Connect with us

Business

Secret U.S.-Russia talks led to plan that blindsided Ukraine

Published

on



The controversial 28-point plan dropped suddenly by the Trump administration to Ukraine as a take-it-or-leave it proposition mere days ago was mostly the result of several weeks of negotiations behind the scenes between Steve Witkoff and his Russian counterpart Kirill Dmitriev that excluded not only Ukraine and its allies but even some key US officials.

Faced with a Thanksgiving holiday deadline, European officials are racing to buy Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy more time with their own counter-proposal on how to end the war that will be presented to US officials on Sunday in Switzerland. 

This reconstruction on how the ultimatum came about and who was really behind it is based on conversations with several people familiar with the deliberations who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss delicate negotiations.

Read More: Ukraine Seeks NATO-like Shield From US, Counter-Plan Says

For Europeans, the alarm went off when a new player was introduced to the scene: US Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, a close friend of JD Vance going back to their days at Yale Law School. It was he who told their ambassadors and Ukraine officials in an urgent tone that US President Donald Trump had run out of patience, that Ukraine was in a bad position and that Kyiv had to agree to concede territory.

The fact that it was a figure close to the vice president tasked to push the plan during a trip to Kyiv this past week was telling. It was a weighty assignment typically undertaken by high-level diplomats, like Secretary of State Marco Rubio or other foreign diplomats. Vance and Rubio have had different takes on how the war should end, with Vance taking a more isolationist bent and Rubio much warier of being manipulated by Russia.

Read More: Vance and Rubio Offer Clues to Trump’s Emerging Foreign Policy

Before European leaders and Zelenskiy jumped into action, they needed to try and understand who was most responsible for the framework. They had been entirely shut out and it wasn’t clear who had the most influence with Trump on the issue.

As Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk quipped pointedly on X: “Before we start our work, it would be good to know for sure who is the author of the plan and where was it created.”

The picture that emerged was that Witkoff and Dmitriev forged the plan during an October meeting in Miami that included Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, who worked with Witkoff on the Israel-Gaza peace deal, according to people familiar with the matter.

Rubio hadn’t been fully looped in until late. Trump also found out about it at the last minute, but he blessed it once he was briefed. The White House didn’t immediately respond to messages left for comment. 

A deal would give him a win as he faces a domestic political slump, with Democrats shellacking his party in early November elections, raising the possibility of painful midterm election results next year. A previously pliant Republican-led Congress is also bucking his wishes to release files related to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, with whom Trump once had a relationship before they fell out.

In addition, the US president has taken an increasingly aggressive posture in the Caribbean and is weighing a possible strike against Venezuela. 

Meanwhile, Zelenskiy is battling a corruption scandal that threatens to engulf his powerful chief of staff, Andriy Yermak. So he’s feeling the heat, too, back home.

For Trump, what matters is getting a deal, not the fine print. But for Ukrainians, the devil is in the details. Their fears that Russia drafted large swathes of the document unbeknown to them were proved right. The document still bears the hallmarks of a direct translation from Russian with oddly formulated sentences.

The measures would force Ukraine to cede large chunks of land, reduce the size of its military and forbid it from ever joining NATO. The plan would also reestablish economic ties between Russia and the US, the world’s largest economy.

To try and correct course, Ukraine and its European allies will insist that discussions with Russia on any territorial swaps can only take place once the war ceases along the current line of contact. They also want a security agreement that mirrors NATO’s Article 5 mutual defense clause, among other measures.

Read More: Finland’s Stubb and Italy’s Meloni Spoke to Trump on Ukraine

Efforts to find a resolution have gone through operatic fits and spurts since Trump returned to the White House in January, when he pledged to stop the fighting in a matter of days. 

The current episode is no less dramatic than previous ones that saw Zelenskiy upbraided by Vance and Trump in an Oval Office meeting. Back then, European leaders rushed to the White House following a hastily-staged summit with Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska in August. Their suspicion was that Putin had a strange hold on Trump. The sly smile the Russian president flashed in the backseat of “the beast” car did little to put them at ease.

When Trump suddenly declared in October he was up for a second summit with Putin, this time in Budapest, it felt like a replay of the summer. However, this time, the Europeans were grateful to have Rubio in their corner. The meeting was cancelled after the US top official had a call with his Russian counterpart and realized the Russians hadn’t budged on their asks.

What they didn’t know was that in the background, Witkoff was putting together what came to be the 28-point plan. They believed Rubio had displaced the special envoy and real estate mogul as the key US interlocutor on Ukraine. 

US Senator Mike Rounds, a South Dakota Republican, said that Rubio — while en route to Geneva — told him and US Senator Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat from New Hampshire, that the 28-point plan is a Russian proposal and that “it is not our recommendation. It is not our peace plan.”

Read More: Ukraine Talks Take Center Stage as G-20 Summit Closes: TOPLive

Rubio later wrote on X that the peace proposal was authored by the US and that it offers a strong framework for negotiations. But his choice of words was careful: “It is based on input from the Russian side. But it is also based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine.”

He traveled to Geneva for the talks on Sunday, joining Witkoff and Driscoll. Ukraine is represented by Yermak. It’s unclear if the Americans even want to see the Europeans together with the Ukrainians. 

Driscoll has been in constant contact with Witkoff and Vance as he became the new interface with European officials. Before this past week, his public comments about Russia and Ukraine were largely based on his calls for technological reform in the US military, based on how the two countries have deployed drones on the battlefield.

Vance’s deputy national security adviser, Andy Baker, has also been heavily involved, the people said, in yet another sign of Vance’s influence. 

Confronted with pushback, Trump wasn’t irate. He told NBC on Saturday that the proposal is “not my final offer,” hinting that contrary to what Driscoll had said behind closed doors, there was perhaps room for maneuver.

Yet his mood worsened on Sunday.

Ukraine’s leadership has “EXPRESSED ZERO GRATITUDE FOR OUR EFFORTS,” he said in a social media post.

A lot will depend on how talks in Switzerland go, and in which direction US planes go to next: back home or further east, toward Moscow.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Nathan’s Famous goes from 5-cent hot dog stand in Coney Island to $450 million acquisition by Smithfield Foods over 100 years later

Published

on



Nathan’s Famous, which opened as a 5-cent hot dog stand in Coney Island more than a century ago, has been sold to packaged meat giant Smithfield Foods in a $450 million all-cash deal, the companies announced Wednesday.

Smithfield, which has held rights to produce and sell Nathan’s products in the U.S., Canada and at Sam’s Clubs in Mexico since 2014, will acquire all of Nathan’s outstanding shares for $102 each. The transaction is expected to close in the first half of 2026.

Smithfield said it expects to achieve annual savings of about $9 million within two years of closing the deal.

“As a long-time partner, Smithfield has demonstrated an outstanding commitment to investing in and growing our brand while maintaining the utmost quality and customer service standards,” said Nathan’s CEO Eric Gatoff.

Nathan’s board of directors, which own or control nearly 30% of the outstanding shares of Nathan’s Famous common stock, approved the buyout and agreed to recommend to its shareholders to vote in favor of the deal.

Smithfield, which also owns the Gwaltney bacon and Armour frozen meat brands, rang up more than $1 billion in operating profit in 2024 on sales of $14.1 billion. It’s on track to eclipse both those figures when it reports its fourth-quarter results.

Smithfield shares were unchanged in midday trading Wednesday at $23.39.

In fiscal 2025, Nathan’s reported profit of $24 million on revenue approaching $150 million.

Join us at the Fortune Workplace Innovation Summit May 19–20, 2026, in Atlanta. The next era of workplace innovation is here—and the old playbook is being rewritten. At this exclusive, high-energy event, the world’s most innovative leaders will convene to explore how AI, humanity, and strategy converge to redefine, again, the future of work. Register now.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Trump tones down escalating Greenland rhetoric in Davos

Published

on



President Donald Trump, in his own inimitable way, struck a bellicose and yet conciliatory tone with European leaders in Davos, Switzerland, on Wednesday, somewhat tempering rising trans-Atlantic tensions and stock market jitters over concerns the U.S. is considering a takeover of Greenland. 

The nearly 90-minute speech, in which Trump lectured and hectored the tech executives and government officials in the audience, many from Europe, before clarifying that he didn’t want to use force and ultimately wanted peace, could be summed up by Trump ribbing French President Emmanuel Macron, seemingly unaware of his eye injury. “I watched him yesterday with his beautiful sunglasses. I said, ‘What the hell happened?’” Trump later added, “I actually like him. I do.” 

