Read the daily news to learn English

picture of article

‘Matter of survival’: South Korean president urges public health cover for hair loss

South Korean president Lee Jae Myung has instructed his government to consider extending public health insurance to cover hair-loss treatments, arguing that baldness has become a “matter of survival” rather than a cosmetic concern for young people. The proposal, which has since faced a backlash from medical professionals and conservative figures, was announced during a policy briefing on Tuesday and would expand coverage beyond the limited medical treatments currently available for certain types of hair loss. South Korea operates a universal insurance scheme funded by premiums that are calculated based on income. Currently, the scheme covers only hair loss caused by medical reasons, such as alopecia areata. Most treatments for common male pattern baldness remain excluded from coverage. “There may be young people who think it’s unfair that they only pay insurance premiums and can’t receive benefits,” Lee said, noting that the “sense of alienation” among them had become severe. The president first proposed the policy as a candidate during his unsuccessful 2022 presidential election campaign, when it drew criticism as populist pandering, but dropped it from his most recent election platform. The proposal has highlighted South Korea’s intense cultural focus on physical appearance. A 2024 survey of young adults found that 98% of respondents believe attractive people receive social benefits. The cultural pressure is particularly demanding and acute for women, who face strict expectations about makeup, skincare and body shape. For men, the issue is less openly discussed, but some with a receding hairline opt to grow out their fringes to disguise hair loss, or seek expensive treatments. South Korea’s hair-loss treatment market was thought to be worth around 188bn won (£95m) in 2024, and industry groups claim that of a population of more than 51 million, around 10 million experience hair loss, though this figure has never been officially verified. Hair-loss shampoos are particularly popular, though in recent years some products have faced criticism over their claims of effectiveness. The timing of Lee’s proposal is particularly sensitive because South Korea’s health insurance system faces mounting financial pressure. Recent internal projections suggest the system could reportedly face deficits as large as 4.1tn won (£2.1bn) in 2026. Medical professionals have reacted with scepticism to the idea. The influential Korean Medical Association said that “rather than investing health insurance finances in hair loss treatment coverage, prioritising coverage for cancer and other serious diseases would better align with health insurance principles.” Conservative newspapers have been particularly critical. The Chosun Ilbo argued in its editorial that “this is not something the president should suddenly instruct without collecting opinions from citizens who pay insurance premiums.” Health minister Jeong Eun Kyeong expressed caution about the proposal, interpreting Lee’s “survival” claim as referring to young people’s confidence during job searches and the impact on mental health. When asked on a radio show whether extending coverage would substantially affect health insurance finances, Jeong replied: “I think so,” and noted that expanded coverage would require a comprehensive analysis. Former conservative lawmaker Yoon Hee-sook, who has a relative undergoing cancer treatment, wrote on Facebook that while she sympathises with young people’s hair-loss stress, “prioritising treatments directly connected to life and bodily function represents the current social consensus.” Park Joo-min, a ruling party MP who has publicly discussed his hair transplant procedure and is known for his advocacy on hair-loss issues, posted “truly Korea!” on X in an apparent endorsement.

picture of article

Ukraine deal: EU leaders agree €90bn loan, but without use of frozen Russian assets

