The request comes amid a broader escalation in aerial warfare more than four years after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Ukrainian officials said the country’s existing air defense capacity is struggling to keep pace with increasingly frequent missile barrages targeting major cities and infrastructure.

In a letter obtained by the Associated Press, Zelenskyy urged Washington to provide more Patriot PAC-3 missiles and related systems, warning that current deliveries are falling behind operational needs. He said Ukraine remains heavily dependent on the United States for anti-ballistic missile capabilities because it cannot yet manufacture comparable systems domestically.

The Ukrainian leader stated that while the country has improved its drone interception rate to above 90%, missile defense remains a critical vulnerability. He also noted that Ukrainian specialists have assisted partners in the Gulf region and at U.S. military facilities in the Middle East with strengthening air defense operations.

Russian Attacks Increase Pressure on Defenses

Kyiv’s appeal followed a recent wave of large-scale Russian aerial assaults involving missiles and drones aimed at overwhelming Ukrainian defensive systems. Official statements cited by international reporting said Russia launched nearly 90 missiles alongside hundreds of drones during attacks over the previous weekend.

Zelenskyy described the sight of Patriot systems without available interceptors as especially damaging for a country defending itself against sustained missile attacks. According to Reuters, the Ukrainian president warned that global security pressures, including conflict involving Iran, are placing additional strain on U.S. stockpiles and slowing deliveries.

Washington had not publicly responded to the request at the time of reporting.

Russia Expands Civilian Role in Drone Defense

At the same time, Russian lawmakers approved draft legislation that would allow bank employees to participate in defending facilities against Ukrainian drone attacks, according to Russian parliamentary reporting cited by AP.

The proposal would permit banks to install electronic jamming systems and train selected personnel to intercept drones targeting financial institutions and other infrastructure. The legislation still requires approval from Russia’s Federation Council and President Vladimir Putin before taking effect.

Russian authorities have increasingly encouraged civilian institutions and businesses to support defensive measures as Ukrainian long-range drone strikes reach deeper into Russian territory. Western analysts cited in the AP report said the move may reflect mounting pressure on Russia’s conventional air defense systems.

Conflict Shows Limited Front-Line Movement

Despite intensified attacks from both sides, neither Russia nor Ukraine has made major advances along the approximately 780-mile front line, according to international reporting.

The head of Britain’s intelligence agency GCHQ, Anne Keast-Butler, also stated Wednesday that Russia was “going backwards on the battlefield,” while citing data indicating heavy Russian military losses since the conflict began. Those claims could not be independently verified within the available reporting.

The latest developments highlight the growing strategic importance of air defense systems in the war, as both Moscow and Kyiv continue expanding the use of drones and missile technology in a conflict that increasingly stretches beyond traditional front-line combat.

The post Zelenskyy Appeals for Expanded US Air Defense Support as Russian Missile Threat Intensifies appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

U.S. and Ukrainian officials said discussions in Geneva on a proposed peace framework to end Russia’s nearly four-year war in Ukraine made meaningful progress, though few specifics were released. The high-level talks come as Washington’s European allies raise concerns that key elements of the U.S. blueprint may be too accommodating to Moscow. Ukraine says its core security and sovereignty concerns are being addressed.

Progress Reported After High-Level Meetings in Geneva

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the weekend discussions as the most constructive in “a very long time,” saying the session was “very worthwhile” and left him optimistic that a path forward is possible. Speaking after the meeting, Rubio avoided detail but emphasized that negotiators could continue working through Monday and beyond, despite a Thursday deadline set by President Donald Trump for Kyiv to formally respond to the proposal.

Rubio said the process remains sensitive and involves issues ranging from technical language to decisions requiring higher-level political approval. He noted that while progress was encouraging, several items still needed time and consultation.

The U.S. has put forward a 28-point plan aimed at ending the conflict, which began with Russia’s full-scale invasion in early 2022. The proposal has raised alarm in Kyiv and across European capitals over fears that elements may force Ukraine into concessions it has long rejected, including ceding territory occupied by Russian forces.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has repeatedly stated that Ukraine will defend its sovereignty and cannot accept deals that undermine its territorial integrity.

White House Says Ukraine’s Core Concerns Are Being Addressed

In a statement released Sunday evening, the White House said Ukraine’s delegation affirmed that key priorities — including security guarantees, long-term economic support, critical infrastructure protection, freedom of navigation, and political sovereignty — were thoroughly discussed.

