‘A great step forward': Trump shortens Russian ceasefire deadline
'A ceasefire deadline, it's a hopeful sign, but history tells us these timelines, they often slip,' Ms Tate told Sky News host Chris Kenny.
'Putin is a very stubborn leader, he's not going to want Trump to look like the big master negotiator with all the power … but it's a great step forward.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
26 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
'Wake up call': Securty expert says Australians must take security more seriously following ASIO boss' espionage warning
Strategic Analysis Australia founder and Director Peter Jennings told Sky News host Steve Price that comments made by the boss of ASIO should be a wake-up call to all Australians on the threat foreign espionage poses. ASIO chief Mike Burgess at a conference in Adelaide revealed foreign espionage was costing the Australian economy $12.5 billion a year as he unveiled the inaugural cost of espionage report. Reacting on Sky News on Friday, Mr Jennings told host Steve Price that it was not surprising. 'This is industrial level espionage and intellectual property theft," he said. 'And of course it's being directed against Australia because we're a high technology country with very significant alliance relations with the United States and other developed economies, and it will be happening all the time.' Mr Jennings said that Australia needed to be taking steps to protect its military and economy from people who were looking to take advantage of the situation, adding that businesses needed to be aware of the risks they are facing. 'Mike Burgess touches on this in his speech as well, how naive Australians are to imagine that it couldn't possibly happen here or it wouldn't happen to my business,' he said. 'And Mike actually quotes Australian officials saying, oh, well, no one would be interested in going after my information. This is industrial level espionage and intellectual property theft' Mr Burgess on Thursday said "Many entities do not know their secrets have been stolen, or do not realise they've been stolen by espionage, or do not report the theft.' He also said that there were many countries that were committing this espionage. 'The obvious candidates are very active – I've previously named China, Russia and Iran – but many other countries are also targeting anyone and anything that could give them a strategic or tactical advantage, including sensitive but unclassified information.' Mr Burgess also said that he could not understand why some people were mentioning on social media that they carried a security clearance. "On just one professional networking site, the profiles of more than 35,000 Australians indicate they have access to sensitive and potentially classified information. Around 7,000 reference their work in the defence sector, including the specific project they are working on, the team they are working in, and the critical technologies they are working with," he said. "Close to 400 explicitly say they work on AUKUS, and the figure rises above 2,000 if you include broader references to 'submarines' and 'nuclear'.
Perth Now
26 minutes ago
- Perth Now
Trump orders nuclear submarines moved near Russia
US President Donald Trump said he had ordered two nuclear submarines to be positioned in regions near Russia in response to threats from former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. "I have ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that," Trump said in a social media post on Friday that called Medvedev's statements highly provocative. "Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances." Trump and Medvedev, who is deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council, traded taunts in recent days after Trump on Tuesday said Russia had "10 days from today" to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine or be hit, along with its oil buyers, with tariffs. Trump has expressed mounting frustration with Putin, accusing him of "bullshit" and describing Russia's latest attacks on Ukraine as "disgusting" Moscow, which has set out its own terms for peace in Ukraine, has shown no sign that it will comply with Trump's deadline. Medvedev on Monday accused Trump of engaging in a "game of ultimatums" and reminded him that Russia possessed Soviet-era nuclear strike capabilities of last resort after Trump told Medvedev to "watch his words." Medvedev has emerged as one of the Kremlin's most outspoken anti-Western hawks since Russia sent tens of thousands of troops into Ukraine in 2022. Kremlin critics deride him as an irresponsible loose cannon, though some Western diplomats say his statements illustrate the thinking in senior Kremlin policy-making circles. Earlier on Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Moscow hoped for more peace talks with Ukraine but that the momentum of the war was in its favour, signalling no shift in his stance despite Washington's threats.. Putin, without referring to the Trump deadline, said three sessions of peace talks with Ukraine had yielded some positive results, and Russia was expecting negotiations to continue. "As for any disappointments on the part of anyone, all disappointments arise from inflated expectations. This is a well-known general rule," he said. "But in order to approach the issue peacefully, it is necessary to conduct detailed conversations. And not in public, but this must be done calmly, in the quiet of the negotiation process." He said Russian troops were attacking Ukraine along the entire front line and that the momentum was in their favour, citing the announcement by his Defence Ministry on Thursday that Moscow's forces had captured the Ukrainian town of Chasiv Yar after a 16-month battle. Ukraine denied that Chasiv Yar is under full Russian control. Ukraine for months has been urging an immediate ceasefire but Russia says it wants a final and durable settlement, not a pause. Since the peace talks began in Istanbul in May, it has conducted some of its heaviest air strikes of the war, especially on the capital Kyiv. The Ukrainian government has said the Russian negotiators do not have the mandate to take significant decisions and President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has called on Putin to meet him for talks. "We understand who makes the decisions in Russia and who must end this war. The whole world understands this too," Zelenskiy said on Friday on X, reiterating his call for direct talks between him and Putin. "The United States has proposed this. Ukraine has supported it. What is needed is Russia's readiness." Russia says a leaders' meeting could only take place to set the seal on agreements reached by negotiators. Ukraine and its European allies have frequently said they do not believe Putin is really interested in peace and have accused him of stalling, which the Kremlin denies.
