Connect with us

Published

on

The Atlantic is publishing a collection of key internal government documents related to the Trump administrations family-separation policy, known as Zero Tolerance. The records informed the reporting of my cover story on how it came to be and who was responsible. Our hope is to introduce greater transparency around a policy that gravely harmed thousands of families and whose development and intent were concealed from the public for years. During the Trump administration, more than 5,000 migrant children were taken from their parents as part of a dubious and ineffectual strategy to deter migration across the southern border. Hundreds remain separated today.

From the September 2022 issue: We need to take away children

These records showcase, among other things, government officials attempts to mislead the public; inconsistent and sometimes nonexistent record keeping, which to this day means that a full accounting of separations does not exist; efforts to extend the length of time that children and parents were kept apart; and early and repeated internal warnings about the policys worst outcomes, which were ignored.

As you will see, some of the records are marked pre-decisional, deliberative, or attorney-client privileged in an attempt to exempt them from federal disclosure requirements and ensure they would never become public. The Atlantic obtained them only through extensive litigation.

The Atlantics records, combined with others secured by the House Judiciary Committee, the progressive nonprofit group American Oversight, and separated families themselves, have been organized and tagged for future use. The collection is far from complete, and many of the documents still contain redactions. However, we hope that this database will prove a useful tool for those engaged in research and documentation of family separations, and that the body of publicly available information will continue to grow.

Jump to Initial separations, Deliberations leading up to the implementation of Zero Tolerance, Zero Tolerance Policy, Misleading the public, Investigations by the Department of Homeland Securitys Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Problems with family reunification and attempts to thwart it, Known instances of separation, Collections, Further readingInitial Separations (Pilot Programs)

In the spring of 2017, Jeff Self, the Border Patrol chief in the El Paso Sector, which includes New Mexico and parts of Texas, quietly launched a regional program to start referring migrant parents traveling with children for prosecution, which would require those families to be separated. This strained resources throughout the immigration system, including at the Department of Health and Human Services, which took custody of the children. Federal officials would later call the program a pilot and use it as a model for expanding the practice nationwide. Some early separations also occurred in Yuma, Arizona, under a separate initiative.

Family Separation Directive for Texas Border Patrol stations in the El Paso Sector*

Family Separation Directive for New Mexico Border Patrol stations in the El Paso Sector*

Department of Health and Human Services official: They are discovering more separations that were not reported.

HHS officials contact Immigration and Customs Enforcement seeking help locating the parents of detained separated children.

HHS official reports that the Department of Homeland Security is working on a family separation policy again.

El Paso Sector After Action Report summarizing the results of separations that occurred there in 2017

Jonathan White, head of the HHS program housing children, reports, We had a shortage last night of beds for babies.

HHS officials report, We suspect that there are other [unaccompanied children] being separated from parents.

Border Patrol official Gloria Chavez tells the acting agency chief Carla Provost that the El Paso Sector has been separating families for more than four months. Provost calls for separations to stop.

Provost: This has been ongoing since July without our knowledge It has not blown up in the media as of yet but of course has the potential to.

Border Patrol official Scott Luck asks colleagues Chavez and Hull, Why are we just hearing about it?

A DHS official requests a Border Patrol report on initial separations in El Paso to present to Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen.

The acting deputy chief of the Border Patrols El Paso Sector tells Chavez, inaccurately, that family separations there lasted only two to seven days, and suggests, despite evidence to the contrary, that many people presenting themselves as families at the border were in fact unrelated. Deliberations Leading Up to the Implementation of Zero Tolerance

At a February 14, 2017, interagency meeting, immigration-enforcement officials presented a nationwide plan to separate families as an immigration deterrent. Afterward, officials at the Department of Health and Human Servicesthe agency that would be charged with caring for separated childrenpushed back against the plan while scrambling to prepare. The plan was also leaked to the media, after which Homeland Security officials began to assert publicly that the idea had been abandoned. In reality, during and after regional separation programs were implemented in Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico, the nationwide plan was still being pushed aggressively by leaders of the immigrant-enforcement agencies, as well as by Stephen Miller, President Donald Trumps chief immigration adviser, and Gene Hamilton, a confidant of Millers who worked at DHS and the Department of Justice.

