Diplomacy
Trump proposes using private security firms in Ukraine as part of a peace plan
American private security companies could be sent to Ukraine as part of a long-term “peace plan.”
In this context, US President Donald Trump is in discussions with European allies about allowing security companies to help build fortifications to protect American interests in the country.
This plan, reported by The Telegraph, is designed as a solution following the US president’s promise that American troops will not be deployed in Ukraine.
American companies could be sent to help rebuild Ukraine’s front-line defenses and new bases, as well as to protect American businesses.
According to the US, the presence of private security personnel would deter Russia from breaking a future ceasefire.
The plan is being discussed alongside a series of other security guarantees prepared by a coalition led by the United Kingdom and France, which will form the basis of the long-term peace plan.
The final details, which include air policing, training, and Black Sea naval missions, could be announced this weekend following weeks of diplomatic activity after Trump’s talks with Vladimir Putin in Alaska.
Trump’s green light for ‘security guarantees’ gives hope to Europeans
European military planners have accelerated their work after Trump told continental leaders that Putin was open to Western allies offering security guarantees to Ukraine.
The American leader has also agreed to support this mission, which could become one of the most significant overseas missions since the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
European officials have said that the key strategy to prevent future conflict is to make the war-damaged Ukrainian armed forces the main deterrent by rebuilding them.
According to the plan, Ukrainian troops will defend a fortified border on the front line, as agreed upon in any peace deal.
Kyiv’s forces will be rearmed and trained by European NATO allies using existing and new mechanisms.
For example, Ukraine could continue to purchase US systems like Patriot air defense batteries or Himars rocket launchers using funds provided by European allies.
Afghanistan and Iraq experience: Private companies on the front lines
Fortifications on the front line and nearby bases could be built by American private military companies, as was done in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The presence of American companies in Ukraine will be seen as a major boost for European powers seeking American support for a final peace agreement.
According to sources, their deployment would mean the White House has a stake in the matter, increasing the deterrent effect against a Russian attack for fear of US retaliation.
Discussions about using American private security companies date back to a joint agreement signed between Washington and Kyiv to extract Ukraine’s rich mineral and rare earth element resources.
The White House continues to oppose sending its own troops to Ukraine but has agreed to provide extensive support to European forces to back any peace agreement.
A British government source argued that private American companies “put American ‘boots on the ground,’ meaning American passport holders, which is an effective deterrent for Putin.”
Trump also hopes to appease his ‘MAGA’ base
Officials stated that by using private security companies, Trump would not only address the concerns of his “MAGA” (Make America Great Again) supporters who are against foreign intervention but also secure another “business deal” to champion.
Some European countries have proposed the idea of creating an unarmed buffer zone to separate Ukrainian and Russian forces once the conflict ends. This zone could be monitored by peacekeepers or observers as agreed upon by Kyiv and Moscow in any peace deal.
Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy will likely request the deployment of European troops to this zone. The Kremlin has suggested China as a security guarantor in the peace treaty negotiations.
According to the Financial Times (FT), Trump also proposed the deployment of Chinese soldiers as peacekeepers in post-war Ukraine during his meeting with European leaders last week.
The differences between the warring countries mean that this option is unlikely to be accepted by all parties.
This idea, first floated by Putin, was rejected by Europe and had previously been dismissed by Zelenskyy due to Beijing’s “support for Russia’s war effort.”
European countries insist they will not place their soldiers on the front line between the Ukrainian and Russian armies.
Responding to reports about the possibility of a buffer zone, Zelenskyy said that if the Russians want to create more distance between themselves and Ukrainian forces, they can withdraw.
Europe has downsized its proposal for a 30,000-strong force
A European-led force could be deployed deeper inside Ukraine to form a third line of defense should Russia decide to invade.
This force would primarily serve as another deterrent, consisting of thousands of European soldiers.
“The main goal is to show Ukraine that if Russia invades again, we will fight with you,” an official said.
