Jonathan Rao

As the Russian-Ukrainian war enters its third week, there is no sign of its end.
Despite three meetings between the Russian and Ukrainian delegations, no substantial breakthrough has been made as bloodshed and human displacement continue. The effect of the war has already shown itself in rising commodity prices globally, especially crude oil and wheat, and there have been logistical disruptions. A gigantic human crisis resulting in the displacement of around two million people from Ukraine is putting pressure on neighboring counties.

India, being the largest democracy in the world, is preoccupied with the stakes of the Russian-Ukrainian war. He is close to both Russia and Ukraine and, as a sympathizer, believes that any dispute between two sovereign nations should be resolved through dialogue rather than war. The Indian Prime Minister held talks with the leaders of the two belligerent countries as well as with neighboring countries such as Hungary. India’s response to the war and the resulting abstention from voting on the UN resolution could be seen as a responsible, neutral and humane stance on the issue. India has made it a point of honor for leaders of warring nations to create a humane corridor for civilians to walk away from war-torn regions with its own students in Ukraine. India has also sent a very strong message as a responsible nation by facilitating students from neighboring Pakistan and Nepal.

India, as the fastest growing economy in the world, is concerned about the economic implications of the war on the global economy, especially Russia, Ukraine and Europe with which India has deep ties. Disruptions to the global commodity supply chain, particularly crude oil, gas and wheat, would not bode well for the nascent global economic recovery from COVID-19. India believes that the two warring countries which share a long common history and culture should open their doors for fruitful dialogue.

Unlike others, India has not taken sides or fallen into the blame game. Although many Western countries accuse Russia of invading a sovereign nation, China in its statements has accused NATO of instigating the Russian-Ukrainian war. The blame game often reduces the chances of finding a solution to a problem. It is obvious that under Russia-Ukraine there is an undeniable semblance of war for hegemony between the superpowers which refreshes the memory of the Cold War.

It is necessary to appreciate Russian concern over the presence of NATO forces in its backyard, but nothing can justify a war. India understands Russia’s concerns, but does not approve of violent methods of resolving issues. The efforts of the United States and its NATO partners to contain a superpower like Russia, even indirectly, alleging that it is an arrogant, autocratic and irresponsible power would only lead to a vicious circle of arguments and counter-arguments and vitiate the situation.

Indications have been given by China, Israel and Turkey for interim talks between the two belligerent countries. But these countries do not command as much confidence as the mediators. While China remains aligned with Russia, however, tacitly Turkey is known to have played both sides – Russia and Western allies.
For Israel, it will be very difficult to prove that it is neutral between Russia and the United States, as it has long been an ally of the latter, especially in the context of geopolitics in the Middle East.

The global economy, which was showing “green shoots” of economic recovery after the recessionary impact of the Covid pandemic, is once again under threat. India fears that the ripple effects of a war of this magnitude, if continued, could undermine the world’s efforts to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.

The series of sanctions, including debarment from SWIFT, imposed on Russia would not have economic implications for Russia alone, but for all countries, including those in the EU that have close ties with the Russia. Although the sanctions would significantly disrupt Russia’s ability to receive payments for exports and imports and cripple cross-border financial transactions, Russia’s major trading partners, including European countries, would also face difficulties in paying Russian oil and gas imports.

The US President’s recent speech that people should be prepared to pay the price for the cause of democracy as global commodity prices, including crude oil and wheat, hit new highs, is not very reassuring to solve the problem. Inflationary pressure would make life difficult for poor households around the world.

Many Asian economies, including India, import a large part of their energy needs and a sharp spike in crude prices would put immense pressure on their balance of payments. Importantly, as the Indian economy is being treated as a driver of the global economic recovery post Covid, such a spike would weigh heavily on growth and price stability. Nor can China afford to rejoice as the silent winner of Russia’s challenge to the United States and its allies in the game of hegemony. Due to its strategic location, Ukraine is very important for China as a gateway to Europe and the European Union, the war would affect the supply of minerals and agricultural products in both directions. Ukraine is an important hub within the BRI, which Kyiv joined in 2017. Chinese companies working in Ukraine, including Beinkew Energy, Xinjiang communications Construction Group and Weldatlantic Group, would also experience disruptions to their operations.

*****

There is more inflation to come.

The Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine and the sanctions imposed on the Russian Federation have driven up oil and energy prices.

Catastrophic flooding on the east coast of Australia has caused severe food shortages.

Supermarkets will raise prices in response.

