Russia and Ukraine agree on prisoner swap and handover of bodies
Today's talks were over in even shorter order. Only an hour had passed when the negotiators emerged, though not before they managed to agree a major exchange of dead and detained personnel. Under the terms of the agreement, some 6,000 bodies of fighters from each side killed in action will be handed over for burial.
At least 1,000 prisoners of war on each side will be exchanged along with all soldiers under the age of 25 and those who suffered serious injuries in combat, Ukraine's lead negotiator and Defence Minister Rustem Umerov told reporters in Istanbul. Despite the positive outcome on prisoner transfers, the negotiations appeared to yield no progress toward the full and unconditional ceasefire desired by Ukraine. Ukrainian officials said their Russian counterparts only offered partial two-to-three-day ceasefires at certain points of the frontline to allow for the recovery of those killed in action.
Ukraine's state centre for strategic communications, Spravdi, said Russia was only present at the talks to avoid further sanctions from the United States, whose President Donald Trump has expressed frustration with the slow pace of negotiations . Russia's lead negotiator Vladimir Medinsky in turn dismissed a Ukrainian request for Moscow to return children forcibly relocated from the occupied regions into Russia.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants in March 2023 for Vladimir Putin and Russia's children's ombudsman Maria Lvova-Belova on war crimes charges related to the abduction of Ukrainian children. 'Don't put on a show for bleeding-heart European old ladies with no children of their own,' Medinsky is said to have claimed during the talks after he was presented with an official list of 339 children Kyiv claims have been abducted by Russian authorities. There were doubts today's proceedings would return any progress toward a proper ceasefire even before talks got underway in Istanbul.
While Ukraine presented their negotiating papers and requests to the Russian side one week in advance of the talks, Moscow's representatives only gave their terms today, leaving Kyiv's negotiators with no time to study them. The meeting in Istanbul also came just one day after Ukraine's SBU security service pulled off a breathtakingly coordinated operation that saw a swarm of kamikaze drones demolish dozens of Russian military planes thousands of miles from Ukrainian soil.
The stunning attack - reportedly more than 18 months in the making - represents a glaring intelligence failure on the part of Russia's security apparatus and has been lauded as a great success by Zelensky. That followed one of the largest single-day drone and missile attacks on Ukraine by Russia of the war so far.
Yet Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said the progress made during today's talks was superb and expressed a desire to host a face-to-face summit between Zelensky , Putin and Trump in the near future. 'My greatest wish for both sides is to bring both Vladimir Putin and Zelensky together in Istanbul or Ankara, and even to bring Mr Trump to their side, if they accept,' he said. Many analysts doubt that Putin has any interest in meeting with his Ukrainian counterpart and have predicted that ceasefire talks between Kyiv and Moscow will go round in circles unless Washington steps up to play a more significant role.
Zelensky himself said that 'if Russia turns the Istanbul meeting into an empty talk, there must be a new level of pressure, new sanctions, and not just from Europe,' in an apparent reference to US threats to further penalise Russia. 'Without pressure, Putin will just keep playing games with everyone who wants this war to end,' he said. The relentless fighting has frustrated Trump's goal of bringing about a quick end to the war. A week ago, he expressed impatience with Putin as Moscow pounded Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities with drones and missiles for a third straight night. Trump said on social media that Putin 'has gone absolutely CRAZY!' but offered no further details.
Ukraine's Umerov told reporters in Istanbul that officials in Kyiv would need a week to review the Russian document setting out fresh ceasefire proposals before deciding on a response. The Ukrainian delegation offered to enter a third round of talks on a date between June 20 and June 30, but Russia is yet to respond. In the meantime, Putin and his military officials are likely to be plotting revenge for Ukraine's so-called 'Operation Spiderweb' that Kyiv claims damaged or destroyed up to one-third of the aircraft used to deliver cruise missile strikes on Ukraine.
