International

Volodymyr Zelensky silences Irish parliament all the way from Ukraine

Published

4 years ago

April 7, 2022

Volodymyr Zelensky

President Volodymyr Zelensky hushed the Irish parliament on Wednesday all the way from Ukraine, on a day when the languages of the two countries intermingled inside and outside the chamber.

The histories of the two countries are intertwined, the Dail heard, as Mr Zelensky spoke to a state marking 100 years since its foundation.

Those sentiments came not from Mr Zelensky himself, but from the politicians who pledged solidarity to the people of Kyiv, Mariupol, Bucha and a host of other war-torn towns.

The Ukrainian leader, when he spoke at 10am on Wednesday, had a different script to the leaders who have previously addressed a joint sitting of the Oireachtas.

He did not, like Tony Blair in 1998, regale politicians with memories of childhood holidays in Co Donegal.

Neither did he share snapshots from career-making moments in Dublin, as European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker did in 2018.

The only Irish poetry referenced came from Ceann Comhairle Sean O Fearghail, who cited WB Yeats.

Instead, Mr Zelensky asked for help during the first virtual address in the history of the Oireachtas.

What Irish politicians heard was a demand for Irish and European support for the country in the face of Russian aggression.

Gratitude too, but calls to go further.

Mr Zelensky said Ireland has supported Ukraine from the start of the war.

READ ALSO:

He said: “You did not doubt starting helping us, you began doing this right away and, although you are a neutral country, you have not remained neutral to the disaster and to the mishaps that Russia has brought to Ukraine.”

The voice of the Ukrainian leader, which has been heard in parliaments all the way from Brussels to Washington, was replaced by that of a translator.

But unmistakable was the impassive face of Mr Zelensky, which loomed above legislators from two screens behind Mr O Fearghail.

Dressed in military green, the Ukrainian president looked on as Irish politicians wore bright hues of blue and yellow.

Lapels, dresses and pocket-squares were all turned into expressions of silent support for Ukraine.

At the entrance to the Dail chamber, Oireachtas staff had also placed two small baskets of yellow and blue flowers.

Looking on too were around 50 ambassadors to Ireland from countries around the globe.

For them hunger is a weapon against us ordinary people as an instrument of domination

Volodymyr Zelensky

Mr Zelensky told those gathered that Russia is using hunger as a weapon in its war against his country.

“This night, our territory was again hit by Russian missiles,” he said.

“They are destroying things that are sustaining livelihoods to people.

“They also have blocked all of our sea ports, together with the vessels that had already agricultural cargos for exports.

“Why are they doing this? Because for them hunger is a weapon against us ordinary people as an instrument of domination.”

The Ukrainian leader stayed just long enough to hear a message of support from Irish premier Micheal Martin, who had sat upright, leaning forward, as he listened intently.

Mr Zelensky must have heard too, from thousands of miles away in Ukraine, the thunderous applause from senators and TDs inside the Dail chamber.

Not all members applauded – four People Before Profit TDs refused to clap, even as other politicians stood for a minute of applause.

The reason, a spokesperson said, was a disagreement with calls from Mr Zelensky for Nato involvement in the war, as well citing demands for more sanctions and a “decision to ban opposition parties” in Ukraine.

“Russia will have to live with the shame of what they have done in Ukraine for generations. Those responsible will be held to account,” Mr Martin told the Dail.

“We are with Ukraine and I am certain that, in the end, Ukraine will prevail.

“We are a militarily neutral country. However, we are not politically neutral in the face of war crimes. Quite the opposite.”

Outside the gates of Leinster House in the Irish capital, a small group of Ukrainian supporters gathered to listen to proceedings.

Irish and Ukrainian schoolchildren from St Joseph’s in the Dublin suburb of Fairview sang the national anthems of the two countries.

Nick Kozlov, from the Ukrainian Crisis Centre, led the crowd in chants.