But will this rise in prices force the Reserve Bank to raise interest rates sooner than expected, to control inflation?

There are two schools of thought.

World events dominate

The response of Western governments to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is changing rapidly.

Early last week, the European Union announced its intention to cut its imports of Russian gas by two-thirds by the end of the year.

A few days later, he unveiled his fourth package of measures to further isolate Russia and drain the resources it uses to finance its war.

French European Affairs Minister Clement Beaune said Ukraine, among other Eastern European countries, will “probably” join the European Union “in a few years”.

“It is my deep conviction that there will be a European Union which will be in a few years, I don’t know when, in a few years, probably extended to Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, maybe other countries,” Beaune told French TV channel France Inter, speaking ahead of a meeting of European leaders today and Friday in Versailles, near Paris.

Ukraine’s EU membership “is not for tomorrow, however”, he added.

Beaune joined a chorus of global condemnation of a Russian “massacre” at a Ukrainian maternity hospital, adding that strikes against civilians were intensifying.

The minister also reiterated the need to move away from Russian gas as “quickly as possible”, adding that “Russia is counting on the fact that we need it”.

“By buying Russian gas, we are financing Vladimir Putin’s war,” he said.

Beaune also called for a common European military defense complementary to the NATO military alliance.

He said this would require investment and the possibility of funding these efforts through common European debt would be discussed at the Versailles summit.

A Chinese-led development bank has suspended all business with Russia and Belarus, a possible sign of the limits of Beijing’s support for Moscow as it faces sanctions and censorship over its war in Ukraine.

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) said it had suspended all activities related to the two countries in light of “economic and financial developments”.

“Under these circumstances, and in the best interest of the Bank, management has decided that all activities relating to Russia and Belarus are suspended and under review,” the Beijing-based institution said Thursday in a statement. a statement.

The multilateral development bank, which has 105 members worldwide, did not specify the reasons for its decision, but expressed “its thoughts and sympathy to all concerned”.

“Our hearts go out to all who are suffering,” the bank said.

This announcement comes after several Chinese public financial institutions, including the Bank of China, stopped financing transactions involving Russian commodities.

Gary Ng, senior economist at Natixis in Hong Kong, said the AIIB’s decision was “symbolic” because the bank has only financed two projects in Russia to the tune of $800 million and none in Belarus.

“Even though most cross-border lending from China to Russia may take place with political banks, this is yet another example that China cannot unconditionally support Russia as it would weigh its own benefits and costs of any move. geopolitics,” Ng told Al Jazeera.

“The withdrawal of the AIIB shows that the pressure of global financial sanctions on Russia has become more apparent in supranational organizations,” Ng added.

Development of Sino-Russian relations

China and Russia have grown increasingly close in recent years, often aligning themselves against perceived interference by the United States and its allies.

Last month, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin said the friendship between their countries had “no limits” and no “prohibited” areas of cooperation.

Beijing has refused to condemn Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine, refrained from participating in a United Nations resolution calling on Putin to withdraw his forces, and expressed opposition to “all unlawful unilateral sanctions”.

Last month, Chinese customs authorities lifted import restrictions on Russian wheat, an industry worth around $7.9 billion a year, fueling speculation that the Chinese market could become a a key economic lifeline for the beleaguered Russian economy, which faces unprecedented international isolation.

The two sides have also stepped up energy cooperation, including signing a 30-year contract last month for Russia to supply gas to China through a new pipeline.

Despite deepening ties, Beijing is widely seen as reluctant to openly violate sanctions, which could put it at risk of being cut off from Western export markets and the U.S. dollar-centric international financial system.

China’s trade with Russia stood at $146.9 billion in 2021, about a tenth of its combined trade with the United States and the European Union.

Tim Harcourt, chief economist at the Institute for Public Policy and Governance at the University of Technology Sydney, called the AIIB’s decision significant “even given the little work done in Russia” by the development bank.

“It shows that China is moving away from Russia and the ‘limitless partnership’ between Xi and Putin,” Harcourt told Al Jazeera.

However, Peter Lewis, a former investment baker who runs a consultancy firm in Hong Kong, questioned whether the AIIB’s decision suggested a weakening of Beijing’s support for Moscow, saying the bank had an obligation to make sound financing decisions independent of its shareholders.

“Beijing will present this as an independent decision made by the AIIB for financial stability and prudence purposes,” Lewis told Al Jazeera. “However, I am sure that Beijing is increasingly alarmed by what is happening in Ukraine and that there are frantic discussions going on with the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. But this decision by the AIIB does not reflect really that.

