Viktor Orbán’s block on a loan for Ukraine is not the United States’ issue, said
Washington’s ambassador to the EU, days after Donald Trump endorsed the
Hungarian prime minister’s reelection campaign.
“This is an internal EU issue, this isn’t a United States issue; they need to
resolve the issue of how they’re going to finance Ukraine to the extent to which
they’re gonna finance it,” Andrew Puzder told POLITICO in an interview.
The U.S. has stepped up pressure on Europe to increase its financial aid to
Ukraine since Donald Trump returned to office. All EU countries agreed on a €90
billion loan to Ukraine, but Orbán changed his mind after Russian oil stopped
flowing through the Druzhba pipeline.
Despite Trump’s close ties to Orbán, Puzder said it’s up to the EU to find a way
to finance Kyiv.
“Whether that loan goes through and the condition in which it goes through is
something for the EU to resolve internally, and I have every confidence that
they will resolve it,” Puzder said. He added that the U.S. is “happy” to sell
more weapons to Ukraine that Kyiv could pay for with the EU loan.
Trump on Saturday endorsed Orbán ahead of the April 12 election, in a video
streamed at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Budapest.
“He’s a fantastic guy, and it’s such an honor to endorse him. I endorsed him
last time he won, and he did a fantastic job for his country,” Trump said.
Asked if accusations that Hungary’s foreign minister informed Moscow about
internal EU talks would change Washington’s stance toward Orbán, Puzder said
that’s “obviously a decision that the president has to make,” but that Trump
“likes” the Hungarian prime minister. “They’ve been supportive of each other,
and that’s certainly the president’s call.”
Puzder declined to comment on the allegations but said he has “very good
relationships” with Hungary’s representatives in Brussels.
“I think Hungary has been very friendly to the United States, and we do share
views on certain issues with Hungary,” he said, citing migration as a key point
of convergence. He said the EU is now adopting the Hungarian model by hardening
its migration policy.
“I think a lot of the dust that’s been thrown in the air with respect to Hungary
and its relationship with the European Union will settle down after the
election. No matter which party wins, I think a lot of this will settle once
the election’s over,” Puzder added.
Tag - Weapons
HOW TWO WARS ARE PULLING EUROPE AND THE US APART
The EU is worried President Trump could abandon Ukraine if the bloc doesn’t
support him in the Middle East.
By NICHOLAS VINOCUR
in Brussels
Illustration by Natália Delgado/ POLITICO
The biggest fear of European leaders is that Donald Trump’s war in Iran will
lead him to abandon Ukraine.
Governments are terrified that the U.S. president could retaliate against
America’s European allies for spurning his appeals for assistance in the Middle
East, primarily by cutting off what’s left of U.S. help for Kyiv, according to
four EU diplomats with knowledge of their discussions. As they scramble to avoid
a permanent break in the transatlantic relationship, leaders hope their offer of
limited support for his action against Tehran will suffice to convince Trump to
stay the course in the conflict with Russia.
The war in Iran “must not divert our attention from the support we give
Ukraine,” French President Emmanuel Macron said at the end of last week’s EU
summit in Brussels.
It’s easy to see why EU leaders are so anxious. In recent days Trump has
repeatedly blasted them for failing to do more to help him unblock the Strait of
Hormuz, the shipping route used by about 20 percent of the world’s oil that has
effectively been closed by Iran. He has also explicitly linked continued U.S.
involvement in NATO to the Middle East conflict.
“NATO IS A PAPER TIGER!” he railed in a Truth Social Post over the weekend.
“They complain about the high oil prices they are forced to pay, but don’t want
to help open the Strait of Hormuz … COWARDS,” he concluded. “[W]e will
remember.”
At the same time, further deepening fears about the transatlantic alliance,
Moscow offered Washington a quid pro quo under which the Kremlin would stop
sharing intelligence with Iran if Washington ceased supplying Ukraine with intel
about Russia, POLITICO revealed on Friday.
While the U.S. declined the offer, according to two people familiar with the
U.S.-Russia negotiations, the fact it was proffered in the first place points to
a possible tradeoff between U.S. involvement in Ukraine and the Middle East.
“There’s a crack right now emerging between, you know, Europe and the U.S.,
which, again, as an avid pro-American and transatlanticist, I lament,” Finnish
President Alexander Stubb said in an interview with the Daily Telegraph. “But
it’s a reality that I have to live with. And I obviously try to salvage what I
can.”
MISSILES LIKE CANDIES
Governments are concerned that the war in Iran is using up missiles and air
defense munitions that Kyiv needs to protect itself against Russia, the four EU
diplomats, who were granted anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomatic exchanges,
told POLITICO.
