Connect with us

Published

on

Ceasefires that are suddenly declared tend to be pretty fragile.

Stable ceasefires usually require a lot of preparation so that everyone on both sides knows what is supposed to happen, and – more importantly – when.

And they normally agree on how it will be monitored so one side cannot seize a quick advantage by breaking it suddenly.

Israel-Iran live updates: Trump swears live on camera as he rages at Israel and Iran

An ambulance burned by Israeli attacks stands on a street, amid the Iran-Israel conflict, in Tehran, Iran, June 23, 2025. Majid Asgaripour/W
Image:
An Israeli attack in Tehran, Iran, ahead of the ceasefire. Pic: Majid Asgaripour/WANA via Reuters

Without such preparations, and sometimes even with them, ceasefires will tend to be breached – perhaps by accident, perhaps because one side does not exercise full control over its own forces, perhaps as a result of false alarms, or even because a third party – a guerrilla group or a militia, say – choose that moment to launch an attack of their own.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Timeline of Israel-Iran conflict so far

The important question is whether a ceasefire breach is just random and unfortunate, or else deliberate and systemic – where someone is actively trying to break it.

Either way, ceasefires have to be politically reinforced all the time if they are to hold.

Read more from Sky News:
Israel-Iran ceasefire hopes drive down oil and gas costs
‘They don’t know what the f*** they’re doing’: Trump rages

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Furious Trump lashes out at Israel and Iran

All sides may need to rededicate themselves to it at regular intervals, mainly because, as genuine enemies, they won’t trust each other and will remain naturally suspicious at every twitch and utterance from the other side.

This is where an external power like the United States plays a critical part.

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

If enemies like Israel and Iran naturally distrust each other and need little incentive to “hit back” in some way at every provocation, it will take US pressure to make them abide by a ceasefire that may be breaking down.

Appeals to good nature are hardly relevant in this respect. An external arbiter has to make the continuance of a ceasefire a matter of hard national interest to both sides.

And that often requires as much bullying as persuasion. It may be true that “blessed are the peacemakers”.

Continue Reading

World

What’s it like with the National Guard on the streets of DC?

Published

on

By

What's it like with the National Guard on the streets of DC?

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

What’s it like on the streets of DC right now, as thousands of federal police patrol the streets?

Who is Steve Witkoff, the US envoy regularly meeting Vladimir Putin and Benjamin Netanyahu to broker peace in Ukraine and Gaza?

And why is Californian Governor Gavin Newsom now tweeting like Donald Trump?

Martha Kelner and Mark Stone answer your questions.

If you’ve also got a question you’d like the Trump100 team to answer, you can email it to trump100@sky.uk.

You can also watch all episodes on our YouTube channel.

Continue Reading

World

It’s been a confusing week – and Trump’s been made to look weak

Published

on

By

It's been a confusing week - and Trump's been made to look weak

It’s been a confusing week.

The Monday gathering of European leaders and Ukraine’s president with Donald Trump at the White House was highly significant.

Ukraine latest: Trump changes tack

The leaders went home buoyed by the knowledge that they’d finally convinced the American president not to abandon Europe. He had committed to provide American “security guarantees” to Ukraine.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

European leaders sit down with Trump for talks

The details were sketchy, and sketched out only a little more through the week (we got some noise about American air cover), but regardless, the presidential commitment represented a clear shift from months of isolationist rhetoric on Ukraine – “it’s Europe’s problem” and all the rest of it.

Yet it was always the case that, beyond that clear achievement for the Europeans, Russia would have a problem with it.

Trump’s envoy’s language last weekend – claiming that Putin had agreed to Europe providing “Article 5-like” guarantees for Ukraine, essentially providing it with a NATO-like collective security blanket – was baffling.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump: No US troops on ground in Ukraine

Russia gives two fingers to the president

And throughout this week, Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov has repeatedly and predictably undermined the whole thing, pointing out that Russia would never accept any peace plan that involved any European or NATO troops in Ukraine.

“The presence of foreign troops in Ukraine is completely unacceptable for Russia,” he said yesterday, echoing similar statements stretching back years.

Remember that NATO’s “eastern encroachment” was the justification for Russia’s “special military operation” – the invasion of Ukraine – in the first place. All this makes Trump look rather weak.

It’s two fingers to the president, though interestingly, the Russian language has been carefully calibrated not to poke Trump but to mock European leaders instead. That’s telling.

