President of Russia (19992008, 2012present)

Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin[c] (born 7 October 1952) is a Russian politician and former intelligence officer who has served as the president of Russia since 2012, having previously served between 2000 and 2008.[7][d] He was the prime minister of Russia from 1999 to 2000 and again from 2008 to 2012,[e] thus having served continuously as either president or prime minister from 1999 onwards.

Putin worked as a KGB foreign intelligence officer for 16 years, rising to the rank of lieutenant colonel (podpolkovnik), before resigning in 1991 to begin a political career in Saint Petersburg. He moved to Moscow in 1996 to join the administration of president Boris Yeltsin. He briefly served as director of the Federal Security Service (FSB) and secretary of the Security Council, before being appointed as prime minister in August 1999. After the resignation of Yeltsin, Putin became acting president and, less than four months later, was elected outright to his first term as president. He was reelected in 2004. As he was constitutionally limited to two consecutive terms as president at the time, Putin served as prime minister again from 2008 to 2012 under Dmitry Medvedev. He returned to the presidency in 2012 in an election marred by allegations of fraud and protests and was reelected in 2018. In April 2021, following a referendum, he signed into law constitutional amendments including one that would allow him to run for reelection twice more, potentially extending his presidency to 2036.[8][9]

During Putin's first tenure as president, the Russian economy grew on average by seven percent per year,[10] following economic reforms and a fivefold increase in the price of oil and gas.[11][12] Putin also led Russia during a war against Chechen separatists, reestablishing federal control of the region.[13][14] As prime minister under Medvedev, he oversaw a war against Georgia as well as military and police reform. During his third term as president, Russia annexed Crimea and sponsored a war in eastern Ukraine with several military incursions made, resulting in international sanctions and a financial crisis in Russia.[15] He also ordered a military intervention in Syria against rebel and jihadist groups.[16] During his fourth term as president, he presided over a military buildup on the border of Ukraine, and in February 2022,[17] launched a large-scale invasion, leading to international condemnation and expanded sanctions. The International Criminal Court opened an investigation into war crimes in Ukraine.[18] In September 2022, Putin announced a partial mobilisation and officially approved the forcible annexation of four Ukrainian oblasts into Russia, an act which is illegal under international law.

Under Putin's leadership, Russia has undergone democratic backsliding and a shift to authoritarianism. His rule has been characterised by endemic corruption as well as numerous human rights violations, including the jailing and repression of political opponents, the intimidation and suppression of independent media in Russia, and a lack of free and fair elections.[19][20][21] Putin's Russia has scored poorly on Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, the Economist Intelligence Unit's Democracy Index, and Freedom House's Freedom in the World index. Putin is the second-longest currently serving European president after Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus.

Putin was born on 7 October 1952 in Leningrad, Soviet Union (now Saint Petersburg, Russia),[22][23] the youngest of three children of Vladimir Spiridonovich Putin (19111999) and Maria Ivanovna Putina (ne Shelomova; 19111998). His grandfather, Spiridon Putin, was a personal cook to Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin.[24][25] Putin's birth was preceded by the deaths of two brothers: Albert, born in the 1930s, died in infancy, and Viktor, born in 1940, died of diphtheria and starvation in 1942 during the Siege of Leningrad by Nazi Germany's forces in World War II.[26][27]

Putin's father, Vladimir Spiridonovich Putin

Putin's mother, Maria Ivanovna Shelomova

Putin's mother was a factory worker and his father was a conscript in the Soviet Navy, serving in the submarine fleet in the early 1930s. Early in World War II, his father served in the destruction battalion of the NKVD.[28][29][30] Later, he was transferred to the regular army and was severely wounded in 1942.[31] Putin's maternal grandmother was killed by the German occupiers of Tver region in 1941, and his maternal uncles disappeared on the Eastern Front during World War II.[32]

On 1 September 1960, Putin started at School No. 193 at Baskov Lane, near his home. He was one of a few in the class of approximately 45 pupils who were not yet members of the Young Pioneer organization. At age 12, he began to practise sambo and judo.[33] In his free time, he enjoyed reading the works of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, and Lenin.[34] Putin studied German at Saint Petersburg High School 281 and speaks German as a second language.[35]

Putin studied law at the Leningrad State University named after Andrei Zhdanov (now Saint Petersburg State University) in 1970 and graduated in 1975.[36] His thesis was on "The Most Favored Nation Trading Principle in International Law".[37] While there, he was required to join the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) and remained a member until it ceased to exist in 1991.[38]

Putin met Anatoly Sobchak, an assistant professor who taught business law,[f] and who later became the co-author of the Russian constitution and of corruption schemes in France. Putin would be influential in Sobchak's career in Saint Petersburg, and Sobchak would be influential in Putin's career in Moscow.[39]

In 1997, he received his Ph.D. in economics (Candidate of Economic Sciences) at the Saint Petersburg Mining University for a thesis on the strategic planning of the mineral economy.[40]

In 1975, Putin joined the KGB and trained at the 401st KGB school in Okhta, Leningrad.[22][41] After training, he worked in the Second Chief Directorate (counter-intelligence), before he was transferred to the First Chief Directorate, where he monitored foreigners and consular officials in Leningrad.[22][42][43] In September 1984, Putin was sent to Moscow for further training at the Yuri Andropov Red Banner Institute.[44][45][46]

Multiple reports have suggested Putin was sent by the KGB to New Zealand, allegedly working for some time undercover as, among at least one other alias, a Bata shoe salesman in central Wellington.[47][48][49] From 1985 to 1990, he served in Dresden, East Germany,[50] using a cover identity as a translator.[51]

Unlike Putin's presence in East Germany, his time in New Zealand has never been confirmed by Russian security services, but corroborated through New Zealand eyewitness accounts and government records. Former Waitkere City mayor Bob Harvey and Prime Minister during the 1980s David Lange both alleged that Putin served in both Wellington and Auckland.[47]

"Putin and his colleagues were reduced mainly to collecting press clippings, thus contributing to the mountains of useless information produced by the KGB", Russian-American Masha Gessen wrote in their 2012 biography of Putin.[51] His work was also downplayed by former Stasi spy chief Markus Wolf and Putin's former KGB colleague Vladimir Usoltsev. Journalist Catherine Belton wrote in 2020 that this downplaying was actually cover for Putin's involvement in KGB coordination and support for the terrorist Red Army Faction, whose members frequently hid in East Germany with the support of the Stasi. Dresden was preferred as a "marginal" town with only a small presence of Western intelligence services.[52]

According to an anonymous source, a former RAF member, at one of these meetings in Dresden the militants presented Putin with a list of weapons that were later delivered to the RAF in West Germany. Klaus Zuchold, who claimed to be recruited by Putin, said that Putin handled a neo-Nazi, Rainer Sonntag, and attempted to recruit an author of a study on poisons.[52] Putin reportedly met Germans to be recruited for wireless communications affairs together with an interpreter. He was involved in wireless communications technologies in South-East Asia due to trips of German engineers, recruited by him, there and to the West.[43]

According to Putin's official biography, during the fall of the Berlin Wall that began on 9 November 1989, he saved the files of the Soviet Cultural Center (House of Friendship) and of the KGB villa in Dresden for the official authorities of the would-be united Germany to prevent demonstrators, including KGB and Stasi agents, from obtaining and destroying them. He then supposedly burnt only the KGB files, in a few hours, but saved the archives of the Soviet Cultural Center for the German authorities. Nothing is told about the selection criteria during this burning; for example, concerning Stasi files or about files of other agencies of the German Democratic Republic or of the USSR. He explained that many documents were left to Germany only because the furnace burst but many documents of the KGB villa were sent to Moscow.[53]

After the collapse of the Communist East German government, Putin was to resign from active KGB service because of suspicions aroused regarding his loyalty during demonstrations in Dresden and earlier, though the KGB and the Soviet Army still operated in eastern Germany. He returned to Leningrad in early 1990 as a member of the "active reserves", where he worked for about three months with the International Affairs section of Leningrad State University, reporting to Vice-Rector Yuriy Molchanov, while working on his doctoral dissertation.[43]

There, he looked for new KGB recruits, watched the student body, and renewed his friendship with his former professor, Anatoly Sobchak, soon to be the Mayor of Leningrad.[54] Putin claims that he resigned with the rank of lieutenant colonel on 20 August 1991,[54] on the second day of the 1991 Soviet coup d'tat attempt against the Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev.[55] Putin said: "As soon as the coup began, I immediately decided which side I was on", although he noted that the choice was hard because he had spent the best part of his life with "the organs".[56]

In 1999, Putin described communism as "a blind alley, far away from the mainstream of civilization".[57]

In May 1990, Putin was appointed as an advisor on international affairs to the mayor of Leningrad Anatoly Sobchak. In a 2017 interview with Oliver Stone, Putin said that he resigned from the KGB in 1991, following the coup against Mikhail Gorbachev, as he did not agree with what had happened and did not want to be part of the intelligence in the new administration.[58] According to Putin's statements in 2018 and 2021, he may have worked as a private taxi driver to earn extra money, or considered such a job.[59][60]

On 28 June 1991, he became head of the Committee for External Relations of the Mayor's Office, with responsibility for promoting international relations and foreign investments[62] and registering business ventures. Within a year, Putin was investigated by the city legislative council led by Marina Salye. It was concluded that he had understated prices and permitted the export of metals valued at $93 million in exchange for foreign food aid that never arrived.[63][36] Despite the investigators' recommendation that Putin be fired, Putin remained head of the Committee for External Relations until 1996.[64][65] From 1994 to 1996, he held several other political and governmental positions in Saint Petersburg.[66]

In March 1994, Putin was appointed as first deputy chairman of the Government of Saint Petersburg. In May 1995, he organized the Saint Petersburg branch of the pro-government Our Home Russia political party, the liberal party of power founded by Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin. In 1995, he managed the legislative election campaign for that party, and from 1995 through June 1997, he was the leader of its Saint Petersburg branch.[66]

In June 1996, Sobchak lost his bid for reelection in Saint Petersburg, and Putin, who had led his election campaign, resigned from his positions in the city administration. He moved to Moscow and was appointed as deputy chief of the Presidential Property Management Department headed by Pavel Borodin. He occupied this position until March 1997. He was responsible for the foreign property of the state and organized the transfer of the former assets of the Soviet Union and the CPSU to the Russian Federation.[39]

On 26 March 1997, President Boris Yeltsin appointed Putin deputy chief of the Presidential Staff, a post which he retained until May 1998, and chief of the Main Control Directorate of the Presidential Property Management Department (until June 1998). His predecessor in this position was Alexei Kudrin and his successor was Nikolai Patrushev, both future prominent politicians and Putin's associates.[39] On 3 April 1997, Putin was promoted to 1st class Active State Councillor of the Russian Federation the highest federal state civilian service rank.[67]

On 27 June 1997, at the Saint Petersburg Mining Institute, guided by rector Vladimir Litvinenko, Putin defended his Candidate of Science dissertation in economics, titled Strategic Planning of the Reproduction of the Mineral Resource Base of a Region under Conditions of the Formation of Market Relations.[68] This exemplified the custom in Russia whereby a young rising official would write a scholarly work in mid-career.[69] Putin's thesis was plagiarized.[70] Fellows at the Brookings Institution found that 15 pages were copied from an American textbook.[71]

On 25 May 1998, Putin was appointed First Deputy Chief of the Presidential Staff for the regions, in succession to Viktoriya Mitina. On 15 July, he was appointed head of the commission for the preparation of agreements on the delimitation of the power of the regions and head of the federal center attached to the president, replacing Sergey Shakhray. After Putin's appointment, the commission completed no such agreements, although during Shakhray's term as the head of the Commission 46 such agreements had been signed.[73] Later, after becoming president, Putin cancelled all 46 agreements.[39]

On 25 July 1998, Yeltsin appointed Putin director of the Federal Security Service (FSB), the primary intelligence and security organization of the Russian Federation and the successor to the KGB.[74]

On 9 August 1999, Putin was appointed one of three first deputy prime ministers, and later on that day, was appointed acting prime minister of the Government of the Russian Federation by President Yeltsin.[75] Yeltsin also announced that he wanted to see Putin as his successor. Later on that same day, Putin agreed to run for the presidency.[76]

On 16 August, the State Duma approved his appointment as prime minister with 233 votes in favor (vs. 84 against, 17 abstained),[77] while a simple majority of 226 was required, making him Russia's fifth prime minister in fewer than eighteen months. On his appointment, few expected Putin, virtually unknown to the general public, to last any longer than his predecessors. He was initially regarded as a Yeltsin loyalist; like other prime ministers of Boris Yeltsin, Putin did not choose ministers himself, his cabinet was determined by the presidential administration.[78]

Yeltsin's main opponents and would-be successors were already campaigning to replace the ailing president, and they fought hard to prevent Putin's emergence as a potential successor. Following the Russian apartment bombings and the invasion of Dagestan by mujahideen, including the former KGB agents, based in the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria, Putin's law-and-order image and unrelenting approach to the Second Chechen War soon combined to raise his popularity and allowed him to overtake his rivals.

While not formally associated with any party, Putin pledged his support to the newly formed Unity Party,[79] which won the second largest percentage of the popular vote (23.3%) in the December 1999 Duma elections, and in turn supported Putin.

On 31 December 1999, Yeltsin unexpectedly resigned and, according to the Constitution of Russia, Putin became Acting President of the Russian Federation. On assuming this role, Putin went on a previously scheduled visit to Russian troops in Chechnya.[80]

The first presidential decree that Putin signed on 31 December 1999 was titled "On guarantees for the former president of the Russian Federation and the members of his family".[81][82] This ensured that "corruption charges against the outgoing President and his relatives" would not be pursued.[83] This was most notably targeted at the Mabetex bribery case in which Yeltsin's family members were involved. On 30 August 2000, a criminal investigation (number 18/238278-95) in which Putin himself,[84][85] as a member of the Saint Petersburg city government, was one of the suspects, was dropped.

On 30 December 2000, yet another case against the prosecutor general was dropped "for lack of evidence", despite thousands of documents having been forwarded by Swiss prosecutors.[86] On 12 February 2001, Putin signed a similar federal law which replaced the decree of 1999. A case regarding Putin's alleged corruption in metal exports from 1992 was brought back by Marina Salye, but she was silenced and forced to leave Saint Petersburg.[87]

While his opponents had been preparing for an election in June 2000, Yeltsin's resignation resulted in the presidential elections being held on 26 March 2000; Putin won in the first round with 53% of the vote.[88][89]

The inauguration of President Putin occurred on 7 May 2000. He appointed the minister of finance, Mikhail Kasyanov, as prime minister.[90] The first major challenge to Putin's popularity came in August 2000, when he was criticized for the alleged mishandling of the Kursk submarine disaster.[91] That criticism was largely because it took several days for Putin to return from vacation, and several more before he visited the scene.[91]

Between 2000 and 2004, Putin set about the reconstruction of the impoverished condition of the country, apparently winning a power-struggle with the Russian oligarchs, reaching a 'grand bargain' with them. This bargain allowed the oligarchs to maintain most of their powers, in exchange for their explicit support forand alignment withPutin's government.[92][93]

The Moscow theater hostage crisis occurred in October 2002. Many in the Russian press and in the international media warned that the deaths of 130 hostages in the special forces' rescue operation during the crisis would severely damage President Putin's popularity. However, shortly after the siege had ended, the Russian president enjoyed record public approval ratings83% of Russians declared themselves satisfied with Putin and his handling of the siege.[94]

In 2003, a referendum was held in Chechnya, adopting a new constitution which declares that the Republic of Chechnya is a part of Russia; on the other hand, the region did acquire autonomy.[95] Chechnya has been gradually stabilized with the establishment of the Parliamentary elections and a Regional Government.[96][97] Throughout the Second Chechen War, Russia severely disabled the Chechen rebel movement; however, sporadic attacks by rebels continued to occur throughout the northern Caucasus.[98]

On 14 March 2004, Putin was elected to the presidency for a second term, receiving 71% of the vote.[100] The Beslan school hostage crisis took place on 13 September 2004; more than 330 people died, including 186 children.[101]

The near 10-year period prior to the rise of Putin after the dissolution of Soviet rule was a time of upheaval in Russia.[102] In a 2005 Kremlin speech, Putin characterized the collapse of the Soviet Union as the "greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the Twentieth Century."[103] Putin elaborated, "Moreover, the epidemic of disintegration infected Russia itself."[104] The country's cradle-to-grave social safety net was gone and life expectancy declined in the period preceding Putin's rule.[105] In 2005, the National Priority Projects were launched to improve Russia's health care, education, housing, and agriculture.[106][107]

The continued criminal prosecution of the wealthiest man in Russia at the time, president of Yukos oil and gas company Mikhail Khodorkovsky, for fraud and tax evasion was seen by the international press as a retaliation for Khodorkovsky's donations to both liberal and communist opponents of the Kremlin.[108] Khodorkovsky was arrested, Yukos was bankrupted, and the company's assets were auctioned at below-market value, with the largest share acquired by the state company Rosneft.[109] The fate of Yukos was seen as a sign of a broader shift of Russia towards a system of state capitalism.[110][111] This was underscored in July 2014, when shareholders of Yukos were awarded $50billion in compensation by the Permanent Arbitration Court in The Hague.[112]

On 7 October 2006, Anna Politkovskaya, a journalist who exposed corruption in the Russian army and its conduct in Chechnya, was shot in the lobby of her apartment building, on Putin's birthday. The death of Politkovskaya triggered international criticism, with accusations that Putin had failed to protect the country's new independent media.[113][114] Putin himself said that her death caused the government more problems than her writings.[115]

In February 2007, at the Munich Security Conference Putin complained about the feeling of insecurity engendered by the dominant position in geopolitics of the United States, and observed that a former NATO official had made rhetorical promises not to expand into new countries in Eastern Europe.