“When you see what Trump did on Greenland, how he cut off intelligence-sharing
with Ukraine on a whim, there’s always a risk [that Trump could remove U.S.
support for Ukraine],” one of the diplomats said.
“The concern is obviously that the Middle East is taking attention away from
Ukraine,” added a second diplomat from a mid-sized EU country. “The Emiratis are
shooting out Patriot [air defense missiles] like candies, whereas Ukraine
desperately needs them. It can’t become an either-or situation” in which the
U.S. only has enough bandwidth for one conflict and abandons Ukraine, the
diplomat added.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been explicit about the risk of such
a tradeoff, telling the BBC on Thursday that he had a “very bad feeling” about
the impact of the Middle East war on Ukraine. He lamented the fact that as the
war goes on, U.S.-led peace negotiations between Ukraine and Russia are being
“constantly postponed” in what the Kremlin calls a “situational pause.”
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is pictured at Moncloa Palace in Madrid,
Spain on March 18, 2026. | Alberto Gardin/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty
Images
Ukrainian negotiators traveled over the weekend to the U.S. for talks with
Trump’s envoys, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. The latter praised the talks as
“constructive” in a post on X, but gave no hint of when negotiations with Russia
would resume.
DAMAGE CONTROL
European leaders, including France’s Emmanuel Macron, Britain’s Keir Starmer and
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, are ramping up efforts to show they support
the U.S. president’s goal of freeing up the Strait of Hormuz.
In a now familiar role, Rutte has been outspoken in praising Trump’s efforts.
The former Dutch prime minister last week called the destruction of Iran’s
military capacity by the U.S. and Israel “very important,” linking it to
“European security” at a time when some EU leaders, like Spanish Prime Minister
Pedro Sanchez, have criticized the war as “illegal.”
Macron has been more circumspect in public, but active behind the scenes. In two
separate calls with Trump before last Thursday’s gathering of EU leaders, the
French president assured his U.S. counterpart that France would help clear the
Strait when conditions allow, according to comments from Trump himself and a
third EU diplomat who was briefed on the calls.
“This is about managing the man,” the diplomat said.
In the early hours of Friday, Macron — who has otherwise pledged to send a naval
detachment to the Strait of Hormuz after the hot phase of the war dies down —
said France was pursuing the aim of freeing it up via the United Nations. In
response to a question from POLITICO at the European Council on Thursday, the
French leader said Paris intends to “sound out its main partners” about tabling
a resolution in the Security Council on securing freedom of navigation in the
vital waterway.
Trump is no fan of the United Nations, but he could see an advantage to a U.N.
Security Council resolution that forms the basis for a broader coalition to free
up the Strait, a fourth EU diplomat said.
The southern suburbs of Beirut after an Israeli airstrike on March 10, 2026. |
Fadel Itani/AFP via Getty Images
The U.K.’s Starmer is also doing more to help Trump in the Middle East.
Following reports that Iran had fired a ballistic missile at the Diego Garcia
U.S.-U.K. base in the Indian Ocean, Starmer gave the U.S. a green light to use
British bases to launch strikes on Iranian sites targeting the Strait of Hormuz.
Previously he had only granted permission for the bases to be used for defensive
strikes.
Starmer was also the main organizer of a statement signed by seven EU and allied
countries (the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Canada
and Japan) in which they expressed their “readiness to contribute to appropriate
efforts to ensure safe passage through the Strait.” Asked about the intent of
this statement, which doesn’t promise any immediate material help, the third
diplomat said: “It’s part of the same effort. We need to show Trump we are
active in the Middle East. It’s in our interests, but also in Ukraine’s.”
Such pledges remain vague for now. Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz
have both asserted they have no intention of being drawn into the war in Iran.
But as far as Trump is concerned, “appearances matter — sometimes more than
substance,” said the same diplomat.
ZAGROS MOUNTAINS, Iraq — About 5 kilometers from Iran, aircraft roar overhead.
Are the planes American, Israeli, Iranian? The Kurdish fighter shrugged and
urged haste. The final stretch to his militia’s base could be reached only on
foot, along a steep path covered in loose rock. Out in the open, everyone is
vulnerable.
A tunnel leads to the underground base in a sliver of the Zagros Mountains in
northeastern Iraq. The Iranian-Kurdish guerrilla group, the Kurdistan Free Life
Party, is careful to keep its exact location secret. Visitors must switch their
smartphones to flight mode before handing them over upon entry.
The Kurdistan Free Life Party is in waiting mode, poised along Iran’s western
border to move in if a weakened regime opens up a path to strike it. The Axel
Springer Global Reporters Network, which includes POLITICO, was granted rare
access to the group’s base and its members, who discussed its ideology, goals
and under what conditions they’d go into Iran.