Read more on Ukraine:
Trump risks ‘very big mistake’
NATO-like promise for Ukraine may be too good to be true
Europe tried to starve Putin’s war machine – it didn’t go as planned

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Europe ‘undermining’ Ukraine talks

The bilateral meeting (between Putin and Zelenskyy) hailed by Trump on Monday as agreed and close – “within two weeks” – looks decidedly doubtful.

Maybe that’s why he went along with Putin’s suggestion that there be a bilateral, not including Trump, first.

It’s easier for the American president to blame someone else if it’s not his meeting, and it doesn’t happen.

NATO defence chiefs met on Wednesday to discuss the details of how the security guarantees – the ones Russia won’t accept – will work.

European sources at the meeting have told me it was all a great success. And to the comments by Lavrov, a source said: “It’s not up to Lavrov to decide on security guarantees. Not up to the one doing the threatening to decide how to deter that threat!”

The argument goes that it’s not realistic for Russia to say from which countries Ukraine can and cannot host troops.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sky’s Mark Stone takes you inside Zelenskyy-Trump 2.0

Would Trump threaten force?

The problem is that if Europe and the White House want Russia to sign up to some sort of peace deal, then it would require agreement from all sides on the security arrangements.

The other way to get Russia to heel would be with an overwhelming threat of force. Something from Trump, like: “Vladimir – look what I did to Iran…”. But, of course, Iran isn’t a nuclear power.

Something else bothers me about all this. The core concept of a “security guarantee” is an ironclad obligation to defend Ukraine into the future.

Future guarantees would require treaties, not just a loose promise. I don’t see Trump’s America truly signing up to anything that obliges them to do anything.

A layered security guarantee which builds over time is an option, but from a Kremlin perspective, would probably only end up being a repeat of history and allow them another “justification” to push back.

Read more from Sky News:
Inside the ISIS resurgence
10 years since one of UK’s worst air disasters
How Republicans are redrawing maps to stay in power

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

Image and reality don’t seem to match

Among Trump’s stream of social media posts this week was an image of him waving his finger at Putin in Alaska. It was one of the few non-effusive images from the summit.

He posted it next to an image of former president Richard Nixon confronting Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev – an image that came to reflect American dominance over the Soviet Union.

Pic: Truth Social
Image:
Pic: Truth Social

That may be the image Trump wants to portray. But the events of the past week suggest image and reality just don’t match.

The past 24 hours in Ukraine have been among the most violent to date.

Continue Reading

World

At least 17 dead in Colombia after car bombing and helicopter attack

Published

on

By

At least 17 dead in Colombia after car bombing and helicopter attack

At least 17 people were killed after a car bombing and an attack on a police helicopter in Colombia, officials have said.

Authorities in the southwest city of Cali said a vehicle loaded with explosives detonated near a military aviation school, killing five people and injuring more than 30.

Pics: AP
Image:
Pics: AP

Authorities said at least 12 died in the attack on a helicopter transporting personnel to an area in Antioquia in northern Colombia, where they were to destroy coca leaf crops – the raw material used in the production of cocaine.

Antioquia governor Andres Julian said a drone attacked the helicopter as it flew over coca leaf crops.

Read more from Sky News:
Man charged after fatal stabbing of ice cream seller
Trump changes tack with renewed attack over Ukraine

Pic: AP
Image:
Pic: AP

Colombian President Gustavo Petro attributed both incidents to dissidents of the defunct Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).

He said the aircraft was targeted in retaliation for a cocaine seizure that allegedly belonged to the Gulf Clan.

Who are FARC, and are they still active?

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, a Marxist guerrilla organisation, was the largest of the country’s rebel groups, and grew out of peasant self-defence forces.

It was formed in 1964 as the military wing of the Colombian Communist Party, carrying out a series of attacks against political and economic targets.

In 2016, after more than 50 years of civil war, FARC rebels and the Colombian government signed a peace deal.

It officially ceased to be an armed group the following year – but some small dissident groups rejected the agreement and refused to disarm.

According to a report by Colombia’s Truth Commission in 2022, fighting between government forces, FARC, and the militant group National Liberation Army had killed around 450,000 people between 1985 and 2018.

Both FARC dissidents and members of the Gulf Clan operate in Antioquia.

It comes as a report from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime found that coca leaf cultivation is on the rise in Colombia.

The area under cultivation reached a record 253,000 hectares in 2023, according to the UN’s latest available report.

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

Continue Reading

Trending