Dozens of countries have informed their counterparts that they are ready to participate in this deployment. These include the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Belgium, as well as Baltic, Scandinavian, and Nordic countries.
The deployment of approximately 30,000 European soldiers had been previously discussed. A source added that this number appears to have been reduced due to a lack of resources and concerns that it might be perceived as “too powerful” in Putin’s eyes.
Regarding the talks, officials said that offers of support for the mission are often not backed by concrete commitments on how they might participate.
The Telegraph previously reported that this assurance force would only be deployed in Ukraine for 5 to 10 years, or until the involved countries are confident that the Ukrainian military can defend itself.
No-fly zone discussions
European countries are in talks to establish a no-fly zone so that Ukraine can safely reopen its commercial aviation routes.
According to The Telegraph, this plan could be implemented in stages: for example, starting from the west and gradually covering more airspace until the entire country is safe enough for commercial air travel.
Allowing air travel to resume is seen as a key element for boosting investment in the country and is also thought to help refugees return home.
Initially, the mission, which will be carried out using Western fighter jets and ground-based air defense systems, will aim to open Lviv and other Ukrainian airports in the west of the country.
As confidence in the sustainability of ceasefire agreements grows, the mission will be expanded eastward toward Kyiv and other cities.
Türkiye to lead the ‘task force’ in the Black Sea
According to the plans, Türkiye will lead a naval mission in the Black Sea to ensure the security of commercial shipping routes to and from Ukraine.
Kyiv has managed to keep its wartime shipping corridors open, and the operation will re-establish more routes through Western naval patrols.
The mission, supported by Black Sea countries Bulgaria and Romania, will also lead mine-clearing efforts in the waters.
Romania is purchasing naval vessels from Turkish shipyards as it prepares to play a more significant role in the region.
To limit the conflict in the region, Türkiye has blocked access to the Black Sea for both Russian ships and the new vessels promised to Ukraine by Western allies.
European countries will continue to train Ukrainian soldiers
The most likely deployment in Europe will be the relocation of military trainers to new bases in Western Ukraine.
This idea was first proposed last year by French President Emmanuel Macron due to concerns about a large number of Ukrainian soldiers deserting from training camps in his country.
A former US official said the idea was rejected at the time by Joe Biden on the grounds that it risked escalation.
However, this year, the idea has been revived under pressure from Trump to create a peace plan aimed at providing another deterrent against a “new Russian invasion.”
The training forces will also accelerate the process of rearming and restructuring the Ukrainian armed forces to create a “steel hedgehog” effect on the front line.
According to current plans, alongside France’s mission, the United Kingdom’s training program, Operation Interflex, will also likely be moved to Western Ukraine.
Never without the US: The flow of weapons continues
US logistical support for any European military deployment is seen as a prerequisite for the security guarantees.
European officials believe that Washington is receptive to requests for assistance in the form of American heavy-lift aircraft to move equipment and troops east into Ukraine.
This will also help maintain the flow of Western weapons to Ukraine. In recent weeks, European countries have committed to purchasing at least $10 billion worth of American-made military equipment for Kyiv.
Ukraine has also submitted a proposal promising to purchase an additional $90 billion worth of hardware when the war ends.
In preparation, the US State Department had approved a potential sale of air-launched cruise missiles and related equipment to Ukraine for an estimated $825 million.
The potential sale of 3,350 extended-range attack munition (ERAM) missiles, which could be delivered to Kyiv within weeks, includes GPS guidance kits and electronic warfare defense systems for weapons with a range of “several hundred” miles.
The Pentagon announced on Thursday that the package also includes support equipment, mission planning software, spare parts, and technical support.
American intelligence called to duty
Officials said that another prerequisite for any deployment in Europe would be an offer of American intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) support.
European countries lack the necessary satellite capacity to adequately monitor a ceasefire. In addition to supporting local forces, intelligence assistance will be key to the success of the air policing mission.