Militia representative Bahar Avrin said in an interview inside the base that the
organization already has elements “inside” Iran, and that deploying a larger
force against Tehran is ultimately a question of the right timing and
conditions. The border between northern Iraq and Iran runs through the Zagros
Mountains and is considered porous — for smugglers, locals and the handful of
militias operating there.
The Kurdistan Free Life Party, often referred to by its Kurdish acronym PJAK, is
part of a coalition of six Kurdish militia groups that want to topple Iran’s
Islamist regime and usher in a government that is more democratic and grants
more rights and autonomy to Iranian Kurds in Iran.
President Donald Trump has said Iraqi and Iranian Kurdish groups are “willing”
to participate in a ground offensive against Tehran — but he has said he ruled
out the idea to avoid making the war “any more complex than it already is.”
A Kurdish assault could spark a sectarian power struggle that destabilizes Iran.
And key U.S. allies with their own Kurdish minorities — Iraq and Turkey — have
warned the idea could spread unrest elsewhere in the Middle East.
The idea could nonetheless prove tempting for Trump as the war, now in its third
week, drags on. The ruling regime in Tehran has not capitulated despite
punishing airstrikes that have killed scores of its top leaders. Trump could
find himself looking for military options that do not trigger the political risk
that would accompany deployment of U.S. ground troops.
“The president never takes anything fully off the table,” said Victoria Coates,
who served as deputy national security adviser for the Middle East in Trump’s
first term. “And if you were considering this, this is the last thing you would
want the Iranians to know.”
TUNNEL VISION
PJAK looks ready to go into a fight, with a base that suggests an organized
military operation. It consists of a tunnel system running through the
mountain’s interior, with electricity and running water. On the walls hang
photographs of fallen fighters — many of them young, women and men in their 20s
and 30s. Four monitors mounted to the walls display the surrounding terrain
outside. Motion sensors control the cameras; when a bird flutters across the
screen, the image switches to it automatically.
In a dark tunnel, a 20-year-old fighter holding an assault rifle introduced
herself as Zilan. Her day begins at 5:30 a.m. and follows a strict schedule.
“Our daily life is based on discipline,” she said. Ideological instruction aims
at building a democratic society; military training focuses on defending the
Kurdish people.Watch: The Conversation
“We never want the help of foreign powers like Israel and the United States,”
she said. “We are an independent party.”
The Kurdistan Free Life Party is one of several Iranian-Kurdish groups in
Iraq. In 1979, Kurds in Iran supported the revolution against the shah. When the
new Islamic Republic rejected their demands for autonomy, heavy fighting broke
out in Iranian Kurdistan. Numerous groups relocated to Iraq, where they now
operate freely in northern Iraq, which is largely autonomous from the rest of
the country and detached from the central government in Baghdad.
The six members of the political and military alliance are not in agreement
about whether to invade if called on, and under what conditions they would
embark on a full-scale war for their political goals.
Some parties appear eager to take on a ground offensive in Iran. Reza Kaabi,
secretary-general of the Komala of the Toilers of Kurdistan, has even set out a
blueprint, declaring a U.S.-enforced no-fly zone to be a prerequisite for any
Kurdish invasion.
There is a general sense in the region that PJAK — given its proximity to the
Iranian border and its relatively strong military presence — would be one of the
first of the six Kurdish militias in the coalition to go into Iran if given U.S.
military support. But PJAK publicly rejects the idea that they would do so at
the bidding of Washington. It’s a stance rooted in distrust of the U.S. — not
least because the United States abruptly withdrew support from the Kurds in
Syria in January.
Asked under what conditions PJAK would launch an offensive across the
Iraqi-Iranian border, Avrin declined to answer. But, she said, her organization
has “never waited for any force to bring about change.”
CNN recently reported that just a few days into the Iran war, Trump spoke with
Mustafa Hijri, the secretary-general of another group in the Kurdish-Iranian
opposition alliance: the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan, or PDKI. It is
one of the oldest Iranian-Kurdish opposition parties and has maintained armed
units operating from exile in northern Iraq.
PDKI executive committee member Hassan Sharafi said in an interview that he
could “neither confirm nor deny” whether such a conversation had taken place, in
part because of the limited contact among the group’s leadership maintained for
security reasons.
Sharafi said the PDKI had “no operational relations” with the United States on
the ground in Iraq. At the political level, however, contacts exist: “In
Washington, Paris, and London we have contacts, and our representatives there
maintain relations. Our relations are diplomatic and political.” Such links, he
said, were long-standing: “For more than 20 years we have had relations with the
United States and with all European countries. We have contacts with all of
them.”