According to the statement, amendments were made to ensure the emerging framework aligns with Ukraine’s national interests and includes mechanisms to safeguard the country’s security in both the short and long term.

This reassurance came after a bipartisan group of U.S. senators said Rubio had indicated that the original proposal resembled a Russian “wish list.” Those claims contributed to mounting European unease over the direction of the peace plan.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said he told President Trump that Europe remains aligned with Ukraine and that Ukrainian sovereignty “must not be jeopardized.” He added that some parts of the proposal could be acceptable to European countries, while others would not.

U.S. Says Plan Still Evolving; Kyiv Cites ‘Good Progress’

Rubio defended the proposal as a “living breathing document” subject to continuous revision. Any final version, he stressed, would still need to be presented to Russia — noting that “the Russians get a vote here.”

Andrii Yermak, chief of staff to President Zelenskyy and head of Ukraine’s delegation, echoed Rubio’s positive tone, saying the conversations had produced “very good progress” toward a sustainable peace.

The upbeat assessment contrasted with earlier comments and social-media posts by Trump, who criticized Ukraine for a perceived lack of gratitude for U.S. military support. Despite his Thursday deadline, Trump suggested it could be extended if negotiators demonstrated meaningful progress.

Following the president’s remarks, Zelenskyy publicly thanked the United States and reaffirmed that Russia alone initiated the conflict. The Ukrainian leader stressed that halting the war permanently remains the central diplomatic objective.

Europe Pushes Back Against Potential Concessions

Before meeting with U.S. officials, Yermak and his delegation held discussions with national security advisers from the U.K., France, and Germany. European partners have been working closely with Kyiv to amend the proposal and remove provisions they believe restrict Ukraine’s ability to defend itself.

French Defense Ministry official Alice Rufo told France Info that limits placed on the Ukrainian military would affect the country’s sovereignty. She emphasized that Ukraine must retain its capacity to defend itself against Russia, which “has waged war many times over the past years.”

On Sunday, Zelenskyy said there was now an understanding that U.S. proposals could reflect several Ukrainian priorities, though he did not detail what changes were made.

Confusion Over Origin of Draft Peace Plan

Uncertainty over the proposal’s origins intensified after Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk questioned who authored the plan and where it was developed. The debate grew after several U.S. lawmakers said Rubio had described the document as a Russian “wish list.”

A State Department spokesperson denied the characterization as “blatantly false.” Rubio later suggested the senators had misunderstood him, even though they cited him as their source.

Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the plan resembled “a series of Russian talking points” and had generated “ferocious pushback” from European allies who felt sidelined.

Turkey Pursues Separate Diplomatic Track

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced he would speak with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday about reviving the 2022 Black Sea grain deal. The agreement, brokered by the UN and Turkey, had allowed Ukraine to export grain safely until Russia exited the deal in 2023, citing unmet commitments related to Russian agricultural exports.

Erdogan said he hoped to restore the initiative, which he described as an effort “to open the path to peace.” His outreach followed talks with Zelenskyy in Ankara days earlier.

Turkey’s involvement highlights the wide diplomatic efforts underway as the conflict approaches its fourth year, with global leaders seeking a durable settlement that preserves Ukrainian sovereignty while reducing the humanitarian, economic, and security costs of the war.

Source: AP News – In Geneva, US and Ukraine officials report progress on ending Russia’s war but offer few specifics

The post US and Ukraine Report Progress in Geneva Talks on Ending Russia’s War appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Published Time: 09-05-2025, 14:30

French President Emmanuel Macron announced that 26 nations have pledged to provide troops and security forces for Ukraine once active fighting in the war with Russia ends. The commitment, made during a high-level meeting in Paris, underscores international efforts to guarantee Ukraine’s long-term stability after a ceasefire or peace agreement is reached.

A Coalition to Secure Ukraine’s Future

The announcement followed a gathering of the “coalition of the willing,” a group of 35 nations supporting Kyiv. According to Macron, 26 of those countries confirmed plans to deploy forces on land, at sea, or in the air to help ensure Ukraine’s security in the post-war period.

Macron emphasized that the reassurance force would not be designed to wage war against Russia, but rather to deter further aggression. “The objective is to prevent any new major attack and to involve the 26 states directly in Ukraine’s lasting security,” Macron said at a joint press conference with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

The French leader also noted that Washington had signaled its readiness to participate in the planning process, though specific details remain under discussion.

U.S. Signals Conditional Support

Both Macron and Zelenskyy highlighted that the United States has expressed willingness to contribute to the security framework. While the scope of U.S. involvement is not yet defined, Macron said planning would be finalized in consultation with Washington.

Zelenskyy welcomed the development, adding: “As for in what format, I am not yet ready to tell you in detail, but the U.S. position is very important for us.”

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, co-leading the initiative with Macron, has repeatedly stressed that U.S. backing is essential for any European reassurance mission to succeed.

Pressure on Russia to End the Conflict

European leaders participating in the Paris meeting—some in person, others virtually—called on Russian President Vladimir Putin to work toward ending hostilities. Germany warned that sanctions against Moscow would intensify if Russia continued to delay peace efforts.

Following the session, leaders also spoke by phone with U.S. President Donald Trump, who urged Europe to stop buying Russian oil and gas, citing figures that the EU had paid Moscow approximately €1.1 billion in fuel sales over the past year. Trump also encouraged stronger economic pressure on China, accusing Beijing of indirectly funding Russia’s war.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz proposed three areas of focus, including convening a summit with Zelenskyy, pushing for a ceasefire agreement, and expanding sanctions if Moscow resists negotiations.

Zelenskyy Calls for Direct Talks with Putin

President Zelenskyy reiterated his view that direct negotiations with Putin are essential. “This is not a matter of desire, this is a matter of necessity,” he said. Zelenskyy added that Ukraine remains open to bilateral or trilateral formats, accusing Russia of deliberately delaying talks.

Putin, meanwhile, stated that a settlement could be possible “if common sense prevails” and noted that Trump has shown “a sincere desire” to help reach an agreement. Russian officials have yet to formally respond to Macron’s reassurance force proposal.

NATO and Security Guarantees

In a shift of U.S. policy earlier this year, Washington signaled openness to supporting security guarantees for Ukraine similar to NATO’s collective defense commitments. Zelenskyy has said Kyiv hopes for continued American intelligence sharing and air defense support as part of any post-war arrangement.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte underscored the need for a broad coalition, both to safeguard Ukraine and to strengthen Europe’s ability to deter Russian military actions elsewhere.

“We cannot be naive about Russia,” Rutte said. “Our deterrence must be strong enough that they never attempt further aggression, knowing that the response would be devastating.”

Escalation and Drone Attacks in Ukraine

While diplomatic talks continue, the war has not paused. Ukraine’s Air Force reported that Russia launched 112 strike and decoy drones overnight Thursday, with Ukrainian defenses intercepting or jamming 84.

Separately, Moscow announced the expulsion of an Estonian diplomat, a move seen as retaliation for Tallinn’s recent decision to declare a Russian envoy persona non grata.

Outlook: Balancing Diplomacy and Defense

The Paris meeting marked a significant step toward outlining Ukraine’s post-war security framework. With 26 nations committing to a reassurance force, leaders sought to send a strong signal to Moscow that international support for Ukraine will not waver, even after a ceasefire.

Still, uncertainties remain over the precise structure of U.S. involvement, the durability of European unity, and whether Russia will agree to peace talks. For now, Kyiv continues to prepare for both ongoing conflict and the complex negotiations that will shape its long-term security.

Source: AP News – Macron says 26 countries pledge troops as a reassurance force for Ukraine after war ends

The post Macron: 26 Nations Commit to Post-War Reassurance Force for Ukraine appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Published Time 08-12-2025, 14:00

As Ukraine faces relentless nightly bombardments from Russian forces, U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement of sending Patriot missile systems to Kyiv has sparked cautious optimism. Despite the excitement, many questions remain about how many systems Ukraine will receive, when they will arrive, and their overall impact on the conflict.

The Strategic Importance of Patriot Missile Systems

Patriot missiles, short for Phased Array Tracking Radar for Intercept on Target, represent the backbone of the U.S. Army’s advanced missile defense capabilities. These systems have gained global recognition, notably for their recent success in intercepting 13 out of 14 missiles launched by Iran at a U.S. base in Qatar last month.

