Russia and Ukraine agree new POW swaps but no progress on ceasefire talks
'We have progress on the humanitarian track, with no progress on a cessation of hostilities,' Ukraine's chief delegate, Rustem Umerov, said after talks that lasted just 40 minutes.
He said Ukraine had proposed a meeting before the end of August between Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. He added: 'By agreeing to this proposal, Russia can clearly demonstrate its constructive approach.'
Russia's chief delegate Vladimir Medinsky said the point of a leaders' meeting should be to sign an agreement, not to 'discuss everything from scratch'.
He renewed Moscow's call for a series of short ceasefires of 24-48 hours to enable the retrieval of bodies. Ukraine says it wants an immediate and much longer ceasefire.
The talks took place just over a week after the US president, Donald Trump, threatened heavy new sanctions on Russia and countries that buy its exports unless a peace deal was reached within 50 days.
There was no sign of any progress towards that goal, although both sides said there was discussion of further humanitarian exchanges following a series of prisoner swaps, the latest of which took place on Wednesday.
Medinsky said the negotiators agreed to exchange at least 1,200 more prisoners of war from each side, and Russia had offered to hand over another 3,000 Ukrainian bodies.
He said Moscow was working through a list of 339 names of Ukrainian children that Kyiv accuses it of abducting. Russia denies that charge and says it has offered protection to children separated from their parents during the war.
'Some of the children have already been returned back to Ukraine. Work is under way on the rest. If their legal parents, close relatives, representatives are found, these children will immediately return home,' said Medinsky.
Umerov said Kyiv was expecting 'further progress' on POWs, adding: 'We continue to insist on the release of civilians, including children.' Ukrainian authorities say at least 19,000 children have been forcibly deported.
Before the talks, the Kremlin had played down expectations, describing the two sides' positions as diametrically opposed and saying no one should expect miracles.
At 40 minutes, the meeting was even shorter than the two sides' previous encounters on 16 May and 2 June, which lasted a combined total of under three hours.
Oleksandr Bevz, a member of the Ukrainian delegation, said Kyiv had proposed a Putin-Zelenskyy meeting in August because that would fall within the deadline set by Trump for a deal.
Putin turned down a previous challenge from Ukraine's president to meet in person and has said he does not see him as a legitimate leader because Ukraine, which is under martial law, did not hold new elections when Zelenskyy's five-year mandate expired last year.
Trump has patched up relations with Zelenskyy after a public row with him at the White House in February, and has lately expressed growing frustration with Putin.
Three sources close to the Kremlin told Reuters last week that Putin, unfazed by Trump's ultimatum, would keep fighting in Ukraine until the west engaged on his terms for peace, and that his territorial demands may widen as Russian forces advance.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
28 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Online hate and rising vitriol: deep divisions amid shaky peace between Thailand and Cambodia
As a Cambodian living in Thailand, 31-year-old Da, has kept her children home from school this week in fear they might face abuse. 'One of my friends went to the market yesterday to buy durian and the seller told her that she hated Cambodians,' she says, of rising tensions between the neighbouring countries. Days after Thailand and Cambodia announced a ceasefire after a deadly five-day conflict, relations remain dangerously frayed, and peace tenuous. Since the truce both sides have accused each other of violating it, while online, public distrust is being fuelled by a bitter confluence of disinformation, threats and nationalism. Dowsawan Vanthong, 50, who is volunteering at a temple in Surin, northeastern Thailand, that is hosting evacuated people, worries that even if calm prevails and the disputed border eventually reopens, relations won't be the same. 'For me, I can make a distinction and separate normal Cambodians [from the government or military]… But I'm not sure if everyone could do this, especially people in the areas that were most affected,' she says. At least 43 people were killed on either side of the border in the clashes, the worst to grip the two nations in more than a decade. In normal times, residents would regularly cross the 800km border that separates the two countries, going back and forth for trade and work, school or healthcare. Before the conflict started, more than 520,000 Cambodians worked across Thailand, often in low-paid jobs in agriculture, construction, fishing and manufacturing. But the border is now almost entirely shut, though Cambodians living in Thailand can return home. Thousands have queued up to do so, worried about rising vitriol in Thailand. Da, who works as a cleaner and asked for her real name not to be published due to the tensions, says she has to stay in Thailand for economic reasons and to pay off debts, but she feels still feels uneasy about the decision. 