Trump’s previous tariff push terrified the world economy. He’s betting this time is different

Trump’s previous tariff push terrified the world economy. He’s betting this time is different
Containers are seen at the International Container Terminal in Surabaya, Indonesia on July 7, 2025. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 09 July 2025

Trump’s previous tariff push terrified the world economy. He’s betting this time is different

Trump’s previous tariff push terrified the world economy. He’s betting this time is different
  • With Trump’s 90-day tariff negotiation period ending, he has so far sent letters to 14 countries that place taxes on imported goods ranging from 25 percent to 40 percent

WASHINGTON: When President Donald Trump last rolled out tariffs this high, financial markets quaked, consumer confidence crashed and his popularity plunged.
Only three months later, he’s betting this time is different.
In his new round of tariffs being announced this week, Trump is essentially tethering the entire world economy to his instinctual belief that import taxes will deliver factory jobs and stronger growth in the US, rather than the inflation and slowdown predicted by many economists.
On Tuesday, he told his Cabinet that past presidents who hadn’t aggressively deployed tariffs were “stupid.” Ever the salesman, Trump added that it was “too time-consuming” to try to negotiate trade deals with the rest of the world, so it was just easier to send them letters, as he’s doing this week, that list the tariff rates on their goods.
The letters marked a change from his self-proclaimed April 2 “Liberation Day” event at the White House, where he had posterboards with the rates displayed, a choice that led to a brief market meltdown and the 90-day negotiating period with baseline 10 percent tariffs that will end Wednesday. Trump, instead, chose to send form letters with random capitalizations and punctuation and other formatting issues.
“It’s a better way,” Trump said of his letters. “It’s a more powerful way. And we send them a letter. You read the letter. I think it was well crafted. And, mostly it’s just a little number in there: You’ll pay 25 percent, 35 percent. We have some of at 60, 70.”
When Trump said those words, he had yet to issue a letter with a tariff rate higher than 40 percent, which he levied Monday on Laos and Myanmar. He plans to put 25 percent tariffs on Japan and South Korea, two major trading partners and allies deemed crucial for curbing China’s economic influence. Leaders of the 14 countries tariffed so far hope to negotiate over the next three weeks before the higher rates are charged on imports.
“I would say that every case I’m treating them better than they treated us over the years,” Trump said.
Three possible outcomes
His approach is at odds with how major trade agreements have been produced over the last half-century, detailed sessions that could sometimes take years to solve complex differences between nations.
There are three possible outcomes to this political and economic wager, each of which could drastically reshape international affairs and Trump’s legacy.
Trump could prove most economic experts wrong and the tariffs could deliver growth as promised. Or he could retreat again on tariffs before their Aug. 1 start in a repeat of the “Trump Always Chickens Out” phenomenon, also known as TACO. Or he could damage the economy in ways that could boomerang against the communities that helped return him to the White House last year, as well as hurt countries that are put at a financial disadvantage by the tariffs.
Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, said Trump’s letters had “extended his tariff purgatory for another month,” essentially freezing in place the US economy as CEOs, foreign leaders and consumers are unclear of Trump’s actual strategy on foreign trade.
“The TACO negotiating tactic pioneered by Trump is making his threats less and less credible and reducing our trading partners’ willingness to even meet us halfway,” Wyden said. “There’s no sign that he’s any closer to striking durable trade deals that would actually help American workers and businesses.”
So far, the stock and bond markets are relatively calm, with the S&P 500 stock index essentially flat Tuesday after a Monday decline. Trump is coming off a legislative win with his multitrillion-dollar income tax cuts. And he’s confidently levying tariffs at levels that previously rocked global markets, buoyed by the fact that inflation has eased so far instead of accelerating as many economists and Democratic rivals had warned.
“By floating tariffs as high as 40 percent to even 100 percent, the administration has ‘normalized’ the 25 percent tariff hikes — yet this is still one of the most aggressive and disruptive tariff moves in modern history,” said Wendong Zhang, an economist at Cornell University. “This gradual unveiling, paradoxically, risks normalizing what would otherwise be considered exceptionally large tariff hikes.”
Others simply see Trump as a source of nonstop chaos, with the letters and their somewhat random tariff rates showing the absence of a genuine policy process inside his administration.
“It’s really just a validation that this policy is all over the place, that they’re running this by the seat of their pants, that there is no real strategy,” said Desmond Lachman, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a right-leaning think tank.
Questions about how much money tariffs will generate
With Trump’s 90-day tariff negotiation period ending, he has so far sent letters to 14 countries that place taxes on imported goods ranging from 25 percent to 40 percent. He said he would sign an order Tuesday to place 50 percent tariffs on copper and said at the Cabinet meeting that at some point pharmaceutical drugs could face tariffs of as much as 200 percent. All of that is on top of his existing 50 percent tariffs on steel and aluminum, 25 percent tariffs on autos and his separate import taxes on Canada, Mexico and China.
“The obvious inference is that markets for now are somewhat skeptical that Trump will go through with it, or alternatively they think compromises will be reached,” said Ben May, a director of global economic research at the consultancy Oxford Economics. “That’s probably the key element.”
May said the tariffs are likely to reduce the growth in US household incomes, but not cause those incomes to shrink outright.
Trump has said his tariffs would close US trade imbalances, though it’s unclear why he would target nations such as Tunisia that do relatively little trade with America. Administration officials say trillions of dollars in tariff revenues over the next decade would help offset the revenue losses from the continuation and expansion of his 2017 tax cuts that were signed into law Friday.
The federal government has collected $98.2 billion in tariff revenues so far this year, more than double what it collected last year, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center.
At Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the tariff revenues could be “well over $300 billion by the end of the year.” Bessent added that “we don’t agree” with the Congressional Budget Office estimate that tariffs would bring in $2.8 trillion over 10 years, “which we think is probably low.”
The governments of Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia and South Africa have each said they hope for further negotiations on tariffs with Trump, though it’s unclear how that’s possible as Trump has said it would be too “complicated” to hold all those meetings.
Instead on Tuesday, Trump posted on social media that the tariffs would be charged as scheduled starting Aug. 1.
“There has been no change to this date, and there will be no change,” Trump said on Truth Social. “No extensions will be granted. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”