On 14 July 2007, Putin announced that Russia would suspend implementation of its Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe obligations, effective after 150 days,[116][117] and suspend its ratification of the Adapted Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty which treaty was shunned by NATO members abeyant Russian withdrawal from Transnistria and the Republic of Georgia. Moscow continued to participate in the joint consultative group, because it hoped that dialogue could lead to the creation of an effective, new conventional arms control regime in Europe.[118] Russia did specify steps that NATO could take to end the suspension. "These include [NATO] members cutting their arms allotments and further restricting temporary weapons deployments on each NATO members territory. Russia also want[ed] constraints eliminated on how many forces it can deploy in its southern and northern flanks. Moreover, it is pressing NATO members to ratify a 1999 updated version of the accord, known as the Adapted CFE Treaty, and demanding that the four alliance members outside the original treaty, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Slovenia, join it."[117]

In early 2007, "Dissenters' Marches" were organized by the opposition group The Other Russia,[119] led by former chess champion Garry Kasparov and national-Bolshevist leader Eduard Limonov. Following prior warnings, demonstrations in several Russian cities were met by police action, which included interfering with the travel of the protesters and the arrests of as many as 150 people who attempted to break through police lines.[120]

On 12 September 2007, Putin dissolved the government upon the request of Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov. Fradkov commented that it was to give the President a "free hand" in the run-up to the parliamentary election. Viktor Zubkov was appointed the new prime minister.[121]

In December 2007, United Russiathe governing party that supports the policies of Putinwon 64.24% of the popular vote in their run for State Duma according to election preliminary results.[122] United Russia's victory in the December 2007 elections was seen by many as an indication of strong popular support of the then Russian leadership and its policies.[123][124]

Putin was barred from a third consecutive term by the Constitution. First Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev was elected his successor. In a power-switching operation on 8 May 2008, only a day after handing the presidency to Medvedev, Putin was appointed Prime Minister of Russia, maintaining his political dominance.[125]

Putin has said that overcoming the consequences of the world economic crisis was one of the two main achievements of his second premiership.[107] The other was stabilizing the size of Russia's population between 2008 and 2011 following a long period of demographic collapse that began in the 1990s.[107]

At the United Russia Congress in Moscow on 24 September 2011, Medvedev officially proposed that Putin stand for the presidency in 2012, an offer Putin accepted. Given United Russia's near-total dominance of Russian politics, many observers believed that Putin was assured of a third term. The move was expected to see Medvedev stand on the United Russia ticket in the parliamentary elections in December, with a goal of becoming prime minister at the end of his presidential term.[126]

After the parliamentary elections on 4 December 2011, tens of thousands of Russians engaged in protests against alleged electoral fraud, the largest protests in Putin's time. Protesters criticized Putin and United Russia and demanded annulment of the election results.[127] Those protests sparked the fear of a colour revolution in society.[128] Putin allegedly organized a number of paramilitary groups loyal to himself and to the United Russia party in the period between 2005 and 2012.[129]

On 24 September 2011, while speaking at the United Russia party congress, Medvedev announced that he would recommend the party nominate Putin as its presidential candidate. He also revealed that the two men had long ago cut a deal to allow Putin to run for president in 2012.[130] This switch was termed by many in the media as "Rokirovka", the Russian term for the chess move "castling".[131]

On 4 March 2012, Putin won the 2012 Russian presidential election in the first round, with 63.6% of the vote, despite widespread accusations of vote-rigging.[132][133][134] Opposition groups accused Putin and the United Russia party of fraud.[135][136] While efforts to make the elections transparent were publicized, including the usage of webcams in polling stations, the vote was criticized by the Russian opposition and by international observers from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe for procedural irregularities.[137]

Anti-Putin protests took place during and directly after the presidential campaign. The most notorious protest was the Pussy Riot performance on 21 February, and subsequent trial.[138] An estimated 8,00020,000 protesters gathered in Moscow on 6 May,[139][140] when eighty people were injured in confrontations with police,[141] and 450 were arrested, with another 120 arrests taking place the following day.[142] A counter-protest of Putin supporters occurred which culminated in a gathering of an estimated 130,000 supporters at the Luzhniki Stadium, Russia's largest stadium.[143] Some of the attendees stated that they had been paid to come, were forced to come by their employers, or were misled into believing that they were going to attend a folk festival instead.[144][145][146] The rally is considered to be the largest in support of Putin to date.[147]

Putin's presidency was inaugurated in the Kremlin on 7 May 2012.[148] On his first day as president, Putin issued 14 presidential decrees, which are sometimes called the "May Decrees" by the media, including a lengthy one stating wide-ranging goals for the Russian economy. Other decrees concerned education, housing, skilled labor training, relations with the European Union, the defense industry, inter-ethnic relations, and other policy areas dealt with in Putin's program articles issued during the presidential campaign.[149]

In 2012 and 2013, Putin and the United Russia party backed stricter legislation against the LGBT community, in Saint Petersburg, Archangelsk, and Novosibirsk; a law called the Russian gay propaganda law, that is against "homosexual propaganda" (which prohibits such symbols as the rainbow flag,[150][151] as well as published works containing homosexual content) was adopted by the State Duma in June 2013.[152][153] Responding to international concerns about Russia's legislation, Putin asked critics to note that the law was a "ban on the propaganda of pedophilia and homosexuality" and he stated that homosexual visitors to the 2014 Winter Olympics should "leave the children in peace" but denied there was any "professional, career or social discrimination" against homosexuals in Russia.[154]

In June 2013, Putin attended a televised rally of the All-Russia People's Front where he was elected head of the movement,[155] which was set up in 2011.[156] According to journalist Steve Rosenberg, the movement is intended to "reconnect the Kremlin to the Russian people" and one day, if necessary, replace the increasingly unpopular United Russia party that currently backs Putin.[157]

In February 2014, Russia made several military incursions into Ukrainian territory. After the Euromaidan protests and the fall of Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych, Russian soldiers without insignias took control of strategic positions and infrastructure within the Ukrainian territory of Crimea. Russia then annexed Crimea and Sevastopol after a referendum in which, according to official results, Crimeans voted to join the Russian Federation.[158][159][160] Subsequently, demonstrations against Ukrainian Rada legislative actions by pro-Russian groups in the Donbas area of Ukraine escalated into the Russo-Ukrainian War between the Ukrainian government and the Russia-backed separatist forces of the self-declared Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics. In August 2014,[161] Russian military vehicles crossed the border in several locations of Donetsk Oblast.[162][163][164] The incursion by the Russian military was seen by Ukrainian authorities as responsible for the defeat of Ukrainian forces in early September.[165][166]

In October 2014, Putin addressed Russian security concerns in Sochi at the Valdai International Discussion Club.

In November 2014, the Ukrainian military reported intensive movement of troops and equipment from Russia into the separatist-controlled parts of eastern Ukraine.[167] The Associated Press reported 80 unmarked military vehicles on the move in rebel-controlled areas.[168] An OSCE Special Monitoring Mission observed convoys of heavy weapons and tanks in DPR-controlled territory without insignia.[169] OSCE monitors further stated that they observed vehicles transporting ammunition and soldiers' dead bodies crossing the Russian-Ukrainian border under the guise of humanitarian-aid convoys.[170]

As of early August 2015, the OSCE observed over 21 such vehicles marked with the Russian military code for soldiers killed in action.[171] According to The Moscow Times, Russia has tried to intimidate and silence human-rights workers discussing Russian soldiers' deaths in the conflict.[172] The OSCE repeatedly reported that its observers were denied access to the areas controlled by "combined Russian-separatist forces".[173]

In October 2015, The Washington Post reported that Russia had redeployed some of its elite units from Ukraine to Syria in recent weeks to support Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.[174] In December 2015, Putin admitted that Russian military intelligence officers were operating in Ukraine.[175]

According to academic Andrei Tsygankov, many members of the international community assumed that Putin's annexation of Crimea had initiated a completely new kind of Russian foreign policy.[176][177] They took the annexation of Crimea to mean that his foreign policy had shifted "from state-driven foreign policy" to taking an offensive stance to recreate the Soviet Union. He also says that this policy shift can be understood as Putin trying to defend nations in Russia's sphere of influence from "encroaching western power". While the act to annex the Crimea was bold and drastic, his new foreign policy may have more similarities to his older policies.[178]

On 30 September 2015, President Putin authorized Russian military intervention in the Syrian civil war, following a formal request by the Syrian government for military help against rebel and jihadist groups.[179]

The Russian military activities consisted of air strikes, cruise missile strikes and the use of front line advisors and Russian special forces against militant groups opposed to the Syrian government, including the Syrian opposition, as well as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), al-Nusra Front (al-Qaeda in the Levant), Tahrir al-Sham, Ahrar al-Sham, and the Army of Conquest.[180][181] After Putin's announcement on 14 March 2016 that the mission he had set for the Russian military in Syria had been "largely accomplished" and ordered the withdrawal of the "main part" of the Russian forces from Syria,[182] Russian forces deployed in Syria continued to actively operate in support of the Syrian government.[183]

In January 2017, a U.S. intelligence community assessment expressed high confidence that Putin personally ordered an influence campaign, initially to denigrate Hillary Clinton and to harm her electoral chances and potential presidency, then later developing "a clear preference" for Donald Trump.[184] Trump consistently denied any Russian interference in the U.S. election,[185][186][187] as did Putin in December 2016,[188] March 2017,[189] June 2017,[190][191][192] and July 2017.[193]

Putin later stated that interference was "theoretically possible" and could have been perpetrated by "patriotically minded" Russian hackers,[194] and on another occasion claimed "not even Russians, but Ukrainians, Tatars or Jews, but with Russian citizenship" might have been responsible.[195] In July 2018, The New York Times reported that the CIA had long nurtured a Russian source who eventually rose to a position close to Putin, allowing the source to pass key information in 2016 about Putin's direct involvement.[196] Putin continued similar attempts in the 2020 U.S. presidential election.[197]

Putin won the 2018 Russian presidential election with more than 76% of the vote.[198] His fourth term began on 7 May 2018,[199] and will last until 2024.[200] On the same day, Putin invited Dmitry Medvedev to form a new government.[201] On 15 May 2018, Putin took part in the opening of the movement along the highway section of the Crimean bridge.[202] On 18 May 2018, Putin signed decrees on the composition of the new Government.[203] On 25 May 2018, Putin announced that he would not run for president in 2024, justifying this in compliance with the Russian Constitution.[204] On 14 June 2018, Putin opened the 21st FIFA World Cup, which took place in Russia for the first time. On 18 October 2018, Putin said Russians will 'go to Heaven as martyrs' in the event of a nuclear war as he would only use nuclear weapons in retaliation.[205]In September 2019, Putin's administration interfered with the results of Russia's nationwide regional elections and manipulated it by eliminating all candidates in the opposition. The event that was aimed at contributing to the ruling party, United Russia's victory, also contributed to inciting mass protests for democracy, leading to large-scale arrests and cases of police brutality.[206]

On 15 January 2020, Medvedev and his entire government resigned after Putin's 2020 Presidential Address to the Federal Assembly. Putin suggested major constitutional amendments that could extend his political power after presidency.[207][208] At the same time, on behalf of Putin, he continued to exercise his powers until the formation of a new government.[209] Putin suggested that Medvedev take the newly created post of deputy chairman of the Security Council.[210]

On the same day, Putin nominated Mikhail Mishustin, head of the country's Federal Tax Service for the post of prime minister. The next day, he was confirmed by the State Duma to the post,[211][212] and appointed prime minister by Putin's decree.[213] This was the first time ever that a prime minister was confirmed without any votes against. On 21 January 2020, Mishustin presented to Putin a draft structure of his Cabinet. On the same day, the president signed a decree on the structure of the Cabinet and appointed the proposed ministers.[214][215][216]

On 15 March 2020, Putin instructed to form a Working Group of the State Council to counteract the spread of coronavirus. Putin appointed Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin as the head of the group.[217]

On 22 March 2020, after a phone call with Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, Putin arranged the Russian army to send military medics, special disinfection vehicles and other medical equipment to Italy, which was the European country hardest hit by the COVID-19 pandemic.[218]

On 24 March 2020, Putin visited a hospital in Moscow's Kommunarka, where patients with coronavirus are kept, where he spoke with them and with doctors.[219] Putin began working remotely from his office at Novo-Ogaryovo. According to Dmitry Peskov, Putin passes daily tests for coronavirus, and his health is not in danger.[220][221]

On 25 March, President Putin announced in a televised address to the nation that the 22 April constitutional referendum would be postponed due to the coronavirus.[222] He added that the next week would be a nationwide paid holiday and urged Russians to stay at home.[223][224] Putin also announced a list of measures of social protection, support for small and medium-sized enterprises, and changes in fiscal policy.[225] Putin announced the following measures for microenterprises, small- and medium-sized businesses: deferring tax payments (except Russia's value-added tax) for the next six months, cutting the size of social security contributions in half, deferring social security contributions, deferring loan repayments for the next six months, a six-month moratorium on fines, debt collection, and creditors' applications for bankruptcy of debtor enterprises.[226][227]

On 2 April 2020, Putin again issued an address in which he announced prolongation of the non-working time until 30 April.[228] Putin likened Russia's fight against COVID-19 to Russia's battles with invading Pecheneg and Cuman steppe nomads in the 10th and 11th centuries.[229] In a 24 to 27 April Levada poll, 48% of Russian respondents said that they disapproved of Putin's handling of the coronavirus pandemic,[230] and his strict isolation and lack of leadership during the crisis was widely commented as sign of losing his "strongman" image.[231][232]

In June 2021, Putin said he was fully vaccinated against the disease with the Sputnik V vaccine, emphasising that while vaccinations should be voluntary, making them mandatory in some professions would slow down the spread of COVID-19.[234] In September, Putin entered self-isolation after people in his inner circle tested positive for the disease.[235]

Putin signed an executive order on 3 July 2020 to officially insert amendments into the Russian Constitution, allowing him to run for two additional six-year terms. These amendments took effect on 4 July 2020.[236]

Since 11 July, protests have been held in the Khabarovsk Krai in Russia's Far East in support of arrested regional governor Sergei Furgal.[237] The 2020 Khabarovsk Krai protests have become increasingly anti-Putin.[238][239] A July 2020 Levada poll found that 45% of surveyed Russians supported the protests.[240]

On 22 December 2020, Putin signed a bill giving lifetime prosecutorial immunity to Russian ex-presidents.[241][242]

Putin met Iran President Ebrahim Raisi in January 2022 to lay the groundwork for a 20-year deal between the two nations.[243]

