The Ukrainian delegation to peace talks on settling the conflict in Donbass will refuse to attend any discussions if they continue to be held in Minsk. Kiev accused Belarus of "hostile rhetoric" and being "influenced" by Russia.

The Trilateral Contact Group is made up of Ukraine, Russia and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and in September 2014, representatives from all three parties signed the Minsk Protocol, an agreement to end the Donbass war. Now, with worries that fighting may flare up again, there have been proposals to head back to the Belarusian capital for further talks.

According to Kiev's deputy prime minister, Alexey Reznikov, the Ukrainian side will refuse to attend.

"We said that we will not take part in the meetings of the Trilateral Contact Group if the Covid-19 quarantine suddenly ends and it is proposed to continue consultations in Minsk. To hold talks in real life, we will have to look for another country, another city."

This is because Belarus is "under the influence" of the Kremlin, and Kiev has lost confidence in its northern neighbor, he said. As things stand, due to Covid-19, discussions between the three parties take place via videoconference. Before the pandemic, they met face-to-face in the Belarusian capital.

Reznikov's assertion that Kiev will no longer go to Minsk follows attempts by other Ukrainian officials to move discussions to another country. Last summer, Ukraine's former president Leonid Kravchuk, who now serves on the Donbass negotiation team, revealed that he tried to move talks from Minsk to Sweden.

In response, the Russian Foreign Ministry then noted that "the key to success in settling the Ukrainian conflict is not in the change of negotiating venues or formats," but simply the political will of all parties.

The conflict is taking place in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions of Ukraine, collectively known as Donbass, where a civil war has raged for almost seven years. Separatists now control large swathes of land and have declared themselves to be independent of Kiev. While Russia does not recognize these breakaway states, Ukraine accuses the Kremlin of supporting them.

• The destructive plan behind the Biden Russia agenda
• Biden's Ukrainian "Putin Push" may lead to World War III
• Is the Ukraine on the brink of war (again)
• The Ukraine's many ticking time bombs

Russia would be forced to defend itself if Western nations go through with plans to station short- and long-range missiles in Europe, a Moscow diplomat has warned, insisting they could be used to target the country's air defenses.

In a statement released on Monday, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that Washington was increasingly discussing proposals to deploy rocket launchers to the continent. Previously banned by the INF Treaty, research and development has reportedly resumed since the pact was torn up in 2019 by then-US President Donald Trump.

Citing British intentions to upgrade its missile launch complexes, the spokeswoman argued that

"the British military has now joined in with the openly hostile and destabilizing rhetoric to make it possible to deliver deep missile strikes, in order to neutralize enemy air defense systems. We cannot help but notice the obsession of these Anglo-Saxon commanders on the task of defeating purely defensive units designed to ensure the security of the Russian Federation in the event of a military attack."

She also said Russia disputes the officially declared ranges of the launchers, claiming that Britain was being "clearly and deliberately misleading" about its ability to strike targets at distance. The Foreign Ministry official added:

"We aren't closing the door to dialogue, but we can't rule out that Russia will be forced to shift its efforts towards military measures in response to emerging missile threats."

In her statement this week, Zakharova cited "cynical" US plans that she said had been put forward by US General John Rafferty "to test the prototype of the missile at the maximum range to see by how much it will exceed 500 km."

Iran has rejected US proposals to suspend its 20% uranium enrichment in return for unfreezing $1 billion of its assets, Tehran's chief negotiator has said after a first round of talks to reinstate the 2015 nuclear deal.

When the Government holds a vote on vaccine passports, the support of the Labour benches will be vital for a victory (presuming that a decent number of Conservative MPs vote "no"). But Keir Starmer has yet to decide whether to back the Government over the introduction of such certification and was "really angry" that an interview he gave to the Telegraph last week foregrounded his criticism of the idea. The Guardian has the story.

Keir Starmer is weighing up whether to support Covid status certificates in a vote within weeks for which he could lend the Government crucial support to pass one of its most controversial coronavirus policies.

The Labour leader has been hesitant to endorse a proposal that would mean people would have to prove they had been vaccinated, had a recent negative test or antibodies from prior infection in order to access venues such as theatres and sports stadiums. ...

Labour is trying to keep its options open given that details about the plan are scarce, and will hope that attention remains on the splits within the Conservative party, where more than 40 of Boris Johnson's backbenchers have branded the idea "divisive and discriminatory" and vowed to oppose it.

But after dozens of prominent Labour backbenchers, including the former party leader Jeremy Corbyn, also pledged to vote against the certificates, Starmer is being forced to decide whether he should give the Government the support it may need.

A Labour source said Starmer's team was "worried that this issue splits the PLP [parliamentary Labour party] just like it splits the Tory party" and was "really angry" that an interview he gave to the Telegraph last week was headlined on his criticism of the Covid status certificates.

They admitted: "There isn't really a consensus yet" within the party, though they predicted Labour would probably end up supporting the certificates "but probably not make much of a song and dance about it".

The "reservations are real", says another Labour source - but mainly around the "digital infrastructure" of Covid passports, rather than about their implication on liberty.

That's about as much "opposition" as we can expect from the notional Leader of the Opposition.

Worth reading in full.

Stop Press: Labour has called vaccine passports "discriminatory" and appears to be leaning towards opposing the Government on a Covid ID card scheme. The Guardian has the story.

The Shadow Health Secretary, Jon Ashworth, accused the Government of "creating confusion" by not explaining clearly where the documents may be needed, after Boris Johnson confirmed they were being investigated but would not be introduced earlier than mid-May.

"I'm not going to support a policy that, here in my Leicester constituency, if someone wants to go into Next or H&M, they have to produce a vaccination certificate on their phone, on an app," Ashworth told BBC Breakfast. "I think that's discriminatory."

He added it made sense to ask people to get tested before going to events such as a football game, but warned that forcing everyone to carry an "ID card" proving they had been jabbed was not fair.

Worth reading in full.

• Life WON'T return to normal on June 21 because Covid vaccines aren't good enough, SAGE warns
• UK's coronavirus response is being led by a secretive, incompetent cabal
• UK's ex-SAGE member speaks out against 'circuit breaker' lockdown
• Apps now being developed for global vaccine passport help fulfill 'one world order' totalitarian agenda
• Coronavirus vaccine passport may be required for traveling in 2021
• Papers, please! New York announces 'Excelsior' vaccine passport program
• Petition against Covid-19 'vaccine passports' hits 37,000 signatures amid reports UK govt hatching travel scheme
• 'It would be discriminatory': UK vaccine minister says government is NOT planning Covid vaccine passport

• The Great Nonsense of "The Great Reset"
• Engdahl: The Great Reset is here - follow the money
• The Great Reset: Corporate Socialism, or 'Capitalism' with Chinese Characteristics
• James Delingpole on the Great Reset: A coup by the globalist oligarch and big tech monopolists
• The Great Reset is here
• Great reset? Putin says, 'Not so fast!"
• Conservatives must now draw a line in the sand and stop the "Great Reset"
• After COVID, Davos moves to Great Reset