China says it does not target any third party in ties with others

China says it does not target any third party in ties with others
Updated 6 sec ago

China says it does not target any third party in ties with others

China says it does not target any third party in ties with others
BEIJING: China does not target any third party while developing diplomatic ties with other countries, its foreign ministry said on Thursday, responding to US President Donald Trump’s comment that China, Russia and North Korea were conspiring against the US
In a post directed at Chinese President Xi Jinping on Truth Social as a massive military parade kicked off in Beijing on Wednesday, Trump highlighted the US role in helping China secure its freedom from Japan during World War Two.
“Please give my warmest regards to Vladimir Putin, and Kim Jong Un, as you conspire against the United States of America,” Trump added.

Afghanistan earthquake death toll climbs as aid runs thin

Afghanistan earthquake death toll climbs as aid runs thin
Updated 30 min 21 sec ago

Afghanistan earthquake death toll climbs as aid runs thin

Afghanistan earthquake death toll climbs as aid runs thin
  • Humanitarian needs are “vast and growing rapidly,” said aid group the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC)
  • The United Nations has warned the toll could rise with people still trapped under rubble as time runs out for survivors

KABUL/NURGAL: Rescue workers and volunteers in eastern Afghanistan are still pulling bodies from the rubble days after powerful earthquakes devastated mountainous provinces bordering Pakistan, with Taliban authorities reporting the death toll has surpassed 1,457 and could rise further. More than 3,700 people have been injured and over 6,700 homes destroyed.

The first quake, measuring 6.0 in magnitude, struck on Sunday at a shallow depth of 10 km, making it one of the deadliest in decades. A second tremor of 5.5 magnitude on Tuesday triggered landslides, blocking access to remote villages in Kunar and Nangarhar provinces and complicating rescue efforts. Entire households were wiped out in some areas, and survivors have been left to sift through rubble with pickaxes and carry bodies on woven stretchers.

