Archive for the ‘Ukraine’ Category

Ukraine’s new law will let it fund the war effort by selling Russian assets – NPR

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Sergei Supinsky/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy signed a law on Monday that lays out a process for his country to seize and sell the assets of people who support Russia's invasion. Zelenskyy says the law will bolster Ukraine's war chest, three months after Russia sparked a bloody conflict with its neighbor.

The law is primarily aimed at Russian-owned assets and property in Ukraine, particularly Russian citizens who have already had their assets blocked by Ukraine's government. Last week, a Ukrainian court seized hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of assets owned by Russian billionaire Mikhail Fridman an oligarch who was born in Ukraine.

The new law lists a number of offenses, such as giving money to Russia's government or glorifying those who are fighting against Ukraine. It also covers people who are found to have helped set up an occupation government in Russian-controlled portions of Ukraine, or those who help organize elections or referendums in occupied territories.

The law contains several elements that aim to ensure a rapid resolution of cases, including a stipulation that a person's failure to appear or be represented at court cannot slow the court's consideration of the claim against them. It also lays out plans for a speedy appeals process, with each party given five days to ask for an appeal. An appeals panel would then have five days to take up the matter.

The new sanction will be in effect for as long as Ukraine operates under martial law, as it has since the invasion began on Feb. 24. On Sunday, the Rada approved extending martial law in Ukraine through late August.

More here:
Ukraine's new law will let it fund the war effort by selling Russian assets - NPR

Ukraine war strains space station ties between Russia and US – NPR

The International Space Station depends on a mix of U.S. and Russian parts. "I hope we can hold it together as long as we can," says former NASA astronaut Scott Kelly. NASA hide caption

The International Space Station depends on a mix of U.S. and Russian parts. "I hope we can hold it together as long as we can," says former NASA astronaut Scott Kelly.

On the ground, tensions between the U.S. and Russia are running high.

Russian President Vladimir Putin falsely claims the U.S. is working with Nazis in Ukraine, while President Biden calls Putin a "war criminal."

Aboard the jointly controlled International Space Station (ISS), however, the tone is very different: American astronauts live side-by-side with Russian cosmonauts; they regularly check in with mission control centers in both countries; and supplies arrive aboard Russian and U.S. spacecraft alike.

NASA administrator Bill Nelson expects all that to continue for the foreseeable future: "I see nothing that has interrupted that professional relationship," Nelson said at a Senate hearing earlier this month. "No matter how awful Putin is conducting a war with such disastrous results in Ukraine."

But as the decades-old station nears the end of its physical lifespan, some experts worry that the long-standing relationship may come to an end.

"I hope we can hold it together as long as we can," says Scott Kelly, a former astronaut who lived alongside Russian cosmonauts for nearly a year.

But he adds, NASA should prepare for the possibility that Russia might soon end its participation: "I think what they've shown us is they're capable of anything," he says.

For 23 years, the space station has floated above the politics of planet earth as a symbol of unity between several nations around the globe.

It launched largely as a U.S.-Russian project in 1998, when it seemed possible the two foes could make a new start. The station was designed so that each side literally needed the other to survive: The U.S. provides power, while Russia keeps the station at the correct altitude and orientation.

At the time "it was in the U.S. national interest to engage with Russia," says Mariel Borowitz, an associate professor at the Sam Nunn School of International Affairs at the Georgia Institute of Technology. The joint program kept Russian rocket scientists employed during a moment when Russia faced political and economic instability, she says.

Kelly notes that by depending solely on Russia systems for certain functions, NASA was able to save money.

In 2011, the interdependency grew even stronger. NASA retired the space shuttle, which regularly carried astronauts and supplies to the station. Without the shuttle, the space agency relied on Russia's space program to get its astronauts to the station. Kelly says the Russian program excelled at launching humans into orbit. "They can reliably put three people into space and bring them home," he says. "That's what they do very, very well."