EU leaders have pledged a €90bn loan for Ukraine to meet urgent financial needs, but failed to agree on the preferred option for many of securing that loan against Russia’s frozen assets in the bloc. After talks ended in the early hours of Friday, the president of the European Council, António Costa, told reporters: “We committed and we delivered.” He said EU leaders had approved a decision to make a €90bn loan to Ukraine for the next two years backed by the EU budget, which Kyiv would repay only once Russia pays reparations. Costa added: “The union reserves its right to make use of the immobilised assets to repay this loan.” EU leaders entered the summit on Thursday with many wanting to secure the urgently needed loan against some of Russia’s €210bn frozen assets on the continent. But the plan fell on the demand of Belgium, which hosts 88% of the Russian funds in the EU, to have unlimited budget guarantees from other member states if Moscow won a successful claim for damages. Belgium’s prime minister, Bart De Wever, said the reparations loan had not been a good idea. “When we explained the text again, there were so many questions that I said, ‘I told you so, I told you so.’ There are a lot of loose ends. And if you start pulling at the loose ends in the strings, the thing collapses.” Euroclear in Brussels is being sued by the Russian central bank for $230bn while its top executives have also faced a campaign of intimidation orchestrated by Russian intelligence, the Guardian reported this week. German chancellor Friedrich Merz, a strong advocate of the reparations loan, said the agreement was “a decisive message because Putin will only make concessions once he realises his war will not pay off”. In a statement he said: “If Russia does not pay reparations we will – in full accordance with international law – make use of Russian immobilised assets for paying back the loan.” Merz and other supporters of the reparations loan plan had argued that funding Ukraine via the EU budget was impossible because it required unanimity. But the path was cleared when the three nationalist governments in central Europe indicated they would approve the use of the EU budget to fund Ukraine, as long as they did not have to contribute to the loan guarantees. The leaders of Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic were pictured in a trilateral meeting by Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán, who tweeted: “back in business!” According to the final text of the agreement, the EU guarantees for the loan “will not have an impact on the financial obligations” of these three countries. The Danish prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, said it was “quite something” to get 27 countries to agree on a €90bn loan for another. She said: “There are a lot of people outside the European Union and unfortunately also inside the European Union who tries to divide us. It is getting more and more difficult and I think this will continue.” The Ukraine finance decision had been cast as “money today or blood tomorrow” by Poland’s prime minister Donald Tusk. EU officials had hoped that if the union went ahead with using frozen assets for Ukraine, other western allies , such as the UK, Canada and Japan, would follow suit. Now it is not clear how they will respond. But Brussels has called on non-EU allies to provide around €45bn to cover the rest of Ukraine’s estimated €136bn needs for military and civilian finance in 2026 and 27. Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, had earlier told EU leaders that the decision to use Russia’s frozen assets for the defence of his country was “one of the clearest and most morally justified decisions that could ever be made”. But Kyiv is also likely to be relieved that EU leaders have agreed on funding. Zelenskyy had also warned that Ukraine risked running out of money to make drones, a vital component of its defence against Russia’s invasion.

picture of article

‘Better off with Taiwan’: Honduras joins other Latin American countries rethinking ties with China

