Tag: Russia

  • Ukraine’s Drone Academy is in session

    Ukraine’s Drone Academy is in session

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    KYIV — As the distant howl of air raid sirens echoes around them, a dozen Ukrainian soldiers clamber out of camouflaged tents perched on a hill off a road just outside Kyiv, hidden from view by a thick clump of trees. The soldiers, pupils of a drone academy, gather around a white Starlink antenna, puffing at cigarettes and doomscrolling on their phones — taking a break between classes, much like students around the world do.

    But this isn’t your average university.

    The soldiers have come here to study air reconnaissance techniques and to learn how to use drones — most of them commercial ones — in a war zone. Their training, as well as the supply chains that facilitate the delivery of drones to Ukraine, are kept on the down low. The Ukrainians need to keep their methods secret not only from the Russian invaders, but also from the tech firms that manufacture the drones and provide the high-speed satellite internet they rely on, who have chafed at their machines being used for lethal purposes.

    Drones are essential for the Ukrainians: The flying machines piloted from afar can spot the invaders approaching, reduce the need for soldiers to get behind enemy lines to gather intelligence, and allow for more precise strikes, keeping civilian casualties down. In places like Bakhmut, a key Donetsk battleground, the two sides engage in aerial skirmishes; flocks of drones buzz ominously overhead, spying, tracking, directing artillery.

    So, to keep their flying machines in the air, the Ukrainians have adapted, adjusting their software, diversifying their supply chains, utilizing the more readily available commercial drones on the battlefield and learning to work around the limitations and bans foreign corporations have imposed or threatened to impose.

    Enter: The Dronarium Academy.

    Private drone schools and nongovernmental organizations around Ukraine are training thousands of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) pilots for the army. Dronarium, which before Russia’s invasion last year used to shoot glossy commercial drone footage and gonzo political protests, now provides five-day training sessions to soldiers in the Kyiv Oblast. In the past year, around 4,500 pilots, most of them now in the Ukrainian armed forces, have taken Dronarium’s course.

    What’s on the curriculum

    On the hill outside Kyiv, behind the thicket of trees, break time’s over and school’s back in session. After the air raid siren stops, some soldiers grab their flying machines and head to a nearby field; others return to their tents to study theory.

    A key lesson: How to make civilian drones go the distance on the battlefield.

    “In the five days we spend teaching them how to fly drones, one and a half days are spent on training for the flight itself,” a Dronarium instructor who declined to give his name over security concerns but uses the call sign “Prometheus” told POLITICO. “Everything else is movement tactics, camouflage, preparatory process, studying maps.”

    Drone reconnaissance teams work in pairs, like snipers, Prometheus said. One soldier flies a drone using a keypad; their colleague looks at the map, comparing it with the video stream from the drone and calculating coordinates. The drone teams “work directly with artillery,” Prometheus continued. “We transfer the picture from the battlefield to the servers and to the General Staff. Thanks to us, they see what they are doing and it helps them hit the target.”

    GettyImages 1467388055
    Private drone schools and nongovernmental organizations around Ukraine are training thousands of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) pilots for the army | John Moore/Getty Images

    Before Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, many of these drone school students were civilians. One, who used to be a blogger and videogame streamer but is now an intelligence pilot in Ukraine’s eastern region of Donbas, goes by the call sign “Public.” When he’s on the front line, he must fly his commercial drones in any weather — it’s the only way to spot enemy tanks moving toward his unit’s position.

    “Without them,” Public said, “it is almost impossible to notice the equipment, firing positions and personnel in advance. Without them, it becomes very difficult to coordinate during attack or defense. One drone can sometimes save dozens of lives in one flight.”

    The stakes couldn’t be higher: “If you don’t fly, these tanks will kill your comrades. So, you fly. The drone freezes, falls and you pick up the next one. Because the lives of those targeted by a tank are more expensive than any drone.”

    Army of drones

    The war has made the Bayraktar military drone a household name, immortalized in song by the Ukrainians. Kyiv’s UAV pilots also use Shark, RQ-35 Heidrun, FLIRT Cetus and other military-grade machines.

    “It is difficult to have an advantage over Russia in the number of manpower and weapons. Russia uses its soldiers as meat,” Ukraine’s Digital Transformation Minister Mykhailo Fedorov said earlier this month. But every Ukrainian life, he continued, “is important to us. Therefore, the only way is to create a technological advantage over the enemy.”

    Until recently, the Ukrainian army didn’t officially recognize the position of drone operator. It was only in January that Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Valerii Zaluzhnyi ordered the army to create 60 companies made up of UAV pilots, indicating also that Kyiv planned to scale up its own production of drones. Currently, Ukrainian firms make only 10 percent of the drones the country needs for the war, according to military volunteer and founder of the Air Intelligence Support Center Maria Berlinska.

    In the meantime, many of Ukraine’s drone pilots prefer civilian drones made by Chinese manufacturer DJI — Mavics and Matrices — which are small, relatively cheap at around €2,500 a pop, with decent zoom lenses and user-friendly operations.

    Choosing between a military drone and a civilian one “depends on the goal of the pilot,” said Prometheus, the Dronarium instructor. “Larger drones with wings fly farther and can do reconnaissance far behind enemy lines. But at some point, you lose the connection with it and just have to wait until it comes back. Mavics have great zoom and can hang in the air for a long time, collecting data without much risk for the drone.”

    But civilian machines, made for hobbyists not soldiers, last two, maybe three weeks in a war zone. And DJI last year said it would halt sales to both Kyiv and Moscow, making it difficult to replace the machines that are lost on the battlefield.

    In response, Kyiv has loosened export controls for commercial drones, and is buying up as many as it can, often using funds donated by NGOs such as United24 “Army of Drones” initiative. Ukraine’s digital transformation ministry said that in the three months since the initiative launched, it has purchased 1,400 military and commercial drones and facilitated training for pilots, often via volunteers. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s Serhiy Prytula Charitable Foundation said it has purchased more than 4,100 drones since Russia’s full-scale invasion began last year — most were DJI’s Mavic 3s, along with the company’s Martice 30s and Matrice 300s.

    But should Ukraine be concerned about the fact many of its favorite drones are manufactured by a Chinese company, given Beijing’s “no limits” partnership with Moscow?

