller neighbour, despite his 2024 campaign vow to end it in one day.
Trump, who has pushed both sides towards ceasefire talks since his January inauguration, said on Friday he thinks "something will happen" about a settlement of the war.
"A lot depends, naturally, on the position of the Kyiv regime," Peskov told Belarus 1 TV, the main state television channel in Russia's neighbour.
"It depends on how effectively Washington's mediating efforts continue," he said, adding that the situation on the ground was another factor that could not be ignored.
Peskov did not elaborate on what Moscow expects from Washington or Kyiv. Moscow has been demanding that Ukraine cede more land and abandon Western military support, conditions Kyiv calls unacceptable.
While no date has been set for the next round of talks, Peskov said Russia hoped dates would become clear "in the near future".
After a gap of more than three years, Russia and Ukraine held face-to-face talks in Istanbul on May 16 and Jun 2 that led to a series of prisoner exchanges and the return of their dead soldiers.
They have made no progress towards a ceasefire, however. Their blueprints for a peace deal shared at the Jun 2 talks were "absolutely contradictory memorandums", Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Friday.
Russia, which already controls about a fifth of Ukraine, continues to advance gradually, gaining ground in recent weeks in Ukraine's southeastern regions of Donetsk and Dnipropetrovsk, and ramping up air attacks nationwide.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Times
44 minutes ago
- Business Times
Make hay while the Trump shines
[SINGAPORE] The Trump trend is your friend until it isn't. That sounds like a Taoist I-Ching tautology, but it's not. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky knows what this means – investors are about to find out. It means that although the current, prolonged uptrend in the market is continuing, it is also unreliable, with the potential for a sudden change without warning. This is not the same as a bearish outlook, because the bears are hankering for a market crash as a means of making money. A sudden change in the uptrend includes a painful but temporary retreat, a sudden slowing of momentum, or a radical readjustment in trend behaviour. All of these options have the potential to do serious damage to investment portfolios. As Zelensky found, the sudden Trumpian tempest leads to a reset and new conditions which may not be as favourable as in the past. When trading the current market trend, either as a new investor or when adding to existing positions, investors need to be alert for trend changes which challenge their assumptions. Until then, investors aggressively build positions or add to existing positions when the sun shines. However, they cannot assume the current trend will continue indefinitely. Investors need to ask: 'How do we recognise when the trend is changing?' The answer to this question provides the methods to continue to enjoy the profits from the uptrend, and avoid holding on as a market retreat turns into a collapse. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up The first focus is obviously the equity market, but attention also needs to be paid to associated markets such as the US Dollar Index. Home to the once-Magnificent Seven stocks, the Nasdaq has clawed its way back above the long-term uptrend line. The trend line now acts as a support feature. The activity of the Nasdaq is defined by trading bands which impose both resistance and support barriers to the uptrend movement. Using the trading-band price-projection target, the next objective for the Nasdaq is near 24,380. What's needed to reach that target is for the trend line to continue to offer support for any market retreat. Once above the current resistance level near 22,370, it is reasonable to anticipate that any retreat would find support at this level. Any fall below 22,370 has support at the value of the trend line. The strength of the uptrend is confirmed when the trend line passes through the resistance level at 22,370, around Oct 6. As seen in March, a move below the trend line has downside targets established by the previous trading-band support levels. Currently, there is no indication of any end of uptrend pattern developing. This includes patterns such as rounding tops, double tops and other trend-exhaustion behaviours. This suggests any retreats are likely to be temporary, offering opportunities to add to existing positions at bargain prices before the uptrend resumes. There is considerable debate about whether President Donald Trump is delivery-forcing US dollar weakness, or whether it is an unintended byproduct of his policy approach. Our concern is to establish the persistence of the trend and its potential pause and reversal levels. The notable feature is the collapse of the US dollar, shown