After weeks of technology failures, accusations of fraud and complaints about US President Donald Trump’s interference, the outcome of Honduras’ 30 November election is yet to be called. But there is a clear winner beyond the Central American nation’s borders: Taiwan. Both leading candidates say they will cut diplomatic ties with Beijing and re-establish relations with Taipei, reversing the March 2023 decision by the then president, Xiomara Castro, to sensationally end Honduras’ 82-year relationship with Taiwan. At the time, Honduras was the ninth of 10 countries to sever ties with Taipei in favour of Beijing in the last decade, amid an intensifying pressure campaign by the Chinese government to isolate Taiwan and delegitimise its sovereignty, and boost Beijing’s claim that it’s a part of China. But they seem to be having regrets. “For Honduras there has been absolutely no benefit from [the relationship with China],” says Salvador Nasralla, the Liberal party’s candidate. “We were 100 times better off with Taiwan,” agrees his opponent Nasry Asfura, the former mayor of Tegucigalpa who received Trump’s endorsement days before the vote. Today, Taipei has just 12 diplomatic allies in the world, thanks to Beijing’s relentless campaign to force foreign governments to choose one or the other. Sometimes it sparks an unedifying bidding war of financial and other inducements, even alleged corruption. In the end most countries choose the world’s second-biggest economy. Honduras was the fifth Central American and Caribbean nation (after Panama, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador and Nicaragua) to cut ties with them in the past decade. Since the beginning of the century, 21 nations have turned from Taipei to Beijing. Nauru has done it twice. Those who resist face enormous pressure. During the pandemic Guatemala, Taiwan’s most populous remaining ally, was urged to recognise China in return for vaccine aid. Taiwan-based diplomats from its remaining allies have told the Guardian they have faced a gamut of tactics, from promises of major infrastructure investment to intimidating visits by Chinese officials to their UN offices, and sudden bans on lucrative Chinese tourism to their countries. Now however, US pressure, broken Chinese promises and corruption scandals appear to have halted Taiwan’s seemingly inexorable slide into diplomatic irrelevance in the region. In November, a delegation of 10 Panamanian lawmakers and advisers made a trip to Taipei in search of business deals and parliamentary ties. Meanwhile Godwin Friday, the recently elected president of St Vincent and the Grenadines, dropped his party’s longstanding promise to recognise China from his party’s manifesto. Officials in Taipei may be feeling vindicated. At the time Honduras cut ties, its foreign minister said Honduras was struggling financially and Taiwan hadn’t answered a request to renegotiate $600m in debt or increase financial aid. Taiwan in turn accused Honduras of asking for more than $2bn and urged it not to “quench your thirst with poison” by siding with China. The foreign ministries of Taiwan and China were contacted for comment. US pressure and China’s broken promises The cost-benefit analysis of establishing relations with China have shifted, especially since Trump’s re-election, according to Evan Ellis, a professor in the US Army War College in Pennsylvania. In Honduras, shrimp exports collapsed when Chinese buyers didn’t replace the 40% of exports absorbed by Taiwan, as promised. In Panama, major Chinese infrastructure projects, including ports and bridges have been chronically delayed or cancelled. Panama also wants to play a role in the re-shoring of the microchip industry to the western hemisphere, for which economic relations with Taiwan are crucial. Public opinions of China have also been affected by revelations about some of the methods by which the switches were achieved. Messages from the phone of former Panamanian president Juan Carlos Varela suggested that his family-run business had benefited from multimillion-dollar orders from Chinese diplomats after recognition, allegations that Varela denies. In Paraguay, the head of the Chinese business association tasked with establishing political relations told undercover reporters for Al Jazeera “we’ll pay bribes”. But geopolitics are far from the thoughts of most Central American citizens. The issue of the net benefits of ties to China or Taiwan are of secondary importance compared with “virtue signalling” allegiance to US influence, according to Ellis. “The US is pushing back against China in the region and countries choosing to stay with Taiwan is part of this,” he says, “The expectation is that they will be rewarded.” Honduras – where Trump endorsed one candidate and pardoned a former president for drug trafficking in the space of the week – is just the latest example of his often nakedly transactional foreign policy in the region. Following Trump’s threats to “take back” the Panama Canal from alleged Chinese control, Panama said it would not renew its membership of China’s Belt & Road infrastructure scheme and lodged a legal case against two Chinese-run ports at either end of the waterway. US firms seem well placed to win a number of new port and energy projects in the country. When the Panamanian delegation to Taiwan received WhatsApp messages from the Chinese ambassador demanding that they cancel their trip, the US ambassador stepped in to reassure them of his support. With the Trump administration’s focus shifting to the Caribbean, where several warships float off the coast of Venezuela, governments such as that of St Vincent’s are unlikely to make diplomatic moves that would antagonise the US. “It’s not the time for a small Caribbean island not too far from major US military operations to be flipping to the PRC [People’s Republic of China],” says Ellis.

picture of article

Ukraine war briefing: Hungary agrees to allow EU loan to Kyiv but will not contribute

