US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has made it clear that the Trump administration sees Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders as an unattainable goal and does not support NATO membership as a resolution to the ongoing war.

Speaking at a high-level NATO summit in Brussels, Hegseth urged European allies to take greater responsibility for regional security, marking a pivotal shift in US policy toward the nearly three-year-old conflict.

“We want, like you, a sovereign and prosperous Ukraine. But we must start by recognizing that returning to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective,” Hegseth told representatives from over 40 nations supporting Kyiv.

He warned that pursuing such a goal would only extend the war and increase suffering.

His remarks come as Russia continues to hold about 20% of Ukraine’s territory, including Crimea—annexed in 2014—and parts of eastern Donbas, where Moscow-backed separatists have waged a prolonged insurgency.

Hegseth stressed that any lasting peace deal must include “robust security guarantees” to prevent future conflict.

However, he dismissed NATO membership for Ukraine as an impractical outcome, suggesting instead that European and non-European forces should provide security assurances.

“If these troops are deployed as peacekeepers to Ukraine at any point, they should be part of a non-NATO mission and should not fall under NATO’s Article 5 obligations,” he stated, reinforcing the US stance on limiting direct military engagement.

With Washington shifting its focus, the Trump administration is signaling that European nations must take the lead in securing long-term stability in the region.

The post Trump administration sees Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders as an unattainable goal appeared first on Invezz

Elon Musk’s social media platform X, formerly Twitter, has agreed to pay approximately $10 million to settle a lawsuit brought by President Donald Trump and other plaintiffs over the platform’s decision to ban him in the wake of the January 6, 2021, US Capitol riot, as per a WSJ report.

Trump initially filed the lawsuit in 2021 against Twitter and its then-CEO Jack Dorsey, alleging the deplatforming violated his rights.

Trump used the platform extensively after losing the 2020 election to spread false claims of voter fraud and to rally supporters to attend the “Stop the Steal” event, which led to the Capitol attack.

Twitter at the time stated that the suspension was necessary to prevent further violence.

Twitter suspended Trump’s account two days after the riots, citing concerns over incitement to violence.

The lawsuit was part of a broader legal effort targeting major social media companies, including Meta (formerly Facebook) and Google, for suspending Trump’s accounts following the Capitol riots.

In November 2022, after acquiring Twitter, Musk reinstated Trump’s account following a public poll, signaling a shift in platform policy under his leadership.

Trump and social media settlements

X will pay about $10 million to settle litigation over the suspension of Donald Trump’s account.

The settlement marks the conclusion of a legal battle that had been appealed after a federal judge dismissed the case in 2022.

Earlier this week, a motion to dismiss the appeal was granted following the agreement, as per the report.

The settlement comes just a month after Meta agreed to pay $25 million to resolve a similar lawsuit regarding Trump’s Facebook account.

Of the amount, $22 million was allocated to Trump’s presidential library. The remaining $3 million was set aside for Trump’s legal fees and other plaintiffs who joined the lawsuit.

Meanwhile, Trump’s legal team is reportedly seeking a settlement with Google over its decision to ban him from YouTube after the Capitol riots.

Elon Musk, now heading the Department of Government Efficiency under Trump’s administration, has drawn criticism for his close ties to the president.

In December, ABC News agreed to a $15 million settlement to resolve a defamation lawsuit filed by Donald Trump.

As part of the agreement, ABC News stated that the settlement amount would be donated to Trump’s future presidential foundation and museum.

Musk and Trump

A close adviser to the president, Musk has expressed strong support for Trump, contributing over $250 million to his campaign.

Since the beginning of Trump’s presidency, Musk has been leading the newly established Department of Government Efficiency, a government cost-cutting initiative.

In this role, Musk has spearheaded efforts to rapidly reduce the size of the federal government.

Representatives from Doge, a team aligned with Musk’s initiative, have been deployed to various departments to monitor spending, while offering millions of federal employees voluntary exit packages.

Additionally, the initiative has moved to freeze federal funding and halt the work of certain agencies, including the US Agency for International Development (USAID).

The post Elon Musk’s X settles Trump lawsuit, to pay around $10M appeared first on Invezz

President Donald Trump held his first confirmed conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday, describing it as a “lengthy and highly productive” discussion aimed at ending the war in Ukraine.

The call, which lasted nearly 90 minutes, signals a shift in US policy, with Trump prioritizing a US-backed resolution to the conflict that has dragged on for more than two years.

“We discussed Ukraine, the Middle East, Energy, Artificial Intelligence, the power of the Dollar, and various other subjects,” Trump wrote in a post on the social media platform Truth Social.

“We each talked about the strengths of our respective nations and the great benefit that we will someday have in working together,” Trump added.

“But first, as we both agreed, we want to stop the millions of deaths taking place in the War with Russia/Ukraine.”

The primary focus remained on peace negotiations, which Trump suggested could begin “immediately.”

