WARSAW, Poland — Thousands of people attended an antigovernment rally organized by Poland’s nationalist conservative opposition party to boost support before next year’s presidential election.

Law and Justice leader Jaroslaw Kaczynski called on supporters to be active at social and political levels and to back the party’s candidate in next year’s presidential election. He hasn’t yet named the candidate.

Kaczynski also accused the pro-European Union government of acting against the nation’s interests and violating its laws and cited recently opened investigations into allegations of mismanagement and corruption of the Law and Justice government.

Up to 4,000 people with national white-and-red flags gathered for the rally held in windy weather outside the Justice Ministry in Warsaw, which has become a symbol of years of deep rifts between the backers of Kaczynski and Donald Tusk, now the prime minister and leader of the center-right Civic Platform party.

Law and Justice, which governed Poland for from 2015 until 2023, drew criticism from Brussels and Tusk alike for making changes to Poland’s judicial system that were deemed undemocratic.

Many in the nation of 38 million people were also tired of the aggressive and divisive language that Kaczynski, who dictated the government’s policies from the sidelines, used to energize support.

The party lost power in the 2023 election, but is still exerting control through President Andrzej Duda, who is allied with Law and Justice. Duda, whose second and last term runs out in August, has been blocking many of the government’s draft laws.
…

your ad here

DUBAI — Iran’s foreign minister said that Tehran was open to diplomacy to solve disputes but not “threats and pressure,” state media reported on Saturday, after the U.S. and three European powers imposed sanctions against the country’s aviation sector.

Abbas Araqchi’s comments come a day after the European Union’s chief diplomat said the bloc is considering new sanctions targeting Iran’s aviation sector, in reaction to reports Tehran supplied Russia with ballistic missiles in its war against Ukraine.

“Iran continues on its own path with strength, although we have always been open to talks to resolve disputes … but dialogue should be based on mutual respect, not on threats and pressure,” Araqchi said, according to the official news agency IRNA.

Araqchi said on Wednesday that Tehran had not delivered any ballistic missiles to Russia and that sanctions imposed on Iran by the United States and three European powers would not solve any problems between them.

The United States, Germany, Britain and France on Tuesday imposed new sanctions on Iran, including measures against its national airline, Iran Air.
…

your ad here

KYIV, UKRAINE — Russia and Ukraine conducted a major exchange of prisoners Saturday, 206 in all, in their second such swap in two days, following negotiations mediated by the United Arab Emirates, officials said.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that all 103 Ukrainians returned were from the military — 82 soldiers and privates and 21 officers.

The Russian Defense Ministry said that the 103 Russian soldiers exchanged had been taken prisoner in the Kursk border region where Ukrainian forces launched a surprise incursion in August.

“Our people are home,” Zelenskyy said on the Telegram messaging app. “We have successfully brought back another 103 warriors from Russian captivity to Ukraine.”

Zelenskyy posted pictures of servicemen wrapped in the national blue and yellow flag, hugging each other, talking on mobile phones and posing for group photographs at an undisclosed location.

The exchange was mediated by the UAE, Emirati state news agency WAM said. It was the country’s eighth such mediation since the start of 2024, it said.

Kyiv and Moscow have frequently exchanged prisoners since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, and Saturday’s swap was the third since Ukraine began its incursion into the Kursk region.

Ukrainian officials have previously said its troops had captured at least 600 Russian soldiers during the incursion, and that this would help it secure the return of captured Ukrainians.

Dmytro Lubinets, Ukraine’s ombudsman, said most of the freed Ukrainians had been in Russian captivity since the early days of the invasion.

He posted a short video on the Telegram messaging app showing the servicemen standing in front of a bus and shouting “Glory to Ukraine.”

Lubinets said that Kyiv had so far secured the return of 3,672 Ukrainians in 57 exchanges.
…

your ad here

london — An animal rights group trying to get real fur out of the bearskin caps worn by King’s Guards at Buckingham Palace took aim Thursday at the cost of the ceremonial garb. 

