Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro announced the deployment of 4.5 million militias nationwide on Monday, ensuring that “the empire will not touch Venezuela’s sacred soil.”

Last week, the US government confirmed that it had ordered CNN to contain the region’s naval movement to contain threats from drug trafficking groups. On Monday, Reuters reported that three US Navy destroyers and around 4,000 servicemen will arrive at the edge of Venezuela’s territory within the next 36 hours.

However, on Tuesday, US Department of Defense officials said they currently have no or no US ships in the area. I received an order heading there. Venezuela’s territory has almost 2,500 miles of coastline.

“This week I intend to activate a special plan that will guarantee compensation with more than 4.5 million militias across national territory. The militia are prepared, revitalized and armed,” Maduro said during a televised broadcast with the country’s governor and mayor.

The president described the “luxurious, strange, eccentric” American threat as a “rotten rehash” without specifying what he refers to.

“We protect the sea, the sky and the land. We have freed them. We protect them and patrol them. The empire will not touch the sacred soil of Venezuela, and we should not touch the sacred soil of South America,” he emphasized in his speech.

White House Press Secretary Caroline Leavitt was asked about the possible deployment of the troops into Venezuela on Tuesday following reports of military accumulation. “President (Donald) Trump is very clear and consistent. He is ready to use every element of American power to stop drugs from flooding our country and lead those responsible to justice,” she said.

She also reiterated the US government’s position that Maduro is “not a legitimate president.” Washington and Caracas have not had formal bilateral diplomatic relations since 2019.

The Venezuelan government has rejected accusations of Washington’s drug trafficking, saying the US is relying on “threats and delinquents.”

Created in 2005 by President Hugo Chavez in 2005 and formally established in 2010, Venezuelan militia is part of the Bolivar National Army (FANB) and has the “incorporation of organized people” that ensures “inclusive defense of the people” of “incorporation of organized people.”

Maduro said he would move forward with plans to revitalize farmer and workers militias “in all factories and workplaces in the country.”

“Working class missiles and rifles to protect your hometown,” he said.

The Venezuelan Ministry of Defense states that the FANB is “comprised with approximately 95,000 to 150,000 active combatants” and “growth of the national militia, consisting of hundreds of thousands of people who can serve as study abroad.”

Specializing in military analysis, using official statistics and providing estimates when they are not available, the Global Firepower website ranks 50th in Venezuela in 2025 rankings in 145 countries. The United States is number one, Russia is number two, and China is number three.

A few weeks ago, the Trump administration doubled its pay to $50 million for information that led to the arrest of “one of the world’s biggest drug traffickers,” the Sands cartel chief, and Maduro, known as a threat to US national security.

The Venezuelan government and other agencies in the country rejected the announcement, with several Chavista figures denying the claim. Home Minister Diosdado Cabello said Cartel de los Salles was a US “invention” and Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino Lopez “resolutely” rejected Washington’s “silly” charges.

US President Donald Trump abandoned the call for a ceasefire in Ukraine and instead supported Russian President Vladimir Putin’s calling for a permanent peace deal. It has not stopped some European leaders from pushing for a temporary ceasefire first, despite the apparent decision the US president has decided.

It’s not that Kiev and his allies don’t want peace. But they understand that the kind of dealings Russia is seeking will not happen unless the most basic principles underpinning the world’s order – the state cannot force it to get what it wants – is thrown under the bus.

And Kiev’s European allies are willing to put it at risk, especially as they could become the next target of Russian invasion.

Speaking with Ukrainian President Voldymi Zelensky and European leaders in the Oval Office on Monday, Trump adopted some of Moscow’s topics and questioned whether a ceasefire would be “necessary” if a wider peace deal could be achieved.

However, international law experts and analysts say that the deal that forces Ukraine to abandon its land to stop the killing of its citizens by Russia is completely illegal under the UN Charter.

Although often considered essentially the same thing, there is a huge difference between a peace agreement and a ceasefire in the eyes of international law.