And while the president ruled out using military force to acquire the Danish territory of Greenland, he did not back down from antagonistic rhetoric while repeating his contested claim of having stopped eight wars around the world. (Trump’s desire for a Nobel Peace Prize, one measure of his competitiveness with predecessor Barack Obama, has hung on this eight-war figure, which some countries such as India and Pakistan reject.)

Trump used his highly anticipated address at the World Economic Forum as a platform to reaffirm his critique of European nations and of the U.S.’s status as a global superpower, but clarified that he prefers a peaceful resolution to the question over Greenland’s ownership that has threatened to kneecap the 76-year-old NATO alliance.

“I don’t have to use force. I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force,” he said.

Trump’s statement on having resolved multiple conflicts first emerged in a leaked text message the president sent to Norwegian prime minister Jonas Gahr Støre over the weekend in which he said, ominously, that he was no longer obliged to “think purely of Peace.” In that message, Trump linked his Greenland bombast to the Nobel committee deciding not to award him a Peace Prize last October, despite having “stopped 8 wars PLUS.” The committee that awards Nobel Prizes is based in Norway, although the Norwegian government does not have a say in allocating the prizes. 

Sigh of relief in the mountains

The statement assuaged the concerns of some European leaders about a possible military confrontation with the U.S. and seemed to reassure markets jittery about the onset of a new trade war, or the end of the western alliance. 

Markets responded positively after their big Tuesday sell-off. As of late morning, both the S&P 500 and the Dow Jones Industrial Average had risen over 1%, while the Nasdaq Composite index had advanced 1.3%. The 10-year Treasury yield turned lower, and the U.S. dollar stabilized after big losses Tuesday.

But Trump’s comments were an olive branch in text only, not in tone. Speaking for over an hour, the president reiterated his desire for Greenland, stating “that’s our territory” with regards to the island, while claiming he had “stopped eight wars.” (India has repeatedly rejected Trump’s claim that he stopped a war between the countries, while Pakistan has welcomed his involvement, nominating him for a Nobel.)

And while Trump toned down aggressive rhetoric of an impending military takeover of Greenland, he made clear to foreign leaders that it was a choice, even a favor: “We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force, where we would be, frankly, unstoppable, but I won’t do that,” he said.

Trump’s claim has been disputed. While the president did not specify which wars he was referring to, the U.S. has been involved in six ceasefires, although tensions have occasionally flared between Israel and Hamas and India and Pakistan. He may also be referring to agreements brokered during his first term.

Trump’s ruling out of military force on Wednesday soothed some European officials. Rasmus Jarlov, who chairs the defense committee in Denmark’s parliament, told The New York Times he “wasn’t too upset” with the president’s comments.

Lars Lokke Rasmussen, Denmark’s foreign minister, was encouraged as well: “It is positive that it is being said that military force will not be used,” he told local reporters Wednesday. “But that will not make this case go away,” he added.

While Trump reiterated his desire for a peaceful resolution during his speech, he challenged European leaders to remain opposed to him.

“You can say yes and we will be very appreciative, or you can say no and we will remember,” he said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

One Trump proposal meant to prevent ‘nation of renters’ may make homeownership harder, experts say

Published

on



President Donald Trump said he is reestablishing the American dream of homeownership, but one of his most recent housing policy proposals may put the dream even more out of reach, experts say.

Speaking Wednesday at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Trump touted his barrage of recent housing policy executive orders, including preventing institutional investors from buying single-family homes and attempting to lower mortgage rates by directing government-controlled mortgage finance firms Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to purchase $200 billion in mortgage-backed securities.

“It’s just not fair to the public [that] they’re not able to buy a house,” Trump said Wednesday of institutional homebuying. “And I’m calling on Congress to pass that ban into permanent law, and I think they will.” Trump has also asked Congress to cap credit-card interest rates at 10%, which he claimed Wednesday “will help millions of Americans save for a home.” 

Trump also spoke directly to Wall Street giants and institutional homebuyers at Davos, saying that “many of you are good friends of mine [and] many of you are supporters,” but “you’ve driven up housing prices by purchasing hundreds of thousands of single family homes.” 