For nearly a decade, the U.S. relied on Russia's Soyuz rockets to get its astronauts to the space station. NASA/Bill Ingalls/(NASA/Bill Ingalls) hide caption

For nearly a decade, the U.S. relied on Russia's Soyuz rockets to get its astronauts to the space station.

The U.S. may have needed a ride, but they also had plenty of what Russia's space agency required money.

NASA paid billions over the years for its seats aboard the Soyuz rocket, helping keep the venerable Russian space program financially afloat.

The symbiotic relationship has endured even as things on the Earth have deteriorated: Wars, assassination attempts and allegations of political meddling have not been enough to send the space station off course. But a mix of geopolitical and technical factors are now bringing rapid change to the collaboration.

In 2020, SpaceX officially began transporting NASA astronauts to the station, ending America's reliance on Russian rockets.

The end of that vital tie was big at the time, but it pales in comparison to Russia's decision to invade Ukraine. The war has strained almost every aspect of U.S. and Russian relations, and it has already ruptured another long-standing Russian collaboration with the European Space Agency, or ESA.

"There was ongoing cooperation between Europe and Russia on different things, and it's being severed," says Tomas Hrozensky, a research fellow at the European Space Policy Institute in Vienna, Austria. ESA has kicked Russia out of its lunar program, and a long-awaited European mission to Mars is suspended, because it was set to go to space later this year aboard a Russian rocket.

"As a consequence of the war in Ukraine, the member states of ESA have put significant sanctions on Russia," ESA's director general, Josef Aschbacher, said at a recent NASA press conference. The decision to suspend the rover mission "is painful" he conceded.

Russia's interest in Western collaboration has also cooled as the war has heated up.

In response to European sanctions, the country suspended Soyuz launches from ESA's spaceport in French Guiana. And late last month, the head of Russia's space agency, a prickly politician named Dmitry Rogozin, hinted that Russia may soon announce it will pull out of the space station.

"The decision has already been made," Rogozin said during an interview on Russian state television. "We aren't obligated to talk about it publicly. I can only say one thing: that in accordance with our obligations we will notify our partners a year in advance about the end of our work on the ISS."

NASA would like to keep the station running until 2030, but the Russian components are among the oldest parts and are only certified to operate until 2024, says Anatoly Zak, publisher of Russianspaceweb.com, a site that has long tracked the Russian space program. "Beyond that [date], Russia will need to make some additional investments and some political commitments," he says.

Both Zak and Borowitz say they're not sure how seriously to take Rogozin's threats of withdrawal. He has made similar statements in the past, Borowitz notes, but without the space station, or some kind of replacement, "they're going to be in a situation where their cosmonauts don't have a clear mission."

"It would be politically very costly for Russia not to have human spaceflight," Zak says. The space program "has a huge role in Russian propaganda and Russian politics."

Cosmonauts unfurled a Soviet-era victory banner on a recent space walk. The banner, which is used to mark "Victory Day" in Russia, has also been used frequently by Russian forces in Ukraine. Screenshot by NPR/Roscosmos Youtube hide caption

Cosmonauts unfurled a Soviet-era victory banner on a recent space walk. The banner, which is used to mark "Victory Day" in Russia, has also been used frequently by Russian forces in Ukraine.

Indeed the station has played a part in Russia's propaganda efforts around its latest war.

Soviet-era memorabilia has begun to appear in the Russian part of the station, Zak notes. And on a space walk in April, two cosmonauts unfurled a Soviet victory banner to celebrate Russia's "Victory Day" that marks the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945. The banner has more recently been flown by Russian forces throughout Ukraine.

NASA astronaut Scott Kelly says the U.S. should start thinking about how to keep the station operating without the Russians. "It would be really really hard, but I think NASA is great at doing really, really hard things," he says.

Kelly, an outspoken opponent of Russia's actions in Ukraine, says he supports continuing to work together in space, for the time being.

But as the war grinds on and the allegations of atrocities grow, he says his views may change: "At some point, things like murdering innocent people, rape, genocide transcend the importance of space cooperation."