The price of the caps soared 30% in a year to more than 2,000 pounds ($2,600) apiece for the hats made of black bear fur, the Ministry of Defense said in response to a freedom of information request by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. 

“Stop wasting taxpayer pounds on caps made from slaughtered wildlife and switch to faux fur today,” the group said in a statement. 

A luxury fake fur maker has offered to supply the army with free faux bear fur for 10 years, PETA said. 

Military willing to consider alternatives

The military said it was open to exploring alternatives if they pass muster in durability, water protection and appearance. But “no alternative has met all those criteria to date,” a ministry spokesperson said in a statement. 

The distinctive tall black hats, worn by guards in bright scarlet tunics, are seen by millions who watch the regular changing of the guard ceremony at the palace. They also appear at other royal events including the annual Trooping the Color ceremony honoring the monarch’s birthday in June.

The cost of the caps rose from 1,560 pounds ($2,035) each in 2022 to 2,040 pounds ($2,660) in 2023, the ministry said. More than 1 million pounds ($1.3 million) was spent on them in the past decade. 

The price went up because of a contract change for fur that comes from bears killed in licensed hunts in Canada, the military said.

PETA, which has been pushing for more than two decades to scrap the fur hats, said each cap requires one bear pelt. The group claimed that the defense department is propping up the “cruel” Canadian bear-hunting industry. 

The ministry denied that charge and said if it stopped buying the pelts, it would not reduce the numbers of bears being killed. 

Petition calls for fake fur

Parliament debated the issue in July 2022 after an online petition with more than 100,000 signatures called for using fake fur in the caps. 

“This hunting involves the violent killing of bears, with many bears being shot several times,” Martyn Day, then a Scottish National Party member of Parliament, said at the time. “It seems undeniable, therefore, that by continuing to purchase hats made from the fur of black bears the MOD is funding the suffering of bears in Canada by making the baiting and killing of those animals and the sale of their pelts a profitable pursuit for the hunters.” 

Day said a poll at the time found 75% of the U.K. population found real bearskins were a bad use of taxpayer money and supported replacing the hats. 

He noted that the late Queen Elizabeth II had ceased buying fur for her wardrobe. 

Earlier this year, Queen Camilla, wife of King Charles III, pledged to buy no more fur products. 
…

your ad here

BANGUI, Central African Republic — Hours after Russian mercenary leader Yevgeny Prigozhin rebelled against his country’s top military leaders, his private army’s biggest client in Africa panicked, turning for help to his foe in the West. 

Officials from Central African Republic, where some 1,500 of Prigozhin’s Wagner Group mercenaries were stationed, wrote a letter that day, requesting to “rapidly” arrange a meeting with a private U.S. security firm to discuss collaboration. 

Dated June 23, 2023, the day Prigozhin launched the armed rebellion, the letter sparked a series of meetings, culminating in a deal with the central African nation and Bancroft Global Development. That sparked backlash from Russian mercenaries, according to a dozen diplomats, locals, and analysts. 

The tensions in Central African Republic are a window into a larger battle playing out across the continent as Moscow and Washington vie for influence. 

The Russian mercenaries — using success in staving off rebels in this impoverished nation as a model for expansion — have long been accused by locals and rights groups of stripping natural resources such as minerals and timber and are linked to the torture and death of civilians. In the wake of Prigozhin’s rebellion and suspicious death in a plane crash, the Russians are recalibrating their Africa operations. The United States, which has been largely disengaged from the region for years, is attempting to maintain a presence and stymie Russian gains as it pushes African countries to distance themselves from the mercenaries. 

U.S. officials blame Russia for anti-American sentiment in the region and say they’re trying to shift the narrative. 

“If the U.S. can’t regain a foothold, it could give Russia greater economic and political leverage,” said Samuel Ramani of the Royal United Services Institute, a defense and security think tank. “If Russia loses Central African Republic, its flagship model on the continent, there could be a domino effect in other countries.” 