Following the pro-western Revolution of Dignity in Ukraine in 2014, Putin had seized eastern regions of the nation and annexed Crimea. In July 2021, Putin published an essay titled On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians, in which he states that Belarusians, Ukrainians and Russians should be in one All-Russian nation as a part of the Russian world and are "one people" whom "forces that have always sought to undermine our unity" wanted to "divide and rule".[244] The essay denies the existence of Ukraine as an independent nation.[245][246]

In September 2021, Ukraine had conducted military exercises with NATO forces.[247] The Kremlin warned that NATO expanding military infrastructure in Ukraine would cross "red lines" for Putin.[248][249] Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov denied allegations that Russia was preparing for a possible invasion of Ukraine.[250]

On 30 November, Putin stated that an enlargement of NATO in Ukraine, especially the deployment of any long-range ballistic missiles capable of striking Russian cities or U.S. national missile defense systems similar to those in Romania and Poland, would be a "red line" issue for the Kremlin.[251][252][253] Putin asked President Joe Biden for legal guarantees that NATO would not expand eastward or put "weapons systems that threaten us in close vicinity to Russian territory".[254] The U.S. and NATO have rejected Putin's demands.[255][256]

The Kremlin repeatedly denied that it had any plans to invade Ukraine.[259][260][261] Putin dismissed such fears as "alarmist".[262] In December 2021, a Levada Center poll found that about 50% of Russians believed the U.S. and NATO are to blame for the Russo-Ukrainian crisis, while 16% blamed Ukraine, and 4% blamed Russia.[263][264]

On 2 February 2022, Putin warned that Ukraine's accession to NATO could embolden Ukraine to reclaim control over Russian-annexed Crimea or areas ruled by pro-Russian separatists in Donbas, saying: "Imagine that Ukraine is a NATO member and a military operation [to regain Crimea] begins. What are we going to fight with NATO? Has anyone thought about this?"[265]

On 21 February, Putin signed a decree recognizing the two self proclaimed separatist republics in Donbas as independent states and made an Address concerning the events in Ukraine. The same day Putin spoke of the "historic, strategic mistakes" that were made when in 1991 the USSR "granted sovereignty" to other Soviet republics on "historically Russian land" and called the entire episode "truly fatal".[267] He described Ukraine as being turned into the "anti-Russia" by the West.[268]

On 22 February, Putin televised a meeting of the Security Council of Russia over the annexation,[269][270][271] during which the chief of the SVR, Sergey Naryshkin, was seen visibly to tremble while he "stutter[ed] uncomfortably"[272] as Putin humiliated him publicly for "fumbling"[273] in his response to the Russian President's questioning.[274]

On 23 February, Putin in a televised address announced a "special military operation" in Ukraine,[275][276] launching a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.[277] Citing a purpose of "denazification", he said the purpose of the "operation" was to "protect the people" in the predominantly Russian-speaking region of Donbas who, according to Putin, "for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kyiv regime".[278] Putin said that "all responsibility for possible bloodshed will be entirely on the conscience of the regime ruling on the territory of Ukraine".[279] In his speech, Putin said he had no plans to occupy Ukrainian territory,[280] adding: "We are not going to impose anything on anyone by force".[279] On 24 February, he launched a war to gain control of the remainder of the country and overthrow the elected government under the pretext that it was run by "Nazis".[281][282]

Putin's invasion was met with international condemnation.[283][284][285] International sanctions were widely imposed against Russia, including against Putin personally.[286][287] Following an emergency meeting of United Nations Security Council on 24 February, UN Secretary-General Antnio Guterres said: "President Putin, in the name of humanity, bring your troops back to Russia."[288]

The invasion led to numerous calls for Putin to be pursued with war crime charges.[18][289] British Prime Minister Boris Johnson suggested Putin could face war crimes charges, and said that the UK and its allies are working to set up a "particular international war crimes tribunal for those involved in war crimes in the Ukraine theatre".[290] President Joe Biden said that be believes Putin "meets the legal definition" of being "a war criminal".[291] The International Criminal Court (ICC) stated that it would investigate the possibility of war crimes in Ukraine since late 2013.[292] The United States has pledged to help the ICC to prosecute Putin and others for war crimes committed during the invasion of Ukraine.[293]

From Africa, Kenya expressed opposition to Putin's actions and to the idea of using force to change borders left behind by collapsing colonial empires.[294] On 3 March, the United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly voted to condemn Russia for the invasion and demanded the withdrawal of Putin's forces. The Resolution ES-11/1 was passed by 141 votes to five (with 35 abstentions).[295] Putin's ally China and India abstained. International reactions to the invasion has given Russia a pariah status,[296] facing increasing international isolation.[297]

In response to what Putin called "aggressive statements" by the West, he put the Strategic Rocket Forces's nuclear deterrence units on high alert.[298] U.S. intelligence agencies determined that Putin was "frustrated" by slow progress due to the unexpectedly strong Ukrainian defense, "directing unusual bursts of anger" at his inner circle.[299]

On 4 March, Putin signed into law a bill introducing prison sentences of up to 15 years for those who publish "knowingly false information" about the Russian military and its operations, leading to some media outlets in Russia to stop reporting on Ukraine.[300] On 7 March, as a condition for ending the invasion, the Kremlin demanded Ukraine's neutrality, recognition of Crimea as Russian territory, and recognition of the self-proclaimed republics of Donetsk and Luhansk as independent states.[301][302]

On 16 March, Putin issued a warning to Russian "traitors" who he said the West wanted to use as a "fifth column" to destroy Russia. He said that Russians should undergo "natural and necessary self-cleansing of society" to rid themselves of "bastards" and pro-Western "traitors."[303][304]

On 24 March, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution drafted by Ukraine and its allies which criticized Russia for creating a "dire" humanitarian situation and demanded aid access as well as the protection of civilians in Ukraine. 140 member states voted in favour, 38 abstained, and five voted against the resolution.[305]

As early as 25 March, credible reports were published by the UN Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights that Putin ordered a kidnapping policy whereby Ukrainian nationals who did not cooperate with the Russian takeover of their homeland were victimized by FSB agents.[306][307][308] The Ukrainian government reported that 400,000 citizens have been forcibly taken to Russia where "some could be sent as far as the Pacific Ocean island of Sakhalin and are being offered jobs on condition they don't leave for two years", while "the Kremlin" in the person of Colonel General Mikhail Mizintsev said the relocated people wanted to go to Russia.[309] The Mayor of the besieged city of Mariupol compared the kidnappings to the actions of Nazi Germany during World War II.[310]

Follow this link:

Vladimir Putin - Wikipedia

Russian president Vladimir Putin has been given just three years to live by doctors, its claimed.

A growing number of unconfirmed reports alledge the 69-year-old president has cancer and that his health is deteriorating quickly.

And now an FSB officer has claimed Putin has no more than two to three years to stay alive, adding the Russian president has a severe form of rapidly progressing cancer.

Messages said to be from the unidentified Russian spy to FSB defector Boris Karpichkov also say Putin is losing his sight and suffering from headaches.

Putin is under the spotlight as the Ukraine war shows no sign of ending soon (Mikhail Metzel, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP)

We are told he is suffering from headaches and when he appears on TV he needs pieces of paper with everything written in huge letters to read what hes going to say, the Russian officer told the Sunday Mirror.

They are so big each page can only hold a couple of sentences. His eyesight is seriously worsening.

The spy added that Putins limbs are now also shaking uncontrollably.

Previous footage from earlier this year appeared to show his hand shaking, while as he also appeared to grip a table for support during a meeting broadcast in April.

Whispers about his health appear to have originated with the hugely popular Russian Telegram channel General SVR.

It claimed Mr Putins doctors have warned him the surgery might incapacitate him for a short time, and that during this period the president will briefly hand over the reins of power to an aide.

Concerns for his health grew after former UK intelligence official Christopher Steele said the Russian leader left meetings for medical treatements.

Its claimed that Putin has not been able to control his anger and frequently experiences outbursts of uncontrolled fury (AP)

Meetings of the security council that are shown to supposedly last for a whole hour are actually broken up into several sections, Mr Steele, who wrote a dossier on Donald Trump and Moscows alleged interference in the 2016 US election, told LBC radio.

Hes constantly accompanied around the place by a team of doctors.

And earlier this month an oligarch with close ties to Mr Putin was reportedly recorded saying he is very ill with blood cancer.

The unnamed Russian alleged in the recording that the president had surgery on his back shortly before ordering the invasion of Ukraine on 24 February, according to the US-based New Lines magazine.

Follow our live coverage of Ukraine-Russia news here.

See the original post here:

Vladimir Putin given three years to live and is losing his eyesight ...

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken

Weve also communicated directly and very clearly to the Russians, President Putin about the consequences, said Blinken.

Read also: Russia holds massive nuclear exercise, observed by dictator Putin

The secretary did not specify how the message was delivered to Putin, adding that Washington is carefully monitoring Moscows nuclear threats, and that Russias nuclear posture remains unchanged thus far.

Read also: Bowing to Putins nuclear blackmail will make nuclear war more likely

He also dismissed recent Russian claims of Kyiv allegedly preparing to detonate a dirty bomb in southern Ukraine.

Read also: Kremlins lies about Ukraines plans to use dirty bomb aim to force acceptance of occupation

The reason this particular allegation gives us some concern is because Russia has a track record of projecting, which is to say, accusing others of doing something that they themselves have done or are thinking about doing, Blinken concluded.

Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu contacted his French, UK, and Turkish counterparts on Oct. 23, alerting them to Ukraines plans to allegedly stage false flag operations involving a dirty bomb device.

Read also: Reznikov talks with Turkish, French and British counterparts after Shoigus lies

Western leaders and NATO officials have subsequently dismissed the claims as absurd.

Read the original article on The New Voice of Ukraine

Read more here:

US has warned Putin against using nuclear weapons, Blinken says

MIKHAIL KLIMENTYEV/Sputnik/AFP Russian President Vladimir Putin (L) and Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu (C) meet soldiers during a visit at a military training center of the Western Military District for mobilised reservists, outside the town of Ryazan on October 20, 2022.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is facing dissent from both pro-war activists and anti-war protesters, as Russia's war against Ukraine drags on.

More than eight months into the war against neighboring Ukraine, anger is growing across the country.

Staunch Putin allies are criticizing the military's handling of the conflict, Russian state TV hosts are shifting their tone on the war, attacks on military registration and enlistment offices and Russian railway infrastructure are increasing, and some officials are even calling for Putin's resignation.

The British Ministry of Defence said in its latest intelligence update on the war that the Russian anti-war group "Stop the Wagons" (STW) claimed responsibility for an October 24 explosion that damaged the railway near the village of Novozybkovo, located near the Russia-Belarus border.

It marked at least the sixth incident of sabotage against Russian railway infrastructure claimed by STW since June.

The ministry said that Russia's military primarily relies on rail transport for transporting forces to Ukraine and that Monday's attack is part of a wider trend of attacks against railways in both Russia and Belarus.

The railway that was targeted this week is the main rail link between Russia and southern Belarus.

"The Russian leadership will be increasingly concerned that even a small group of citizens has been sufficiently opposed to the conflict to resort to physical sabotage," the latest British intelligence update said.

The Institute for the Study of War (ISW), a U.S. think tank, separately said on Wednesday that prominent members of Putin's inner circle are equally voicing their dissatisfaction with war efforts in Ukraine.

It said this indicates that Putin will "continue to struggle to appease the pro-war constituency in the long term."

The ISW pointed to remarks made by Ramzan Kadyrov, the head of Russia's Chechen Republic, as he once again criticized the military's handling of the war on Tuesday.

In an audio message on his Telegram channel, Kadyrov, a longtime ally of Putin, said Moscow is "responding weakly" to Kyiv's counteroffensive to retake the southern Kherson region, and shelling in other areas that Putin has proclaimed to have annexed.

"In my opinion, we are responding weakly. If a shell flew in our direction, in our region, we must wipe out the cities," Kadyrov said.

Kadyrov last month also publicly ridiculed Putin's military, and lashed out at the Defense Ministry's leadership, saying that the Russian military "gave away several cities and villages."

The ISW said Kadyrov's statement indirectly criticizes the scale of the Russian missile campaign against Ukraine's energy infrastructure and that it lines up with other critiques that came after the first campaign began on October 10.

Criticism within the Kremlin elite will likely intensify as Russia loses more territories it had previously occupied, the ISW said, amid an anticipated Ukrainian victory in the Kherson region.

Putin hasn't directly addressed criticism from his inner circle, but last month, his spokesman issued a stern warning to Russians angry at the ongoing war in Ukraine.

Pro-Kremlin Telegram channels must be "very careful" when criticizing the Russian Defense Ministry, Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters at a news briefing on September 13.

"As for other points of view, critical points of view, as long as they remain within the framework of the current legislation, this is pluralism," Peskov said. "But the line is very, very thin, you have to be very careful here."

Newsweek has reached out to Russia's Foreign Ministry for comment.

Related Articles

Start your unlimited Newsweek trial

Visit link:

Vladimir Putin Faces Dissent From Both Sides as Russian Mood Sours

Thanks for signing up!

Access your favorite topics in a personalized feed while you're on the go. download the app

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday admitted his country faces "issues" in the Ukraine war, and told his team to speed up the decision-making process in the conflict.

But his remarks which were made in Russian, and were televised appear to have been translated differently by news organizations.

"Now we are faced with the need to more rapidly resolve issues associated with providing support for the special military operation and the need to counter economic restrictions that were imposed on us, which are truly unprecedented without any exaggeration," Putin told a newly formed Coordination Council, which was set up to improve support for the invasion of Ukraine, according to an official transcript from the Kremlin.

Putin's remarks have been translated differently by the AFP and Reuters, both of which have operations in Russia. While the Kremlin wrote that Putin used the phrase "economic restrictions," the AFP reported that Putin said Russia was facing "economic difficulties" due to sanctions over the war.

The difference in translations is notable because if Putin did indeed use the words "economic restrictions," the wording marks a departure from Putin's usual line of statements that indicate Russia is holding up well under sanctions.

Putin's comments, which came eight months after the invasion of Ukraine, wereseen as acknowledging challenges Russia has been facing on the ground.

They also came days after the Russian central bank issued several reports in October that acknowledged a challenging environment for the country's economy, even though it had seemed to be propped up by firm energy prices.

Putin's partial mobilizationof the country's 300,000 military reservists in September created new challenges for production processes and output maintenance, according to a Russian central bankreport released last week. The exerciseis also expected to "negatively affect consumer and business confidence," the central bank said.

"The recovery of economic activity stalled in September," the research department of the central bank wrote. By the end of the month, the economic conditions had worsened, it added.

Putin's address to his coordination council came two days after Russia's defense minister accused Ukraine of preparing to use radioactive "dirty bombs" sparking concerns about an escalation in the war.

The US, the UK, and France rejected Russia's allegation about "dirty bombs" in a joint statement, saying Russia's "transparently false allegations" were "a pretext for escalation."

Read the rest here:

Putin Admits Russia Is Facing 'Issues' in the Ukraine War

Paramount+

According to everyone featured in Secrets of the Oligarch Wives, Vladimir Putin is a ruthless, greedy, sociopathic monster who cares only about his own power, wealth, and legacy as a titan who united and restored the glory of Mother Russia. The ongoing war in Ukraine, as well as the continued imprisonment and mistreatment of opposition leader Alexei Navalny, corroborates those claims, although the true hook of the Paramount+ documentary about the Russian president is its insider commentary from the women who were closest to the authoritarians oligarchs. What they have to say isnt particularly shocking, but its certainly further evidence that the world is in peril from a man willing to do anything, to anyone, to achieve his own ends.

Narrated by Ranvir Singh and executive produced by Justine Kershaw, Laura Jones and David McNab, Secrets of the Oligarch Wives (out June 28) is a portrait of Putin as the most dangerous man on the planet, told largely by a collection of women with ties to bigwigs whose lives were deeply affected by him. There are only two nominal oligarch wives spotlighted by this 90-minute documentaryCountess Alexandra Tolstoy (a distant relative of Russian writer Leo Tolstoy), who spent years alongside oligarch Sergei Pugachev; and Tatiana Fokina, the spouse of exiled cellphone oligarch Evgeny Chichvarkinand even then, the former was never formally married to her Russian billionaire partner. In terms of false advertising, this is a moderate case, if not an ultimately disastrous turn of events, given that the speakers do an adequate job providing first-hand accounts of the turmoil and terror wrought by Putin against anyone who dares stand in his way.