    GettyImages 1245884819
    Choosing between a military drone and a civilian one “depends on the goal of the pilot,” said Prometheus, the Dronarium instructor | Sameer Al-Doumy/AFP via Getty Images

    DJI, the largest drone-maker in the world, has publicly claimed it can’t obtain user data and flight information unless the user submits it to the company. But its alleged ties to the Chinese state, as well as the fact the U.S. has blacklisted its technology (over claims it was used to surveil ethnic Uyghurs in Xinjiang), have raised eyebrows. DJI has denied both allegations.

    Asked if DJI’s China links worried him, Prometheus seemed unperturbed.

    “We understand who we are dealing with — we use their technology in our interests,” he said. “Indeed, potentially our footage can be stored somewhere on Chinese servers. However, they store terabytes of footage from all over the world every day, so I doubt anyone could trace ours.”

    Dealing with Elon

    Earlier this month, Elon Musk’s SpaceX announced it had moved to restrict the Ukrainian military’s use of its Starlink satellite internet service because it was using it to control drones. The U.S. space company has been providing internet to Ukraine since last February — losing access would be a big problem.

    “It is not that our army goes blind if Starlink is off,” said Prometheus, the drone instructor. “However, we do need to have high-speed internet to correct artillery fire in real-time. Without it, we will have to waste more shells in times of ongoing shell shortages.”

    But while the SpaceX announcement sparked outcry from some of Kyiv’s backers, as yet, Ukraine’s operations haven’t been affected by the move, Digital Transformation Minister Fedorov told POLITICO.

    Prometheus had a theory as to why: “I think Starlink will stay with us. It is impossible to switch it off only for drones. If Musk completely turns it off, he will also have to turn it off for hospitals that use the same internet to order equipment and even perform online consultations during surgeries at the war front. Will he switch them off too?”

    And if Starlink does go down, the Ukrainians will manage, Prometheus said with a wry smile: “We have our tools to fix things.”



    [ad_2]
    #Ukraines #Drone #Academy #session
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • The environmental scars of Russia’s war in Ukraine

    The environmental scars of Russia’s war in Ukraine

    [ad_1]

    One year of war in Ukraine has left deep scars — including on the country’s natural landscape.

    The conflict has ruined vast swaths of farmland, burned down forests and destroyed national parks. Damage to industrial facilities has caused heavy air, water and soil pollution, exposing residents to toxic chemicals and contaminated water. Regular shelling around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the largest in Europe, means the risk of a nuclear accident still looms large.

    The total number of cases of environmental damage tops 2,300, Ukraine’s environment minister, Ruslan Strilets, told POLITICO in an emailed statement. His ministry estimates the total cost at $51.45 billion (€48.33 billion).

    Of those documented cases, 1,078 have already been handed over to law enforcement agencies, according to Strilets, as part of an effort to hold Moscow accountable in court for environmental damage.

    A number of NGOs have also stepped in to document the environmental impacts of the conflict, with the aim of providing data to international organizations like the United Nations Environment Program to help them prioritize inspections or pinpoint areas at higher risk of pollution.

    Among them is PAX, a peace organization based in the Netherlands, which is working with the Center for Information Resilience (CIR) to record and independently verify incidents of environmental damage in Ukraine. So far, it has verified 242 such cases.

    “We mainly rely on what’s being documented, and what we can see,” said Wim Zwijnenburg, a humanitarian disarmament project leader with PAX. Information comes from social media, public media accounts and satellite imagery, and is then independently verified.

    “That also means that if there’s no one there to record it … we’re not seeing it,” he said. “It’s such a big country, so there’s fighting in so many locations, and undoubtedly, we are missing things.”

    After the conflict is over, the data could also help identify “what is needed in terms of cleanup, remediation and restoration of affected areas,” Zwijnenburg said.

    Rebuilding green

    While some conservation projects — such as rewilding of the Danube delta — have continued despite the war, most environmental protection work has halted.

    “It is very difficult to talk about saving other species if the people who are supposed to do it are in danger,” said Oksana Omelchuk, environmental expert with the Ukrainian NGO EcoAction.

    That’s unlikely to change in the near future, she added, pointing out that the environment is littered with mines.

    Agricultural land is particularly affected, blocking farmers from using fields and contaminating the soil, according to Zwijnenburg. That “might have an impact on food security” in the long run, he said.

    When it comes to de-mining efforts, residential areas will receive higher priority, meaning it could take a long time to make natural areas safe again.

    The delay will “[hinder] the implementation of any projects for the restoration and conservation of species,” according to Omelchuk.

    And, of course, fully restoring Ukraine’s nature won’t be possible until “Russian troops leave the territory” she said.

    Meanwhile, Kyiv is banking that the legal case it is building against Moscow will become a potential source of financing for rebuilding the country and bringing its scarred landscape and ecosystems back to health.

    It is also tapping into EU coffers. In a move intended to help the country restore its environment following Russia’s invasion, Ukraine in June became the first non-EU country to join the LIFE program, the EU’s funding instrument for environment and climate.

    Earlier this month, Environment Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius announced a €7 million scheme — dubbed the Phoenix Initiative — to help Ukrainian cities rebuild greener and to connect Ukrainian cities with EU counterparts that can share expertise on achieving climate neutrality.



    [ad_2]
    #environmental #scars #Russias #war #Ukraine
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Western firms say they’re quitting Russia. Where’s the proof?

    Western firms say they’re quitting Russia. Where’s the proof?

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    BERLIN — In an earlier life as a reporter in Moscow, I once knocked on the door of an apartment listed as the home address of the boss of company that, our year-long investigation showed, was involved in an elaborate scheme to siphon billions of dollars out of Russia’s state railways through rigged tenders.

    To my surprise, the man who opened the door wore only his underwear. He confirmed that his identity had been used to register the shell company. But he wasn’t a businessman; he was a chauffeur. The real owner, he told us, was his boss, one of the bankers we suspected of masterminding the scam. “Mr. Underpants,” as we called him, was amazed that it had taken so long for anyone to take an interest.

    Mr. Underpants leapt immediately to mind when, nearly a decade on, I learned that a sulfurous academic dispute had erupted over whether foreign companies really are bailing out of Russia in response to President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine and subsequent international sanctions.

    Attempting to verify corporate activity in Russia — a land that would give the murkiest offshore haven a run for its money — struck me as a fool’s errand. Company operations are habitually hidden in clouds of lies, false paperwork and bureaucratic errors. What a company says it does in Russia can bear precious little resemblance to reality.