Russia’s influence 

In recent years, Russia has emerged as the security partner of choice for a growing number of governments in the region, displacing traditional allies such as France and the U.S. 

Moscow expanded its military cooperation by using mercenaries like Wagner, which since around 2017 has operated in at least half a dozen countries by protecting African leaders and in some cases helping fight rebels and extremists. 

They’re also plagued by their human rights record. Two years ago in Mali, Wagner and the army were accused of executing about 300 men — some suspected of being Islamist extremists, but most civilians — in what Human Rights Watch called the worst single atrocity reported in the country’s decade-long armed conflict. And in Central African Republic, mercenaries train the army on torture tactics, including how to tburn people alive, according to watchdog The Sentry. 

Central African Republic 

Central African Republic was one of the first places the mercenaries entered. The country has been in conflict since 2013, when predominantly Muslim rebels seized power and forced the president from office. Six of the 14 armed groups that signed a 2019 peace deal later left the agreement. Locals and the government credited Wagner with fighting back rebels who tried to overtake Bangui, the capital, in 2021. The Russians soon expanded to Burkina Faso and Niger, and have ambitions for further growth. 

Russia is refurbishing a military base some 80 kilometers from Bangui. Alexander Bikantov, Russia’s ambassador to Central African Republic, said the base will improve the country’s security. 

Fidele Gouandjika, adviser to President Faustin-Archange Touadera, said the base aims to have 10,000 fighters by 2030 to engage with more African nations. 

Touadera’s office didn’t reply to written requests for comment for this story. His adviser to the country’s spy agency declined to be interviewed. 

Pressure from United States 

The U.S. had been pushing Central African Republic to find an alternative to Wagner for years. A more assertive U.S. approach came as it faced new setbacks and tried to rework agreements in the region. Its troops left Chad and Niger, where they were no longer welcome. 

Still, the State Department said in a statement this year that it wasn’t involved in the decision to establish Bancroft Global Development’s presence in Central African Republic. 

But Washington could deny such contracts if it wanted, said Sean McFate, a former contractor in Africa and author of “The New Rules of War.” 

The U.S. has used private military companies to reduce American “boots on the ground” in Africa, McFate said, and companies like Bancroft have to play by Washington’s rules if they want future government work. 

In response to AP questions, the U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity said it uses private contractors in Africa to help countries operate more effectively, with U.S. government oversight to ensure accountability. The official said the State Department has overseen Bancroft’s work in Somalia but not Central African Republic or elsewhere. 

Bancroft’s background 

Washington-based Bancroft is a nonprofit working in nine countries — five in Africa. Its involvement in Central African Republic has been shrouded in secrecy since signs emerged of its presence last fall. 

During an AP visit months later, rumors swirled about Bancroft’s activities, fueling speculation the U.S was bringing its own Wagner to oust Russia. 

But according to Bancroft founder Michael Stock, the group entered at Bangui’s behest. 

Stock received the letter from the presidency within a day of Prigozhin’s mutiny, and the two signed a deal in September, he said. 

Fewer than 30 Bancroft personnel work there, Stock said, helping Central African Republic with intelligence systems, interagency cooperation and law enforcement. 

Bancroft has invested some $1.4 million there, Stock said. 

Much of Bancroft’s funding has come from U.S. and United Nations grants. From 2018 to 2020, it received more than $43 million from the U.S., according to audits required as part of tax forms. 

Amal Ali, a former U.S. intelligence analyst, is among critics who say that despite its yearslong presence in Somalia, Bancroft hasn’t contributed to any eradication of terrorism. 

Stock dismissed such comments as uninformed and said the Somali and U.S. governments “agree Bancroft has done a great deal to damaging illegal armed groups and developing the capacity of the government to perform its national defense functions professionally.” 