Trump had temporarily withdrawn ISR support provided to Kyiv following a dispute with Zelenskyy in the Oval Office. This decision was linked to the Ukrainian armed forces rapidly losing their presence in Russia’s Kursk region.
The Pentagon reportedly did not provide the full intelligence needed by Ukraine to conduct cross-border missile strikes, effectively creating an American veto over such plans.
A source told The Telegraph that US officials also asked the British Ministry of Defence not to share intelligence on this matter while Trump’s peace talks with Putin were ongoing.
Europe’s lack of coordination experience is a headache
Europe also lacks experience in coordinating large military missions, a task that has mostly been left to American generals.
European and American officials have discussed the possibility of appointing a US military commander to oversee all deployments under the peace plan.
There is talk that NATO’s top commander, US General Alexus Grynkewich, could be appointed to this role if the idea is approved by Trump.
The White House has already approved his involvement in the recent intensive military planning, which is seen as one of the biggest signs of the president’s support for the security guarantees from European allies.
By giving Grynkewich a larger role, the coalition will benefit from pre-existing plans to defend the continent against Russia and from additional American support for any security guarantees.
Diplomacy
Iran rejects Turkish foreign minister’s comparison of regional policy to Israel
Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei strongly criticized Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan’s recent statements comparing Iran’s regional actions to those of Israel, calling the comparison “astonishing and incorrect” during his weekly press conference.
In a comprehensive briefing on Monday, Baghaei addressed a wide range of foreign policy developments and regional security matters, including relations with Türkiye, the current state of diplomatic understandings with the United States, and Iran’s nuclear program.
“Hakan Fidan’s comparison is astonishing and incorrect”
When asked about Fidan’s assertions regarding Iran and his comparison of Iranian actions to those of the Israeli government, Baghaei sharply rejected the assessment.
“It is astonishing that a figure of Mr. Fidan’s standing would make such an unwarranted comparison,” Baghaei said. “He knows very well that the Israeli regime is expansionist by nature and seeks to harm the entire region, including Türkiye. How they arrived at such a bizarre comparison remains a major question for us.”
Baghaei asserted that Iran maintains no proxy forces in the region and argued that Israel represents the only true proxy entity in the Middle East. “We ask our Turkish friends to align their analyses with existing realities and to avoid repeating analyses that serve the exploitative interests of the Israeli regime,” the spokesperson added.
The remarks follow recent statements by Fidan, in which he addressed the ongoing conflict involving Hezbollah and Hamas, describing them as Iranian proxies in the region.
“We need to return to a situation where the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every nation is fully recognized,” Fidan had stated. “Iran has long claimed to pursue a preventive security policy by maintaining proxies in these countries, just as the Israelis occupy the rest of the region as part of their own security.”
“The Islamabad Agreement has entered a crisis phase”
Responding to a question regarding the status of the Islamabad Agreement, Baghaei stated: “There is no doubt that this agreement has entered a crisis phase.”
While emphasizing that Iran approaches all negotiations with seriousness and precision, and fulfills its commitments in good faith once an agreement is reached, Baghaei accused the opposing party of failing to honor its pledges.
“They were so eager to breach the agreement that they did not even allow the one-month period specified in Article 5 regarding the Strait of Hormuz to run its course. They began backsliding from the very first days,” Baghaei said. “Looking at the 14 articles of the memorandum of understanding, the Americans dismantled different components of the agreement within this short timeframe. We have maintained from the beginning that it is a matter of ‘commitment for commitment.’ As long as the other party fulfills its obligations, we will remain committed to ours.”
“We reject the IAEA’s request to access damaged facilities”
Asked about the request by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi for inspectors to return to Iran and visit damaged nuclear facilities, Baghaei delivered a flat rejection, stating that the request would not be granted.
Addressing separate reports regarding satellite imagery of nuclear facility reconstruction, Baghaei noted that he had not yet seen the satellite images in question and therefore declined to comment.