THE ROAD TO TEHRAN
From Tehran’s perspective, the militias represent a serious threat. Iranian
artillery has struck in the border region multiple times in recent days, hitting
villages near the frontier. These attacks primarily affect civilians. The
Kurdish guerrillas sheltered inside the mountain remain protected. Other militia
groups, whose positions are located in more exposed terrain, have also come
under fire.
A 2023 security agreement between Iran and Iraq obliged Baghdad to disarm
Iranian-Kurdish opposition groups, dismantle their bases and relocate them
deeper into Iraqi territory. Now that the Kurdish groups are openly considering
an offensive in Iran, Tehran has concluded that the agreement has failed,
according to Kamaran Osman, an Iraq-based human rights officer with a nonprofit
organization called Community Peacemaker Teams that monitors human rights abuses
in conflict zones.
“Now it believes it must target, destroy and defeat these groups,” Osman said,
speaking in the Iraqi city of Sulaymaniyah, about a two-hour drive from the PJAK
base.
As of Monday, his organization had recorded 307 Iranian attacks on the Kurdistan
region in Iraq, leaving eight people killed and 51 injured.
He sees only grim scenarios for the Kurdish people in Iran. “If the regime
falls, there is a risk of civil war in Iran,” he said. If the regime survives,
he fears more retaliation from Tehran against Kurds in Iraq — both
Iranian-Kurdish opposition groups and the Kurdistan Regional Government.
Should northern Iraq become destabilized, a power vacuum could emerge. The last
time order eroded here, in 2014, ISIS militants seized control of a swathe of
territory stretching from Iraq to Syria, a landmass nearly as large as the
United Kingdom. PJAK has ties to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, a militant group
that has fought against the Turkish government, and is listed as a terrorist
organization there — as well as in the EU and the U.S.
The United States has a troubled history of making big promises to ethnic
Kurdish groups — and then abandoning them at the worst possible moment. After
calling on Iraqis to rise up and overthrow then-dictator Saddam Hussein in 1991,
President George H.W. Bush declined to intervene when Hussein began slaughtering
Iraqi Kurds who took up the U.S. president’s call. And as recently as this
January, the Trump administration stood by as a Syrian Kurdish militia that led
the U.S.-backed campaign to defeat ISIS just a few years ago was attacked by
Syria’s new government.
The big question for U.S. policymakers may be how much they would need to
support a Kurdish assault on Iran to make it successful. Former U.S.
intelligence and special forces experts believe it would require the type of
commitment he might prefer to avoid: large infusions of cash and weapons, close
air support, and potentially even on-the-ground aid from U.S. special forces.
Even then, a Kurdish-led attack could fizzle, leaving Trump with two grim
choices: Abandon the Kurds, or come to their rescue with even greater U.S.
combat support.
“It would require a lot of commitment on the U.S. side with a very unclear end
state,” said Alex Plitsas, a former senior Pentagon official who worked on
special operations and counterterrorism policy in the Middle East.
While Coates cautioned that Trump had other, better options at hand, she argued
that even modest U.S. military support for the Kurds — such as small arms
shipments and limited air support — could threaten Iran’s increasingly brittle
regime.
The key, she said, was arming the exiled Kurds in Iraq in conjunction with other
Iranian resistance groups inside the country to avoid the perception it was
coming from outside.
“The way this is going to be effective,” Coates said, “is not by a bunch of
Iraqis invading Iran.”
Drüten of WELT reported from Iraq. Sakellariadis reported from Washington.
The Axel Springer Global Reporters Network is a multi-publication initiative
publishing scoops, investigations, interviews, op-eds and analysis that
reverberate across the world. It connects journalists from Axel Springer brands
— including POLITICO, Business Insider, WELT, BILD, and Onet — on major stories
for an international audience. Their ambitious reporting stretches across Axel
Springer platforms: online, print, TV and audio. Together, the outlets reach
hundreds of millions of people worldwide.
Switzerland said it won’t allow weapons exports to the U.S. as long as
Washington is involved in its ongoing military campaign against Iran.
The Swiss government said on Friday that it will not sign off on any new
licenses for the export of war materiel to countries involved in the conflict,
citing Switzerland’s commitment to neutrality.
Switzerland said that it has not issued new export licenses to send weapons to
the U.S. since the U.S. and Israel launched strikes on Tehran on Feb. 28.
Existing licenses to export weapons to the U.S. can continue as they are not
relevant “to the war at present,” but they will be kept under review in case
they conflict with Swiss neutrality laws, it said.
Exports of other dual-use and military goods, and other goods affected by
sanctions against Iran, will also be kept under review, it added.