During the ceasefire, the fighting parties agree to cease fighting against each side that holds the territory under military control. But the understanding is that pauses are temporary – usually to negotiate, provide humanitarian assistance, or to provide windows to evacuate civilians.

Kiev and its European allies have suggested that the ceasefire portends a meeting between Zelensky and Putin, followed by a trilateral meeting between Trump, Zelensky and Putin.

“I can’t imagine the next meeting being held without a ceasefire,” German Prime Minister Friedrich Merz attended the summit on Monday.

The ceasefire could be as short as the 1914 Christmas truce that lasted several days. A ceasefire between Cyprus and Türkiye, and between India and Pakistan, has been introduced for decades where a permanent peace settlement is invisible.

What President Putin wants, and now Trump, seems to be a permanent peace deal.

Under international law, a peace agreement is intended to be a formal long-term treaty that determines future relationships between the two countries.

And that’s where things get complicated.

“International law, which is engraved in the front and center of the UN Charter, has a unique core principle. The use of force is emphasized. Therefore, it also means that treaties procured using force are effectively illegal and inherently invalid.”

While little details have been shared about the peace deal he discussed with President Trump last week, it is clear that the Russian leader has not abandoned some of his biggest demands, including Ukraine’s abandonment of the entire eastern Donetsk and Luhansk region known as Donbas and being banned from joining NATO in the future.

This makes transactions double illegal under international law. It is illegal because of the way it is forced to reach and because of its content.

But even if he wanted to – but Zelensky cannot agree to abandon his territory.

Under the Ukrainian Constitution, changes to the borders of the country must be approved by referendum. This is a rule that has been made partially due to the Russian trend of establishing doll governments in foreign countries.

A survey conducted in May and June by the leading polling officer, Kiev International Sociology Institute (KIIS), found that the majority of Ukrainians rejected the idea of recognizing Ukrainian territory as part of Russia. An even larger majority opposes waiving control of the territory currently controlled by Ukraine.

Speaking to CNN from Kyiv, Piji said that even if Ukrainians voted in favor of somehow changing their minds and giving up on their land, KIIS said it was unlikely they would do that.

“No one can hand over Zelensky, or anyone else, a territory associated with an offensive military conquest, regardless of the Ukrainian constitution. The prohibition on using the army to conquer territory is absolute under international law,” Piji said.

There are also practical and strategic reasons why Ukraine cannot agree with Moscow’s demands.

The Russian army now controls almost all of Luhansk and over 70% of Donetsk. In other words, Putin is asking Kiev to give up more than ever before.

However, parts of the Donbas region, still under Kiev’s control, contain infrastructure important for Ukraine’s defense. A series of industrial cities, including Slobiansk, Kramatalk and Kostiantinibka, connected by main roads and railways, form the backbone of Ukraine’s defence. If they were taken to Russia, the road to the western part of the country is wide open.

There is also little incentive for Kiev to trust Moscow, Pizzi said.

“Russia has been consistently and repeatedly engaged in armed attacks on Ukraine for over a decade. Russia has continued to use violence, maintaining the same illegal maximalism goal in the background, and while Ukrainian authorities are painfully aware of this, it has given sincerity to be negotiated,” he said.

“There is no logical and wise reason to trust Russia if there are no pioneers. They are honest decisions or involvement that they make on their part to stop killing more Ukrainians,” he added.

Supported by Europeans, Kiev shows that he is willing to recognize the current reality of earth in order to stop the killing. This means essentially giving up on trying to freeze conflicts along the current frontlines and reclaim the land while the ceasefire is in place.

Analysts with the Eurasian Group wrote in a memo on Monday that it is certainly clear to Trump that European leaders are unquestionable that they will be forced to accept a permanent annexation of Ukraine’s territory.

“There is openness in the perception of de facto military status on the ground, but neither Ukraine nor Europeans accept that they should be “given” more land than Russia captured,” they said.

