radiofree.asia

Category: Russia

  • Two Dead In Russian Strikes On Ukrainian Regions

    Russians began voting on the first day of a three-day presidential election that President Vladimir Putin is all but certain to win, extending his rule by six more years after any serious opponents were barred from running against him amid a brutal crackdown on dissent and the independent media.

    The vote, which is not expected to be free and fair, is also the first major election to take place in Russia since Putin launched his full-scale invasion of neighboring Ukraine in February 2022.

    Putin, 71, who has been president or prime minister for nearly 25 years, is running against three low-profile politicians — Liberal Democratic Party leader Leonid Slutsky, State Duma Deputy Speaker Vladislav Davankov of the New People party, and State Duma lawmaker Nikolai Kharitonov of the Communist Party — whose policy positions are hardly distinguishable from Putin’s.

    Boris Nadezhdin, a 60-year-old anti-war politician, was rejected last month by the Russian Central Election Commission (TsIK) because of what it called invalid support signatures on his application to be registered as a candidate. He appealed, but the TsIk’s decision was upheld by Russia’s Supreme Court.

    “Would like to congratulate Vladimir Putin on his landslide victory in the elections starting today,” European Council President Charles Michel wrote in a sarcastic post on X, formerly Twitter. “No opposition. No freedom. No choice.”

    The first polling station opened in Russia’s Far East. As the day progresses, voters will cast their ballots at nearly 100,000 polling stations across the country’s 11 time zones, as well as in regions of Ukraine that Moscow illegally annexed.

    By around 10 a.m. Moscow time, TsIK said 2.89 percent of the 110 million eligible voters had already cast their ballots. That figure includes those who cast early ballots, TsIK Chairwoman Ella Pamfilova said.

    Some people trying to vote online reported problems, but officials said those being told they were in an electronic queue “just need to wait a little or return to voting later.”

    There were reports that public sector employees were being urged to vote early on March 15, a directive Stanislav Andreychuk, the co-chairman of the Golos voters’ rights movement, said was aimed at having workers vote “under the watchful eyes of their bosses.”

    Ukraine and Western governments have condemned Russia for holding the vote in those Ukrainian regions, calling it illegal.

    Results are expected to be announced on March 18.

    The outcome, with Putin’s foes in jail, exile, or dead, is not in doubt. In a survey conducted by VTsIOM in early March, 75 percent of the citizens intending to vote said they would cast their ballot for Putin, a former KGB foreign intelligence officer.

    The ruthless crackdown that has crippled independent media and human rights groups began before the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine was launched, but it has been ratcheted up since. Almost exactly one month before the polls opened, Putin’s most vocal critic, opposition politician Aleksei Navalny, died in an isolated Arctic prison amid suspicious circumstances as he served sentences seen as politically motivated.

    Many observers say Putin warded off even the faintest of challengers to ensure a large margin of victory that he can point to as evidence that Russians back the war in Ukraine and his handling of it.

    Most say they have no expectation that the election will be free and fair, with the possibility for independent monitoring very limited. Nadezhdin said he would recruit observers, but it was unclear whether he would be successful given that only registered candidates or state-backed advisory bodies can assign observers to polling stations.

    “Who in the world thinks that it will be a real election?” Michael McFaul, the former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, said in an interview with Current Time, the Russian-language network run by RFE/RL, ahead of the vote.

    McFaul, speaking in Russian, added that he’s convinced that the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden and other democracies in the world will say that the election did not offer a fair choice, but doubted they will decline to recognize Putin as Russia’s legitimate president.

    “I believe that is the right action to take, but I expect that President Biden is not going to say that [Putin] is not a Russian president. And all the other leaders won’t do that either because they want to leave some kind of contact with Putin,” he said.

    Before his death, Navalny had hoped to use the vote to demonstrate the public’s discontent with both the war and Putin’s iron-fisted rule. He called on voters to cast their ballots at 12 p.m. on March 17, naming the action Noon Against Putin.


    Viral images of long lines forming at this time would indicate the size of the opposition and undermine the landslide result the Kremlin is expected to concoct. The strategy was endorsed by Navalny not long before his death and his widow, Yulia Navalnaya, has promoted it.

    “We need to use election day to show that we exist and there are many of us, we are actual, living, real people and we are against Putin…. What to do next is up to you. You can vote for any candidate except Putin. You could ruin your ballot,” Navalnaya said.

    How well this strategy will work remains unclear. Moscow’s top law enforcement office warned voters in the Russian capital on March 14 against heeding calls to take part in the action, saying participants face legal punishment.

    With reporting by RFE/RL’s Todd Prince, Current Time, and AP


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Russians Begin Voting In A Presidential Election Whose Outcome Is Not In Doubt

    Russians began voting on the first day of a three-day presidential election that President Vladimir Putin is all but certain to win, extending his rule by six more years after any serious opponents were barred from running against him amid a brutal crackdown on dissent and the independent media.

    The vote, which is not expected to be free and fair, is also the first major election to take place in Russia since Putin launched his full-scale invasion of neighboring Ukraine in February 2022.

    Putin, 71, who has been president or prime minister for nearly 25 years, is running against three low-profile politicians — Liberal Democratic Party leader Leonid Slutsky, State Duma Deputy Speaker Vladislav Davankov of the New People party, and State Duma lawmaker Nikolai Kharitonov of the Communist Party — whose policy positions are hardly distinguishable from Putin’s.

    Boris Nadezhdin, a 60-year-old anti-war politician, was rejected last month by the Russian Central Election Commission (TsIK) because of what it called invalid support signatures on his application to be registered as a candidate. He appealed, but the TsIk’s decision was upheld by Russia’s Supreme Court.

    “Would like to congratulate Vladimir Putin on his landslide victory in the elections starting today,” European Council President Charles Michel wrote in a sarcastic post on X, formerly Twitter. “No opposition. No freedom. No choice.”

    The first polling station opened in Russia’s Far East. As the day progresses, voters will cast their ballots at nearly 100,000 polling stations across the country’s 11 time zones, as well as in regions of Ukraine that Moscow illegally annexed.

    By around 10 a.m. Moscow time, TsIK said 2.89 percent of the 110 million eligible voters had already cast their ballots. That figure includes those who cast early ballots, TsIK Chairwoman Ella Pamfilova said.

    Some people trying to vote online reported problems, but officials said those being told they were in an electronic queue “just need to wait a little or return to voting later.”

    There were reports that public sector employees were being urged to vote early on March 15, a directive Stanislav Andreychuk, the co-chairman of the Golos voters’ rights movement, said was aimed at having workers vote “under the watchful eyes of their bosses.”

    Ukraine and Western governments have condemned Russia for holding the vote in those Ukrainian regions, calling it illegal.

    Results are expected to be announced on March 18.

    The outcome, with Putin’s foes in jail, exile, or dead, is not in doubt. In a survey conducted by VTsIOM in early March, 75 percent of the citizens intending to vote said they would cast their ballot for Putin, a former KGB foreign intelligence officer.

    The ruthless crackdown that has crippled independent media and human rights groups began before the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine was launched, but it has been ratcheted up since. Almost exactly one month before the polls opened, Putin’s most vocal critic, opposition politician Aleksei Navalny, died in an isolated Arctic prison amid suspicious circumstances as he served sentences seen as politically motivated.

    Many observers say Putin warded off even the faintest of challengers to ensure a large margin of victory that he can point to as evidence that Russians back the war in Ukraine and his handling of it.

    Most say they have no expectation that the election will be free and fair, with the possibility for independent monitoring very limited. Nadezhdin said he would recruit observers, but it was unclear whether he would be successful given that only registered candidates or state-backed advisory bodies can assign observers to polling stations.

    “Who in the world thinks that it will be a real election?” Michael McFaul, the former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, said in an interview with Current Time, the Russian-language network run by RFE/RL, ahead of the vote.

    McFaul, speaking in Russian, added that he’s convinced that the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden and other democracies in the world will say that the election did not offer a fair choice, but doubted they will decline to recognize Putin as Russia’s legitimate president.

    “I believe that is the right action to take, but I expect that President Biden is not going to say that [Putin] is not a Russian president. And all the other leaders won’t do that either because they want to leave some kind of contact with Putin,” he said.

    Before his death, Navalny had hoped to use the vote to demonstrate the public’s discontent with both the war and Putin’s iron-fisted rule. He called on voters to cast their ballots at 12 p.m. on March 17, naming the action Noon Against Putin.


    Viral images of long lines forming at this time would indicate the size of the opposition and undermine the landslide result the Kremlin is expected to concoct. The strategy was endorsed by Navalny not long before his death and his widow, Yulia Navalnaya, has promoted it.

    “We need to use election day to show that we exist and there are many of us, we are actual, living, real people and we are against Putin…. What to do next is up to you. You can vote for any candidate except Putin. You could ruin your ballot,” Navalnaya said.

    How well this strategy will work remains unclear. Moscow’s top law enforcement office warned voters in the Russian capital on March 14 against heeding calls to take part in the action, saying participants face legal punishment.

    With reporting by RFE/RL’s Todd Prince, Current Time, and AP


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Macron Again Declines To Rule Out Western Troops In Ukraine, But Says Not Needed Now

    Russians began voting on the first day of a three-day presidential election that President Vladimir Putin is all but certain to win, extending his rule by six more years after any serious opponents were barred from running against him amid a brutal crackdown on dissent and the independent media.

    The vote, which is not expected to be free and fair, is also the first major election to take place in Russia since Putin launched his full-scale invasion of neighboring Ukraine in February 2022.

    Putin, 71, who has been president or prime minister for nearly 25 years, is running against three low-profile politicians — Liberal Democratic Party leader Leonid Slutsky, State Duma Deputy Speaker Vladislav Davankov of the New People party, and State Duma lawmaker Nikolai Kharitonov of the Communist Party — whose policy positions are hardly distinguishable from Putin’s.

    Boris Nadezhdin, a 60-year-old anti-war politician, was rejected last month by the Russian Central Election Commission (TsIK) because of what it called invalid support signatures on his application to be registered as a candidate. He appealed, but the TsIk’s decision was upheld by Russia’s Supreme Court.

    “Would like to congratulate Vladimir Putin on his landslide victory in the elections starting today,” European Council President Charles Michel wrote in a sarcastic post on X, formerly Twitter. “No opposition. No freedom. No choice.”

    The first polling station opened in Russia’s Far East. As the day progresses, voters will cast their ballots at nearly 100,000 polling stations across the country’s 11 time zones, as well as in regions of Ukraine that Moscow illegally annexed.

    By around 10 a.m. Moscow time, TsIK said 2.89 percent of the 110 million eligible voters had already cast their ballots. That figure includes those who cast early ballots, TsIK Chairwoman Ella Pamfilova said.

    Some people trying to vote online reported problems, but officials said those being told they were in an electronic queue “just need to wait a little or return to voting later.”

    There were reports that public sector employees were being urged to vote early on March 15, a directive Stanislav Andreychuk, the co-chairman of the Golos voters’ rights movement, said was aimed at having workers vote “under the watchful eyes of their bosses.”

    Ukraine and Western governments have condemned Russia for holding the vote in those Ukrainian regions, calling it illegal.

    Results are expected to be announced on March 18.

    The outcome, with Putin’s foes in jail, exile, or dead, is not in doubt. In a survey conducted by VTsIOM in early March, 75 percent of the citizens intending to vote said they would cast their ballot for Putin, a former KGB foreign intelligence officer.

    The ruthless crackdown that has crippled independent media and human rights groups began before the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine was launched, but it has been ratcheted up since. Almost exactly one month before the polls opened, Putin’s most vocal critic, opposition politician Aleksei Navalny, died in an isolated Arctic prison amid suspicious circumstances as he served sentences seen as politically motivated.