“Everything we had has been destroyed,” said Aalem Jan, a survivor from Kunar. “Our house collapsed, and all our belongings and possessions were lost. The only remaining things are these clothes on our backs.”

While most cut-off villages have now been reached, hopes of finding survivors are fading quickly. “Many survivors are still believed to be trapped beneath collapsed homes, and the window for finding them alive is rapidly closing,” the World Health Organization (WHO) warned.

Aid Shortfalls

Relief efforts face steep challenges. Rockfalls and poor infrastructure have slowed aid deliveries, while decades of war, poverty, and shrinking foreign assistance have left Afghanistan ill-prepared for large-scale disasters. The WHO said local health care services are “under immense strain” and appealed for $4 million to expand emergency operations, while also pointing to a critical funding gap for trauma supplies and medicines.

The UN World Food Programme (WFP) said it has resources to support survivors for just four more weeks, warning of a looming cutoff. Other aid groups stressed the need for long-term donor commitments. “The earthquake should serve as a stark reminder: Afghanistan cannot be left to face one crisis after another alone,” said Jacopo Caridi of the Norwegian Refugee Council.

UN refugee chief Filippo Grandi estimated more than 500,000 people have been affected, with thousands displaced. The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) said humanitarian needs are “vast and growing rapidly.”

Meanwhile, Afghanistan faces overlapping crises: endemic poverty, severe drought, and the forced return of millions of Afghans from Pakistan and Iran since the Taliban’s 2021 takeover. Despite the disaster, Pakistan has resumed its push to expel Afghan migrants, with more than 6,300 crossing back into quake-hit Nangarhar province on Tuesday alone.

“Every hour counts,” said WHO emergency lead Jamshed Tanoli. “Hospitals are struggling, families are grieving, and survivors have lost everything.”


Land mines and tuberculosis are no match for Tanzanian ‘hero rats’ sniffing out danger and disease

Land mines and tuberculosis are no match for Tanzanian ‘hero rats’ sniffing out danger and disease
Updated 04 September 2025

Land mines and tuberculosis are no match for Tanzanian ‘hero rats’ sniffing out danger and disease

Land mines and tuberculosis are no match for Tanzanian ‘hero rats’ sniffing out danger and disease
  • For decades APOPO has trained these “hero rats,” which have one of the most sensitive noses in the animal kingdom
  • Since 2003, the rats have been finding land mines and, more recently, have been turned on to trafficked wildlife and earthquake survivors