“We will not allow the Strait of Hormuz to be threatened by the US”
Commenting on maritime security in the Strait of Hormuz and allegations that the United States is providing military escorts to 20 vessels, Baghaei reiterated Iran’s opposition to the presence of extra-regional forces.
Baghaei stated that regional security can only be achieved without foreign intervention, through consultative mechanisms among regional countries. He added that the US military presence is a source of insecurity in the region.
“We will not allow the Strait of Hormuz to become an area of threat against Iran’s interests,” the spokesperson said. “We made genuine efforts to ensure navigation security, but the US was the party that undermined the process. The claims regarding vessel escorts demonstrate that the US is continuing its interventionist and aggressive policies in the region.”
Regarding the interpretation of Article 5 of the memorandum of understanding, Baghaei stated that the text is clear and leaves no room for interpretation.
He noted that provisions designating the management of the strait to Iran, in consultation with Oman, were included in the text to protect Iranian interests. He added that the US is attempting to establish parallel routes by provoking regional countries, which he warned causes environmental issues and jeopardizes maritime safety.
“The declaration by the three European countries is null and void”
Referring to a joint declaration issued by France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, Baghaei dismissed the statement as entirely invalid, accusing the European nations of attempting to distort facts.
He stated that the actions of the US and Israel are the source of instability and harm in both the region and the wider world, adding that such declarations do not contribute to any resolution.
Addressing claims made by the French Foreign Minister, Baghaei added that French officials should cease attempting to assume roles in matters that do not concern them.
“We have not conditioned cooperation with Afghanistan on recognition”
Baghaei provided details on a recent visit to Afghanistan by Alireza Jalalzadeh, the Deputy Foreign Minister for Consular Affairs, noting that discussions were conducted within the framework of consular affairs and people-to-people relations.
Highlighting that Iran shares a border of more than 900 kilometers with Afghanistan, hosts a large number of Afghan migrants, and maintains extensive commercial ties, Baghaei said: “We have not conditioned the official recognition of the Afghan administration on the cooperation necessary for the interests of both countries. The recognition process is a legal procedure, and a decision on this matter will be made when the time comes.”
“We do not make decisions on behalf of Lebanon”
Rejecting allegations that Iran is interfering in the internal affairs of Lebanon and Oman, Baghaei said: “We do not make decisions on behalf of anyone. The inclusion of Lebanon’s name in the memorandum of understanding demonstrates Iran’s sense of responsibility toward maintaining international security. In the first article of the text, we emphasized the need to end the war on all fronts, including Lebanon. This is not a matter of decision-making; the decision belongs to the Lebanese people.”
Addressing international pressure regarding the disarmament of Hezbollah, Baghaei stated that the Lebanese people are best positioned to understand the value of the resistance’s weapons in protecting their sovereignty, and that any decision on the matter rests solely with them.
“Trump’s claims are false”
Baghaei denied claims made by former US President Donald Trump regarding Iran’s conduct during nuclear negotiations.
“Lying has become a behavioral pattern and an addiction for the US,” Baghaei said. “The talks held in Muscat on Saturday focused exclusively on the Strait of Hormuz. We attempted to establish a mechanism to ensure the safe passage of vessels through Omani mediation, but this outcome was not reached due to pressure exerted on Oman.”
He added that alleged assassination plots against Trump were never a subject of negotiation.
“The death of Lindsey Graham will not grieve free people”
When asked to comment on the death of US Senator Lindsey Graham, Baghaei remarked:
“The Angel of Death is just. One cannot expect the peoples of the region to mourn a figure who built his life philosophy on aggression, war, and terror, and who boasted of being the greatest supporter of genocide. The death of this aggressive senator will not grieve the heart of any free person.”
Diplomacy
NATO leadership sees no evidence of Russian preparations for attack on Baltics by 2030
The military and political leadership of NATO sees no evidence that Russia is preparing for a potential attack on the Baltic states by 2030, according to a report by The Times, citing a senior alliance source.
