Trump and Putin speak over the phone after US officials halt arms shipments to Ukraine
It was their sixth publicly disclosed chat since Trump returned to the White House this year.
Putin told Trump that Moscow will not 'give up' on its aims in Ukraine, while pledging it will also keep up a negotiating process on the conflict, the Kremlin said after the call.
'Our president said that Russia will achieve the aims it set, that is to say the root causes that led to the current state of affairs,' Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov told reporters.
'Russia will not give up on these aims.'
'He also spoke of the readiness of the Russian side to continue the negotiation process,' Ushakov added, saying the call lasted almost an hour.
Advertisement
Their previous publicly known call came on 14 June, a day after Israel attacked Iran.
Ten days before that, they also spoke on the same topic, at which point Putin had offered to assist in the then-ongoing US nuclear talks with Tehran.
Their resumed contacts appeared to reflect both leaders' interest in mending US-Russian ties that have plummeted to their lowest point since the Cold War amid the conflict in Ukraine.
Today's call follows the Pentagon's confirmation that it is pausing shipments of some weapons to Ukraine as it goes about a global review of US military stockpiles.
The pause includes some shipments of Patriot missiles, precision-guided GMLRS, Hellfire missiles and Howitzer rounds, all of which are needed by Ukraine's defense forces.
The details on the weapons in some of the paused deliveries were confirmed by a US official and former national security official familiar with the matter.
On Tuesday, Putin and French President Emmanuel Macron held their first direct telephone call in almost three years.
With reporting from Andrew Walsh
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
5 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Trump's tariff threat reignites union push in Ireland's billion-euro pharma sector
As negotiations between the European Commission and the US conclude after almost 90 days of talks, an agreement has been deemed 'absolutely essential' to ensure a level of certainty for Irish exporters reliant on the US market. Among them is Ireland's mammoth pharmaceutical sector, a cornerstone of the national economy, which, since US President Donald Trump's 'Liberation Day' announcement, has remained stuck in the cross-hairs of his global tariff onslaught. Ireland is one of the largest pharmaceutical exporters in the world due to the several large US firms operating here, with their earnings contributing significantly to the Exchequer's corporation tax receipts. While initially excluded from punitive measures, the booming industry now faces renewed scrutiny from Mr Trump, which, in his view, has flourished at America's expense. After calling out Ireland specifically for benefiting from US companies, Mr Trump last month said tariffs on pharmaceuticals would come 'very soon,' which would help bring multinationals back to America. Historically, Ireland's pharmaceutical sector has been defined by stable demand and high-paying salaries, particularly within the industry's epicentre in Cork, which hosts pharma giants Merck, AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Pfizer, Johnson and Johnson, Thermo Fischer Scientific, Eli Lilly and GE Healthcare, among others. The concentration of these firms has made Ireland's southern region the wealthiest area in the European Union (EU), recording the largest GDP per capita in 2022, according to Eurostat. Despite this economic strength, collective bargaining in the sector has remained relatively limited. However, with rising uncertainty and looming tariff fears, momentum for unionisation is growing. 'We saw a sharp spike in union membership following Trump's 'Liberation Day' announcement,' says Siptu Manufacturing Divisional Organiser Neil McGowan. The trade union currently counts some 13,500 members from the pharmaceutical industry, the majority of whom are based in Cork. 'There's a lot of uncertainty in the air at the moment. I think Liberation Day made a lot of workers sit up and think, 'Are we really ready for what could happen?' Mr McGowan told the Irish Examiner. However, unionisation efforts have presented mixed results, he said, with some companies refusing to recognise or interact with Siptu when addressing worker disputes. 'It can be incredibly frustrating at times. We have members who want us there, who want to bargain collectively, and their company refuses to acknowledge us,' Mr McGowan said. But the fight doesn't stop there. Last month, trade union members at the Kinsale branch of US pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly welcomed a Labour Court recommendation urging their employer to allow for collective representation by Siptu during workplace disputes. Union members at the Kinsale branch of US pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly welcomed a Labour Court recommendation urging their employer to allow for collective representation by Siptu during workplace disputes. '[Eli] Lilly staff are on a journey for recognition, but senior management doesn't want to acknowledge us,' says Siptu sector organiser, Andrea Cleere. 