António Guterres was speaking to journalists in the capital Nicosia at the end of his first official visit to the country, where he met with the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot leaders as well as stakeholders. 

Mr. Guterres said he held “frank and constructive discussions” with Nikos Christodoulides and Tufan Erhürman, both separately and together. 

Solidarity and a search for a solution 

He recalled that the UN has consistently worked to assist the communities “in their efforts to reach a comprehensive, sustainable solution to the Cyprus issue”. 

The island has been divided since July 1974. Recent UN engagement has focused on rebuilding confidence after years without a formal settlement track.  

Since 2017, six meetings have been held in Switzerland, Germany and the United States in this regard.  

“In this context, it was my duty to come to Cyprus to express my full solidarity with the people of Cyprus in their quest for a solution,” Mr. Guterres said, stressing that “this is the moment when all efforts must be made to rebuild trust.” 

He appealed to the two leaders to intensify efforts “to define and implement confidence-building measures that can make a difference in the daily lives of all Cypriots”. 

The Secretary-General said they have both assured him of their determination to continue working with his Personal Envoy, Maria Angela Holguin. 

New meeting proposed 

“Based on our discussions on the way forward, I decided that I would convene another 5+1 meeting after adequate preparations on confidence building, methodology and substance, taking into account the convergences already achieved,” he said. 

The 5+1 format brings together the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot leaders, guarantors Greece, Türkiye and the United Kingdom and the UN.  

He said the UN will consult with the two sides and the guarantors “to create the conditions for the meeting’s success”.  

A clear message 

The Secretary-General noted that throughout the visit, he also had the opportunity to hear from many Cypriots, and their clearest message was a desire for progress.

“They want to see their leaders make compromises and to walk that last mile towards a settlement of the Cyprus issue,” he said. 

“They want a future in which this island is defined not by division, but by cooperation, opportunity and peace.” 

Respect UN force 

Regarding the situation on the ground, the Secretary-General emphasised the need to respect the mandated authority of the UN peacekeeping operation UNFICYP, both in the buffer zone and UN-delineated ceasefire lines. 

The force, which has deployed since 1964, “has helped maintain calm and stability in a sensitive environment” and “its continued effectiveness depends on the cooperation of all sides.” 

He also commended the work of the Committee on Missing Persons as well as the bicommunal technical committees working to bridge the gap between political negotiations and the everyday concerns of the people, in addition to highlighting his engagement with civil society. 

A ‘crucial moment’ 

The Secretary-General concluded his remarks by recognising the significant contributions of the UNFICYP staff and his Mission of Good Offices for their critical roles in supporting peace and stability. 

He stressed that “the United Nations cannot impose peace,” but “remains fully committed to supporting the people of Cyprus in this crucial moment for the island and the wider region”. 

Responding to a journalist’s question, he pointed to the “important geopolitical movements” and persistent and unending conflicts in a region “where we have seen how conflicts can be enlarged”. 

He expressed the belief that “a solution in Cyprus is absolutely crucial not only to preserve the interests and the peace of the Cypriot people, but also as a factor of stability in what is becoming a dangerously unstable region.” 

The 15-member Security Council is meeting in emergency session on Thursday morning to address the escalating tensions in the Gulf region following Iran attacks in recent days on Bahrain and Kuwait while Tehran and Washington continue to trade strikes over the Strait of Hormuz chokepoint. Stay tuned for live updates.

The Security Council meets late on Monday at France’s request, as concern grows over escalating violence in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah amid warnings of Israeli strikes on Beirut’s southern suburbs, and confusion over the status of US-Iran peace talks linked to the faltering ceasefires. Follow live here from New York. 

The UN Security Council is meeting in emergency session on Ukraine, with Secretary-General António Guterres telling ambassadors following what Kyiv describes as the most devastating attack on its capital to date, that “the time for peace is now.” In the early hours of 23-24 May, Russia launched a massive barrage of missiles and drones against multiple Ukrainian cities. Moscow has since threatened further sustained strikes. Sharp divisions among Council members are expected, with European nations demanding an immediate ceasefire while Russia insists its strikes target only military infrastructure.

Syria will join the international coalition to combat the Islamic State group, marking a shift in US foreign policy in the Middle East, a senior Trump administration official has confirmed.

The announcement came as President Donald Trump met Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa at the White House – the first such visit from a Syrian leader in the country’s history.

In an interview with Special Report on Fox News, al-Sharaa said the visit was part of a “new era” in which the country would co-operate with the US.

Trump has expressed his support for al-Sharaa, who until recently was designated a terrorist by the US government.

Syria will now be the 90th country to join the global coalition, which is aimed at eliminating remaining elements of the so-called Islamic State and stemming the flow of foreign militants to the Middle East.