“I believe, if we have young people like this, Ukraine will never be beaten,” he said.

As the two languages blended together outside, inside Leinster House the histories of the two countries were explicitly linked.

One hundred years after the creation of the Irish Free State, Ireland’s own struggle for independence was invoked, as was 19th century Irish political leader Daniel O’Connell and African-American abolitionist Frederick Douglass.

“In the long history of our own country, we have never invaded another but we do know what it’s like to have been invaded,” Tanaiste Leo Varadkar told the Dail.

“And to have the very existence of our national identity questioned too. For these reasons, we feel for the idealism of the Ukrainian people – their defiance and their determination to face down a new evil empire.”

Unity and silence reigned for most speeches, punctured only by renewed opposition calls for the expulsion of the Russian ambassador – a move resisted so far by the Irish Government.

Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou McDonald, dressed in white, said it is “long past time” to eject Yury Filatov.

That demand was conspicuously clapped by some TDs on the Government benches.

There was levity too.

Senator David Norris, partially kept from the corridors of the Seanad by ill health, made an appearance.

His particularly loud cheers at various stages in proceedings prompted applause and laughter, as well as compliments from Climate Minister Eamon Ryan.

But above all else, there was poignancy.

“Slava Ukraini,” Mr Martin told the embattled Ukrainian leader as he ended his speech.

Only a few metres above him, invisible to the Taoiseach, Ukrainian ambassador to Ireland Larysa Gerasko looked on.

Ms Gerasko, surrounded by colleagues, echoed quietly: “Slava Ukraini.”

INDEPENDENT

Related Topics:Irish parliament Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky

Up Next

Russia becomes 2nd country ever kicked off UN Human Rights Council

Don't Miss

Putin adviser vows legal battles against attempts to seize Russian assets

International

Trump Signs New Executive Orders Targeting Birthright Citizenship, ‘Birth Tourism’

Published

1 day ago

August 7, 2026

Trends Admin

Trump Signs New Executive Orders Targeting Birthright Citizenship, ‘Birth Tourism’

President Donald Trump signed two executive orders on August 6, 2026, aimed at narrowing birthright citizenship and blocking the practice of “birth tourism” — just weeks after the Supreme Court struck down his broader attempt to end automatic citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants. The new orders represent a more targeted approach to restricting who qualifies for U.S. citizenship at birth, focusing on specific categories of foreign nationals rather than attempting a blanket ban.

The first executive order targets birth tourism, which the White House defines as foreign nationals entering the United States on nonimmigrant visas with the primary purpose of giving birth on U.S. soil. The order directs the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security to deny or revoke visas and travel authorizations for individuals suspected of engaging in birth tourism, block entry or authorize deportation of foreign nationals participating in or planning birth tourism, and take action against operators — both in the U.S. and abroad — who organize or facilitate birth tourism schemes. The White House accused birth tourism operators of deceiving foreign nationals through advertisements encouraging them to travel to the U.S. to give birth, arguing that these schemes “undermine” the integrity of the U.S. immigration system. Exceptions apply for foreign nationals entering on humanitarian grounds or when their entry serves the national interest.

The second executive order expands the definitions of individuals whose U.S.-born children would not qualify for automatic citizenship. Under the new order, children are ineligible if their parents fall into any of several expanded categories. These include foreign government employees such as diplomats, consular officers, and employees of foreign governments or international organizations with immunity; designated Foreign Terrorist Organization members as well as “specially designated global terrorists”; individuals who engaged in fraudulent acts to obtain U.S. citizenship; “alien enemies” considered enemy aliens under U.S. law; and children born through commercial surrogacy arrangements or commercial transactions. The order also clarifies that children born in U.S. territories or territorial waters where federal law does not grant birthright citizenship are excluded from automatic recognition. Federal agencies including the State Department, Justice Department, Homeland Security, and Social Security Administration must issue implementation guidance within 30 days.