“I see absolutely no sign that Russia is interested in engaging in any conflict with NATO,” the high-ranking source told the newspaper. The official added that they had no intention of speculating on the date of a potential conflict, as some other officials within the alliance have done.
The Times noted that rhetoric suggesting an open military conflict between NATO and Russia could begin in 2030 is primarily being used to mobilize the resources of the alliance’s member states. The report stated that this framing aims to encourage members to meet a defense spending target set at 5% of their gross domestic product (GDP) by 2035. Speaking to the newspaper on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Ankara, Martin O’Donnell, spokesperson for the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE), said that allies currently have a “window of opportunity” to build up the capabilities already agreed upon.
Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov has previously stated that the militarization of Europe would require Russia to take additional measures to guarantee its national security.
As the implications of these developments continue to play out in the military arena, Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda announced on July 9 that NATO leadership has converted the mandate of the Baltic air policing mission from air patrol to a combat footing.
The day before this decision, leaders attending the NATO summit in Ankara pointed to the “long-term threat Russia poses to Euro-Atlantic security and stability” in a joint declaration.
NATO has repeatedly expressed concerns over a potential conflict with Russia. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has urged member states not to be “naive” about threats coming from Russia and to increase their defense spending. Similarly, the commander of the German Army, Christian Freuding, asserted on June 12 that his country must “be ready for a Russian attack” by 2029 or sooner, stating, “We must be ready for war.”
In contrast, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Grushko claimed in a June 22 interview with the Izvestia newspaper that NATO and the European Union are preparing for a military conflict with Russia on the horizon of 2030. Grushko noted that from a military perspective, there is now little difference between NATO and the EU regarding aggressive ambitions toward Moscow, and that their main objective is to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia.
The Moscow administration has repeatedly emphasized that it has no intention of attacking Europe. Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated that there are no geopolitical, economic, or military reasons to fight the alliance. Nevertheless, Putin has also stated that “all NATO countries are virtually at war with Russia.”
Last year, representatives of NATO countries approved a declaration agreeing to raise military spending to 5% of GDP by 2035. Under this target, 3.5% of spending is projected to go directly to the military budget, while 1.5% is to be allocated indirectly to defense through cybersecurity and the modernization of highways.
Diplomacy
Zelenskyy announces sweeping Ukrainian cabinet shakeup as Prime Minister Sviridenko resigns
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has announced a sweeping structural overhaul of the government, confirming that a new prime minister will soon take office.
Following the announcement, the Ukrainian leader held a series of meetings over a two-and-a-half-hour period with potential candidates positioned to succeed Yulia Sviridenko as prime minister.
“Political strategy is changing”
Writing on his Telegram channel, Zelenskyy announced that the structure of the cabinet of ministers will change and that Sviridenko, who is stepping down from her post, will be assigned to a new role.
The Ukrainian president stated that the country is renewing its political strategy. Under the new approach, specific individuals with extensive experience will be put in charge of each priority foreign policy direction to implement agreements reached at the leadership level and to meet the expectations of the Ukrainian people.
Approximately one hour after Zelenskyy’s statement, Sviridenko confirmed her departure from the post of Prime Minister of Ukraine via a message on social media.
Thanking the president for his high valuation of her work, Sviridenko stated that she and Zelenskyy had discussed future steps.
Sviridenko began her career in the Ukrainian government in 2019 as Deputy Minister of Economy. Between 2020 and 2021, she served as deputy head of the presidential office, during which time she participated in negotiations regarding the Donbas.
In November 2021, she assumed control of economic management as First Deputy Prime Minister. In the spring of 2025, she signed a resource agreement with the US on behalf of Ukraine.
Zelenksyy proposed that Sviridenko lead the government in July 2025, and the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine’s parliament, approved her candidacy with 262 votes in a session held on July 17, 2025.
Prior to Sviridenko, Denys Shmyhal had led the cabinet since March 2020. He currently serves as the Minister of Energy.