MOROGORO: A man lies unmoving, slumped in the rubble of a simulated earthquake, as an unlikely rescuer approaches: a rat with a backpack. Whiskers waving, the rat breezes past garbage, toppled furniture and scattered clothes to find him and pull a trigger on its pack, alerting searchers above.
Then a resounding click. A survivor has been found. The search in Morogoro in Tanzania’s Uluguru Mountains is over and the rat scurries out of the abandoned building to be rewarded with a banana. A successful mission is complete for this African giant pouched rat being trained for search and rescue operations.
“Their sense of smell is incredible,” said Fabrizio Dell’Anna, an animal behaviorist at APOPO, a Tanzania-based nongovernmental organization that trains the rats for lifesaving applications. “These rats are able to detect explosives, tuberculosis — even tiny amounts of the bacteria — and in this project, they are able to correctly identify and indicate humans.”
In a field nearby, more rats walk on leashes held between handlers, pacing a grid filled with land mines as part of an initiative by APOPO, which works alongside Sokoine University of Agriculture. When they pause, it indicates that explosives are beneath. These rats are readying for their next deployment, perhaps Angola or Cambodia, where APOPO has helped clear more than 50,000 land mines since 2014.
From detecting land mines to sniffing out tuberculosis, these “hero rats” have become unlikely, and sometimes unrecognized, front-line responders in Tanzania and beyond.
Trained ‘hero rats’ with sensitive noses
For decades APOPO has trained these “hero rats,” which have one of the most sensitive noses in the animal kingdom. Since 2003, the rats have been finding land mines and, more recently, have been turned on to trafficked wildlife and earthquake survivors.
The rats begin training shortly after birth for specific missions and, with a longer-than-average rodent life span of almost a decade, can spend years carrying out their work. The cost of training each rat runs around 6,000 euros ($6,990).
It is all done with classical conditioning and positive reinforcement, explained Dell’Anna, who oversees the search and rescue program. The first cohort of this group of specialized rats are already in Turkiye with a partner search and rescue organization.
Helping the global fight against TB
While the rats focused on explosives or survivors buried in rubble get all the glory, it is a group of rats inside a lab that are arguably the most impactful lifesavers. These are not typical lab rats, but rather, as their proponents would argue, one of the world’s most effective detectors of tuberculosis.
“Every day as many people die from TB as from land mines in a whole year,” said Christophe Cox, the CEO of APOPO. “It’s more spectacular to be on the minefield … but for TB … in terms of social impact, it’s tremendous.”
Tuberculosis is an ancient respiratory disease that continues to run rampant despite centuries of research and treatment. The World Health Organization said last October in its most recent TB report that the disease had resurged as the top infectious disease killer, with 1.25 million deaths and a record 8.2 million infections in 2023.
In sub-Saharan Africa, only about half of TB patients receive a diagnosis, according to a study by researchers in the UK and Gambia published in the National Library of Medicine, and this leaves them liable to spread the disease. Tanzania struggles with one of the highest global TB burdens, according to the WHO.
APOPO expanded into TB detection in 2007 and its rats have been deployed in Tanzania, Ethiopia and Mozambique. The group works with 80 hospitals in Tanzania, collecting samples daily and bringing them to the lab rats.
With their sensitive noses, the rats sniff out samples of sputum from patients, looking for positive TB cases that had been marked as negative. Research suggests the rats are picking up on six unique volatile organic compounds in positive TB samples, said Cox.
False negatives remain a persistent issue in TB detection and suppression because each infected person can spread the disease to 10 to 15 more people each year.
“The benefits of using rats are significant,” said Felista Stanesloaus, a doctor at a TB clinic in Morogoro. “They help us detect cases that might otherwise be missed, which prevents people from unknowingly spreading infections.”
Making TB detection accessible
TB detection has made significant advances in recent years, including using artificial intelligence tools in conjunction with lung scans. However, many areas that are burdened most by TB, such as rural villages or low-income urban communities, do not have access to these tools.
While the use of molecular detection devices, such as one called GeneXpert, have become more widespread, a clinic may only have one of these devices and it can take two hours to process a sample. Overburdened clinics turn to the centuries-old technique of microscopy, or investigation of sputum under a microscope, which is both fallible and time-consuming.
“Human error may result in a person being told they are disease-free when they are not,” said Stanesloaus. “Using rats is a very effective initiative.”
APOPO’s rats can scan 100 samples in 20 minutes, and since the program’s inception, the rats have been able to identify more than 30,000 patients who had been sent home with a clean bill of health but were actually carrying TB, said Cox. The NGO is able to do with one lab what 55 hospitals do in a day, he adds.
Yet using live animals in the place of medical devices poses challenges, especially when it comes to scale. Samples have to be brought directly to a lab with enough trained rats to conduct the detection, with some samples brought to Morogoro by motorbike each day. Operations are most effective in dense urban centers, like Dar es Salaam, Cox said.
Meeting WHO standards
The more existential challenge for these “hero rats” comes from regulators and a wider health community who doubt this unconventional method of disease detection.
APOPO’s rats are not classified as primary diagnostic tools by the WHO. Instead, they are a second line of defense. Any positive samples detected by the rats must be confirmed with human microscopy in APOPO’s labs before treatment can be administered.
“It’s a big challenge,” said Cox. “Not being recognized by the WHO means that the mainstream funding for TB … never reaches us.”
Cox has given up on the prospect of getting approval from the WHO, though APOPO has faced pressure from donors to go through this process, which would be extensive and rigorous with no guarantee of success.
Regulators may also challenge APOPO’s method of focusing on finding every single positive case possible at the cost of more potential false positives.
APOPO relies on the indication of just one rat to proceed with further investigation into a possible positive case, while higher specificity standards may need multiple rats to flag a sample.
Cox defends this approach.
“Our choice was to go for that last patient out there — to go for the social impact,” said Cox.