'It has been denying our members the right to be supported by the union in individual workplaces, which is contrary Workplace Relations Commission's Code of Practice." But as Ms Cleere points out, Labour Court findings are reliant on the company choosing to acknowledge them. 'This is the problem with Ireland's weak voluntarist model of industrial relations. 'It allows companies to flout the Labour Court whenever it sides with workers seeking their basic human right to bargain collectively.' In May, workers at the Cork branch of pharmaceutical giant AbbVie served a notice of industrial action after the company refused to engage with employees' chosen trade union. Ms Cleere says AbbVie opted not to acknowledge the union despite workers securing two Labour Court recommendations urging the employer to recognise Siptu for collective bargaining purposes. "Numerous attempts to resolve issues of pay and union recognition through negotiations were refused by management,' Ms Cleere told the Irish Examiner. 'Companies simply don't need to do anything, meaning circumstances are always stacked against the worker.' 'Employee rights can be so easily forgotten. We pump money into big firms through the IDA or Enterprise Ireland without any requirement that they take care of their workers.' An AbbVie pharmaceutical manufacturing facility in Sligo. In May, workers at the Cork branch of pharmaceutical giant AbbVie served a notice of industrial action after the company refused to engage with employees' chosen trade union. In a statement to the Irish Examiner, Eli Lilly said: "Lilly does not comment on specific employee relations matters. "Our direct employee engagement model promotes open communication and teamwork, creating an inclusive work environment where all voices are heard. We prioritise transparency and mutual respect, empowering our employees to contribute to our mission." AbbVie did not respond when contacted for comment. While layoffs in the pharmaceutical sector remain unlikely, Mr McGowan says worker concerns extend far beyond just job cuts. 'Pay is always a significant issue, but more than anything, people just want to have their say. Oftentimes, large multinationals operating in Ireland have decisions made by their foreign headquarters, which can be very frustrating for those here on the ground. 'Irish pharma remains particularly exposed to Trump's tariff threats, as do these workers. They deserve to have a voice.' But as the organiser notes, sometimes not having a union recognised is the least of their concerns. 'Union-busting is extremely prevalent in the pharmaceutical industry and happens on nearly every site. 'We have outside meetings where members fear being followed by senior management. We've heard cases of staff being guilt-tripped and being made to feel like they're damaging the company's reputation. 'Life at work can be made very difficult for union members. From bogus disciplinary measures to exclusion, people often pay the price for being part of a union. We've even seen cases of people being paid off by their company for taking part in union activity.' At around 35%, trade union coverage in Ireland is notably weak in a European context, falling far below the EU average of around 60%. Despite implementing an EU Directive last year requiring an action plan to raise coverage to over 80%, Ms Cleere says the Government has done the 'bare minimum' to increase the strength of trade unions. The EU Directive of Adequate Minimum Wages calls on the governments of EU Member States to draw up an action plan to increase collective bargaining coverage in their economies to over 80%. Countries below the mandated 80% figure will be asked to provide a framework to further enable conditions for collective bargaining as well as establish an action plan to promote collective bargaining and increase coverage rates. Although the directive does not set a specific deadline for the adoption of the action plan, the European Commission has urged member states with a collective bargaining coverage below 80% to establish them by the end of 2025 'at the latest'. Approached by the Irish Examiner, a spokesperson for the Department of Enterprise said the Government was committed to publishing the action plan by the end of 2025. 'A public consultation on the possible content of the action plan was held by the Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment recently.' 'The outcome of the consultation process will help guide the Department in finalising the proposals, both legislative and administrative, which may be considered for inclusion in the action plan,' the spokesperson concluded. But as Ms Cleere argues, bold measures are needed to bring Ireland's coverage rate to the EU requirement. 'If the Government is serious about increasing coverage, companies need to be penalised if they refuse to recognise unions.' 'We've seen time and time again that unionised companies are more productive than their non-unionised counterparts. 'It is in the pharma industry's best interest to do this, it's just a shame it can't see that on its own.'
