Trump, Zelenskyy to discuss arms delivery pause on Friday: Report
Donald Trump
and Ukrainian President
Volodymyr Zelenskyy
are expected to discuss the abrupt halt in some key
US weapons
deliveries to
Kyiv
in a call on Friday, the Financial Times reported on Thursday.
Zelenskyy would also raise potential future arms sales, the newspaper said, citing people familiar with the planning.
The timing of the call could change, the newspaper added.
The White House did not immediately respond to a Reuters' request for comment.
The US has paused some shipments of critical weapons to Ukraine due to low stockpiles. That decision led to Ukraine calling in the acting US envoy to Kyiv on Wednesday to underline the importance of military aid from Washington continuing, and caution that the move would weaken Ukraine's ability to defend against intensifying Russian airstrikes and battlefield advances.
Live Events
Details about the supply of military assistance are being clarified at the working level, Zelenskyy said in his daily video address on Wednesday.
The US move led in part to a cut in deliveries of Patriot air defence missiles that Ukraine relies on to destroy fast-moving ballistic missiles.
Economic Times WhatsApp channel
)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
19 minutes ago
- First Post
Can India and the US strike a trade deal without clashing over agriculture?
As India and the US push to finalise a trade pact before Trump's July 9 deadline, agriculture has emerged as the biggest roadblock. With disagreements over GM crops, dairy and ethanol, and concerns over rural livelihoods, both sides are locked in a tense standoff. Can they reach a deal without upsetting India's farmers? read more A farm worker holds rice sapling as he prepares to plant them in a field on the outskirts of Ahmedabad, India, July 22, 2024. File Image/Reuters India and the United States are racing to conclude an interim trade pact ahead of President Donald Trump's July 9 deadline but a long-standing hurdle threatens to block progress — agriculture. Despite nearing consensus on various industrial sectors, disputes around farm goods, including genetically modified crops, dairy imports and ethanol remain reportedly unresolved. The issue is not merely economic for India; it touches upon food security, rural livelihoods, and political sensitivities, all of which have major implications for the country's domestic stability. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Why India's agriculture sector is non-negotiable Though farming and allied activities contribute a relatively modest portion — around 16 per cent — to India's GDP, the sector supports nearly half of the country's population of 1.4 billion. The farming community represents a dominant political constituency and has historically influenced policy decisions through sustained mobilisations. In 2021, the Indian government was compelled to withdraw major agricultural reforms following year-long nationwide protests. This past resistance still casts a shadow over current trade negotiations, as New Delhi remains wary of sparking fresh unrest by opening up its agricultural sector to foreign competition. India's farming structure is notably small-scale. The average size of a farm is just over a hectare, contrasting sharply with American agricultural operations, where the mean farm size exceeds 180 hectares. In India, most farms are manually operated or use outdated techniques passed down over generations, while US agriculture is highly mechanised and supported by advanced technology, including AI-based monitoring systems and large-scale machinery. US agricultural demands vs India's red lines A central point of contention is Washington's push for increased access to the Indian market for a range of American agricultural products. The US seeks to expand exports of various farm commodities — among them genetically modified (GM) corn and soybeans, wheat, poultry, dairy, rice, ethanol, and a variety of processed foods including canned peaches, frozen French fries, chocolates, cookies and citrus fruits. While India has indicated some openness to easing tariffs on selected imports such as dry fruits and apples, it has remained firm on rejecting access to GM grains, US dairy products, and ethanol. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Genetically modified crops form a significant part of US agricultural output. However, India does not currently allow the commercial cultivation of GM food crops due to concerns over ecological balance, food safety and the impact on smallholder farmers. Even as India imports edible oils made from genetically modified crops — such as soy and canola — it restricts GM crop cultivation. The commercial release of GM mustard, for example, remains on hold due to pending legal proceedings, and a previous attempt to introduce GM brinjal was blocked in 2010. Nonetheless, some flexibility is being explored. According to Bloomberg, Indian regulators may consider permitting select GM-derived by-products used in animal feed, such as soybean meal or distillers dried grains from corn-based ethanol production. These items would not directly affect human food chains but would still mark a departure from India's long-standing GM restrictions. Why dairy and ethanol are particularly sensitive India's dairy sector employs more than 80 million individuals, a figure that includes small-scale farmers, cooperatives, and vendors. The industry is largely unorganised and depends on herds that typically contain two to three animals per household. In contrast, US dairy farms operate on a vastly different scale, often managing hundreds of cattle with heavy reliance on mechanisation and feed practices that include animal by-products. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This latter point is a major concern in India, where dietary norms and religious sensitivities significantly influence food preferences. The potential entry of dairy sourced from cows fed with animal remnants has been met with strong resistance from Indian consumers and cooperatives like Amul, which have played a key role in shaping the country's self-reliant dairy ecosystem. Similarly, ethanol is another highly sensitive area. India has made substantial progress under its Ethanol Blended Petrol (EBP) initiative, aiming to reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels by blending petrol with domestically produced ethanol. Most of the ethanol used in India is derived from surplus sugarcane, rice and corn. Allowing the import of US ethanol would not only compromise this strategic energy programme but could also undermine the investments made by Indian distillers and agribusinesses. What each side is willing to concede With the deadline for reciprocal tariffs fast approaching, negotiators from both countries are working to close the deal. Sources indicated that the Indian delegation, led by Special Secretary Rajesh Agarwal, has had to extend its stay in Washington due to ongoing disagreements, particularly over agricultural tariffs. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India has shown willingness to discuss reductions on industrial tariffs and provide access to the US in sectors where the political cost is lower — such as in automobiles, a long-standing American request. It has also pushed for broader access to US markets for Indian exports from labour-intensive sectors including textiles, leather, jewellery, plastics, and chemicals. The interim agreement is seen as a stepping-stone towards increasing bilateral trade volumes, with a shared ambition to double total trade to USD 500 billion by 2030 — a goal reiterated by Trump during Prime Minister Narendra Modi's February visit to the United States. Trump, speaking about the potential deal earlier this week, said: 'I think we are going to have a deal with India. And that is going to be a different kind of a deal. It is going to be a deal where we are able to go in and compete. Right now, India does not accept anybody in. I think India is going to do that, and if they do that, we are going to have a deal for much less tariffs.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Why India is not backing down India's resistance to opening its agricultural market is deeply rooted in structural and strategic realities. The rural economy is vulnerable to global market shocks. Even modest tariff relaxations could disrupt domestic pricing and erode the safety net provided by public procurement and the Minimum Support Price (MSP) system — pillars that protect farmers from price crashes. Many experts argue that liberalising agricultural trade too quickly could expose India's fragmented farming community to the volatility of global commodity markets dominated by large multinational agribusinesses. These companies often benefit from generous subsidies and economies of scale unavailable to Indian farmers. Further complicating the negotiations is the demand from US exporters for greater parity. However, India's current agricultural tariff regime — ranging from zero to 150 per cent — is not exceptional. The US, too, maintains steep tariffs on specific imports, such as tobacco at over 350 per cent. Thus, criticisms of asymmetry in trade practices may not be entirely justified. India's position finds some backing under WTO norms, which allow member nations to protect sensitive sectors for reasons such as food security, rural development, and employment. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Nonetheless, the final decision may come down to political calculus more than legal boundaries. Farmers and labour unions mount pressure Opposition to agricultural liberalisation is growing beyond policy circles. On July 3, leaders of the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (SKM) held a press conference in Hyderabad, reaffirming their call for an all-India strike on July 9. The SKM, in collaboration with trade unions, is staging protests to oppose what it describes as 'anti-farmer, anti-labour, and anti-people' policies. Former Member of Parliament Vadde Sobhanadreeswara Rao voiced strong opposition to including agriculture in any trade agreement with the U.S. He and other SKM leaders also criticised the government's delay in enacting legislation to guarantee MSP as a legal right. The farmers' coalition has called for a full withdrawal of the National Policy Framework for Agricultural Marketing (NPFAM) and warned of further mobilisations if agriculture is compromised in trade talks. A way out? In light of these challenges, a compromise may be possible through selective market access rather than full liberalisation. One such mechanism could involve tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) — a system that allows a limited volume of imports at reduced tariffs, while maintaining higher duties on imports exceeding the quota. This model was recently adopted in the US-UK mini trade pact announced in May, where agriculture was kept out of contentious discussions. India may be open to marginally lowering tariffs on select low-risk items such as almonds, walnuts, apples, raisins, olive oil, spirits and wine — products that pose minimal threat to domestic producers. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Such a calibrated approach could allow both sides to claim victory without triggering adverse political fallout in India. However, the extent of these concessions remains uncertain. A NITI Aayog policy paper has suggested tariff cuts on certain US agricultural products, but it is unclear whether this reflects the official stance of the Indian government or is merely a preliminary recommendation. Agriculture remains the thorniest issue in the India-US trade negotiations. With inputs from agencies
Indian Express
32 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Dalai Lama's succession plan: China warns India against interference after Union Minister Rijiju backs his authority
After the Dalai Lama said that only the Gaden Phodrang Trust, established by him, had the authority to identify his successor, China, in a strong statement, said it hopes India will stop using Tibet issues to interfere in domestic affairs and avoid affecting the development of ties, according to news agency Reuters. The Chinese foreign ministry's statement Friday highlights the rising geopolitical tension over the future of Tibetan leadership. This came after Union Minister Kiren Rijiju on Thursday said: 'No one has the right to interfere or decide who the successor of His Holiness the Dalai Lama will be.' He was speaking ahead of his visit to the Dalai Lama's base in Dharamshala for the religious leader's 90th birthday on Sunday. 'Only he or his institution has the authority to make that decision. His followers believe that deeply. It's important for disciples across the world that he decides his succession,' Rijiju added. To this, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters: 'We hope the Indian side will fully understand the highly sensitive nature of Tibet-related issues, recognise the anti-China separatist nature of the 14th Dalai Lama.' She further urged India to avoid interfering in China's internal affairs 'at the expense of bilateral relations.' Beijing maintain that it has the sole right to approve the Dalai Lama's successor, calling it a legacy of imperial authority. India's support for the Dalai Lama's decision marks a rare public contradiction of that claim. On Wednesday, the Dalai Lama, who fled Tibet in 1959 after a failed uprising against Chinese rule, confirmed that he would reincarnate. He also stated that his successor would be born in the 'free world.' His succession announcement has not dispelled concerns among the Tibetan exile community in Dharamshala, home to more than 20,000 Tibetans and the headquarters of the Tibetan government-in-exile. 'The absence of His Holiness would be a huge setback for the Tibetans,' said Penpa Tsering, president of the government-in-exile. 'The responsibility lies on us as to how we carry forward the legacy of His Holiness.' Tibetans see the Dalai Lama not only as a spiritual leader but also as a symbol of their struggle for cultural preservation and autonomy from Chinese rule. Traditionally, senior monks identify the next Dalai Lama through visions, signs, and spiritual consultations. The current Dalai Lama has hinted he may leave written instructions or even name a successor before his death — a step meant to prevent political interference from Beijing. (With inputs from AP, Reuters)
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
34 minutes ago
- First Post
As Trump emboldens Putin again, Russia hits Ukraine with largest air attack