Invitation to the February 14, 2017, meeting

HHS official Jonathan Whites internal summary of proposals discussed at the February meeting

HHS official: DHS stressed in a meeting that the overall intent of the actions is to serve as a deterrent.

White asks enforcement officials for more information about plans to separate families.

List of attempts by White to inquire and raise red flags about plans to separate families

HHS March 2017 report: Children who would be separated tend to skew heavily toward tender aged; separations could be considered a human rights abuse, cause a myriad of international legal issues, and increase the risk of human trafficking.

HHS official: DHS is looking to expand family separations despite a complaint filed with the inspector general. (Original complaint here.)

In an internal memo, federal officials describe family separation as a short term solution to be implemented in the next 30 days.**

December 2017 correspondence between DHS officials: Announce that DHS will begin separating family units.

December 2017 DHS policy proposal: Parental Choice of Detention or Separation

Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan plans to formally recommend family separation: I do believe that this approach would have the greatest impact. Zero Tolerance Policy

Zero Tolerance memo signed by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen

DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsens follow-up Zero Tolerance memo with additional instructions

El Paso Sector initial implementation guidance

El Centro Sector implementation guidance

Del Rio Sector implementation guidance

Scott Lloyd of Health and Human Services asks McAleenan and Acting ICE Director Tom Homan for a meeting to discuss the implications of Zero Tolerance.

Border Patrol officials warn of repercussions for prosecutors who declined to participate in separations.

The Justice Departments Gene Hamilton touts a dramatic increase in prosecutions under Zero Tolerance.

A lot of parent separation cases are missing information, an HHS official reports.

HHS officials note inconsistent documentation and tracking issues.

An HHS official reports, There are a bunch of tender age girls stuck in Border Patrol stations; this is caused by the policy decision to separate kids from their families as a deterrent.

A magistrate judge in Tucson, Arizona, inquires about separation and reunification processes.

After a Bownsville, Texas, magistrate demands a list of separated families and their locations, a Border Patrol agent jokes, I might be spending some time in the slammer.

Yuma Border Patrol Sector reports: Resources are strained by meal preparation, and feeding detained families.

Amended Big Bend Sector guidance

Orders to halt separations following President Trumps executive order reversing course on Zero Tolerance in response to public outcry

A Customs and Border Protection official notes failures to properly document separations of 0-to-4-year-old children. Zero Tolerance Charts

Though a full accounting of the family separations that took place during the Trump administration does not exist, these internal government charts offer some insight into the nature of those that were recorded. For example, Homeland Security officials have often suggested that some of the individuals separated under Zero Tolerance were actually false families, or that separated parents were guilty of more serious crimes beyond the misdemeanor of illegally crossing the border, to justify taking their children away. But the first chart in this list makes clear that 2,146 of 2,256 separated parents who were referred for prosecution between May 5 and June 20, 2018, were charged only with the misdemeanor. During the same period, 137 parents were charged with the felony of having crossed the border illegally more than once, while only two were presented with other charges. The second chart notes that over those weeks, at least 251 children younger than 6 were separated from their parents, along with 1,370 children ages 6 to 12, and 1,272 ages 13 to 17.

Zero Tolerance Separation datasets May 5-June 20, 2018

Internal Border Patrol Prosecution Initiative Update charts from July 1 to July 7, 2018

Undated list of reasons for some separations Misleading the Public

Below is a small sampling of instances when government officials, members of congress, reporters and community groups sought information about a noticeable rise in family separations. Despite these inquiries, for more than a year, Department of Homeland Security officials denied that the agencys treatment of families had changed, suggesting that business was proceeding as usual and that families were not being separated any more than in the past.

The El Paso Federal Defenders Office has registered an increase in the separation of children and parents, an immigrant advocacy group wrote to Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials ahead of an August 2017 meeting. What is the current policy on family separation?

Border Patrol officials scramble to respond after a meeting with Representative Beto ORourkes office, in which family separations were inadvertently disclosed.

Months into the El Paso Sector separation initiative, Border Patrol official Aaron Hull tells the ICE official Phil Miller, We dont like to separate families.

Houston Chronicle reporter Lomi Kriel asking whether the Border Patrols policy on family separations had changed, and receiving unclear answers in response. (Kriels article here)

Jonathan White of the Department of Health and Human Services asks Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan and Acting ICE Director Tom Homan why his agency is receiving larger numbers of separated children than in the past. Homan does not respond. McAleenan does not disclose that separations have been underway to White.