Hungary’s Viktor Orbán has agreed not to block a massive EU-backed interest-free loan to Ukraine to meet its military and economic needs for the next two years, as long as his country, Slovakia and the Czech Republic were excluded from the guarantees for the debt. After failing to agree on using frozen Russian assets, diplomats announced the new loan in the early hours of Friday. The deal will not affect the financial obligations of Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, which did not want to contribute to the financing of Ukraine, the text said. Moscow-friendly Hungary had previously said it would oppose the deal, just as it opposed the use of Russian assets. German chancellor Friedrich Merz said Ukraine would have to repay the loan only if Russia paid reparations for its war, and that the EU reserved the right to use Russian assets immobilised in the EU for repayment if Russia failed to pay compensation. Merz had pushed hard for the frozen asset plan – but still said the final decision on the loan “sends a clear signal” to Russian president Vladimir Putin. The move follows hours of discussions among leaders on the technical details of a loan based on the frozen Russian assets, which turned out to be too complex or politically demanding to sort out at this stage, diplomats said. “We have gone from saving Ukraine to saving face, at least that of those who have been pushing for the use of the frozen assets,” one EU diplomat said. The main difficulty in the use of the Russian money was providing Belgium, where €185bn ($217bn) of the total €210bn of Russian assets in Europe are held, with sufficient guarantees against financial and legal risks from potential Russian retaliation for the release of the money to Ukraine. Donald Trump has urged Ukraine to move “quickly” on a deal to end Russia’s invasion ahead of fresh talks expected in Miami at the weekend. The US president told reporters in the Oval Office on Thursday on a potential settlement: “Well, they’re getting close to something, but I hope Ukraine moves quickly. I hope Ukraine moves quickly because Russia is there. And you know, every time they take too much time, then Russia changes their mind.” Trump envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner plan to meet Russian officials in Florida for the talks, a White House official said, after the envoys met a Ukrainian delegation in Berlin last Sunday and Monday. The Danish government has accused Russia of being behind two “destructive and disruptive” cyber-attacks in what it describes as “very clear evidence” of a hybrid war, reports Miranda Bryant. The Danish Defence Intelligence Service (DDIS) announced on Thursday that Moscow was behind a cyber-attack on a Danish water utility in 2024 and a series of distributed denial-of-service attacks on Danish websites in the lead-up to municipal and regional council elections in November. A DDIS statement cited Russia’s “hybrid war against the west” and said: “The aim is to create insecurity in the targeted countries and to punish those that support Ukraine.” Russian strikes near Ukraine’s Black Sea port of Odesa on Thursday killed a woman in her car and hit infrastructure and the regional governor asked residents suffering long power cuts to stop blocking roads in protest. Oleh Kiper said on Telegram that a Russian drone killed a woman crossing a bridge in her car south-west of Odesa. Her three children were injured. Kiper asked residents whose homes had been hit by extended power outages to exhibit patience and end roadblocks. Britain has imposed sanctions on more Russian oil companies and Canadian-Pakistani billionaire Murtaza Lakhani as part of efforts to increase pressure on Moscow over the Ukraine war. The government on Thursday targeted 24 individuals and entities, including what it described as Russia’s largest remaining unsanctioned oil companies: Tatneft, Russneft, NNK-Oil and Rusneftegaz. Earlier in the day the EU imposed sanctions on 41 more ships in Russia’s so-called shadow fleet that seeks to circumvent western trading restrictions.