READ ALSO:

These executive orders come after a major legal setback for the administration. On June 30, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court voted 6-3 to reject Trump’s earlier executive order — signed on his first day back in office in January 2025 — which sought to deny birthright citizenship to children of undocumented immigrants or temporary residents. Chief Justice John Roberts delivered the majority opinion, stating that “Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights — to freely participate in our political community. The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land’ … We keep that promise today.” The Court upheld the long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment, which states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” The ruling reaffirmed the precedent set by the 1898 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which established that virtually all children born on U.S. soil are citizens — with only narrow exceptions such as children of foreign diplomats or enemy occupying forces.

Speaking from the Oval Office as he signed the new orders, Trump described the Supreme Court decision as “very unfortunate.” He stated, “We had a very unfortunate decision in the Supreme Court concerning birthright. It was close, but a very, very unfortunate decision. So we’re making adjustments because it’s very unfair.” Trump also called the previous situation “a disgrace,” arguing that wealthy individuals are building businesses around birthright citizenship and exploiting the system. He remarked that “Wealthy people are building businesses around birthright citizenship. That’s not the way it was supposed to work.” Following the Supreme Court defeat, Trump had announced he would seek to address birthright citizenship through Congress. The new executive orders represent a shift to a more targeted administrative strategy.

There are no official government statistics on birth tourism. However, a 2020 analysis by the Center for Immigration Studies — which supports lower levels of immigration — estimated that between 20,000 and 25,000 women entered the U.S. for birth tourism between 2016 and 2017. Trump has claimed the number could be much higher, stating that “hundreds of thousands” of children may be obtaining citizenship through birth tourism annually.

The new executive orders are expected to face legal challenges, similar to the previous effort. Constitutional scholars have noted that the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause has long been interpreted broadly, and any attempt to narrow its application — even in specific categories — is likely to be tested in court. The administration argues that the new orders are more narrowly tailored and therefore constitutional, focusing on specific scenarios rather than attempting a blanket denial of citizenship.

In summary, two new executive orders were signed August 6, 2026, following a Supreme Court defeat on a broader birthright citizenship ban. Birth tourism is targeted, with foreign nationals entering on nonimmigrant visas to give birth facing possible visa denials, entry blocks, or deportation. Expanded ineligibility now includes children of foreign government employees, terrorist organization members, and those who committed citizenship fraud. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 against the administration’s earlier order on June 30, 2026, and legal challenges are expected as the new orders test the limits of the 14th Amendment.

Trump Signs New Executive Orders Targeting Birthright Citizenship, ‘Birth Tourism’

International

Trump rejects US munitions shortage reports, threatens alleged leakers

Published

1 day ago

August 7, 2026

Trends Admin

US President Donald Trump

Trump rejects US munitions shortage reports, threatens alleged leakers

US President Donald Trump has rejected reports that the United States is facing a broad military munitions shortage, insisting that the country retains substantial supplies while warning that officials responsible for leaking classified information about US weapons inventories could face severe punishment.

Trump made the remarks on Thursday as his administration faced renewed scrutiny over the condition of US weapons stockpiles following months of military operations against Iran.

In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump said the United States had “massive amounts” of munitions, particularly certain types, and added that large quantities were being manufactured and shipped to the country as needed.

The President also warned officials accused of leaking information about US military capabilities, saying those responsible were being pursued and could face lengthy prison sentences.

Trump’s comments came after reports raised concerns about the depletion of some US long-range missiles and air-defence interceptors during the Iran conflict. Reuters reported that US forces had used virtually all of their stockpiles of some long-range precision missiles, including Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) and Precision Strike Missiles (PrSM), during the five-month war. (Reuters)

However, the reports do not indicate that the United States has run out of weapons generally. Instead, they point to significant pressure on particular categories of high-demand munitions, raising questions about how quickly depleted stocks can be rebuilt.