    Many observers say Putin warded off even the faintest of challengers to ensure a large margin of victory that he can point to as evidence that Russians back the war in Ukraine and his handling of it.

    Most say they have no expectation that the election will be free and fair, with the possibility for independent monitoring very limited. Nadezhdin said he would recruit observers, but it was unclear whether he would be successful given that only registered candidates or state-backed advisory bodies can assign observers to polling stations.

    “Who in the world thinks that it will be a real election?” Michael McFaul, the former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, said in an interview with Current Time, the Russian-language network run by RFE/RL, ahead of the vote.

    McFaul, speaking in Russian, added that he’s convinced that the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden and other democracies in the world will say that the election did not offer a fair choice, but doubted they will decline to recognize Putin as Russia’s legitimate president.

    “I believe that is the right action to take, but I expect that President Biden is not going to say that [Putin] is not a Russian president. And all the other leaders won’t do that either because they want to leave some kind of contact with Putin,” he said.

    Before his death, Navalny had hoped to use the vote to demonstrate the public’s discontent with both the war and Putin’s iron-fisted rule. He called on voters to cast their ballots at 12 p.m. on March 17, naming the action Noon Against Putin.


    Viral images of long lines forming at this time would indicate the size of the opposition and undermine the landslide result the Kremlin is expected to concoct. The strategy was endorsed by Navalny not long before his death and his widow, Yulia Navalnaya, has promoted it.

    “We need to use election day to show that we exist and there are many of us, we are actual, living, real people and we are against Putin…. What to do next is up to you. You can vote for any candidate except Putin. You could ruin your ballot,” Navalnaya said.

    How well this strategy will work remains unclear. Moscow’s top law enforcement office warned voters in the Russian capital on March 14 against heeding calls to take part in the action, saying participants face legal punishment.

    With reporting by RFE/RL’s Todd Prince, Current Time, and AP


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • U.S. Lawmakers Weigh Lend-Lease Program Favored By Trump As Ukraine Aid Compromise

    Russians began voting on the first day of a three-day presidential election that President Vladimir Putin is all but certain to win, extending his rule by six more years after any serious opponents were barred from running against him amid a brutal crackdown on dissent and the independent media.

    The vote, which is not expected to be free and fair, is also the first major election to take place in Russia since Putin launched his full-scale invasion of neighboring Ukraine in February 2022.

    Putin, 71, who has been president or prime minister for nearly 25 years, is running against three low-profile politicians — Liberal Democratic Party leader Leonid Slutsky, State Duma Deputy Speaker Vladislav Davankov of the New People party, and State Duma lawmaker Nikolai Kharitonov of the Communist Party — whose policy positions are hardly distinguishable from Putin’s.

    Boris Nadezhdin, a 60-year-old anti-war politician, was rejected last month by the Russian Central Election Commission (TsIK) because of what it called invalid support signatures on his application to be registered as a candidate. He appealed, but the TsIk’s decision was upheld by Russia’s Supreme Court.

    “Would like to congratulate Vladimir Putin on his landslide victory in the elections starting today,” European Council President Charles Michel wrote in a sarcastic post on X, formerly Twitter. “No opposition. No freedom. No choice.”

    The first polling station opened in Russia’s Far East. As the day progresses, voters will cast their ballots at nearly 100,000 polling stations across the country’s 11 time zones, as well as in regions of Ukraine that Moscow illegally annexed.

    By around 10 a.m. Moscow time, TsIK said 2.89 percent of the 110 million eligible voters had already cast their ballots. That figure includes those who cast early ballots, TsIK Chairwoman Ella Pamfilova said.

    Some people trying to vote online reported problems, but officials said those being told they were in an electronic queue “just need to wait a little or return to voting later.”

    There were reports that public sector employees were being urged to vote early on March 15, a directive Stanislav Andreychuk, the co-chairman of the Golos voters’ rights movement, said was aimed at having workers vote “under the watchful eyes of their bosses.”

    Ukraine and Western governments have condemned Russia for holding the vote in those Ukrainian regions, calling it illegal.

    Results are expected to be announced on March 18.

    The outcome, with Putin’s foes in jail, exile, or dead, is not in doubt. In a survey conducted by VTsIOM in early March, 75 percent of the citizens intending to vote said they would cast their ballot for Putin, a former KGB foreign intelligence officer.

    The ruthless crackdown that has crippled independent media and human rights groups began before the February 2022 invasion of Ukraine was launched, but it has been ratcheted up since. Almost exactly one month before the polls opened, Putin’s most vocal critic, opposition politician Aleksei Navalny, died in an isolated Arctic prison amid suspicious circumstances as he served sentences seen as politically motivated.

    Many observers say Putin warded off even the faintest of challengers to ensure a large margin of victory that he can point to as evidence that Russians back the war in Ukraine and his handling of it.

    Most say they have no expectation that the election will be free and fair, with the possibility for independent monitoring very limited. Nadezhdin said he would recruit observers, but it was unclear whether he would be successful given that only registered candidates or state-backed advisory bodies can assign observers to polling stations.

    “Who in the world thinks that it will be a real election?” Michael McFaul, the former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, said in an interview with Current Time, the Russian-language network run by RFE/RL, ahead of the vote.

    McFaul, speaking in Russian, added that he’s convinced that the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden and other democracies in the world will say that the election did not offer a fair choice, but doubted they will decline to recognize Putin as Russia’s legitimate president.

    “I believe that is the right action to take, but I expect that President Biden is not going to say that [Putin] is not a Russian president. And all the other leaders won’t do that either because they want to leave some kind of contact with Putin,” he said.

    Before his death, Navalny had hoped to use the vote to demonstrate the public’s discontent with both the war and Putin’s iron-fisted rule. He called on voters to cast their ballots at 12 p.m. on March 17, naming the action Noon Against Putin.


    Viral images of long lines forming at this time would indicate the size of the opposition and undermine the landslide result the Kremlin is expected to concoct. The strategy was endorsed by Navalny not long before his death and his widow, Yulia Navalnaya, has promoted it.

    “We need to use election day to show that we exist and there are many of us, we are actual, living, real people and we are against Putin…. What to do next is up to you. You can vote for any candidate except Putin. You could ruin your ballot,” Navalnaya said.

    How well this strategy will work remains unclear. Moscow’s top law enforcement office warned voters in the Russian capital on March 14 against heeding calls to take part in the action, saying participants face legal punishment.

    With reporting by RFE/RL’s Todd Prince, Current Time, and AP


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • CPJ joins call for Russia to keep the internet on during presidential elections

    The Committee to Protect Journalists joined #KeepItOn Coalition partners on Thursday in calling on Russian authorities and telecommunications providers to maintain free, open, and secure internet access before, during, and after presidential elections scheduled for March 15 to 17.

    The letter highlights Russia’s history of internet shutdowns, including the blocking of tech companies that refused to comply with censorship orders and throttling internet access during moments of civil unrest.

    Read the full letter here.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Navalny’s Widow Calls Putin A ‘Gangster’ Unworthy To Be Recognized As President

    Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) was behind a sweeping wave of drone attacks on several Russian regions on March 13 that reportedly set a Rosneft refinery on fire and targeted other economic and military objectives, a Ukrainian intelligence source told RFE/RL.

    Russia’s Defense Ministry earlier said its air defenses shot down 65 Ukrainian drones over six regions — 35 in Voronezh, 25 in Belgorod, eight in Bryansk and Kursk each, one in Leningrad, and one on Ryazan region.

    Regional officials reported that the Rosneft oil refinery in Ryazan was struck, a day after another drone attack seriously damaged a LUKoil refinery.

    Live Briefing: Russia’s Invasion Of Ukraine

    RFE/RL’s Live Briefing gives you all of the latest developments on Russia’s full-scale invasion, Kyiv’s counteroffensive, Western military aid, global reaction, and the plight of civilians. For all of RFE/RL’s coverage of the war in Ukraine, click here.

    Pavel Malkov, the governor of Ryazan, some 180 kilometers southeast of Moscow, said the local Rosneft oil refinery, Russia’s seventh-largest, was on fire as a result of a drone attack.

    There were also casualties, according to preliminary information, Malkov wrote on Telegram, without providing further details.

    The Shot Telegram channel reported that the attack on the Rosneft subsidiary Ryazannefteprodukt also injured two people.

    Russian news agency RIA Novosti later quoted emergency services as saying that four drones had hit the refinery. The fire, which affected two tanks used in the processing of oil products on an area of some 175 square meters, was later extinguished, it said.

    The source, who is in security enforcement and spoke on condition of anonymity to RFE/RL, said that three Russian oil refineries — one in Ryazan, one in Kstovo in the Nizhny Novgorod region, and one in Kirishi in the Leningrad region — were targeted by Ukrainian drones as Kyiv seeks to inflict as much damage as possible to Russia’s economy

    “We have been systematically implementing a detailed strategy to diminish the economic potential of the Russian Federation. Our task is to deprive the enemy of resources and reduce the flow of oil money and fuel, which the Russia directs toward the war and the murdering of our citizens,” the source said

    Ukrainian drones also targeted a Russian air base in Buturlinovka and a military airfield in Voronezh region, the source said.

    Separately, an SBU source who wished to remain anonymous confirmed to Ukrayinska Pravda that the strikes had been orchestrated by the agency.

    “We are at war with everything that finances the Russian military and the war. And Russia is at war with civilians and high-rise buildings,” Andriy Yermak, the head of Ukraine’s presidential office, wrote on Telegram, without directly confirming the attacks.

    In Belgorod, regional Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov said an apartment building was struck but there were no injuries, while according to TASS, the facade of the regional headquarters of the Federal Security Service (FSB) was damaged and windows were broken.

    The March 13 attacks came a day after another sweeping wave of strikes on multiple targets in Russia that reportedly started fires at two major oil facilities.

    The attacks damaged LUKoil’s NORSI refinery, Russia’s fourth-largest, in the Nizhny Novgorod region about 775 kilometers from the Ukrainian border and hit an oil depot in Oryol, 116 kilometers from Ukraine.

    Also on March 12, the Freedom of Russia Legion, the Russian Volunteer Corps, and the Siberian Battalion, which consist of Russian citizens who have been fighting alongside Ukrainian forces in the war, claimed to have launched cross-border attacks into Russia territory.

    The Kremlin said Russian forces repelled the incursions and inflicted heavy losses on the armed groups. Neither claim could be independently verified.

    Meanwhile, Russian air strikes killed at least two people and wounded several others on March 13 in Ukraine’s Donetsk and Sumy regions, officials said.

    Two civilians were killed and 11 wounded in the eastern Donetsk region in the bombardment of a high-rise residential building in the city of Myrnohrad, regional Governor Vadym Filashkin said on Telegram.

    In the northeastern region of Sumy, a Russian drone attack on a five-story apartment building destroyed 30 apartments and caused a number of casualties, the region’s military administration said on Telegram.

    Ten people were rescued from the rubble, eight of whom sustained injuries, it said.


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Are We Stumbling into World War III in Ukraine?


    U.S. and Ukrainian armies attend the opening ceremony of the “RAPID TRIDENT-2021” military exercises.

    President Biden began his State of the Union speech with an impassioned warning that failing to pass his $61 billion dollar weapons package for Ukraine “will put Ukraine at risk, Europe at risk, the free world at risk.” But even if the president’s request were suddenly passed, it would only prolong, and dangerously escalate, the brutal war that is destroying Ukraine.

    The assumption of the U.S. political elite that Biden had a viable plan to defeat Russia and restore Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders has proven to be one more triumphalist American dream that has turned into a nightmare. Ukraine has joined North Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Haiti, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and now Gaza, as another shattered monument to America’s military madness.