Priority targets of the new cabinet established
Zelenskyy outlined the primary areas of focus for the renewed government, listing relations with the US—specifically licensing agreements for the production of Patriot systems and security cooperation—as top priorities.
Other core objectives include the European anti-ballistic missile project, the European Union accession process, relations with neighboring states—particularly Poland and Hungary—cooperation with the Middle East, the Gulf countries, and China, as well as relations with international organizations.
The Ukrainian leader also stressed the need to strengthen operations along the front lines and border regions, increase weapons supplies, complete winter preparations, accelerate the transformation of state-owned enterprises, and implement agreements reached with partners regarding the reconstruction of Ukraine.
Who could succeed Sviridenko as prime minister?
The last major reshuffle in the Ukrainian government took place a year ago, with Sviridenko assuming the premiership in July 2025.
Under Ukrainian law, the candidate for prime minister must be proposed by the majority coalition in the Verkhovna Rada.
Once appointed, the prime minister submits the majority of the cabinet members to parliament for approval.
Russian President Vladimir Putin previously stated that the only legitimate power in Ukraine is the Verkhovna Rada. According to Putin’s assessment, the only authority qualified to participate in peace talks is the speaker of the Ukrainian parliament, asserting that Zelenskyy lacks legitimacy and therefore has no authority to sign any document.
According to a report by the Ukrainska Pravda newspaper, citing sources familiar with the matter, potential candidates being considered for the premiership include:
- Sergiy Koretskyy, Chairman of the Board of Naftogaz and Director of Ukrnafta
- Denys Shmyhal, Minister of Energy
- Mykhailo Fedorov, Minister of Defense
- Ihor Terekhov, Mayor of Kharkiv
Zelenskyy announced that he met with all of these officials, as well as Ukrainian Interior Minister Ihor Klymenko, during the day.
Sources familiar with the matter who spoke to RBC-Ukraine stated that the president’s decision to renew the government came as a surprise to many. The sources informing the publication also put forward Koretskyy’s name for the premiership.
Sources speaking to Bloomberg also pointed to Koretskyy alongside Shmyhal. The agency reported that both Koretskyy and Shmyhal possess extensive experience in the energy sector, which partially explains their candidacy to succeed Sviridenko.
Meanwhile, Verkhovna Rada Deputy Yaroslav Zheleznyak reported that the parliamentary vote on the prime minister’s resignation could take place on July 13 or 14.
Zheleznyak stated that following this vote, the entire government will function in an interim capacity, with Shmyhal temporarily leading the administration in his capacity as deputy prime minister.
According to information shared by Zheleznyak, Sviridenko will become Ukraine’s new ambassador to the US. The Financial Times also reported, citing two sources, that the outgoing prime minister will be appointed to this post.
Zelenskyy stated that he had offered Sviridenko the opportunity to head a new and important direction in relations with a key partner, though he did not share specific details regarding which country or organization this would involve.
Subsequently, a report by the Interfax-Ukraine agency, citing sources, stated that Olga Stefanishyna, who currently serves as Ukraine’s Ambassador to the US, wishes to end her diplomatic service due to personal reasons.
Stefanishyna has held the post for less than a year, with Zelenskyy having signed the decree for her appointment in August 2025.
-
America2 weeks agoUS begins development of first new nuclear warhead in four decades for submarine fleet
-
Europe2 weeks agoGermany’s BSW proposes cooperation with AfD to break political ‘firewall’
-
America2 weeks agoAnthropic withdraws covert China user tracking feature after online backlash
-
Europe1 week agoUK diplomatic, NHS, and local government credentials put up for sale on darknet
-
Diplomacy1 week agoEuropean NATO members accelerate plans to replace departing US military assets
-
Europe2 weeks agoEU pauses China tariffs to seek negotiated trade settlement by October
-
Europe2 weeks agoEuropean armies accelerate rearmament and shift procurement plans amid shifting US commitment
-
Diplomacy1 week agoFrance eases opposition to Turkish SAMP/T air defense acquisition, sources say