A communications official at DHS seeks guidance on how to respond to inquiries from the media and immigrant advocacy groups.

DHS official to reporters: We ask that members of the public and media view advocacy group claims that we are separating women and children for reasons other than to protect the child with the level of skepticism they deserve.

In response to another inquiry, HHS officials decline to respond, and then confirm that more than 700 children have in fact been separated.

In internal emails, DHS officials push back against the story about 700 separated children, claiming inaccurately that the actual number is much lower. Investigations by Homeland Securitys Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL)

Quarterly meeting agenda: There are reports of family separation cases at the border.

A report on an investigation into complaints of family separations cites inconsistency, inadequate protocols, and lack of collaboration. It recommends the creation of an interagency working group, a Family-Member Locator System, and other tools to prevent prolonged separations and to ensure that families are eventually reunified.

A summary of an investigation into 950 complaints about family separations anticipates permanent family separation and new populations of US orphans.

CRCL staff seeks information about the enormous volume of matters alleging inappropriate family separations.

Cameron Quinn, the head of CRCL, emails Customs and Border Protection Commissioner McAleenan to raise concerns about reports of family separations.

Quinn tells McAleenan that CRCL has received over 100 recent allegations of separations.

CRCL staff notes the Border Patrols failure to document some separations.

Quinn forwards allegations of coercion and abuse of separated parents to McAleenan and Acting ICE Director Ron Vitiello. (Original complaint found here) Problems With Family Reunification and Attempts to Thwart It

An Immigration and Customs Enforcement official named Matt Albence insists that the expectation is that we are NOT to reunite the families and proposes ways to avoid such reunifications, such as moving children away from the border faster.

We cant have this, Albence writes about reunifications.

Albence and other ICE and Border Patrol officials lament that some families have been reunified, calling it a fiasco and not the consequence we had in mind, which obviously undermines the entire effort.

Reunifications, Albence insists, are not going to happen unless we are directed by the Dept to do so.

Reports that reunification forms were given to parents in languages they did not understand

Correspondence on harried reunification efforts

An employee at a company contracted to care for separated children tells colleagues, ICE will be stopping all reunifications due to limited bed space. Known Instances of Separation

In the federal lawsuit Ms. L. v. ICE, lawyers representing the federal government turned over the most complete list of family separations that exists. The ACLU shared that database with The Atlantic after redacting details such as names and dates of birth, which could be used to identify individual parents or children who were affected by the separation policy. Collections

Here, documents are organized into collections based on key criteria, such as year, location, federal agency, and the key players involved.

Full collection

2017, the first year in which separations took place

2018, the second year in which separations took place

Department of Justice, which prosecuted some separated parents

Department of Health and Human Services, which took custody of most separated children

Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the immigration-enforcement agencies Customs and Border Protection, the Border Patrol, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, whose officers separated some families at ports of entry

Border Patrol, whose agents separated most of the families affected by the Trump administrations family-separation policy

ICE, whose leadership advocated for separating families and sought to prolong separations

The White House, where a group of hawks, led by Stephen Miller, Donald Trumps senior immigration adviser, pushed for aggressive enforcement tactics, including separating families

Matt Albence, Head of enforcement and removal operations, the division of Immigration and Customs Enforcement that carries out deportations

Gloria Chavez, a long-serving Border Patrol official who had early knowledge of separations that occurred in the El Paso Sector

Gene Hamilton, Served as senio counsel at DHS under President Donald Trump. When Nielsen took over as DHS secretary, Hamilton left to work on immigration enforcement with his former boss Jeff Sessions, who was then Trumps attorney general.

Jonathan Hoffman, A close adviser and assistant secretary for public affairs to DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen

Tom Homan, The intellectual father of the idea to separate migrant families as a deterrent, who went on to serve as acting ICE director through the end of Zero Tolerance

Bob Kadlec, HHS assistant secretary of preparedness and response, who led the agencys family-reunification task force

John Kelly, Considered but ultimately rejected the idea to separate migrant families as a deterrent while serving as Trumps first DHS secretary. Kelly went on to serve as Trumps chief of staff during Zero Tolerance.

