Latest news with #Groupof7
Straits Times
5 hours ago
- Politics
- Straits Times
Can Nato keep Trump on-message about Russia threat?
Since coming back into office on Jan 20, US President Donald Trump has upended the West's approach towards Russia's war on Ukraine by opening the door to closer ties with Moscow. PHOTO: EPA-EFE BRUSSELS - When leaders from Nato's 32 countries gather for a summit in The Hague next week, most want to send a clear message: Russia is the main threat to their alliance. But the loudest voice in the room likely won't be on the same page. Since coming back to office, US President Donald Trump has upended the West's approach towards Russia's war on Ukraine by undercutting Kyiv and opening the door to closer ties with Moscow. While the volatile leader has expressed some frustration with Russia's Vladimir Putin for refusing a ceasefire, he has steered clear of punishing the Kremlin. At a Group of 7 summit this week, Mr Trump made waves by saying the group of industrialised countries should never have expelled Russia. Ahead of the Hague gathering, diplomats at Nato have been wrangling over a five-paragraph summit statement, with many countries pressing for a full-throated assertion of the menace from Moscow. That, they say, will help explain the main thrust of the meeting: an agreement for countries to ramp up defence spending to satisfy Mr Trump's demand for it to reach 5 per cent of GDP. Statement on Russia 'threat' Since the Kremlin launched its 2022 invasion of Ukraine, the alliance has called Russia 'the most significant and direct threat to allies' security and to peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area'. But this time around the United States – backed up by Moscow-friendly Hungary and Slovakia – has been intent on watering that down. Diplomats have been juggling with variants such as referring to 'threats, including Russia' or mentioning 'the long-term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security'. The verbal nuances may seem slight, but they mean a lot to those countries being asked to massively ramp up spending and those on Nato's eastern flank most threatened by the Kremlin. Nato has warned that Russia could be ready to attack an alliance country within five years. 'If we can get Trump to sign off on calling Russia a long-term threat then that would be a good result,' a senior European diplomat told AFP. 'Near threat' As US peace efforts between Russia and Ukraine have stalled, the diplomat said that Washington appeared to have 'moved a centimetre in our direction' on taking a stronger stance on Russia. 'Of course more hawkish countries want to go further – but just getting Trump to agree that would still be fine,' the diplomat said. Part of the US reasoning is that Washington is more worried about the threat China poses worldwide – and that Russia is more a problem just in Europe. 'Russia is the near threat,' said US ambassador to Nato Matthew Whitaker. 'But China is obviously a big challenge for all of us, and we need to be allied and address those threats as well.' Mr Camille Grand of the European Council on Foreign Relations said that beneath the diplomatic fine-tuning, Nato was being confronted by a 'fundamental question'. 'How does the United States view Russia?' he said. 'So far, we haven't really got an answer.' Even if Nato does opt for stronger wording on Moscow, there is always the possibility that Mr Trump could show up in The Hague and directly contradict it. But the debate could come into sharper focus in the months after the summit when the United States could announce a pull-back of forces in Europe as part of a review of its global deployments. Division on Ukraine One area where Washington appears clearly not on board with most other allies is on backing Ukraine. Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky is set to attend on the sidelines of the summit but his involvement is being kept to a minimum to avoid a bust-up with Mr Trump. Diplomats said there should be a reference in the summit statement linking new defence spending to helping Ukraine – but there will be no talk of Kyiv's long-term push to join Nato. 'The US does not see Ukrainian security as essential to European security,' said Mr Kurt Volker, a former US ambassador to Nato. 'Our European allies do, so they feel that if Putin is allowed to prevail in Ukraine, or if Ukraine does not survive as a sovereign, independent state, they are at risk.' AFP Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Sydney Morning Herald
11 hours ago
- Politics
- Sydney Morning Herald
Trump buys himself time, and opens up some new options
In fact, within an hour of the White House release of Trump's statement that 'I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks', Netanyahu signalled that he was likely to use the time to try his own attacks on the deeply buried Fordow nuclear plant. 'I established that we will achieve all of our objectives, all of their nuclear facilities,' he said. 'We have the power to do so.' In fact, American and foreign experts say, the Israelis have been preparing military and covert options for years, examining how they might interrupt the massive electrical supply systems that keep the centrifuges buried in an enrichment hall under a mountain. Even the introduction of a surge or a pulse in that electrical flow could destabilise and destroy the delicate machines as they spin at supersonic speeds, like a top spinning out of control. In recent days, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) concluded that Israel's destruction of the electric plant above another enrichment centre, at Natanz, probably critically damaged the thousands of centrifuges spinning below. The Israelis have considered what it would take to bomb and seal the tunnel entrances into the facility, trapping workers inside and making it all the more difficult to bring near-bomb-grade fuel into the plant for a final boost that would make it usable in a weapon. That fuel itself, stored in the ancient capital of Isfahan, would also be a target for the Israelis, American officials say. But the first question is whether the Iranians have the political flexibility to seize on the time period Trump has opened up. Administration officials say Steve Witkoff, the president's special envoy, has already been in touch in recent days with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, with whom he has been talking since early April. 