Inside Sundances Top-Secret Documentary on Putin Target Alexei Navalny

For its opening third, Secrets of the Oligarch Wives functions as a basic primer on Putins rise to power. When the Soviet Union fell in 1989, Putin was a KGB agent stationed in Dresden, East Germany, and in Russias ensuing wild west of the 1990s under President Boris Yeltsin, he rose through the countrys political ranks, eventually becoming Yeltsins successor when the leader abruptly resigned from his post on Dec. 31, 1999. According to financier and political activist Bill Browder, Yeltsin had propped up his failing nationracked by pervasive unemployment, food shortages, and crumbling state industriesby selling 40 percent of the country to 22 oligarchs, borrowing money from them and then defaulting on the loans. This created a class of oligarch billionaires with not only untold riches but massive political clout, and this group hand-selected Putin as Russias new president, assuming he was a boring functionary whod do their bidding.

Story continues

They were wrong. Though Yeltsin had turned a blind eye to the oligarchs, who basically operated as mafia bosses, Putin decided that hed become Russias chief Godfather, demanding huge cuts of their profits (and their unwavering loyalty), and dishing out severe penalties for anyone who disobeyed his wishes. For critical voices in the FSB like Alexander Litvinenko, that meant fatal poisoning. For his former businessmen allies, it meant criminal prosecution and the seizure of assets. Far from a malleable pawn, Putin revealed himself to be a cagey tyrant with no limits. Yet since hed initially appeared to be a young, vibrant, open-to-the-West breath of fresh air, most were happy to overlook his more dictatorial actions. Even when the mysterious deaths of opponents began piling up, those crimes were carried out with enough plausible deniability to provide others with justification for continuing to do business with him.

All of this is well-trod territory, and Secrets of the Oligarch Wives is hardly thorough enough to be a real non-fiction history lesson. Nonetheless, it gets the general background details right, and embellishes that familiar material with stories from Tolstoy and Fokina. For the former, life with Pugachev was a whirlwind of glamorous yachts and ritzy palaces, which she makes no bones about having lovedat least until Putin decided to turn on his former confidant and send him fleeing to France. Fokina, meanwhile, didnt meet Chichvarkin until after he had escaped Russia following Putins attempts to confiscate his empire and prosecute him for all manner of offenses. In both instances, the women dispense tales about Putins nastiness, little-man complex, and brutality, which are then complemented by similar remarks from Litvinenkos widow Marina as well as Browder, whose colleague was killed after speaking out against Russian corruption, and whoin a stunning archival press-conference clipis singled out as an enemy by Putin, at which point Donald Trump voices his support for the Russian leaders autocratic intentions.

Tolstoy takes viewers on a car-ride tour of some of the many mansions that the oligarchs own (or previously owned) in London, where so many have fled over the past 20 years. Yet just as Secrets of the Oligarch Wives leaves Tolstoys personal details vague, so too does the documentary refuse to pointedly question her about her willingness to get into bed with a shady criminal simply because his affluence and influence were enticing. Even Browder, who speaks harshly about Putin, is barely identified, such that his current position in Putins crosshairs comes across as a fact devoid of meaningful context. Talk about Putins own humble upbringing, and later enthusiasm for living in the lavish Kremlin, are eventually fingered as potential reasons for his merciless tyranny, but that angle also feels thin and underdeveloped.

The ongoing siege of Ukraine is briefly addressed toward the close of Secrets of the Oligarch Wives, and it serves as the latest and most heartbreaking example of Putins viciousness. Fokina surmises that Putin is willing to do anything because hes secretly ill, while Browder suggests that hes a mentally unwell madman who lacks empathy, a conscience, and normal human emotionsand has for his entire life. A wealth of old clips cast Putin in an unflattering light, depicting him as a stone-faced creep. Unfortunately, just about any nightly news broadcast could tell you the same thing, and without the pretenses of this rather shallow documentary, which purports to deliver untold secrets about Russias elite from the women who were once a part of it, and yet mostly mixes well-publicized facts and scattered anecdotes to produce unenlightening results.

Read more at The Daily Beast.

Get the Daily Beast's biggest scoops and scandals delivered right to your inbox. Sign up now.

Stay informed and gain unlimited access to the Daily Beast's unmatched reporting. Subscribe now.

Original post:

Russias Oligarch Wives Claim Putin Is Suffering From a Secret Illness

A new Holy Roman Empire has formed across the world. It is a new nomosthe phrase Carl Schmitt borrowed from the Greeks to outline the scope of a new Europeof territorial and resource acquisition. In this new Europe, borders collapse and civilizational economic, political, and cyberspace diasporas harken to the real dark age, that of modernity. The worlds existential crisis is not only the makings of the mad Tsar but a competition for the grossraum (empire-building) of resource scarcity and areas of influence. The nomos is not written over maps or borders. It is spherical rather than linear and revolves around several dimensions as civilizational states ebb and flow, and competition extends into space and technology. Traditional ideologies of Left and Right become superfluous as the new technological materialism ushers in a tsunami of crises, wrapped in uniform elite manipulation of the political.

At present, the Western media consensus is correct about Russian aggression and aggrandizement. However, the underlying tectonic plates have shifted to a concerted new alliance. This alliance is a New Holy Roman Empire that does not sit in the heart of Europe but on the peripheries. The U.S.-British alliance is Atlanticism dressed in the old robes of liberality but the main player is the new grossraum of elite competition. The origins of the alliance are not only material and resource-oriented but also cultural. The United States has once again placed itself at the epicenter of the liberal order. Liberalisms values are essentially against the other and presume a moral superiority that is exported through missionary ventures. It is no wonder that George Soros is a big fan of Atlanticism and keen to dismantle the main threat to the United States: the Molotov-Ribbentrop marriage of convenience between Russia and Germany. For Soros, a strong European powerhouse like Germany shifts the balance back to Europe. The United States has the strategic support of Great Britain. However, while the United States is driven by raison dtat, the British are driven by Palmerstons assertion of self-interest dosed with a vindictive streak for enemies. Therefore, Great Britains enemies are Russia and Germany in equal order. Of course, this is all dressed up in the pretty verbiage of liberal values. The essential realpolitik is to weaken Germany, stoke the flames of Europes eastern borders, and destroy a Russo-German collaboration that would establish a super-powerful grossraum in Europe. Germany, already the dominant force in the European Union (EU), is, despite its post-war liberal fawning, essentially a culture state like Italy,

The Russian response reflects the structure of the two hegemonic blocks: the Atlantic alliance of the United States and Great Britain, and the Chinese-Russian grossraum. Ukraine represents the grinding tectonic plates of the hinterland. However, it is represented almost universally in U.S. and British media as a fight between authoritarianism and democracy. Yet, in 2015 The Guardian described Ukraine as the most corrupt nation on earth. The trend towards authoritarianism is a chimera as it has occurred in all political systems, not only ostensibly authoritarian ones. The geopolitical policy of the West is shrouded in the language of humanitarian global moral rights. War, away from the battlefield, amounts to a battle of media narratives, and here the cannon fodder is the modern man confined to the economic realm. Yet liberal democracy suffers from an internal weakness when it confronts civilizational states: the lack of homogeneity. While differentiation and individualism benefit isolated people in the economic marketplace, the world of realpolitik is suited to homogeneity, irrespective of any moral take on this position.

The value-driven world of the Western knowledge class is at odds with the productive class, represented by the schism shown in the shift to populism and democracy in European countries such as Italy, Sweden, and Hungary. The neoliberal dream of deterritorialization and degradation of the nation-state and civilizational realmsconsidered part of the raison dtat of a globalized marketis seen as a major threat by Russia. The Russian policy of pushback in Ukraine has been long nurtured by Russian analysts. It is not a recent reaction of some hardliners in the Kremlin, or an idea dreamed up by the mad Tsar. It is deemed sacrosanct that globalization on the scale so far seen is a strategic disaster for Russian interests due to the hegemonic effects of U.S. financial and technological monopolization of the world. Consequently, for Russia, the war in Ukraine serves two purposes. One is the expulsion of NATO from Eastern Europe and the second is to foment a crisis of confidence in globalization and build new blocks of cooperation in the east.

Russia, China, and a resurgent Germany would represent an existential threat to U.S. interests, which are already suffering from internal dissonance and social breakdown. U.S. institutions are failing to represent the heterogeneity that existed after World War II. The United States, due to this internal dissonance, always needed a foe, first communism then Islam. At the same time, this allowed for massive spending and a wartime economy that was an exportable commodity. Military aid to Ukraine is the global tax on such a system. As Vladimir Lenin apparently noted (although the quote was never attributed to him), at the heart of the Western mission is a contradiction. When the time comes to hang the capitalists, they will sell us the rope. This contradiction is more noted when liberal democracy attempted to legitimate capital through a global liberal values-based system.

The reason why the Ukraine conflict is so essential to Russian interests is that it has its roots in the legacy of the Russian revolution. In essence, the Soviet republics were never part of a civilizational Soviet Union. It was a forced marriage and outside of European Russia;the nomenklatura of the Soviet Union had little in common with the Kazakhs or the Tartars. This is why the war with Ukraine has existential connotations for Vladimir Putin and Russia. It could lead to the collapse of the Soviet system. Everywhere the world is facing a return to populism and federalism. In the United States, this is a fundamental reaction to state aggrandizement of the liberal knowledge class. Although populism is highly democratic, as seen with the Brothers of Italy partys recent victory, it is savaged by the liberal knowledge class since it poses a threat to their extraction of state funding through blocs like the EU. Likewise, in other regions of the world, from the post-Soviet space to Iran and Great Britain, there is a nascent democratic urge to move away from centralization. The elites of the world are battling each other for resources and financial aggrandizement but the removal of the elites would benefit a move to a Westphalian system of federation and autonomy for homogenous, civilizational states. The 1648 Treaty of Westphalia heralded a definition of respect for borders, religious tolerance, an end to the Thirty Years War, and the Holy Roman Empire. A new system based on these tenets could revitalize Europe by demolishing the liberal universalism of the EU and respecting ethnic diversity. At Westphalia, precedent and tradition were merged with law and reason. We stand now at a similar juncture. The liberality of the Enlightenment descended into the dogmatism of modern liberal democracy. Dostoevsky correctly diagnosed the descent into nihilism and materialism of modernity, writing that If nations fail to live by superior disinterested ideas, by the lofty aims of serving mankind, and merely to serve their own interests, they must unfailingly perish, grow benumbed, wear themselves out, die.

Brian Patrick Bolger studied at the London School of Economics. He has taught political philosophy and applied linguistics in Universities across Europe. His articles have appeared in The National Interest, The Montreal Review, The European Conservative, The Salisbury Review,The Village, New English Review, The Burkean, The Daily Globe, American Thinker, and Philosophy Now. His new book,Coronavirus and the Strange Death of Truth, is now available in the United Kingdom and United States. He can be reached at[emailprotected].

Image: Reuters.

Read more:

Is the West Ready for the Second Russian Revolution? - The National Interest Online

Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the exiled Russian businessman, has called on Russians still inside the country to launch a wave of sabotage against state structures, with the aim of derailing Vladimir Putins war in Ukraine and destabilising his government.

Khodorkovsky, who spent a decade in jail between 2003 and 2013 and now lives in London, said Putins invasion had completely changed the agenda for Russias political opposition, and claimed that armed resistance may play a role at some point in the future.

We need to explain to people what they can do, persuade them that they should do it, and also help people if as a result they end up in a dangerous situation, Khodorkovsky told the Guardian.

He said potential actions should depend on each persons tolerance for risk, and could range from painting anti-war graffiti in the streets to sabotaging railway deliveries linked to the war or burning down conscription offices.

But we are very clearly against terrorist methods that harm unarmed people, he said, criticising the killing of Darya Dugina, the daughter of a Russian imperialist ideologue, last month, which was claimed without any evidence by a hitherto unknown group of Russian partisans.

Khodorkovsky was speaking in his first interview about his new book, The Russia Conundrum, which is out later this week. Part memoir and part analysis of Putins years in office, the book lays out a template for western states on how to deal with Moscow.

Khodorkovsky has one of the most remarkable personal stories of post-Soviet Russia, rising from economic beginnings in the Youth Communist League during Mikhail Gorbachevs reforms in the late 1980s to become Russias richest businessperson through his chairmanship of Yukos oil company.

In the book, Khodorkovsky describes his early meetings with Putin, which he left convinced that the new Russian president was an ideological ally. His technique is to look at you and mirror what you are saying Hes a chameleon who leaves everyone thinking hes on their side, he writes.

Looking back, he admits he completely misread Putin. I wasnt sharp enough to see it. He has that professional KGB skill of adapting to his interlocutor, but he also just has a personal talent for it Back then, he didnt feel stable in his position and he didnt want to create enemies who would unite against him. Of course he never had any liberal views.

In 2003, Khodorkovsky was arrested on charges widely seen as political, after he publicly criticised government corruption during a meeting with Putin, and promised to fund opposition parties. His arrest was seen as one of the first milestones in Putins gradual tightening of the screws over the past two decades.

Khodorkovsky said Putins decision to launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine had shocked him anew, and completely changed his views on how best to oppose the regime.

Of course, [the invasion] was an absolutely fundamental moment. My impressions and feelings before and after 24 February are completely different, he said.

All four of Khodorkovskys grandparents were either Ukrainian or spent time living in Ukraine, and as a young child, he used to spend summers at his great-grandmothers house near Kharkiv. Nevertheless, he always identified as Russian.

It always felt normal, nothing to be ashamed of to be Russian. Now every time you say youre Russian, there is an internal discomfort, he said.

Like many Russians, Khodorkovsky has had arguments in recent months that have ended longstanding friendships. He said even among friends who supported him through his years of imprisonment, some had turned out to be fans of the Ukraine invasion.

Imagine, you know people since you were both seven years old, and now youre both nearly 60 and you just cant speak to them, he said.

Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you through the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning

However, he also said it was important for the west to focus on the many Russians who did not support Putins regime or the war in Ukraine. He is strongly against the policy being floated in some European capitals of a full ban on tourist visas for Russians.

The west has ideological allies inside Russia, who think that Russia should develop on a European path, he said.

If Putin lives another 10 or 15 years it would really lower the number of European oriented Russians, and I dont think this is good for anyone except Putin.

During his decade in London, Khodorkovsky has remained an active commentator on issues inside Russia, and funded various civil society movements through his Open Russia foundation, which was ruled an undesirable organisation by Russian courts back in 2017 and ceased operations.

He was one of many opposition figures to address the so-called Congress of Free Russia, which took place in Lithuania last week and aimed to come up with a coordinated platform for opposition to Putin. But critics say much of the opposition is now disconnected from life inside the country. Associates of jailed opposition leader Alexei Navalny declined to take part in the Lithuania congress, dismissing it as a meaningless talking shop. For now, it is hard to see a mass opposition movement being possible inside Russia.

Khodorkovsky said that, sooner or later, Putins regime would fall. One key element in this will be Ukraine winning the war, he hopes. Then, Russia should be reformatted as a loose parliamentary federation. There was a path to this outcome that did not involve bloodshed, he claimed, but its rather unlikely.

The most important thing, he said, was for the west not to write Russia off completely, so that when the crunch moment did come, there would be more chance of post-Putin Russia being liberal and pro-western.

This is a nightmare, but this nightmare does not mean that Russia and Europe have separated for ever. Its extremely important that in this difficult emotional background, we keep a sound mind, pragmatism and a vision of the future, of a democratic, European Russia, he said.

The Russia Conundrum: How the West Fell for Putins Power Gambit and How to Fix It by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, with Martin Sixsmith, will be published on 8 September by WH Allen, 20

More:

Exiled Russian calls on those still in country to sabotage Putins war - The Guardian

Ukraines major western allies have yet to sign up to establish a tribunal to try Vladimir Putin and his inner circle for the crime of aggression, wanting to leave space for future relations with Russia, according to Ukraines top officials.

Its big politics. On the one hand, countries publicly condemn the aggression but on the other, they are putting their foot in the closing door on relations with Russia so that it doesnt close completely, said Andriy Smyrnov, deputy head of Ukraines presidential administration, who is leading the countrys effort to establish the international tribunal.