Switzerland has not granted weapons export licenses for Israel or Iran for a
“number of years,” the government said.
BERLIN — German Defense Minister Boris Pistorus will spend next week touring the
Indo-Pacific with a passel of corporate chiefs in tow to make deals across the
region.
It’s part of an effort to mark a greater impact in an area where Berlin’s
presence has been minor, but whose importance is growing as Germany looks to
build up access to natural resources, technology and allies in a fracturing
world.
“If you look at the Indo-Pacific, Germany is essentially starting from scratch,”
said Bastian Ernst, a defense lawmaker from Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s
Christian Democrats. “We don’t have an established role yet, we’re only just
beginning to figure out what that should be.”
Pistorius leaves Friday on an eight-day tour to Japan, Singapore and Australia
where he’ll be aiming to build relations with other like-minded middle powers —
mirroring countries from France to Canada as they scramble to figure out new
relationships in a world destabilized by Russia, China and a United States led
by Donald Trump.
“Germany recognizes this principle of interconnected theaters,” said
Elli-Katharina Pohlkamp, visiting fellow of the Asia Programme at the European
Council on Foreign Relations. Berlin, she said, “increasingly sees Europe’s
focus on Russia and Asia’s focus on China and North Korea as security issues
that are linked.”
The military and defense emphasis of next week’s trip marks a departure from
Berlin’s 2020 Indo-Pacific guidelines, which laid a much heavier focus on trade
and diplomacy.
Pistorius’ outreach will be especially important as Germany rapidly ramps up
military spending at home. Berlin is on track to boost its defense budget to
around €150 billion a year by the end of the decade and is preparing tens of
billions in new procurement contracts.
But not everything Germany needs can be sourced in Europe.
Australia is one of the few alternatives to China in critical minerals essential
to the defense industry. It’s a leading supplier of lithium and one of the only
significant producers of separated rare earth materials outside China.
Australia also looms over a key German defense contract.
Berlin is considering whether to stick with a naval laser weapon being developed
by homegrown firms Rheinmetall and MBDA, or team up with Australia’s EOS
instead.
That has become a more sensitive political question in Berlin. WELT, owned by
POLITICO’s parent company Axel Springer, reported that lawmakers had stopped the
planned contract for the German option, reflecting wider concern over whether
Berlin should back a domestic system or move faster with a foreign one. That
means what Pistorius sees in Australia could end up shaping a decision back in
Germany.
TALKING TO TOKYO
Japan offers something different — not raw materials but military integration,
logistics and technology.
Pohlkamp said the military side of the relationship with Japan is now “very much
about interoperability and compatibility, built through joint exercises, mutual
visits, closer staff work, expanded information exchange and mutual learning.”
She described Japan as “a kind of yardstick for Germany,” a country that lives
with “an enormous threat perception” not only militarily but also economically,
because it is surrounded by pressure from China, North Korea and Russia.
The Japan-Germany Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement took effect in July
2024, giving the two militaries a framework for reciprocal supplies and services
and making future port calls for naval vessels, exercises and recurring
cooperation easier to sustain.
Pohlkamp said what matters most to Tokyo are not headline-grabbing deployments
but “plannable, recurring contributions, which are more valuable than big,
one-off shows of force.”
But that ambition only goes so far if Germany’s presence remains sporadic.
Bundeswehr recruits march on the market square to take their ceremonial oath in
Altenburg on March 19, 2026. | Bodo Schackow/picture alliance via Getty Images
Berlin has sent military assets to the region for training exercises in recent
years — a frigate in 2021, combat aircraft in 2022, army participation in 2023,
and a larger naval mission in 2024.
But as pressure grows on Germany to beef up its military to hold off Russia,
along with its growing presence in Lithuania and its effort to keep supplying
Ukraine with weapons, the attention given to Asia is shrinking. The government
told parliament last year it sent no frigate in 2025, plans none in 2026 and has
not yet decided on 2027.
Germany’s current military engagement in the Indo-Pacific consists of a single
P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft, sent to India in February as part of the
Indo-Pacific Deployment 2026 exercises.
Germany, according to Ernst, is still “relatively blank” in the region. What it
can contribute militarily remains narrow: “A bit of maritime patrol, a frigate,
mine clearance.”
Pohlkamp said Germany’s role in Asia is still being built “in small doses” and
is largely symbolic. But what matters is whether Berlin can turn occasional
visits and deployments into something steadier and more predictable.
The defense ministry insists that is the point of Pistorius’s trip. Ministry
spokesperson Mitko Müller said Wednesday that Europe and the Indo-Pacific are
“inseparably linked,” citing the rules-based order, sea lanes, international law
and the role of the two regions in global supply and value chains.