And, importantly, even if Kiev realizes that the reality on earth gives Russia the de facto control of a portion of the land, he certainly disagrees with this as a permanent recognition. Kyiv’s goal is to reclaim all territory in the future.

Eurasian analysts said there was doubt in Europe’s mind that “Trump understands or cares about the importance of distinctions.”

A ceasefire may be the only way out of current violence. A permanent peace agreement would violate international law.

“The reality is that (international law) makes it almost politically impossible to close a peace treaty when the victims aren’t winning, and that’s the point of my response to that,” Pizzi said.

Dakar, Senegal
AP
–

In a recent evening in Senegal’s Dakar capital, an imam named Ibrahima Diane explained to a group of men why they should be more involved in the household chores.

“The Prophet himself says that men who do not support their wife and children are not good Muslims,” the 53-year-old said he bathed his baby and explained that he was helping his wife in other duties.

Some of the 14 men laughed, but they didn’t sell at all. Others applauded.

Diane was attending “School for Husbands.” This is a UN support initiative that encourages respected male community members to learn about and promote in their communities about the “positive masculinity” of health and social issues.

In Senegal, like many other West African countries with large or conservative populations, men often have final say in key household decisions, including those related to health.

Women may need permission to make life-changing decisions regarding family planning and access to other reproductive health services, along with hospital delivery or prenatal care.

After a school session for her husband, Diane will preach regularly during Friday prayers, discussing issues relating to gender and reproductive health, from gender-based violence to combating stigma surrounding HIV.

“Many women appreciate my sermon,” he said. “They say their husbands’ actions have changed since they attended them,” he said that several men told him that the sermons had encouraged him to become more caring husbands and fathers.

Habib Diallo, a 60-year-old former Army commander, said he attended a sermon and discussion with the Imam and taught him about the risks of childbirth.

“When my son’s wife got pregnant, I encouraged him to take her to the hospital for birth,” Diallo said. “At first he was hesitant. He worried about the costs and didn’t trust the hospital. But when I explained how safe it was for both his wife and the baby, he agreed.”

The programme was launched in Senegal in 2011, but has attracted attention from the Ministry of Women, Family, Gender and Child Protection in recent years, and considers it an effective strategy to combat mother and infant mortality.

“Without male involvement, mothers’ health attitudes will not change,” said Aida Diuff, 54, a female health worker working with the program. Many husbands prefer that their wives are not treated by male healthcare workers, she said.

The class for husbands follows similar efforts in other African countries, particularly Niger, Togo and Burkina Faso, and states that the UN Population Fund has improved women’s access to reproductive health services by increasing male involvement, increasing the use of contraceptives by both men and women, and by increasing prenatal care and access to skilled births.

The discussion for men also focuses on the harmful effects of girls’ rights, equality and the female genital mutilation.

The program currently runs more than 20 schools in Senegal, with over 300 men being trained.

According to Senegal’s Gender Ministry, in some communities, men who once enforced patriarchal norms have promoted gender equality, leading to a decrease in the number of forced marriages and more acceptance of family planning.

Men join the group after being hired based on trust, leadership and commitment. Candidates must marry, be respected locally and support women’s health and rights.

After training, the men act as peer educators, visit homes and hold informal lectures.

“My husband used to not do much around the house so we just had to order. Now he actually cooks and helps out with his daily work,” said 52-year-old Khary Ndeye.

While mother and infant deaths in Senegal have declined over the past decade, experts say there is a long way to go. It recorded 237 mother deaths for every 100,000 births in 2023, but 21 newborns of 1,000 died within the first month. Globally, the United Nations hopes to reduce globally to 70 deaths per 100,000 births and 70 pregnancies under 12 years of age by 2030.

One important issue was that many women were giving birth at home, said El Hadmalik, one of the coordinators of the Senegal program.

“We are protecting people’s health by educating men about the importance of supporting their wives while pregnant, taking them to hospitals and helping out housework at home,” Malick said.

He said he still experiences difficulty in thinking about some issues.