Trump himself acknowledged on Thursday that the availability of some types of weapons was tighter, while maintaining that the US had an almost unlimited supply of certain other powerful munitions. He also said American defence companies were expanding production capacity, including facilities producing Patriot and Tomahawk missiles. (Reuters)

READ ALSO:

The issue has become particularly important because the United States is balancing its military requirements in the Middle East with commitments to allies, including Ukraine, which relies heavily on Western air-defence systems to protect against Russian missile and drone attacks.

Independent assessments have also highlighted pressure on US air-defence inventories. The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) said in July that US stocks of Patriot interceptors had fallen below 1,000, while THAAD interceptor inventories stood at about 250. The organisation warned that continued combat could further reduce stocks and create challenges for US readiness. (CSIS)

CSIS has also assessed that rebuilding some depleted US missile inventories could take several years. Its analysis found that replenishing systems such as THAAD, Patriot and Tomahawk to pre-war levels could take three years or more under existing production projections, while some other missile systems could be replenished more quickly. (CSIS)

The pressure has prompted Washington to accelerate efforts to expand its defence-industrial capacity. Reuters reported that the United States recently reached an agreement worth more than $3 billion with Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman to increase production of components for Patriot and THAAD interceptors. The arrangement is designed to significantly increase production capacity as the Pentagon seeks to rebuild depleted stocks. (Reuters)

The situation has also renewed concerns about the United States’ ability to respond simultaneously to multiple major security crises. CSIS has warned that reduced stocks of long-range offensive missiles and air-defence interceptors could create a strategic vulnerability if the US were required to fight another major conflict while continuing to support its allies. (CSIS)

Despite the concerns, the Trump administration maintains that US military readiness has not been fundamentally compromised. The administration has emphasised the size of America’s overall arsenal and the rapid expansion of domestic weapons production.

The disagreement therefore centres largely on the condition of specific weapons inventories rather than whether the United States has weapons available at all. While Trump insists that the country has substantial munitions reserves, independent assessments indicate that several important missile and interceptor stocks have been significantly reduced by sustained combat operations.

The debate is expected to continue as Washington weighs the demands of the Iran war, support for Ukraine and the longer-term need to rebuild American military stockpiles.

Trump rejects US munitions shortage reports, threatens alleged leakers

International

Trump Warns Iran: Open Hormuz or Get ‘Hit Very Hard’ as 48-Hour Deadline Looms

Published

3 days ago

August 5, 2026

Trends Admin

Trump Warns Iran: Open Hormuz or Get ‘Hit Very Hard’ as 48-Hour Deadline Looms

United States President Donald Trump has warned Iran it will be “hit very hard” unless the Strait of Hormuz is reopened “very soon,” while insisting that talks between the two sides were ongoing despite Tehran flatly denying any direct negotiations were taking place. Speaking in an interview with Fox News on Tuesday during a visit to California, Trump said he preferred a diplomatic resolution but left no doubt about the consequences of failure. “The strait is going to be open very soon, or they are going to get hit very hard, and then the strait’s going to be open,” he said. “If they back out again, they are going to get hit really hard. They know that. They understand that. I have no choice.” The president also described the planned military operation as extensive and still on the table despite his decision to pause it over the weekend. “It’s very tough to do what we have planned, still planned. We’ll see what happens,” he said, adding that he was “very proud” of giving Iran a chance to negotiate before launching what he suggested would be a large-scale assault. “We hit them very, very hard. But the hard hit is yet to come, and hopefully we won’t have to use it.” Trump simultaneously accused Iran of duplicity for publicly denying it was in talks with Washington. In a post on Truth Social, he wrote: “Iranian Leadership is unbelievably duplicitous! They ask for a meeting, some would say ‘beg,’ talks begin, with more scheduled in the immediate future, and they say, openly and proudly, that they’re not having any discussions, that nothing is being talked about, and they’re only dealing with ‘Oman’.” He added that “nothing gets through to Iran, unless we want it to, and nothing will get through, unless a Deal, or Total Surrender, is accomplished.”