'I think the question is, can the Iranians see this as an opportunity to avoid the significant challenges that would come from the destruction of their last remaining facility?' asked Laura Holgate, who served as American ambassador to the IAEA during the Biden administration. But she said that 'direct surrender is probably not on the table for them', or 'total abandonment of enrichment capacity either, even now'. Robert Litwak, a scholar who has written extensively on diplomacy with Iran, said, 'Here is the diplomatic needle both sides need to thread: the US accepts that Iran has a right to enrich uranium, and Iran accepts that it must completely dismantle its nuclear program'. The conflict between Israel and Iran has consumed the president's week, as he returned early from the Group of 7 meeting in Canada to deal with the war. He spent the early part of the week posting a series of bellicose threats on social media, seeming to lay the groundwork for the US to join Israel's bombing campaign. He urged all the residents of Tehran, a city of roughly 10 million people, to evacuate, claimed the US had 'complete and total control of the skies over Iran', and said American officials knew where Iran's leader was hiding but would not kill him – 'at least not for now'. Many of the president's allies believed that the US's entrance into the war was imminent. But on Wednesday, the president said he had not made a final decision about whether to bomb Iran, and he berated Iran for not agreeing to a new deal to limit its nuclear program. Still, he said, it was not too late for a diplomatic solution. 'Nothing's too late,' he said. Trump's public flirtation with entering the war has sharply divided his base – so much so that Vice President JD Vance wrote a lengthy social media post on Tuesday seeking to downplay concerns that the president was abandoning his commitment to keep America out of overseas conflict. Loading 'I can assure you that he is only interested in using the American military to accomplish the American people's goals,' Vance wrote. But some of the president's most prominent allies, including Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson and former aide Steve Bannon have criticised the prospect of the US getting involved in another country's war. 'Anyone slobbering for the US to become fully involved in the Israel/Iran war is not America First/MAGA,' Greene posted on social media. On the other end of the spectrum, many of Trump's hawkish allies in the Senate, including South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham and Arkansas senator Tom Cotton, are urging the president to take a more aggressive posture toward Iran. 'Be all in, President Trump, in helping Israel eliminate the nuclear threat,' Graham said this week on Fox News. 'If we need to provide bombs to Israel, provide bombs. If we need to fly planes with Israel, do joint operations.'
The Age
11 hours ago
- Politics
- The Age
Trump buys himself time, and opens up some new options
In fact, within an hour of the White House release of Trump's statement that 'I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks', Netanyahu signalled that he was likely to use the time to try his own attacks on the deeply buried Fordow nuclear plant. 'I established that we will achieve all of our objectives, all of their nuclear facilities,' he said. 'We have the power to do so.' In fact, American and foreign experts say, the Israelis have been preparing military and covert options for years, examining how they might interrupt the massive electrical supply systems that keep the centrifuges buried in an enrichment hall under a mountain. Even the introduction of a surge or a pulse in that electrical flow could destabilise and destroy the delicate machines as they spin at supersonic speeds, like a top spinning out of control. In recent days, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) concluded that Israel's destruction of the electric plant above another enrichment centre, at Natanz, probably critically damaged the thousands of centrifuges spinning below. The Israelis have considered what it would take to bomb and seal the tunnel entrances into the facility, trapping workers inside and making it all the more difficult to bring near-bomb-grade fuel into the plant for a final boost that would make it usable in a weapon. That fuel itself, stored in the ancient capital of Isfahan, would also be a target for the Israelis, American officials say. But the first question is whether the Iranians have the political flexibility to seize on the time period Trump has opened up. Administration officials say Steve Witkoff, the president's special envoy, has already been in touch in recent days with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, with whom he has been talking since early April. 