    This could have been one of the shortest wars in history, if President Biden had just supported a peace and neutrality agreement negotiated in Turkey in March and April 2022 that already had champagne corks popping in Kyiv, according to Ukrainian negotiator Oleksiy Arestovych. Instead, the U.S. and NATO chose to prolong and escalate the war as a means to try to defeat and weaken Russia.

    Two days before Biden’s State of the Union speech, Secretary of State Blinken announced the early retirement of Acting Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, one of the officials most responsible for a decade of disastrous U.S. policy toward Ukraine.

    Two weeks before the announcement of Nuland’s retirement at the age of 62, she acknowledged in a talk at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) that the war in Ukraine had degenerated into a war of attrition that she compared to the First World War, and she admitted that the Biden administration had no Plan B for Ukraine if Congress doesn’t cough up $61 billion for more weapons.

    We don’t know whether Nuland was forced out, or perhaps quit in protest over a policy that she fought for and lost. Either way, her ride into the sunset opens the door for others to fashion a badly needed Plan B for Ukraine.

    The imperative must be to chart a path back from this hopeless but ever-escalating war of attrition to the negotiating table that the U.S. and Britain upended in April 2022 – or at least to new negotiations on the basis that President Zelenskyy defined on March 27, 2022, when he told his people, “Our goal is obvious: peace and the restoration of normal life in our native state as soon as possible.”

    Instead, on February 26, in a very worrying sign of where NATO’s current policy is leading, French President Emmanuel Macron revealed that European leaders meeting in Paris discussed sending larger numbers of Western ground troops to Ukraine.

    Macron pointed out that NATO members have steadily increased their support to levels unthinkable when the war began. He highlighted the example of Germany, which offered Ukraine only helmets and sleeping bags at the outset of the conflict and is now saying Ukraine needs more missiles and tanks. “The people that said “never ever” today were the same ones who said never ever planes, never ever long-range missiles, never ever trucks. They said all that two years ago,” Macron recalled. “We have to be humble and realize that we (have) always been six to eight months late.”

    Macron implied that, as the war escalates, NATO countries may eventually have to deploy their own forces to Ukraine, and he argued that they should do so sooner rather than later if they want to recover the initiative in the war.

      The mere suggestion of Western troops fighting in Ukraine elicited an outcry both within France–from extreme right National Rally to leftist La France Insoumise–and from other NATO countries. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz insisted that participants in the meeting were “unanimous” in their opposition to deploying troops. Russian officials warned that such a step would mean war between Russia and NATO.

    But as Poland’s president and prime minister headed to Washington for a White House meeting on February 12, Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski told the Polish parliament that sending NATO troops into Ukraine “is not unthinkable.”

    Macron’s intention may have been precisely to bring this debate out into the open and put an end to the secrecy surrounding the undeclared policy of gradual escalation toward full-scale war with Russia that the West has pursued for two years.

    Macron failed to mention publicly that, under current policy, NATO forces are already deeply involved in the war. Among many lies that President Biden told in his State of the Union speech, he insisted that “there are no American soldiers at war in Ukraine.”

    However, the trove of Pentagon documents leaked in March 2023 included an assessment that there were already at least 97 NATO special forces troops operating in Ukraine, including 50 British, 14 Americans and 15 French. Admiral John Kirby, the National Security Council spokesman, has also acknowledged a “small U.S. military presence” based in the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv to try to keep track of thousands of tons of U.S. weapons as they arrive in Ukraine.

    But many more U.S. forces, whether inside or outside Ukraine, are involved in planning Ukrainian military operations; providing satellite intelligence; and play essential roles in the targeting of U.S. weapons. A Ukrainian official told the Washington Post that Ukrainian forces hardly ever fire HIMARS rockets without precise targeting data provided by U.S. forces in Europe.

    All these U.S. and NATO forces are most definitely “at war in Ukraine.” To be at war in a country with only small numbers of “boots on the ground” has been a hallmark of 21st Century U.S. war-making, as any Navy pilot on an aircraft-carrier or drone operator in Nevada can attest. It is precisely this doctrine of “limited” and proxy war that is at risk of spinning out of control in Ukraine, unleashing the World War III that President Biden has vowed to avoid.

    The United States and NATO have tried to keep the escalation of the war under control by deliberate, incremental escalation of the types of weapons they provide and cautious, covert expansion of their own involvement. This has been compared to “boiling a frog,” turning up the heat gradually to avoid any sudden move that might cross a Russian “red line” and trigger a full-scale war between NATO and Russia. But as NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg warned in December 2022, “If things go wrong, they can go horribly wrong.”

    We have long been puzzled by these glaring contradictions at the heart of U.S. and NATO policy. On one hand, we believe President Biden when he says he does not want to start World War III. On the other hand, that is what his policy of incremental escalation is inexorably leading towards.

    U.S. preparations for war with Russia are already at odds with the existential imperative of containing the conflict. In November 2022, the Reed-Inhofe Amendment to the FY2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) invoked wartime emergency powers to authorize an extraordinary shopping-list of weapons like the ones sent to Ukraine, and approved billion-dollar, multi-year no-bid contracts with weapons manufacturers to buy 10 to 20 times the quantities of weapons that the United States had actually shipped to Ukraine.

    Retired Marine Colonel Mark Cancian, the former chief of the Force Structure and Investment Division in the Office of Management and Budget, explained, “This isn’t replacing what we’ve given [Ukraine]. It’s building stockpiles for a major ground war [with Russia] in the future.”

    So the United States is preparing to fight a major ground war with Russia, but the weapons to fight that war will take years to produce, and, with or without them, that could quickly escalate into a nuclear war. Nuland’s early retirement could be the result of Biden and his foreign policy team finally starting to come to grips with the existential dangers of the aggressive policies she championed.

    Meanwhile, Russia’s escalation from its original limited “Special Military Operation” to its current commitment of 7% of its GDP to the war and weapons production has outpaced the West’s escalations, not just in weapons production but in manpower and actual military capability.

    One could say that Russia is winning the war, but that depends what its real war goals are. There is a yawning gulf between the rhetoric from Biden and other Western leaders about Russian ambitions to invade other countries in Europe and what Russia was ready to settle for at the talks in Turkey in 2022, when it agreed to withdraw to its pre-war positions in return for a simple commitment to Ukrainian neutrality.

    Despite Ukraine’s extremely weak position after its failed 2023 offensive and its costly defense and loss of Avdiivka, Russian forces are not racing toward Kyiv, or even Kharkiv, Odesa or the natural boundary of the Dnipro River.

    Reuters Moscow Bureau reported that Russia spent months trying to open new negotiations with the United States in late 2023, but that, in January 2024, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan slammed that door shut with a flat refusal to negotiate over Ukraine.

    The only way to find out what Russia really wants, or what it will settle for, is to return to the negotiating table. All sides have demonized each other and staked out maximalist positions, but that is what nations at war do in order to justify the sacrifices they demand of their people and their rejection of diplomatic alternatives.

    Serious diplomatic negotiations are now essential to get down to the nitty-gritty of what it will take to bring peace to Ukraine. We are sure there are wiser heads within the U.S., French and other NATO governments who are saying this too, behind closed doors, and that may be precisely why Nuland is out and why Macron is talking so openly about where the current policy is heading. We fervently hope that is the case, and that Biden’s Plan B will lead back to the negotiating table, and then forward to peace in Ukraine.

    The post Are We Stumbling into World War III in Ukraine? first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Russia Deploys “Game Changer” Weapon against Ukraine

    WATCH Russia deploy ‘game changer’ weapon against Ukraine©  Telegram / mod_russia

    Russia’s Defense Ministry has released footage of an Su-34 bomber dropping FAB-500 glide munitions, which have been hailed as a game-changer in the Ukraine conflict for their destructive potential and deployment range of up to 80km.

    In a video that appears to be shot from a camera attached to the side of an aircraft, several bombs can be seen dropping and then deploying their wings shortly thereafter.

    The bombs are equipped with a unified planning and correction module (UMPC), which turns regular free-falling bombs into guided glide munitions. The high-explosive aerial FAB-500 bombs seen in the video each carry a 300-kilogram payload.

    The UMPC system has also been used on other older Soviet aerial gravity bombs such as the FAB-1500 – a 1.5-tonne weapon, nearly half of which consists of high explosives – to turn them into highly destructive and effective glide munitions.

    These modernized bombs have proven to be “dramatically” effective against Ukrainian forces, as noted by Western experts and media outlets such as the Washington Post and CNN, because Kiev’s troops cannot effectively defend against such munitions.

    With their ability to traverse long distances with accuracy, the UMPC-fitted bombs can be fired from Russian jets well outside the effective range of Kiev’s existing aerial defense systems, leaving Ukrainian forces unable to defend against them.

    Ukrainian commanders have also noted the “very high destructive power” of these munitions. Dmitry Lykhoviy, a Ukrainian military spokesman, told the Post that the Russian bombs are capable of completely demolishing houses and foundations that are used for defense fortifications.

    “These bombs completely destroy any position. All buildings and structures simply turn into a pit after the arrival of just one,” recalled one fighter of a Ukrainian assault brigade operating near the stronghold town of Avdeevka, which was captured by Russian forces last month.

    Russia has reportedly “significantly” increased the rate at which these  bombs have been used on Ukrainian positions, particularly around Avdeevka, leading to heavy casualties.

    According to the Russian Defense Ministry’s latest estimates, Ukraine’s losses of military personnel since the start of the conflict in 2022 have surpassed 444,000 people.

    The post Russia Deploys “Game Changer” Weapon against Ukraine first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • What Happens In LGBT Conversion Therapy In Russia


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Russia Strikes Apartment Buildings In Kryviy Rih, Kupyansk, Killing 3

    Andrija Mandic, the pro-Russian head of the New Serbian Democracy party, will continue to serve as the speaker of the Montenegrin parliament after surviving a no-confidence vote.

    In a secret ballot, 44 lawmakers voted for Mandic to remain at the helm of parliament, while 27 voted for his dismissal. There are 81 legislators in the Montenegrin parliament.

    Mandic’s dismissal was sought by the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS), which accused him of abusing the assembly for “party, nationalist, and anti-European interests.”

    DPS, the biggest opposition party, was outraged after Mandic received Milorad Dodik, the pro-Russian president of the Bosnian Serb entity on February 27.

    Dodik visited Montenegro immediately after meetings with the authoritarian presidents of Russia and Belarus, Vladimir Putin, and Alyaksandr Lukashenka. The visit triggered violent protests in Montenegro and Bosnia-Herzegovina, prompting the latter to send a note of protest to the Montenegrin authorities.

    The note highlighted that only the flag of the Bosnian Serb entity, Republika Srpska, was displayed behind Dodik at the press conference and not Bosnia’s. Dodik has called for the seccession of the Serb-dominated Republika Srpska from Bosnia. A quarter of Montenegro’s population is ethnic Serb.

    “Mandic is a representative of those who implement national-chauvinist politics, a promoter of Greater Serbian nationalism. For him, (Radovan) Karadzic and (Ratko) Mladic are his heroes,” DPS deputy Ivan Vukovic said in explaining the request for Mandic’s dismissal.

    Karadzic and Mladic are Bosnian Serbs who were convicted of war crimes, including genocide, during the Yugoslav wars.

    The DPS criticized Mandic for visiting the election headquarters of Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic’s party on the day of the parliamentary elections in Serbia. They also criticized him for placing a tricolor flag identical to the official national flag of Serbia in his cabinet. Montenegro declared its independence from Serbia in 2006.

    The DPS called Mandic a “weight on the neck” of European Montenegro and claimed that Western ambassadors bypass the Montenegrin parliament because of his leadership role.