Backlash on the ground 

Rights groups say a lack of transparency about Bancroft’s operations has fostered an atmosphere of distrust in a country already rampant with armed actors. Wagner, a U.N. peacekeeping mission and Rwandan troops are all on the ground to try to quell violence. 

“Operating in a vague and nontransparent way in the Central African Republic only leads to suspicion,” said Lewis Mudge, of Human Rights Watch. 

Stock defended Bancroft’s work and policies. “It is perfectly normal for a government not to publicize how it is defending the people and the state,” he told AP. 

Unclear future 

As the U.S. and Russia jockey for power, African governments say they want to make their own choices. 

Central African Republic officials approached Bancroft, which shows that these governments haven’t become Russian puppets, said Jack Margolin, an expert on private military companies. 

But, he added, Russia’s reaction to Bancroft could hurt Moscow’s standing with other nations. 

After Prigozhin’s death, Russia moved quickly to take control of Wagner’s assets, and the defense ministry told countries where Wagner operated that it would take over. The country and its military intelligence arm have taken a more direct role in Africa operations, deploying more official detachments from its army. 

In Central African Republic, it’s unclear how much sway the Russian state has with the mercenaries, who are beloved by many. For most people here, there’s little interest in squabbles among foreign nations. 

“There are problems between the Americans and Russians, but that doesn’t matter to us,” said Jean Louis Yet, who works at Bangui’s market. “We are here working, trying our best to make a living. All we want is security.” 
…

your ad here

pentagon — The Pentagon says it has nearly $6 billion in funding for Ukraine left that could expire at the end of this month unless Congress or the State Department acts to extend the military’s authority to draw weapons from its stockpiles to send to Kyiv.

“We have $5.9 billion left in Ukraine Presidential Drawdown Authority, all but $100 million of which will expire at the end of the fiscal year,” Pentagon press secretary Major General Pat Ryder said Friday. “The department will continue to provide drawdown packages in the near future and is working with Congress to seek an extension of PDA [presidential drawdown] authorities beyond the end of the fiscal year.”

A defense official, who spoke to VOA on the condition of anonymity, said Congress’ monthslong deadlock in passing the supplemental funding bill for Ukraine was a “contributing factor” as to why billions of dollars for weapons remained unspent.

The money was expected to be allocated for Ukraine last year, but the U.S. House was unable to pass the $95 billion foreign aid package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan until late April of this year. Of that, about $61 billion was earmarked for Ukraine.

The official said the delay left the Pentagon with less time to identify and send military aid to Kyiv from its stockpiles. The nearly $6 billion left in funding amounts to less than 10% of the aid allocated in April to address the conflict in Ukraine.

Speaking in response to a VOA question earlier this month, deputy Pentagon press secretary Sabrina Singh said the Pentagon would “use everything we can that’s available to us to make sure that we are continuing to provide Ukraine what it needs, both in the short term and the long term.”

“We’re in this fight with Ukraine for the long haul,” she said.

Two ways to ensure access

There are two ways to make sure that access to the remaining funds will not expire at the beginning of October, Mykola Murskyj, director of advocacy for the NGO Razom for Ukraine, told VOA.

The first is that Congress has to approve it again. This requires lawmakers to pass a provision that would extend the authority to use the remaining amount in the next budget year.

House members from both sides of the aisle have expressed support for extending the authorities so that all the allocated funding for Kyiv can be used.

“If we need to extend it, we’ll extend it,” Representative Adam Smith, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, told VOA.

Representative Mike Lawler, a Republican on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, added that he would “push to get it done” if the funding was not all spent by the deadline.

The second way to ensure the military can access the remaining funds is for the State Department to notify Congress of its intent to use the funds, according to Murskyj. In this case, lawmakers will not need to vote on the extension, but formal notification must be issued by the secretary of state, as has been done in the past.