picture of article

Dashed dreams and land grabs: The rise of rural protests in China

Standing inside the temple armed with buckets of rice, the villagers gaze out at police officers armed with riot shields and sticks, the sound of shouting audible over banging drums. Then the tension erupts. A scuffle breaks out, some villagers throw handfuls of rice at the officers, a traditional custom for dispelling evil, while others hoist religious artefacts onto their shoulders and march away, past groups of police and other officials. The showdown happened last month, apparently caused by the planned demolition of a small local temple in a village in Lingao county in Hainan, a tropical island province in south China. Underneath a video of the incident posted on Douyin, a video-sharing platform, one commenter wrote: “Oh, even their spiritual solace is gone. In such a vast world, can’t a single temple be spared?” The protest in itself appears minor, but these scenes of anger are being repeated in one form or another across rural China, and the number of them is soaring. By the end of November this year, China Dissent Monitor, a protest-tracking project run by Freedom House, recorded 661 rural protests in China, a 70% increase on the whole of 2024. The startling rise in unrest reflects the increasing pressures in China’s economy, particularly on low-paid workers. For decades, people have flocked from China’s countryside to booming cities to chase dreams, opportunities and incomes that could transform their lives and those of their families back home. But as China’s development enters a new era of slower growth and the country battles “involution” – a downward spiral in the economy that means people have to work longer hours for less pay – many of those internal migrants are giving up on their big city dreams. The life that then awaits them back in their home towns and villages is often at odds with the promises of prosperity that have secured the Chinese Communist party’s legitimacy since the 1990s. “When these rural people return, they bring back urban expectations, political awareness, and frustration,” says Chih-Jou Jay Chen, a professor of sociology at Academia Sinica in Taipei. “Many returnees are young; they are not content to retire; they are frustrated by the lack of economic opportunity and are more prone to volatile outbursts,” Chen says, adding that returnees often settle in smaller towns rather than their original home villages. Debt, land and broken dreams The Hainan protest was about trying to save a local Taoist temple that was ultimately demolished. But very often the protests are about land. In a video from a village in Hunan province, a protest in September shows dozens of villagers crowding around uniformed officers. Two women are kowtowing, a traditional gesture performed by those seeking justice. The dispute appears to have arisen from the local authorities seizing farmland in Tongxing village, a mountainous community in south China’s Hunan province, known for its crops of bayberries, a small, prickly, red fruit. A person who uploaded a video of the protest to Douyin, a video-sharing app, accused the local government of hiring “more than 200 thugs to violently assault the villagers”. “In this [sluggish] economy, they are seizing farmland, sparing no way for villagers to live,” wrote one commenter on Douyin. The video could not be independently verified, although several videos collected by China Dissent Monitor appear to corroborate the reports. A report published by Chinese media earlier in the summer detailed an ongoing dispute between villagers and a limestone mining company to repurpose their land for a quarry. Several villagers signed a petition opposing the quarry, citing environmental concerns and the impact on their homes. The company could not be reached for comment. Lingao county in Hainan and Xinhua county in Hunan, where Tongxing village is, were both contacted for comment. In China’s cities, all land is owned by the state, but in the countryside, land is owned by a rural collective. However, the state has the power to requisition farmland for commercial development – a right that cash-strapped local authorities often exercise without giving villagers a level of compensation that they feel is fair. Small local protests represent frustration with a system where there is little accountability and few avenues for appeals. In November, protests erupted in Guizhou province over a directive that deceased people should be cremated rather than buried. After several days of intense clashes, a video emerged of villagers appearing to overpower local officials, forcing them to kneel. The video was posted online by Yesterday, a website run by overseas Chinese dissidents that tracks unrest in China. It could not be independently verified. There is no evidence that the protests are linked to each other, or are the result of social contagion between different places. Mostly they are a response to a local issue, and are normally quickly brought under control by the authorities, who prize social stability above all else. But the rapid increase in protests comes at a time of nationwide malaise about the sluggish economy, which may fuel discontent across different locations. ‘No jobs … no land … no place to go’ The pressure comes from two directions. Firstly, struggling local governments, which collectively are estimated to be saddled with at least 44tn yuan ($6.2tn) of debt, need money for public services and to pay salaries. This incentivises local officials to seize land. Even though the property sector has plummeted the seized land can still be used as collateral to get new loans – despite their eye-watering levels of existing debt. Meanwhile, many ordinary people feel their livelihoods are under pressure as China’s economic growth remains sluggish by recent standards. “Many local governments have persistent and significant debt problems, made worse by the economic slowdown. This could lead to a greater need to confiscate and [develop] rural land to generate revenue, resulting in more conflict with residents in these areas,” says Kevin Slaten, research lead for China Dissent Monitor. “At the same time, people from these areas may be dealing with other consequences of the slowing economy, such as unemployment or difficulty in their small businesses. This generates greater discontent with the state of things, which could make people more willing to engage in public dissent.” “Land seizures continue to be a major issue because the country is rapidly urbanising,” says Rachel Murphy, a professor of Chinese development and society at the University of Oxford. “Meanwhile, local government coffers continue to rely in large part on converting land use from agricultural to non-farm uses”. Secondly, another trend that has the potential to foment dissatisfaction in China’s rolling countryside is the return of migrant workers from China’s cities. While there is no official data on this trend, anecdotes abound. Hengyang county in south China’s Hunan province saw around 183,000 workers return home for this year’s Spring Festival, with more than 40,000 of them staying there, according to one recently published paper. The failure of those people to return to work reflects “the deep-seated contradictions in the current employment situation of migrant workers”, wrote researchers from Hunan Normal University. Some in China talk of the “three no’s” to describe the situation of rural migrant workers: no jobs to find, no land to cultivate, no place to go” Building an accurate view of the situation is difficult, because official statistics do not tell the whole picture. Evidence is generally scrubbed from social media, and there is scant independent local reporting inside China, making unrest difficult to track. Still, some of the rural protest videos have remained online, and there is a community of overseas monitors who work to collect evidence outside China’s internet firewall. ‘Rural contention is becoming harder to handle’ Experts are divided about whether or not the rise in protests represents a serious threat to the Communist party’s grip on power. This year, the government has started rolling out new service centres in rural areas staffed with social workers, legal advisers and even psychological counsellors to mediate disputes before they escalate. There were 2,800 such centres at a county level as of September, according to a government announcement. “The considerable resources being invested … suggest that the central leaders are taking note of increasing expressions of social unrest,” says Murphy. Villagers tend to focus their complaints on bad apples in the local government rather than central authorities. But Chen believes the trend is clear: “Rural contention is becoming harder to handle. “These protests may not threaten the central government directly, but they can overwhelm county and township officials, pile up across regions, and put real pressure on the system,” he says. Additional research by Lillian Yang