See the rest here:
Ukraine war strains space station ties between Russia and US - NPR

OPEC is on the wrong side of history in sticking with Russia, Ukraine’s Naftogaz CEO says – CNBC

Naftogaz CEO Yuriy Vitrenko says OPEC is on the wrong side of history in choosing to stick with Russia.

Future Publishing | Future Publishing | Getty Images

The chief executive of Ukrainian state energy giant Naftogaz says oil producer group OPEC is on the wrong side of history in choosing to stick with Russia to stabilize energy markets.

Speaking to CNBC's Hadley Gamble at the World Economic Forum in Davos on Monday, Naftogaz CEO Yuriy Vitrenko warned the Middle East-dominated group of exporting countries to recognize the Kremlin's onslaught in Ukraine as a challenge to their wealth.

When asked whether OPEC was in danger of being out of sync with the international community over Russia's widely condemned invasion, Vitrenko replied: "Yes, it seems like they are on the wrong side of history."

"They have a vested interest in the economic development of the world, in the sustainability of the world and Putin is challenging this sustainability. He is challenging their wealth. Maybe they don't understand it at the moment but if we live in the world that Putin wants us to live in, there will be no wealth for the Gulf countries," he continued.

"Again, everything they have been building for years will just disappear. They have to be fully aware of it," Vitrenko said.

A spokesperson for OPEC was not immediately available to comment.

Governments around the world have imposed a barrage of unprecedented punitive sanctions and severed economic ties with Russia in response to President Vladimir Putin's war with Ukraine. However, OPEC does not appear willing to take similar action against Moscow.

Russia is a key partner in the wider OPEC+ energy alliance and is itself a major exporter of oil.

OPEC kingpin Saudi Arabia has previously said the group would keep politics out of its output decisions.

Speaking to CNBC in late March, Saudi Arabia's Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman bin Abdulaziz said that OPEC's very existence was dependent on the separation of its mission to stabilize oil prices from other geopolitical factors.

CNBC's Elliot Smith contributed to this report.

Follow CNBC International onTwitterandFacebook.

Read more here:
OPEC is on the wrong side of history in sticking with Russia, Ukraine's Naftogaz CEO says - CNBC

YouTube removes more than 9,000 channels relating to Ukraine war – The Guardian

YouTube has taken down more than 70,000 videos and 9,000 channels related to the war in Ukraine for violating content guidelines, including removal of videos that referred to the invasion as a liberation mission.

The platform is hugely popular in Russia, where, unlike some of its US peers, it has not been shut down despite hosting content from opposition figures such as Alexei Navalny. YouTube has also been able to operate in Russia despite cracking down on pro-Kremlin content that has broken guidelines including its major violent events policy, which prohibits denying or trivialising the invasion.

Since the conflict began in February, YouTube has taken down channels including that of the pro-Kremlin journalist Vladimir Solovyov. Channels associated with Russias Ministries of Defence and Foreign Affairs have also been temporarily suspended from uploading videos in recent months for describing the war as a liberation mission.

YouTubes chief product officer, Neal Mohan, said: We have a major violent events policy and that applies to things like denial of major violent events: everything from the Holocaust to Sandy Hook. And of course, whats happening in Ukraine is a major violent event. And so weve used that policy to take unprecedented action.

In an interview with the Guardian, Mohan added that YouTubes news content on the conflict had received more than 40m views in Ukraine alone.

The first and probably most paramount responsibility is making sure that people who are looking for information about this event can get accurate, high-quality, credible information on YouTube, he said. The consumption of authoritative channels on our platform has grown significantly, of course in Ukraine, but also in countries surrounding Ukraine, Poland, and also within Russia itself.

YouTube did not provide a breakdown of the taken-down content and channels but Mohan said much of it represented Kremlin narratives about the invasion. I dont have the specific numbers, but you can imagine a lot of it being the narratives that are coming from Russian government, or Russian actors on behalf of the Russian government, he said.