Trump signals shift in US approach to Ukraine war

Trump’s announcement that negotiations would commence raises questions about Ukraine’s role in the process.

While he stated that he would brief Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, he did not specify whether Kyiv would have equal footing in the talks with Moscow.

“…we will begin by calling President Zelenskyy, of Ukraine, to inform him of the conversation, something which I will be doing right now…”, he said.

Trump has long been skeptical of Ukraine’s leadership and has not openly expressed strong support for Zelensky.

Meanwhile, the Kremlin portrayed the discussion as a diplomatic breakthrough.

Russian government spokesman Dmitri Peskov said Putin and Trump agreed that “the time has come for our countries to work together” and confirmed that Trump was invited to visit Moscow.

The Russian leader also insisted that addressing the “root causes” of the Ukraine conflict was essential, a position that suggests Russia will demand significant concessions from Ukraine before agreeing to a cease-fire.

Return to Ukraine’s pre-2014 border ‘unrealistic’

While the call between Trump and Putin was taking place, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth made remarks at NATO headquarters in Brussels that suggested a shift in Washington’s position on Ukraine’s territorial ambitions.

He described restoring Ukraine’s borders to pre-2014 levels—before Russia annexed Crimea—as an “unrealistic” goal.

He also stated that the US would not support Ukraine’s NATO membership as part of a peace agreement, echoing one of Putin’s key demands.

Hegseth’s comments, combined with Trump’s phone call, indicate that Washington may push Ukraine toward a compromise that falls short of its stated objectives.

European nations, which have supported Ukraine militarily and economically, are likely to scrutinize any emerging US-Russia framework.

UN welcomes potential for negotiations

The United Nations responded to the news by saying it welcomed any initiative that could lead to peace talks.

UN spokesman Farhan Haq stated that any process involving both Russia and Ukraine “would be a welcome development.”

However, he emphasized that any negotiation should include Ukrainian representatives, a point Trump did not explicitly confirm.

Trump announced that his negotiating team would include Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, National Security Adviser Michael Waltz, and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.

Witkoff was in Moscow earlier this week and helped secure the release of Marc Fogel, an American schoolteacher imprisoned in Russia for over three years.

Notably absent from Trump’s list was retired General Keith Kellogg, whom he previously named as his envoy for Russia and Ukraine.

US-Russia relations amid Ukraine war

For Putin, the call marked a symbolic victory, signaling the end of Western efforts to isolate him diplomatically following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

Since Trump’s reelection, the Kremlin has expressed optimism about a potential shift in US policy, with Putin frequently praising Trump in public statements.

Trump, while occasionally critical of Putin in the past, has often spoken admiringly of the Russian leader.

Following the Ukraine invasion in 2022, Trump described Putin as a “genius,” though he took a different tone after his second inauguration, saying Putin’s war effort had been mismanaged.

“He can’t be thrilled, he’s not doing so well,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on his first day in office.

“Russia is bigger, they have more soldiers to lose, but that’s no way to run a country.”

As Trump prepares to navigate the complex dynamics of US-Russia relations, his approach to Ukraine is likely to face resistance from both US allies and members of Congress.

While his administration moves toward negotiations, the extent to which Ukraine will be involved—and what compromises it may be asked to make—remains uncertain.

The post Trump speaks with Putin on ending Ukraine war, says peace negotiations could start ‘immediately’ appeared first on Invezz

President Donald Trump’s voluntary resignation programme for federal employees has seen approximately 75,000 workers accepting the offer, as per a Bloomberg report.

The number falls short of the White House’s original goal of reducing the workforce by 5% to 10%.

The final figure represents about 3.3% of the 2.3 million civilian federal workforce, prompting concerns that the administration will move forward with forced layoffs to meet its objectives.

The buyout programme, officially titled “Fork in the Road,” was temporarily halted due to legal challenges but was reinstated by a federal judge in Massachusetts on Wednesday.

The decision has allowed the administration to proceed with its workforce reduction strategy, with the resignation window closing at 7 pm ET that same day.

While some employees opted for the eight-month severance package, many others remained hesitant amid warnings from Democrats that the government’s funding beyond March 14 remains uncertain.

Musk-backed cuts reshape workforce

The initiative was spearheaded by Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, which Trump has empowered to cut spending and streamline operations.

In a move that signals an escalation of the administration’s push to shrink federal employment, Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday directing agency heads to initiate “large-scale reductions in force.”

The General Services Administration (GSA), which oversees the federal government’s real estate portfolio, has already begun layoffs, according to Reuters.

Other agencies could soon follow, particularly as Trump’s administration has indicated that voluntary resignations alone will not be enough to meet its downsizing objectives.

The programme’s rollout has sparked criticism from federal employee unions, which initially sought to block it in court.

The Massachusetts judge dismissed their challenge, ruling that the unions lacked standing to sue and that the court lacked jurisdiction over the matter.

This decision paved the way for the administration to proceed with the buyouts and, potentially, further workforce reductions.