ABC News
26 minutes ago
- ABC News
Trump's new tariffs reveal somewhat vindictive and irrational strategy
Myanmar, Laos, Serbia and Syria. They seem unlikely targets for some of the most aggressive moves in Donald Trump's war on the global trading system. Yet these small and troubled nations are among those facing the highest tariffs from the United States in the wake of its president's slew of August 1 trade announcements. Myanmar, which mostly exports clothing to the US, and Laos, which predominantly exports electronics equipment, now face 40 per cent tariffs on the goods they sell to America, while Serbia will be hit with a 35 per cent tariff and Syria 41 per cent. None of these countries have been notably the subject of the same public Trumpian wrath as, say, Canada (35 per cent) and Brazil (50 per cent) since "Liberation Day" on April 2. And the country which is arguably the biggest target or threat to the US in terms of world trade — China — was not mentioned at all but will be engaged with in further negotiations. Having said that, there is still a 40 per cent on goods regarded as being "trans-shipped" to avoid higher tariffs (for which read "trans-shipped from China"). And the tough treatment on Friday of South-East Asian nations which are manufacturing hubs for China must be seen as an indirect assault on the regional economic superpower. In Australia, the focus on Trump's tariff announcements on Friday (AEST) was of course primarily on the "relatively" good news that we were still only facing a 10 per cent tariff, when the spectre of a 15 or 25 per cent generic rate had been mentioned by the US president in the days leading up to the announcement. The outcome somewhat took the wind out of the sails of those who have been criticising the prime minister for not getting to the White House, or into any meeting with Trump, and instead boosted the argument that there was little to be lost from staying out of his uniquely coiffed hair. Australia will enjoy the 10 per cent tariff rate being applied to those countries that buy more goods from the US than they export to America: that is, that run a trade surplus with one of the world's biggest economies. The new tariff regime starts at 10 per cent, based on trade balance, lifts to a 15 per cent rate for countries that only have a small deficit, while those with big deficits, that haven't negotiated, or that have otherwise incurred the ire of the president face this much wider and more unpredictable range of outcomes. It's worth pausing for a moment of silence to mark the momentous shift in global affairs that the Friday announcement confirms: the shift not just from a free trade ambition to a protectionist one by the United States, but a shift to a system of fairly arbitrary, vindictive and sometimes irrational decisions. Beyond that, though, the patterns in the trade deals that have been done to date — or perhaps more appropriately the lack of patterns and rigour — raise a range of other questions about their impact, and the extent to which they appear in some cases to be little more than standover tactics of lesser or greater actual import. Take the deals struck with Japan and the European Union last month. Both exemplified some striking features of the "deals" being done. In both cases, the parties documented very different understandings of the deals they thought they had done. There were also glaring holes in the deals in terms of major sectors about which there was only a conspicuous silence. For example, the EU deal was silent on wine and spirits. Most of the deals have yet to be formalised or legislated. Finally, the US has been claiming in almost all of the deals that it struck prior to August 1 that they involved massive commitments of investment in the US by the trade partners involved. For example, in Japan's case, the White House announced that Japan would create a $US550 billion fund to invest in the US, with Trump making the investment decisions and the US government receiving 90 per cent of the profits. It seemed this astonishing deal was news to Japanese negotiators who, the New York Times reported, had already made an offer (which in itself seemed extraordinary): to create a $US400 billion investment fund with half the profits going to the US government. The US president subsequently referred to the deal that he announced as a "signing bonus", which underpinned Japan "only" facing a 15 per cent tariff impost, even as doubts were aired about whether the investment would ever materialise. The NYT reported that Japan's chief trade negotiator, Ryosei Akazawa told Tokyo that the deal was that Japan would offer a blend of investment, loans and loan guarantees, totalling up to $550 billion, with profits to be allocated based on each side's committed risk and financial contribution. There have been similar scenes unfolding over possible investments from the European Union and South Korea. Equally unsettling has been the increasingly blatant intrusion of non-trade factors into the tariff decisions announced by the White House. Brazil is facing 50 per cent tariffs because Trump doesn't like the way former president, strongman and Trump ally Jair Bolsonaro is being treated by the Brazilian judicial system, where he is facing up to 40 years in prison for allegedly plotting a coup to stay in power after losing the 2022 election. By agreeing this week to a Trump demand for a ceasefire, Thailand and Cambodia appear to have ended up with lower 19 per cent tariffs they had originally been proposed. Canada appeared to be facing a more punitive tariff regime than Mexico at 35 per cent — which Trump said was due to Prime Minister Mark Carney signalling Canada would recognise statehood for Palestine. But it turns out the higher tariff rate will not apply to goods covered by the United States-Mexico-Canada trade agreement. That covers an estimated 94 per cent of Canada's exports to the US. The tariff decisions will have a very different impact to those suggested by the headline numbers in other countries too. For example, Germany may only face a 15 per cent tariff as part of the EU deal but is particularly exposed through its big automotive exports to the US. Another shock was the 25 per cent rate applied to India. This caused immediate political blowback for Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi who claims "bestie" status with the US president but who immediately faced intense criticism at home that this elevated position had not saved India from a punitive tariff rate. What happened in India is just one of the examples of the political shock waves caused around the globe by Trump's moves, in addition to any economic impact they may have. There is considerable concern in Europe, for example, about how European Union member nations react to its deal. The federated nature of the EU structure lends itself to a lot more public debate about a deal not directly negotiated by national leaders. The concern among European political analysts this week is that the deal will play into the hands of far-right and nationalist groups in fuelling resentment against both the EU and sitting governments. It will take countries around the world some time to see how these domestic pressures play out. And then there's the question of how such a deliberately uneven playing field affects their relative competitiveness to each other, even when direct trade with the US is left out of the calculations. It feels like a certain resignation has crept into global trade discussions in the past few months. It is driven as much by a trade-off between uncertainty and certainty as specific tariff numbers. If there is one thing we seem to know about Donald Trump, it is that all that uncertainty is unlikely to end any time soon. Laura Tingle is the ABC's Global Affairs Editor.