    Mandic did not directly respond to the accusations and criticism, emphasizing instead that te public is primarily interested in the results delivered by the parliamentary majority.

    “In response to claims by political opponents that I am a hindrance to European integration, I defer to [EU Enlargement Commissioner] Oliver Varhelyi and others in Brussels with whom I have engaged. They appreciate the efforts of the parliament and me,” Mandic said.

    Mandic received support from his own party as well as members of the ruling coalition, which includes the Europe Now Movement (PES) led by Prime Minister Milojko Spajic, the Democrats led by Deputy Prime Minister Aleksa Becic, and the Socialist People’s Party.

    However, during the parliamentary session, no member of the Europe Now Movement voiced support for Mandic, despite not voting for his dismissal.

    Mandic was the leader of the former pro-Russian Democratic Front, which until 2020 was the main opposition to the DPS, which subsequently lost power.

    The program guidelines of the Democratic Front included the withdrawal of recognition of Kosovo’s independence, the lifting of sanctions against Russia introduced in 2014 after the annexation of Crimea, and the withdrawal of Montenegro from NATO.


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • U.S. To Send $300 Million In Military Aid To Ukraine, First New Package In Months

    Andrija Mandic, the pro-Russian head of the New Serbian Democracy party, will continue to serve as the speaker of the Montenegrin parliament after surviving a no-confidence vote.

    In a secret ballot, 44 lawmakers voted for Mandic to remain at the helm of parliament, while 27 voted for his dismissal. There are 81 legislators in the Montenegrin parliament.

    Mandic’s dismissal was sought by the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS), which accused him of abusing the assembly for “party, nationalist, and anti-European interests.”

    DPS, the biggest opposition party, was outraged after Mandic received Milorad Dodik, the pro-Russian president of the Bosnian Serb entity on February 27.

    Dodik visited Montenegro immediately after meetings with the authoritarian presidents of Russia and Belarus, Vladimir Putin, and Alyaksandr Lukashenka. The visit triggered violent protests in Montenegro and Bosnia-Herzegovina, prompting the latter to send a note of protest to the Montenegrin authorities.

    The note highlighted that only the flag of the Bosnian Serb entity, Republika Srpska, was displayed behind Dodik at the press conference and not Bosnia’s. Dodik has called for the seccession of the Serb-dominated Republika Srpska from Bosnia. A quarter of Montenegro’s population is ethnic Serb.

    “Mandic is a representative of those who implement national-chauvinist politics, a promoter of Greater Serbian nationalism. For him, (Radovan) Karadzic and (Ratko) Mladic are his heroes,” DPS deputy Ivan Vukovic said in explaining the request for Mandic’s dismissal.

    Karadzic and Mladic are Bosnian Serbs who were convicted of war crimes, including genocide, during the Yugoslav wars.

    The DPS criticized Mandic for visiting the election headquarters of Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic’s party on the day of the parliamentary elections in Serbia. They also criticized him for placing a tricolor flag identical to the official national flag of Serbia in his cabinet. Montenegro declared its independence from Serbia in 2006.

    The DPS called Mandic a “weight on the neck” of European Montenegro and claimed that Western ambassadors bypass the Montenegrin parliament because of his leadership role.

    Mandic did not directly respond to the accusations and criticism, emphasizing instead that te public is primarily interested in the results delivered by the parliamentary majority.

    “In response to claims by political opponents that I am a hindrance to European integration, I defer to [EU Enlargement Commissioner] Oliver Varhelyi and others in Brussels with whom I have engaged. They appreciate the efforts of the parliament and me,” Mandic said.

    Mandic received support from his own party as well as members of the ruling coalition, which includes the Europe Now Movement (PES) led by Prime Minister Milojko Spajic, the Democrats led by Deputy Prime Minister Aleksa Becic, and the Socialist People’s Party.

    However, during the parliamentary session, no member of the Europe Now Movement voiced support for Mandic, despite not voting for his dismissal.

    Mandic was the leader of the former pro-Russian Democratic Front, which until 2020 was the main opposition to the DPS, which subsequently lost power.

    The program guidelines of the Democratic Front included the withdrawal of recognition of Kosovo’s independence, the lifting of sanctions against Russia introduced in 2014 after the annexation of Crimea, and the withdrawal of Montenegro from NATO.


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Romanian President Says He Will Run For NATO’s Top Job

    Andrija Mandic, the pro-Russian head of the New Serbian Democracy party, will continue to serve as the speaker of the Montenegrin parliament after surviving a no-confidence vote.

    In a secret ballot, 44 lawmakers voted for Mandic to remain at the helm of parliament, while 27 voted for his dismissal. There are 81 legislators in the Montenegrin parliament.

    Mandic’s dismissal was sought by the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS), which accused him of abusing the assembly for “party, nationalist, and anti-European interests.”

    DPS, the biggest opposition party, was outraged after Mandic received Milorad Dodik, the pro-Russian president of the Bosnian Serb entity on February 27.

    Dodik visited Montenegro immediately after meetings with the authoritarian presidents of Russia and Belarus, Vladimir Putin, and Alyaksandr Lukashenka. The visit triggered violent protests in Montenegro and Bosnia-Herzegovina, prompting the latter to send a note of protest to the Montenegrin authorities.

    The note highlighted that only the flag of the Bosnian Serb entity, Republika Srpska, was displayed behind Dodik at the press conference and not Bosnia’s. Dodik has called for the seccession of the Serb-dominated Republika Srpska from Bosnia. A quarter of Montenegro’s population is ethnic Serb.

    “Mandic is a representative of those who implement national-chauvinist politics, a promoter of Greater Serbian nationalism. For him, (Radovan) Karadzic and (Ratko) Mladic are his heroes,” DPS deputy Ivan Vukovic said in explaining the request for Mandic’s dismissal.

    Karadzic and Mladic are Bosnian Serbs who were convicted of war crimes, including genocide, during the Yugoslav wars.

    The DPS criticized Mandic for visiting the election headquarters of Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic’s party on the day of the parliamentary elections in Serbia. They also criticized him for placing a tricolor flag identical to the official national flag of Serbia in his cabinet. Montenegro declared its independence from Serbia in 2006.

    The DPS called Mandic a “weight on the neck” of European Montenegro and claimed that Western ambassadors bypass the Montenegrin parliament because of his leadership role.

    Mandic did not directly respond to the accusations and criticism, emphasizing instead that te public is primarily interested in the results delivered by the parliamentary majority.

    “In response to claims by political opponents that I am a hindrance to European integration, I defer to [EU Enlargement Commissioner] Oliver Varhelyi and others in Brussels with whom I have engaged. They appreciate the efforts of the parliament and me,” Mandic said.

    Mandic received support from his own party as well as members of the ruling coalition, which includes the Europe Now Movement (PES) led by Prime Minister Milojko Spajic, the Democrats led by Deputy Prime Minister Aleksa Becic, and the Socialist People’s Party.

    However, during the parliamentary session, no member of the Europe Now Movement voiced support for Mandic, despite not voting for his dismissal.

    Mandic was the leader of the former pro-Russian Democratic Front, which until 2020 was the main opposition to the DPS, which subsequently lost power.

    The program guidelines of the Democratic Front included the withdrawal of recognition of Kosovo’s independence, the lifting of sanctions against Russia introduced in 2014 after the annexation of Crimea, and the withdrawal of Montenegro from NATO.


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • What Happens In LGBT Conversion Therapy In Russia


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Know Your Enemy: Why the Right Loves Foreign Dictators

    Matt and Sam talk to Jacob Heilbrunn about his new book, America Last: The Right’s Century-Long Romance with Foreign Dictators.

    This post was originally published on Dissent MagazineDissent Magazine.

  • Borrell Urges EU To Beef Up Defense Industry For Potential Threats, Keep Aiding Ukraine

    Ukraine and its regional allies on March 10 assailed reported comments by Pope Francis in which the pontiff suggested opening negotiations with Moscow and used the term “white flag,” while the Vatican later appeared to back off some of the remarks, saying Francis was not speaking about “capitulation.”

    Francis was quoted on March 9 in a partially released interview suggesting Ukraine, facing possible defeat, should have the “courage” to sit down with Russia for peace negotiations, saying there is no shame in waving the “white flag.”

    Live Briefing: Russia’s Invasion Of Ukraine

    RFE/RL’s Live Briefing gives you all of the latest developments on Russia’s full-scale invasion, Kyiv’s counteroffensive, Western military aid, global reaction, and the plight of civilians. For all of RFE/RL’s coverage of the war in Ukraine, click here.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy hit out in a Telegram post and in his nightly video address, saying — without mentioning the pope — that “the church should be among the people. And not 2,500 kilometers away, somewhere, to mediate virtually between someone who wants to live and someone who wants to destroy you.”

    Earlier, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba reacted more directly on social media, saying, “When it comes to the ‘white flag,’ we know this Vatican strategy from the first half of the 20th century.”

    Many historians have been critical of the Vatican during World War II, saying Pope Pius XII remained silent as the Holocaust raged. The Vatican has long argued that, at the time, it couldn’t verify diplomatic reports of Nazi atrocities and therefore could not denounce them.

    Kuleba, in his social media post, wrote: “I urge the avoidance of repeating the mistakes of the past and to support Ukraine and its people in their just struggle for their lives.

    “The strongest is the one who, in the battle between good and evil, stands on the side of good rather than attempting to put them on the same footing and call it ‘negotiations,’” Kuleba said.

    “Our flag is a yellow-and-blue one. This is the flag by which we live, die, and prevail. We shall never raise any other flags,” added Kuleba, who also thanked Francis for his “constant prayers for peace” and said he hoped the pontiff will visit Ukraine, home of some 1 million Catholics.

    Zelenskiy has remained firm in not speaking directly to Russia unless terms of his “peace formula” are reached.

    Ukraine’s terms call for the withdrawal of all Russian troops from Ukraine, restoring the country’s 1991 post-Soviet borders, and holding Russia accountable for its actions. The Kremlin has rejected such conditions.

    Following criticism of the pope’s reported comments, the head of the Vatican press service, Matteo Bruni, explained that with his words regarding Ukraine, Francis intended to “call for a cease-fire and restore the courage of negotiations,” but did not mean capitulation.

    “The pope uses the image of the white flag proposed by the interviewer to imply an end to hostilities, a truce that is achieved through the courage to begin negotiations,” Bruni said.

    “Elsewhere in the interview…referring to any situation of war, the pope clearly stated: ‘Negotiations are never capitulations,’” Bruni added.

    The head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, Major Archbishop Svyatoslav Shevchuk, said Ukraine was “wounded but unconquered.”

    “Believe me, no one would think of giving up. Even where hostilities are taking place today; listen to our people in Kherson, Zaporizhzhya, Odesa, Kharkiv, Sumy! Because we know that if Ukraine, God forbid, was at least partially conquered, the line of death would spread,” Shevchuk said at St. George’s Church in New York.

    Andriy Yurash, Ukraine’s ambassador to the Vatican, told RAI News that “you don’t negotiate with terrorists, with those who are recognized as criminals,” referring to the Russian leadership and President Vladimir Putin. “No one tried to put Hitler at ease.”

    Ukraine’s regional allies also expressed anger about the pope’s remarks.

    “How about, for balance, encouraging Putin to have the courage to withdraw his army from Ukraine? Peace would immediately ensue without the need for negotiations,” Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski wrote on social media.

    Lithuanian President Edgars Rinkevichs wrote on social media: “My Sunday morning conclusion: You can’t capitulate to evil, you have to fight it and defeat it, so that evil raises the white flag and surrenders.”

    Alexandra Valkenburg, ambassador and head of the EU Delegation to the Holy See, wrote “Russia…can end this war immediately by respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. EU supports Ukraine and its peace plan.”