picture of article

Denmark says Russia was behind two ‘destructive and disruptive’ cyber-attacks

The Danish government has accused Russia of being behind two “destructive and disruptive” cyber-attacks in what it describes as “very clear evidence” of a hybrid war. The Danish Defence Intelligence Service (DDIS) announced on Thursday that Moscow was behind a cyber-attack on a Danish water utility in 2024 and a series of distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks on Danish websites in the lead-up to the municipal and regional council elections in November. The first, it said, was carried out by the pro-Russian group known as Z-Pentest and the second by NoName057(16), which has links to the Russian state. “The Russian state uses both groups as instruments of its hybrid war against the west,” DDIS said in a statement. “The aim is to create insecurity in the targeted countries and to punish those that support Ukraine. Russia’s cyber operations form part of a broader influence campaign intended to undermine western support for Ukraine.” It added: “The DDIS assesses that the Danish elections were used as a platform to attract public attention – a pattern that has been observed in several other European elections.” The director of the DDIS, Thomas Ahrenkiel, said they were “very certain that these are pro-Russian groups that have connections to the Russian state”. Denmark’s defence minister, Troels Lund Poulsen, said the attacks were “completely unacceptable” and he was taking the incidents “very seriously”. In an attack on a water utility in Køge in December 2024, a hacker took control of a waterworks and changed the pressure in the pumps, resulting in three burst pipes. “This is very clear evidence that we are now where the hybrid war we have been talking about is unfortunately taking place. It once again puts the spotlight on the situation we find ourselves in in Europe,” Lund Poulsen said. The Danish foreign office would summon the Russian ambassador for a meeting, he said. “It is completely unacceptable that hybrid attacks are carried out in Denmark by the Russian side,.” Although the attacks caused limited damage, the minister for resilience and preparedness, Torsten Schack Pedersen, said they showed that “there are forces capable of closing down important parts of our society”. Denmark, he added, was not sufficiently equipped to withstand such attacks from Russia. “I think you have to be incredibly naive if you think we are at the top of cybersecurity.” Copenhagen described a series of drone incursions on Danish airports and areas of military significance in September as a “hybrid attack”. The incidents, which exposed gaps in its defence capabilities, contributed to plans to establish a European “drone wall”.

picture of article

Ukraine may need to cut drone production if no deal reached on frozen Russian assets, says Zelenskyy – as it happened

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy urged EU leaders to reach a deal at a critical summit where EU leaders were trying to overcome differences on whether to use frozen Russian assets to finance Ukraine’s war effort against Russian aggression. Zelenskyy said without a significant cash injection by spring, Ukraine will have to cut its drone production, with Kyiv under pressure to cede territory as the US pushes for a swift deal to bring the war to an end. Most of Russia’s €210bn (£185bn; $245bn) worth of assets in the EU are held by Euroclear, the Brussels-based securities depository. Belgium is deeply anxious about being left exposed to legal and financial risks, and other states including Italy have also voiced concerns. EU leaders arriving at the summit in Brussels said it was imperative they find a solution. Russia has filed a lawsuit against Euroclear in a Moscow court to try to get its money back. Russia’s central bank said in a statement today that “in connection with the ongoing attempts … to illegaly seize and use” its assets, it just wanted to warn everyone that would take legal actions to “recover damages from European banks in a Russian arbitration court,” demanding not just the value of “illegally withheld assets,” but also “lost profits”. A draft summit text presented on Thursday pledged “full solidarity” and risk-sharing with countries and financial institutions in the context of the reparations loan. But the text seen by the Guardian was scant on details sought by Belgium. Polish prime minister Donald Tusk said leaders had a simple choice: “Either money today or blood tomorrow.” Tusk also warned that Ukraine’s capitulation – as a result of a lack of European support and poor decision making – would put Poland’s independence under threat if it were to happen. Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko said, meanwhile, that a Russian hypersonic, nuclear-capable missile known as the “Oreshnik” had been deployed in Belarus. Thanks for following along today. We are now closing this blog. You can read a wrap-up of today’s events in this story by my colleagues Jennifer Rankin and Helena Smith.