The new P-8A Poseidon reconnaissance aircraft stands in front of a technical
hangar at Nordholz airbase on Nov. 20, 2025. | Christian Butt/picture alliance
via Getty Images
The trip is meant to focus on the regional security situation, expanding
strategic dialogue, current and possible military cooperation, joint exercises
including future Indo-Pacific deployments, and industrial cooperation.
That explains why industry is traveling with Pistorius.
Müller said executives from Airbus, TKMS, MBDA, Quantum Systems, Diehl and Rohde
& Schwarz are coming along, suggesting Berlin sees the trip as a chance to widen
defense ties on the ground.
But any larger German role in Asia would have to careful calibrated to avoid
angering China — a key trading partner that is very wary of European powers
expanding their regional presence.
“That leaves Germany trying to do two things at once,” Pohlkamp said. “First,
show up often enough to matter, but not so forcefully that it gets dragged into
a confrontation it is neither politically nor militarily prepared to sustain.”
Moscow proposed a quid pro quo to the U.S. under which the Kremlin would stop
sharing intelligence information with Iran, such as the precise coordinates of
U.S. military assets in the Middle East, if Washington ceased supplying Ukraine
with intel about Russia.
Two people familiar with the U.S.-Russia negotiations said that such a proposal
was made by Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev to Trump administration envoys Steve
Witkoff and Jared Kushner during their meeting last week in Miami.
The U.S. rejected the proposal, the people added. They, like all other officials
cited in this article, were granted anonymity due to the sensitivity of the
discussions.
Nevertheless, the sheer existence of such a proposal has sparked concern among
European diplomats, who worry Moscow is trying to drive a wedge between Europe
and the U.S. at a critical moment for transatlantic relations.
U.S. President Donald Trump has voiced anger over the refusal of allies to send
warships in the Strait of Hormuz. On Friday, he lambasted his NATO allies as
“COWARDS“ and said: “we will REMEMBER!”
The White House declined to comment. The Russian Embassy in Washington did not
respond to a request for comment.
One EU diplomat called the Russian proposal “outrageous.” The suggested deal is
likely to fuel growing suspicions in Europe that the Witkoff-Dmitriev meetings
are not delivering concrete progress toward a peace agreement in Ukraine, but
are instead seen by Moscow as a chance to lure Washington into a deal between
the two powers that leaves Europe on the sidelines.
On Thursday, the Kremlin said that the U.S.-mediated Ukraine peace talks were
“on hold.”
Russia has made various proposals about Iran to the U.S., which has rejected
them all, another person familiar with the discussions said. This person said
the U.S. also rejected a proposal to move Iran’s enriched uranium to Russia,
which was first reported by Axios.
Russia has expanded intelligence-sharing and military cooperation with Iran
since the war started, a person briefed on the intelligence said. The Wall
Street Journal first reported the increase and wrote that Moscow is providing
satellite imagery and drone technology to help Tehran target U.S. forces in the
region. The Kremlin called that report “fake news.”
Trump hinted at a link between the intelligence-sharing with Iran and Ukraine
during a recent interview with Fox News, saying that Russian President Vladimir
Putin “might be helping them [Iran] a little bit, yeah, I guess, and he probably
thinks we’re helping Ukraine, right?”
The U.S. continues to share intelligence with Ukraine, even as it has reduced
other support. Washington briefly paused the exchanges last year after a
disastrous Oval Office meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr
Zelenskyy. That abrupt halt to U.S. intelligence sharing triggered a chaotic
scramble among allies and exposed deep tensions in the partnership with Kyiv.
One European diplomat sought to downplay the risk of the Russian proposal,
noting that French President Emmanuel Macron had said in January that
“two-thirds” of military intelligence for Ukraine is now provided by France.
Still, intelligence-sharing remains a last crucial pillar of American support
for Ukraine after the Trump administration stopped most of its financial and
military aid for Kyiv last year. Washington is still delivering weapons to
Ukraine but under a NATO-led program where allies pay the U.S. for arms.
Deliveries of critical air defense munitions, however, are under strain amid the
U.S.-Israel war with Iran.
Most recently, the Trump administration decided to ease sanctions on Russian oil
to alleviate pressure on oil markets, causing strong concern and criticism from
European leaders like German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.
Hans von der Burchard reported from Berlin, Felicia Schwartz and Diana Nerozzi
from Washington and Jacopo Barigazzi from Brussels.
LONDON — Donald Trump loves to make deals, and one of his closest confidants in
Europe believes a pact might be within reach that could help solve both the Gulf
oil crisis and the war in Ukraine in one go.