Scott Lloyd, Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the HHS division that houses detained unaccompanied children. For months, Lloyd declined to look into reports of family separations, even when presented with overwhelming evidence that they were occurring.

Kevin McAleenan, Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, which oversees the Border Patrol. In May 2018, McAleenan recommended that the Border Patrol start referring migrant parents for prosecution and separating them from their children.

Kirstjen Nielsen, After serving as chief of staff to John Kelly at DHS, Nielsen became DHS secretary and the face of family separations

Carla Provost, Acting Border Patrol chief during Zero Tolerance

Ron Vitiello, Acting Director Customs and Border Protection, who was second in command to Kevin McAleenan during Zero Tolerance and the preceding pilots

Katie Waldman, DHS deputy press secretary, who went on to marry Stephen Miller

Jonathan White, Served as head of the HHS program that houses detained migrant children. White opposed and tried to prevent family separations, and later helped lead HHS efforts to reunify families.

Chad Wolf, Chief of staff to Acting DHS Secretary Elaine Duke and Secretary Nielsen. Under Duke, Wolf pressed the DHS policy office to support proposals to separate families. Locations: Big Bend, Brownsville, Calexico, California, Canutillo, Del Rio, El Centro, El Paso, Harlingen, Hidalgo, Houston, Laredo, New Mexico, New York, Nogales, Phoenix, Port Isabel, Rio Grande Valley, San Diego, San Luis, San Ysidro, Texas, Tucson, Yuma Further Reading Congressional Reports

House Oversight Committee: Child Separations by the Trump Administration

House Judiciary Committee: The Trump Administrations Family Separation Policy: Trauma, Destruction, and Chaos Inspector General Reports Department of Justice

Review of the Department of Justices Planning and Implementation of Its Zero Tolerance Policy and Its Coordination With the Departments of Homeland Security and Health and Human Services Department of Health and Human Services

Separated Children Placed in Office of Refugee Resettlement Care

Communication and Management Challenges Impeded HHSs Response to the Zero-Tolerance Policy

Characteristics of Separated Children in ORRs Care: June 27, 2018November 15, 2020 Department of Homeland Security and Components

DHS Lacked Technology Needed to Successfully Account for Separated Migrant Families

CBP Separated More Asylum-Seeking Families at Ports of Entry Than Reported and for Reasons Other Than Those Outlined in Public Statements

Children Waited for Extended Periods in Vehicles to Be Reunified With Their Parents at ICEs Port Isabel Detention Center in July 2018

ICE Did Not Consistently Provide Separated Migrant Parents the Opportunity to Bring Their Children Upon Removal *The government supplied numerous copies of this directive with various portions redacted. The least redacted version has been excerpted here from the Border Patrols After Action Report, which summarized the results of the separations that occurred in the El Paso Sector in 2017.

**This memo was originally obtained by the office of Senator Jeff Merkley.

Note: The government occasionally supplied The Atlantic with multiple versions of the same email chain or report, and redacted different portions of each. Such documents have been combined in order to show all unredacted material.

Continue Reading

Business

Daily Mail owner in talks to buy Telegraph titles for £500m

Published

on

By

Daily Mail owner in talks to buy Telegraph titles for £500m

The owner of the Daily Mail is in talks to buy the Daily Telegraph and its Sunday sister title for £500m, a deal that would finally end the more-than two-year hiatus over their future.

DMGT confirmed on Saturday morning Sky News’s revelation on the social media platform X that it had entered exclusive negotiations to buy the broadsheet titles, less than two weeks after their sale to a consortium led by RedBird Capital Partners collapsed.

In a statement, DMGT said the exclusivity period to combine the two national newspaper groups would be used to “finalise the terms of the transaction and to prepare the necessary regulatory submissions”.

A deal to combine the Mail and Telegraph titles will require scrutiny from the competition regulator, with the culture secretary, Lisa Nandy, also expected to be involved in the process.

The collapse of the RedBird-led deal came after opposition from within the Telegraph’s newsroom over reported links of its chairman, John Thornton, to influential Chinese state actors.

Lord Rothermere, DMGT’s controlling shareholder, had intended to acquire a minority stake of just under 10% in the Telegraph titles as part of the RedBird-led consortium.