on the DXY monthly chart where the price scale is in cents. Under usual circumstances, the chart suggests the fall should have at least paused, if not stopped, at around the support level at US$1 parity. Instead, it plunged below this level before staging a weak recovery, followed by another major plunge to around US$0.97. The significant feature on the DXY chart is that this is no strong historical support until US$0.90. There is a weak support level near US$0.93. In either case, they both represent a significant fall in the US dollar. This is not trending behaviour. This is the opposite of a fast-moving rising rally – an avalanche. It's the collapse that can quickly swallow a chair of the Federal Reserve. It's an avalanche that is difficult to stop and reverse once it moves below the well-established and tested parity level. The monthly DXY chart carries an important behavioural characteristic. Reversals from the current price direction can be both rapid and large. This suggests the fall towards US$0.93 support could take as little as two months, or about the same length of time as the fall from US$1.06 in March to US$1 in April. The US dollar at US$0.93 or lower is a significant change in market and trade relationships, which will inevitably impact equity markets. Investors don't fight the trend, but while the sun shines, they also keep an eye open for the patterns of behaviour which increase the probability of a major change in trend direction. The writer is a financial technical analysis specialist, equity and derivatives trader and author
Business Times
an hour ago
- Business Times
Trump suggests DOGE look at subsidies for Musk's companies to save money
[WASHINGTON] US President Donald Trump suggested the government efficiency department should review the subsidies Tesla CEO Elon Musk's companies have received in order to save money, reginiting a war of words between the world's most powerful man and its richest. Trump's remarks on Tuesday (Jul 1) came after Musk renewed his criticism of the sweeping tax-cut and spending Bill, vowing to unseat lawmakers who supported it after campaigning on limiting government spending. Tesla shares fell nearly 5 per cent in premarket trading. Feuding with Trump could create hurdles for Tesla and the rest of Musk's business empire. The US Transportation Department regulates vehicle design and would play a key role in deciding whether Tesla can mass-produce robotaxis without pedals and steering wheels, while Musk's rocket company SpaceX has about US$22 billion in federal contracts. 'Elon may get more subsidy than any human being in history, by far, and without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa. No more Rocket launches, Satellites, or Electric Car Production, and our Country would save a FORTUNE. Perhaps we should have DOGE take a good, hard, look at this? BIG MONEY TO BE SAVED!!!,' Trump said in a post on Truth Social, referring to the federal Department of government Efficiency (DOGE). BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up In response to Trump's post, Musk, on his own social media platform X, said, 'I am literally saying CUT IT ALL. Now.' Trump previously threatened to cut Musk's government contracts when their relationship erupted into an all-out social media brawl in early June over the bill, which non-partisan analysts have said would add about US$3 trillion to the US debt. The rift had sent Tesla shares into a free-fall, wiping out about US$150 billion in market value in the company's biggest single-day decline. The stock later rebounded after Musk walked back some of his jabs, saying he had gone 'too far.' But after weeks of relative silence, Musk rejoined the debate on Saturday as the Senate took up the package, calling it 'utterly insane and destructive' in a post on X. On Monday, he said lawmakers who campaigned on cutting spending but backed the bill 'should hang their heads in shame!' 'And they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth,' Musk added. He also called again for a new political party, saying the bill's massive spending indicated 'that we live in a one-party country – the PORKY PIG PARTY!!' The criticism marked a dramatic shift after the billionaire spent nearly US$300 million on Trump's re-election campaign and led the administration's controversial DOGE initiative. Musk has argued that the legislation would greatly increase the national debt and erase the savings he says he achieved through DOGE. It remains unclear how much sway Musk has over Congress or what effect his opinions might have on the bill's passage. But Republicans have expressed concern that his on-again, off-again feud with Trump could hurt their chances to protect their majority in the 2026 midterm congressional elections. REUTERS
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
What are the digital services taxes drawing Trump's ire?