    So, who are the rival university camps trying to determine whether there really is a corporate exodus from Russia?

    In the green corner (under the olive banner of the University of St. Gallen in Switzerland) we have economist Simon Evenett and Niccolò Pisani of the IMD business school in Lausanne. On January 13, they released a working paper which found that less than 9 percent of Western companies (only 120 firms all told) had divested from Russia. Styling themselves as cutting through the hype of corporate self-congratulation, the Swiss-based duo said their “findings challenge the narrative that there is a vast exodus of Western firms leaving the market.”

    Nearly 4,000 miles away in New Haven, Connecticut, the Swiss statement triggered uproar in Yale (the blue corner). Jeffrey A. Sonnenfeld, from the university’s school of management, took the St. Gallen/IMD findings as an affront to his team’s efforts. After all, the headline figure from a list compiled by Yale of corporate retreat from Russia is that 1,300 multinationals have either quit or are doing so. In a series of attacks, most of which can’t be repeated here, Sonnenfeld accused Evenett and Pisani of misrepresenting and fabricating data.

    Responding, the deans of IMD and St. Gallen issued a statement on January 20 saying they were “appalled” at the way Sonnenfeld had called the rigor and veracity of their colleagues’ work into question. “We reject this unfounded and slanderous allegation in the strongest possible terms,” they wrote.

    Sonnenfeld doubled down, saying the Swiss team was dangerously fueling “Putin’s false narrative” that companies had never left and Russia’s economy was resilient.

    That led the Swiss universities again to protest against Sonnenfeld’s criticism and deny political bias, saying that Evenett and Pisani have “had to defend themselves against unsubstantiated attacks and intimidation attempts by Jeff Sonnenfeld following the publication of their recent study.”

    How the hell did it all get so acrimonious?

    Let’s go back a year.

    The good fight

    Within weeks of the February 24 invasion, Sonnenfeld was attracting fulsome coverage in the U.S. press over a campaign he had launched to urge big business to pull out of Russia. His team at Yale had, by mid-March, compiled a list of 300 firms saying they would leave that, the Washington Post reported, had gone “viral.”

    Making the case for ethical business leadership has been Sonnenfeld’s stock in trade for over 40 years. To give his full job titles, he’s the Senior Associate Dean for Leadership Studies & Lester Crown Professor in the Practice of Management at the Yale School of Management, as well as founder and president of the Chief Executive Leadership Institute, a nonprofit focused on CEO leadership and corporate governance.

    And, judging by his own comments, Sonnenfeld is convinced of the importance of his campaign in persuading international business leaders to leave Russia: “So many CEOs wanted to be seen as doing the right thing,” Sonnenfeld told the Post. “It was a rare unity of patriotic mission, personal values, genuine concern for world peace, and corporate self-interest.”

    Fast forward to November, and Sonnenfeld is basking in the glow of being declared an enemy of the Russian state, having been added to a list of 25 U.S. policymakers and academics barred from the country. First Lady Jill Biden topped the list, but Sonnenfeld was named in sixth place which, as he told Bloomberg, put him “higher than [Senate minority leader] Mitch McConnell.”

    Apparently less impressed, the Swiss team had by then drafted a first working paper, dated October 18, challenging Sonnenfeld’s claims of a “corporate exodus” from Russia. This paper, which was not published, was circulated by the authors for review. After receiving a copy (which was uploaded to a Yale server), Sonnenfeld went on the attack.

    Apples and oranges

    Before we dive in, let’s take a step back and look at what the Yale and Swiss teams are trying to do.

    Sonnenfeld is working with the Kyiv School of Economics (KSE), which launched a collaborative effort to track whether companies are leaving Russia by monitoring open sources, such as regulatory filings and news reports, supported where possible through independent confirmation.

    Kyiv keeps score on its Leave Russia site, which at the time of writing said that, of 3,096 companies reviewed, 196 had already exited and a further 1,163 had suspended operations.

    Evenett and Pisani are setting a far higher bar, seeking an answer to the binary question of whether a company has actually ditched its equity. It’s not enough to announce you are suspending operations, you have to fully divest your subsidiary and assets such as factories or stores. This is, of course, tough. Can you find a buyer? Will the Russians block your sale?

    The duo focuses only on companies based in the G7 or the European Union that own subsidiaries in Russia. Just doing business in Russia doesn’t count; control is necessary. To verify this, they used a business database called ORBIS, which contains records of 400 million companies worldwide.

    The first thought to hold onto here, then, is that the scope and methodology of the Yale and Swiss projects are quite different — arguably they are talking about apples and oranges. Yale’s apple cart comprises foreign companies doing business in Russia, regardless of whether they have a subsidiary there. The Swiss orange tree is made up of fewer than half as many foreign companies that own Russian subsidiaries, and are themselves headquartered in countries that have imposed sanctions against the Kremlin.

    So, while IKEA gets an ‘A’ grade on the Yale list for shutting its furniture stores and letting 10,000 Russian staff go, it hasn’t made the clean equity break needed to get on the St. Gallen/IMD leavers’ list. The company says “the process of scaling down the business is ongoing.” If you simply have to have those self-assembly bookshelves, they and other IKEA furnishings are available online.

    The second thing to keep in mind is that ORBIS aggregates records in Russia, a country where people are willing to serve as nominee directors in return for a cash handout — even a bottle of vodka. Names are often mistranslated when local companies are established — transliteration from Russian to English is very much a matter of opinion — but this can also be a deliberate ruse to throw due diligence sleuths off the trail.

    Which takes us back to the top of this story: I’ve done in-depth Russian corporate investigations and still have the indelible memory of those underpants (they were navy blue briefs) to show for it.

    Stacking up the evidence

    The most obvious issue with the Yale method is that it places a lot of emphasis on what foreign companies say about whether they are pulling out of Russia.

    There is an important moral suasion element at play here. Yale’s list is an effective way to name and shame those companies like Unilever and Mondelez — all that Milka chocolate — that admit they are staying in Russia.

    But what the supposed good kids — who say they are pulling out — are really up to is a murkier business. Even if a company is an A-grade performer on the Yale list, that does not mean that Russia’s economy is starved of those goods during wartime. There can be many reasons for this. Some companies will rush out a pledge to leave, then dawdle. Others will redirect goods to Russia through middlemen in, say, Turkey, Dubai or China. Some goods will be illegally smuggled. Some companies will have stocks that last a long time. Others might hire my old friend Mr. Underpants to create an invisible corporate structure.