Irish Examiner
5 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Book review: Fresh, relevant, and concise
The time it takes to write a book, and the gap between completing a book and it being published, makes tackling contemporary events tricky. This is particularly so in the turbulent rollercoaster that is world politics and conflict. But Professor Donnacha Ó Beacháin has risen to the task in his new book, Unfinished Empire: Russian Imperialism in Ukraine and the Near Abroad. It is not just a study of contemporary politics. It has the added heft of history: charting the rise of Russian imperialism since the 15th century, Russian interests during communism, the post-Soviet era, and Russia's resurgence under Vladimir Putin. The author's landscape extends from Finland to the Baltics, focusing, naturally, on Ukraine, then onto the South Caucasus and the 'Stans' — the five Central Asian countries. Ó Beacháin, a professor of politics in DCU, complements academic knowledge with extensive personal experience of the so-called Russian 'Near Abroad', having lived and worked for 12 years in the region, conducting research in every post-Soviet state. There are other reasons to commend his book: it is refreshingly short at 218 pages — just 163 pages of the core book and the remainder a chronology, references, primary sources, and bibliography; and it is written in plain English. People move properties from an office building destroyed by a Russian strike in Kyiv, Ukraine, last month. Picture: Evgeniy Maloletka/ AP Ó Beacháin's central concern is Russian imperialism and — similar to other empires — the damage it causes to those at the receiving end. He covers the expansion of what was a small country to a sprawling land empire — from the reigns of Ivan 'The Terrible', Peter I — who Putin is a fan of — to Catherine II (The Great). The reader learns of the grim fate for many indigenous peoples on the way, such as the Circassians. Ó Beacháin writes: 'As many as 1.5m Circassians lived in the Caucasus in 1860 of whom almost half are estimated to have perished as a result of Russia's annihilationist campaign.' Under communism, state-induced famines claimed at least four million lives in Ukraine and a third of Kazakhstan's indigenous population. Two central chapters cover Putin's two wars in Ukraine — first, the annexation of Crimea and Donbas in 2014 and second, the full-scale invasion in 2022. Ó Beacháin authoritatively dispatches the various 'reasons' Putin cited for the invasion — denazification, demilitarisation/spread of Nato, and protection of ethnic Russians. Separate chapters follow on Belarus, Moldova, South Caucasus, and the Central Asian states. In his final chapter, Ó Beacháin sums up: Russia's war on Ukraine has a 'clear, genocidal intent'; Putin has created the 'very bogey' he most feared — a Russia-hating Ukraine bent on joining the EU and Nato and has pushed Finland and Sweden into joining Nato. The author is critical of the EU and the US under Biden in the level and speed of their military help to Ukraine, stating the 'war could have ended quickly' if Ukraine got what they asked for at the time. Ó Beacháin knows that Trump II is the unknown factor — a US President who sees Ukraine as a 'pawn in a much larger game' and how this has 'emboldened Putin'. The author is clear what has to happen: Europe needs a sustainable peace; accountability for war crimes is essential and, more fundamentally, 'Russian defeat is necessary'. Perhaps because of space reasons, he does not set out exactly how this might happen or what the risks of implementing this might be. But Ó Beacháin finds hope in the ultimate concern of Putin — to stay in power and how this matters more than success in Ukraine. Ó Beacháin believes that if Putin sees that continuing the war will weaken his reign, the faster the war will end. Read More Book review: Warnings on Putin ignored at our peril
RTÉ News
6 hours ago
- RTÉ News
Trump signs 'big, beautiful' bill on US Independence Day
US President Donald Trump signed into law a massive package of tax and spending cuts at the White House during an outdoor ceremony on the Fourth of July holiday. With military jets flying overhead and hundreds of supporters in attendance, Mr Trump signed the bill one day after the Republican-controlled House of Representatives narrowly approved the signature legislation of the president's second term. The bill, which will fund Mr Trump's immigration crackdown, make his 2017 tax cuts permanent, and is expected to knock millions of Americans off health insurance, was passed with a 218-214 vote after an emotional debate on the House floor. "I've never seen people so happy in our country because of that, because so many different groups of people are being taken care of: the military, civilians of all types, jobs of all types," Mr Trump said at the ceremony, thanking House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune for leading the bill through the two houses of Congress. "So you have the biggest tax cut, the biggest spending cut, the largest border security investment in American history," he said. Mr Trump scheduled the ceremony on the South Lawn of the White House for the 4 July Independence Day holiday, replete with a flyover by stealth bombers and fighter jets like those that took part in the recent US strikes on nuclear facilities in Iran. Hundreds of Mr Trump supporters attended, including White House aides, members of Congress, and military families. After a speech that included boastful claims about the ascendance of America on his watch, Mr Trump signed the bill, posed for pictures with Republican congressional leaders and members of his cabinet, and waded through the crowd of happy supporters. The bill's passage amounts to a big win for Mr Trump and his Republican allies, who have argued it will boost economic growth, while largely dismissing a non-partisan analysis predicting it will add more than $3 trillion (€2.5 trillion) to the nation's $36.2 trillion debt. While some politicians in Mr Trump's party expressed concerns over the bill's price tag and its hit to healthcare programmes, in the end just two of the House's 220 Republicans voted against it, joining all 212 Democrats in opposition. The tense standoff over the bill included a record-long floor speech by House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who spoke for eight hours and 46 minutes, blasting the bill as a giveaway to the wealthy that would strip low-income Americans of federally-backed health insurance and food aid benefits. Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin predicted the law would cost Republicans votes in congressional elections in 2026. "Today, Donald Trump sealed the fate of the Republican Party, cementing them as the party for billionaires and special interests - not working families," Mr Martin said in a statement. "This legislation will hang around the necks of the GOP for years to come. This was a full betrayal of the American people. Today, we are putting Republicans on notice: you will lose your majority," he added.