“It’s sometimes tension because we just tell them about gender and it’s considered abstract or even foreign,” Malick said. Some men mistakenly believe that such stories promote LGBTQ+ issues.

“But when we focus on women’s rights to be healthy, it puts the human face in the concept and it becomes universal,” Malick said.

Security assurance has been a central focus in debate over Ukraine’s peace agreements, and its “start to end the war” at the White House on Monday.

Zelensky knows that in the long run, Russia’s excellent numbers and weapons will crush Ukrainian resistance. So he has long argued that the agreement must provide Ukraine with a promise that the US and Europe will prevent Russians from resuming the attack in a year or two.

Here’s what you need to know about this important part of the deal to end the war in Ukraine:

What does security guarantee look like and who is involved?

First, this is an unknown territory. “The “Union of Will,” a group of important Ukraine’s allies, is still addressing what it can realistically offer.

The purpose is clear enough. It is to stop Russians from new attacks on Ukraine in the coming years. The shape is not very clear, but there will be plans to apply force to the ground and support Ukraine from the sea and into the air. He also had support for the reconstruction of the Ukrainian army, and is now tired of the war for over three years.

In fact, Zelensky argues that the powerful Ukrainian army itself is one of the security guarantees. French President Emmanuel Macron emphasized the support of the robust Ukrainian forces, the robust Ukrainian forces that can stop and stop them, therefore there is no limit to their numbers, capabilities or weapons.”

Earlier this year, the UK and France came up with the concept of multinational forces, which British Prime Minister Kiel Starmer said would “develop following a ceasefire to stop Russian attacks for years to come.”

Initially, there were talks about both countries leading the conditions for the approximately 30,000 troops deployed in Ukraine. It ended up discussing smaller deterrents offered by allies, including ocean, air and training elements, and more “security umbrellas.”

Approximately 30 countries have registered with the Union. However, it is still unknown that they are each ready to contribute. Countries like Germany and Italy are reluctant to violate ground forces. Australia and Canada may be more pleased.

The Union “provides peace of mind in the sea, in the air and in the lands that the Allies are ready to offer to Ukraine,” Macron said Monday. He added: “We need to support Ukraine with boots on the ground to ensure there are no invasions from Russia in the future.”

However, before hostility ceases, there is no chance that this future force will be deployed in and around Ukraine, giving the Kremlin what some analysts call a strong veto.

“We’re already working on the specifics of our security assurance,” Zelensky said Tuesday. This is a process that will continue at high temperatures over the next few weeks.

But here’s the problem. A full-scale guarantee unit covered over the 1,000-kilometer (600 miles) frontline requires well over 100,000 men.

For example, in the 1990s, 60,000 powerful NATO corps were deployed at the much smaller frontline of the Bosnian War.

Now add to what you need to understand logistics, rotations, and command structure. Rules of involvement in the event of a ceasefire violation. This requires that all governments agree with the troops on the ground.

According to a report from the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), “It has been resolved that the deployed forces must be reliable by Moscow and that they will act decisively in the event of a ceasefire violation.”

What’s more feasible, according to military analysts, could be a deterrent of a troop of around 10,000 people, a kind of warning to Russia, with price tags attached to resuming the attack. This unit is located in Ukraine, but it is not necessarily close to the forefront.

“The deterrent effect on Russian forces will mostly be achieved through its very existence, as it limits the capabilities of high-intensity combat operations,” IISS said of the option.

not much. During the war there was considerable intelligence sharing with weapons pipelines from both Europe and the US. And there has been a lot of talk during the Biden administration about Ukraine’s route to either full NATO membership or partnership status. But when Trump took office, that prospect disappeared.

Over the weekend, Trump repeated that Ukraine would not be allowed to participate in the US-led security alliance, in line with key Russian demand.

Before the complete Russian invasion there was a private surveillance mission run by European security cooperation agencies that tracked offences along the frontlines of eastern Ukraine. However, it was never equipped to provide security assurances and was often ignored by both parties.

It’s the elephant in the room.