'The kids saw on social media that a lot of Cambodians are going back home, so they wanted to as well,' she says. Social media commentaries have become increasingly incendiary and, at times, violent. In a viral TikTok clip, a Thai man appears to instruct young Cambodians to tell Hun Sen - the former Cambodian leader who remains extremely powerful – not to attack Thai people. When one of the group smiles, the man slaps him on camera. Hun Sen later shared the video on his Facebook page, warning Cambodians in Thailand to stay safe. Another video, shared widely online, apparently shows a group of Thai people beating up a man who is reportedly a Cambodian national. When two Cambodian women posted videos stamping on the Thai flag, part of a new social media trend, people demanded their deportation. Thai authorities have urged young people and social media influencers against inciting violence, but the bitterness has continued to be shared online. The South-east Asian neighbours have a long history of rivalry, especially arguments over the roots of their shared heritage. In 2003, when false rumours that a Thai soap opera actor had suggested Angkor Wat, a Unesco world heritage site, belonged to Thailand, riots erupted in Phnom Penh, and the Thai embassy set on fire. Diplomatic rows and social media storms have broken out periodically since. Two years ago, Thailand boycotted a kickboxing event at the South-East Asian Games in Cambodia after the discipline was called Kun Khmer rather than Thailand's name for the sport, Muay Thai. Even well-meaning posts can spiral into online wars. The UK ambassador to Cambodia Dominic Williams inadvertently created a social media furore in 2023 when he posted a picture of some sweet treats on social media, captioned 'Khmer dessert'. Thai people responded with a flood of angry comments claiming the snacks were in fact Thai. Social media, far more prevalent than the last time the border dispute erupted in 2008 and 2011, has inflamed tensions. Some have pushed back. A major hospital in Ubon Ratchathani province was forced to backtrack after it suspended services for new Cambodian patients and announced it would be strictly 'zoning' existing Cambodian patients due to the recent fighting. Critics pointed out the policy was discriminatory. But online others supported the hospital. 'Shall we help them get better so they can shoot at us again?' wrote one commentator. The public mood in Thailand – and pressure for Thai authorities to seek responsibility for Cambodian attacks on Thai civilians – could threaten the fragile ceasefire. Ken Lohatepanont, a political analyst in Thailand, says the ceasefire will probably hold for now, but the prospects in the medium and long term are less clear. 'Thailand and Cambodia are still going to have a lot of border issues to resolve, because none of the core points of contention have actually been discussed so far,' he said. Both Thailand and Cambodia still insist on usingdifferent maps to demarcate the border. Da, who lives far from the border, in Rayong province, is mostly staying at home, going out only to buy food and work. 'In my opinion, both sides have done things wrong – they need to find a way to speak peacefully,' she says. 'I want the situation to go back to normal, to open the border gates so that Thai and Cambodian people can come together again.'
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Putin is more likely to start a nuclear war than many are prepared to admit
We've grown used to blood-curdling nuclear threats from Russia's leadership – but this time, Donald Trump has very publicly reacted to them by moving two nuclear-armed submarines closer to Russia. Russia has primarily used nuclear sabre-rattling as part of its information warfare to scare the West. Sadly, it has delivered results. Western states moved cautiously after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, in part because of the Kremlin's nuclear threats. Trump's submarine move is a direct response to social media posts by Dmitry Medvedev, the former Russian president. Many Russians believe that Medvedev is a heavy drinker, and some have suggested that some of his posts were written while drunk. His role within the Russian regime hierarchy is now as a snarling attack dog, hurling blood-curdling threats at the Kremlin's enemies. It is good that Trump is beginning to see through the Russian regime. He is clearly angry that his policy of appeasing the Kremlin hasn't worked – despite his extraordinary tactic of offering, over the heads of the Ukrainians, a peace deal that would have allowed Vladimir Putin to pay virtually no price for the appalling actions of his armies. It is perhaps not so good that Trump has made it clear that he is reacting directly to Medvedev's nuclear bluster. The Russian regime now knows that it is possible to goad the president into real-world actions if they can upset him enough online. They have spent years studying the president and their understanding of human motivation is deeply researched. There is a risk that nuclear policy – which historically has been agonised over by experts due to its extraordinary