A State Department spokesperson would not comment on whether it would issue the extension, saying it would not discuss communications with lawmakers and their staffs, but would continue “to coordinate closely with Congress concerning the steadfast support that the United States, our allies and our partners worldwide are providing to help Ukraine defend itself against Russia’s premeditated, unprovoked and unjustified war.”

Murskyj told VOA his advocacy group was working with members of Congress to extend the funds.

“However, I am not going to put all of my eggs in that basket,” he said, because “it is very difficult to predict what Congress will do, and there’s always the potential for some kind of last-minute derailment.”

In a letter to the administration, members of pro-Ukrainian nongovernmental organizations said extending these funds “would send a powerful message to Ukraine, Russia and American voters that the administration wants Ukraine to win.”

Kateryna Lisunova of VOA’s Ukrainian Service contributed to this report.
…

your ad here

washington — The United States and some of its allies have launched a global campaign to undercut efforts by RT and other Russian state-backed media outlets, accusing them of operating on behalf of the Kremlin’s intelligence agencies.

The State Department on Friday announced sanctions against two people and three entities, including RT’s Moscow-based parent company, saying new intelligence leaves no doubt that they are no longer engaged in providing anything that resembles news and information.

RT’s parent company and its subsidiaries “are no longer merely fire hoses of Russian government propaganda and disinformation,” U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told reporters at the State Department.

“They are engaged in covert influence activities aimed at undermining American elections and democracy, functioning like a de facto arm of Russia’s intelligence apparatus,” he said, adding the Russian operations also seek to “meddle in the sovereign affairs of countries around the world.”

Blinken and other U.S. officials declined to share details about the new intelligence, saying only that some of it comes from RT employees, and that it shows how the Russian-controlled television network is playing a key role in running cyber operations and even acquiring lethal weapons for Russian troops fighting in Ukraine.

RT quickly ridiculed the U.S. accusations both on social media and in a response to VOA.

“RT: Lives rent free in the State Department head,” the outlet posted on X. “We’re running out of popcorn, but we’ll be here live, laughing hard…”

In response to a query from VOA, RT pointed to comments by editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan on her Telegram channel.

“American intelligence services have uncovered that we are helping the front lines,” Simonyan wrote, according to a translation from Russian. “We’ve been doing this openly, you idiots. Should I send you a list of what we’ve bought and sent? We regularly publish this, just so you know.”

The Russian Embassy in Washington has not yet responded to a request from VOA for comment.

U.S. officials, though, said comments like the ones from RT’s Simonyan only give more weight to the allegations.

“They’ve admitted it,” said James Rubin, the special envoy for the State Department’s Global Engagement Center. “They have said they’re operating under direct instruction of [Russian President] Vladimir Putin. That’s what they say they’re doing.”

And the U.S. says the intelligence shows those Kremlin-assigned responsibilities go far beyond what could be considered normal broadcast operations, including oversight of a crowdsourcing campaign to provide Russian troops in Ukraine with sniper rifles, body armor, drones, night vision equipment and other weaponry.

“That’s not what a TV station normally does. That’s what … that’s what a military entity does,” Rubin said. RT is “a fully fledged member of the intelligence apparatus and operation of the Russian government on the war in Ukraine.”

The U.S. intelligence also points to Kremlin-directed RT operations in Argentina, Germany and the South Caucasus – some linked to a Russian military intelligence cyber team that has been embedded within the company.

U.S. officials also said evidence shows RT is “almost certainly” coordinating with traditional Russian intelligence services to meddle in next month’s presidential elections in Moldova.

“RT is going to be used to try to manipulate an election and, if they don’t win the election, manipulate a crowd to try to generate violence for the possibility of overthrowing [the government],” Rubin said.

U.S. officials also called out RT for covert influence operations in Latin America and Africa that have had serious consequences.

“One of the reasons why so much of the world has not been as fully supportive of Ukraine as you would think they would be — given that Russia has invaded Ukraine and violated rule number one of the international system — is because of the broad scope and reach of RT,” Rubin said.