Trump says US strike targeting Venezuelan gang will cause cartels to think twice

Trump says US strike targeting Venezuelan gang will cause cartels to think twice
Updated 04 September 2025

Trump says US strike targeting Venezuelan gang will cause cartels to think twice

Trump says US strike targeting Venezuelan gang will cause cartels to think twice
  • Tuesday’s strike was an astonishing departure from typical US drug interdiction efforts at a time when Trump has ordered a major Navy buildup in the waters near Venezuela
  • Trump and administration officials have repeatedly blamed the gang for being at the root of the violence and illicit drug dealing that plague some American cities

WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump on Wednesday justified the lethal military strike that his administration said was carried out a day earlier against a Venezuelan gang as a necessary effort by the United States to send an unmistakable message to Latin American cartels.
Asked why the military did not instead interdict the vessel and capture those on board, Trump said the operation would cause drug smugglers to think twice about trying to move drugs into the US
“There was massive amounts of drugs coming into our country to kill a lot of people, and everybody fully understands that,” Trump said while hosting Polish President Karol Nawrocki at the White House. He added, “Obviously, they won’t be doing it again. And I think a lot of other people won’t be doing it again. When they watch that tape, they’re going to say, ‘Let’s not do this.’”
Tuesday’s strike was an astonishing departure from typical US drug interdiction efforts at a time when Trump has ordered a major Navy buildup in the waters near Venezuela.
Later Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned that such operations “will happen again.”
Rubio said previous US interdiction efforts in Latin America have not worked in stemming the flow of illicit drugs into the United States and beyond.
“What will stop them is when you blow them up, when you get rid of them,” Rubio said on a visit to Mexico.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on “Fox & Friends” that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro was running his country “as a kingpin of a drug narco-state.”
Hegseth said officials “knew exactly who was in that boat” and “exactly what they were doing.” But the Republican administration has not presented any evidence supporting Trump’s claim that operators of the vessel were from the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua and were trying to smuggle in drugs.
“President Trump is willing to go on offense in ways that others have not seen,” said Hegseth, who declined to detail how the strike was carried out.
Venezuela’s government, which has long minimized the presence of Tren de Aragua in the South American country, limited its reaction to the strike to questioning the veracity of a video publicized by the Trump administration showing the attack. Communications Minister Freddy Ñáñez suggested it was created using artificial intelligence and described it as an “almost cartoonish animation, rather than a realistic depiction of an explosion.”
Hegseth responded that the strike “was definitely not artificial intelligence,” adding he watched live footage from Washington as the strike was carried out.
Trump and administration officials have repeatedly blamed the gang for being at the root of the violence and illicit drug dealing that plague some American cities.
The president on Tuesday repeated his claim — contradicted by a declassified US intelligence assessment — that Tren de Aragua is operating under Maduro’s control.
In announcing the strike, Trump said the operation, which he said killed 11, was carried out in international waters. He also noted that the gang is designated by the US government as a foreign terrorist organization.
Unlike its counterparts from Colombia, Brazil and Central America, Tren de Aragua has no large-scale involvement in smuggling cocaine across international borders, according to InSight Crime, which last month published a 64-page report on the gang based on two years of research.
“We’ve found no direct participation of TdA in the transnational drug trade, although there are cases of them acting as subcontractors for other drug trafficking organizations,” said Jeremy McDermott, a Colombia-based co-founder of InSight Crime, referring to the Venezuelan gang by its initials.
Still, with affiliated cells spread across Latin America, it would not be a huge leap for Tren de Aragua to one day delve deeper into the drug trade, he said. Meanwhile, the rhetoric from officials in Washington who would blame TdA as a proxy for all Venezuelan drug traffickers assures it will remain a target of intense US government focus.
“It is almost impossible today to determine who is TdA and who is not,” said McDermott. “Deportations and statements from the United States suggest that TdA is now being used as a catch-all description for Venezuelan criminals acting abroad.”
Some international warfare experts are questioning the legality of the strike.
“Intentional killing outside armed conflict hostilities is unlawful unless it is to save a life immediately,” said Mary Ellen O’Connell, an expert on international law and the use of force at the University of Notre Dame Law School. “No hostilities were occurring in the Caribbean.”
Hegseth was opaque in his comments on Fox about whether Trump was looking to press for “regime change” in Venezuela.
“Well, that’s a presidential decision,” Hegseth said. He added that “anyone would prefer that” Maduro “would just give himself up. But that’s a presidential-level decision.”
The US announced plans last month to boost its maritime force in the waters off Venezuela to combat threats from Latin American drug cartels.
Maduro’s government has responded by deploying troops along Venezuela’s coast and border with neighboring Colombia, as well as by urging Venezuelans to enlist in a civilian militia.
Ryan Berg, director of the Americas program at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, said Tuesday’s strike clearly shows governments in the region, not only Maduro, the paradigm shift brought on by the US decision to declare Tren de Aragua and Mexican cartels as foreign terrorist organizations.
“This is a United States that sees security differently,” Berg said. “They’ve just demonstrated the ability to use deadly force in the Western Hemisphere, and they’ve already told Mexico that they’re going to do the same thing on Mexican territory if they don’t get the level of cooperation that they want.”
The US has a complicated legacy of sticking its hand in Latin American affairs, and American military interventions — particularly during the Cold War — played a major part in destabilizing governments and paving the way for coups in Guatemala, Chile and a number of Central American nations, which still grapple with the sometimes violent fallout.
In recent years, the US has taken a a more subtle approach, providing foreign assistance to many countries and security forces, but not making direct strikes like what was seen in Caribbean waters.
Mexican Secretary of Foreign Relations Juan Ramón de la Fuente, who met with Rubio on Wednesday, underscored the importance of the Trump administration to operate in the region “without subordination” of other governments and “respecting sovereignty” of allies.