    A stroll through downtown Moscow reveals the challenges. Many luxury brands have conspicuously shut up shop but goods from several companies on the Yale A list and B list (companies that have suspended activities in Russia) were still easy to find on one, totally random, shopping trip. The latest Samsung laptops, TVs and phones were readily available, and the shop reported no supply problems. Swatch watches, Jägermeister liquor and Dr. Oetker foods were all also on sale in downtown Moscow, including at the historic GUM emporium across Red Square from the Kremlin.

    All the companies involved insisted they had ended business in Russia, but acknowledged the difficulties of continued sales. Swatch said the watches available would have to be from old stocks or “a retailer over which the company has no control.” Dr. Oetker said: “To what extent individual trading companies are still selling stocks of our products there is beyond our knowledge.” Jägermeister said: “Unfortunately we cannot prevent our products being purchased by third parties and sold on in Russia without our consent or permission.” Samsung Electronics said it had suspended Russia sales but continued “to actively monitor this complex situation to determine our next steps.”

    The larger problem emerging is that sanctions are turning neighboring countries into “trading hubs” that allow key foreign goods to continue to reach the Russian market, cushioning the economic impact.

    Full departure can also be ultra slow for Yale’s A-listers. Heineken announced in March 2022 it was leaving Russia but it is still running while it is “working hard to transfer our business to a viable buyer in very challenging circumstances.” It was also easy to find a Black & Decker power drill for sale online from a Russian site. The U.S. company said: “We plan to cease commerce by the end of Q2 of this year following the liquidation of our excess and obsolete inventory in Russia. We will maintain a legal entity to conduct any remaining administrative activities associated with the wind down.”

    And those are just consumer goods that are easy to find! Western and Ukrainian security services are naturally more preoccupied about engineering components for Putin’s war machine still being available through tight-lipped foreign companies. Good luck trying to track their continued sales …

    Who’s for real?

    Faced with this gray zone, St. Gallen/IMD sought to draw up a more black-and-white methodology.

    To reach their conclusions, Evenett and Pisani downloaded a list of 36,000 Russian companies from ORBIS that reported at least $1 million in sales in one of the last five years. Filtering out locally owned businesses and duplicate entries whittled down the number of owners of the Russian companies that are themselves headquartered in the G7 or EU to a master list of 1,404 entities. As of the end of November, the authors conclude, 120 companies — or 8.5 percent of the total — had left.

    The Swiss team was slow, however, to release its list of 1,404 companies and, once Sonnenfeld gained access to it, he had a field day. He immediately pointed out that it was peppered with names of Russian businesses and businessmen, whom ORBIS identified as being formally domiciled in an EU or G7 country. Sonnenfeld fulminated that St. Gallen/IMD were producing a list of how few Russian companies were quitting Russia, rather than how few Western companies were doing so.

    “That hundreds of Russian oligarchs and Russian companies constitute THEIR dataset of ‘1,404 western companies’ is egregious data misrepresentation,” Sonnenfeld wrote in one of several emails to POLITICO challenging the Swiss findings.

    Fair criticism? Well, Sonnenfeld’s example of Yandex, the Russian Google, on the list of 1,404 is a good one. Naturally, that’s a big Russian company that isn’t going to leave Russia.

    On the other hand, its presence on the list is explicable as it is based in the Netherlands, and is reported to be seeking Putin’s approval to sell its Russian units. “Of course, a large share of Yandex customers and staff are Russian or based in Russia. However, the company has offices in seven countries, including Switzerland, Israel, the U.S., China, and others. What criteria should we use to decide if it is Russian or not for the purpose of our analysis?” St. Gallen/IMD said in a statement.

    Answering Sonnenfeld’s specific criticism that its list was skewed by the inclusion of Russian-owned companies, the Swiss team noted that it had modified its criteria to exclude companies based in Cyprus, a favored location for Russian entrepreneurs thanks to its status as an EU member country and its business-friendly tax and legal environment. Yet even after doing so, its conclusions remained similar.

    Double knockout

    Sonnenfeld, in his campaign to discredit the Swiss findings, has demanded that media, including POLITICO, retract their coverage of Evenett and Pisani’s work. He took to Fortune magazine to call their publication “a fake pro-Putin list of Western companies still doing business in Russia.”

    Although he believes Evenett and Pisani’s “less than 9 percent” figure for corporates divesting equity is not credible, he bluntly declined, when asked, to provide a figure of his own.

    Instead, he has concentrated on marshaling an old boys’ network — including the odd ex-ambassador — to bolster his cause. Richard Edelman, head of the eponymous public relations outfit, weighed in with an email to POLITICO: “This is pretty bad[.] Obvious Russian disinformation[.] Would you consider a retraction?” he wrote in punctuation-free English. “I know Sonnenfeld well,” he said, adding the two had been classmates in college and business school.

    Who you were at school with hardly gets to the heart of what companies are doing in Russia, and what the net effect is on the Russian economy.

    The greater pity is that this clash, which falls miles short of the most basic standards of civil academic discourse, does a disservice to the just cause of pressuring big business into dissociating itself from Putin’s murderous regime.

    And, at the end of the day, estimates of the number of companies that have fully left Russia are in the same ballpark: The Kyiv School of Economics puts it at less than 200; the Swiss team at 120.

    To a neutral outsider, it would look like Sonnenfeld and his mortal enemies are actually pulling in the same direction, trying to work out whether companies are really quitting. Yet both methodologies are problematic. What companies and databases say offers an imprecise answer to the strategic question: What foreign goods and services are available to Russians? Does a year of war mean no Samsung phones? No. Does it mean Heineken has sold out? Not yet, no.

    This has now been submerged in a battle royal between Sonnenfeld and the Swiss researchers.

    Appalled at his attacks on their work, St. Gallen and IMD finally sent a cease-and-desist letter to Sonnenfeld.

    Yale Provost Scott Strobel is trying to calm the waters. In a letter dated February 6 and seen by POLITICO, he argued that academic freedom protected the speech of its faculty members. “The advancement of knowledge is best served when scholars engage in an open and robust dialogue as they seek accurate data and its best interpretation,” Strobel wrote. “This dialogue should be carried out in a respectful manner that is free from ad hominem attacks.”

    With reporting by Sarah Anne Aarup, Nicolas Camut, Wilhelmine Preussen and Charlie Duxbury.