Days after US President Donald Trump emboldened Vladimir Putin by blocking weapons' supplies to Ukraine, Russia launched the largest aerial attack with 550 missiles and drones. Trump said that no progress was made about ending the war in a phone call with Putin yesterday. read more Flames and smoke billow from buildings during mass Russian drones and missile strikes on the Ukraine's capital Kyiv on July 4, 2025, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine. (Photo: OLEKSII FILIPPOV/AFP) Days after US President Donald Trump emboldened Russia again by stopping the supply of weapons to Ukraine, Russia launched the largest aerial attack of the war so far with 550 missiles and drones. Kyiv's skyline erupted in fireballs and clouds of smoke as Russian projectiles hammered the city. The Russian barrage came hours after Trump spoke to Russian leader Vladimir Putin on phone. Trump said that they 'didn't make any progress' about ending the conflict over the call. However, Putin certainly got the message that he was free to attack Ukraine at will. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The overnight barrage followed a monthslong pattern: Trump first cuts supplies to Ukraine that have already been approved and trashes Ukraine. Then Putin launches massive attacks on Ukraine and gains leverage on the battlefield as a result of Trump depriving Ukraine of even defensive weapons. The Kremlin's readout demonstrated how emboldened Russia stood after getting a shot in the arm from Trump. It said that 'Russia will not back down' unless 'root causes' were eliminated. 'Root causes' is a euphemism for Putin's maximalist demands, such as the recognition of all Ukrainian provinces in their entirety that Russia has annexed and other territories that it controls; the ouster of Volodymyr Zelenskyy as the President of Ukraine and the ouster of his administration; amendment of the Ukrainian constitution to put limits on its military in a Versailles-like treaty, include Russian in the nation's cultural affairs, and rule out its membership of Nato; put limits on foreign military partnerships of Ukraine; etc. The implementation of such terms would mean the end of Ukraine as a sovereign nation. Russia makes most of Trump's decision — again For months, Russia has attacked Ukraine with hundreds of missiles and drones on a near-daily basis and Ukraine has sought to buy US-made air defence systems. Earlier this week, instead of clearing such sales, the Trump administration blocked the supply of air defence systems and other weapons that had already been cleared. Trump trashed Ukraine on Thursday and said 'We've given so many weapons' to Ukraine. Russia was quick to grasp the message and respond by ramping up the aerial campaign. Ukraine said Russia launched 539 drones and 11 ballistic missiles overnight in the largest aerial attack of the war. Earlier this year, when Trump suspended military and intelligence assistance to Ukraine after ambushing Zelenskyy at the White House, Russia had responded with a renewed counter-offensive in Kursk region and driving out Ukrainian forces from there. Ukraine's incursion of Kursk was a significant achievement and its occupation of the region was seen as a critical leverage in negotiations where Kursk could be exchanged in lieu of Russia-occupied Ukrainian territory. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Thanks to Trump, however, Ukraine lost that leverage as Russia retook nearly all of Kursk from Ukraine after making the most of the suspension of intelligence-sharing and military supplies. In the overnight attack, Zelenskyy said that at least 23 people were injured. Russia has largely targeted civilians and critical infrastructure in its escalating attacks. A United Nations (UN) report this month said that Ukrainian civilian casualties in Russian airstrikes rose by 50 per cent between January and June. Trump expected to speak to Zelenskyy today After a call with Russia, Trump is expected to speak to Zelenskyy on Friday. If his past behaviour is any guide, Trump would likely push Zelenskyy to accept Putin's terms and wrap the conflict irrespective of the consequences for his nation. On his part, Zelenskyy would likely call for the resumption of military supplies and reiterate the call for the purchase of Patriot air defence systems. He would also likely press Trump to toughen up on Putin. Even as Trump has expressed dissatisfaction with Putin, he has not done anything to put pressure on him. Instead, he has rewarded him at every step by accepting his terms and punishing Ukraine — the defender. He has neither imposed new sanctions on Russia nor ramp up military supplies to Ukraine as he had threatened in the past. Instead, he has slammed Zelenskyy as a warmonger over request to buy air defence systems. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