Because Sunday's drones were launched from trucks close to the bases in five Russian regions, military defences had virtually no time to prepare for them. The attack was so devastating that Russian military bloggers termed the operation 'Russia's Pearl Harbor'. The attacks were 'a big blow to Russian strategic air power' and exposed significant vulnerabilities in Moscow's military capabilities, said Phillips O'Brien, a professor of strategic studies at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
9 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump signs three executive orders targeting ‘woke' AI models
Donald Trump on Wednesday signed a trio of executive orders that he vowed would turn the United States into an 'AI export powerhouse', including a directive targeting what the White House described as 'woke' artificial intelligence models. The anti-woke order is part of the administration's broader anti-diversity campaign that has also targeted federal agencies, academic institutions and the military. 'The American people do not want woke Marxist lunacy in the AI models, and neither do other countries,' Trump said during remarks at an AI summit in Washington on Wednesday. Trump also signed orders aimed at expediting federal permitting for datacentre infrastructure and promoting the export of American AI models. The executive actions coincide with the Trump administration's release of a broader, 24-page 'AI action plan' that seeks to expand the use of AI in the federal government as well as position the US as the global leader in artificial intelligence. 'Winning this competition will be a test of our capacities unlike anything since the dawn of the space age,' Trump told an audience of AI industry leaders, adding: 'We need US technology companies to be all-in for America. We want you to put America first.' The metrics of what make an AI model politically biased are extremely contentious and open to interpretation, however, and therefore may allow the administration to use the order to target companies at its own discretion. The action plan, titled 'Winning the Race', is a long-promised document that was announced shortly after Trump took office and repealed a Biden administration order on AI that mandated some safeguards and standards on the technology. It outlines the White House's vision for governing artificial intelligence in the US, vowing to speed up the development of the fast-growing technology by removing 'red tape and onerous regulation'. During his remarks, Trump also proposed a more nominal change. 'I can't stand it,' he said, referring to the use of the word 'artificial'. 'I don't even like the name, you know? I don't like anything that's artificial. So could we straighten that out, please? We should change the name. I actually mean that.' 'It's not artificial. It's genius,' he added. A second order Trump signed on Wednesday calls for deregulating AI development, increasing the building of datacentres and removing environmental protections that could hamper their construction. Datacentres that house the servers for AI models require immense amounts of water and energy to function, as well as produce greenhouse gas emissions. Environmental groups have warned about harmful increases to air and noise pollution as tech companies build more facilities, while a number of local communities have pushed back against their construction. In addition to easing permitting laws and emphasizing the need for more energy infrastructure, both measures that tech companies have lobbied for, Trump's order also frames the AI race as a contest for geopolitical dominance. China has invested billions into the manufacturing of AI chips and datacentres to become a competitor in the industry, while Chinese companies such as Deepseek have released AI models that rival Silicon Valley's output. While Trump's plan seeks to address fears of China as an AI superpower, the Trump administration's move against 'woke' AI echoes longstanding conservative grievances against tech companies, which Republicans have accused of possessing liberal biases and suppressing rightwing ideology. As generative AI has become more prominent in recent years, that criticism has shifted from concerns over internet search results or anti-misinformation policies into anger against AI chatbots and image generators. Sign up to TechScape A weekly dive in to how technology is shaping our lives after newsletter promotion One of the biggest critics of perceived liberal bias in AI is Elon Musk, who has vowed to make his xAI company and its Grok chatbot 'anti-woke'. Although Musk and Donald Trump are still locked in a feud after their public falling out last month, Musk may stand to benefit from Trump's order given his emphasis on controlling AI's political outputs. Musk has consistently criticized AI models, including his own, for failing to generate what he sees as sufficiently conservative views. He has claimed that xAI has reworked Grok to eliminate liberal bias, and the chatbot has occasionally posted white supremacist and antisemitic content. In May, Grok affirmed white supremacist conspiracies that a 'white genocide' was taking place in South Africa and said it was 'instructed by my creators' to do so. Earlier this month, Grok also posted pro-Nazi ideology and rape fantasies while identifying itself as 'MechaHitler' until the company was forced to intervene. Despite Grok's promotion of Nazism, xAI was among several AI companies that the Department of Defense awarded with up to $200m contracts this month to develop tools for the government. OpenAI, Anthropic and Google, all of which have their own proprietary AI models, were the other recipients. Conservatives have singled out incidents such as Google's Gemini image generator inaccurately producing racially diverse depictions of historical figures such as German second world war soldiers as proof of liberal bias. AI experts have meanwhile long warned about problems of racial and gender bias in the creation of artificial intelligence models, which are trained on content such as social media posts, news articles and other forms of media that may contain stereotypes or discriminatory material that gets incorporated into these tools. Researchers have found that these biases have persisted despite advancements in AI, with models often replicating existing social prejudices in their outputs. Conflict over biases in AI have also led to turmoil in the industry. In 2020, the co-lead of Google's 'ethical AI' team Timnit Gebru said she was fired after she expressed concerns of biases being built into the company's AI models and a broader lack of diversity efforts at the company. Google said she resigned.