importance and the terrible risks of getting it wrong – is now part of high stakes 'trash talking' on social media. While the risk that Putin will order the use of nuclear weapons is small, it is not non-existent. Ever since the Russian leader began his political and military conflict with Ukraine back in 2005 to force it into eventual unification with Russia, he has escalated crises when he has failed to achieve his aims. The Russian leader did so in 2014 with the partial invasion of eastern Ukraine, and then in 2022 with the full invasion. Will he escalate again with nuclear weapons? There is a much-speculated-on secret nuclear theory in Russia called 'escalate to de-escalate', in which nuclear weapons are used to regain control of a conflict, forcing an enemy to surrender, or face annihilation. Confidential Russian papers have suggested that a first stage might involve a 'demonstration strike', perhaps a one-off strike on water. The second would be the targeting of a low-population site on land, potentially an abandoned town or city. The third would be a 'deterrence-demonstration' on a potential military target such as a transport hub. From there, nuclear use would escalate to multiple tactical nuclear strikes across a theatre of operations. Putin has already weakened the grounds for using nuclear weapons. Russia's 2014 Military Doctrine gives two main grounds for using nuclear weapons: either in response to their use by others or when the existence of the Russian Federation is threatened. A more recent 2020 document allowed for a nuclear strike if Russia is facing an imminent nuclear attack (so pre-empting a pre-emptive strike), or if Russia would lose control of its arsenal via, for example, multiple, conventional precision strikes. Both are inherently dangerous. Twice in the Cold War, junior officers of the then-Soviet Union refused to react when technology or their superiors told them to prepare nuclear weapons. Their brave actions saved the world from a potentially catastrophic escalation. Last year, Putin lowered Russia's nuclear weapon threshold again, decreeing that an attack on Russia with conventional missile systems might justify a nuclear response, although Ukraine's infamous Spider's Web attack on his bomber fleet this June did not result in a nuclear response. Ukrainians have long argued that Russia's threats are a bluff to hide a failing army weighed down by a million casualties. What can be done? There are no good options, and this crisis may get more dangerous yet. Putin's regime is bent on war – there is no simpler way to say it. He doesn't want peace. I have been in Kyiv this week discussing my book on Russia's new form of warfare and the city is under regular and, on occasions, prolonged missile attack. Putin has strung Trump along. The best bet for the West is for Ukraine – with allied support, especially in air defence to protect its resilient but suffering citizens – to fight Russia to a standstill and (hopefully) force a snarling Russian leader to end the war. Most of the alternatives don't bear thinking about.
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
Ukraine protects Europe from Kremlin aggression, Russian dissident Yashin says
BELGRADE, Aug 1 (Reuters) - Europe must start seeing Ukraine as a European country, and the Ukrainian military as a European army, Ilya Yashin, a prominent Russian opposition activist, said in Belgrade on Friday. "The Ukrainian army is not only protecting Ukraine, it is protecting Europe from Russian aggression," he told hundreds of Russians who now live in Serbia. Yashin was imprisoned in 2022 for criticising Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine and released last year, along with 15 other prisoners in Russian and Belarusian jails. His speech at a Belgrade concert hall was the first such public appearance of a high-profile Russian dissident in Serbia since 2022. Between February 2022 and 2024, more than 74,000 Russians registered for temporary residence in Serbia, according to the latest Interior Ministry data, many fleeing conscription or persecution for their opposition to President Vladimir Putin. "This is a meeting with a true hero," said Petr Nikitin, a Belgrade-based Russian and an anti-war activist who came to hear Yashin. Serbia's relations with Moscow soured this year after Russia's SVR spy agency complained about sales of ammunition to Ukraine, and Yashin's visit would likely further complicate their ties. The Russian embassy to Serbia could not be immediately reached for comment. Serbia, which aspires to join the European Union, balances its policies between its historical ties to Russia and the West. Belgrade has repeatedly condemned the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but has refused to join Western sanctions against Moscow. In May, President Aleksandar Vucic travelled to Moscow to meet with Putin and attend a parade marking the 80th anniversary of the victory in World War Two. But Belgrade also recognises Ukraine in its entirety, including territories held by Russia. In June, Vucic visited Ukraine for the first time. Russia remains Serbia's biggest gas supplier, and the Balkan country's only oil refinery is majority-owned by Gazprom ( opens new tab and Gazprom Neft .