They are attempting to keep some space for diplomatic manoeuvres, said Smyrnov. We know that agreements with Russia are not worth the paper they are written on.

His claims come as the US president, Joe Biden, said on Monday that Russia should not be designated as a state sponsor of terrorism, something Ukrainian officials and some US politicians had pushed for. Russia had previously said such a designation would mean Washington had crossed the point of no return.

Ukrainian officials say that since April, they have been trying to convince their western allies to establish an ad hoc tribunal which would hold Russias senior leadership responsible for the crime of aggression for invading Ukraine. Aggression is viewed as the supreme crime under international law because without the transgression of borders during an invasion, subsequent war crimes would not have been committed.

So far only the Baltic states and Poland have pledged support for the tribunal, said Ukraines officials. We are expecting broader support, said Ukraines prosecutor general, Andriy Kostin. For us, the support of the UK and the US is very important as well as the rest of the civilised world, said Smyrnov.

The UKs newly elected prime minister, Liz Truss, told Times Radio in May, when she was foreign secretary, that she would consider supporting the tribunal. The Council of Europe is due to discuss support for such a measure on 13 September.

At an event in Brussels on Monday, Andriy Yermak chief adviser to Ukraines president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy asked why there was a delay in creating the tribunal and said some European officials seemed convinced the international criminal court (ICC) was enough.

At the same event, the European commissioner for justice, Didier Reynders, said he was open to the idea, but talked mainly about help the EU is giving to compile war crimes which can be referred to the ICC.

Ukraine favours a one-off international tribunal to try the Russian leadership for aggression, which is not within the ICCs jurisdiction. The court is set to bring cases of war crimes which require prosecutors to identify the direct perpetrators of a crime and then trace the command structure upwards, making it difficult to reach the top echelons of the Russian regime.

Western allies have, however, been reluctant to move to try Putin and other senior figures, an act that would probably end all relations. Ukraine believes this is an indication that, despite the scale of atrocities and public declarations against Russia, some of its allies envisage possible negotiations with Russias current leadership.

It will be like trying the concentration camp directors and letting Hitler and his team walk free, said Oleh Gavrysh, part of Smyrnovs team in the presidential office. During the Nuremberg trials after the second world war, Nazi leaders were tried for the crime of aggression, which was then known as the crime against peace.

Ukraines officials say the case would not need much investigation and would act as a straightforward mechanism to ensure the Kremlins decision makers face responsibility since the fact that the act of aggression took place was overwhelmingly accepted by a vote at the UN general assembly and has been supported by a resolution of the European parliament. It has also been repeatedly admitted by Putin and his circle.

The legal arm of the Open Society Foundations has drawn up a preliminary indictment of Putin and seven of his closest allies for the crime of aggression. It said it hoped the document can demonstrate the feasibility of such a tribunal.

When you help the ICC, you donate to the independent judicial authority and you are not linked somehow to the result, said Kostin, Ukraines chief prosecutor. When you support [a] tribunal, you act as a state, its a political act and not all of them, at the moment, are ready to politically support this.

He added: Russia is like terra incognita (unexplored territory) for many of them and some of them want to keep some room to, if not be friends again, but to have some relations, which I dont understand and no Ukrainians will understand.

Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you through the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning

Some states have viewed the idea of the tribunal with scepticism because Putin and his men would probably be tried in absentia, said Smyrnov.

The main thing I want to say to the sceptic countries is that the creation of this tribunal is not a question of symbolism, said Smyrnov.

It makes no difference if Putin is personally present at this tribunal. [If] the majority of civilised countries in the world sign this international agreement to establish the tribunal we will narrow down and limit the international allies of Putin.

If Putins circle is narrowed down to North Korea and Syria that will be very good and if [Putin] dies in his own country labelled as an international criminal, that will be concrete punishment.

See more here:

West reluctant to put Putin on trial, say Ukrainian officials - The Guardian

During the early stages of Vladimir Putins special military operation in Ukraine, there was speculation in the western media that his days as Russian leader were numbered.

As Ukrainians fought fiercely against Russian forces, many commentators claimed that unprecedented western sanctions would soon bring the Russian economy to its knees.

Russian oligarchs were supposedly going to shed their loyalty to Putins regime as their assets and yachts were seized in the West. The wider Russian population would soon feel the economic pain of sanctions and be unwilling to accept the growing death toll for Russian forces in Ukraine.

This scenario has yet to take place, and there arent any meaningful signs that it will in the near future.

In fact, Russian public opinion polls have suggested an increase in Putins popularity after the invasion. Support for the war itself is not as high as Putins overall approval rating but he can still count on majority support for the invasion.

Additionally, the Russian economy has remained surprisingly robust to a considerable extent helped by the sanctions meant to damage it. By denying themselves Russian oil and to a lesser extent gas, European countries contributed to an increase in oil and gas prices that has buoyed the Russian coffers.

Western commentators have also suggested that, simmering beneath the opinion poll numbers, there is latent opposition to Putin that isnt being expressed because of fear. At the same time, there have been arguments that the Russian population is subject to a barrage of pro-Kremlin propaganda and therefore unable to really question the status quo.

This alternative to Putins world view is almost nowhere to be found in Russian media.

Theres no question the Russian population is subject to a Russian media largely loyal to the Kremlin and speaking out publicly against the war will certainly get you into trouble in Russia. But that doesnt mean Putin lacks genuine supporters.

Most of Russias population is, at worst, willing to quietly acquiesce in Putins regime.

There are good reasons for this beyond fear. First of all, many Russian oligarchs and political leaders are closely bound to Putin through a system of patronage that is deeply entrenched. Without Putin, they are likely to lose much of their wealth and status.

At the same time, some of those in the upper echelons of Russian society support Putins nationalist agenda. Many Russian nationalists believe Russia has been reborn under Putin.

In some ways, thats true after the widespread misery of the 1990s.

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 was a major blow to Russian prestige. The economic and political turmoil of the 1990s that followed under President Boris Yeltsin is not looked back upon with nostalgia by many Russians.

During the Yeltsin era, Russia seemed to be joining the western liberal fold, but for many, that brought only economic pain and disorder. Not only was Russia a second-class power on the world stage, but the benefits of economic and political liberalization seemed to lack substance.

During the 1990s, older Russians saw their savings wiped out not once but twice within a decade.

I spent some time in the city of Podol'sk near Moscow during the second financial crash of 1998 as hyperinflation destroyed savings and made many imported goods unaffordable. A sort of fatalistic anger was a common response to yet another economic blow.

Currency devaluation soon followed, and yet the Russian economy recovered far more quickly than many observers expected.

Shortly after the 1998 financial crash, Yeltsin helped bring Putin to power as acting president at the end of 1999. An unlikely successor for Yeltsin in terms of his political profile, I didnt expect much to change under Putin.

At first, Putins policies were similar to Yeltsins.

Nonetheless, by the time I visited Russia for the first time in several years in 2015, I could feel a palpable change in mood since my last visit. Not only was there greater order and cleanliness on the streets, but also a growing feeling of self-confidence in the Russian capital.

This was a year after Russia had annexed Crimea. Most Russians supported that move.

Putin had not rid Russia of the hated oligarchs, but they had been brought into line. Attempts were also made to reduce or give the appearance of reducing corruption.

Putin the strongman had brought a degree of order after the chaos, and many Russians welcomed it even though a number of democratic elements of the Yeltsin regime disappeared. Western-style liberalism had not offered most Russians the sort of life promised to them by proponents of reform as the Soviet Union collapsed.

Even today, evidence suggests many Russians including those born after the Soviet Unions collapse value many things before democracy and western political liberalism. The relative economic stability and order provided under the Putin regime has had widespread appeal.

Western sanctions have undoubtedly hit many Russians. However, the blanket and unprecedented nature of western sanctions and western hypocrisy in its treatment of Russia feed into Putins narrative that the West wants to keep Russia down.

Read more: Why Vladimir Putin won't back down in Ukraine

The West has made it easy for Putin to claim to be a defender of Russian interests.

In the absence of obvious alternatives to Putin, only his health is likely a significant potential threat to his rule at the moment, and recent speculation about his ill health seems to be based on little or no meaningful evidence.

As far as we can reasonably tell, Putin is here to stay.

See more here:

Why Vladimir Putin still has widespread support in Russia - The Conversation

U.S. ambassador to U.N. says Russia has deported up to 1.6 million Ukrainians to 'filtration camps'

New US Ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield speaks after meeting with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres at the United Nations on February 25, 2021 in New York City.

Angela Weiss | AFP | Getty Images

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield said that Russian authorities have forcibly deported between 900,000 and 1.6 million Ukrainian citizens from their homes to Russia.

"We have evidence that hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian citizens including children have been interrogated, detained, and forcibly deported, and some of them sent to very remote areas," Thomas-Greenfield told reporters ahead of the U.N. Security Council meeting.

"I want to be clear, the United States has information that officials from Russia's presidential administration are overseeing and coordinating these filtration operations," Thomas-Greenfield said, without naming Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Thomas-Greenfield outlined the "filtration" process for members of the U.N. National Security Council.

"You're stripped of your clothes, you are interrogated, you're beaten. You hear gunfire and screams from rooms next door. Others deemed more threatening are being tortured and killed. Because you are fighting age, you're asked to fight for Russia," she said.

"When you refuse, you're given a Russian passport and set deep into Russia against your will far away from your family and with no means to communicate with anyone you know or love. You've been filtered," she added.

The Kremlin has denied that it has forcibly detained Ukrainian civilians.

Amanda Macias

U.N. inspectors vowed to continue their visit to a Russian-held nuclear power plant in southern Ukraine despite an early shelling attack on the town next to the facility.

Genya Savilov | Afp | Getty Images

Ukraine's Permanent Representative to the United Nations Sergiy Kyslytsya said that Russia tried to exert pressure on IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi during his visit to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.

Kyslytsya addressed members of the U.N. Security Council.

Grossi, who led a team of investigators to the site earlier this month, published a report yesterday on the nuclear watchdog agency's findings.

Grossi recommended an immediate establishment of a demilitarized zone at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.

Amanda Macias

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky looks on at a press conference for selected media at his official residence the Maryinsky Palace on March 3, 2022 in Kyiv, Ukraine.

Laurent Van Der Stockt | Getty Images

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is considering the possibility of participating in the G-20 summit.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said during a national telethon that Zelenskyy may participate but has not yet made his decision. It is not clear if Russian President Vladimir Putin will attend the G-20.

The meeting will be held in Bali, Indonesia next month.

Amanda Macias

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken speaks during a news conference after meeting with top Japanese Ministers at the U.S. State Department on July 29, 2022 in Washington, DC.

Drew Angerer | Getty Images

Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke with his Polish counterpart Foreign Minister Zbigniew Rau on ways to continue coordinating support for Ukraine.

"The Secretary thanked Poland for its sustained security assistance and humanitarian support to Ukraine and its generosity in hosting millions of refugees from Ukraine," according to a readout of the call from State Department spokesman Ned Price.

"The Secretary also discussed strengthening bilateral cooperation on civil nuclear power generation in Poland to advance shared energy security, climate change, and national security objectives," Price added.

Amanda Macias

Ukraine Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said he spoke with the new British foreign secretary James Cleverly.

"We see eye to eye on the main goal: Ukraine must win," Kuleba wrote in a tweet.

"We will work actively together to persuade others across the globe to support it, especially those who may still have doubts. The fact that our call was Foreign Secretary's first speaks for itself," he added.

Cleverly became the U.K.'s foreign minister after Liz Truss ascended from that role to prime minister.

Amanda Macias

Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy attends the NATO summit via video link, as Russia's attack on Ukraine continues, in Kyiv, Ukraine June 29, 2022.

Ukrainian Presidential Press Service | via Reuters

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy spoke with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on the "military, humanitarian and economic situation in Ukraine," according to a German readout of the call.

The two leaders also discussed efforts to support Ukraine during its reconstruction from the war.

"The Chancellor stressed that Germany would not stop supporting Ukraine militarily, but also politically, financially and on a humanitarian level," German government spokesman Steffen Hebestreit wrote.

Scholz also received an update from Zelenskyy about the Russian-controlled Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant.

The two leaders agreed to remain in close contact.

Amanda Macias

A combine harvester of Continental Farmers Group agricultural company harvests wheat on August 4, 2022 in the Ternopil region of Ukraine.

Alexey Furman | Getty Images

More than 50 agricultural vessels have departed Ukraine for Asia in the first month since exports restarted, Ukraine's Infrastructure Minister Oleksandr Kubrakov said.

Under the U.N.-backed Black Sea Grain Initiative, a deal to reopen three Ukrainian ports, 54 vessels carrying more than 1 million metric tons of agricultural products have been exported to Asia. He added that so far 16 vessels have departed Ukraine for Africa carrying nearly half a million metric tons of grain and other foodstuffs.

Another 32 vessels carrying nearly 1 million metric tons of agricultural goods have departed for European ports.

Amanda Macias

Doctors Without Borders (MSF), in cooperation with the Ukrainian railways and the Ministry of Health, has just completed a new medical train referral of 48 patients, coming from hospitals close to the frontline in the war-affected east of the country.

Genya Savilov | AFP | Getty Images

Since Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, there have been at least 516 attacks on vital health services in the country, the World Health Organization'sSurveillance System for Attacks on Health Careestimates.

The organization reports that health care facilities were damaged 438 times, ambulances were targeted in 73 cases and at least 144 attacks affected crucial medical supplies. The group also estimated that attacks on health services led to at least 100 deaths and 129 injuries.

The Kremlin has previously denied that it targets civilian infrastructure like hospitals, schools and apartment buildings.

Amanda Macias

A serviceman with a Russian flag on his uniform stands guard near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in the course of Ukraine-Russia conflict outside the Russian-controlled city of Enerhodar in the Zaporizhzhia region, Ukraine August 4, 2022.

Alexander Ermochenko | Reuters

Ukraine's deputy prime minister called on residents near the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant to evacuate the area amid reports of Russian troops holding Ukrainians in the area hostage.

"The Russians are holding hostage not only the staff of the station. Residents of the temporarily occupied territories adjacent to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant are also held hostage. Tens of thousands of people," Iryna Vereshchuk wrote on Telegram, according to an NBC News translation.

Vereshchuk added thatUkraine's Ministry of Reintegration requested a humanitarian corridor in order to evacuate the civilian population from areas adjacent to the nuclear power plant.

"The answer is cynical silence," she said.

Amanda Macias

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping plan to meet next week in Uzbekistan at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization forum, a Russian official said on Wednesday.

Photo by Alexei Druzhinin/Sputnik/AFP via Getty Images

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping plan to meet next week in Uzbekistan, a Russian official said Wednesday, announcing a summit that could signal another step in warming ties between two powers that are increasingly facing off against the West.

Putin and Xi last met in Beijing in February, weeks before the Kremlin sent troops into Ukraine.

The two presidents oversaw the signing of an agreement pledging that relations between the sides would have no limits.

It remains unclear whether Xi knew at the time of Russias plans to invade Ukraine.

Associated Press

People arrive at the central train station from Pokrovsk, in the eastern part of Ukraine on April 11, 2022 in Lviv, Ukraine.

Joe Raedle | Getty Images

More than 7 million Ukrainianshave become refugees and moved to neighboring countries since Russia invaded Ukraine in late February, the U.N. Refugee Agency estimates.

Nearly 4 million of those people have applied for temporary resident status in neighboring Western countries, according to data collected by the agency.

"The escalation of conflict in Ukraine has caused civilian casualties and destruction of civilian infrastructure, forcing people to flee their homes seeking safety, protection and assistance," the U.N. Refugee Agency wrote.

Amanda Macias

ISTANBUL, TURKIYE - AUGUST 09: An aerial view of "Glory" named empty grain ship as Representatives of Russia, Ukraine, Turkiye and the United Nations (UN) of the Joint Coordination Center (JCC) conduct inspection on vessel in Istanbul, Turkiye on August 09, 2022. The UN, Russia, and Ukraine signed a deal on July 22 to reopen three Ukrainian ports -- Odessa, Chernomorsk, and Yuzhny -- for grain that has been stuck for months because of the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, which is now in its sixth month. (Photo by Ali Atmaca/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

Anadolu Agency | Anadolu Agency | Getty Images

The organization overseeing the export of agricultural products from Ukraine said that so far 96 vessels have left the besieged country since ports reopened.