Sign up to First Edition, our free daily newsletter every weekday morning at 7am BST

YouTube has an estimated 90 million users in Russia, although it no longer allows advertising on the platform in the country. The decision by YouTubes parent company, Google, has drawn protests from Navalny, who said well-targeted ads helped counteract Kremlin propaganda.

YouTube remains the largest video-sharing site up and running in Russia itself, said Mohan. So YouTube is a place where Russian citizens can get uncensored information about the war, including from many of the same authoritative channels that we all have access to outside of the country. We remain an important platform for Russian citizens themselves as this crisis continues to evolve.

Last week, the Russian minister for digital development, Maksut Shadaev, said the country would not block YouTube, despite disputes over content that have resulted in the platform being fined in court for not removing banned videos.

Shadaev indicated that blocking Russias most popular social media platform would affect users. We are not planning to close YouTube, the minister said. Above all, when we restrict something, we should clearly understand that our users wont suffer.

YouTube has also placed a worldwide ban on channels associated with Russian state media, including Russia Today and Sputnik. Facebook and Instagram are banned in Russia and access to Twitter has been restricted, in response to the platforms own bans on Russian state-owned media.

See the original post:
YouTube removes more than 9,000 channels relating to Ukraine war - The Guardian

Ukraine war: Russia’s blockade will increase starvation and global instability, UN organisation warns – Sky News

Russia's blockade of Ukraine will lead to worsening starvation, famine and instability around the world if it cannot be lifted, the World Food Programme has said.

The warning came as Sky News gained rare access to Odesa port on Ukraine's Black Sea coast.

The port should be busy exporting tens of thousands of tonnes of grain but its huge grain elevators stand idle.

Sky was shown a huge grain cargo vessel loaded with 60,000 tonnes.

It should have sailed for Egypt in February but remains moored up thanks to Russia's naval blockade.

Opposite the ship, 30 huge silos stand full of grain.

A quarter of a million tonnes has been sitting there for months with no means of getting it out to sea.

Matthew Hollingworth is World Food Programme emergency co-ordinator for Ukraine.

He says unless something gives the impact will be devastating around the world.

'Public dissatisfaction' predicted in Russia after death toll claim - live Ukraine war updates

"There's no question it's going to mean areas of starvation in the world are going to get worse. That famine will get worse.

"And we're in a situation where the world's economies are only partially getting better from COVID-19 and this situation is going to tip many countries over the edge."

They call Ukraine the breadbasket of the world.

Its rich black earth is among the best soil in the world. Its fertility allows Ukraine to export 70% of its crops. Its harvest last year fed an extraordinary 400 million people.

Dutch farmer Kees Huizinga came here to Odesa to farm 20 years ago.

His farm is vast by British standards, stretching over 37,000 acres.

He has managed to export some of last year's harvest overland by truck, but it's a six-day wait at the border and will only shift a fraction of his grain.

If the naval blockade is not lifted he says, it will be disastrous for those who depend on him and millions around the world.

He said: "For us, for the company, it means bankruptcy and 400 employees without a job and me without a job and for the world it means a huge gap in the world food supply.

"I mean more than 70% of Ukrainian crops are meant for export and people who really need them in the poor countries, they won't receive it, so they're going to die."

Even if the EU opened up its land borders to Ukrainian grain, two million tonnes at the most could be exported a month.

Between five and seven million tonnes needs to be getting out.

Ukraine says it needs NATO to take action to escort cargo ships through the blockade or be given weapons to let it attack Russia's navy instead.

That would risk confrontation between NATO and Russia.

But the alternative could be global instability, civil unrest elsewhere, possibly revolution and war.

Western governments are wrestling with the problem but three months in they have not found a solution and time is running out.

Ukraine's next harvest is in a month or two's time. If Ukrainian farmers cannot sell their harvest by then, they will go bankrupt and will be unable to buy seed or fertiliser.

Then the world's breadbasket will see its agricultural sector become a basket case with potentially disastrous consequences for hundreds of millions.

More:
Ukraine war: Russia's blockade will increase starvation and global instability, UN organisation warns - Sky News