The Guardian
9 minutes ago
- The Guardian
North Korea's military is being transformed on the battlefields of Ukraine – so why is Seoul silent?
When North Korea fired multiple ballistic missiles from its eastern coast in May, South Korea's response was swift. Within hours, Seoul joined Washington and Tokyo in condemning the launch as a 'serious threat' to regional peace and security. But just weeks earlier, when a North Korean KN-23 missile – designed to strike South Korean targets – hit a residential building in Kyiv, killing 12 civilians, Seoul said nothing. That silence fits a broader pattern. There was no response when Russia reportedly deployed a surface-to-air missile system to protect Pyongyang, nor when Ukrainian intelligence revealed that Russian instructors were training North Korean drone pilots on home soil, even as Kim Jong-un voiced 'unconditional support' for Moscow's war. Relations between the North and South, technically still at war, remain tense and the muted response has raised questions from analysts over whether Seoul fully grasps the consequences of what many see as North Korea's most significant military transformation in decades – one shaped in real warfare, on the battlefields of Ukraine. 'We definitely should be alarmed,' says Chun In-bum, a former South Korean special forces commander. 'But it's just the nature of people to avoid catastrophe or be indifferent to the terrors of reality.' According to Ukraine's military intelligence agency, North Korea supplies 40% of all munitions used by Russia in its war against Kyiv. It has dramatically increased arms production at home, with Moscow paying Pyongyang directly. In autumn last year, Pyongyang dispatched an estimated 12,000 troops to fight in Russia's Kursk region. That deployment has since expanded significantly. An additional 6,000 soldiers are now joined by 1,000 military engineers, hundreds of railway engineers, bridge-building specialists, logistics personnel, electricians, military police, and even interpreters, focused largely on rebuilding the battle-scarred Kursk region, according to Ukrainian officials. This military partnership with Moscow has been invaluable for Kim Jong-un's regime, Maj Gen Vadym Skibitskyi, deputy head of Ukraine's military intelligence agency, the HUR, told the Guardian. 'North Korea's armed forces got new ammunition [from Russia]. Its soldiers gained experience of modern conflict. No other army in the region – Japan, South Korea and other countries – [has] participated in a modern war between two huge regular armies.' The ideological commitment of their forces became clear when Ukraine captured two wounded North Korean prisoners in January. 'We were shocked by them. They were bio-robots. They tried to kill themselves by biting their own veins,' Skibitskyi says. When one was asked if he wanted to return home, he replied: 'Yes, because I will be treated like a hero. I fought in a modern war.' North Korean troops are learning about combined arms warfare and the operation of strike and reconnaissance drones, electronic warfare systems, and other technologies previously unfamiliar to them. Moscow has transferred advanced weaponry and has helped upgrade the accuracy of North Korea's KN-23 ballistic missiles, which have since targeted Ukrainian urban centres, including Kharkiv. In June, the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, issued a pointed warning identifying South Korea directly: 'This must be addressed now, not when thousands of upgraded Shahed drones and ballistic missiles begin to threaten Seoul and Tokyo.' However, a mix of strategic, economic and political factors are discouraging more visible action from South Korea, says Dr Yang Uk, a defence expert at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies in Seoul. Acknowledging North Korea's military experience as a direct threat to Seoul would create pressure for a more robust domestic response, including potential weapons transfers to Ukraine that remain deeply unpopular in South Korea. 'Defence officials are particularly wary after December's events,' Yang said, referring to the failed declaration of martial law by South Korean's then president, Yoon Suk Yeol. 'They're really afraid of political attack and prefer to stay unseen by the public and press.' Yang warns that Russia is working to integrate North Korea into its long-term defence supply chain – a partnership that could reshape Asia's military balance long after the war ends. Some analysts see Seoul's silence as an extension of its longstanding 'strategic ambiguity': a reluctance to engage in foreign conflicts or unnecessarily alienate key powers, particularly those that might retain influence over Pyongyang. Economic factors weigh heavily too. Prewar, Russia was one of South Korea's top trading partners. Amid Donald Trump's tariff threats, the new Lee Jae Myung government's focus on economic recovery and 'pragmatic diplomacy' leaves little appetite for confrontation. Domestic politics also play a role. Lee's Democratic party supports engagement with the North, reflecting how South Korea's left-right divide centres more on North Korea policy than on western progressive values. Voices on the left argue South Korea owes Ukraine nothing. Some of Seoul's inertia may be bureaucratic. Chun points to procurement and planning processes that can take years, even as threats evolve within months. 'We are dealing with a level 10 super Godzilla,' he said. 'But the bureaucracy only sees a tiger.' North Koreans are already employing what they have learned in battle, he warns. 'This should be a real wake-up call.' Skibitskyi echoes that concern, suggesting South Korea's military doctrine is outdated and modelled on a pre-drone era. When asked by the Guardian whether it viewed North Korea's deployments and combat experience in Ukraine as a security concern, South Korea's defence ministry avoided addressing the implications directly. 'The participation of North Korean military personnel in the war in Ukraine constitutes a flagrant violation of the UN charter and relevant UN security council resolutions,' a spokesperson said. 'The Republic of Korea strongly condemns such inhumane and unlawful acts in concert with the international community.' Whether Seoul's cautious approach reflects calculated long-term strategy or institutional paralysis remains unclear. But for Chun, the warning signs are impossible to ignore. 'This is like a speeding train coming towards you,' he said. 'You better move aside or start making preparations – while you still have time.'
The Guardian
9 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Labor lifts ban on US beef, saying new measures ‘effectively' manage biosecurity risks
Labor will lift restrictions on imports of US beef, easing tensions with the Trump administration as the federal government seeks relief from punishing US tariffs on steel and aluminium. The government confirmed on Thursday morning that the Department of Agriculture would allow the imports into Australia, saying the US now 'effectively' manages biosecurity risks in beef production. A ban on beef from cows raised and slaughtered in the US was lifted in 2019 but restrictions remained on beef from cattle raised in Canada and Mexico but slaughtered in the US. Changes to make protections more robust introduced in late 2024 and early 2025 allow for meat from those countries to be traced through supply chains to their source farm. The concession is expected to help pave the way for the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, to argue the case to Donald Trump that Australia should be given exemptions from the US's 50% tariff on steel and aluminium, and a looming 200% tariff planned for pharmaceuticals. Sign up: AU Breaking News email The US president specifically cited Australia's restrictions on beef imports when he announced his 'Liberation Day' tariff regime. Australia faces a 10% baseline tariff on all products exported to the US. During the federal election campaign, Albanese said Australia would not change or compromise any biosecurity rules, 'full stop, exclamation mark'. Despite the comments, a concession on beef had been expected from Australia. The agriculture, fisheries and forestry minister, Julie Collins, said the government wanted fair and open trade, which significantly benefited the cattle industry. 'The US beef imports review has undergone a rigorous science and risk-based assessment over the past decade,' she said. 'The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry is satisfied the strengthened control measures put in place by the US effectively manage biosecurity risks. 'Australia stands for open and fair trade – our cattle industry has significantly benefited from this.' The new arrangements are due to come into place from 28 July, with Australian importers able to apply for permits to handle fresh beef products from the US, the largest buyer of Australian beef, ahead of China, in a $14bn market. The shadow finance minister, James Paterson, called for Albanese to explain the new arrangements. He said farmers needed reassurance there would be no risk to their businesses. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'The prime minister himself has said that we couldn't relax the restrictions on the importation of US beef because of serious biosecurity concerns,' Paterson told Sky News. 'So if the government has found some way of dealing with that issue, protecting our domestic agricultural industry from the introduction of foreign diseases and pests, then they should say so.' The Nationals frontbencher Bridget McKenzie warned against sacrificing farmers for 'deficiencies' in the government's handling of the US alliance. 'We need a biosecurity arrangement that's based on science,' she told Channel Nine. 'We would be concerned around, particularly the protocols on the slaughtering of beef out of Canada and Mexico, because we do not want to bring those diseases into our country and our farmers and our industry shouldn't be sacrificed because the PM can't get his act together on this relationship.' McKenzie said Nationals MPs 'will be very concerned if our $11bn beef export industry is sacrificed to actually make up for the deficiencies in the Anthony Albanese-United States diplomatic relationship.'