Following the meeting, a senior administration official also confirmed that the US Treasury Department, along with the departments of state and commerce, will announce new measures to lift economic restrictions on Syria and provide “compliance clarity for investors”.

As part of the measures, the administration is also issuing an 180-day suspension of the Caesar Act, which since 2019 had sanctioned the former Syrian government.

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office several hours after the meeting, Trump said that “we want to see Syria become a country that’s very successful.”

“And I think this leader can do it,” he added. “I really do.”

Diplomatic relations between Syria and the US have been suspended since 2012, although the US will now allow Syria to re-open its embassy in Washington.

This is the third meeting between the two leaders, following one in May on the sidelines of the Gulf Cooperation Council and a dinner during the UN General Assembly in September.

Al-Sharaa’s visit to the White House caps a remarkable re-branding for the former jihadist.

Not long ago, he led a branch of Al-Qaeda – the group behind the 9/11 attacks and many others – before breaking off ties.

Even until this year, he was the leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, an armed Islamist group which the US officially considered a terrorist organisation until four months ago, with a $10m bounty on his head.

The Treasury Department removed al-Sharaa from its “specially designated global terrorist list” just last week.

But since becoming interim Syrian president, al-Sharaa has worked to soften his public image as he tries to rebuild Syria, with foreign support, following 13 years of war.

“He has had a rough past,” Trump said on Monday. “And I think, frankly, if you didn’t have a rough past, you wouldn’t have a chance.”

In his interview, al-Sharaa said that he and Trump had not discussed his past, but instead focused on the “present and the future” of Syria in which it was a “geopolitical” and economic partner of Washington.

Al-Sharaa’s rule, however, has been marred by killings of members of Syria’s Alawite minority, as well as by deadly violence between Sunni Bedouin fighters and Druze militias.

He has vowed to root out members of his security forces that have committed human rights violations.

Trump, for his part, has repeatedly expressed support for al-Sharaa, referring to him as a “young, attractive guy” and a “fighter”.

In June, President Trump signed an executive order lifting sanctions against Syria, which the White House said would help support the country’s “path to stability and peace”.

At the time, the administration said it would monitor the new Syrian government’s actions, including “taking steps toward normalising ties with Israel” and addressing “foreign terrorists” and militant groups operating in the country.

Japan’s new prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, said Monday she has formally requested a summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un as part of a renewed push to resolve the long-running issue of Japanese nationals abducted by Pyongyang decades ago.

Speaking at an awareness event in Tokyo attended by family members of the abductees, Takaichi said she had conveyed Tokyo’s desire for a top-level meeting and expressed determination to secure a “breakthrough” during her term. “In order to build a new, fruitful relation between Japan and North Korea, I am resolved to meet face-to-face with Chairman Kim Jong Un,” she told the gathering. Pyongyang has not yet issued a public response to the request.

The abduction cases are one of the most painful and politically sensitive issues between Tokyo and Pyongyang. After years of denials, North Korea publicly acknowledged in 2002 that its agents had kidnapped a group of Japanese citizens in the 1970s and 1980s, saying 13 people had been taken to the North to train agents in Japanese language and customs. Tokyo maintains the official list at 17 abductees and has long warned that others could also have been taken.

The issue has repeatedly been a barrier to any normalization of ties. In the early 2000s, then-prime minister Junichiro Koizumi secured the return of five abductees after visiting Pyongyang in 2002 and 2004 and meeting the North’s then leader Kim Jong Il, but Pyongyang said the remaining cases were closed, claiming the survivors had died. Subsequent Japanese administrations have sought progress through sanctions, diplomatic channels and pressure from allies, but direct talks with Kim have not been achieved.

Takaichi, who was elected prime minister in October, framed the issue as both a human tragedy and a matter of national sovereignty. “I will use any means necessary for this issue with the lives of the victims and our national sovereignty at stake,” she said, echoing vows from earlier leaders that resolving the abduction cases remains a priority for Japan. She told the victims’ families her cabinet would treat the issue as a core mission.

Tokyo has also been leveraging diplomatic support from Washington to keep the spotlight on the cases. U.S. President Donald Trump met members of abductees’ families during his recent visit to Tokyo and pledged U.S. backing for efforts to resolve the matter, underscoring the international dimension of Japan’s campaign. Japan’s government has long cultivated U.S. attention on the abductions as part of its strategy to sustain pressure on Pyongyang.

Experts say Takaichi faces significant obstacles. North Korea has for years linked progress on a range of bilateral issues — including potential economic benefits or the easing of sanctions — to Japan’s acceptance of political compromises that Tokyo finds unacceptable, particularly any suggestion of overlooking Pyongyang’s weapons programs. Moreover, relationships between the two countries remain fraught by security concerns, mutual distrust and Seoul’s own complex role on the peninsula. Past attempts at piecemeal confidence-building, including proposals for liaison offices, have failed to yield durable progress.