    With reporting by RFE/RL’s Ukrainian Service


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Imprisoned Kara-Murza Says Putin’s Rule Based ‘Exclusively On Fear And Apathy’

    Ukraine and its regional allies on March 10 assailed reported comments by Pope Francis in which the pontiff suggested opening negotiations with Moscow and used the term “white flag,” while the Vatican later appeared to back off some of the remarks, saying Francis was not speaking about “capitulation.”

    Francis was quoted on March 9 in a partially released interview suggesting Ukraine, facing possible defeat, should have the “courage” to sit down with Russia for peace negotiations, saying there is no shame in waving the “white flag.”

    Live Briefing: Russia’s Invasion Of Ukraine

    RFE/RL’s Live Briefing gives you all of the latest developments on Russia’s full-scale invasion, Kyiv’s counteroffensive, Western military aid, global reaction, and the plight of civilians. For all of RFE/RL’s coverage of the war in Ukraine, click here.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy hit out in a Telegram post and in his nightly video address, saying — without mentioning the pope — that “the church should be among the people. And not 2,500 kilometers away, somewhere, to mediate virtually between someone who wants to live and someone who wants to destroy you.”

    Earlier, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba reacted more directly on social media, saying, “When it comes to the ‘white flag,’ we know this Vatican strategy from the first half of the 20th century.”

    Many historians have been critical of the Vatican during World War II, saying Pope Pius XII remained silent as the Holocaust raged. The Vatican has long argued that, at the time, it couldn’t verify diplomatic reports of Nazi atrocities and therefore could not denounce them.

    Kuleba, in his social media post, wrote: “I urge the avoidance of repeating the mistakes of the past and to support Ukraine and its people in their just struggle for their lives.

    “The strongest is the one who, in the battle between good and evil, stands on the side of good rather than attempting to put them on the same footing and call it ‘negotiations,’” Kuleba said.

    “Our flag is a yellow-and-blue one. This is the flag by which we live, die, and prevail. We shall never raise any other flags,” added Kuleba, who also thanked Francis for his “constant prayers for peace” and said he hoped the pontiff will visit Ukraine, home of some 1 million Catholics.

    Zelenskiy has remained firm in not speaking directly to Russia unless terms of his “peace formula” are reached.

    Ukraine’s terms call for the withdrawal of all Russian troops from Ukraine, restoring the country’s 1991 post-Soviet borders, and holding Russia accountable for its actions. The Kremlin has rejected such conditions.

    Following criticism of the pope’s reported comments, the head of the Vatican press service, Matteo Bruni, explained that with his words regarding Ukraine, Francis intended to “call for a cease-fire and restore the courage of negotiations,” but did not mean capitulation.

    “The pope uses the image of the white flag proposed by the interviewer to imply an end to hostilities, a truce that is achieved through the courage to begin negotiations,” Bruni said.

    “Elsewhere in the interview…referring to any situation of war, the pope clearly stated: ‘Negotiations are never capitulations,’” Bruni added.

    The head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, Major Archbishop Svyatoslav Shevchuk, said Ukraine was “wounded but unconquered.”

    “Believe me, no one would think of giving up. Even where hostilities are taking place today; listen to our people in Kherson, Zaporizhzhya, Odesa, Kharkiv, Sumy! Because we know that if Ukraine, God forbid, was at least partially conquered, the line of death would spread,” Shevchuk said at St. George’s Church in New York.

    Andriy Yurash, Ukraine’s ambassador to the Vatican, told RAI News that “you don’t negotiate with terrorists, with those who are recognized as criminals,” referring to the Russian leadership and President Vladimir Putin. “No one tried to put Hitler at ease.”

    Ukraine’s regional allies also expressed anger about the pope’s remarks.

    “How about, for balance, encouraging Putin to have the courage to withdraw his army from Ukraine? Peace would immediately ensue without the need for negotiations,” Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski wrote on social media.

    Lithuanian President Edgars Rinkevichs wrote on social media: “My Sunday morning conclusion: You can’t capitulate to evil, you have to fight it and defeat it, so that evil raises the white flag and surrenders.”

    Alexandra Valkenburg, ambassador and head of the EU Delegation to the Holy See, wrote “Russia…can end this war immediately by respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. EU supports Ukraine and its peace plan.”

    With reporting by RFE/RL’s Ukrainian Service


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Russian Conviction Of Former Mediazona Publisher Verzilov Canceled

    Ukraine and its regional allies on March 10 assailed reported comments by Pope Francis in which the pontiff suggested opening negotiations with Moscow and used the term “white flag,” while the Vatican later appeared to back off some of the remarks, saying Francis was not speaking about “capitulation.”

    Francis was quoted on March 9 in a partially released interview suggesting Ukraine, facing possible defeat, should have the “courage” to sit down with Russia for peace negotiations, saying there is no shame in waving the “white flag.”

    Live Briefing: Russia’s Invasion Of Ukraine

    RFE/RL’s Live Briefing gives you all of the latest developments on Russia’s full-scale invasion, Kyiv’s counteroffensive, Western military aid, global reaction, and the plight of civilians. For all of RFE/RL’s coverage of the war in Ukraine, click here.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy hit out in a Telegram post and in his nightly video address, saying — without mentioning the pope — that “the church should be among the people. And not 2,500 kilometers away, somewhere, to mediate virtually between someone who wants to live and someone who wants to destroy you.”

    Earlier, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba reacted more directly on social media, saying, “When it comes to the ‘white flag,’ we know this Vatican strategy from the first half of the 20th century.”

    Many historians have been critical of the Vatican during World War II, saying Pope Pius XII remained silent as the Holocaust raged. The Vatican has long argued that, at the time, it couldn’t verify diplomatic reports of Nazi atrocities and therefore could not denounce them.

    Kuleba, in his social media post, wrote: “I urge the avoidance of repeating the mistakes of the past and to support Ukraine and its people in their just struggle for their lives.

    “The strongest is the one who, in the battle between good and evil, stands on the side of good rather than attempting to put them on the same footing and call it ‘negotiations,’” Kuleba said.

    “Our flag is a yellow-and-blue one. This is the flag by which we live, die, and prevail. We shall never raise any other flags,” added Kuleba, who also thanked Francis for his “constant prayers for peace” and said he hoped the pontiff will visit Ukraine, home of some 1 million Catholics.

    Zelenskiy has remained firm in not speaking directly to Russia unless terms of his “peace formula” are reached.

    Ukraine’s terms call for the withdrawal of all Russian troops from Ukraine, restoring the country’s 1991 post-Soviet borders, and holding Russia accountable for its actions. The Kremlin has rejected such conditions.

    Following criticism of the pope’s reported comments, the head of the Vatican press service, Matteo Bruni, explained that with his words regarding Ukraine, Francis intended to “call for a cease-fire and restore the courage of negotiations,” but did not mean capitulation.

    “The pope uses the image of the white flag proposed by the interviewer to imply an end to hostilities, a truce that is achieved through the courage to begin negotiations,” Bruni said.

    “Elsewhere in the interview…referring to any situation of war, the pope clearly stated: ‘Negotiations are never capitulations,’” Bruni added.

    The head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, Major Archbishop Svyatoslav Shevchuk, said Ukraine was “wounded but unconquered.”

    “Believe me, no one would think of giving up. Even where hostilities are taking place today; listen to our people in Kherson, Zaporizhzhya, Odesa, Kharkiv, Sumy! Because we know that if Ukraine, God forbid, was at least partially conquered, the line of death would spread,” Shevchuk said at St. George’s Church in New York.

    Andriy Yurash, Ukraine’s ambassador to the Vatican, told RAI News that “you don’t negotiate with terrorists, with those who are recognized as criminals,” referring to the Russian leadership and President Vladimir Putin. “No one tried to put Hitler at ease.”

    Ukraine’s regional allies also expressed anger about the pope’s remarks.

    “How about, for balance, encouraging Putin to have the courage to withdraw his army from Ukraine? Peace would immediately ensue without the need for negotiations,” Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski wrote on social media.

    Lithuanian President Edgars Rinkevichs wrote on social media: “My Sunday morning conclusion: You can’t capitulate to evil, you have to fight it and defeat it, so that evil raises the white flag and surrenders.”

    Alexandra Valkenburg, ambassador and head of the EU Delegation to the Holy See, wrote “Russia…can end this war immediately by respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. EU supports Ukraine and its peace plan.”

    With reporting by RFE/RL’s Ukrainian Service


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Hungary’s Orban Says Trump’s Plan To End Ukraine War Is To Cut Funding

    Ukraine and its regional allies on March 10 assailed reported comments by Pope Francis in which the pontiff suggested opening negotiations with Moscow and used the term “white flag,” while the Vatican later appeared to back off some of the remarks, saying Francis was not speaking about “capitulation.”

    Francis was quoted on March 9 in a partially released interview suggesting Ukraine, facing possible defeat, should have the “courage” to sit down with Russia for peace negotiations, saying there is no shame in waving the “white flag.”

    Live Briefing: Russia’s Invasion Of Ukraine

    RFE/RL’s Live Briefing gives you all of the latest developments on Russia’s full-scale invasion, Kyiv’s counteroffensive, Western military aid, global reaction, and the plight of civilians. For all of RFE/RL’s coverage of the war in Ukraine, click here.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy hit out in a Telegram post and in his nightly video address, saying — without mentioning the pope — that “the church should be among the people. And not 2,500 kilometers away, somewhere, to mediate virtually between someone who wants to live and someone who wants to destroy you.”

    Earlier, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba reacted more directly on social media, saying, “When it comes to the ‘white flag,’ we know this Vatican strategy from the first half of the 20th century.”

    Many historians have been critical of the Vatican during World War II, saying Pope Pius XII remained silent as the Holocaust raged. The Vatican has long argued that, at the time, it couldn’t verify diplomatic reports of Nazi atrocities and therefore could not denounce them.

    Kuleba, in his social media post, wrote: “I urge the avoidance of repeating the mistakes of the past and to support Ukraine and its people in their just struggle for their lives.

    “The strongest is the one who, in the battle between good and evil, stands on the side of good rather than attempting to put them on the same footing and call it ‘negotiations,’” Kuleba said.

    “Our flag is a yellow-and-blue one. This is the flag by which we live, die, and prevail. We shall never raise any other flags,” added Kuleba, who also thanked Francis for his “constant prayers for peace” and said he hoped the pontiff will visit Ukraine, home of some 1 million Catholics.

    Zelenskiy has remained firm in not speaking directly to Russia unless terms of his “peace formula” are reached.

    Ukraine’s terms call for the withdrawal of all Russian troops from Ukraine, restoring the country’s 1991 post-Soviet borders, and holding Russia accountable for its actions. The Kremlin has rejected such conditions.

    Following criticism of the pope’s reported comments, the head of the Vatican press service, Matteo Bruni, explained that with his words regarding Ukraine, Francis intended to “call for a cease-fire and restore the courage of negotiations,” but did not mean capitulation.

    “The pope uses the image of the white flag proposed by the interviewer to imply an end to hostilities, a truce that is achieved through the courage to begin negotiations,” Bruni said.

    “Elsewhere in the interview…referring to any situation of war, the pope clearly stated: ‘Negotiations are never capitulations,’” Bruni added.

    The head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, Major Archbishop Svyatoslav Shevchuk, said Ukraine was “wounded but unconquered.”

    “Believe me, no one would think of giving up. Even where hostilities are taking place today; listen to our people in Kherson, Zaporizhzhya, Odesa, Kharkiv, Sumy! Because we know that if Ukraine, God forbid, was at least partially conquered, the line of death would spread,” Shevchuk said at St. George’s Church in New York.

