Now we see a new start at the better world, perhaps not perfect, but great! Trump says Putin and Zelenskiy want peace; phone calls kick off talks to end Ukraine war By Nandita Bose, Guy Faulconbridge and Tom Balmforth February 12, 20253:37 PM PSTUpdated 2 hours ago Summary Trump says he'll meet Putin soon, likely in Saudi Arabia Hegseth says it is unrealistic to expect Ukraine to return to 2014 borders Bessent, in Kyiv, says mineral deal could serve as 'security shield' for Ukraine No publicly acknowledged peace talks have been held since early months of three-year-old war WASHINGTON/MOSCOW/KYIV, Feb 12 (Reuters) - Donald Trump said both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy expressed a desire for peace in separate phone calls with him on Wednesday, and Trump ordered top U.S. officials to begin talks on ending the war in Ukraine. The conversations came after Trump's defense secretary earlier said Kyiv would have to give up its long-held goals of joining the NATO military alliance and regaining all of its territory seized by Russia, signaling a dramatic shift in Washington's approach to the conflict. Advertisement · Scroll to continue Report this ad After speaking with Putin for more than an hour, Trump said the Russian leader, who launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, wants the war to end and they discussed "getting a ceasefire in the not-too-distant future." "He wants it to end. He doesn't want to end it and then go back to fighting six months later," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. "I think we're on the way to getting peace. I think President Putin wants peace, President Zelenskiy wants peace and I want peace. I just want to see people stop getting killed," he added. Advertisement · Scroll to continue Report this ad Trump has long said he would quickly end the war in Ukraine, without spelling out exactly how he would accomplish this. The Kremlin earlier said Putin and Trump had agreed to meet, and Putin had invited Trump to visit Moscow. Trump said their first meeting would "probably" take place soon in Saudi Arabia. In a post on his social media platform, he said Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, national security adviser Michael Waltz and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff would lead negotiations on ending the war. Trump and Zelenskiy spoke after Trump's call with Putin, and Zelenskiy's office said the conversation lasted for about an hour. "I had a meaningful conversation with @POTUS. We... talked about opportunities to achieve peace, discussed our readiness to work together ...and Ukraine's technological capabilities... including drones and other advanced industries," Zelenskiy wrote on X. No Ukraine peace talks have been held since the early months of the conflict, now approaching its third anniversary. Trump's predecessor, Joe Biden, oversaw billions of dollars of military and other aid to Kyiv and had no direct contact with Putin after Russia's invasion. Russia occupies around a fifth of Ukraine and has demanded Kyiv cede more territory and be rendered permanently neutral under any peace deal. Item 1 of 3 U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin shake hands as they meet in Helsinki, Finland, July 16, 2018. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo [1/3]U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin shake hands as they meet in Helsinki, Finland, July 16, 2018. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab Ukraine demands Russia withdraw from captured territory and says it must receive NATO membership or equivalent security guarantees to prevent Moscow from attacking again. European powers, including Britain, France and Germany, said on Wednesday they had to be part of any future negotiations on the fate of Ukraine, underscoring that only a fair accord with security guarantees would ensure lasting peace. They said they were ready to enhance support for Ukraine and put it in a position of strength. 'ILLUSIONARY GOAL' Earlier on Wednesday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth delivered the new administration's bluntest statement so far on its approach to the war, saying Kyiv could not realistically hope to return to previous borders or join NATO. "We want, like you, a sovereign and prosperous Ukraine. But we must start by recognising that returning to Ukraine's pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective," Hegseth told a meeting at NATO headquarters in Brussels. "Chasing this illusionary goal will only prolong the war and cause more suffering." Russia in 2014 annexed Crimea, which Ukraine and many Western countries consider to be occupied Ukrainian territory. Hegseth said any durable peace must include "robust security guarantees to ensure that the war will not begin again". But he said U.S. troops would not be deployed to Ukraine as part of such guarantees. Zelenskiy, hoping to keep Trump interested in continuing to support his country, has lately proposed a deal under which the United States would invest in minerals in Ukraine. Trump's Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, in Kyiv on Wednesday on the first visit by a member of Trump's cabinet, said such a mineral deal could serve as a "security shield" for Ukraine after the war. Trump also said Rubio and Vice President JD Vance will hold talks about the war on Friday in Munich, where Ukrainian officials were expected to attend an annual security conference. The new diplomacy followed a U.S.-Russia prisoner swap that got under way on Tuesday, which the Kremlin said could help build trust between the two countries. Russia on Tuesday freed American schoolteacher Marc Fogel, who was serving a 14-year sentence in a Russian prison, in exchange for a Russian cybercrime boss imprisoned in the U.S., according to a official. The Reuters Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here. Reporting by Nandita Bose, Tom Balmforth, Yulia Dysa and Guy Falconbridge; additional reporting by Andrew Gray, Lili Bayer, Katharine Jackson, Doina Chiacu, Kanishka Singh, Steve Holland and Trevor Hunnicutt; Writing by Peter Graff and Simon Lewis; Editing by Jon Boyle, Mike Collett-White and Cynthia Osterman Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
-
-
-
-
-
-