“It’s been a great investment for them, often as much as 10% of houses on the market,” Trump said. “You know, the crazy thing is, a person can’t get depreciation on a house, but when a corporation buys it, they get depreciation.” 

One policy that went unmentioned during Trump’s Wednesday speech in Davos, and one experts say could carry potentially big risks and do little to address the root causes of high housing costs, is his proposal that would allow Americans tap their 401(k) savings for mortgage down payments, which now averages 19% of a home’s price. The current U.S. median home price is about $428,000, according to Redfin, meaning a down payment could amount to a whopping $81,000. Trump hasn’t put a dollar or percentage figure on the cap for the amount Americans could pull from their 401(k)s to use toward a down payment.

Trump’s final plan on allowing Americans to use their retirement savings for down payments would likely require congressional approval because it may involve changing the tax code. The proposal, announced Friday by Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, is Trump’s latest attempt to address growing concerns about affordability across the U.S. economy, especially in the housing market, and prevent America from becoming “a nation of renters,” as he said in his address at the World Economic Forum Wednesday.

Benefits of using 401(k) funds for a down payment

Trump’s idea has some benefits. The number of first time homebuyers has fallen to half of what it was about a decade ago, according to data from the National Association of Realtors. In addition, 22% of those who are able to buy their first home are already using either borrowed money or a gift from a friend or relative for their downpayment, according to the NAR.

While Americans can already withdraw up to $10,000 to pay for a home from individual retirement accounts (IRAs) without repaying it before age 59 ½ , this rule doesn’t apply to employer-sponsored 401(k)s, the most common retirement account, unless account holders pay a 10% penalty. 

Americans can withdraw money without a penalty from their retirement plans for some exempted purposes such as recovering from a natural disaster and some medical expenses, but still have to pay income taxes on their tax-deferred accounts. These “hardship withdrawals” increased to 4.8% of participants in Vanguard retirement plans in 2024, up from 3.6% in 2023.

Most employer-sponsored 401(k)s also allow Americans to borrow for a limited time from their retirement savings penalty-free before 59 ½, including for a home purchase, as long as they repay the amount borrowed to the account with interest.

Given the limited options for accessing retirement accounts, the president’s proposal could help Americans in need of cash to unlock liquidity for a down payment. This could be especially helpful for those who may struggle to repay an IRA loan, Robert Goldberg, a finance professor at Adelphi University in Garden City, N.Y., told Fortune.

Drawbacks of using 401(k) funds for a down payment

Still, Goldberg warned swapping out the diversified investments of a 401(k) and concentrating a large chunk of their investment into one asset is risky. While some believe home prices always go up, the housing market collapse of 2008 showed this isn’t always the case.

“Imagine home prices drop so much that the home price goes not just down to the mortgage level, but to below the mortgage level, wipes out your equity position,” he said. “You would have lost your equity, your 401(k) equity. Bad outcome.” 

Experts say Trump’s proposal also does little to address the supply side of the housing market, which has been largely frozen as homebuyers who bought in at lower interest rates prior to the pandemic have been hesitant to sell, Goldberg said. Giving more people the means to buy homes without adding more supply may inadvertently increase prices and lock more people out of the housing market, instead of making it more affordable, he argued. 

“Some people will benefit from [Trump’s plan], but overall it will just be more competition for homes,” Goldberg said. 

Yet, Trump’s proposal dealing with retirement savings is especially risky because it makes it easier for Americans to use crucial retirement savings meant for the future for non-retirement uses, said Jake Falcon, a chartered retirement planning counselor and the CEO of Falcon Wealth Advisors.

The median retirement savings for an American between the ages of 45 and 55 was $115,000 as of 2022, according to the Federal Reserve. Yet, this amount may not suffice for everyone, as some experts suggest the average person needs to have saved eight to 10 times their annual salary to retire comfortably.  

“People, generally speaking, are more than likely behind, and this will just make them further behind,” Falcon said.

Given the bleak data on American retirement savings, Falcon said the government should make dipping into a retirement account for other uses harder instead of easier.

“Allowing people to raid their 401(k) doesn’t solve the problem,” he said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.