Finland’s President Alexander Stubb says he can see real potential in offering
Trump what he wants: European military support to secure the Strait of Hormuz,
the crucial oil shipping route that Iran has effectively blockaded in response
to American and Israeli bombing.
Europe’s condition for providing such assistance? That the U.S. president
delivers all the help Ukraine needs to reach an acceptable peace deal with
Russia.
The idea of bargaining with Trump was put to Stubb during a question-and-answer
session at London’s Chatham House think tank on Tuesday. The Finnish leader
seemed surprised — and impressed. “I think it’s a really good idea,” he said,
adding after a pause: “No, I think it’s actually a really good idea.” Stubb said
he’d consider it further and discuss options with his team.
Finland itself doesn’t have any assets to contribute to securing the Strait of
Hormuz, and it’s still far from clear what role European forces could play
there.
But the question of how to bolster Ukraine — and get Trump on board — is an
urgent one for Europe.
Officials — including Stubb — fear the longer Trump’s war against Iran
continues, the more it could constrain Ukraine’s fight against invading Russian
forces. Soaring global energy prices — and Washington’s decision to loosen
sanctions on Russia’s oil industry — will significantly boost Vladimir Putin’s
income from Russian fossil fuel sales.
At the same time, American forces are using hundreds of interceptor missiles to
shoot down Iranian rockets and drones, leaving fewer available for Ukraine. Kyiv
and other Ukrainian cities rely on air defenses for protection against an
ongoing barrage of ballistic missiles from Russia.
And Trump has again recently pressured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy
to agree a deal with Putin, without clarifying what — if any — security
guarantees America would provide to keep the peace.
Stubb told his audience he feared that peace talks in Ukraine are fast
approaching a moment of truth, which could force Kyiv to accept a a bad
settlement that involves ceding territory to Putin. The negotiations could even
collapse, leaving Europe on the hook — without American help — obliging European
powers to step in to help Ukraine with more intelligence, weapons and other
support, he said.
Stubb said he takes a realistic view of how much he is able to influence Trump,
after the two bonded over a seven-hour golf and lunch meeting last year. Finland
has just bought 64 F-35 fighter jets from the U.S. and hosts thousands of
American troops training in Arctic conditions.
“I have no illusions about who can convince President Trump on anything,” Stubb
said. “If I get one idea out of 10 in on Ukraine, I think it’s good.”
The implications of the war in Iran are “negative” for Ukraine, mainly because
the price of oil favors Russia’s war machinery, Stubb said. “The Russian economy
was actually doing extremely badly a couple of weeks back, now it’s bouncing
back.” It’s also taking air defense systems away from where they are needed in
Ukraine.
Finally, it has shifted the focus from the peace talks on Ukraine. “I hope the
peace negotiations on Ukraine don’t collapse like the negotiations between Iran
and the U.S. did,” Stubb said. “But time will tell.”
LONDON — Rachel Reeves has reopened discussions about cuts to sensitive areas of
government spending as she tries to find more money for the Ministry of Defense
against a backdrop of global volatility.
Further cuts to the aid budget were floated during intense talks between No. 10
and the Treasury about how to unlock the much-delayed Defense Investment Plan
(DIP), three people briefed on the matter told POLITICO.
Spending on overseas aid has already been slashed from 0.5 percent to 0.3
percent of GDP to pay for future rises in defense funding, but Reeves is under
pressure to find billions for key defense capabilities including the U.K.’s
nuclear deterrent and new high-tech weapons.
A senior Whitehall official acknowledged further aid cuts had been raised, but
said they are now being ruled out.
David Taylor, a Labour MP on the international development committee, said any
such cuts would have “gone against Labour values,” and said “the Treasury need
to put serious efforts into innovative forms of finance for both development and
defense.”
Several Labour MPs who did not want to be named because they are still hoping to
influence internal debates about spending said they were not wholly reassured,
with one saying any move to cut aid further would be “completely unjustified.”
The same senior Whitehall official declined to rule out changes to the welfare
budget.
A separate U.K. government official described the claims as “speculation.”
One Labour MP close to the talks, granted anonymity to discuss sensitive
matters, said the Treasury is now mulling changes to social security, which is
forecast to make up 24 percent of public spending between 2025 and 2026.
However, it is not clear which element of the welfare budget might be singled
out. Keir Starmer’s government was forced into a major climbdown last year after
facing a revolt over plans to reduce the cost of disability benefits, and is
currently attempting to draw up alternative reforms.
The investment plan is now effectively “on hold” until the Treasury finds new
sources of revenue, two people working on the DIP said.
No. 10 Downing Street and the U.K. Treasury declined to comment.