    Douglas Busvine is Trade and Agriculture Editor at POLITICO Europe. He was posted with Reuters to Moscow from 2004-08 and from 2011-14.



    [ad_2]
    #Western #firms #theyre #quitting #Russia #Wheres #proof
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • ‘We are all Ukrainian.’ How the yellow-and-blue flag won over Europe

    ‘We are all Ukrainian.’ How the yellow-and-blue flag won over Europe

    [ad_1]

    The yellow-and-blue flag of Ukraine has become a powerful symbol for millions of people across the Western world who want to express their solidarity with the victims of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression.

    Adopted officially in 1992, the year after Ukraine gained its independence from the Soviet Union, the banner represents the country’s pride in its status as Europe’s bread basket — just picture endless wheat fields under blue skies.

    In the early days of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the colors were displayed on some of Europe’s most famous landmarks, from the Eiffel Tower to the Brandenburg Gate.

    Over the course of the year since, the flag has spread to all corners of the Continent and beyond, in the hands of protesters, on official government buildings in London and Washington, and in the windows of private homes and cars.

    The flag not only came to signify Ukraine’s brave resistance in a war that ended decades of peace in Europe — it quickly became the hallmark of European unity in the face of the biggest state-backed threat to the Continent’s security this century.

    On a visit to Kyiv in January, Charles Michel, the European Council’s president, captured the point.

    “With the Maidan uprising, 22 years after gaining your independence, you, Ukrainians said: We are European,” Michel said. “So today, I have come to Ukraine to tell you: We are all Ukrainian.”

    Beyond political symbols, Putin’s invasion triggered the largest refugee crisis in Europe since World War II.

    Within weeks, European governments rushed to welcome in millions of Ukrainians, skipping administrative procedures at a speed that caused some to raise eyebrows.

    Benedicte Simonart was one of the founders of a Brussels-based NGO BEforUkraine, whose logo features the Belgian and Ukrainian flags side by side. She was “struck” by the solidarity of those early days. “It was unbelievable: People kept coming to us, they were so eager to help,” she said.

    “We felt very close to the Ukrainians,” she added. “Ukraine is the door to Europe, it’s almost as if it was our home.”

    As the war has dragged on, European resolve has remained stable at a political level and in surveys of public opinion. The question is how long this will last if the conflict continues.

    “One year ago, Europe came together very strongly and very supportively,” said Erik Jones, director of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies at the European University Institute.

    “I’m very interested to see what this is going to do over the longer term in the way Europeans think about themselves,” Jones added. “As we approach this one-year anniversary, I think it’s really important to ask: Do we have the same power as a community to support Ukraine through what may be a very long conflict?”

    For now at least, Europe and Ukraine seem closer than ever. Ukrainians, through the voice of their President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, make no secret of their desire to join the EU — the sooner, the better.

    And the powerful symbolism of the flag continues to color European towns and cities, a gesture that’s welcomed by Ukrainians who are now living in Europe.

    “The flag is very important: it’s the symbol of Ukraine, and we need to keep displaying it, to talk about it, to remind people,” said Artem Datsii. “Because the war goes on.”

    Datsii, 21, is a student at the University of Geneva (Switzerland), where he moved before the war. He has not seen his parents, who live in Kyiv, for a year, but they speak regularly over the phone.

    “At home, everyone is afraid that something will happen on the 24th,” Datsii said, referring to the invasion’s one-year marker. “The Russians love anniversaries.”



    [ad_2]
    #Ukrainian #yellowandblue #flag #won #Europe
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Russians hunting property in Finland hit a new wall of suspicion

    Russians hunting property in Finland hit a new wall of suspicion

    [ad_1]

    KANKAANPÄÄ, Finland — In October, three Russian citizens arrived in the border town of Imatra and filed the paperwork to buy a rambling former old people’s home outside the small town of Kankaanpää, a five-hour drive away in Finland’s southwestern reaches. 

    The applicants ticked a box saying the property would be used for “leisure or recreational purposes” and all gave the same contact email and street address: a nondescript suburban apartment block in Russia’s second city, St. Petersburg.

    The story didn’t fly. 

    Two months later, the Finnish defense ministry announced it had blocked the purchase, citing national security concerns to justify the move — the first time such reasoning had been used during the war on Ukraine.

    The authorities’ problem with the transaction was a simple one: the building was a stone’s throw from the Niinisalo Garrison, an army training center for troops assigned to national defense and overseas operations. In May last year, the joint Finnish and NATO training exercise Arrow 22 — testing the readiness of armored brigades — was run out of the garrison. 

    On a recent weekday, green military transport vehicles could be seen entering and exiting the Niinisalo base. The old people’s home had a clear view of some of the roads in and out.

    In the nearby town of Kankaanpää, locals were bemused by the Russians’ attempt to buy the old people’s home. Juhani Tuori, an estate agent, said he had heard about the planned deal and thought it odd. Tuori said he had been involved in trying to sell the old people’s home before, but had no role this time. 

    “I wondered why such a trade was made,” he said. “Especially given the state of the world.”

    In a statement, the Finnish government said the transaction had been rejected because of the “special role” the city of Kankaanpää plays in securing Finland’s national defense. 

    “According to the Ministry of Defence, it is possible that the large property in the vicinity of the Niinisalo Garrison could be used in a manner that could hinder the organization of national defense and safeguarding of territorial integrity,” the statement said.

    The Russian buyers did not respond to an emailed request for comment sent to the address they provided on their application to the defense ministry. They had 30 days from the date of the decision to appeal. As of February 9, they had not done so. 

    New suspicion 

    The Kankaanpää case shows how suspicions about Russian activity — official and civilian — have spiked in neighboring states as the anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine looms. 

    For more than two decades after the end of the Cold War, Russians enjoyed increased freedom to buy assets across much of Europe, and Finland was no exception, despite a bloody recent history that saw Finland fight two wars with the Soviet Union in the middle of the last century. 

    Three Russian billionaires bought a leading Finnish ice hockey team and entered it in the Russian league. A Finnish energy company announced a joint plan with Russian state-run firm Rosatom to build a nuclear power plant in Finland. 

    Across the Nordic state, Russians also snapped up holiday homes in forests, on picturesque lake shores, and on remote Baltic Sea archipelagos in what were widely seen at the time as innocent investments in an economically stable neighboring state. 

    But now, with the Russian army’s aggression in Ukraine intensifying and the activities of its intelligence wing the GRU increasingly visible across Europe, Russian property purchases are being viewed with much greater skepticism.