The latest Patriot models can intercept a range of threats—including short-range ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones—at altitudes reaching 15 kilometers (9.3 miles) and distances up to 35 kilometers. This capability allows a single Patriot battery to protect an area of approximately 100 to 200 square kilometers, depending on terrain and deployment specifics.

While impressive, this coverage is relatively limited considering Ukraine’s vast size—over 603,000 square kilometers—highlighting Kyiv’s urgent need for multiple Patriot batteries to secure key regions.

What Does a Patriot Battery Consist Of?

A Patriot battery includes six to eight missile launchers, each capable of holding up to 16 interceptor missiles. The system also features a sophisticated phased-array radar, a command and control center, and power generation units, all mounted on mobile trucks and trailers.

Operating the system requires a crew of about 90 personnel, though during combat situations, only three soldiers are needed in the control center to manage launches and tracking. This complexity reflects the high technical demands and operational costs involved.

The High Cost of Advanced Missile Defense

The Patriot system comes with a hefty price tag. According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a full Patriot battery—including launchers, radars, and interceptor missiles—costs over one billion dollars. Each interceptor missile alone can cost up to $4 million.

This raises challenges in the Ukrainian context, where Russia often uses inexpensive drones—costing as little as $50,000—in large numbers to overwhelm defenses. Deploying costly interceptors against cheap drones presents a tactical and financial dilemma.

U.S. officials have indicated that Ukraine’s access to Patriots could accelerate if systems are reallocated from NATO allies in Europe, who would then be replenished with new equipment purchased from the U.S.

President Trump mentioned that some or all of the 17 Patriot batteries ordered by other countries might be delivered to Ukraine “very quickly,” though precise timelines and quantities remain unclear.

International Support and NATO’s Role

The 2025 Military Balance report by the International Institute for Strategic Studies highlights that six NATO members—Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, and Spain—currently operate Patriot batteries.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte recently acknowledged that countries including Germany, Finland, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway could be potential suppliers of new defense systems, though he did not specify if Patriots would come from these nations.

Inside the U.S. military, there are concerns over stretched Patriot inventories. General James Mingus, Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, described the Patriot force as “our most stressed force element,” noting long deployments like the 500 days in the Middle East for the Qatar-based unit.

Ukraine’s Current Status and Ongoing Needs

Kyiv has requested 10 new Patriot batteries to bolster its air defense amid intensifying Russian missile and drone attacks. To date, Ukraine has received six operational batteries from a mix of sources: two from the U.S., two from Germany, one from Romania, and one jointly from Germany and the Netherlands, according to the UK-based arms monitoring group Action on Armed Violence.

Despite these additions, experts agree that Patriot systems alone will not end the war or halt the invasion. Their primary role is defensive—protecting cities and infrastructure from aerial attacks.

Experts Weigh In: No Single Solution to the Conflict

Retired U.S. Army General and former NATO Supreme Commander Wesley Clark told CNN that an effective arms package must include more than just air defenses.

“If you want to really stop this, you’ve got to strike Russia and you’ve got to strike deep,” Clark said. “You have to shoot the archer, not just the arrows coming in.”

This perspective highlights the complexity of the conflict and the need for a comprehensive strategy that includes offensive capabilities alongside missile defense systems.

Conclusion: Patriot Missiles as a Vital but Partial Answer

The Patriot missile system remains a critical asset in Ukraine’s defense arsenal against Russia’s escalating missile and drone campaign. While the systems provide significant protective coverage, the scale of Ukraine’s territory and the volume of attacks demand multiple batteries and a broader, multi-faceted military approach.

As Kyiv awaits further deliveries, the world watches closely, recognizing that advanced air defense is essential but insufficient on its own to turn the tide of war.

Source: CNN – What are Patriot missiles and why does Ukraine need them so badly?

The post Why Ukraine’s Urgent Need for Patriot Missiles Could Change the War’s Dynamics appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

July-27-2025, 20:45 ET

In a major foreign policy shift, President Donald Trump has taken a firmer stance on Russia, signaling support for Ukraine through NATO and warning the Kremlin of severe oil-related sanctions unless it agrees to peace negotiations. The new strategy aims to curb Russia’s war ambitions by targeting its most critical economic sector—energy exports.

While experts see the move as a strategic escalation, they caution that achieving a durable peace could take years and require complex diplomatic concessions. Trump’s evolving policy reflects the broader challenge of balancing U.S. national interests with global security.