If Pyongyang were to accept talks, analysts say Takaichi would need to balance the strong domestic demand for the abductees’ return with broader security considerations, including Japan’s alliance with the United States and the international sanctions regime aimed at curbing North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs. Any summit would also carry political risk at home: families of the abductees and conservative factions expect tangible results, and failure to make progress could undermine Takaichi’s pledges.

For the families, the prime minister’s statement offered cautious hope amid decades of uncertainty. “We’ve waited for so long,” one family representative told reporters after the event, calling for speedy and concrete action. Those relatives continue to press Tokyo for every available diplomatic avenue to bring their loved ones home or at least to learn their fate.

The latest diplomatic drama surrounding  U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin has once again underscored the delicate — and deeply strategic — nature of their relationship. The announcement of a planned meeting between Trump and Putin in Hungary, followed by its abrupt cancellation, revealed not only the volatile dynamic between the two men but also the calculated way Moscow leverages personal politics to influence Washington’s stance on Ukraine.

For a few fleeting days, the world anticipated what could have been a high-stakes summit between two of the most unpredictable leaders in global politics. The Trump administration said preparations were underway for a meeting between the American and Russian presidents, with teams from both sides coordinating details in Budapest. Yet within days, the Kremlin abruptly denied any agreement, calling reports of the summit “premature.” Trump, characteristically, countered by implying that Moscow had backed out.

Soon after, Trump dismissed the idea altogether, saying any meeting without a “peace agreement in hand” would be a “waste of time.”

While the episode might appear to be a diplomatic misunderstanding, it in fact exposes a deeper pattern: Putin’s methodical management of Trump’s ego and emotions — a tactic that ultimately undermines Ukraine’s interests and reshapes the Western alliance.

Since returning to the White House in early 2025, Trump has revived his distinctly personal brand of diplomacy — one that often sidelines traditional institutions in favor of leader-to-leader dealings. Putin, a master manipulator of such dynamics, has proven adept at exploiting this.

The Russian president sees the United States as the indispensable actor in determining the outcome of Russia’s war in Ukraine. But for Putin, the real objective is not peace — it is legitimacy. By engaging directly with Trump, Putin seeks to elevate Russia’s status as a co-equal superpower and to gain recognition of its sphere of influence over Ukraine and Eastern Europe.

Putin has long recognized that Trump admires strength and personal loyalty. After their August meeting in Alaska — the first face-to-face encounter since Trump’s return to office — Trump publicly praised Putin for “agreeing” with his criticisms of mail-in ballots during U.S. elections. The anecdote, trivial as it may seem, revealed the depth of Putin’s psychological insight: he feeds Trump’s ego to earn his trust.

In October, shortly after being snubbed by the Nobel Committee, Putin publicly lauded Trump’s supposed “peacemaking instincts.” The message was not for the global audience but for Trump himself. By showering the American leader with praise and flattery, Putin keeps open a personal channel of influence that consistently yields strategic dividends for Moscow.

The results of this influence have been visible. After private calls or meetings with Putin, Trump has repeatedly echoed Kremlin talking points about the Ukraine war. He has described the conflict as “a tragic misunderstanding” and argued that Ukraine must “compromise to survive.”

These statements, which mirror Moscow’s narrative that blames NATO expansion and Western interference for the war, have become recurring themes in Trump’s public remarks. Most recently, on October 17, 2025, Trump reportedly clashed with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during their meeting in Washington, telling him that “Ukraine will be destroyed by Russia” unless Kyiv accepted Putin’s demands.

Such rhetoric not only undermines U.S. policy but also strains Washington’s credibility with European allies. The pattern reflects how Putin manipulates Trump’s personal diplomacy to sow discord within the Western alliance — a key goal of Moscow since the start of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Putin’s handling of Trump serves three overlapping objectives.

First, it disrupts the U.S.-Ukraine relationship. Each engagement between Trump and Putin — even informal ones — tends to precede moments of tension between Washington and Kyiv. The infamous Oval Office meeting in February 2025, attended by Trump, Zelenskyy, and Vice President JD Vance, occurred shortly after Trump spoke with Putin. That meeting reportedly ended with Trump lecturing Zelenskyy about corruption and NATO’s “burden sharing,” leaving Kyiv alarmed.

Second, Putin’s manipulation of these personal ties directly affects military aid and arms negotiations. The most recent Hungarian summit announcement coincided with an impending U.S.-Ukraine discussion about Kyiv’s request to purchase Tomahawk cruise missiles — a move that would have extended Ukraine’s long-range strike capability deep into Russian-held territory. Following the cancellation of the Trump-Putin summit, those talks evaporated. Without the prospect of new missile systems, Ukraine’s negotiating leverage diminished — precisely what Moscow desired.