    Finland, which has a 1,340 km border with Russia, sees itself as especially vulnerable to covert Russian operations and has begun to take a much greater interest in which Russians are buying what assets: a Finn recently bought back the ice hockey team and the nuclear power plant plan was scrapped last year.

    The defense ministry was granted powers in 2020 to block property sales to Russians and other citizens from outside the EU and the European Economic Area, but had never used them before the Kankaanpää case on national security grounds, a spokesman for the ministry said. The only other application rejection was because of an unpaid processing fee.

    Experts say the officials are likely concerned the old people’s home could have been used as a base for special forces on covert missions, or more routinely as a place to run monitoring of comings and goings around the army base. 

    “This kind of place would not necessarily be part of some Russian masterplan, but could theoretically be there in case it was needed,” said Charly Salonius-Pasternak, a researcher at the Finnish Institute for International Affairs, a think tank. 

    In its ruling, the Finnish defense ministry said the Russian would-be buyers of the old people’s home had changed their story several times about what they intended to use the building for. Their explanations were “not credible,” the ministry said. 

    Visited on a recent weekday, the empty old people’s home, standing unheated in sub-zero temperatures, was clearly in need of some attention. The front door was yellow with rust. The driveway was covered in thick ice. 

    The old people’s home appeared to have around 100 bedrooms as well as extensive parking and other surrounding land. It could be accessed by vehicle from two sides with the edge of the Niinisalo Garrison area accessible from the property via wooded back roads as well as the main approach. 

    The tightening of Finnish property policy comes at a sensitive time for the Nordic country as it proceeds with applications to join NATO alongside nearby Sweden. 

    Vladimir Putin has threatened what he called a “military-technical response” to those bids, which has led to calls for heightened vigilance in both states. 

    Officials in Sweden, where there has been a flurry of arrests recently of suspected Russian spies, are likely watching closely to see what lessons can be learned from the Finnish rule change, experts say.

    The state-run Swedish Defense Research Agency recently produced a report taking stock of Russian investments in Sweden.

    In Finland, security experts have welcomed the country’s new property rules as part of a reckoning with Russian investment in the country, which some suggest was overdue. 

    “This is a problem which has long been recognized and now there are tools to at least fix some of it,” said researcher Salonius-Pasternak.



    [ad_2]
    #Russians #hunting #property #Finland #hit #wall #suspicion
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Zelenskyy open to considering some parts of Beijing’s proposals to end Ukraine war

    Zelenskyy open to considering some parts of Beijing’s proposals to end Ukraine war

    [ad_1]

    russia ukraine war one year anniversary 41136

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy cautiously welcomed Beijing’s efforts toward ending the war in Ukraine and said he would like to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping to discuss China’s proposals.  

    Speaking at a press conference in Kyiv Friday to mark the first anniversary of Moscow’s invasion, Zelenskyy said he was open to considering some aspects of the 12-point “position paper” published by the Chinese foreign ministry. Both NATO and the EU have criticized the initiative, with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen saying that “China has taken sides” in the Ukraine conflict.

    Beijing claims to have a neutral stance in the war but also has said it has a “no limits” relationship with Moscow and has refused to criticize President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

    Zelenskyy said a meeting with Xi could be “useful” to both countries and for global security. “As far as I know, China respects historical integrity,” he told reporters in Kyiv.

    “I believe that the fact that China started talking about Ukraine is not bad,” Zelenskyy said, according to the Associated Press. “But the question is what follows the words. The question is in the steps and where they will lead to.”

    Ukrainian presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak called the Chinese proposals “unrealistic” in a tweet on Saturday.

    Zelenskyy also warned Beijing against providing Russia with weapons, something of increasing concern to Western governments. China is considering providing drones and ammunition to help Moscow’s war efforts in Ukraine, a person familiar with the matter told POLITICO on Friday.

    “I very much want to believe that China will not deliver weapons to Russia, and for me this is very important,” Zelenskyy said, according to Reuters.

    NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg on Friday said the alliance is closely monitoring China’s activities, adding that Beijing sending lethal aid to Moscow would be a “very big mistake.”

    French President Emmanuel Macron on Saturday welcomed Beijing’s initiative on the conflict in Ukraine and said he will visit China in early April and seek Chinese help in ending the war. “The fact that China is engaging in peace efforts is a good thing,” Macron said, according to French media reports.

    The French leader also asked Beijing “not to supply any arms to Russia.” And he sought Beijing’s aid to “exert pressure on Russia to ensure it never uses chemical or nuclear weapons and it stops this aggression prior to negotiations,” according to the reports.

    Meanwhile, Beijing announced on Saturday that Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko will visit China on a state visit from February 28 to March 2. The Belarusian foreign ministry confirmed the planned visit.

    Lukashenko, a close ally of Putin, has backed Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine and allowed its territory to be used in the Russian assault. Lukashenko said last week that his country was prepared to join Russia’s war against Ukraine, if attacked.

    Zelenskyy also said that any proposal to end the war would be acceptable only if it led to Putin pulling his troops out of all occupied Ukrainian territory.

    Amid growing concerns in the West about Ukraine’s ability to recover all its territory, NATO’s biggest European members — Germany, France and the U.K. — are putting forward a defense pact with Ukraine as a way to encourage Kyiv toward peace talks with Moscow, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing officials from the three governments. 

    French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz told Zelensky at a meeting earlier this month in Paris that Kyiv needed to start considering peace talks with Moscow, the WSJ reported, citing people familiar with the conversation.



    [ad_2]
    #Zelenskyy #open #parts #Beijings #proposals #Ukraine #war
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Russian nuclear fuel: The habit Europe just can’t break

    Russian nuclear fuel: The habit Europe just can’t break

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    Europe is on track to kick its addiction to Russian fossil fuels, but can’t seem to replicate that success with nuclear energy a year into the Ukraine war.

    The EU’s economic sanctions on Russian coal and oil permanently reshaped trade and left Moscow in a “much diminished position,” according to the International Energy Agency. Coal imports have dropped to zero, and it is illegal for Russian crude to be imported by ship; only four countries still receive it by pipeline.

    That’s compared to the bloc getting 54 percent of its hard coal imports and one-quarter of its oil from Russia in 2020.

    Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to turn off the gas taps while the EU turned increasingly to liquefied natural gas deliveries from elsewhere caused the reliance on Moscow to tumble from 40 percent of the bloc’s gas supply before the war to less than 10 percent now.

    But nuclear energy has proved a trickier knot for EU countries to untie — for both historical and practical reasons.

    As competition in the global nuclear sector atrophied following the Cold War, Soviet-built reactors in the EU remained locked into tailor-made fuel from Russia, leaving Moscow to play an outsized role.

    In 2021, Russia’s state-owned atomic giant Rosatom supplied the bloc’s reactors with 20 percent of their natural uranium, handled a quarter of their conversion services and provided a third of their enrichment services, according to the EU’s Euratom Supply Agency (ESA).

    That same year, EU countries paid Russia €210 million for raw uranium exports, compared to the €88 billion the bloc paid Moscow for oil.

    The value of imports of Russia-related nuclear technology and fuel worldwide rose to more than $1 billion (€940 billion) last year, according to research from the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI). In the EU, the value of Russia’s nuclear exports fell in some countries like Bulgaria and the Czech Republic but rose in others, including Slovakia, Hungary and Finland, RUSI data shared with POLITICO showed.

    “While it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions from what is ultimately a time-limited and incomplete dataset, it does clearly show that there are still dependencies on, and a market for, Russian nuclear fuel,” said Darya Dolzikova, a research fellow at RUSI.

    Although uranium from Russia could be replaced by imports from elsewhere within a year — and most nuclear plants have at least one-year extra reserves, according to ESA head Agnieszka Kaźmierczak — countries with Russian-built VVER reactors rely on fuel made by Moscow.

    “There are 18 Russian-designed nuclear power plants in [the EU] and all of them would be affected by sanctions,” said Mark Hibbs, a senior fellow at Carnegie’s Nuclear Policy Program. “This remains a deeply divided issue in the European Union.”

    That’s why the bloc has struggled over the past year to target Russia’s nuclear industry — despite repeated calls from Ukraine and some EU countries to hit Rosatom for its role in overseeing the occupied Ukrainian Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, and possibly supplying equipment to the Russian arms industry.

    “The whole question of sanctioning the nuclear sector … was basically killed before there was ever a meaningful discussion,” said a diplomat from one EU country who spoke on condition of anonymity.

    The most vocal opponent has been Hungary, one of five countries — along with Slovakia, Bulgaria, Finland and the Czech Republic — to have Russian-built reactors for which there is no alternative fuel so far.

    Bulgaria and the Czech Republic have signed contracts with U.S. firm Westinghouse to replace the Russian fuel, according to ESA chief Kaźmierczak, but the process could take “three years” as national regulators also need to analyze and license the new fuel.

    The “bigger problem” across the board is enrichment and conversion, she added, due to chronic under-capacity worldwide. It could take “seven to 10 years” to replace Rosatom — and that timeline is conditional on significant investments in the sector.

    While Finland last year scrapped a deal to build a Russian-made nuclear plant on the country’s west coast — prompting a lawsuit from Rosatom — others aren’t changing tack.

    Slovakia’s new Mochovce-3 Soviet VVER-design reactor came online earlier this month, which Russia will supply with fuel until at least 2026. 

    GettyImages 543401232
    Russia’s nuclear energy was not initially included in EU sanctions over Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine | Eric Piermont/AFP via Getty Images

    Hungary, meanwhile, deepened ties with Moscow by giving the go-ahead to the construction of two more reactors at its Paks plant last summer, underwritten by a €10 billion Russian loan.

    “Even if [they] were to come into existence, nuclear sanctions would be filled with exemptions because we are dependent on Russian nuclear fuel,” said a diplomat from a second EU country.

    This article has been updated with charts depicting Russia’s nuclear exports.



    [ad_2]
    #Russian #nuclear #fuel #habit #Europe #break
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • On eve of war anniversary, EU fails to finalize Russia sanctions deal

    On eve of war anniversary, EU fails to finalize Russia sanctions deal

    [ad_1]

    The EU has failed to sign off on a much-anticipated round of sanctions against Russia, leaving the bloc struggling to finalize a deal in time to mark the first anniversary on Friday of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

    Talks will now run into Ukraine’s official commemorations of its first year at war, casting into doubt European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s recent promise to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv to deliver a 10th round of sanctions by then.

    Diplomats said agreement had been reached on nearly all of the package, but Poland was objecting to proposed restrictions on imports of synthetic rubber that it claims aren’t strong enough.

    While acknowledging holding up the package, Warsaw denied being the problem. “We are not blocking sanctions,” a Polish official said on condition of anonymity. “We just want to have sanctions that make sense.” 

    All other points have been agreed on, four EU diplomats said.

    The Commission was continuing talks with some EU countries on Thursday evening in search of a compromise, according to two of the diplomats. Another meeting of ambassadors from the 27 EU member countries will be held on Friday morning, four diplomats said, to try and secure a deal.

    Poland’s objection related to proposed restrictions on imports of synthetic rubber from Russia. Sanctions hawks had called for a complete ban, but in an effort to appease other countries that rely on those imports the Commission suggested setting a quota limit at 560,000 metric tons, an EU diplomat said.

    That’s even higher than current imports, the Polish official said. While several EU diplomats said Poland had been the most outspoken opponent of this quota, others have also expressed their discontent over derogations for certain companies. One EU diplomat said that the proposed quota “makes the sanction meaningless.”

    Trade data show that imports from Russia haven’t exceeded that quota in the last decade.

    The current package already excludes other controversial points, like a ban on Russian diamond imports, making it easier to sanction the family members and the entourages of oligarchs, or sanctioning certain employees of state nuclear company Rosatom.

    Patience was running out, with another EU diplomat calling Poland’s move “unsustainable.” 

    Victor Jack contributed reporting.



    [ad_2]
    #eve #war #anniversary #fails #finalize #Russia #sanctions #deal
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Belarusian leader, a key Putin ally, to pay state visit to China next week

    Belarusian leader, a key Putin ally, to pay state visit to China next week

    [ad_1]

    belarus russia 88735

    Beijing announced on Saturday that Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, will travel to China on a state visit from February 28 to March 2.

    The announcement of the trip comes a day after Beijing, looking to play a role in mediating a resolution to the Russian war on Ukraine, published a 12-point “position paper” aimed at ending the conflict.

    “At the invitation of President Xi Jinping, President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko will pay a state visit to China from February 28 to March 2,” the Chinese foreign ministry said in a statement on Saturday.