European leaders face tough choices as the UK and France host another meeting on Ukraine

European leaders face tough choices as the UK and France host another meeting on Ukraine
Updated 04 September 2025

European leaders face tough choices as the UK and France host another meeting on Ukraine

European leaders face tough choices as the UK and France host another meeting on Ukraine
  • For months, the so called “coalition of the willing” has been meeting to discuss aid for Ukraine, including sketching out plans for military support in the event of a ceasefire to deter future Russian aggression
  • While Trump and European leaders met in Washington after the Alaska summit and US, European and NATO military chiefs held discussions on support for Ukraine little concrete detail emerged on the security guarantees to deter Moscow from a future conflict

LONDON: European countries are stuck between a rock and a hard place as a coalition of countries meets in Paris on Thursday to discuss security guarantees for a postwar Ukraine.
The war is raging unabated, with no ceasefire in sight — and the crucial question of American involvement in ensuring Ukraine’s future security remains unresolved.
For months, the so-called “coalition of the willing” has been meeting to discuss aid for Ukraine, including sketching out plans for military support in the event of a ceasefire to deter future Russian aggression.
The coalition leaders — French President Emmanuel Macron and U.K Prime Minister Keir Starmer — have insisted that any European “reassurance” force in Ukraine needs the backing of the United States. But while US President Donald Trump has hinted his country will be involved, he has moved away from calling for a ceasefire in Ukraine and refrained from implementing tough additional economic measures to punish Moscow.
Although Trump said he is “disappointed” in Russian President Vladimir Putin and issued several threats to try to cajole him into negotiating an end to hostilities, none has worked. At a meeting with Putin in Alaska in August, Trump failed to persuade the Russian leader to stop fighting and has not yet managed to broker talks between Putin and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky.
While Trump and European leaders met in Washington after the Alaska summit — and US, European and NATO military chiefs held discussions on support for Ukraine — little concrete detail has emerged on the security guarantees to deter Moscow from a future conflict.
Former military generals and experts suggest Europe is in a bind — not knowing the level of support the US is prepared to provide the coalition, the nature of any ceasefire or if the US will abide by commitments made. It’s also far from certain that Putin would agree to a cessation of hostilities, something Russian officials have invariably dismissed.
“Talking about detailed operational planning when you don’t actually have your mission is, quite frankly, impossible,” said Ed Arnold, an expert in European Security at the Royal United Services Institute in London and a former military planner.
Why Europeans believe a ceasefire is necessary
The “coalition of the willing” is a broad term for about 30 nations supporting Ukraine, but the so-called “reassurance force” that would provide security guarantees to Kyiv is a subset of that group.
The UK, France and Estonia have all suggested they are ready to deploy troops to Ukraine to deter Putin from attacking again, while officials in Poland said Warsaw will not take part and will instead focus on bolstering NATO security in the east of Europe.
There is “no suggestion” that any troops will be deployed without a ceasefire because it’s too risky, said François Heisbourg, special adviser at the Foundation for Strategic Research in Paris.
Despite Zelensky signaling his willingness to talk, a ceasefire agreement is not currently in the cards — not least because of the positions of the US and Russian presidents.