'I think the question is, can the Iranians see this as an opportunity to avoid the significant challenges that would come from the destruction of their last remaining facility?' asked Laura Holgate, who served as American ambassador to the IAEA during the Biden administration. But she said that 'direct surrender is probably not on the table for them', or 'total abandonment of enrichment capacity either, even now'. Robert Litwak, a scholar who has written extensively on diplomacy with Iran, said, 'Here is the diplomatic needle both sides need to thread: the US accepts that Iran has a right to enrich uranium, and Iran accepts that it must completely dismantle its nuclear program'. The conflict between Israel and Iran has consumed the president's week, as he returned early from the Group of 7 meeting in Canada to deal with the war. He spent the early part of the week posting a series of bellicose threats on social media, seeming to lay the groundwork for the US to join Israel's bombing campaign. He urged all the residents of Tehran, a city of roughly 10 million people, to evacuate, claimed the US had 'complete and total control of the skies over Iran', and said American officials knew where Iran's leader was hiding but would not kill him – 'at least not for now'. Many of the president's allies believed that the US's entrance into the war was imminent. But on Wednesday, the president said he had not made a final decision about whether to bomb Iran, and he berated Iran for not agreeing to a new deal to limit its nuclear program. Still, he said, it was not too late for a diplomatic solution. 'Nothing's too late,' he said. Trump's public flirtation with entering the war has sharply divided his base – so much so that Vice President JD Vance wrote a lengthy social media post on Tuesday seeking to downplay concerns that the president was abandoning his commitment to keep America out of overseas conflict. Loading 'I can assure you that he is only interested in using the American military to accomplish the American people's goals,' Vance wrote. But some of the president's most prominent allies, including Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson and former aide Steve Bannon have criticised the prospect of the US getting involved in another country's war. 'Anyone slobbering for the US to become fully involved in the Israel/Iran war is not America First/MAGA,' Greene posted on social media. On the other end of the spectrum, many of Trump's hawkish allies in the Senate, including South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham and Arkansas senator Tom Cotton, are urging the president to take a more aggressive posture toward Iran. 'Be all in, President Trump, in helping Israel eliminate the nuclear threat,' Graham said this week on Fox News. 'If we need to provide bombs to Israel, provide bombs. If we need to fly planes with Israel, do joint operations.'
Los Angeles Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
India and Canada to restore diplomatic services nearly two years after killing of Sikh separatist
NEW DELHI — India and Canada agreed to restore diplomatic services nearly two years after Ottawa accused New Delhi of alleged involvement in the killing of a Sikh separatist leader, which turned into a row straining relations between the two countries. The announcement was made after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Canadian counterpart, Mark Carney, met Tuesday on the sidelines of the Group of 7 summit in Kananaskis, Alberta. 'The leaders agreed to designate new high commissioners, with a view to returning to regular services to citizens and businesses in both countries,' a statement from Carney's office said. High commissioners are senior diplomats, representing their country's interests and fostering relationships with the host nation. Modi and Carney reiterated the importance of a bilateral relationship based on mutual respect and a commitment to the principle of territorial sovereignty, according to the statement. They also discussed further collaboration in several sectors, including technology, digital transition, food security, and critical minerals. Meanwhile, India's foreign ministry underscored the importance of restarting senior ministerial engagements to 'rebuild trust and bring momentum to the relationship.' Carney's predecessor, Justin Trudeau, shocked the world in September 2023 after announcing in Parliament there were credible allegations about India's link to the killing of Hareep Singh Nijjar near Vancouver. New Delhi vehemently denied the allegations and accused Trudeau's government of harboring extremists. The Indian government had declared Nijjar a terrorist in 2020 under a law meant to suppress dissent. The Sikh independence advocate was a prominent member of the Khalistan movement, banned in India, to create an independent Sikh homeland. He was seen as a human rights activist by Sikh organizations. Ties between the two countries continued to worsen and in October, India expelled Canadian diplomats and withdrew its high commissioner and other officials from Canada. Ottawa retaliated by dismissing Indian diplomats and accusing the Indian government of an intensifying campaign against Canadian citizens, a charge New Delhi denied. India's anxieties about Sikh separatist groups have long strained its relationship with Canada, where some 2% of the population is Sikh. As President Trump abruptly left the G7 summit, Modi had a detailed phone conversation with the U.S. president and shared India's military response against Pakistan last month following the killings of 26 innocent people, mostly Hindu men, in Indian-controlled Kashmir, foreign secretary Vikram Misri said. In recent weeks, Trump had claimed to have brokered a ceasefire between India and Pakistan and offered trade concessions in part to make the nuclear-armed rivals reach an agreement after shooting at each other for days, which was checkmate by New Delhi. Trump had also proposed mediation over Kashmir. In a statement, Misri said Modi clarified to Trump that India had never in the past accepted nor would it encourage in the future a third-party mediation over the simmering dispute of Kashmir, a Himalayan region claimed by both India and Pakistan in its entirety. Misri said Modi made it clear to Trump that during multiple talks held between New Delhi and Washington senior officials amid the ongoing military conflict, there was no mention of a trade deal or the U.S. mediation over Kashmir. The talks to stop military actions were held directly between the military leaders of India and Pakistan through existing channels, Misri said. Roy writes for the Associated Press.