Mr Trump has long argued that these levies are discriminatory against US tech giants like Amazon. PHOTO: REUTERS WASHINGTON – Digital services taxes targeting the revenue of big technology companies have returned as a flash point in President Donald Trump's efforts to rewrite the rules of global trade. Mr Trump has long argued that these levies are discriminatory against US tech giants like Amazon, Google owner Alphabet and Facebook owner Meta. During his first term as president, Mr Trump threatened to use tariffs to punish countries imposing digital taxes. Now that he is back in office, tensions have flared again over who gets to tax the world's largest firms, and how. Canada was the first to back down in the face of Mr Trump's ire. It decided to scrap its digital levy in late June – hours before it was due to go into effect – after Mr Trump suspended trade talks with the country over what he called an 'egregious' tax. The two countries have resumed talks. What are digital services taxes? Broadly speaking, digital services taxes are levies on the revenue that tech companies generate from users in a particular country, from activities such as targeted online advertising, streaming and the sale of data. These taxes come in a variety of forms, with different thresholds and parameters. France was among the first nations to implement a digital services tax. In 2019, it introduced a 3 per cent charge on revenue from targeted advertising and other digital services of companies with an annual revenue of at least €750 million (S$1.13 billion) globally and €25 million in France. Other European countries followed, including Italy, Austria, Spain and the United Kingdom. Canada was behind the curve. Its tax was passed into law in 2024 when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was in office. From June 30, 2025, firms were meant to be on the hook for 3 per cent of the digital services revenue generated from Canadian users above C$20 million (S$18.7 million) in a calendar year. Why have countries introduced digital services taxes? The global economy is becoming more and more digitalised, running on flows of data. But the companies providing services often don't have brick-and-mortar operations in every country they operate in. Taxing companies based on their physical presence has thus become an increasingly ineffective method for governments to ensure the tax bills of tech companies match the value they derive from local customers. Pressure to address perceived injustice in tax systems grew in the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crisis, when public outcry over bank bailouts spurred a push to tackle tax evasion. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) – a club of 38 mostly rich countries – has been working for years on a solution to rewrite the rules of how taxing rights are shared among jurisdictions. It has been hosting negotiations with more than 140 countries to adapt the international tax system. Progress has been slow and regularly set back by the reigniting of trade tensions. Frustrated by the lack of momentum, European countries began to introduce digital services taxes as a stopgap measure – even as they recognised the controversial nature of levies based on revenue rather than profit. How has the US responded to the digital services taxes? The US asserts that digital services taxes are less about fairness and more about hobbling American tech firms. In 2020, the first Trump administration announced plans to impose tariffs of 25 per cent on goods imported from France, including makeup, soap and handbags. These duties were suspended pending negotiations and the US ultimately reached a standstill agreement with multiple European governments, including that of France. Under this truce, the US shelved its punitive tariffs and these countries effectively agreed to refund any taxes in excess of what corporations will pay once the OECD's global tax regime is in place. Shortly after Mr Trump was sworn into office this year, he ordered a reopening of the so-called Section 301 investigations launched during his first term into countries with digital services taxes, and to probe nations that have since developed such levies. These investigations lay the groundwork for the US to retaliate against trade practices it deems unfair to American interests, for example with tariffs. Mr Trump also instructed the US Treasury to notify the OECD that any commitments the US previously made to its tax negotiations have no force. How have countries with digital services taxes reacted to Mr Trump's attacks? While Canada yielded to Mr Trump, the UK and countries in the European Union have thus far held firm. When the US struck a trade agreement with the UK in May, it said in a statement that it was 'disappointed' that the British government was unwilling to withdraw its digital services tax. US Treasury Scott Bessent previously said that these taxes were a sticking point in trade discussions with the EU. The EU's ability to make concessions on this front is complicated by the fact that taxation is a national prerogative for the bloc's member states, while trade is managed by the European Commission in Brussels. In February, the French government ruled out undoing its digital services tax to appease Mr Trump. The levy is a growing source of revenue at a time when France's finance ministry is struggling to rein in the country's budget deficit. The government expects the tax to bring in almost €775 million this year. How could the dispute over digital services taxes be de-escalated? The renewed tensions around digital services taxes will refocus attention on the OECD's efforts. Many countries have pledged to abolish their digital taxes if there is an international agreement on how to allocate the profits of multinationals for the purposes of taxation. The hurdles to reaching a deal are high. Numerous treaties would have to be rewritten, and the US would likely lose some taxation rights to countries where its big digital firms operate. Still, global tech companies have previously expressed support for the OECD's initiative as a way of avoiding a mushrooming of different tax regimes around the world. Moreover, as part of work toward a separate agreement on a global minimum corporate tax, the US signed off on a Group of Seven statement in June that spoke in favour of 'constructive dialogue on the taxation of the digital economy.' BLOOMBERG Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