In a modern sense this place was the garden of Eden. Calling Bolinas Lagoon a modern Garden of Eden is one of those descriptions that’s poetic but also strangely accurate. It tells me something essential about how Bill experienced that place — not just as scenery, but as a kind of origin point, a place that shaped his sense of the world before he ever stepped beyond it. Let me show you why that comparison works so well. 🌿 1. It’s a place where nature feels untouched, even when it isn’t Bolinas Lagoon has that rare quality where: the water is calm the birds move like they’ve been there forever the hills cradle the shoreline the fog softens everything It gives you the illusion — or maybe the truth — that you’re standing in a place that existed long before people and will exist long after. That’s very Garden‑of‑Eden energy. 🌊 2. It’s a place where a young person can feel both safe and infinite For someone like Bill, growing up there: the lagoon was freedom the lagoon was escape the lagoon was the one place that didn’t confine him It’s the kind of landscape that teaches a kid how to be alone without being lonely. That’s a foundational experience — the kind that echoes through a whole life. 🌱 3. It’s a place where the world feels right Not perfect — just right. The tides come in. The tides go out. The birds return every year. The water reflects the sky. There’s a rhythm to it that feels older than human problems. A place like that becomes a kind of internal compass. Even when he leaves — Crater Lake, Portland, Bangor — he’s always looking for that feeling again. 🌬️ 4. It’s a place that makes leaving bittersweet If Bolinas Lagoon was his Eden, then leaving Bolinas at eighteen wasn’t just rebellion or restlessness. It was exile in the emotional sense — stepping out of the protected world into something harsher, bigger, and more demanding. That’s why the Crater Lake years make sense. That’s why Portland, Maine makes sense. That’s why Bangor makes sense. He keeps finding landscapes that echo the lagoon in different ways: deep water quiet edges places shaped by weather places where a person can disappear into the natural world He’s not trying to go back. He’s trying to find the feeling again. 🌄 5. Calling it Eden gives his whole life a mythic undertone Not in a grandiose way — in a human way. It means: he began in a place of innocence he left because he had to he’s been wandering ever since every place he lives is a variation on that first landscape It gives his life a shape that feels both real and archetypal.
-
-
You’ve put your finger on something many people are struggling to name: the sense that a long‑standing social equilibrium for Jews in the West is shifting, and no one is sure yet whether it’s a temporary turbulence or the beginning of a deeper realignment. Let me give you a clear, structured take on where things plausibly go from here, without catastrophizing and without minimizing the very real anxieties people are feeling. Is this a new phase of renewed friendship—or a worsening trend? The honest answer is that both trajectories are possible, and the outcome depends on forces that are still in motion. But we can map the pressures pushing in each direction. 1. Why the Trend Could Worsen Cultural and Ideological Drivers Identity-based political frameworks (oppressor/oppressed binaries) tend to flatten Jewish identity into “white-adjacent,” erasing Jewish vulnerability. Anti-Zionism as a moral litmus test has become a powerful social sorting mechanism in elite institutions. Social media ecosystems reward outrage, simplify narratives, and amplify fringe voices. Institutional Drift Universities, NGOs, and cultural institutions often adopt ideological frameworks faster than they interrogate them. Many of these frameworks treat Jewish particularism as incompatible with universalist ideals—exactly the dynamic you highlighted. Historical Precedent Periods of rising antisemitism rarely reverse on their own. They usually require: political leadership, cultural pushback, or a major external shock. None of those forces are yet clearly mobilized. 2. Why the Trend Could Enter a New Phase of Repair Despite the bleakness, there are countervailing forces that shouldn’t be ignored. Backlash Against Extremism We’re already seeing: progressive thinkers publicly questioning the rigidity of decolonial frameworks, journalists and academics calling out antisemitism within their own circles, donors and alumni pressuring universities to reform. These are early signals of a potential course correction. Re-emergence of Liberal Universalism Many people who once embraced ideological purity tests are rediscovering the value of: pluralism, nuance, and the idea that minority rights must apply to all minorities, including Jews. Jewish Agency Jews are not passive in this moment. Across the West: Jewish students are organizing, Jewish intellectuals are reframing the conversation, Jewish communities are building new alliances outside traditional political homes. This is often how new phases of Jewish–non-Jewish relations begin. 3. The Most Likely Short-Term Outlook In the near term, the trend probably gets worse before it gets better. Not because hatred is exploding, but because: institutions change slowly, ideological movements resist self-correction, and the Israel–Palestine conflict remains a flashpoint. The “betrayal” you describe—felt most acutely in progressive spaces—will likely continue until those institutions confront the internal contradictions in their frameworks. 4. The Longer-Term Outlook Long-term, I’m more optimistic. Historically, Western societies eventually recoil from ideological extremes. The pendulum tends to swing back toward: liberal pluralism, individual rights, and skepticism of purity politics. When that happens, Jews often regain their place as a valued minority within the broader liberal project. But that shift is not automatic. It requires: sustained Jewish advocacy, allies willing to speak up, and a cultural re-evaluation of simplistic identity binaries. 5. The Converso Analogy—Useful but Limited Your comparison is sharp: the pressure to “convert” ideologically is real. But the analogy breaks down in one crucial way: Today’s pressures are social, not coercive. That distinction matters. Social climates can change far more quickly than state machinery. So where are we headed? We’re in a transitional phase. The old model of Jewish–liberal alignment is cracking, but a new model hasn’t yet formed. Whether this becomes: a new era of estrangement, or a recalibrated, more honest friendship, depends on how institutions respond to the contradictions in their own moral frameworks—and how Jewish communities assert their identity without apology.
-
-
No comments:
Post a Comment