Iran’s Foreign Ministry flatly rejected Trump’s characterisation. Spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said Tehran was not holding direct discussions with the United States and was only engaged in talks with Oman regarding a temporary safe route through the strait. “Discussions are currently focused on a possible navigation corridor for two-way vessel traffic. That initiative is unrelated to negotiations on fully reopening the strait. It is a separate issue,” Baghaei said. Baghaei added that all Iranian negotiators were currently in the country, with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on a religious pilgrimage in Iraq and unavailable for negotiations at least until the end of the week. The only exception, he said, was the ongoing bilateral discussions with Oman as the two coastal states responsible for the waterway.

READ ALSO:

According to Axios, which cited unnamed regional and US officials, the United States, Iran, and Oman are nearing an interim agreement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, with Washington hoping to announce the deal as early as Wednesday. The proposed arrangement would be a 60-day agreement for safe passage in the strait between Iran and Oman, with negotiators working on final details. Under the reported framework, ships entering the Persian Gulf would travel north through Iranian territorial waters, while outbound vessels would travel south through Omani waters in coordination with Tehran. The agreement would not involve the collection of transit fees or tolls, and the parties would clear mines from the central shipping lane within 30 days. A US official and one regional source told Axios that Iranian leadership had completed the approval process for the agreement on Tuesday. While US Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed that progress had been made in discussions with Iran, he noted that talks had not yet been finalized but that the White House was “hoping” for an agreement “in the very near future.”

Iran’s senior officials have taken a defiant stance, warning the United States against any adventurous actions. The Iranian Foreign Ministry reiterated that Tehran views Hormuz as a crucial source of strategic leverage that it cannot afford to surrender, while Washington insists that Iran must not be allowed to control an international waterway. Iran continues to insist that any agreement must leave it in control of the Strait of Hormuz. Regional officials told The Associated Press that any agreement to reopen Hormuz would also require the removal of the current US blockade on Iranian ports. Meanwhile, Iranian military sources have denied Trump’s claim that Tehran asked Washington to call off its strikes, calling his remarks “a new lie,” according to Iran’s semi-official Mehr news agency.

The diplomatic confusion was underscored when another cargo vessel was attacked near the strait’s Omani coast on Tuesday. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations Centre (UKMTO) reported receiving multiple reports that a tanker had been struck by an unknown projectile approximately eight nautical miles east of Oman’s Limah. The tanker’s crew abandoned the vessel and boarded a lifeboat, with the vessel’s main engine disabled and a bunker tank on fire. The UKMTO did not identify the ship or its owner, and authorities are investigating. Separately, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards said on Tuesday that two oil tankers had caught fire after explosions while attempting to transit the southern route of the strait, though Reuters could not independently verify the Guards’ statement.

The disruption of the Strait of Hormuz has sent oil prices soaring and placed heavy pressure on Trump to stop the fighting, partly because of the effect rising energy prices could have on American voters ahead of the November congressional midterm elections. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had earlier told CNBC that a deal to reopen the strait could come as early as Tuesday or Wednesday, saying there were “hundreds if not 1,000 ships sitting in there waiting to go out,” including tankers carrying oil, fertiliser, refined products and industrial gases. Trump has vowed that Iran will not be permitted to collect transit fees in the strait, declaring, “If anyone is allowed to collect fees, it will be us. We have complete control.” The president had previously said he expected to know by Tuesday how the talks were going, “one way or the other,” but insisted that the path forward is clear. As the 48-hour window unfolds, the world watches to see whether the negotiations will yield a breakthrough or whether Trump will follow through on his threat to unleash a devastating military campaign. “If they don’t make a deal, it’s going to be too bad. And we have much more on Iran coming up,” Trump said. All parties remain on high alert, with the potential for a catastrophic escalation in West Asia now greater than at any point since the conflict began.