An earlier deal proposed by a consortium including RedBird and the Abu Dhabi state-owned investment firm IMI collapsed after the government changed the law regarding foreign state ownership of national newspapers.

IMI was to have owned a 15% stake – the maximum permitted – under the more recent deal.

“I have long admired the Daily Telegraph,” Lord Rothermere said.

“My family and I have an enduring love of newspapers and for the journalists who make them.

“The Daily Telegraph is Britain’s largest and best quality broadsheet newspaper, and I have grown up respecting it.

“It has a remarkable history and has played a vital role in shaping Britain’s national debate over many decades.

“Chris Evans is an excellent editor, and we intend to give him the resources to invest in the newsroom.

“Under our ownership, the Daily Telegraph will become a global brand, just as the Daily Mail has.”

A spokesman for RedBird IMI said: “DMGT and RedBird IMI have worked swiftly to reach the agreement announced today, which will shortly be submitted to the Secretary of State.”

If the deal is completed, it would bring the Telegraph newspapers under the same stable of ownership as titles including Metro, The i Paper and New Scientist.

DMGT said it planned “to invest substantially in TMG [Telegraph Media Group] with the aim of accelerating its international expansion.

“It will focus particularly on the USA, where the Daily Mail is already successful, with established editorial and commercial operations.”

Continue Reading

World

Trump peace plan: We could all pay if Europe doesn’t step up and guarantee Ukraine’s security

Published

on

By

Trump peace plan: We could all pay if Europe doesn't step up and guarantee Ukraine's security

The Donald Trump peace plan is nothing of the sort. It takes Russian demands and presents them as peace proposals, in what is effectively for Ukraine a surrender ultimatum.

If accepted, it would reward armed aggression. The principle, sacrosanct since the Second World War, for obvious and very good reasons, that even de facto borders cannot be changed by force, will have been trampled on at the behest of the leader of the free world.

The Kremlin will have imposed terms via negotiators on a country it has violated, and whose people its troops have butchered, massacred and raped. It is without doubt the biggest crisis in Trans-Atlantic relations since the war began, if not since the inception of NATO.

The question now is: are Europe’s leaders up to meeting the daunting challenges that will follow. On past form, we cannot be sure.

Vladimir Putin, President of Russia. Pic: Sputnik/Gavriil Grigorov via Reuters
Image:
Vladimir Putin, President of Russia. Pic: Sputnik/Gavriil Grigorov via Reuters

The plan proposes the following:

• Land seized by Vladimir Putin’s unwarranted and unprovoked invasion would be ceded by Kyiv.

• Territory his forces have fought but failed to take with colossal loss of life will be thrown into the bargain for good measure.

Ukraine will be barred from NATO, from having long-range weapons, from hosting foreign troops, from allowing foreign diplomatic planes to land, and its military neutered, reduced in size by more than half.

Donald Trump meeting Vladimir Putin in Alaska in August, File pic: Reuters
Image:
Donald Trump meeting Vladimir Putin in Alaska in August, File pic: Reuters

And most worryingly for Western leaders, the plan proposes NATO and Russia negotiate with America acting as mediator.

Lest we forget, America is meant to be the strongest partner in NATO, not an outside arbitrator. In one clause, Mr Trump’s lack of commitment to the Western alliance is laid bare in chilling clarity.

And even for all that, the plan will not bring peace. Mr Putin has made it abundantly clear he wants all of Ukraine.

He has a proven track record of retiring, rallying his forces, then returning for more. Reward a bully as they say, and he will only come back for more. Why wouldn’t he, if he is handed the fortress cities of Donetsk and a clear run over open tank country to Kyiv in a few years?

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

US draft Russia peace plan

Since the beginning of Trump’s presidency, Europe has tried to keep the maverick president onside when his true sympathies have repeatedly reverted to Moscow.

It has been a demeaning and sycophantic spectacle, NATO’s secretary general stooping even to calling the US president ‘Daddy’. And it hasn’t worked. It may have made matters worse.

A choir sing in front of an apartment building destroyed in a Russian missile strike in Ternopil, Ukraine. Pic: Reuters
Image:
A choir sing in front of an apartment building destroyed in a Russian missile strike in Ternopil, Ukraine. Pic: Reuters

The parade of world leaders trooping through Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, lavishing praise on his Gaza ceasefire plan, only encouraged him to believe he is capable of solving the world’s most complex conflicts with the minimum of effort.