The State Department said Friday that it had instructed its diplomats to share evidence about RT’s efforts with countries around the world.

“We urge every ally, every partner, to start by treating RT’s activities as they do other intelligence activities by Russia within their borders,” Blinken said.

Friday’s sanctions came a little more than a week after the U.S. acted against what it described as two Russian plots, one of them involving RT, aimed at undermining the U.S. presidential elections in November.

The U.S. Department of Justice announced the takedown of 32 fake websites designed by Russia to mimic legitimate news sites, to bombard U.S. voters with propaganda aimed at building support for Russia in its war against Ukraine and bolstering support for Republican presidential candidate and former President Donald Trump.

The U.S. also unsealed indictments against two RT employees, accusing them of funneling nearly $10 million to a U.S. company in Tennessee to promote and distribute English-language material favorable to the Russian government.

What impact all these actions will have on Russia and RT, however, remains to be seen.

“I don’t think there’s any evidence that deterrence is working in this space,” said Margaret Talev, who directs the Syracuse University Institute for Democracy, Journalism and Citizenship in Washington.

“These efforts are getting much more sophisticated,” she told VOA, adding that Russian influence operations have become adept at seeding the social media environment and letting audiences do the work.

“One of the biggest drivers of the spread of misinformation and disinformation is sharing by people who aren’t trying to do anything wrong,” Talev said. “They’re either amused by something or horrified by something that comes into their feed, and they hit ‘share.’ And now someone spread it to you, and you’re spreading it to someone else.”
…

your ad here

…

your ad here

Washington — When Kamala Harris and Donald Trump met in a presidential debate on Tuesday, they spoke about a range of foreign policy issues, including China and Russia’s war in Ukraine.

But while the debate attracted large audiences and coverage in the United States and Europe, Beijing and Moscow’s state-run media were relatively quiet on the event.

The minimal coverage is a contrast to the presidential debate between Joe Biden and Trump in June.

Chinese media

After that debate, Beijing-run outlets — like media around the world — were flooded with coverage of Biden’s poor performance.

But Harris-Trump coverage was noticeably slimmer in state-run outlets such as Xinhua, the Global Times and the People’s Daily newspaper, China media analysts say.

The shift is a subtle but significant distinction, according to China media analysts, that reflects how the Chinese Communist Party, or CCP, employs its propaganda apparatus.

The relative lack of coverage wasn’t all that surprising to Kenton Thibaut, a senior resident China fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab in Washington.

The Chinese government is probably still figuring out how to move forward following Biden’s abrupt withdrawal, said Thibaut. She believes that’s a primary reason for the reduced coverage of this week’s debate.

“This is really reflective of how China handles changes in foreign policy issues,” Thibaut said. “They just stick to very fact-based coverage, basically restating what the candidate said, until they — the propaganda department and such — can figure out basically how to cover it globally and domestically.”

Another reason for the reduced coverage may have to do with democracy itself, according to China experts.

“The presidential debate is important for U.S. democracy, and democracy is always a sensitive topic for the CCP,” Anne-Marie Brady, a professor and specialist in Chinese politics at the University of Canterbury in New Zealand, told VOA in an email.

Jonathan Hassid, an Iowa State University professor who specializes in Chinese media, agreed.

“Chinese media does not like covering democratic successes,” Hassid told VOA. “Democratic failures are highlighted, but the successes are not.”

That helps explain the difference between the coverage of the two debates. During the first debate, which by many accounts was a fiasco, Biden sounded hoarse and frail, and his repeated fumbles highlighted concerns over the 81-year-old’s capacity to serve another four-year term as president.

In coverage of that debate, Chinese state media relied on narratives about how democracy doesn’t work well, Hassid said.

For instance, Hu Xijin, a Chinese media commentator and former state media editor, wrote, “Objectively speaking, the low-quality performance of these two old men was a negative advertisement for Western democracy.”

By contrast, Hassid said, this week’s debate may have been perceived as a better display of democracy.

Still, China also didn’t even feature that largely in the latest debate.

While Harris didn’t go into much detail, she said that “a policy about China should be in making sure the United States of America wins the competition for the 21st century.” Trump, meanwhile, has previously proposed tariffs up to 100% on Chinese products.

When asked about Harris and Trump’s views about tariffs on imports from China, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning on Wednesday said she had no comment.

“The presidential elections are the United States’ own affairs,” she said. “That said, we are opposed to making China an issue in U.S. elections.”

A spokesperson for China’s Washington embassy replied to VOA’s request for comment with a similar statement: “On the issue of the U.S. election, China’s position is consistent and clear. China has no intention and will not interfere in it. At the same time, we hope that the U.S. side will not make accusations against China in the election.”

Russian media

Russia — another propaganda powerhouse — also didn’t offer much coverage of the debate. “But that doesn’t mean that they don’t drop in plenty of spin,” according to Darren Linvill, co-director of Clemson University’s Media Forensics Hub.

Based on his analysis of Russian state media coverage of the debate, Linvill said outlets such as RT and Sputnik were focused on downplaying Harris and playing up Trump.

There were some outliers, such as a Sputnik article in which a psychiatrist claimed Harris was trying to “hide her imposter syndrome” during the debate. But most of the coverage was subtler, Linvill said.

Articles tended to be anodyne and not necessarily critical of either side, Linvill said, but they still reveal Moscow’s well-documented preference for Trump.

U.S. officials are again warning about Russian efforts to influence this year’s election. Last week, the Justice Department accused two Russians who work at the Kremlin-backed RT of money laundering by funneling nearly $10 million to a conservative Tennessee-based media outlet that is a leading platform for pro-Trump voices.

While it’s important to monitor disinformation in the lead-up to and during an election, according to Thibaut, the period immediately after is perhaps even more important, especially if the election is close.

“This is a prime time for threat actors to take advantage of information, the polarizing narratives, the charged-up atmosphere to really sow social division,” Thibaut said.

“We have to really remain vigilant after the election as well.”
…

your ad here

Ukraine is preparing for winter, which energy experts predict will be the most difficult since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. Russia’s intense rocket attacks over the spring and summer destroyed 90% of Ukraine’s thermal generation capacity, and Ukrainians are rushing to restore damaged power plants. Lesia Bakalets in Kyiv reports on those efforts. Camera: Vladyslav Smilianets
…

your ad here

Washington — United States President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer are meeting Friday amid an intensified push by Ukraine to loosen restrictions on using weapons provided by the U.S. and Britain to strike Russia. 

The talks come amid signs that the White House could be moving toward a shift in its policy, and as Russia’s President Vladimir Putin warned that Ukraine’s use of long-range weapons would put NATO at war with Moscow. 

Ukrainian officials renewed their pleas to use Western-provided long-range missiles against targets deeper inside Russia during this week’s visit to Kyiv by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and U.K. Foreign Secretary David Lammy. Blinken said he had “no doubt” that Biden and Starmer would discuss the matter during their visit, noting the U.S. has adapted and “will adjust as necessary” as Russia’s battlefield strategy has changed. 

The language is similar to what Blinken said in May, shortly before the U.S. allowed Ukraine to use American-provided weapons just inside Russian territory. The distance has been largely limited to cross-border targets deemed a direct threat out of concerns about further escalating the conflict. 

While the issue is expected to be at the top of the leaders’ agenda, it appeared unlikely that Biden and Starmer would announce any policy changes during this week’s visit, according to two U.S. officials familiar with planning for the leaders’ talks who spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the private deliberations. 

In addition to Blinken, Biden also has hinted a change could be afoot. In an exchange with reporters earlier this week about whether he was ready to ease weapons restrictions on Ukraine, he responded, “We’re working that out now.” 

Putin warned Thursday that allowing long-range strikes “would mean that NATO countries, the United States, and European countries are at war with Russia. … If this is so, then, bearing in mind the change in the very essence of this conflict, we will make appropriate decisions based on the threats that will be created for us.” 

His remarks were in line with the narrative the Kremlin has actively promoted since early in the Ukraine war, accusing NATO countries of de-facto participation in the conflict and threatening a response. 

Earlier in the year, Putin warned that Russia could provide long-range weapons to others to strike Western targets in response to NATO allies allowing Ukraine to use their arms to attack Russian territory, saying it “would mark their direct involvement in the war against the Russian Federation, and we reserve the right to act the same way.” 

Starmer, in response to the Russian leader’s Thursday comments, said on his way to the U.S. that Britain does not seek any conflict with Russia. 

“Russia started this conflict. Russia illegally invaded Ukraine. Russia could end this conflict straight away,” Starmer told reporters. “Ukraine has the right to self-defense and we’ve obviously been absolutely fully supportive of Ukraine’s right to self-defense — we’re providing training capability, as you know.” 

“But we don’t seek any conflict with Russia — that’s not our intention in the slightest,” Starmer said. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has pressed U.S. and allied military leaders to go much further. He argues that the U.S. must allow Ukraine to target Russian air bases and launch sites far from the border as Russia has stepped up assaults on Ukraine’s electricity grid and utilities ahead of the coming winter. 

Zelenskyy also wants more long-range weaponry from the United States, including the Army Tactical Missile System, known as ATACMS, for strikes in Russia. 

ATACMS wouldn’t be the answer to the main threat Ukraine faces from long-range Russian glide bombs, which are being fired from more than 300 kilometers (185 miles) away, beyond the ATACMS’ reach, said Lt. Col. Charlie Dietz, Pentagon spokesperson. 

American officials also don’t believe they have enough of the weapon systems available to provide Ukraine with the number to make a substantive difference to conditions on the ground, one of the U.S. officials said. 

During a meeting of allied defense ministers last week, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said he did not believe providing Ukraine with long-range weapon systems would be a game-changer in the grueling war. He noted that Ukraine has already been able to strike inside Russia with its own internally produced systems, including drones. 

“I don’t believe one capability is going to be decisive, and I stand by that comment,” Austin said. 

“As of right now, the policy has not changed,” Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder, Pentagon press secretary, said Thursday. 

Starmer said he was visiting Washington for “strategic meetings to discuss Ukraine and to discuss the Middle East.” It’s the prime minister’s second meeting with Biden since his center-left government was elected in July. 

It comes after Britain last week diverged from the U.S. by suspending some arms exports to Israel because of the risk they could be used to break international law. Both countries have downplayed their differences over the issue. 

Biden and Starmer’s meeting also comes ahead of this month’s annual meeting of global leaders at the United Nations General Assembly. The Oval Office meeting was scheduled in part to help the two leaders compare notes on the war in Ukraine, languishing efforts to get a cease-fire deal in Gaza and other issues ahead of the U.N. meeting. 

The White House also has sought in recent days to put a greater emphasis on the nexus between the war in Ukraine and conflict in the Middle East sparked after Iranian-backed Hamas militants in Gaza launched attacks on Israel on Oct. 7. 

The Biden administration said this week that Iran recently delivered short-range ballistic weapons to Russia to use against Ukraine, a transfer that White House officials worry will allow Russia to use more of its arsenal for targets far beyond the Ukrainian front line while employing Iranian warheads for closer-range targets. 

In turn, the U.S. administration says Russia has been tightening its relationship with Iran, including by providing it with nuclear and space technology. 

“This is obviously deeply concerning,” White House national security spokesperson John Kirby said of the missile transfer. “And it certainly speaks to the manner in which this partnership threatens European security and how it illustrates Iran’s destabilizing influence now reaches well beyond the Middle East.” 

 
…

your ad here