The Joint Coordination Center, an initiative of Ukraine, Russia, the United Nations and Turkey, said the ships transported a total of 2,212,972 metric tons of grain and other food products.

Amanda Macias

A Russian serviceman stands guard the territory outside the second reactor of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Station in Energodar on May 1, 2022.

Andrey Borodulin | AFP | Getty Images

Ukraine's top nuclear inspector says the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant could be shut down if hostilities continue around the plant. Europe's largest nuclear plant continues to be at the center of accusations between Russia and Ukraine with both repeatedly accusing each other of shelling the Russian-occupied facility.

The head of Ukraine's nuclear regulatory body,Oleh Korikov, said shutting down the plant was under consideration.

"Further deterioration of the situation will lead to the fact that we will be forced to operate backup diesel power generators in order to sustain our security systems, and diesel fuel reserves are very difficult to replenish in conditions of war," Korikov said Wednesday in an interview broadcast on YouTube.

"In fact, we will need four tanks of diesel per day. It is very problematic to bring such a volume of fuel across the contact line now. That is, we can potentially get into a situation where we run out of diesel, which can lead to an accident with damage to the active zone of the reactors and the release of radioactive products into the environment. Then it will have consequences not only for Ukraine but also for other countries," he said.

"The option of turning off the station is indeed considered if appropriate conditions arise that would require such a stop. If this happens, the 6th power unit will be turned off."

The 6th reactor is currently the only one functioning in the plant, which was inspected by the International Atomic Energy Agency last week.

In the52-page report, IAEA investigators warned that while ongoing shelling "has not yet triggered a nuclear emergency, it continues to represent a constant threat to nuclear safety and security."

"The IAEA recommends that shelling on site and in its vicinity should be stopped immediately to avoid any further damages to the plant and associated facilities, for the safety of the operating staff and to maintain the physical integrity to support safe and secure operation," wrote IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi.

Holly Ellyatt

Britain's Ministry of Defense has confirmed earlier reports from officials in Ukraine that the armed forces there have been counterattacking Russian positions in the northeastern and eastern parts of the country, as well the south, where a counteroffensive was launched last week.

"Over the last 24 hours, heavy fighting has taken place on three fronts: in the north, near Kharkiv; in the east in the Donbas; and in the south in Kherson Oblast," the ministry said in its latest intelligence update Wednesday.

"Russia's planned main effort is probably an advance on Bakhmut in the Donbas, but commanders face a dilemma of whether to deploy operational reserves to support this offensive, or to defend against continued Ukrainian advances in the south," the ministry added.

Firefighters at the rubble of a building destroyed by Russia's missile strike in the Ukrainian city of Kharkiv on Sept. 06, 2022.

Metin Aktas | Anadolu Agency | Getty Images

"Multiple concurrent threats spread across 500km will test Russia's ability to coordinate operational design and reallocate resources across multiple groupings of forces. Earlier in the war, Russia's failure to do this was one of the underlying reasons for the military's poor performance," it said.

Holly Ellyatt

Russia has indicated that plans are being made for President Vladimir Putin to meet his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Samarkand, Uzbekistan, from Sept.15-16.

Russian envoy to Beijing, Andrey Denisov, told reporters on Wednesday that "in less than ten days we will have a regular meeting of our SCO leaders in Samarkand, we are getting ready for it. In general, this summit promises to be interesting, because it will be the first full-fledged summit since the pandemic," he said in comments reported by Russian state news agency Tass.

Read the rest here:

Putin says sanctions are a 'danger' to the world; Ukraine counterattacks in Kharkiv while Russian troops are occupied in the south - CNBC

Six months after Vladimir Putin announced the special military operation in Ukraine, Moscows commanders are said to be facing a dilemma. An intelligence update suggests they must choose between pursuing an offensive in the Donbas or to focus on defence in the south of Ukraine.

The UK Ministry of Defence this morning reported: Over the last 24 hours, heavy fighting has taken place on three fronts: in the north, near Kharkiv; in the east in the Donbas; and in the south in Kherson Oblast.

Russias planned main effort is probably an advance on Bakhmut in the Donbas.

But commanders face a dilemma of whether to deploy operational reserves to support this offensive, or to defend against continued Ukrainian advances in the south.

Intelligence officials at the British body added multiple concurrent threats over a large area will test Russias ability to coordinate operational design.

This will relate not only to the designation of troops but of resources.

Military economist Marcus Keupp today told German broadcaster NTV that in a year at the latest, the Russian army will have no more tans if the rate of attrition continues at this rate.

He said: Russia still has artillery superiority.

But within a month, the scale could be roughly tied between Russia and Ukraine with regards to arms.

READ MORE: Weakened Putin 'running out of weapons' - could be level with Ukraine

They said: Earlier in the war, Russias failure to do this was one of the underlying reasons for the militarys poor performance.

The success of Ukraines counterattacks could, however, rely on the ability of the West to continue supplying it with weaponry.

This ability becomes more strained by the week, as the Wests own supplies run dry.

A US defence official late last month told the Wall Street Journal that the level of military storage for certain combat resources are uncomfortably low.

Brad Martin, Director of the Institute for Supply Chain Secure at the Rand Corporation, added: Nations assume the risk that war is not going to take place, and have the assumption they can react when they need to.

It simply might not be true that you can ramp up [production quickly].

See more here:

Putin to be tested by Ukrainian counterattacks commanders face dilemma over focus - Express

Elon Musk wanted to "slow down" his $44 billion acquisition of Twitter months after Russia invaded Ukraine, saying in private texts that it wouldn't make sense to buy Twitter "if we're heading into World War 3."

These texts came to light in a hearing Tuesday about pushing back a trial in October over Musk's deal to buy Twitter, along with other disputes about discovery. Musk told Twitter in July he was officially backing out of his agreement to buy the company in a letter that argued Twitter had wrongfully withheld data on "bots" and spam accounts.

The text messages were sent May 8 to a banker at Morgan Stanley, which is financing part of Musk's deal. In these texts, the billionaire also cited a coming speech from Russian President Vladimir Putin. Putin gave a speech May 9 for the 77th anniversary of the Allied victory over Nazi Germany, where he said Russia's decision to invade Ukraine in February was the "only right decision" and baselessly claimed the West was "preparing for invasion of Russia."

"Let's slow down just a few days," Twitter's lawyer said, reading out Musk's texts during the hearing. "Putin's speech tomorrow is really important. It won't make sense to buy Twitter if we're heading into World War 3."

A lawyer for Musk, Alex Spiro of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, said the characterization of the texts in court was "utter nonsense as the full text chain shows." The full text chain is expected to be filed on the court docket next week.

Musk signed an agreement in April to buy Twitter and take it private. When Musk said he was dropping the deal in July, Twitter almost immediately sued him to enforce the contract and make Musk acquire it at the agreed-upon $44 billion price. Musk is widely seen to be on the back foot in the court battle, set to go to a five-day trial in early October.

Before Tuesday's hearing, Musk's lawyers cited a whistleblower complaint from Peiter Zatko, Twitter's former chief information-security officer, who told Congress last month in a formal disclosure that Twitter was inadequately dealing with various security issues. They said the issues Zatko presented called for more time.

In reading Musk's texts, Twitter's lawyer reiterated the company's argument that Musk was in contractual breach and his only motivation for trying to get out of the deal was personal financial concerns. Lawyers for Musk argued during the hearing that Twitter hadn't found any evidence to support its theory that he dropped the deal over economic concerns. "Their theory about what really happened isn't what really happened," his lawyer said at the hearing.

The Tesla CEO's legal team argues the social-media company intentionally misled him about the number of daily users and spam accounts on its site, amounting to fraud and breach of contract.

Are you a Twitter employee or someone with insight to share? Contact Kali Hays at khays@insider.com, on secure messaging app Signal at 949-280-0267, or through Twitter DM at @hayskali. Reach out using a non-work device.

Contact Grace Kay at gkay@insider.com.

See the rest here:

Musk cited Putin speech in early attempt to get out of Twitter deal - Business Insider

No revolutionary posters line the streets, flaming from the walls in clean reds and blues, as they did when George Orwell left Barcelona to fight in the Spanish Civil War. Nor can you hear loudspeakers bellowing revolutionary songs all day and far into the night, as Orwell did in 1936. Instead, gathered in a basement on a quiet, tree-lined street, the Belarusians preparing to leave Warsaw to join the Ukrainian army look more like a bunch of computer programmers getting ready for a long car trip.

Check out more from this issue and find your next story to read.

Maybe thats because they are a bunch of computer programmersor anyway, some of them aregathered in a basement on a quiet, tree-lined street, getting ready for a long car trip. Canned food, dried sausage, and bags of nuts and raisins are neatly stacked on the floor beside a pile of backpacks. A couple of SUVs are parked just outside. The cars have been donated by Polish or Belarusian sympathizers, or else were left behind by others who have departed for the front. The group I am meeting will be leaving for the Ukrainian border in an hour, and they are speaking with me on the condition that I dont take pictures and dont ask for names. If they are identified, members of their families could be visited, harassed, even arrested by the Belarusian police. Our relatives are hostages, one of them told me. Already, mothers of Belarusian soldiers fighting in Ukraine have been forced to make public statements denouncing their children.

I can tell you that they are young, in their 20s and 30s, and that they are on their way to join the Kastus Kalinouski Regiment, a military unit founded in March as a part of the Ukrainian army but with a separate, Belarusian status. I can also tell you that, appearances to the contrary, they and their leaders are thoroughly grounded in the international history of armed rebellion. They know their 19th-century antecedents: Kastus Kalinouski fought in the failed 1863 uprising against the Russian occupation of what was then the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. They know their 20th-century antecedents too, among them not just Orwell in Spain but Jzef Pisudski, a Polish general who fought with the Austrian army in 1914 because he hoped, eventually, to liberate Poland. Although Kalinouski was executed and Orwells cause ultimately failed, Pisudski marched his Polish Legions into Warsaw. By 1918, he was the leader of independent Poland. The men in the basement are going to Ukraine both because they are, like Orwell in Spain, sympathizers with another countrys democratic cause, and because they hope, like Pisudski in Poland, to eventually liberate Belarus from the dictatorship of Alexander Lukashenko, who has been in power for nearly three decades.

From the August 1923 issue: Jzef Pisudski, Aristocrat-Revolutionary

Hope is tempered with realismthey are headed for the front line of one of the most brutal wars of the 21st centuryand bolstered by desperation, the feeling that other, better roads to political change have disappeared. K, a man in his 20sfloppy blond hair, green T-shirt, ripped shortstold me he had begun his career working in a government office in Minsk, but quickly realized what that meant. Your work, everything that you do, is to make sure that the Lukashenko regime remains in power, he said. During a series of mass protests following a stolen election in 2020, a moment all of them call the revolution, K and a friend distributed leaflets with slogans criticizing the regime. The friend is now in prison, serving a four-year sentence (K tells me his name; later I find it on a list of political prisoners). After Russia invaded Ukraine, K was racked with guilt, unable to sleep, angry that the failure of the Belarusian revolution meant that Russian rockets could be launched at Ukraine from Belarus. I understood that we have an obligation to go to Kyiv, he says. And afterwards, we will go to Minsk.

We didnt finish our revolution, we didnt remove Lukashenko, we didnt prevent Russian troops from crossing our border to attack Ukraineall of these are reasons, now, to fight in Ukraine. A long-haired man, R (one of the computer programmers), told me that he, too, took part in the 2020 demonstrations, and that he, too, left Belarus afterward. But then R returned home for a visit. What he saw shocked him. People had stopped protesting: People arent fighting. This lifehe means life under the dictatorshipis enough for them. How can they just go on as if nothing is happening, as if rockets are not flying? To me its surreal.

Most of the men I spoke with have other options; they could have good lives outside Belarus if they wanted to. B, wearing a white T-shirt printed with the slogan INSPIRE, revealed halfway through our conversation that he speaks good English, and we switched from Russian. He has family in the U.S., and has been there several times (Bay Area Yosemite National Park ). His dream was to watch Woody Allen playing jazz in New York, but on the night he went to Caf Carlyle, Allen wasnt there. He describes himself as a digital nomador maybe better to say international homelessand has been traveling around Europe for the past few years. He, too, works in the world of computers, but he has wanted to fight in Ukraine since the war began. In March, it was very cold, and I was very scared. Although I am still scared, he said, those emotional videos, watching them one after another, over and over again, month by month, week by week, finally persuaded him to sign on with the Kalinouski Regiment.

Want to hear more from Anne Applebaum about Russias war on Ukraine? Join her, George Packer, and Franklin Foer at The Atlantic Festival, Friday, September 23. Register and find out more here.

K, R, and B might all be roughly described as Minsk intellectuals. Their leaders, organizing papers in the next room, tell me that among the volunteers are also recent high-school graduates, factory workers, ex-policemen. Some arrive in Warsaw on overnight buses from Belarus with no money and no plans, other than to join the Ukrainian army. On the front gate of the Kalinouski Warsaw headquarters is a sign with a phone number, in case volunteers show up when no one is around. How do they know where to go? Everyone knows, one of them told me.

I was also told about much rougher recruits, including former criminals, though I didnt encounter any myself. One of the exiles who staffs the Warsaw recruitment office put it like this: Certain kinds of people are drawn to the idea of weapons, fighting. Several former members of the Belarusian military and security services are also known to be fighting with the Ukrainian army, some in the Kalinouski Regiment and some in other units. Slowly, they are linking up with one another, and with sympathizers elsewhere. On August 9, a congress of the unified Belarusian opposition appointed Valery Sakhashchik, the former commander of a legendary paratrooper unit in the Belarusian army, as the effective minister of defense in exile; I spoke with him while he was in a car, driving to Ukraine for his first formal meeting with the Kalinouski Regiment. Sakhashchik left Belarus six years agoit was impossible to be a free person there, he told meand has been running a successful construction firm in Poland. He thinks the regiment might not yet be important militarily, but it is important emotionally, because a lot of people believe it represents the future of the Belarusian army.

Whether they make contact in advance or just appear on the doorstep, whether their background is in the military or at a university, all of the volunteers go through a verification process. Pavel Kukhta, the head of the Kalinouski Warsaw recruitment office (and one of the few people who has been public about his association with the regiment), told me that Belarusian kiberpartizanticyberpartisanshave hacked most of the databases used by the Belarusian KGB and can check whether residential, educational, and professional information is genuine. If its not, the men get sent on to the border anyway, where Ukrainian border guards will stop them and question them further. What happens after that to those who have given false information, Kukhta doesnt know.

Anne Applebaum: Russias war against Ukraine has turned into terrorism

Kukhta doesnt know a lot of things. He wont say where the new recruits will be training, or where they will be sent afterward. He cant say with any precision exactly how many of them are already fighting (hundreds). The less you know, the less you can accidentally reveal.

Even putting aside the need for operational security, Kukhta, who has been fighting with the Ukrainian army since 2016, originally in the Donbas, is clearly a man of few words. For this role, he doesnt need many. A couple of times while I am talking with the new recruits, he comes into the room where the men are waiting. He collects their passports, checks their names. There are no inspirational speeches and no drama: Everyone here has already made their decision and accepted the consequences. When I leave, they are lining up in the garden.

The next time I see themor I think I see themis a week later, in a scraggly field behind a parking lot in a suburb in central Ukraine. New recruits, perhaps including some I met in Warsaw, are dressed in camouflage, carrying weapons, and, in a nod to my presence, wearing balaclavas to hide their faces. Their uniforms were crowdfunded or donated by sympathizers in both Poland and Belarus. Their guns came from the Ukrainian army. Their trainer is from one of the Baltic states. He is particularly valued by the Belarusians because he has passed several NATO courses, and they want to learn to fight like NATO soldiers. One of the many ironies of the current moment is how many opponents of Putins Russia, from the Baltic to the Black Sea (and indeed all the way to Central Asia), share Russian as a common language and can use it to organize, even to teach American military doctrine, across national lines.

I watch them with Rokosh, the alias of a man who has been part of different Belarusian-democracy movements since the 1990s. He explains that todays exercises involve training to fight in cities. On other days they go to the Ukrainian armys shooting ranges, or practice trench warfare; the field has been dug up for that purpose. They follow a strict schedulemorning exercise, all-day training, films or lectures in the eveningsand live together in a run-down dormitory nearby.