    The Belarusian foreign ministry confirmed the planned visit, saying the Chinese and Belarusian foreign ministers discussed it in a telephone call on Friday.

    Lukashenko has backed Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine and allowed its territory to be used in the Russian assault. Lukashenko said last week that his country was prepared to join Russia’s war against Ukraine, if attacked. That prompted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to warn the Belarusian leader not to get directly involved in the war.

    Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron on Saturday said he will visit China in early April and seek Beijing’s help in ending the war in Ukraine. “The fact that China is engaging in peace efforts is a good thing,” Macron said, according to French media reports.

    Ukraine’s Zelenskyy also said he would like to engage with Beijing following the proposals unveiled on Friday toward resolving the conflict. Zelenskyy said he was open to considering some aspects of the Chinese “position paper” and would welcome the chance to discuss the proposals with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

    A meeting with Xi could be “useful” to both countries and for global security, Zelenskyy said. 



    [ad_2]
    #Belarusian #leader #key #Putin #ally #pay #state #visit #China #week
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )

  • Ukraine: The day the war broke out

    Ukraine: The day the war broke out

    [ad_1]

    Jamie Dettmer is opinion editor at POLITICO Europe.     

    It was in the early hours of the morning, a year ago in Kyiv, that blasts could be heard coming from the direction of Boryspil International Airport, southeast of the capital.

    Early commuters were already on the road and, for nearly two hours, traffic continued to build. It was as though this was just another normal workday, and the blasts were nothing more than an inconvenience — like a severe rainstorm that weather forecasters had somehow, irritatingly, failed to predict.

    As I looked down from my hotel balcony and talked with my newsdesk, planning the day’s coverage, the contrast between the morning commute and the rumbling explosions in the background was jarring. This is the start of a major European war, I thought. And much as I felt 21 years ago, when planes crashed into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon was engulfed in smoke, everything was going to be different now.

    There’s always delayed shock when a war starts. It takes time to adjust to the enormity of what’s happening; people cling to their routines.

    But by around 7:30 a.m., the commute into Kyiv had thinned out, as workers began to understand that the long-feared invasion was, indeed, happening. Those who had reached their offices turned tail and headed home. Down in the hotel lobby, there was pandemonium as television crews navigated past guests, frantically trying to check out.

    Portly businessmen ordered their bodyguards to muscle through the panicked crowd and pack their Louis Vuitton suitcases into waiting black Mercedes and BMW SUVs. Squabbles erupted, as other guests tried to outbid each other at the concierge for drivers to speed them 600 kilometers away to the Polish border.

    As this was happening, Russian President Vladimir Putin broadcast an angry address from Moscow. He said he could no longer tolerate, what he called threats from Ukraine, and that his goal was the “demilitarization and de-Nazification of Ukraine.” I glanced around but couldn’t see anyone in uniform — nor anyone identifiable as a Nazi.

    Shortly after Putin spoke, the barrage on Kyiv intensified, and there were more thuds coming from the outskirts too, including from the direction of the city’s second airport at Zhuliany.

    Reports of action elsewhere increased — of missile bombardments on half a dozen Ukrainian cities, and the targeting of air defense facilities and military infrastructure as far away as western Ukraine. Meanwhile, Russian troops had also landed on the country’s south coast and, even more alarmingly, armored columns had crossed the border north of the capital, from Belarus.

    Broadcasting from his phone, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told Ukrainians he would declare martial law, and he urged them to stay home, saying: “Don’t panic. We are strong. We are ready for everything. We will defeat everyone. Because we are Ukraine.”

    His words were echoed in the hotel by a spa attendant: “Everything is OK. Keep calm,” she told the jostling crowd to little avail.

    GettyImages 1238956017
    People wait to board an evacuation train at Kyiv central train station on March 5, 2022 | Dimitar Dilkoff/AFP via Getty Images

    By mid-morning the streets of downtown Kyiv were eerily deserted. The only people to be seen were dog-walkers and a handful of scurrying tourists, dragging their luggage and breathlessly asking for directions to the train station.

    The capital’s suburban roads and the highways leading west, however, quickly gridlocked with the start of a huge, breathtaking exodus of families to Lviv and other Ukrainian towns near the borders of Poland, Slovakia, Romania and Hungary.

    As the next few days unfolded, these are the snapshots left in my mind, of what I saw of a country on the move — the most dramatic flood of refugees seen since the Balkan wars of the 1990s, although it quickly dwarfed even that mass flight within days.

    I saw the young saying their goodbyes to their parents, and trying to persuade their grandparents to leave as well. But many of the elderly refused, deciding to remain in family homes either to keep them secure or because they were too infirm or simply too plain stubborn to leave.

    My mind now fills with images of evacuating families who fled the crash and thump of ordnance, pulling over by the side of the road to get some rest from their hours-long, or even days-long, personal odysseys. They were trying to get to neighboring borders that seemed to only get further away with each passing kilometer, their journeys disrupted by snarled-up traffic, sudden road closures, abrupt alarms and distant blasts. Families foraged for gas and food and water where they could — in small towns and at besieged gas stations, which quickly emptied of snacks, drinks and fuel.

    As we traveled around, we saw cars creaking under the weight of stacked luggage and bags spilling over. Startled family pets were held by flagging hands. And etched in my memory are the faces of exhausted, disoriented children. They’d started out on their voyages gripped by a sense of excitement, seeing it all as a great adventure. But then the anxiety of their parents started to seep in, fatigue struck them, and they slowly realized something momentous had happened and struggled to make sense of it all.

    Journeys that would normally take four or five hours stretched on and on. For some, getting from Kyiv to Lviv by car that first week took up to two or three days, and for families further afield in the east, it could take four or five days — a trip further complicated by the country’s notoriously inadequate road system.

    But along the way, they — and I — encountered the kindness of strangers. For me, this kindness was personified by the middle-aged, deeply devout Oksana Shuper in the western town of Ternopil. She welcomed exhausted evacuees into her cramped apartment, also occupied by an infirm father, so that they could get some sleep. She would feed them oatmeal, strong coffee and fruit, before sending them on their way again with a hug and a prayer.

    And as these evacuees made their way west, sometimes taking ever more circuitous routes down pot-holed country roads to bypass gridlock, they fretted: Where will we end up? And how will we cope when we get there?



    [ad_2]
    #Ukraine #day #war #broke
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )