The EU’s unrelated effort to funnel cash to Ukraine from its central budget faced serious political resistance, prompting governments to look at alternative sources of money. It took weeks of diplomatic backchanneling before leaders convinced Hungary on Feb. 1 to lift its veto over the EU’s €50 billion cash pot for Ukraine.
Financial stability
The assets confiscation plan could generate over €200 billion to support Ukraine’s postwar reconstruction, according to backers of the proposal. G7 countries are aiming to come up with a coordinated roadmap amid growing pressure from the United States, which, along with the United Kingdom and Canada, has fewer qualms than EU countries such as Germany, France and Italy.
In Europe, there are fears Moscow might retaliate by lodging a flurry of appeals against Euroclear, a Belgium-based financial depository that holds the vast majority of Russian reserves in Europe.
“An institution like Euroclear is a very systemic financial institution,” Belgian Finance Minister Vincent Van Peteghem said | Nicolas Maeterlinck/Belga/AFP via Getty Images
“An institution like Euroclear is a very systemic financial institution,” Belgian Finance Minister Vincent Van Peteghem told reporters at the end of January. “We should … try to avoid an impact [of Russian asset confiscation] on financial stability.”
In a sign of the sort of retaliation countries fear might come, Russian entities have already filed 94 lawsuits in Russia demanding payback to Euroclear, which operates under Belgian law, after their investments and their profits in Europe were frozen, according to a Belgian official with knowledge of the proceedings.
Top Russian lenders, including Rosbank, Sinara Bank and Rosselkhozbank, filed legal claims against Euroclear worth hundreds of millions of rubles.
Washington — A trio of senators on Sunday released a bipartisan immigration agreement with the White House that would give the president far-reaching powers to clamp down on unlawful border crossings, including the authority to turn away migrants without allowing them to request asylum.
The deal, which has been months in the making, would overhaul American border policy by restricting access to the asylum system during spikes in illegal immigration, making it harder for migrants to pass initial asylum screenings and ramping up deportations of those found to be ineligible for U.S. refuge. The agreement would preserve asylum processing at official border crossings and allow migrants who pass their asylum interviews to work in the U.S. legally.
The agreement was negotiated by Republican Sen. James Lankford, Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy, independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema and top Biden administration officials after Republican lawmakers demanded restrictions to U.S. asylum law in exchange for supporting more military aid to Ukraine. If enacted, the bipartisan compromise would be the first major update to the U.S. immigration system since the 1990s, the last time Congress passed a large-scale immigration law.
While the deal will likely garner the support of many Democrats and some Republican senators, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, its prospects in the GOP-led House are much less certain. House Speaker Mike Johnson and other conservatives in the chamber have denounced elements of the negotiations in the Senate, instead calling on President Biden to use his executive power to deter migrants from coming to the U.S.
On Sunday, Johnson said the proposal would be “dead on arrival” if it reaches the House. “This bill is even worse than we expected, and won’t come close to ending the border catastrophe the President has created,” he added.
Nonetheless, the agreement represents a major pivot on immigration by Mr. Biden. Right after taking office three years ago, he promised to “restore” the U.S. asylum system and dismantle Trump-era border policies that “contravened our values and caused needless human suffering.” But after facing record levels of migrant apprehensions at the southern border and a growing chorus of criticism from Democratic leaders in communities struggling to help migrants, Mr. Biden and his administration have embraced drastic restrictions on asylum.
U.S. Border Patrol agents guard migrants that crossed into Shelby Park as they wait to be picked up for processing on February 4, 2024, in Eagle Pass, Texas.
Michael Gonzalez/Getty Images
In fact, the deal brokered by the White House would be one of the toughest border and immigration laws in modern history and would not legalize any of the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the U.S. without permission, an element of comprehensive immigration reform long championed by Democratic lawmakers.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer praised the deal as a “monumental step towards strengthening America’s national security abroad and along our borders” and in a statement called it “one of the most necessary and important pieces of legislation Congress has put forward in years to ensure America’s future prosperity and security.” He noted that the agreement also contains funding to equip Ukraine in its war against Russia, as well as military aid for Israel and humanitarian assistance for Palestinians in Gaza.
He called on the Senate to act and said he would schedule the first vote on the measure for Wednesday.
Meanwhile, McConnell expressed his gratitude to Lankford for working on the bill. “The Senate must carefully consider the opportunity in front of us and prepare to act,” he said in a statement.
A power to “shut down” asylum processing
If the bill is passed by Congress and signed into law by the president, the federal government would gain a new sweeping emergency authority to reject most migrants when crossings along the southern border reach certain thresholds.
The power could be activated on a discretionary basis after daily average border crossings top 4,000 over seven days. The federal government would be required to use the authority when daily average border crossings reach 5,000 over seven days or 8,500 in a day.
The power, which Mr. Biden has referred to as an authority to “shut down the border,” would allow the president to effectively pause asylum law, which currently allows most migrants on U.S. soil to request asylum, even if they entered the country illegally.
Migrants who illegally cross into the U.S. when this power is invoked would not be allowed to seek asylum. They would be summarily deported from the U.S., unless they passed screenings for forms of humanitarian refuge that are more difficult to obtain, including protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture.
Sen. James Lankford speaks to reporters in the Senate Reception Room on January 31, 2024.
Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Those who enter the U.S. illegally repeatedly when this power is invoked would be banned from the country for one year. Unaccompanied children are exempt from this emergency measure.
The authority would sunset after three years. There would also be limits on the number of days on which this power can be used. For example, it could not be used for more than 270 days during the first year. The emergency measure would be deactivated when the average number of daily border crossings drops by 75%.
When the emergency power is triggered or invoked, access to the U.S. asylum system would be preserved at official border crossings. In fact, the bill mandates that the government be able to process at least 1,400 asylum-seekers at ports of entry each day when the power is activated.
Expedited asylum reviews and tighter rules
This proposal would create a new asylum review process for migrants who are not deported under the emergency authority.
The process is designed to ensure migrants receive final decisions on their asylum cases within months instead of the current years-long average. Eligible migrants would be granted asylum much more quickly, while those found to be ineligible would be deported more expeditiously.
Migrants placed in this new process would be released under so-called “alternatives to detention” programs that track them, through ankle monitors and other means, while their cases are reviewed. The process would be fully adjudicated by asylum officers at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services instead of the Justice Department immigration courts, which are overseeing more than 3 million pending cases.
A U.S. official told CBS News the Biden administration would mainly use this authority on migrant families with children, a population the government cannot generally detain due to operational, legal and humanitarian considerations. Migrant adults would continue to be detained and deported under the expedited removal authority or a process known as voluntary return, unless they qualify for asylum.
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema on “Face the Nation,” Feb. 4, 2023.
CBS News
The standard to pass preliminary asylum interviews, known as credible fear screenings, would be raised in an attempt to weed out those who are not fleeing persecution or torture earlier on in the process. Migrants would also be ineligible for asylum if officers determine that they could have relocated to a different part of their home country to avoid being persecuted.
Migrants who pass their humanitarian screenings with U.S. asylum officers — which will be harder to pass given the new standards — will be allowed to work in the country immediately. The change would likely be welcomed by Democratic leaders in New York City and other places struggling to house migrants relying on local services because they can’t work in the country legally.
Other proposed changes
The compromise forged by the trio of senators and the White House would authorize billions of dollars to fund the surge in resources and personnel needed to implement the proposed border policy changes. The Department of Homeland Security would receive money to hire additional border agents and asylum officers, as well as to reimburse cities and organizations housing migrants.
Notably, the bill would not severely restrict the humanitarian parole authority, which the Biden administration has used to resettle and release more than 1 million migrants and refugees in the U.S.
While the proposal would restrict the use of parole to release migrants at land borders, it would not affect Biden administration parole programs that allow Americans to sponsor the entry of refugees from Ukraine or migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela.
The deal would also expand legal immigration levels. It would allocate 250,000 new immigrant visas over 5 years — or 50,000 each year — for immigrants sponsored by their American family members or U.S. employers.
The tens of thousands of Afghans brought to the U.S. after the fall of Kabul in 2021 would be offered permanent American residency. Right now, many of them only have temporary permission to live and work in the U.S. The agreement would create a new refugee category to evacuate and resettle Afghans abroad who assisted the U.S. military.
Another provision would offer work permits and deportation protections to the children of H-1B visa holders who are at risk of losing the status derived from their parents.
Under the proposal, the government would also be required to offer lawyers to unaccompanied children who are 13 or younger. It would allocate $350 million to fund this.
UKRAINIAN President Volodymyr Zelensky is considering replacing several of the countries senior officials as he claims a “reset is necessary”.
Ukraine‘s senior military commander Valery Zaluzhnyi and a number of other state leaders may lose their jobs as part of the rest, Mr Zelensky revealed in an interview with Italian TV.
2
President Volodymyr Zelensky could replace several of the countries senior officials as he claims a ‘reset is necessary’Credit: Alamy
2
Ukraine’s senior military commander Valery Zaluzhnyi is one of those rumoured to be getting replaced
In the broadcast on Sunday, Ukraine’s leader said he was considering replacing a number of senior officials in his cabinet both inside and out of the military wings.
Zelensky said in the interview: “It is a question of the people who are to lead Ukraine.
“A reset is necessary, I am talking about a replacement of a number of state leaders, not only in the army sector.
“I am reflecting on this replacement. Is a question for the entire leadership of the country.”
Ukraine has been at the heart of rumours over who Zelensky plans on keeping in his cabinet after he recently faced criticism from some over the current situation in the Ukraine war.
The commander of Ukraine’s military, Valery Zaluzhnyi created a rift with his president following the failure of a Ukrainian counteroffensive last year.
Tensions are said to have reached a boiling point after Zaluzhnyi described the war with Russia as a “stalemate” in an interview with The Economist.
If we want to win we must all push in the same direction, we cannot be discouraged, we must have the right and positive energy, negativity must be left at home
Volodymyr ZelenskyPresident of Ukraine
Speaking to Italian state RAI television Zelensky continued saying: “I have in mind something serious that does not concern a single person but the direction of the country’s leadership”
“If we want to win we must all push in the same direction, we cannot be discouraged, we must have the right and positive energy, negativity must be left at home. We can’t take on giving-up attitudes.”
Last week, he also told CNN that some Ukrainian institutions were preventing the country from achieving its main goals to try and push Russia further back.
This included Ukraine trying to build up their forces so they could match up better to Russia’s sheer number of fighters.
Zaluzhnyi is well admired by Ukrainian citizens after he has led Ukraine in intense battles against Russian forces advancing on Kyiv.
He has also been seen as the man responsible for recapturing many areas of territory in the south and northeast of Ukraine’s capital.
But Ukraine’s popular army chief was allegedly called to a meeting at the president’s office on Monday 29, where he was told he was being fired, reports CNN.
According to a pair of sources in Ukraine, a “calm,” Zelensky offered Zaluzhnyi a separate position but the 50-year-old quickly turned it down.
The rumours quickly spread into Western media and caused presidential spokesman Serhiy Nykyforov to shut down the reports calling them all untrue.
The defence ministry was also forced to put out a message on social media saying: “Dear journalists, an immediate answer to everyone: No, this is not true.”
Two possible successors for Zaluzhnyi who are said to be in the running if the position opens up are Kyrylo Budanov and Oleksandr Syrskyi.
Budanov. 38, is the current head of the Defence Intelligence Directorate and is known to have strong ties with Zelensky already.
Whereas Syrskyi, 58, is the Commander of Ground Forces and commanded the successful Kharkiv counteroffensive in 2022.
Ukraine war update
This apparent reshuffle comes after a period of success for Ukraine.
Last week, Ukraine claimed to have sunk a Russian warship – with 50 sailors on board – using kamikaze sea drones.
In another major scalp for Ukraine, two of Putin’s most crucial spy planes worth £290million were shot down last month.
One of the Russian dictator’s £260million spy planes disappeared and a £30million bomber jet was set on fire after Ukrainian forces shot them out of the sky above the Azov Sea.
Since the beginning of the war, Russia had lost approximately 385,230 personnel, 6,310 tanks, and 11,757 armoured combat vehicles, Ukrainian army officials said.
Putin’s army also reportedly lost 9,195 artillery units, 974 multiple launch rocket systems, 663 air defence systems, 332 warplanes, and 324 helicopters.
The list goes on – 7,100 drones, 1,846 cruise missiles, 23 warships, 1 submarine, 12,231 motor vehicles and fuel tankers, and 1,452 units of special equipment.
USAID administrator Samantha Power talks the history of America’s global humanitarian efforts & the importance of Ukraine’s success in their fight against Russia. Power discusses the U.S.’s decision to freeze UNRWA funding, also the challenge of providing assistance to civilians in Gaza.
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
Missed the second half of the show? The latest on…Speaker Mike Johnson said that the House plans to vote next week on a standalone bill on aid to Israel, Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Mike Turner tells “Face the Nation” that the House has to “make certain” that there’s a path for aid to Ukraine. “Ukrainians are getting to the point that it’s critical that the funding come through,” Turner said in a joint appearance with Democratic Rep. Jim Himes, and Retired Gen. Frank McKenzie, the Commander of U.S. Central Command, tells “Face the Nation” that the U.S. needs to have an “understanding” of what it wants as an “end state” after strikes in the Middle East.
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
Tucker Carlson has been spotted hanging out in Moscow over the weekend, the Russian Telegram channel Mash reported, igniting speculation that the former Fox News host was visiting the Russian capital for an interview with the country’s president, Vladimir Putin.
Carlson, who maintains close ties to former President Donald Trump and has been rumored as a possible VP pick, arrived in Moscow on Thursday, and was photographed at the famed Bolshoi Theater, where he reportedly attended the ballet “Spartacus.”
Already on Sunday, the news was generating buzz among U.S. politicians. Georgia Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has been featured on Russian State TV due to the generally pro-Russia line she has taken following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February of 2022, wrote on X, formerly Twitter, that “Democrats and their propagandists in the media are spasming at the prospect of Tucker Carlson interviewing Putin.
“They feel entitled to the position of gatekeeper and believe they are the ones who tell you what to think and believe,” Greene added. “We have a free press in this country, and it’s people like Tucker Carlson who we depend on to speak the truth!”
Former Illinois Representative Adam Kinzinger, whom Carlson frequently derided on his Fox News show, responded to the news on X, formerly Twitter, calling Carlson a “traitor.” Kinzinger has previously described Carlson’s show as “completely evil” and “full of Russian propaganda.”
While Carlson’s reasons for traveling to Moscow are not immediately clear, the news host has long been a vocal defender of Putin’s authoritarian regime. He consistently came to the Russian president’s defense following the invasion of Ukraine, after which he became one of the most high-profile critics of U.S. involvement in the war. He has called Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskiy “sweaty and rat-like” and described Ukraine as “a pure client state of the United States State Department.”
His consistently pro-Putin, anti-Ukraine rhetoric earned him a prominent spot on Russian state TV, which frequently features his commentary. In 2022, when Carlson still had his Fox News primetime slot, Mother Jones magazine reported on a memo the Kremlin sent to Russian state news outlets, asking them to “use as much as possible fragments of broadcasts of the popular Fox News host Tucker Carlson.” When Carlson was fired from Fox News in April of 2023, Russian news outlets leaped to his defense with headlines like “Carlson fired over fearless Ukraine reporting,” The Washington Postreported at the time.
Last September, Russia’s top state news channel began advertising a news show with Carlson as the host. Carlson denied any knowledge of the program, calling it “more Russia-related bullshit.” “I’ve never heard of this, or the channel,” he told the Financial Times. “Of course, I’m not hosting a show on Russian television. That’s absurd.”
But that same month, Carlson indicated his interest in interviewing Putin, telling the Swiss magazine Die Weltwoche that the U.S. government had prevented him from doing so. “Nobody defended me,” Carlson said at the time. “I don’t think there was anybody in the news media who said, ‘Wait a second. I may not like this guy, but he has a right to interview anyone he wants, and we have a right to hear what Putin says.”
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) holds a news conference following a caucus meeting at the U.S. Capitol Visitors Center on January 30, 2024 in Washington, DC.
Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., on Saturday announced an Israel-only funding package to be voted on next week, another step in the deadlocked negotiations over emergency aid that President Joe Biden initially proposed in October.
The House proposal comes as a challenge to a long-awaited Senate package that is expected to be released this weekend. The Senate’s bill is expected to include broader foreign aid than just Israel and address border security funding.
But the Republican-majority House has voiced its intention to be hard on the Senate’s proposal, especially as Johnson tries to appease Republican hardliners who expect him to deliver on their ultraconservative wish list to limit spending and maximize border security.
“While the Senate appears poised to finally release text of their supplemental package after months of behind closed door negotiations, their leadership is aware that by failing to include the House in their negotiations, they have eliminated the ability for swift consideration of any legislation,” Johnson wrote in a letter he addressed to “Friends.”
“Next week, we will take up and pass a clean, standalone Israel supplemental package,” the speaker added.
The House bill includes $17.6 billion for Israel’s military and U.S. military forces in the region as the war with Hamas in Gaza continues. If approved, this funding would add to the $14.3 billion that the House passed for Israel in the wake of Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack.
This bill separates aid to Israel from Ukraine, Taiwan and the U.S. southern border, all of which were linked in Biden’s original $105 billion aid proposal. That initial bill included $61 billion for Ukraine, $14.3 billion for Israel, $6.4 billion for the U.S. border and $2 billion for Taiwan.
But disagreements over how to address the U.S. border and whether to continue funding Ukraine’s defense against Russia stalled the passage of Biden’s October aid package.
Democrats and Republicans have gone back and forth for months negotiating the proposal, leading to a near-miss government shutdown and eating into some lawmakers’ holiday break.
Democrats argue that Ukraine funding is essential to preventing the further rise of authoritarian Russian leader Vladimir Putin and his threat to global democracy. Meanwhile, Republicans want to rein in Ukraine aid, claiming that without a clear end in sight, the nearly two-year war has led to U.S. overspending.
The border has been another major sticking point, as the number of migrants crossing over to the U.S. reached record highs over the past few months. The influx has overwhelmed some cities, whose mayors say they do not have the resources or infrastructure to accommodate the incoming migrant population. That crisis has led Republicans to press even harder for their border security wish list, which includes policies that the Democrat-majority Senate would likely never pass.
These clashes deadlocked the emergency aid package for months. Democrat and Republican lawmakers assured that they were working to find middle ground.
Both sides appeared optimistic that they were making progress. For example, in January, Johnson and Democratic Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said they had a productive meeting with Biden where they assured they would be able to reach a bipartisan agreement to address the border, Ukraine and the rest of the president’s funding requests.
However, in recent weeks, politics have hindered that progress. In closed-door meetings, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky reportedly told senators that former President Donald Trump wanted to torpedo the deal so as not to deliver Biden a campaign victory during an election year. Trump has regularly used the border crisis as a campaign talking point against Biden in his 2024 bid for re-election.
Video appears to show Ukraine exploding drones, finishing off 11 tanks and armored vehicles. It included three T-72 tanks, five tracked amphibious [MTLBS] armored fighting vehicles, and an infantry fighting vehicle, reduced to burning hulks scattered across the battlefield.
Two tracked armored fighting vehicles were also destroyed, one by an anti-tank guided missile, Metro reported.
The battle raged near the settlement of Novomykhailivka, in the Donetsk region of Ukraine, which Russia has been attempting to capture since October.
The assault was captured by cameras mounted on the attacking drones and those flying overhead, showing the devastation caused to the Russian column.
The convoy was maneuvering near the front lines along the east of Ukraine and became vulnerable to fire from artillery and swift and targeted strikes from the air by drones.
Leveling Russia’s battlefield advantage
Footage shows the FPV exploding drones accelerating toward the Russian tanks and armored vehicles, with the feed abruptly cutting off just before impact.
Other footage gives a panoramic view, showing the dark shapes of tanks in motion, some bursting into flames as the exploding drones hit, followed by an aftermath of smoking, twisted wrecks abandoned in winter fields pockmarked with shell holes.
The video was dated January 30. According to reports, the battle lasted nearly two and a half hours.
Business Insider could not independently verify the video.
The apparent victory against the armored column matters because Ukraine increasingly sees relatively inexpensive drone technology as a way of leveling Russia’s battlefield advantage.
He highlighted the key role played by unmanned weapons systems, such as drones, which help Ukraine against Putin’s forces despite Russia’s significant superiority of manpower and weapons.
“Perhaps the number one priority here is mastery of an entire arsenal of (relatively) cheap, modern, and highly effective unmanned vehicles and other technological means.
Already such assets allow commanders to monitor the situation on the battlefield in real time, day and night, and in all weather conditions,” wrote Ukraine’s top military leader.
‘Complete stupidity and incompetence’
Drone-mounted cameras show a UAV hitting a Russian tank, in a video showing a battle in in the Novomykhailivka area of the Donetsk region.Screengrab.
While the number of casualties from the wrecked armored column remains unknown, the strikes triggered a backlash among pro-war ‘Z’ channels associated with Putin, expressing frustration over perceived military incompetence, Metro reports.
Another Kremlin-affiliated milblogger argued that the Russian military command needs to stop attacking in mechanized columns due to repeated high equipment losses.
The milblogger also criticized the military leadership for failing to account for Ukrainian drone operations and to equip Russian armored vehicles with electronic warfare systems, reported the ISW.
“If we compare modern NATO armaments, the armaments of the last period of the Soviet era, in some respects are inferior, but not always,” Putin said, according to Russian state media outlet TASS. “And if you take our newest armaments, they are clearly superior to everything. This is an obvious fact.”
The Russian leader’s comments were made during a meeting with arms industry workers in Tula, Russia, where he also once again attempted to justify his war with Ukraine. Putin claimed that he ordered the invasion to protect Russian speakers in Ukraine as well as to thwart what he claimed were threats made by the United States and NATO on Russia’s security.
Speaking about Russia’s defense industry, Putin said it “demonstrates a very good both pace and quality of work,” and the superior weapons it produces includes “missile equipment, armored vehicles and everything that is used on the battlefield.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday delivers a speech at a forum in Tula, Russia. During the address, Putin claimed Russia’s weapons are “clearly superior” to arms from NATO countries. Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday delivers a speech at a forum in Tula, Russia. During the address, Putin claimed Russia’s weapons are “clearly superior” to arms from NATO countries. GETTY IMAGES
Putin also touted what he claimed were some positive effects the war in Ukraine has had on Russia’s economy, namely the creation of more than half a million new defense industry jobs.
“In the last 1 1/2 years alone, 520,000 new jobs have been created in defense,” Putin said.
Newsweek reached out to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs via email on Friday night for further comment.
Agence France-Presse (AFP) noted Moscow has increased arms production to meet the accelerated pace of its offensives in recent months, providing somewhat of a financial boost to an economy that’s otherwise been hit hard by Western sanctions.
In September, the Russian finance ministry’s draft budget for 2024 showed defense expenditures soared by 68 percent compared to 2023. The budget also included a new allocation of $111 billion for national defense.
The already high tensions between Russia and NATO have seemingly escalated in recent weeks after the alliance’s announcement last month of its largest military exercise in more than 35 years. Dubbed “Steadfast Defender 2024,” the drills launched on January 22 and will ultimately include participation of around 90,000 military personnel from 31 NATO allies and Sweden.
NATO officials have said the exercise will test the allies’ ability to quickly deploy forces and test new defense plans. Military analysts have speculated Steadfast Defender is meant to prepare alliance members for the potential of a future Russian invasion on NATO territory.
When asked about the exercise this week, Kremlin spokespersonDmitry Peskov told reporters Russia considers NATO a “threat” that it is “constantly taking appropriate measures to deal with.”
Uncommon Knowledge
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
Boris Nadezhdin, the Civic Initiative Party presidential hopeful, arrives at the Central Election Commission to submit signatures collected in support of his candidacy, in Moscow on January 31, 2024.
Vera Savina | Afp | Getty Images
Over President Vladimir Putin‘s 24 years in power, a systemic opposition has been wiped out in Russia with the Kremlin’s political opponents either jailed or in self-imposed exile or, in some circumstances, even dead.
But a challenger to Putin’s long reign in office has emerged from an unlikely place — within Russia’s existing political establishment — in the form of Boris Nadezhdin.
Standing on a platform for peace with Ukraine, friendly and cooperative global relations and fair elections, as well as a fairer civil society and smaller state, Nadezhdin submitted his bid to run for the presidency Wednesday.
The Kremlin has sought to dismiss Nadezhdin’s potential to upset an election whose win for Putin is seen as a done deal. Kremlin Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov told CNBC Thursday that “we are not inclined to exaggerate the level of support for Mr. Nadezhdin.”
Nonetheless, the fact that Nadezhdin is even attempting to stand for election on an anti-war platform — and has garnered a certain level of public support — shows there is public appetite for his views, and that’s likely to make the Kremlin nervous after it has staked its political legacy and future on a victory in Ukraine.
Russian political analysts point out that Nadezhdin, 60, isn’t a political outsider or upstart but part of Russia’s political establishment — a former lawmaker who had been a member of political parties that endorsed Putin’s leadership at the start of his political career over two decades ago.
His recent foray into frontline politics, and bid to run for the presidential election, has seemingly been tolerated by Russia’s political leadership and domestic policy makers, despite the misgivings of some pro-Kremlin activists, with Nadezhdin seen previously as a member of the system opposition that gives a veil of political plurality and legitimacy to Russia’s largely autocratic leadership.
However, Nadezhdin’s recent growing popularity and prominence has changed that, political analysts say, and he now poses a challenge and a dilemma for the Kremlin as the election nears.
“He has been always anti war and critical but he played the rules and respected the rules, so he didn’t dare [challenge the political status quo], he was absolutely a part of the systemic opposition … but he decided to go further,” Russian political analyst Tatiana Stanovaya told CNBC Thursday.
“[As soon as] he believed that thousands of people were behind him or even hundreds of thousands, he decided to play another game,” Stanovaya, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center and the founder of analysis firm R.Politik, said.
“And it doesn’t please domestic policy overseers at all. For them, this is a set up, this is a headache and a problem. Nadezhdin has now become a challenge,” she said.
Nadezhdin is a well-known face in Russia. A former State Duma lawmaker, he has made a name for himself on popular TV chat shows on which he’s become known for his critical views on Russia’s war against Ukraine, or what Moscow calls the “special military operation.” However, analysts note that he has been careful to stay within recent legislation that has made “discrediting” the armed forces a criminal offense that can lead to imprisonment.
Nadezhdin has gained a popular following among sections of the Russian public and late last year he was nominated to stand in the election by the center-right Civic Initiative party.
Formed just over 10 years ago, the party states in its manifesto that “its goal is the state to be man’s servant, not his master” and says it wants to restore individual freedoms in Russia, such as freedom of speech and the right to protest, and to revive relations with the West. Nadezhdin has said in interviews that he would end the war with Ukraine, describing the war as a “fatal mistake.”
Many of his supporters have queued in freezing temperatures to add their support and, crucially, their signatures to back his bid to stand in the Mar. 15-17 election.
Candidates representing political parties in Russia must collect at least 100,000 signatures from at least 40 regions in Russia in order to be considered as an election candidate. Putin, running as an independent (and requiring at least 300,000 signatures), reportedly gathered over 3.5 million signatures.
People queue to sign for the presidential candidacy of anti-war candidate Boris Nadezhdin. It is considered impossible that Nadezhdin could win the upcoming presidential election in Russia. However, the candidacy of the war opponent has met with unexpected approval from many Russians.
Surrounded by his supporters and a gaggle of press as he delivered his bid to the Central Election Commission this week, Nadezhdin said 105,000 signatures had been submitted although just over 200,000 had been collected, his campaign website states. His campaign decided not to submit signatures collected from Russian citizens abroad, fearing they would be rejected.
The Central Election Commission, which oversees electoral processes in Russia, will now review the eligibility of those signatures. Given the recent display of support for Nadezhdin, that could prove uncomfortable for the Kremlin, and there are concerns that the electoral authorities could find fault with a significant number of those signatures, meaning that a technicality — real or otherwise — could see him barred from running in the election.
Stanovaya said that was a likely scenario, saying “it is really difficult for me to imagine that Nadezhdin will be allowed to run in the election, it would be absolutely weird.” Stanovaya believed it was likely that the CEC would not recognize a portion of the signatures that Nadezhdin has garnered.
CNBC was unable to reach the CEC for a response to the comment.
András Tóth-Czifra, a fellow in the Eurasia Program at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, told CNBC that the Kremlin now had to weigh up the risks of letting Nadezhdin’s name onto the ballet paper, and the potential for him to perform better than expected in the vote, or to disallow his candidacy before any real reputational damage can be done — even while knowing that stopping Nadezhdin standing could also fan discontent.
“Many have speculated, and I think this is true, that the original idea to let him stand as a candidate and collect signatures, and to express the mildly anti anti war message in his campaign, was to showcase how little support this position enjoys in today’s Russia,” Tóth-Czifra said.
Boris Nadezhdin, Civic Initiative party’s candidate for Russia’s 2024 presidential election, bringing 105,000 signatures to the polling station in Moscow, Russia on January 31, 2024.
Boris Nadezhdin Press Service/Handout/Anadolu via Getty Images
“Now … the question is how risky the Kremlin’s political technologists deem it to allow this to go further and to let Nadezhdin be on the ballot,” he told CNBC Thursday.
“I’m pretty sure that the Kremlin will weigh these risks over the week while the Central Electoral Commission is verifying signatures … There are arguments for letting Naezhdin run and there are arguments for taking him off the ballot paper. There are risks associated with letting him run and there are risks associated with taking him off the ballot,” Tóth-Czifra said.
“I believe, from what we have seen so far, that probably the Kremlin thinks that the risks associated with taking him off the ballot are lower than the risks associated with letting him run,” he added, particularly given that the Kremlin’s risk perception is likely to be elevated in a time of war.
“I’m pretty sure that there are already people in the Kremlin who think that he has gone too far already,” Tóth-Czifra said.
Even if Nadezhdin is allowed to stand, there are no illusions that he can win the election in a country where Putin’s approval ratings remain remarkably high and pro-Putin media dominate, and where political opponents are subject to extensive smear campaigns.
Kremlin’s Press Secretary Peskov told CNBC last fall that Russian “society is consolidated around the president” and that the Kremlin was confident Putin would win another term in office.
Stanovaya said Nadezhdin is running the risk of falling foul of Russian authorities now, having openly challenged its long-standing leadership.
“He takes a lot of risks now, and I’m pretty sure that the Kremlin’s domestic policy overseers, who are very well acquainted with Nadezhdin, are now thinking of how to deal with this and how to signal to Nadezhdin that either he stops and really he rows backwards, or he will have troubles.”
“We have been saying this a long time,” he said on a visit to Brussels. “I have been here three times before and always we said if we didn’t do this … the Houthis will never stop. The Houthis have an ideology, have a project. Iran has a project in the region and unfortunately, the others do not respond.”
He expressed frustration that the EU and U.S. spent years pouring their diplomatic energies into wooing Tehran for a nuclear deal, rather than exerting more pressure on the Islamic Republic to stop supporting their Houthi allies, fellow Shi’ite Muslims who were seeking to impose what he labeled a “theocratic, totalitarian” police state.
The idea behind the nuclear talks was that Tehran should limit its nuclear ambitions in return for sanctions relief, but an accord proved out of reach.
No one paid attention
Bin Mubarak noted international momentum for action — which has included U.S. and British strikes on Houthi targets — did not finally come about “because of what [the Houthis] did to the Yemenis. They killed thousands of Yemenis. Not because of the atrocities they committed, raping women … jailing women … Just look at what Houthis did. No one is paying attention.”
He explained Western diplomacy toward Iran was supposed to have focused on three elements: the nuclear program, Tehran’s support for regional proxies, and its ballistic missile program. The fixation on the first, to the detriment of the other two, means the West is now facing an adversary in Yemen that has been very well armed by Iran, bin Mubarak complained.
“[Iran’s] Shahed drones, the first time we started hearing the European Union talking about it, they were being used in Ukraine. But before that, for years, we were saying Iran is supplying Houthis and drones are attacking Yemeni people. No one was believing [it],” he continued, adding that Houthi drone strikes stopped Yemeni oil exports in October 2022.
A senior Ukrainian Air Force official refused an offer from two Australians to receive 41 of the country’s decommissioned F/A-18 Hornet fighters, bluntly stating that “we do not need your flying trash,” reported the Australian Financial Review on Jan. 30.
This statement effectively killed the deal, highlighting a stark misunderstanding between Australia and Ukraine amid Ukrainian pilots’ desperate attempts to evade Russian aircraft.
The incident occurred as Ukraine was navigating the challenges of avoiding Russian fighters, revealing a significant miscommunication between the two nations.
Australia stands as the world’s seventh-largest military spender based on purchasing power, according to the Lowy Institute. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese claimed that Australia is among the top military aid donors to Ukraine outside NATO.
Nevertheless, the relationship between two countries’ military has been strained by reluctance from Australian Defence Ministry to fulfill Ukraine’s requests for surplus equipment. This includes the MRH-90 Taipan helicopters, which were already being dismantled when Ukraine requested them in December.
Unlike many other countries, Australia has chosen not to reopen its embassy in Kyiv, diminishing direct contact between the nations.
Ukraine’s government, including President Volodymyr Zelensky and his advisors, sends mixed signals about its military needs, complicating negotiations.
The idea of Australia providing Hornet fighters was initially proposed in March last year, and by two months later, news emerged that the U.S. government was “favorably disposed” towards the transfer of the aircraft, which had been in service with the Royal Australian Air Force since 1984 and were retired in 2021.
The Hornets, designed for aircraft carriers, have robust landing gears suitable for Ukraine’s war-damaged runways, enabling them to take off and land on short strips.
Ukraine, however, began discussions with the U.S. and European governments for the less robust F-16 Fighting Falcons, fearing the logistical challenges of operating two types of foreign fighters simultaneously.
The F/A-18 Hornet: an overview
Reports surfaced on June 6 that Australia and the U.S. were discussing the transfer of 41 F/A-18 Hornets to Ukraine, to be replaced by the more modern F-35s. Dozens of old but serviceable F-18s would likely be available for export as Australia, Canada, Switzerland, and Finland transition to the F-35 fighters, Politico reported.
The F/A-18 Hornet, an American carrier-based multi-role fighter developed in the 1970s, serves as the primary combat aircraft of the U.S. Navy and is also operated by several European and Asian countries.
It has been deployed in military operations against Libya, Iraq, and Yugoslavia.
Classified as both a fighter and attack aircraft, the Hornet has been in service since 1983, with a combat radius of about 1000 km.
It is capable of employing a wide range of armaments, including unguided Hydra 70 and Zuni rockets, air-to-air missiles like the AIM-120 AMRAAM and AIM-9 Sidewinder, air-to-ground missiles such as the AGM-88 HARM and Taurus, the AGM-84 Harpoon, unguided bombs like the Mark-80 series, CBU-87, and precision-guided munitions equipped with the JDAM system.
We’re bringing the voice of Ukraine to the world. Support us with a one-time donation, or become a Patron!
BRUSSELS — The leaders of the 27 European Union countries sealed a deal Thursday to provide Ukraine with a new 50-billion-euro ($54 billion) support package despite Hungary’s weeks of threats to veto the move.
European Council President Charles Michel announced the agreement about only an hour into the leaders’ summit in Brussels.
“We have a deal,” Michel said in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter. He said the agreement “locks in steadfast, long-term, predictable funding for Ukraine,” and demonstrated that the “EU is taking leadership and responsibility in support for Ukraine; we know what is at stake.”
It was not immediately clear if any concessions were made to secure Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s approval. He raised staunch objections to the financial aid package in December and in the days leading up to Thursday’s summit in Brussels.
On their way into their meeting, several fellow leaders had lashed out at Orban, accusing him of blackmail and playing political games that undermined support for Ukraine and the country’s war-ravaged economy.
Almost two years after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the war has ground to a halt and Ukraine’s economy desperately needs propping up. But political infighting in the EU and in the United States has held up a long-term source of funding.
Concern has mounted that public support to keep pouring money into Ukraine has started to wane, even though a Russian victory could threaten security across Europe.
“There is no problem with the so-called Ukraine fatigue issue. We have Orban fatigue now in Brussels,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk told reporters Thursday. “I can’t understand. I can’t accept this very strange and very egoistic game of Viktor Orban.”
In December, the 26 other leaders agreed on an aid package worth 50 billion euros ($54 billion) for this year through 2027. They also agreed to make Ukraine a candidate for EU membership, which Orban reluctantly accepted.
But the financial package was part of a review of the EU’s continuing seven-year budget, which requires unanimous approval.
Orban, the EU leader with the closest ties to Russia, is angry at the European Commission’s decision to freeze his government’s access to some of the bloc’s funds. The EU’s executive branch did so over concerns about possible threats to the EU budget posed by democratic backsliding in Hungary.
In response, Hungary vetoed statements at the EU on a range of issues. Orban’s also exported the problem to NATO, by blocking high level meetings with Ukraine until only recently. Budapest is also holding up Sweden’s bid for membership in the military organization.
“I don’t want to use the word blackmail, but I don’t know what other better word” might fit, Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas told reporters as she arrived at EU headquarters.
“Hungary needs Europe,” she said, highlighting the country’s own economic problems and high interest rates. “He should also look into what it is in it for Hungary, being in Europe.”
Tusk insisted that there could be “no room for compromise on our principles, like rule of law. And for sure there is no room for compromise on the Ukraine question.” The recently elected Polish leader added: “If his position will dominate in Europe, then Ukraine will lose for sure.”
Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said it was important for the leaders to try to seal a deal supported by all 27 member countries but that in any case “we can’t go away without an agreement.”
“That war is now raging for two years. Ukraine will not be able to continue to defend itself without the support of the European Union, and we can’t leave them short,” Varadkar told reporters.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said that “we want to finish what we started in December” and stressed that the planned 50 billion euros for Ukraine is “urgently necessary.”
“I will make a great deal of effort, together with many others, to make a decision by 27 (member states) possible,” Scholz said.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was scheduled to address the leaders via video link.
The key bit of the text emphasizes the European Commission should be “objective, fair, impartial and fact-based” and guarantee “non-discrimination” when triggering the mechanism to block EU funding for national capitals.
The concessions are seen in Brussels as minor, as leaders have avoided a scenario in which Orbán would have the possibility of a yearly veto on the financial lifeline for Ukraine. But this way, Orbán can proclaim victory at home by saying Hungary obtained a review.
Orbán’s first public reaction to the deal came in a Facebook post in which said: “We fought it out! Hungarians can’t give money to Ukrainians! We do not participate in the war, we do not send weapons, we are still on the side of peace!”
The deal comes after meetings with small groups of leaders on Thursday. Michel and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, along with the leaders of France, Germany and Italy, held a closed-door meeting with the Hungarian prime minister. The meeting was then widened to other leaders, including Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk and Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo.
Several diplomats denied other concessions were given to Orbán, and that the increased pressure from leaders made clear to Budapest that there was no alternative than giving in on the money to Ukraine. A key element was rebuilding trust between Hungary and the European Commission, for which the extra line on the conditionality mechanism was key.
Ketrin Jochecovácontributed reportingto this story.
VLADIMIR Putin ally Dmitry Ovsyannikov has been arrested in London by the UK’s FBI.
The ex-Kremlin minister, who was previously appointed leader of occupied Sevastopol, is the first person to be charged in the UK with breaching Russian sanctions.
2
Dmitry Ovsyannikov has been arrested in LondonCredit: East2West
2
Ovsyannikov pictured with Vladimir PutinCredit: East2West
Ovsyannikov, 46, was detained at his home in London last week by the National Crime Agency.
He has been charged with breaching sanctions and money laundering.
Siberian-born Ovsyannikov, who was dismissed from the Russian government in 2020, was sanctioned by the EU in 2017.
It came after he publicly supported the illegal annexation of Crimea and called for Sevastopol to “become the capital of the south of Russia”.
In 2017, Ovsyannikov was appointed the so-called governor of Sevastopol, Crimea’s second-largest port city, after Russia’s initial invasion of Ukraine in 2014.
But in 2019 the married dad-of-two was removed from the post and removed from the government in 2020 after serving as deputy minister of industry and trade.
Following his arrest in London on January 22, he was charged with seven counts of circumvention of sanctions regulations and two of money laundering.
He is due to appear at Southwark Crown Court on February 20, and has been remanded in custody.
Ovsyannikov is accused of circumventing sanctions and opening a London-based bank account, as well as making four payments totalling £65,000 and keeping £77,500 in cash.
A spokesman for the NCA told The Sun: “Dmitry Ovsyannikov was arrested on Monday 22nd January, and charged on 23rd January with breaches of the Russia Sanctions Regulations and money laundering.
“Ovsyannikov is a designated person under UK sanctions, which imposes limits on his access to money and financial services.
“He has been remanded in custody to appear at Southwark CC on the 20th February.
“Ovsyannikov has been charged with seven counts of circumvention of sanctions regulations made under the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019; and two counts of Money Laundering contrary to POCA.”
As the war enters its 708th day, these are the main developments.
Here is the situation on Thursday, February 1, 2024.
Fighting
A Russian bomb hit a hospital in northeastern Ukraine, forcing the evacuation of dozens of patients, smashing windows and damaging equipment. Volodymyr Tymoshko, head of the Kharkiv regional branch of the national police, said the bomb made a direct hit on the hospital in the town of Velykyi Burluk, northeast of Kharkiv, and a second bomb landed nearby. Four people were slightly injured.
Ukraine’s air defences shot down 14 out of 20 drones launched by Russia in an overnight attack that injured one person and damaged commercial buildings. The air force said the Iranian-made Shahed drones and three Iskander missiles targeted five Ukrainian regions in the south and the east.
Russia said it destroyed 20 missiles launched by Ukraine over the Black Sea and the Crimean peninsula, which Moscow invaded in 2014 and then annexed.
Ukraine’s air force commander Mykola Oleshchuk said its forces struck the Belbek military airfield in Crimea. He did not go into detail.
Politics and diplomacy
Russia and Ukraine exchanged hundreds of prisoners of war. Russia’s Defence Ministry said 195 of its soldiers were freed, while Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said 207 people, including some civilians, had been returned to Ukraine.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz told his country’s parliament that he would rally European partners to deliver support for Ukraine that was “so huge” it would weigh on Russian President Vladimir Putin. His comments came ahead of a key European Union summit on 50 billion euros ($54bn) of funding for Ukraine that is being blocked by Hungary.
Victoria Nuland, the United States acting deputy secretary of state, visited Kyiv and said she was encouraged by Ukraine’s strengthening defences and that Moscow should expect some “surprises” on the battlefield. A US military aid package for Ukraine is being held up in Congress by Republicans who want to link it to policy changes at the US border. Nuland said she was confident it would be adopted.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) rejected much of a case filed by Ukraine that accused Russia of bankrolling separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine a decade ago, saying only that Moscow had failed to investigate alleged breaches.
Boris Nadezhdin submitted his bid to run for the Russian presidency in March’s election after delivering 105,000 signatures backing his campaign to the Central Election Commission (CEC). The 60-year-old has emerged as a prominent critic of the Kremlin and promised to end the war in Ukraine.
Weapons
The EU’s foreign policy chief Josep Borrell admitted that the EU’s promise to supply Ukraine with one million artillery shells by March would fall short, with just over half that number expected to be delivered by that deadline. The remaining 155-mm artillery shells are likely to be delivered by the end of the year, Borrell said.
Parliament on Monday opened an internal probe into Latvian MEP Tatjana Ždanoka after an independent Russian investigative newspaper, the Insider, reported she had been working as an agent for the Russian secret services for years.
She was one of just 13 MEPs who in March 2022 voted against a resolution condemning Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which caused her to be expelled from the Greens/EFA group. Ždanoka now sits as a non-attached MEP.
“We are convinced that Ždanoka is not an isolated case,” the three Latvian MEPs wrote, citing concerns over suspicious “public interventions, voting record[s], organised events, as well as covert activities.”
“The Greens/EFA group must bear a degree of responsibility for long-term cooperation, financial support, and informational exchange with Ždanoka from July 2004 till March 2022,” the group added.
The Latvian Socialists did not sign the MEPs’ letter — and there are no Latvian Greens in Parliament after Ždanoka’s expulsion from the group.
The Greens/EFA group released a statement Tuesday saying it was “deeply concerned” about the allegations and asked for Ždanoka to be banned from Parliament for the duration of the probe.
A BRIT jailed in Russia has been moved to a hellish new Siberian prison and placed in solitary confinement for not standing up fast enough.
The UK is “deeply concerned” over the fate of Vladimir Kara-Murza, 42, who was sentenced to 25 years last April by Vladimir Putin’s cronies after opposing the Ukraine war.
8
Vladimir Kara-Murza has been put in solitary confinement for four monthsCredit: AP
8
The UK Foreign office is ‘deeply concerned’ about the jailed Putin enemy who suffers from nerve disorder after being poisoned twiceCredit: AP
8
The British-Russian citizen grew up in the UK before pursuing politics in Moscow
Kara-Murza, who also holds a Russian passport and worked as an opposition politician in Moscow, vanished from his prison cell in Omsk, Siberia on Monday.
Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron said he was “deeply concerned” over the fate of the dissident who also suffers from a nerve disorder after two poisonings he blames on the Kremlin.
However, Kara-Murza’s wife, Evgenia, revealed on Tuesday he had been transferred to a new prison and immediately placed in a punishment block.
He said his only crime was not standing up in time when the guard commanded him to “rise” and he was slammed with a “malicious violation”.
The Cambridge graduate will now spend four months in painful solitary confinement, according to the letter he wrote to his lawyer published by Evgenia.
He wrote ironically that the point of the transfer was “so that life doesn’t seem like honey”.
Kara-Murza had publicly criticised Putin since the tyrant came to power in 2000 and was a close aide to opposition politician Boris Nemtsov, who was assassinated in central Moscow in 2015.
He had vocally condemned Russia’s war in Ukraine and lobbied for Western sanctions against Moscow.
He was arrested only weeks after the invasion and hours after CNN broadcast an interview with him in which he said Russia was run by “a regime of murderers”.
Kara-Murza was sentenced to 25 years last April on treason and other charges that he denied, comparing the case against him to a Stalinist show trial.
Putin enemies jailed in Russia
MAD Vlad is not a man who likes to be challenged.
Those who dare to challenge the Kremlin kingpin or discredit his regime have ended up falling out of windows, shot dead in the street or booted off to hellish gulags in Siberia.
The latter is an easy option for paranoid Putin – sentence his opponents to decades behind bars. Out of sight, out of mind.
Here is a list of President Putin’s prominent enemies and critics – or just those who dared to criticise his war in Ukraine – who have been jailed in recent years:
Alexei Navalny
Putin’s best-known opponent Navalny, 47, has been locked up for almost three decades on trumped up charges of treason, which he denies.
He was poisoned with Novichok, a Soviet-made nerve agent, on a trip to Siberia in 2020 and later arrested in 2021 on charges of embezzlement which his supporters call punishment for challenging the Kremlin.
He was later charged with high treason and had 19 years added to his nine-year-sentence, which he is serving in one of Russia’s toughest Arctic prisons, known as the ‘Polar Wolf’ colony.
Human rights groups have long called Navalny’s imprisonment ‘politically motivated’.
Vladimir Kara-Murza
The British citizen, Russian dissident and opposition politician was arrested in April, 2022 after criticising Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
The long-term Putin critic was sentenced to 25 years in April, 2023 – the harshest punishment of its kind since the war began.
Ilya Yashin
Yet another opposition politician who was sent to rot behind bars.
Yashin was sentenced to eight and a half years in December, 2022 on charges of spreading ‘false information’ about the army.
He was tried over a YouTube video in which he discussed evidence regarding Russian atrocities in the Ukrainian village in Bucha, near Kyiv.
Andrei Pivovarov
Pivovarov led a now-defunct activist organisation called Open Russia, which was forced to shut down after a crackdown in May, 2021.
He was jailed for four years in July, 2022 for leading the so-called ‘undesirable organisation’.
Alexei Gorinov
A smaller player than the others, Gorinov was a Moscow district councillor whose only crime was to speak out about the war once at a council meeting.
He was jailed for seven years in July, 2022 after allegedly spreading ‘lies’ about the Russian armed forces.
He told his constituents that children were ‘dying every day’ in Ukraine.
Gorinov was the first person to be jailed under Putin’s sweeping censorship laws passed eight days after the war.
Alexei Moskalyov
Next is a man who was investigated by Putin’s spooks after his 12-year-old daughter drew an anti-war picture at school in 2022.
He was then alleged to have discredited the armed forces on his own social media and sentenced to two years in jail – a vicious punishment likely intended as a warning to others.
He fled the country on the eve of the verdict but was captured in Belarus and extradited back to Russia.
Ivan Safronov
Safronov was a defence reporter who later became an adviser to the head of Russia’s space agency.
He was arrested in 2020 and sentenced to 22 years in jail over claims he disclosed state secrets – a charge that he denies, stating all the information was already in the public domain.
Critics have claimed his imprisonment was a bold warning to others as Putin cracked down on media freedoms.
Kara-Murza wrote: “So now I’m in the IK-7 (penal colony), also in Omsk…It is a special regime colony, there is a special restricted housing unit facility for ‘repeat violators’ like me.”
“I’m in solitary confinement, of course,” he wrote, adding that he was “fine,” had enough food and it was warm in the facility.
More than 160 Russian citizens have been imprisoned for opposing the war, according to human rights group OVD-Info – however Kara-Murza’s is the harshest so far.
A total of 19,854 Russians have been arrested between February 24, 2022, when the war began, and January 28, 2024, for speaking out or demonstrating against the invasion.
Putin’s best-known opponent, Alexei Navalny, was already in jail at the time of the invasion and has since had his term extended by 19 years to more than three decades on new charges related to “extremism”.
He also vanished in December from his prison cell but reappeared 20 days later having been transferred to one of Russia’s toughest prisons in Siberia, known as the “Polar Wolf” colony.
A 72-year-old woman was also jailed recently for five and a half years over two social media posts criticising Russia’s war in Ukraine.
Yevgeniya Maiboroda, from the Rostov region, said she wrote the posts after he relative was caught under rubble after a Russian missile strike in Dnipro.
She is thought to be the oldest person imprisoned for speaking out against the war.
The couple’s home is Washington and they have three teenage children.
She described how he had already survived two assassination attempts, which she believed were carried out on Putin’s direct orders.
“He was poisoned twice by an unknown substance. Both times it happened in Moscow,” she said.
“He developed very weird symptoms suddenly and ended up in a coma with multiple organ failure.
“Both times he was given a five percent chance of survival. He was lucky enough to survive the times because of the very dedicated team of doctors who treated him.”
Afterwards, he suffered severe nerve damage and had to re-learn how to carry out tasks as simple as buttoning up his shirt and pouring tea, but both times he soon went back to work.
She told The Sun that her jailed husband isn’t brave, but “stubborn”.
That stubbornness, Evgenia says, also comes out of her husband’s genuine love for his country.
She said: “My husband is a genuine Russian patriot, and he has fought for years to bring change in our country.”
In Kara-Murza’s final speech to the court after his sentencing he said that he only failed in one thing.
Failing “to convince enough of my compatriots and politicians in democratic countries of the danger that the current Kremlin regime poses for Russia and for the world”.
He compared the Russia of today to that of the Soviet Union in the 1930s, when Stalin was carrying out a series of repressive show trials and purges of his political opponents.
“For me, as a historian, this is cause for reflection,” he said. “Criminals are supposed to repent of what they have done.
“I, on the other hand, am in prison for my political views. I also know that the day will come when the darkness over our country will dissipate.”
8
The Russian dissident has been left to rot in a Siberian prisonCredit: Reuters
8
Kara-Murza is pictured behind bars just before he was sentenced to 25 years in April, 2023Credit: AFP
8
Evgenia Kara-Murza says husband Vladimir will keep fighting for what he believes in
8
Jailed Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny has also been locked away for decadesCredit: Reuters
8
Yevgeniya Maiboroda, 72 was recently jailed for five and half years for posting two anti-war posts onlineCredit: East2West
Macron’s comments come as European nations grapple with the looming consequences of Donald Trump’s potential return to the White House, with the NATO-skeptic ex-president on track to win the Republican nomination. In the U.S., further military aid for Ukraine is also stalled in Congress, with Republican lawmakers reluctant to continue funding Kyiv. Ukraine has been fending off Russian President Vladimir Putin’s full-scale invasion for almost two years now.
“This is a decisive and testing moment for Europe. We must be ready to act to defend and support Ukraine whatever it takes and whatever America decides,” Macron said during a speech at Sweden’s Military Academy Karlberg.
Ahead of a key European summit this week focused on Ukraine, Macron also said the EU will have “to accelerate the scale” of its support, given that the costs “of a Russian victory are too high for all of us.”
EU leaders are hoping to agree on a €50 billion aid package for Ukraine at a European Council summit this Thursday, but fears are growing that Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán will use his veto to block the funds for Kyiv.
Macron is currently on a two-day visit to Sweden to discuss partnerships in areas from energy to defense. French Armed Forces Minister Sébastien Lecornu and his Swedish counterpart Pål Jonson are expected to sign letters of intent on air defense and air surveillance systems.
France and Sweden are among the very few European countries with a wide-ranging defense industry that can also manufacture their own fighter jets — France’s Rafale by Dassault Aviation, and Sweden’s JAS 39 Gripen made by Saab.
“We both have a very strong model in terms of production,” Macron told the audience, listing equipment, weapons, missiles and ammunition. Cyber and space, he added, are “clearly two areas of conflictuality for the future where there’s a lot to do together.”
The partnership between the French and Belgian armies — dubbed CaMo — is a model that could be replicated between France and Sweden, Macron added.
In early January, Ukrainian drones blew up a gas terminal near St. Petersburg. In December, Ukrainian operatives even managed to set off explosives on Russian railway lines deep in Siberia, hundreds of miles from the war. We’ll see more of these attacks inside Russia as fear rises in Kyiv that Ukraine is running out of ways to put Russian forces on the back foot on the battlefield.
The attacks are more a sign of Ukraine’s fears than of its strength. After hundreds of thousands of casualties and the displacement of millions of people, President Volodymyr Zelensky and his generals have new reasons to doubt the staying power of the Western support on which a Ukrainian victory, in any form, will depend. Aware that voters in America, its key military ally, and Europe, both a military and financial backer, are increasingly conflicted about whether Ukraine can ever evict Russian invaders from their trenches and recapture the 18% of territory they occupy, Kyiv is rightly worried.
Even if Congress approves more military aid for 2024, this will probably be the last package from Washington until after the November election. If Donald Trump wins, Ukrainians know he will drastically cut aid. The outlook in Europe is only slightly better. German budgetary problems, growing Hungarian opposition, and a lack of E.U. leadership will make it hard to fill the gap in military help from Washington over the medium term.
In the meantime, as Vladimir Putin shifts Russia’s economy onto a war footing, Ukraine knows it must mobilize and train hundreds of thousands of new recruits. Kyiv is considering mobilizing 500,000 additional troops. Even if that proves possible, it isn’t sustainable in a war against an invader with a much bigger population and economy. That’s why Kyiv is fast becoming more desperate. It’s doing its best to scale up its domestic defense production, especially of drones for the battlefield and for hitting targets inside Russia.
That’s where the danger grows for those not directly involved in the war. Zelensky is already taking bigger risks to turn the war around and maintain his political standing at home, including more aggressive attacks against targets inside Russia and occupied areas of Ukraine. It means a higher likelihood of targeted killings of Russian officials connected to the war, and frequent strikes with drones and missiles in Crimea and on Russian military and economic infrastructure, possibly including oil and grain facilities on the Black Sea that could again disrupt global markets. New attacks are also likely on the Kerch Strait bridge, which links Crimea to the Russian mainland. That, in turn, would provoke more intensive Russian attacks against Ukrainian cities. Any of these attacks—and there are many possible targets—risks a retaliation from Putin that brings NATO more directly into the conflict. Neither Russia nor NATO wants that expansion, but wars take on a life of their own, particularly with one of the key players—in this case, Zelensky—becoming a wild card to watch.