New rules raise job fears

For those federal employees who declined the buyout, the administration has introduced a series of new workplace reforms aimed at increasing efficiency and accountability.

These reforms include stricter in-office attendance policies and enhanced performance standards, with employees expected to be “reliable, loyal, and trustworthy” in their work.

While proponents of the changes argue they will create a more streamlined and effective government, critics have raised concerns that the measures could be used to justify further job cuts.

The uncertainty surrounding government funding beyond March 14 has added to the anxiety, as the administration has not yet detailed how it plans to address potential shortfalls if Congress fails to reach a budget agreement.

Will layoffs close the gap?

Despite the voluntary resignations, the federal workforce remains significantly larger than it was before President Joe Biden’s term, during which it grew by 6.3% due to pandemic-related hiring.

A 3.3% reduction is not enough to fully offset this growth, leading to speculation that forced layoffs may be necessary to meet Trump’s original target.

With the administration’s emphasis on reducing bureaucracy and cutting costs, further downsizing efforts appear imminent.

Agencies that do not meet internal workforce reduction benchmarks could face deeper job cuts, putting thousands of additional federal employees at risk.

The post Trump’s buyout plan draws 75,000 resignations, but misses target appeared first on Invezz

India and the US are set to engage in high-stakes trade negotiations as Prime Minister Narendra Modi meets President Donald Trump.

While previous discussions between the two leaders focused on strengthening bilateral ties, this round of talks is being shaped by economic uncertainties, geopolitical tensions, and a shifting global trade landscape.

With both nations seeking leverage in ongoing tariff disputes, the meeting carries significant implications for trade flows, investment, and strategic alliances.

Trump, who has long used tariffs as a bargaining tool, has targeted India’s trade policies, citing a $45.6 billion trade deficit and what he considers excessive barriers to US goods.

Modi, on the other hand, is looking to protect India’s export-driven industries while securing critical technology and defence partnerships.

As trade imbalances and economic nationalism dominate the conversation, both leaders must navigate domestic pressures and global realities to strike a mutually beneficial agreement.

Trump’s tariff strategy

Trump’s trade policies have consistently emphasised reciprocity, with his administration vowing to impose tariffs on countries that maintain high duties on US imports.

India’s average tariff rate of 12%, compared to the US rate of 2.2%, has been a point of contention. Washington has long pushed New Delhi to lower tariffs on key American exports, including agricultural products, medical devices, and energy.

In recent years, India has increased its purchases of liquefied natural gas (LNG), combat vehicles, and jet engines from the US, hoping that such deals would ease trade tensions.

The US remains unconvinced, demanding further concessions on electronics, chemicals, and agricultural products.

Trump’s administration sees these sectors as critical to balancing trade relations, and any failure to make significant progress could result in further escalation of tariffs.

Beyond tariffs, Trump is also expected to press India on immigration policies, particularly concerning skilled workers.

The US has a significant number of Indian professionals working under H-1B visas, a programme Trump has previously sought to reform.

Concerns over unauthorised immigration from India could become a bargaining chip in the broader negotiations.

Modi’s diplomatic manoeuvre

For India, the stakes are high. While economic cooperation with the US is crucial, Modi must also protect key domestic industries from tariff-related disruptions.

With India’s economy recovering from post-pandemic shocks and global supply chain realignments, striking the right balance in trade negotiations is a priority.

Modi’s team is reportedly preparing tariff reduction proposals across a dozen sectors, hoping to mitigate Washington’s pressure while securing favourable terms for Indian exports.

In particular, India is seeking expanded access to the US market for pharmaceuticals, textiles, and IT services—sectors that have historically driven India’s export growth.

Another critical factor in the negotiations is India’s growing defence ties with the US.

New Delhi has increasingly relied on American military technology to modernise its armed forces, with recent deals covering jet engines, drones, and advanced weaponry.

These partnerships align with India’s broader strategy to counter China’s regional influence, a priority shared by Washington.

India’s policy of “strategic ambiguity” has also led to continued engagement with Russia, particularly in energy purchases, complicating its position in global trade and diplomatic alliances.

Geopolitical undercurrents

The India-US trade discussions are unfolding against a complex geopolitical backdrop. China remains a key factor, with both nations viewing Beijing’s economic and military rise as a strategic challenge.

The US sees India as a counterbalance to China in the Indo-Pacific, yet New Delhi remains cautious about becoming overly aligned with Washington’s confrontational approach.

Beyond China, India’s energy ties with Russia have drawn scrutiny from the US, particularly amid Western efforts to isolate Moscow over the Ukraine war.

While India has continued purchasing Russian oil at discounted rates, Washington has pushed New Delhi to reduce its dependence on Moscow.

The upcoming trade talks may provide further insights into how Trump’s administration views India’s role in global diplomacy and whether economic incentives could be used to shift India’s strategic positioning.

The post India-US trade talks: Modi and Trump seek leverage in tariff battle appeared first on Invezz