A sharp pivot: From diplomacy to economic pressure

President Trump’s stance on Russia has undergone a significant change since his return to office. Earlier this month, for the first time in his current term, Trump reaffirmed U.S. support for Ukraine as part of a broader NATO arms agreement. In doing so, he issued a direct ultimatum to Russian President Vladimir Putin: pursue a peace deal or face tough new sanctions—particularly on oil exports, which are central to Russia’s economy.

The announcement marks a notable departure from Trump’s earlier emphasis on diplomacy and non-intervention. Now, the administration is betting on economic tools to push Moscow back to the negotiating table.

Fred Fleitz, former deputy assistant to Trump and chief of staff of the National Security Council during his first term, said the strategy has long-term potential.

“I think it will be effective, and he’s going to stick to that strategy,” Fleitz told Fox News Digital. “We will see. This may take a couple of years to solve.”

Internal GOP divisions over Ukraine and foreign aid

Trump’s pivot has not been universally embraced, even within the Republican Party. While many conservatives support stronger actions to end the war, some prominent figures have criticized ongoing U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts.

Among them is Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a staunch Trump ally, who voiced opposition on social media:

“We do not want to give or sell weapons to Ukraine or be involved in any foreign wars or continue the never-ending flow of foreign aid. We want to solve our own problems plaguing our own people.”

Despite such pushback, Trump appears determined to maintain pressure on Russia while leveraging alliances through NATO. He recently met with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and confirmed plans to sell advanced U.S. arms to European allies that would, in turn, support Ukraine.

“We want to defend our country. But ultimately, having a strong Europe is a very good thing,” Trump said during the joint press conference.

Can sanctions and arms deals shift Russia’s war strategy?

Many security analysts argue that the war’s trajectory will ultimately be decided on the battlefield—not solely through sanctions or diplomacy. John Hardie, deputy director of the Russia Program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), emphasized this during a recent briefing with the U.S. Helsinki Commission.

“Ukraine shouldn’t be restricted merely to shooting down arrows,” Hardie said, referring to missile defense. “An optimal approach will combine both offense and defense. Ukraine needs to be able to hit the archer—and the factories that make the arrows.”

He argued that sustained pressure on the Russian economy, alongside support for Ukraine’s military capabilities, could eventually force a strategic rethink in Moscow.

“Putin will continue his unprovoked war so long as he believes it’s sustainable,” Hardie told lawmakers. “Changing that calculus requires hitting Russia where it hurts—economically and militarily.”

A long path to armistice, not a quick peace

While some in Washington hold out hope for a swift resolution, Fleitz cautions that peace is unlikely to come easily or quickly. He predicts the war could end not with a formal treaty, but with an armistice—a negotiated suspension of fighting between both sides.

“I think there’s probably going to be an armistice where both sides will agree to suspend the fighting,” said Fleitz, now vice chair of the America First Policy Institute’s Center for American Security.

According to Fleitz, a workable resolution might involve Ukraine agreeing to pause its pursuit of NATO membership for a defined period, while Western allies continue to arm Kyiv to deter future aggression.

“Maybe this is a pipe dream, but I think that’s the most realistic way to stop the fighting,” he said. “We know from history: conflicts like this take time. Peacemaking takes time.”

Balancing America First with international security

Trump’s latest move reflects his evolving “America First” foreign policy, which has often emphasized national sovereignty and reduced overseas entanglements. However, advisers say he is willing to adjust that philosophy when strategic threats grow too serious to ignore.

Fleitz explained that Trump’s decision to target Russia’s energy exports follows a broader shift in response to intelligence and changing battlefield conditions.

“He has ownership of this approach, and he will adjust if necessary,” Fleitz noted. “He looked at the intelligence and realized it was getting too close. First it was diplomacy, now it’s economic pressure.”

That flexibility, Fleitz argues, is what distinguishes Trump’s leadership. It allows him to respond quickly to threats while still adhering to core principles of U.S. sovereignty and strength.

Conclusion: Strategy with patience

As the Ukraine war enters another difficult phase, the success of Trump’s oil sanctions strategy remains uncertain. Security experts believe it could work—but only with time, sustained economic pressure, and strong military support for Ukraine.

In the meantime, the administration must navigate political resistance at home, maintain unity among NATO allies, and avoid escalating tensions with Moscow too far.