Egypt Independent
3 days ago
- Politics
- Egypt Independent
India and Canada signal a reset of relations nearly two years after assassination of Sikh separatist
CNN — India and Canada signaled a reset of relations on Tuesday, agreeing to reestablish high commissions in each other's capitals, after nearly two years of strained ties following Ottawa's accusations that New Delhi was allegedly involved in the killing of a Sikh separatist on its soil. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Canadian counterpart Mark Carney, who took office in March, announced the move after meeting on the sidelines of the Group of 7 summit in the Canadian Rockies. Ottawa and New Delhi agreed to 'designate new high commissioners, with a view to returning to regular services to citizens and business in both countries,' according to a statement from Carney's office following their meeting The move comes nearly two years after former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and other Canadian officials publicly accused New Delhi of being involved in the murder of prominent Sikh separatist and Canadian citizen, Hardeep Singh Nijjar, in a Vancouver suburb in 2023. Canadian authorities said they shared evidence of that with Indian authorities. However, Indian government officials repeatedly denied Canada had provided evidence and called the allegations 'absurd and motivated.' Relations between both countries plummeted in the wake of the accusation, prompting tit-for-tat diplomatic expulsions, the temporary suspension of visa services and allegations from India of Canada harboring 'terrorists' and encouraging 'anti-India activities' – a claim the Canadian government rejects. Carney invited Modi to attend the summit, despite India not being a G7 member, saying earlier this month that it makes sense to have the leader of the world's most populous country around the table when there are 'big challenges' to discuss, according to CNN affiliate CBC. Carney invited the leaders of several other nonmember countries — Brazil, South Africa, Mexico, Ukraine, Australia and South Korea — to also attend this year's gathering. There were no signs of tension on Tuesday as Modi and Carney shook hands in the western Canadian province of Alberta with the Canadian prime minister calling it a 'great honor' to host the Indian leader at the G7. 'India has been coming to the G7 I believe since 2018… and it's a testament to the importance of your country, to your leadership and to the importance of the issues that we look to tackle together,' Carney told reporters. Modi's comments toward Carney were similarly welcoming. 'Had an excellent meeting with Prime Minister Mark Carney,' he wrote on X. 'India and Canada are connected by a strong belief in democracy, freedom and rule of law. PM Carney and I look forward to working closely to add momentum to the India-Canada friendship.' The Canadian prime minister's office said the two discussed opportunities to 'deepen engagement' in areas such as technology, the digital transition, food security, and critical minerals. Neither leader publicly mentioned discussing recent strained relations or the killing of Nijjar. Nijjar, who was gunned down by masked men in June 2023 outside a Sikh temple in Surrey, British Columbia, was a prominent campaigner for an independent Sikh homeland in northern India, which would be known as Khalistan. Campaigning for the creation of Khalistan has long been considered by New Delhi as a national security threat and outlawed in India – and a number of groups associated with the movement are listed as 'terrorist organizations' under Indian law. But the movement garners a level of sympathy from some in the Sikh community, especially in the diaspora, where activists protected by free speech laws can more openly demand secession from India. Since the start of the summit on Sunday, scores of Sikh protesters have been seen waving Khalistan flags in the city of Calgary in Alberta, according to CNN affiliate CTV. Some demonstrators expressed outrage over Modi's visit, while others demanded justice over Nijjar's killing. When asked about the murder of Nijjar during a news conference after speaking with Modi, Carney said: 'There is a judicial process that's underway, and I need to be careful about further commentary.' Carney also told CBC's Radio-Canada last week that he had spoken with Modi about Nijjar, when asked about the Sikh separatist and ongoing police investigation.