Rokosh earlier joined me for a longer conversation in an unremarkable basement bar with three other Belarusians associated with the regiment or with the Belarusian opposition. All of them belong to a different generation from the men in the field. They have watched the rise and fall of various opposition movements and leaders since 1994, when Lukashenko first came to power. They watched his regime turn from the soft authoritarian rule of a collective-farm boss into a vicious, violent autocracy that tortures political prisoners and allows the Russian army to launch missiles into Ukraine from its territory. They remember the Soviet Union, and they do not want their country to become part of a neo-Soviet empire. What they want instead, one of them told me, is a radical change in the political system, legal system, economic system, and deep reforms of the entire society to bring Belarus to the principles of democracy and the rule of law. But they do not believe the current regime will disintegrate peacefully.

Like everybody else in the post-Soviet world, Rokosh and the other men have read Gene Sharp, the philosopher of nonviolent revolution and civic activism who died in 2018. They admire his ideas, but they dont think they apply to their situation anymore. Nonviolence was tried in Belarus. It failed. Flowers and demonstrations could not change this situation, one of them says, so it is time to try something else. They tell me about partisan underground movements inside their countryone of them is called Flying Storkswhich have, they say, racked up a few minor victories, including a drone attack on the headquarters of OMON, the Belarusian riot police, in Minsk. They also say they have distributed clandestine training videos designed to help people counter the tactics of the riot police: The peoples right to revolt is justified because all civilized methods of changing the situation were exhausted, one said. Even so, the Russian invasion of Ukraine was a turning point, a different level of threat, a shock to the system, a spit in the face. If Ukraine does not win, one of them told me, we will have to say goodbye to any idea of a free Belarus.

They arent the first to draw that conclusion. In the very early days of the war, inspired by another piece of historythe Belarusians who blew up railway lines and train stations to stop the Nazi advance into the Soviet Union in the early 1940sa group of Belarusian railway workers, helped by the kiberpartizanti, sabotaged some of the Russian trains carrying soldiers and supplies to the front. They mixed the signals, snarled the tracks, took down the computer system, damaged equipment. One group of saboteurs came under police attack while setting fire to a signaling box. A Belarusian Telegram channel, Belaruski Gayun, also helped by providing constantly updated information from anonymous subscribers on troop and equipment movements along the border, allowing Ukrainians to prepare. The channel is still going, and is still read carefully by those guarding the territory of northern Ukraine.

The members of the Kalinouski Regiment are motivated by a belief that the Belarusian regime is both much weaker and much more dangerous than many assume. Lukashenko, they argue, is deeply unpopular. They reckon that no more than 10 to 20 percent of the population supports himmostly pensioners, bureaucrats, and security-service employees who depend on the state for jobs in a failing economyand he knows this. Lukashenko has no ideology, but he will do anything to stay in power. That means that when Russian President Vladimir Putin threatens, as he did at the end of June, to transfer nuclear missiles to Belarus, the world should pay attention. Putin might want to avoid the geopolitical consequences of using nuclear weapons for the first time since 1945but Lukashenko might not care.

Putin could also force Lukashenko to send Belarusian troops to fight in Ukraine, but that kind of decision could have unintended consequences. Kukhta, Rokosh, and the others all say their regiment has been contacted directly by soldiers and officers now serving in the Belarusian army who want instructions on how to surrender if they are ordered to cross the border into Ukraine. Kukhta, the man of few words, gave them blunt advice: Put your hands up and your weapons down. He predicts that the majority of the Belarusian armys tanks and trucks would wind up in the control of the Ukrainian army. Although there is no way to verify that claim, at least one Belarusian border guard has successfully escaped to the Ukrainian side already, declaring that he wanted to join the fight against Russia. Sakhashchik, who also predicts that the majority of ordinary soldiers would not fight, made a video appeal back in February, calling on Belarusian soldiers not to join the invasion: This is not our war. You will not defend your homeland, home, or family and will not receive gloryonly shame, humiliation, and death.

The Kalinouski fighters think Belarus has another kind of significance too. After all, if the Russian leader wants to reunite Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine into some kind of neo-Soviet empire, Lukashenkos loyalty is a necessary ingredient. But what if the Belarusian pillar disappears? Then everything elsethe empire, the war with Ukraine, Putinism itselfmight crumble as well. This, they want the world to know, is an opportunity that should be taken, not least because, as one of them put it, Lukashenko is easier to unseat than Putin. Right now nobody other than the Poles and of course the Ukrainians is assisting the Kalinouski fighters. But maybe someday others will. Rokosh tells me that he wants the fighters eventually to get access to better Western and NATO intelligence about what goes on inside their country so that they can plan their next steps better. The Biden administrations warnings last autumn about the coming war in Ukraine convinced many people across Eastern Europe, Belarus included, that the Americans know a lot more than they let on. Alongside Gene Sharp, the fighters have also read Charlie Wilsons War, the book that describes how, in the 1980s, a single congressman persuaded Washington to help the Afghans overthrow their Soviet occupiers. If it happened once, maybe it could happen again?

Before I leave the scruffy field, I watch the volunteers get put through their paces. They are walking in groups of three, one behind the other, as if they were in an occupied city. Some of them are slow and awkward, giving the impression that this is the first time theyve ever held a gun. Some move faster, seem more experienced; one of them told me back in Warsaw that hes had some police training, and I wonder if he is one of the men moving lightly, adeptly, across the field. Several other people, including a young woman, are watching from the sidelines, listening intently to the words of the Baltic trainer. One of them has a Cossack haircutshaved head, except for a ponytailand arms covered in patriotic tattoos.

The trainer turns on heavy-metal music, and that adds a bit more drama to the scene. The sun beats down on the suburb, and I begin to feel bad about the balaclavas. The trainees repeat the same exercises over and over again. Rokosh explains that the idea, as with all military training, is for these moves to become automatic, instinctive. Computer programmers, high-school graduates, government bureaucrats, and maybe the odd thief must learn in just a few weeks to react without thinking when they are attacked.

However wearisome the exercise might be, this is the easy part, the predictable part. They will train, they will prepare, they will be sent to the frontall of that, they know. What they dont know is the true nature of the historical moment they inhabit, or how it will end. They have made a bet, but is it the right one?

Here is one more story told to me by the group in the basement bar: In 2021, a few members of the Belarusian underground started communicating clandestinely with some senior Belarusian officers who said they were ready to oppose the regime. After many months of conversation, the partisans finally agreed to travel outside the country, to Russia, in order to meet them; the officers said they didnt dare do so at home but could not travel abroad anywhere else. The meeting was a trap. As soon as the Belarusian-underground leaders arrived, they were all arrested and imprisoned.

I hear the historical echo in the story, as do the Kalinouski fighters. In the winter of 1945, 16 officers of the Polish resistance, all veterans of the struggle against Hitler, began to communicate clandestinely with Ivan Serov, the Red Army general who had just arrived to run the occupation of Poland. Convinced he wanted to help, they arranged to meet him in March. But it was a trap. They were all arrested, flown to Moscow, and imprisoned in the Lubyanka, the Soviet Unions most notorious prison, where three of them eventually died.

That story unfolded at a moment of maximum Soviet strength, when the Second World War was mostly won, the Yalta Agreement had already divided Europe into spheres of Soviet and Western influence, and no outsidersnot the British, not the Americanswere in a position to help the Poles. In 1918, by contrast, Pisudski liberated Warsaw from czarist occupation at a moment of maximum Russian weakness, when the Bolshevik revolution had begun, the Russian army had collapsed, and Europes other imperial autocracies, in Germany and Austria-Hungary, were failing as well.

But is this 1918, with Russian power waning? Or is this 1945, when it is finally consolidating? The Belarusians dont know, of course, but they want to influence the answer. In the bar, I asked the men if they are waiting for the right moment to return home. We are not waiting for the moment, one of them corrected me. We are working on creating the conditions that will make the right moment arrive.

They believe that if they lean hard on the scales of history and help the Ukrainians win, then both Russia and its Belarusian satrap will be far weaker. They could pay a high pricenot just with their time and effort but with their lives. On June 26, the commander of one of the Belarusian battalions died during the battle for Lysychansk. Ivan Marchuk, alias Brest, was 28. Others have also been killed, wounded, or captured.

But if they dont fight, they might pay another kind of price: If Ukraine loses and Russia is empowered, then Belarus will remain a dictatorship, and they will never be able to go home. Those of us who live in luckier countries, with better geography, dont know what it feels like to have a choice between fighting and exile, but all of the people sweating in this field truly do. Back in Warsaw, one of the volunteers told me that since leaving his country in 2020, he had done nothing but move from place to place, trying to make a different life but never really finding a home. Belarus is his only home, but before he can return there, he has to help change it. I run. And I run. And I run. I would like to stop running.

This article appears in the October 2022 print edition with the headline The Kalinouski Regiment. When you buy a book using a link on this page, we receive a commission. Thank you for supporting The Atlantic.

View post:

'Lukashenko Is Easier to Unseat Than Putin' - The Atlantic

Declarations

In the early morning of the first day of the war on Feb. 24, President Vladimir Putin defined the objectives of the countrys "special operation" as "protecting the inhabitants of Donbas, demilitarizing and denazifying Ukraine," and "bringing to justice those who have committed innumerable bloody crimes."

Continuing a Soviet tradition the invasion of Czechoslovakia in August 1968 and Afghanistan in December 1979 Putin said that he had "decided on a special military operation" in response to a request from the leaders of Donbas. And he stressed that "Russia has no plans to occupy Ukrainian territories.

Two and a half months later, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov complimented his boss, saying that the special military operation was designed to put an end to the reckless expansion and the reckless course of total U.S. domination." Four months later he corrected Putin: "the geographical objectives of the 'special operation' have changed. Now it is not only the DNR and LNR [Donetsk and Luhansk Peoples Republics], but also a number of other territories." And one of the generals even issued the enigmatic statement that "control over the South of Ukraine is another path to Transnistria [a Moldovan break-away state supported by Russia], where facts of oppression of the Russian-speaking population are also being observed."

Ultimate goals multiplied in the statements of various Russian officials, from security chief Nikolai Patrushev and parliament chairman Vyacheslav Volodin, Sergei Lavrov and presidential spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, and Putin himself. Now they included "preventing war from starting on the territory of Ukraine"; "restoring the statehood of the LNR and DNR within the borders of 2014; and "achieving a guarantee of Ukraine's real neutral status."

The "demilitarization" of Ukraine? In the six months of war Ukraine has received the most modern Western-made weapons worth tens of billions of dollars that it did not have before. Just the latest tranche for weapons, air defense systems, surface-to-air missiles, radars and artillery from the U.S. government was valued at $2.98 billion.

Denazification of Ukraine? It seems that no one except the Russian Chekists doing reconnaissance has seen them, and if someone else did see some Nazis, there were about as many of them in Ukraine as there are on Moscows Pushkin Square on Adolf Hitler's birthday. None of the dozens of journalists from around the world who broadcast their reports from Ukraine have met any Nazis or fascists. But the rhetoric from various Russian official and quasi-official speakers makes us think that some of the thousands of recordings of Hitlers speeches were put to good use.

Protecting the Russian-speaking population of the eastern and southern regions? Where were they protected in the almost completely destroyed city of Mariupol, where more than 89% of the population considered Russian their spoken language? Or in Kharkiv, which has been mercilessly bombed for week after week, killing civilians, and where 95% of the population speak (spoke?) Russian? Or Mykolaiv, where over 50% of the population, according to the census, speak Russian as their mother tongue, and which is being destroyed by cluster bombs, according to a Philadelphia Inquire reporter who was just there? A curious defense strategy: pile up the corpses of the people youre defending.

Putin, and Peskov after him, called the goal of the military operation the restoration of the self-declared Donetsk and Luhansk republics to their 2014 borders. Today Russian troops control almost all of the Luhansk region and less than 60 percent of the Donetsk. Judging by reports from the fronts, this situation is not going to change any time soon.

It certainly doesnt look like it. A year before the war, in February 2021, there were 4,650 soldiers and officers under NATO command, and now there are almost ten times as many 40,000. In the near future, the number of NATO troops will increase to 300,000. This, military analysts say, is the largest increase in NATO strength since the end of the Cold War. The border between Russia and NATO countries also doubled after Finland and Sweden joined the alliance from 1,207 to 2,575 km.

And now the cost. According to American intelligence, the irrecoverable losses of the Russian Armed Forces in the six months of the war amounted to 70-80,000: 15-20,000 dead (during the 9 years and 2 months of the Afghan war about 15,000 Soviet soldiers and officers were killed), and 60,000 wounded and captured (in Afghanistan over 110 months about 35,000).

Over the six months of war, the Russian army has lost 3-4,000 tanks and armored personnel carriers. Almost all the countrys high-precision weapons have been used, and the production of new missiles is held up because they cant get microchips and semiconductors, which are under sanctions. Anti-ship missiles and Soviet Grads, which have a range of several hundred meters, are being used for strikes.

The shortage of hardware has forced the Russian army to scavenge for weapons, transfer them by quasi-trade ships from the military base in Syria, buy drones from Iran, and even consider North Korea's offer to buy artillery from them.

The situation with manpower is even worse. Due to their heavy losses, Russia is carrying out voluntary mobilization. According to various estimates, 30-35,000 volunteers have been sent to training camps with subsequent deployment in the active army. Soldiers are also being recruited from high-security prisons and deployed in private security companies. Battalions that carried out peacekeeping duties in Nagorno-Karabakh and troops from de facto annexed South Ossetia are also being sent to the front.

Each day of the war costs taxpayers about $500 million. In July, Finance Ministry statistics showed a federal budget deficit of 892 billion rubles, a drop of 22.5% in oil and gas revenues despite high energy prices, and a nearly 30% drop in revenue from tax collection. The expected loss of GDP by the end of the year is 8%, with a further contraction of the economy over the course of a year and a half or two years. These are the calculations for the summer of 2022, when many private Russian banks can still to conduct transactions with the rest of the world and the country is not cut off from SWIFT. But there can be no doubt that the West will choke the Russian economy before it begins to be choked by its own declining level of technological development, and the Russian military-industrial complex will no longer a threat to Europe and the world.

An investigation by Washington Post journalists indicates that Putins initial goal was to totally occupy all of Ukraine.

This seems strange, given that Stratfor military analysts played out five or six scenarios for Russia's war with Ukraine back in 2015 and concluded that the Russian Armed Forces would need between 91,000 and 135,000 troops just to seize the so-called left bank of Ukraine and an equal number to hold the occupied territories. The total is 182,000 to 270,000 troops needed. Military analyst Alexander Goltz wrote in a 2014 article for The New Times that Russia would need at least 100,000 troops to hold southeastern Ukraine alone. Note that both analyses came out before the Ukrainian Armed Forces were reformed and equipped with the most modern weapons.

Today there are approximately 170,000 Russian soldiers and officers on the Ukrainian fronts, and 20% of Ukrainian territory is occupied. A simple extrapolation shows that Russia would need about a million men to occupy and hold the entire country. Meanwhile, Commander-in-Chief Vladimir Putin signed an order to increase the army by 137,000 starting on January 1, 2023.

My Moscow sources who met with Putin on the eve of the military operation do not believe that the Federal Security Service deceived the Russian president by convincing him that everything was ready by Feb. 24 for a quick capture of Kyiv or a blitzkrieg. This was much discussed in the first months of the war and recently covered by the Washington Post.

First of all, they said that in the week before operation began, Putin listened to a variety of people, both those who supported the war and those who opposed it. It is highly unlikely that Chekists or army officers gave him false information, but they probably gave him the information that he wanted to see.

Secondly, they say that there was no plan for the army to occupy the entire country. The goal was to eliminate President Vladimir Zelensky (or force him to leave the country), and then, the KGB officers thought, there would be a domino effect: mayors and regional leaders would either run or swear allegiance to Russia in droves. The logic was as follows: Yanukovich, a "tough guy" with experience of prison and gangster capitalism, was so frightened by the Maidan demonstrations away in 2014 that he fled the country. So what could anyone expect from "that clown Zelensky"? The fact that Zelensky did not leave, did not surrender, did not ask for peace came as a great surprise to Putin: the habit of thinking that the world is run like it is in Russia and that politicians everywhere are a priori greedy and opportunistic has once again let the Kremlin down.