For now, Trump’s message is clear: peace through strength, with sanctions as the stick—and Ukraine’s sovereignty as the goal.

Source: FOX News – From talk to tactics: Trump pivots on Russia strategy to end war

The post Trump’s Russia strategy shifts to sanctions: Can oil pressure end the war in Ukraine? appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Kananaskis, Alberta — The Group of Seven summit wrapped up with more questions than answers as six world leaders struggled to find common ground on key global crises—Russia’s war in Ukraine, the escalating Israel-Iran conflict, and global trade tensions—after U.S. President Donald Trump made an early exit.

While Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and leaders from the U.K., France, Germany, Italy, and Japan continued discussions through the summit’s final day, the absence of Trump loomed large. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte joined the talks on Tuesday, hoping for clear commitments—particularly on Ukraine—but major agreements never materialized.

No Unified Stance on Ukraine

One of the summit’s most pressing challenges—Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine—ended without a joint statement. Zelenskyy, who had been scheduled to meet with Trump (a meeting later scrapped), called for more support and said Ukraine was ready for peace talks and a ceasefire, but needed stronger pressure on Russia.

Behind the scenes, a senior Canadian official said the U.S. had resisted any joint declaration on Ukraine, reportedly to avoid undermining its diplomatic push for negotiations with Moscow. Although Canada later walked back that claim, the lack of a unified front was clear. Carney instead issued Canada’s own statement reaffirming support for a “secure and sovereign Ukraine” and announcing new economic sanctions on Russia.

Meanwhile, Trump defended his reluctance to join new sanctions, arguing that punishing Russia comes with “tremendous” costs to the U.S. He also blamed the Ukraine war on the 2014 G7 decision to expel Vladimir Putin over Crimea’s annexation—a stance at odds with his G7 peers.

Tensions in the Middle East Dominate the Agenda

The summit was also overshadowed by growing fears of a regional war in the Middle East. As Israeli airstrikes pounded Iran and Tehran fired back with missiles and drones, leaders scrambled to address the crisis.

Trump, before leaving, briefly joined the others in releasing a carefully worded joint statement calling for a ceasefire in Gaza and stressing that Iran “can never have a nuclear weapon.” French President Emmanuel Macron warned against any push for regime change in Iran, saying military action would only lead to more instability.

“I believe the greatest mistake today would be to pursue regime change in Iran through military means,” Macron said. “That would lead to chaos.”

Trade Frictions and Awkward Moments

Trade tensions also resurfaced, with Trump’s steep tariffs dominating side conversations. His trade team stayed behind in Canada to continue talks as he flew back to Washington. Trump has slapped 50% tariffs on steel and aluminum, a 25% tax on cars, and a 10% tariff on most imports—measures that have strained relationships with key allies. More hikes may be on the way after his self-imposed 90-day deadline for trade renegotiations ends July 9.

Despite the chilly atmosphere, Trump did share one bright moment with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, finalizing a U.S.–U.K. trade framework first announced in May. But even that included a touch of awkwardness: as Trump waved around the signed agreement, he dropped the papers. Starmer quickly picked them up—explaining afterward that only he could safely approach Trump without alarming security.

“There were quite strict rules about who can get close to the president,” Starmer said. “It wouldn’t have been good for anyone else to step forward.”

Fractured Unity, Lingering Questions

With no major breakthroughs and a summit visibly lacking in unity, questions remain about the G7’s effectiveness in shaping global policy. Macron defended Carney’s leadership, saying it’s unrealistic to expect any host to resolve the world’s biggest problems in a single summit. “That would be unfair,” he said.

Carney himself downplayed Trump’s early departure, saying it was driven by the urgent crisis in the Middle East, not disagreements at the summit. “There was no problem,” he told reporters. “Mr. Trump felt it was better to be in Washington, and I can understand that.”

Still, the optics were hard to ignore: a world grappling with war, rising authoritarianism, and economic uncertainty—and a summit struggling to stay in sync without its most powerful member at the table.

“We did everything I had to do at the G7,” Trump said from Air Force One. But as the headlines and photo ops show, that “everything” may not have been enough.

Source: AP News – G7 leaders fail to reach ambitious joint agreements on key issues after Trump’s exit

The post G7 Summit Ends Without Unity After Trump Walks Out Early appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.