    Andriy Yurash, Ukraine’s ambassador to the Vatican, told RAI News that “you don’t negotiate with terrorists, with those who are recognized as criminals,” referring to the Russian leadership and President Vladimir Putin. “No one tried to put Hitler at ease.”

    Ukraine’s regional allies also expressed anger about the pope’s remarks.

    “How about, for balance, encouraging Putin to have the courage to withdraw his army from Ukraine? Peace would immediately ensue without the need for negotiations,” Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski wrote on social media.

    Lithuanian President Edgars Rinkevichs wrote on social media: “My Sunday morning conclusion: You can’t capitulate to evil, you have to fight it and defeat it, so that evil raises the white flag and surrenders.”

    Alexandra Valkenburg, ambassador and head of the EU Delegation to the Holy See, wrote “Russia…can end this war immediately by respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. EU supports Ukraine and its peace plan.”

    With reporting by RFE/RL’s Ukrainian Service


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Watching the Neighbours

    With political tension rising around the world, airborne special mission aircraft have arguably never been more important. Asia-Pacific states facing Chinese pressure on their South China Sea interests are continuing to enhance their air capabilities. This includes the acquisition of special mission aircraft whose various roles include airborne early warning and control (AEW&C), intelligence, surveillance […]

    The post Watching the Neighbours appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • St. Petersburg Resident Sent To Pretrial Detention For Writing ‘Putin Killed Navalny’

    The Iranian government “bears responsibility” for the physical violence that led to the death of Mahsa Amini, the 22-year-old Iranian-Kurdish woman who died in police custody in 2022, and for the brutal crackdown on largely peaceful street protests that followed, a report by a United Nations fact-finding mission says.

    The report, issued on March 8 by the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran, said the mission “has established the existence of evidence of trauma to Ms. Amini’s body, inflicted while in the custody of the morality police.”

    It said the mission found the “physical violence in custody led to Ms. Amini’s unlawful death…. On that basis, the state bears responsibility for her unlawful death.”

    Amini was arrested in Tehran on September 13, 2022, while visiting the Iranian capital with her family. She was detained by Iran’s so-called “morality police” for allegedly improperly wearing her hijab, or hair-covering head scarf. Within hours of her detention, she was hospitalized in a coma and died on September 16.

    Her family has denied that Amini suffered from a preexisting health condition that may have contributed to her death, as claimed by the Iranian authorities, and her father has cited eyewitnesses as saying she was beaten while en route to a detention facility.

    The fact-finding report said the action “emphasizes the arbitrary character of Ms. Amini’s arrest and detention, which were based on laws and policies governing the mandatory hijab, which fundamentally discriminate against women and girls and are not permissible under international human rights law.”

    “Those laws and policies violate the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of religion or belief, and the autonomy of women and girls. Ms. Amini’s arrest and detention, preceding her death in custody, constituted a violation of her right to liberty of person,” it said.

    The New York-based Center for Human Rights in Iran hailed the findings and said they represented clear signs of “crimes against humanity.”

    “The Islamic republic’s violent repression of peaceful dissent and severe discrimination against women and girls in Iran has been confirmed as constituting nothing short of crimes against humanity,” said Hadi Ghaemi, executive director of the center.

    “The government’s brutal crackdown on the Women, Life, Freedom protests has seen a litany of atrocities that include extrajudicial killings, torture, and rape. These violations disproportionately affect the most vulnerable in society, women, children, and minority groups,” he added.

    The report also said the Iranian government failed to “comply with its duty” to investigate the woman’s death promptly.

    “Most notably, judicial harassment and intimidation were aimed at her family in order to silence them and preempt them from seeking legal redress. Some family members faced arbitrary arrest, while the family’s lawyer, Saleh Nikbaht, and three journalists, Niloofar Hamedi, Elahe Mohammadi, and Nazila Maroufian, who reported on Ms. Amini’s death were arrested, prosecuted, and sentenced to imprisonment,” it added.

    Amini’s death sparked mass protests, beginning in her home town of Saghez, then spreading around the country, and ultimately posed one of the biggest threats to Iran’s clerical establishment since the foundation of the Islamic republic in 1979. At least 500 people were reported killed in the government’s crackdown on demonstrators.

    The UN report said “violations and crimes” under international law committed in the context of the Women, Life, Freedom protests include “extrajudicial and unlawful killings and murder, unnecessary and disproportionate use of force, arbitrary deprivation of liberty, torture, rape, enforced disappearances, and gender persecution.

    “The violent repression of peaceful protests and pervasive institutional discrimination against women and girls has led to serious human rights violations by the government of Iran, many amounting to crimes against humanity,” the report said.

    The UN mission acknowledged that some state security forces were killed and injured during the demonstrations, but said it found that the majority of protests were peaceful.

    The mission stems from the UN Human Rights Council’s mandate to the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran on November 24, 2022, to investigate alleged human rights violations in Iran related to the protests that followed Amini’s death.


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Pope Francis: Ukraine Should Have The Courage Of The ‘White Flag,’ Negotiate End Of War With Russia

    The Iranian government “bears responsibility” for the physical violence that led to the death of Mahsa Amini, the 22-year-old Iranian-Kurdish woman who died in police custody in 2022, and for the brutal crackdown on largely peaceful street protests that followed, a report by a United Nations fact-finding mission says.

    The report, issued on March 8 by the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran, said the mission “has established the existence of evidence of trauma to Ms. Amini’s body, inflicted while in the custody of the morality police.”

    It said the mission found the “physical violence in custody led to Ms. Amini’s unlawful death…. On that basis, the state bears responsibility for her unlawful death.”

    Amini was arrested in Tehran on September 13, 2022, while visiting the Iranian capital with her family. She was detained by Iran’s so-called “morality police” for allegedly improperly wearing her hijab, or hair-covering head scarf. Within hours of her detention, she was hospitalized in a coma and died on September 16.

    Her family has denied that Amini suffered from a preexisting health condition that may have contributed to her death, as claimed by the Iranian authorities, and her father has cited eyewitnesses as saying she was beaten while en route to a detention facility.

    The fact-finding report said the action “emphasizes the arbitrary character of Ms. Amini’s arrest and detention, which were based on laws and policies governing the mandatory hijab, which fundamentally discriminate against women and girls and are not permissible under international human rights law.”

    “Those laws and policies violate the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of religion or belief, and the autonomy of women and girls. Ms. Amini’s arrest and detention, preceding her death in custody, constituted a violation of her right to liberty of person,” it said.

    The New York-based Center for Human Rights in Iran hailed the findings and said they represented clear signs of “crimes against humanity.”

    “The Islamic republic’s violent repression of peaceful dissent and severe discrimination against women and girls in Iran has been confirmed as constituting nothing short of crimes against humanity,” said Hadi Ghaemi, executive director of the center.

    “The government’s brutal crackdown on the Women, Life, Freedom protests has seen a litany of atrocities that include extrajudicial killings, torture, and rape. These violations disproportionately affect the most vulnerable in society, women, children, and minority groups,” he added.

    The report also said the Iranian government failed to “comply with its duty” to investigate the woman’s death promptly.

    “Most notably, judicial harassment and intimidation were aimed at her family in order to silence them and preempt them from seeking legal redress. Some family members faced arbitrary arrest, while the family’s lawyer, Saleh Nikbaht, and three journalists, Niloofar Hamedi, Elahe Mohammadi, and Nazila Maroufian, who reported on Ms. Amini’s death were arrested, prosecuted, and sentenced to imprisonment,” it added.

    Amini’s death sparked mass protests, beginning in her home town of Saghez, then spreading around the country, and ultimately posed one of the biggest threats to Iran’s clerical establishment since the foundation of the Islamic republic in 1979. At least 500 people were reported killed in the government’s crackdown on demonstrators.

    The UN report said “violations and crimes” under international law committed in the context of the Women, Life, Freedom protests include “extrajudicial and unlawful killings and murder, unnecessary and disproportionate use of force, arbitrary deprivation of liberty, torture, rape, enforced disappearances, and gender persecution.

    “The violent repression of peaceful protests and pervasive institutional discrimination against women and girls has led to serious human rights violations by the government of Iran, many amounting to crimes against humanity,” the report said.

    The UN mission acknowledged that some state security forces were killed and injured during the demonstrations, but said it found that the majority of protests were peaceful.

    The mission stems from the UN Human Rights Council’s mandate to the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran on November 24, 2022, to investigate alleged human rights violations in Iran related to the protests that followed Amini’s death.


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Putin’s Russia: A Country at War with Itself


    This content originally appeared on VICE News and was authored by VICE News.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Russian Military Says Dozens Of Ukrainian Drones Launched Over Russian Territory

    The Iranian government “bears responsibility” for the physical violence that led to the death of Mahsa Amini, the 22-year-old Iranian-Kurdish woman who died in police custody in 2022, and for the brutal crackdown on largely peaceful street protests that followed, a report by a United Nations fact-finding mission says.

    The report, issued on March 8 by the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran, said the mission “has established the existence of evidence of trauma to Ms. Amini’s body, inflicted while in the custody of the morality police.”

    It said the mission found the “physical violence in custody led to Ms. Amini’s unlawful death…. On that basis, the state bears responsibility for her unlawful death.”

    Amini was arrested in Tehran on September 13, 2022, while visiting the Iranian capital with her family. She was detained by Iran’s so-called “morality police” for allegedly improperly wearing her hijab, or hair-covering head scarf. Within hours of her detention, she was hospitalized in a coma and died on September 16.

    Her family has denied that Amini suffered from a preexisting health condition that may have contributed to her death, as claimed by the Iranian authorities, and her father has cited eyewitnesses as saying she was beaten while en route to a detention facility.

    The fact-finding report said the action “emphasizes the arbitrary character of Ms. Amini’s arrest and detention, which were based on laws and policies governing the mandatory hijab, which fundamentally discriminate against women and girls and are not permissible under international human rights law.”

    “Those laws and policies violate the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of religion or belief, and the autonomy of women and girls. Ms. Amini’s arrest and detention, preceding her death in custody, constituted a violation of her right to liberty of person,” it said.

    The New York-based Center for Human Rights in Iran hailed the findings and said they represented clear signs of “crimes against humanity.”

    “The Islamic republic’s violent repression of peaceful dissent and severe discrimination against women and girls in Iran has been confirmed as constituting nothing short of crimes against humanity,” said Hadi Ghaemi, executive director of the center.

    “The government’s brutal crackdown on the Women, Life, Freedom protests has seen a litany of atrocities that include extrajudicial killings, torture, and rape. These violations disproportionately affect the most vulnerable in society, women, children, and minority groups,” he added.

    The report also said the Iranian government failed to “comply with its duty” to investigate the woman’s death promptly.

    “Most notably, judicial harassment and intimidation were aimed at her family in order to silence them and preempt them from seeking legal redress. Some family members faced arbitrary arrest, while the family’s lawyer, Saleh Nikbaht, and three journalists, Niloofar Hamedi, Elahe Mohammadi, and Nazila Maroufian, who reported on Ms. Amini’s death were arrested, prosecuted, and sentenced to imprisonment,” it added.

    Amini’s death sparked mass protests, beginning in her home town of Saghez, then spreading around the country, and ultimately posed one of the biggest threats to Iran’s clerical establishment since the foundation of the Islamic republic in 1979. At least 500 people were reported killed in the government’s crackdown on demonstrators.

    The UN report said “violations and crimes” under international law committed in the context of the Women, Life, Freedom protests include “extrajudicial and unlawful killings and murder, unnecessary and disproportionate use of force, arbitrary deprivation of liberty, torture, rape, enforced disappearances, and gender persecution.

    “The violent repression of peaceful protests and pervasive institutional discrimination against women and girls has led to serious human rights violations by the government of Iran, many amounting to crimes against humanity,” the report said.