picture of article

‘Money today or blood tomorrow’: EU leaders race to secure deal for Ukraine

EU leaders are racing to secure a funding deal for Ukraine that has been cast as a choice between “money today or blood tomorrow”, but Belgium continues to oppose a loan secured against Russia’s frozen assets. At a summit billed as make or break, EU leaders are discussing an unprecedented move to tap some of Russia’s €210bn sovereign assets frozen in the bloc days after the full-scale invasion of 2022. Under the scheme, the EU would provide Kyiv with a €90bn loan to help keep Ukraine in the fight, as Russia ekes out gains on the battlefields. Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk, said leaders had a simple choice: “Either money today or blood tomorrow.” Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said he wanted to see a decision on funding by the end of the year, amid forecasts his country faces bankruptcy in the spring. “If these funds can serve European security by holding the aggressor accountable for its war against Ukraine and against Europe, then why would we leave Moscow with any hope or confidence that the money will still come back no matter what it has done,” he told EU leaders. “I know that Russia is intimidating different countries over this decision. But we should not be afraid of threats – we should be afraid of Europe being weak.” EU leaders have been presented with two options to meet Ukraine’s estimated €136bn funding needs in 2026 and 2027: a “reparations loan” secured against Russian frozen assets or joint EU borrowing to fund Kyiv. The European Commission, which proposed the €90bn loan, expects Ukraine’s other western allies to make up the rest. Germany and other frugal countries, such as Sweden and the Netherlands, strongly support tapping Russian assets, rather than European taxpayers. The German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, said the reparations loan was the only option. “We are basically faced with the choice of using European debt or Russian assets for Ukraine, and my opinion is clear: We must use the Russian assets.” But Belgium, which hosts most of the Russian assets, said it had not received adequate guarantees from the rest of the EU if the scheme went wrong. “Give me a parachute and we’ll all jump together,” Belgium’s prime minister, Bart De Wever, told members of the Belgian parliament before the summit began. “If we have confidence in the parachute that shouldn’t be a problem. Belgium has pressed for unlimited guarantees that mean it would not be left alone with the bill should Russia succeed in retaliatory legal claims against Euroclear or Belgian companies. A draft summit text presented on Thursday pledged “full solidarity” and risk-sharing with countries and financial institutions in the context of the reparations loan. But the text seen by the Guardian was scant on details sought by Belgium, such as how quickly guarantees would materialise, or how long they would last. The UK foreign secretary, Yvette Cooper, on a visit to Athens, stressed the importance of “mobilising” Russia’s frozen assets, saying it was clear Moscow was still bent on waging its war of aggression in Ukraine. “I see two presidents who are pursuing peace at the moment, President Trump and President Zelenskyy, and one president, President Putin, who is still seeking to escalate conflict and war,” she said. “That is why it is so important to make progress on mobilising the Russian sovereign assets in order to be able to support Ukraine and also to be able to put increased pressure on Russia to properly bring them to the table and pursue peace.” Russia’s central bank announced on Thursday that it would pursue damages against European banks “for the illegal blocking and use of its assets”, after its claim for $230bn in damages from Euroclear. Euroclear, the Brussels depository where €185bn Russian assets are parked, has been subject to an intimidation campaign, security officials told the Guardian. Zelenskyy said he had had “a good conversation” with De Wever during a one-on-one meeting, but that his country faced bigger risks. “One can fear certain legal steps in court from the Russian Federation but it is not as scary as when Russia is at your borders.” In an impassioned speech to EU leaders he urged them to agree the reparations loan on strategic and self-interest grounds. He said much of the funds would be spent on European weapons, while stressing Ukraine also needed some equipment not available in Europe, such as US missile defence systems. Alongside Belgium, Italy, Malta and Bulgaria favour an EU loan, secured against unallocated funds in the EU budget. Italy’s prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, has said using Russia’s assets frozen in Europe to help Ukraine without a solid legal basis would hand Moscow “the first victory since the start of the war”. But common borrowing requires unanimity of the 27 member states. Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orbán, has slammed using Russia’s frozen assets as a “stupid” idea, while also announcing his veto to joint debt “to finance a war that isn’t our’s” The French president, Emmanuel Macron, said he was confident leaders would find a solution. “We are going to find a technical solution, therefore we must not be divided over technical details. Everyone must be listened and heard.” The European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, said she would not leave the summit without a solution. The meeting is scheduled to finish on Friday. The talks are unfolding against a separate diplomatic dance orchestrated by the Trump administration, which is seeking to negotiate a deal to end the war. US and Russian officials are expected to meet in Miami this weekend to discuss Trump’s peace plan, a White House official told AFP on Wednesday. Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, and son-in-law Jared Kushner are expected to take part on the US side, while Putin’s economic envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, will represent Russia, Politico reported.