Then what does Putin want? "To tear Ukraine to pieces," said a source at the top of the Russian political elite. "But now I think the Kremlin is ready to codify the status quo," said another. That is, Putin is ready for peace talks concerning a map in which 20% of Ukrainian territory is controlled by Russian troops.

I am often asked why there is no widespread anti-war protest in Russia. My answer is to cite the figures quoted by OVD-Info. More than 16,000 people have been detained and over 20,000 cases were opened under Article 20.2 of the Code of Administrative Offences ("Violation of the established order of organizing or holding meetings, rallies, demonstrations, marches or pickets").

Almost every day the few surviving regional websites report that in one place a man with a "No to War" T-shirt came outside and was immediately handcuffed; and in another place a woman held up a "Putin is a war criminal" banner and was, of course, taken away; or even that in a third place a person held up a Mir (Peace) state credit card and was taken in for protesting.

In recent months 3003 people were convicted of committing misdemeanors under laws of military censorship for "discrediting the army" and hundreds have been charged with "intentionally spreading deliberately false information. What false information did The New Times, for example, disseminate, for which it received four administrative penalties? We wrote about the bombing of Kharkiv, Odesa and Mykolaiv. But since the information the outlet published had not been published on the website of the Russian Ministry of Defense, the judge concluded that it hadn't happened. Besides, according to the prosecution, as early as Feb. 24, the Commander-in-Chief said that a special military operation was being conducted in order to protect Russia from an invasion ... from the territory of Ukraine.

According to lawyer and human rights activist Pavel Chikov, 85 criminal cases have been opened to date for "discrediting the army. A certain unspoken rule has been established for well-known people: first, the authorities provide three "administrative cases," followed by a window of 3-4 weeks for the person to leave, and if he/she does not leave, there is a search just before 6 a.m. and then arrest.

This was the case, for example, with Ilya Yashin, Marina Ovsyannikova, and Evgeny Roizman. Alexei Gorinov, a municipal deputy in the Krasnoselsky District, did not get an administrative conviction. He was immediately sentenced to a criminal offense for "military fakes" and sentenced to seven years in prison.

So, the first and foremost reason for the lack of large-scale anti-war protest is fear, which had been the main tool of the KGB during the long years of Soviet power.

When I asked people at a market in Tver, What do you think of the special military operation, only unequivocal supporters replied. Everyone else either declined to answer or slipped behind phrases like, we don't know everything" or "who knows who started it? People who agree to speak in a pre-arranged place asked not to specify their profession or place of work since "the town is small and theyll figure it out.

In Pskov, Pskovskaya Guberniya journalists and Yabloko activists were beaten up as early as March 5. After that, many well-known people in the city left for the neighboring Baltic states. The ones who stayed behind dont even post on social networks, leave alone take part in any street actions.

In Novgorod, in front of the hotel where I was staying which I had intentionally not booked in advance there was a large black SUV from which photographs were very obviously taken of all the people Id arranged to meet. They don't talk to strangers about the war there, and if they do agree to answer questions, its because they have a relative in, say, Kharkiv, and they speak with horror about what is happening.

In Serpukhov, none of the people interviewed agreed to speak under their real name. They are afraid of losing their jobs, although one said confidentially that he and a friend agreed that if they are forcibly mobilized, they will immediately surrender to the Ukrainian armed forces.

The second reason for civil passivity is the lack of leaders.

Some like Alexei Navalny, Ilya Yashin, Vladimir Kara-Murza are already in jail, while others many tens of thousands went into exile in the early weeks of the war. People live by example: if celebrities and well-known people have left, I was told, then it means "we will be trampled. They try to find Polish, Baltic, or Jewish roots and leave.

Finally, the restriction on access to information plays an important role. Since the beginning of the war the General Prosecutor's Office and the courts have blocked about 7,000 websites on the basis of laws about military censorship; all independent mass media, central and regional, agencies, foundations are blocked without exception; entire editorial boards have emigrated from the country. Hundreds of politicians, journalists, and public figures have been given the vile label of "foreign agent" in my case, for the money earned from a YouTube channel. At the same time, the number of VPN downloads has risen sharply by 25 times! since the beginning of the war. In July 25 million Russians were using VPNs. In other words, Russians dont only have access to propaganda television channels; they can find alternative information on the Internet.

This does not make life any easier: a whole range of websites, services and banks, from state services to Yandex cards to Kommersant and RBC sites, do not work if the VPN is turned on, phones heat up and their batteries drain at an alarming rate. But the main problem is something else.

During the six months of the war, I did not meet a single person who was more or less well-known, or high-ranking, or rich, who openly supported the war. I was told, however, that one former deputy prime minister and now head of a state corporation came to the offices of the Presidential Administration wearing a black T-shirt with a defiant "Z" on his chest. Whether this person was trolling the administration or wearing the T-shirt as a sign of eternal loyalty remains unknown.

Another source began his conversation with a statement: "The election of a retired KGB officer as president was a mistake, it should never happen again. I didnt argue the point, of course, but it would have been better if this realization had come 22 years ago. A third source insisted we talk on a balcony and stand so close that we were practically embracing. The fourth was so afraid that the Chekists would tap our conversation that he suggested we meet in a restaurant a couple of dozen kilometers from Moscow. The fifth repeated several times that "society has completely failed to thoroughly consider the implications of using Novichok against opponents." Apparently the terror that the door handle of your luxury palace or car might be smeared with a military nerve agent never leaves many of the top Russian ruling elite for a moment. That fifth source also complained bitterly that he could not use his private plane. "All planes immediately stopped getting software updates. Of course, we could ask a young man with a black briefcase to come in and hack the software. But I asked the pilot of my plane, Could there be a glitch with the system when we're in the air? Of course, he replied. We have to fly Aeroflot, although even their software was probably updated by the same young man with the same briefcase."

I asked a variety of people what percentage of the top Russian ruling class supported the war. The answers ranged from a low of 10% to a high of 30%. Hundreds if not thousands of people at the top have lost millions and billions of dollars, expensive real estate in delightful European countries and the United States because of sanctions and/or the collapse of the stock market. All they get for their loss is endless lamentations from wives and mistresses that "living in this Russia" was not part of the deal. Children studying at Western universities and boarding schools in Britain, Switzerland, and the United States were forced to return to Russia when their educational institutions refused to accept their parents' toxic money.

That said, people mentioned the names of a couple of billionaires who, despite the sanctions and huge personal losses, called for "striking" Ukraine with nuclear weapons. There is also grumbling in the middle stratum of power brokers, who have lost a lot in mutual funds and especially in cryptocurrency.

No one can predict how the political situation in Russia will develop now. Some give the regime until the spring of 2023, others predict a further intensification of repression in the coming months and are confident that the regime has enough strength to survive another ten years. They insist that the upcoming 2024 elections and the next round wont change a thing.

I'm not so sure. I'm not sure that Putin's ruling class, which is made up of dollar millionaires and billionaires and is used to making money in Russia and spending it all over the world, will agree to live and die in a cage.

But we shall see.

This article was first published in Russian in The New Times.

The views expressed in opinion pieces do not necessarily reflect the position of The Moscow Times.

Read the rest here:

Six Months of War: What Putin Wanted; What Putin Got - The Moscow Times

Russian forces have occupied much of the sympathetic Donbas region to the east of the embattled nation and a swathe of the south, but have come under heavy fire in key areas such as Kherson in recent weeks.

Ukraines military has made use of Western-supplied missiles to pinpoint Russian military targets in the region, halting a planned referendum in the region widely seen as an attempt to give legitimacy to the occupation.

Ukrainian armed forces and resistance fighters have been able to inflict lasting damage in Crimea as well annexed by Russia since 2014 believed to have crippled the Black Sea fleet aiding ground assaults in the south.

On the backdrop of a war Putin started and, by the time the summit takes place, will be nearly nine months into with no sweeping gains, he may come to breath the same air as the Ukrainian President.

Follow this link:

Putin to come face-to-face with Truss and Zelensky for first time since Ukraine invasion - Express

Tensions between Serbia and Kosovo continued to boil over the summer, but a surprise visit by Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabi to Kosovo this week seems to have eased tensions.

Analysts warn that Russia may still try to find ways to destabilize the crucial region. "Any potential for destabilization has to do with still unresolved issues from the Serbian perspective," said Kosovar Deputy Prime Minister Besnik Bislimi. "We have an issue in the Western Balkans that Serbia is not clear about its borders with their neighbors."

Bislimi, the Deputy Prime Minister for European Integration, Development, and Dialogue in the country of roughly 2 million, has also warned that Serbia, like Russia, presumes to have a sphere of influence inside neighboring countries.

"Escalation in Russia offers a fruitful terrain for new escalations," Bislimi said. "As of 1999, the Serbs have created a new narrative [in which Serbs and Russians are brothers that] only have Romania and Ukraine between them."

This has allowed penetration by Russia's economic interests, such as investment and infrastructure developments, including gas stations and energy suppliers across the Balkans. "Russia also has a military and intelligence presence," he said.

According to a June poll from Belgrade-based Demostat, about 51 percent of Serbians would oppose EU membership in a national referendum, with 34 percent in support of it. The same poll found that 40 percent of Serbs selected Russian President Vladimir Putin as their favorite world leader.

"Russia's intention to misuse the territory of Russia for creating tensions with neighboring countries does not necessarily have the goal of dividing the West," Bislimi said. "It may be to deviate the focus from Ukraine."

During the 1990s, the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia led to some of the worst conflicts in Europe between the end of World War II and the start of the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

The two final chapters of that series of conflicts took place in Kosovo and what is today North Macedonia. A NATO intervention in 1999 in support of ethnic Albanian Kosovar insurgents ended Serbia's counter-insurgency campaign. Kosovo declared its independence less than a decade later, in 2008. Today over 100 countries recognize Kosovo's independence. As a spillover from that conflict, a group of ethnically Albanian guerrillas launched a brief conflict in 2001 before a similar NATO intervention. North Macedonia joined NATO in 2020 after agreeing to change its name from simply Macedonia. Kosovo hopes to one day follow a similar path.

Officials in Macedonia seem less concerned that Russian intervention in Balkan affairs is a pressing concern.

"We don't expect it this minute, nor do we expect it to happen," said Naser Nuredini, Minister of Environment and Physical Planning of North Macedonia. "Of course, we all need to be prepared for any such event."

(Additional reporting provided by Virginia Van Zandt)

This story was provided to Newsweek by Zenger News.

Original post:

What Does Putin's Aggression Mean for Stability in the Western Balkans - Newsweek

Catherine Belton, in her gripping book Putin's People, mentions a trio of deaths by window mishap that occurred within weeks of each other back in 1991, when the Soviet Union was being dismantled and the KGB was busily covering its tracks. All three held secrets about the Communist Party's finances and where the missing billions had gone as the Soviet system unravelled. Thirty years ago perhaps but the fashion for defenestration seems to be making a comeback. In October last year, a senior diplomat fell out of a window of the Russian embassy in Berlin. In December in Moscow, the founder of a nationalist blog who was also a vocal critic of Putin fell to his death out a window. In August, a Latvian-American investment banker and, you guessed it, a vocal critic of Putin, appeared to have fallen from an apartment window in Washington DC. In a "coincidence" likely to snap credulity, his business partner took a window fall from a Moscow apartment in 2017. Four health care workers fell from windows after reportedly protesting the government's handling of the COVID pandemic in 2020. Also in 2020, a scientist working on a COVID vaccine fell to his death from an apartment window in St Petersburg.

Go here to read the rest:

If you rag on Putin, don't go near the window - The Canberra Times

Name: Phillip Schofield.

Age: 60.

Appearance: The face of Vladimir Putins war on the west.

Really? I guess I was thinking of a different Phillip Schofield. No, no, its the same one.

The former childrens TV presenter and host of The Cube and Dancing On Ice? Thats him.

How did he get involved with Putin? Through his work as co-presenter of ITVs This Morning.

With Holly Willoughby? Correct. This week the pair started fronting a regular Spin to Win competition for viewers, featuring a big wheel and prizes.

Dont tell me: Putin called in and won. No, but along with cash prizes, the wheel now offers viewers a chance to have their runaway energy bills paid for four months.

Didnt they use to give away luxury holidays and stuff? With the average energy bill set to crack 3,600 by this winter, this is the new luxury prize: being warm.

Can ITV afford it? The bad publicity may be worse than the payout, with various commentators likening the competition to something from a Black Mirror episode.

It does seem a bit dystopian, now you mention it. And thats how Schofield became the face of Putins war on the west. The end.

Hang on the stunt may be crass and ill-judged, but its still a long way off taking Putins side. Unfortunately, Russias Kremlin-friendly news outlets have seized on the story as propaganda.

Those bastards. The host of Russian state televisions morning show, Olga Skabeyeva, reported that UK viewers were being offered heating as a prize. Apart from that, one could win 1,000 or even 3,000, she said, but judging from soaring energy prices that have gone up 80% in one go, its clearly much better to win payment for your energy bills.

Shes not wrong. Anyway, This Morning has already made an attempt to address the controversy.

How? It has adjusted the game slightly, so the top prize now covers the cost of living generally. So that could be your mortgage, petrol, food, your energy, said Schofield on Tuesday. You decide, well pay your bills until the end of the year up to a value of 3,000.

That isnt better! Apart from anything else, its still not enough! It might be if you cut back on eating and wear a coat in the house.

Do say: Lets not panic until weve heard Liz Trusss energy plan. Then lets panic.

Dont say: Come on Phillip and Holly, Bradley on The Chase is giving away bags of coal.

View post:

Phillip Schofield: how the TV presenter gave a fresh spin to Putins propaganda - The Guardian

Putin in Tehran for talks with leaders of Iran, Turkey

Russian President Vladimir Putin is in Iran on a trip intended to deepen ties with regional heavyweights as part of Moscow's challenge to the United States and Europe during its grinding campaign in Ukraine. (July 19)

AP

On June 23, China virtually hosted the 14thBRICS Summit. The summit is an annual meeting wherethe leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africadiscuss topics such as trade and the economy.

Several social media users have shared a photo of Russan President Vladimir Putin purportedly being saluted at the 10th BRICS Summit in South Africa. The photo shows two uniformed mensaluting Putin as he enters a golden room.

"Russian President Vladimir Putin in South Africa when he was attending the 10th Session of BRICS," oneJuly 17 Facebook post says.

The post garnered over 2,900 likes in its first two weeks. Other viral iterations have been shared on Facebook and Twitter.

Follow us on Facebook!Like our page to get updates throughout the day on our latest debunks

But the claim is not correct. The photo was taken in Russia in 2020, two years after the 10th BRICS Summit.

USA TODAY reached out to the social media user who shared theclaim for comment.

Since ordering the invasion ofUkraine in February 2022, Putin hashad limited overseas travel. His first trip out of the country since the February invasion wasto Tajikistan and Turkmenistan. The trips took place on June 28 and 29.

Putin attended the 14th annual BRICS Summit on June 23 via videoconference, according to the Kremlin's website.

Fact check: False claim that Trump, Putin had recent meeting in Washington, D.C.

Theclaim mentions the 10th BRICS Summit, which was held four years before the Ukrainian invasion, in 2018. While Putin did attend this conference in person, the photo was not taken at the 2018 summit.

The photo was taken by Getty Images photographerMikhail SvetlovinSt. Alexander Hall at the Grand Kremlin Palace on Feb. 5, 2020, in Moscow. Putinwas pictured entering the room withRussian Foreign MinisterSergei Lavrov and attended a ceremony where he received 23 credentials from newly-appointed foreign ambassadors, according to the photo's description.

Photos from the Kremlin ceremony havebeen included in articlespublished byNewsweek and Forbes.

Based on our research, we rate FALSE the claim that a photo shows Vladimir Putin being saluted at the 10th BRICS Summit in South Africa. The photo was taken by a Getty Images photographer in Russia in 2020, two years after the 10th BRICS Summit was held in South Africa.

Thank you for supporting our journalism.You cansubscribe to our print edition, ad-free app or electronic newspaper replica here.

Our fact-check work is supported in part by a grant from Facebook.

Original post:

Fact check: Photo of guards saluting Putin was taken in Russia in 2020 - USA TODAY