    The UN mission acknowledged that some state security forces were killed and injured during the demonstrations, but said it found that the majority of protests were peaceful.

    The mission stems from the UN Human Rights Council’s mandate to the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran on November 24, 2022, to investigate alleged human rights violations in Iran related to the protests that followed Amini’s death.


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • U.S. Issues Sanctions On Russian, Central African Republic Entities Over Wagner Ties

    The Iranian government “bears responsibility” for the physical violence that led to the death of Mahsa Amini, the 22-year-old Iranian-Kurdish woman who died in police custody in 2022, and for the brutal crackdown on largely peaceful street protests that followed, a report by a United Nations fact-finding mission says.

    The report, issued on March 8 by the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran, said the mission “has established the existence of evidence of trauma to Ms. Amini’s body, inflicted while in the custody of the morality police.”

    It said the mission found the “physical violence in custody led to Ms. Amini’s unlawful death…. On that basis, the state bears responsibility for her unlawful death.”

    Amini was arrested in Tehran on September 13, 2022, while visiting the Iranian capital with her family. She was detained by Iran’s so-called “morality police” for allegedly improperly wearing her hijab, or hair-covering head scarf. Within hours of her detention, she was hospitalized in a coma and died on September 16.

    Her family has denied that Amini suffered from a preexisting health condition that may have contributed to her death, as claimed by the Iranian authorities, and her father has cited eyewitnesses as saying she was beaten while en route to a detention facility.

    The fact-finding report said the action “emphasizes the arbitrary character of Ms. Amini’s arrest and detention, which were based on laws and policies governing the mandatory hijab, which fundamentally discriminate against women and girls and are not permissible under international human rights law.”

    “Those laws and policies violate the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of religion or belief, and the autonomy of women and girls. Ms. Amini’s arrest and detention, preceding her death in custody, constituted a violation of her right to liberty of person,” it said.

    The New York-based Center for Human Rights in Iran hailed the findings and said they represented clear signs of “crimes against humanity.”

    “The Islamic republic’s violent repression of peaceful dissent and severe discrimination against women and girls in Iran has been confirmed as constituting nothing short of crimes against humanity,” said Hadi Ghaemi, executive director of the center.

    “The government’s brutal crackdown on the Women, Life, Freedom protests has seen a litany of atrocities that include extrajudicial killings, torture, and rape. These violations disproportionately affect the most vulnerable in society, women, children, and minority groups,” he added.

    The report also said the Iranian government failed to “comply with its duty” to investigate the woman’s death promptly.

    “Most notably, judicial harassment and intimidation were aimed at her family in order to silence them and preempt them from seeking legal redress. Some family members faced arbitrary arrest, while the family’s lawyer, Saleh Nikbaht, and three journalists, Niloofar Hamedi, Elahe Mohammadi, and Nazila Maroufian, who reported on Ms. Amini’s death were arrested, prosecuted, and sentenced to imprisonment,” it added.

    Amini’s death sparked mass protests, beginning in her home town of Saghez, then spreading around the country, and ultimately posed one of the biggest threats to Iran’s clerical establishment since the foundation of the Islamic republic in 1979. At least 500 people were reported killed in the government’s crackdown on demonstrators.

    The UN report said “violations and crimes” under international law committed in the context of the Women, Life, Freedom protests include “extrajudicial and unlawful killings and murder, unnecessary and disproportionate use of force, arbitrary deprivation of liberty, torture, rape, enforced disappearances, and gender persecution.

    “The violent repression of peaceful protests and pervasive institutional discrimination against women and girls has led to serious human rights violations by the government of Iran, many amounting to crimes against humanity,” the report said.

    The UN mission acknowledged that some state security forces were killed and injured during the demonstrations, but said it found that the majority of protests were peaceful.

    The mission stems from the UN Human Rights Council’s mandate to the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran on November 24, 2022, to investigate alleged human rights violations in Iran related to the protests that followed Amini’s death.


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Is the War in Ukraine over?

    Military strategists, foreign policy experts, and Russian dissidents have analyzed the Russian invasion of Ukraine for Western audiences. How accurate are pundits who always introduce a slight slant to please a specific audience? Read between the lines, choose the best fit and two years of Putin’s “special military operation” looks like this…to me.

    Initially, Russia sought to extend its borders to the Dnipro River, a natural dividing line, that would have incorporated Kyiv, Kharkiv, and possibly Odessa into the motherland.

    The initial thrust brought a caravan of Russian tanks to the gates of Kyiv. Special forces entered Kyiv and Kharkiv to ascertain defensive strengths and civilian and military resistance to invasion. Moscow learned that the urban street-to-street fighting would be merciless. Unlike Mariupol, which is a heavily industrialized city with some Russian cultural artifacts, Kyiv and Kharkiv are associated with Russia’s cultural heritage and historical founding. Capturing the cities, as seen later from the fighting in Mariupol, would destroy the cities and inflict excessive casualties on both sides. Administrating the area would be difficult. The predicted number of casualties did not warrant the onslaught. Putin and his general staff took a step back and developed an alternative strategy — surround both cities, move in slowly, infiltrate, and hope that a starving and isolated population would eventually capitulate. Out in the open and facing deadly attacks, Russian soldiers died and began to surrender. Extending Russia to the Dnipro was not viable. The Russian forces retreated.

    Technically, the Russians did not retreat; they realized an offensive was futile and stopped it at an incipient stage. Their forces vacated and moved to a strategic position — behind the lines of the Donbas battles and close to Russian territory. With the new strategy came a new goal — liberating the entire Donbas region, uniting southeastern Ukraine from Crimea to Zaporhizhia, and incorporating the Azov Sea coast from Rostov to Crimea. Most of those objectives had been accomplished before Ukraine started a counteroffensive that regained Kherson and halted the Russian advance in the south.

    The Russian military built a defensive perimeter that allowed recapture of limited territory, stalled the Ukraine counteroffensive, caused heavy casualties to the Ukrainian military, and decisively injured the morale of Ukraine soldiers and civilian population.

    Forming a defensive line requires more cooperation from military units than does starting an offensive. A stalled offense in one area may not affect an offensive in another area. Any weakness in the defenses affects the total defense. Prigozhin’s mercenary army’s offensive move and intent to occupy ground with troops rather than with mines endangered the defense line. Gen. Valery Gerasimov, Chief of the General Staff, acted decisively and removed the mercenary army from the battlefront.

    With Ukraine weakened by its failed offense, Russia seized the offensive and made minor gains in the Donbass. Ukraine withdrew its forces from Avdivka and the Kremlin claimed control of the city. Its Defense Ministry said, “Capturing Avdivka would push the front line of the war farther from Donetsk city, making it more difficult for Ukraine to stage attempts to reclaim the regional capital.”

    Summarizing the two years after Russian forces invaded Ukraine and we have:

    (1)    Russia has almost accomplished the objectives of its secondary strategy.

    (2)    Both nations realize that huge offensives to gain large territory are no longer feasible.

    (3)    Sanctions against Russia have failed to stifle the economy or diminish Putin’s willingness to continue the war. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) forecasts Russia’s Gross domestic product to rise by 2.6 percent in 2024.

    (4)    Ukraine’s ability to mount another offensive and regain territory is doubtful.

    (5)    Civilian populations seem tired of the war and are operating as if there is no war.

    The Future

    The aggressive war with mass casualties has ended. The Russians want a little more of the Donetsk region and will extend their reach only if they know the battle will be successful and not incur excessive casualties. All is not quiet on the Eastern Front, but the war has a virtual armistice in which invisible lines are set by invisible contestants. Each side knows where it can walk without being challenged. Only the stubbornness of the leaders of the two nations prevents a formal armistice. Putin can claim victory and will remain President of Russia; not so, with President Volodymyr Zelensky. The war made Zelensky an internationally admired figure and brought attention to Ukraine. Zelensky has worn out his appearance, and without a war, he cannot lead. Expect his replacement in the near future.

    The undeclared armistice will continue until the two nations realize that an undeclared armistice allows their soldiers and civilians to remain open to attack. Better to have a formal armistice and end hostilities. Several years later, a new Ukraine government will sense it is better to bite the bullet than face the bullet. The present battle lines will become territorial lines and Ukraine will pledge neutrality.

    The nuclear threat will subside and the world will breathe easier until the next intrusion upon the free-loving people of the universe.

    The post Is the War in Ukraine over? first appeared on Dissident Voice.


    This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Dan Lieberman.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Ukraine’s Zelenskiy In Turkey For Talks On Global Food Security, Defense Cooperation

    WASHINGTON — In a high-profile televised address, U.S. President Joe Biden ripped his likely Republican challenger Donald Trump for “bowing down” to Russian President Vladimir Putin and urged Congress to pass aid for Ukraine, warning that democracy around the world was under threat.

    In the annual State of the Union address, Biden came out swinging from the get-go against Putin and Trump — whom he called “my predecessor” without mentioning him by name — and on behalf of Ukraine, as he sought to win over undecided voters ahead of November’s election.

    The March 7 address to a joint session of Congress this year carried greater significance for the 81-year-old Biden as he faces a tough reelection in November, mostly likely against Trump. The president, who is dogged by questions about his physical and mental fitness for the job, showed a more feisty side during his hourlong speech, drawing a sharp contrast between himself and Trump on a host of key foreign and domestic issues.

    Live Briefing: Russia’s Invasion Of Ukraine

    RFE/RL’s Live Briefing gives you all of the latest developments on Russia’s full-scale invasion, Kyiv’s counteroffensive, Western military aid, global reaction, and the plight of civilians. For all of RFE/RL’s coverage of the war in Ukraine, click here.

    Biden denounced Trump for recent remarks about NATO, the U.S.-led defense alliance that will mark its 75th anniversary this year, and compared him unfavorably to former Republican President Ronald Reagan.

    “Bowing down to a Russian leader, it is outrageous, dangerous, and unacceptable,” Biden said, referring to Trump, as he recalled how Reagan — who is fondly remembered by older Republicans — stood up to the Kremlin during the Cold War.

    At a campaign rally last month, Trump said that while serving in office he warned a NATO ally he “would encourage” Russia “to do whatever the hell they want” to alliance members who are “delinquent” in meeting defense-spending goals.

    The remark raised fears that Trump could try to pull the United States out of NATO should he win the election in November.

    Biden described NATO as “stronger than ever” as he recognized Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson in the audience. Earlier in the day, Sweden officially became the 32nd member of NATO, ending 200 years of nonalignment. Sweden applied to join the defense alliance after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Finland became a NATO member last year.

    Biden called on Congress to pass a Ukraine aid bill to help the country fend off a two-year-old Russian invasion. He warned that should Russia win, Putin will not stop at Ukraine’s border with NATO.

    A group of right-wing Republicans in the House of Representatives have for months been holding up a bill that would allocate some $60 billion in critical military, economic, and humanitarian aid to Ukraine as it defends its territory from Russian invaders.

    The gridlock in Washington has starved Ukrainian forces of U.S. ammunition and weapons, allowing Russia to regain the initiative in the war. Russia last month seized the eastern city of Avdiyivka, its first victory in more than a year.

    “Ukraine can stop Putin if we stand with Ukraine and provide the weapons it needs to defend itself,” Biden said.

    “My message to President Putin…is simple. We will not walk away. We will not bow down. I will not bow down,” Biden said.

    Trump, who has expressed admiration for Putin, has questioned U.S. aid to Ukraine, though he recently supported the idea of loans to the country.

    Biden also criticized Trump for the former president’s attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election, saying those efforts had posed a grave threat to democracy at home.