Third, Putin seeks to weaken transatlantic unity. Since the 2022 invasion, the United States and Europe have largely presented a united front in support of Ukraine. But Trump’s recurring criticism of NATO spending, coupled with his visible camaraderie with Putin, has rattled European capitals. Each proposed or rumored Trump-Putin meeting reignites fears of a “grand bargain” that would sacrifice Ukrainian sovereignty for geopolitical expediency.

The mere announcement of the Hungarian summit sent alarm bells ringing across Europe. Diplomats from Germany, Poland, and France reportedly sought urgent clarification from Washington, fearing that Trump might unilaterally endorse a ceasefire favorable to Moscow.

Yet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has also learned to adapt. Recognizing Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy, Zelenskyy has adopted his own version of personal diplomacy.

In April, Zelenskyy met privately with Trump during Pope Francis’s funeral in Rome — an encounter that reportedly helped reset relations after February’s tense Oval Office confrontation. In August, Zelenskyy made a deliberate effort to project statesmanship during another meeting with Trump, donning a suit instead of his trademark military attire — a subtle nod to Trump’s earlier criticism of his “casual” appearance.

Zelenskyy has also sought to engage Trump’s business instincts. Ukraine signed agreements to supply rare minerals to U.S. companies and expanded purchases of American-made weapons with partial NATO funding — moves designed to appeal to Trump’s preference for deals that benefit U.S. industry.

While these gestures have yet to yield major policy shifts, they have helped Ukraine maintain a fragile line of communication with a White House whose priorities are often unpredictable.

Following the collapse of the Hungarian summit plan, the Trump administration appeared to pivot toward a tougher stance. The U.S. imposed fresh sanctions on Russian oil exporters and entities circumventing the price cap mechanism — signaling Washington’s continued commitment to economic pressure despite diplomatic confusion.

Trump himself told reporters he was “done wasting time” unless Putin showed “real seriousness about peace.” Yet the statement carried an air of resignation. Putin, after all, has not meaningfully altered his demands since launching the invasion in February 2022.

For the Kremlin, these oscillations between engagement and cancellation serve a purpose. By dangling the prospect of talks, Putin fosters division among Western policymakers — between those advocating negotiation and those pushing for unconditional Ukrainian victory. Each aborted meeting, like the one in Hungary, reinforces Moscow’s image as an indispensable interlocutor while keeping the West off balance.

Despite hopes that personal diplomacy could pave the way for peace, the underlying reality remains bleak. Putin’s interactions with Trump are less about conflict resolution and more about influence projection.

Trump, who has repeatedly boasted that he could “end the war in 24 hours,” has shown a willingness to entertain Russian narratives. This creates space for Putin to insert himself into U.S. domestic debates, shaping perceptions of the war among Trump’s supporters and eroding bipartisan consensus on Ukraine.

For now, the aborted Hungarian meeting stands as a microcosm of this manipulative diplomacy — a theatre of gestures, praise, and cancellations that achieves nothing tangible for peace but plenty for Russia’s strategic aims.

Even if another Trump-Putin summit materializes in the months ahead, the outcome is unlikely to be a breakthrough. The meeting would serve as yet another episode in Putin’s long game: cultivating influence within Washington while buying time on the battlefield.

As Ukraine continues to fight for survival, both Putin and Zelenskyy will keep courting Trump — one to legitimize aggression, the other to preserve support. But only one of them benefits from delay.

Ministers and school representatives are set to meet later for the first School Council Network in Jersey of the new term.

The meetings, which take place up to six times a year, allow primary and secondary school councils to shape policy directly with government.

The Department for Children, Young People, Education and Skills (CYPES) said the opening event of the term would focus on safety and digital wellbeing.

Education and Lifelong Learning Minister Rob Ward congratulated all the students elected to their school councils, calling it “a big responsibility but also a fantastic opportunity”.

Ward, who is set to attend the event alongside Minister for Children and Families Richard Vibert and Assistant Minister for Children and Families Malcom Ferey, said: “I’m excited to see the ideas and leadership you’ll bring, and I look forward to working with you through the School Council Network.”

Vibert said the network had grown into a “powerful, student-led forum”.

“I’m proud to support a network that puts young voices at the heart of decision-making, and I look forward to hearing more from them as they focus on safety, which is one of our priorities in the Children, Young People and Families Plan,” he added.

Students will also review Jersey’s new Play Plan, ensuring it reflects their current needs and experiences.

CYPES said students last term helped redesign the Millennium Town Park playground, tested and tasted hot school meals, and submitted hundreds of questions to ministers.