The Gaza plan is mired in deepening difficulty, and it never came near addressing the underlying causes of the war.

Read more:
Ukraine war latest: Putin welcomes peace plan
Trump’s 28-point Ukraine peace plan in full

Most importantly, principles the West has held inviolable for eight decades cannot be torn up for the sake of a quick and uncertain peace.

With a partner as unreliable, the challenge to Europe cannot be clearer.

In the words of one former Baltic foreign minister: “There is a glaringly obvious message for Europe in the 28-point plan: This is the end of the end.

“We have been told repeatedly and unambiguously that Ukraine’s security, and therefore Europe’s security, will be Europe’s responsibility. And now it is. Entirely.”

If Europe does not step up to the plate and guarantee Ukraine’s security in the face of this American betrayal, we could all pay the consequences.

Continue Reading

World

Ukraine and Europe cannot reject Trump’s plan – they will play for time and hope he can still be persuaded to desert the Kremlin

Published

on

By

Ukraine and Europe cannot reject Trump's plan - they will play for time and hope he can still be persuaded to desert the Kremlin

“Terrible”, “weird”, “peculiar” and “baffling” – some of the adjectives being levelled by observers at the Donald Trump administration’s peace plan for Ukraine.

The 28-point proposal was cooked up between Trump negotiator Steve Witkoff and Kremlin official Kirill Dmitriev without European and Ukrainian involvement.

It effectively dresses up Russian demands as a peace proposal. Demands first made by Russia at the high watermark of its invasion in 2022, before defeats forced it to retreat from much of Ukraine.

Ukraine war latest: Kyiv receives US peace plan

(l-r) Kirill Dmitriev and special envoy Steve Witkoff in St Petersburg in April 2025. Pic: Kremlin Pool Photo/AP
Image:
(l-r) Kirill Dmitriev and special envoy Steve Witkoff in St Petersburg in April 2025. Pic: Kremlin Pool Photo/AP

Its proposals are non-starters for Ukrainians.

It would hand over the rest of Donbas, territory they have spent almost four years and lost tens of thousands of men defending.

Analysts estimate at the current rate of advance, it would take Russia four more years to take the land it is proposing simply to give them instead.

It proposes more than halving the size of the Ukrainian military and depriving them of some of their most effective long-range weapons.

And it would bar any foreign forces acting as peacekeepers in Ukraine after any peace deal is done.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Is Moscow back in Washington’s good books?

The plan comes at an excruciating time for the Ukrainians.

They are being pounded with devastating drone attacks, killing dozens in the last few nights alone.

They are on the verge of losing a key stronghold city, Pokrovsk.

And Volodymyr Zelenskyy is embroiled in the gravest political crisis since the war began, with key officials facing damaging corruption allegations.

Read more from Sky News:
Witkoff’s ‘secret’ plan to end war
Navy could react to laser incident

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Ukrainian support for peace plan ‘very much in doubt’

The suspicion is Mr Witkoff and Mr Dmitriev conspired together to choose this moment to put even more pressure on the Ukrainian president.

Perversely, though, it may help him.

There has been universal condemnation and outrage in Kyiv at the Witkoff-Dmitriev plan. Rivals have little choice but to rally around the wartime Ukrainian leader as he faces such unreasonable demands.

The genesis of this plan is unclear.

Was it born from Donald Trump’s overinflated belief in his peacemaking abilities? His overrated Gaza ceasefire plan attracted lavish praise from world leaders, but now seems mired in deepening difficulty.

The fear is Mr Trump’s team are finding ways to allow him to walk away from this conflict altogether, blaming Ukrainian intransigence for the failure of his diplomacy.

Mr Trump has already ended financial support for Ukraine, acting as an arms dealer instead, selling weapons to Europe to pass on to the invaded democracy.

If he were to take away military intelligence support too, Ukraine would be blind to the kind of attacks that in recent days have killed scores of civilians.

Europe and Ukraine cannot reject the plan entirely and risk alienating Mr Trump.

They will play for time and hope against all the evidence he can still be persuaded to desert the Kremlin and put pressure on Vladimir Putin to end the war, rather than force Ukraine to surrender instead.

Continue Reading

Trending