    “You can’t love your country only when you win,” he said, referring not just to Trump but Republicans in Congress who back the former president’s claim that the 2020 election was rigged.

    Biden “really strove to distinguish his policies from those of Donald Trump,” said Kathryn Stoner, a political-science professor at Stanford University and director of its Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law.

    By referencing Reagan, Biden was seeking “to appeal to moderate Republicans and independents to remind them that this is what your party was — standing up to Russia,” she told RFE/RL.

    The State of the Union address may be the biggest opportunity Biden has to reach American voters before the election. More than 27 million people watched Biden’s speech last year, equivalent to about 17 percent of eligible voters.

    Biden’s address this year carries greater importance as he faces reelection in November, most likely against Trump. The speech may be the biggest opportunity he has to reach American voters before the election.

    Trump won 14 of 15 primary races on March 5, all but wrapping up the Republican nomination for president. Biden beat Trump in 2020 but faces a tough reelection bid amid low ratings.

    A Pew Research poll published in January showed that just 33 percent of Americans approve of Biden’s job performance, while 65 percent disapprove. Biden’s job-approval rating has remained below 40 percent over the past two years as Americans feel the pinch of high inflation and interest rates.

    Biden, the oldest U.S. president in history, has been dogged by worries over his age. Two thirds of voters say he is too old to effectively serve another term, according to a recent Quinnipiac poll.

    Last month, a special counsel report raised questions about his memory, intensifying concerns over his mental capacity to run the country for four more years.

    As a result, Biden’s physical performance during the address was under close watch. Biden was animated during the speech and avoided any major gaffes.

    “I thought he sounded really strong, very determined and very clear,” Stoner said.

    Instead of avoiding the subject of his age, Biden took it head on, saying the issue facing our nation “isn’t how old we are, it’s how old our ideas are.”

    He warned Trump was trying to take the country back to a darker period.

    “Some other people my age see a different story: an American story of resentment, revenge, and retribution,” Biden said, referring to the 77-year-old Trump.


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Shielding Armour

    Armour, while useful in attack, needs ways and means to stop it being taken out by the plethora or weapons in now faces. Asia possesses very capable armoured fighting vehicle (AFV) manufacturers, but various systems can improve their survivability, situational awareness, firepower and mobility on modern battlefields. Asia-Pacific militaries are slowly adopting some elements in […]

    The post Shielding Armour appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • Explosion Damages Russian Railway Bridge

    Iranian state media says hard-liners are ahead in the capital, Tehran, as vote counting progresses in Iran’s March 1 elections, which were marred by what appears to be a record-low turnout prompted by voter apathy and calls for a boycott by reformists.

    The elections for a new parliament, or Majlis, and a new Assembly of Experts, which elects Iran’s supreme leader, were the first since the deadly nationwide protests that erupted following the September 2022 death while in police custody of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini, who had been detained for an alleged Islamic dress-code violation.

    Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency said 1,960 from 5,000 ballots in Tehran have been counted so far, with hard-liners ahead as expected.

    An alliance led by hard-liner Hamid Rasaee won 17 out of 30 seats in Tehran, state radio reported, while the incumbent parliamentary speaker, conservative Mohammed Baqer Qalibaf also obtained a new seat.

    The turnout appears to be at a record low, according to unofficial accounts, despite the officials’ repeated appeals to Iranians to show up en masse at the polls as Iran’s theocracy scrambles to restore its legitimacy in the wake of a wave of repression in 2022 and amid deteriorating economic conditions.

    The Mehr news agency, citing unofficial results, reported that voter turnout in Tehran was only 24 percent.

    Iran’s rulers needed a high turnout to repair their legitimacy following the unrest, but many Iranians said they would not vote in “meaningless” elections in which more than 15,000 candidates were running for the 290-seat parliament.

    State media reported that the turnout was “good.” Official surveys before the election, however, suggested that only some 41 percent of eligible Iranians would come out to vote.

    The Hamshahri newspaper said on March 2 that more than 25 million people, or 41 percent of eligible voters, had turned out, thus confirming the official survey.

    If the figure is confirmed, it will be the lowest election turnout in Iran since the Islamic Revolution of 1979 that brought the current theocracy to power, despite officials twice extending voting hours to allow late-comers to cast ballots.

    The pro-reform newspaper Ham Mihan published an opinion piece titled The Silent Majority, reporting a turnout of some 40 percent.

    Shortly afterwards, however, the title of the piece was changed to Roll Call without any explanation, which commenters on social media networks blamed on pressure exerted on the newspaper by authorities.

    So far, the lowest turnout, 42.5 percent, was registered in the February 2020 parliamentary elections, while in 2016, the turnout was some 62 percent.

    As the voting concluded, the United States made clear that the international community was aware that the results of the poll would not reflect the will of the Iranian people.

    “As some Iranians vote today in their first parliamentary election since the regime’s latest violent crackdown, the world knows the Iranian people do not have a true say at the ballot box,” U.S. Deputy Special Envoy for Iran Abram Paley wrote on X, formerly Twitter.

    Ahead of the vote, prominent figures, including Nobel Peace Prize laureate Narges Mohammadi, said they would boycott the elections, labeling them as superficial and predetermined.

    Mohammad Khatami, Iran’s first reformist president, was among the critics who did not vote on March 1.

    Mostafa Tajzadeh, a former deputy interior minister, has also voiced his refusal to vote, criticizing the supreme leader’s indifference to the country’s crises.

    Voter apathy, along with general dissatisfaction over living standards and a clampdown on basic human rights in Iran, has been growing for years.

    Even before Amini’s death, which sparked massive protests and the Women, Life, Freedom movement, unrest had rattled Iran for months in response to declining living standards, wage arrears, and a lack of insurance support.

    In a last-ditch effort to encourage a high turnout, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said after casting his ballot in Tehran that voting would “make friends happy and ill-wishers unhappy.”

    While domestically attention is mostly focused on the parliamentary elections, it is perhaps the Assembly of Experts polls that are more significant.

    The 88-seat assembly, whose members are elected for eight-year terms, is tasked with appointing the next supreme leader. Given that Khamenei is 84, the next assembly may end up having to name his successor.

    Analysts and activists said the elections were “engineered” because only candidates vetted and approved by the Guardian Council were allowed to run. The council is made up of six clerics and six jurists who are all appointed directly and indirectly by Khamenei.

    In dozens of audio and written messages sent to RFE/RL’s Radio Farda from inside Iran, many said they were opting against voting because the elections were “meaningless” and likely to consolidate the hard-liners’ grip on power.

    With reporting by Reuters


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Endemic Corruption Doesn’t Win Wars

    Corruption and military effectiveness do not go hand-in-hand. This has been overwhelmingly demonstrated by the performance of Russian forces during the war in Ukraine, where in many cases (and even literally in some instances), ‘the wheels have fallen off’ military kit and overall effectiveness. The Red Army, once feared by NATO planners who may have […]

    The post Endemic Corruption Doesn’t Win Wars appeared first on Asian Military Review.

    This post was originally published on Asian Military Review.

  • Slovak Foreign Minister Meets With Russia’s Lavrov In Turkey

    Russia is increasing its cooperation with China in 5G and satellite technology and this could facilitate Moscow’s military aggression against Ukraine, a report by the London-based Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) security think tank warns.

    The report, published on March 1, says that although battlefield integration of 5G networks may face domestic hurdles in Russia, infrastructure for Chinese aid to Russian satellite systems already exists and can “facilitate Russian military action in Ukraine.”

    China, which maintains close ties with Moscow, has refused to condemn Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine and offered economic support to Russia that has helped the Kremlin survive waves of sweeping Western sanctions.

    Beijing has said that it does not sell lethal weapons to Russia for its war against Ukraine, but Western governments have repeatedly accused China of aiding in the flow of technology to Russia’s war effort despite Western sanctions.

    The RUSI report details how the cooperation between Russia and China in 5G and satellite technology can also help Russia on the battlefield in Ukraine.

    “Extensive deployment of drones and advanced telecommunications equipment have been crucial on all fronts in Ukraine, from intelligence collection to air-strike campaigns,” the report says.

    “These technologies, though critical, require steady connectivity and geospatial support, making cooperation with China a potential solution to Moscow’s desire for a military breakthrough.”

    According to the report, 5G network development has gained particular significance in Russo-Chinese strategic relations in recent years, resulting in a sequence of agreements between Chinese technology giant Huawei and Russian companies MTS and Beeline, both under sanctions by Canada for being linked to Russia’s military-industrial complex.

    5G is a technology standard for cellular networks, which allows a higher speed of data transfer than its predecessor, 4G. According to the RUSI’s report, 5G “has the potential to reshape the battlefield” through enhanced tracking of military objects, faster transferring and real-time processing of large sensor datasets and enhanced communications.

    These are “precisely the features that could render Russo-Chinese 5G cooperation extremely useful in a wartime context — and therefore create a heightened risk for Ukraine,” the report adds.

    Although the report says that there are currently “operational and institutional constraints” to Russia’s battlefield integration of 5G technology, it has advantages which make it an “appealing priority” for Moscow, Jack Crawford, a research analyst at RUSI and one of the authors of the report, said.

    “As Russia continues to seek battlefield advantages over Ukraine, recent improvements in 5G against jamming technologies make 5G communications — both on the ground and with aerial weapons and vehicles — an even more appealing priority,” Crawford told RFE/RL in an e-mailed response.

    Satellite technology, however, is already the focus of the collaboration between China and Russia, the report says, pointing to recent major developments in the collaboration between the Russian satellite navigation system GLONASS and its Chinese equivalent, Beidou.

    In 2018, Russia and China agreed on the joint application of GLONASS/Beidou and in 2022 decided to build three Russian monitoring stations in China and three Chinese stations in Russia — in the city of Obninsk, about 100 kilometers southwest of Moscow, the Siberian city of Irkutsk, and Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky in Russia’s Far East.

    Satellite technology can collect imagery, weather and terrain data, improve logistics management, track troop movements, and enhance precision in the identification and elimination of ground targets.

    According to the report, GLONASS has already enabled Russian missile and drone strikes in Ukraine through satellite correction and supported communications between Russian troops.

    The anticipated construction of Beidou’s Obninsk monitoring station, the closest of the three Chinese stations to Ukraine, would allow Russia to increasingly leverage satellite cooperation with China against Ukraine, the report warns.

    In 2022, the Russian company Racurs, which provides software solutions for photogrammetry, GIS, and remote sensing, signed satellite data-sharing agreements with two Chinese companies. The deals were aimed at replacing contracts with Western satellite companies that suspended data supply in Russia following Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

    The two companies — HEAD Aerospace and Spacety — are both under sanctions by the United States for supplying satellite imagery of locations in Ukraine to entities affiliated with the Wagner mercenary group.

    “For the time being, we cannot trace how exactly these shared data have informed specific decisions on the front line,” Roman Kolodii, a security expert at Charles University in Prague and one of the authors of the report, told RFE/RL.

    “However, since Racurs is a partner of the Russian Ministry of Defense, it is highly likely that such data might end up strengthening Russia’s geospatial capabilities in the military domain, too.”

    “Ultimately, such dynamic interactions with Chinese companies may improve Russian military logistics, reconnaissance capabilities, geospatial intelligence, and drone deployment in Ukraine,” the report says.

    The report comes as Western governments are stepping up efforts to counter Russia’s attempt to evade sanctions imposed as a response to its military aggression against Ukraine.

    On February 23, on the eve of the second anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion, the United States imposed sanctions on nearly 100 entities that are helping Russia evade trade sanctions and “providing backdoor support for Russia’s war machine.”

    The list includes Chinese companies, accused of supporting “Russia’s military-industrial base.”

    With reporting by Merhat Sharpizhanov


    This content originally appeared on News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was authored by News – Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.