At his Aug. 18 meeting with European leaders at the White House — a day after meeting Putin — Trump walked back his previous demands for a ceasefire in Ukraine and said he thought a peace agreement was preferable.
The comments marked a shift toward the Russian position from Trump and would allow Moscow to fight on in Ukraine while peace negotiations are underway.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov later suggested an end to hostilities was even further away, stating that Moscow will not accept Zelensky’s signature on any peace agreement as Russia considers him to be an illegitimate president.
“If Putin doesn’t want a ceasefire — and if Trump doesn’t call for a ceasefire — what are the chances of a ceasefire happening?” asked Heisbourg.
What a European security guarantee for Ukraine could look like
Even if a ceasefire or peace agreement for Ukraine were implemented, it’s not clear it would be a sufficient deterrent to Putin and would be “very, very risky” for European nations, said Arnold at RUSI.
Such an operation hinges on the US providing intelligence support and the deterrent effect of US airpower in countries outside Ukraine.
The Western appetite to potentially shoot down Russian missiles violating a ceasefire or target launchers firing them from within Russia is “close to zero,” said Heisbourg.
Any response to a ceasefire violation, he said, would likely depend on “how many Western soldiers the Russians would have actually killed...and nobody wants to think about that too much in advance.”
In March, Starmer told allies that a force for Ukraine would need at least 10,000 troops, but that would potentially require around 30,000 troops when taking into account those on rotation and rest.
As a coalition leader, the UK should look at contributing a brigade of 5,000 soldiers which would become 15,000 when taking into account rest and rotation, said Arnold.
That figure would account for about 30 percent of the deployable capacity of the British Army, he said, and potentially create a “tricky” problem whereby the UK deploys more forces on behalf of non-NATO ally Ukraine than it does for NATO allies such as Estonia.
European officials have indicated that the troops could be involved in training Ukrainian soldiers and likely based away from the frontlines although the risk of Russian missile and drone strikes would remain high.
But there would be “zero credibility” if Western troops were put in various Ukrainian towns without a clear mission or purpose, said Ben Hodges, former commanding general of the US Army in Europe.
“That will not impress the Russians at all,” he added.
US as a reliable partner
European leaders are also grappling with the question of whether to take Trump and his officials at their word while also eyeing the rise of populist parties — particularly in the UK, France and Germany — which may not share the same commitment to Ukraine as current political leadership.
That means the future of any security guarantees for Kyiv could be extremely fragile.
There is “absolutely no guarantee” that Trump will abide by commitments made to European nations over Ukraine, said Arnold, pointing to Trump’s withdrawal from previous agreements, including the Paris climate agreement and Iran’s nuclear deal.
That means European nations cannot rely on him ordering US jets into action in the event of a ceasefire violation because “at one time he may say yes, at another time he may say no,” Arnold said.
With NATO membership for Kyiv ruled out by Trump and a host of hurdles to overcome to implement security guarantees for Ukraine, European leaders may decide to navigate the situation by spending “a lot more money on weapons” for Kyiv, said Heisbourg.
Arnold agreed, adding that the best option could be to give Kyiv “loads of guns and loads of ammo.”
“There’s no easy way out,” he said. “None of the options, especially for the Europeans, are good.”