It’s only been the last few days that US President Donald Trump has been led by the idea that the United States is involved in providing security assurances for Ukraine. Previously, he and other members of the regime had been frankly saying that it was the responsibility of the Europeans.

Trump was vague about the nature of his commitment in his White House speech on Monday. He proposed in a post about the True Society that guarantees “it will be provided by various European countries in coordination with the United States.”

However, Trump rejected the prospect of US troops deploying on Ukrainian soil on Tuesday.

“It will be discussed in the next few days – our involvement – our involvement – our involvement -,” NATO Executive Director Mark Latte said in an interview with Fox News.

However, Rutte explained that US involvement was a “breakthrough.” This is because the Russians do not try to take the idea of European guarantee forces seriously without the US taking it on.

The United States has important capabilities that Europeans do not. Its intelligence newsletter and its ability to suppress large enemy air defenses are just two examples. But the Trump administration will be wary of the US role that could lead to escalation.

In a nutshell, no. On Monday, he reiterated the claim that there are no troops from the NATO country on Ukrainian soil. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has rejected “any scenario that envisages the participation of NATO countries and the appearance of military forces in Ukraine.”

Moscow also argues that peace reconciliation includes limits on the number and capabilities of Ukrainian forces. It also deserves security guarantees and has always argued that NATO’s Eastern Expansion is one of the root causes of conflict.

It’s in conflict with Trump’s claim that Putin agreed that Russia agreed to accept Ukraine’s security guarantee, which is one of the key points we need to consider.”

The question is whether Putin can persuade Ukraine to have any kind of security assurance in exchange for closing the interests of the Russian battlefield, or for example, acknowledging Russia’s sovereignty.

There is another risk. Russia may be tempted to test its guaranteed resolve by devising pretexts for new military action. Second, this could fall into Putin’s greatest ambition. Splitting the Transatlantic Alliance, the US doesn’t want to follow up on the security assurances that Europeans have committed themselves to.

There is now further debate about some of the security guarantees that come in the form of Ukrainian air covers. It is a bit like the 1990s plane zone over Iraq and is designed to prevent attacks by Saddam Hussein’s army against minorities.

“The greatest deterrent effect is achieved by placing combat air elements as well as the ground within Ukraine,” says IISS. There is a possibility that more air forces will be stationed in Poland and Romania.

Such beings will provide surveillance and reconnaissance, but if challenged by the Russians, they will struggle to maintain the superiority of the air. And, for example, if a fighter engages in air combat, there is a risk of rapid escalation.

He also says that certain observers, airpower, and ground forces are like eggs and bacon.

And Ukrainians want commitment rather than involvement.

According to Finland President Alexander Stubb, the nation of the “Coalition of Ambitiousness,” a group of Ukrainian allies, has just been described about a meeting between European leaders and US President Donald Trump, held at the White House yesterday.

Here’s what a different leader has said so far:

Finland: “This conference helped ensure that all countries have a common understanding of the situation. The conference reaffirmed Europe’s unity and resolve to support Ukraine in the process of achieving lasting peace, strengthened by discussions in Washington,” Stubb said.

Poland: Polish Prime Minister Donald Tass said leaders from Canada, Japan, Turkey, New Zealand and other European countries were given explanations. “We have all confirmed the need for continued support for Ukraine in the war with Russia,” Task said in a statement Tuesday.

Australia: “Australia is standing with Ukraine,” Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said. “Australia welcomes ongoing efforts to achieve fair and lasting peace, including yesterday’s discussion in Washington.”

european union: Meanwhile, Ursula von der Leyen of the European Commission gave a preview of the upcoming Council of Europe meeting, saying the EU will “discuss the progress of Ukraine’s efforts for peace.”

Council of Europe President Antonio Costa said, “Ukraine will be at the top of its leadership agenda in weeks and months as it continues to support efforts for just and sustainable peace.”

“The first step is that Russia must immediately end the violence,” Costa added, confirming the start of the Council of Europe meeting.