The defense industry has been warning for months of the damage caused to
businesses by the failure to publish the DIP, which was originally scheduled for
last fall. Asked about it Monday, Defence Secretary John Healey failed to give
assurances that the document would be published before the pre-election “purdah”
period, meaning it would not come until May.
Separately, Starmer has stressed that the U.K. needs to go “faster” on overall
defense spending, raising the expectation that Reeves will need to hunt for
additional billions during this parliament.
John Bew, an academic and former adviser to several prime ministers including
Starmer, wrote last week: “There is currently no route to higher defence
spending — which is inevitable unless the nation is content to continue on a
path towards greater insecurity and irrelevance — without major cuts elsewhere
in the public spending stack.”
The PM and chancellor have both spoken of a wish to collaborate more closely
with the EU on defense funding after the collapse of talks on British entry into
the SAFE loan program, but details remain scant.
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy described European allies’ attitude over
the Druzhba oil pipeline as “blackmail.”
In remarks made public on Sunday, the Ukrainian leader criticized European
pressure to allow oil to flow through the pipeline, which connects producer
country Russia to Europe by way of Ukraine.
The pipeline has been offline since January after a Russian attack, and has been
at the center of a bitter row between Ukraine and Hungary.
Budapest has accused Kyiv of deliberately blocking progress on repairing the
infrastructure in order to engineer an energy crisis in the Hungary. In
response, Hungarian Prime Viktor Orbán has been blocking the release of a €90
billion tranche of EU funding for Ukraine needed to keep the war-torn country
financially afloat.
On Thursday, the European Commission proposed sending a fact-finding mission to
inspect the damage to the Druzhba pipeline in an attempt to resolve the dispute.
“If we have decided to restore Russian oil supplies, then I want them to know
that I am against it. … But if I am given conditions that Ukraine will not
receive weapons, then, excuse me, I am powerless on this issue; I told our
friends in Europe that this is called blackmail,” Zelenskyy said in reported
remarks.
The price of oil has surged passed $100 a barrel in recent days due to
disruptions linked to the war in Iran, which began with American-Israeli strikes
on Tehran on Feb. 28. Washington has eased sanctions on certain Russian oil
consignments in response to the price pressure.
On Saturday, Ukraine’s state oil and gas company, Naftogaz, announced that it
had held a briefing with European and G7 ambassadors where it updated them on
the state of the Druzhba pipeline. The company said the pipeline had been
heavily damaged following a Russian attack in January.
“Restoring such infrastructure is a complex technological process that requires
time, specialized equipment, and the continuous work of teams even under
constant threat,” Naftogaz said.
The word druzhba means friendship in Russian.
U.S. President Donald Trump did not commit to a definitive timeline for the war
in Iran, saying in a Friday interview that the fighting would end when he feels
it “in my bones.”
Trump told Fox News Radio that he didn’t think the war “would be long.” But he
suggested that only he will know when it will be over, saying the conflict will
end “when I feel it, feel it in my bones.”
The Trump administration has sent mixed signals on the length of the war, with
senior administration officials suggesting at times that the war could last
anywhere from days to months.
Trump on Friday said he expected the conflict to end soon but added that it
could also continue indefinitely if necessary. The president dismissed reports
that the U.S. was facing a munitions shortage.
“Nobody has the technology or the weapons that we have,” Trump told Fox News’
Brian Kilmeade. “We’re way ahead of schedule. Way ahead.” He later said the U.S.
had “virtually unlimited ammunition. We’re using it, we’re using it. We can go
forever.”
While the president suggested the decision to end the war will ultimately be
based on his personal judgment, he said he was consulting with senior advisers,
including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and
Vice President JD Vance.
“Operation Epic Fury will continue until President Trump, as Commander-in-Chief,
determines that the goals of Operation Epic Fury, including for Iran to no
longer pose a military threat, have been fully realized,” White House
spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement when asked for comment.
Earlier on Friday, Hegseth suggested victory was a certainty and attacked the
press for what he viewed as unfriendly media coverage about the war.
Trump also sought to downplay any economic ramifications of the conflict, saying
the U.S. economy was the greatest in the world and would “bounce right back, so
fast.”
The Trump administration has sought to quell concerns over rising oil and gas
prices after U.S.-Israeli military action against Iran began in February. The
war triggered the largest oil supply disruption in history and cost $11
billion in its first week, according to the Pentagon.
The president’s messaging around the run-up in crude prices has caused a
potential public relations nightmare for the oil industry.
“The United States is the largest Oil Producer in the World, by far, so when oil
prices go up, we make a lot of money,” Trump wrote Wednesday on Truth Social.