China’s Xi launched the AIIB in 2016 as an alternative to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, financial institutions seen as dominated by Western interests. China is the AIIB’s biggest shareholder, with 31% of the bank’s $20 billion paid-up capital.

Markets echoed Monday in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as governments ramped up sanctions and investors shifted funds from companies likely to suffer in the event of a long war.

Equity markets suffered a rollercoaster day after stocks tumbled early in the session before recovering most of the lost ground later in the day.

The FTSE 100 index of Britain’s top 100 companies fell 2% before ending the day where it started at 7,458 points. Across the continent, most exchanges closed lower, with the Paris CAC down 1.4%, although the Amsterdam AEX closed up 0.26%.

Some of the world’s biggest companies said they were considering their responses to the war as the British, US and European governments said additional sanctions on trade with Russia and restrictions on financial transactions would come into effect in A few days.

The Norwegian government has ordered its $1.3 billion oil fund, the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund, to drop its $3 billion in Russian investments. Danish container shipping company AP Møller-Mærsk said it was considering banning its ships from docking at Russian ports.

HSBC, Europe’s biggest bank, was among several leading financial firms, including France’s Societe Generale and major South Korean lenders, that said they would end ties with a host of Russian banks , as they implemented Western sanctions against Russia.

The United States, Britain, Europe and Canada announced new sanctions against Russia on Saturday, including blocking several banks’ access to the international payment system Swift after the invasion of Ukraine by Russia.

Speculation that the sanctions would negatively impact trade with Russia meant UK banks were among the biggest losers on the London Stock Exchange.

HSBC was joined by NatWest, Barclays and Lloyds to lose more than 3% of their value and was joined by insurers Prudential and Legal & General as investors shifted their funds to defense manufacturers and companies likely to benefit from the inflationary effects of the invasion.

The value of BAE Systems, which makes weapons for the UK and US military, climbed 10% to 719p, while defense technology firm FTSE 250 Chemring was up 13% to 309p.

France’s Renault, which controls Russian automaker Avtovaz, fell 6.9%. Shares of German defense firm Rheinmetall rose 43% after German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said on Sunday the country would sharply increase defense spending from 100bn euros (£84bn) to more than 2 % of its economic output.

Companies with close ties to Russia were also among the biggest fallers in London. Evraz, the Russian steel and coal company partly owned by Chelsea FC owner Roman Abramovich, fell 25%. Abramovich owns 29% of the company and received a £1.2bn dividend last year after the company reported £3.1bn profit in 2021.

Polymetal, Russia’s second-biggest gold producer, plunged 55% as investors fled to safer havens.

BP, which is the biggest foreign investor in Russia, said on Sunday it was dumping its stake in state oil company Rosneft at a cost of up to $25bn (£19bn). The British oil company lost 7% of its value on Monday morning, although analysts said it could have been more if its chief executive, Bernard Looney, had rejected overtures from business minister Kwasi Kwarteng to cut ties with Rosneft.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said a number of Russian lenders and the central bank would be barred from using the system. She added: “The European Union and its partners are working to cripple Putin’s ability to fund his war machine.”

The Russian ruble plunged nearly 30% to a record low at one point, forcing the central bank to raise interest rates to 20% from 9.5%. His fall then eased to 20%.

Sign up for the daily Business Today email or follow Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

Crude oil jumped almost 5%, while gas prices in global markets jumped almost 20% to 268p per therm, more than five times higher than the January 2021 price, but still well below to 450p per therm in December last year.

Paul Dales, chief UK economist at consultancy Capital Economics, said the UK’s position was more immune than most European countries to the ripple effects of war. Trade with Russia was minimal, and most British banks had little contact with their counterparts in Moscow.

Inflation from rising energy costs was expected to rise, but not kill economic growth, he said, leading the Bank of England to maintain its policy of raising interest rates. interest.

“But it’s worth considering the other plausible scenarios, which could prompt the Bank to delay interest rate hikes or even raise interest rates more quickly,” Dales said.

“He is obviously very uncertain about the evolution of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, but it looks like it could be more protracted and have broader consequences than seemed likely last week.”

Goldman Sachs predicts European headline inflation will rise sharply to 5% in 2022 and said the crisis could shrink up to 0.4% of eurozone GDP this year.

One of the most moving videos I’ve seen in days – or ever – is this. A German translates a message from Ukrainian President Zelensky to her country. In the middle, the translator breaks down in tears. When she can recover a little, she says: “Entschuldigung” – “Excuse me.”

• Imagine this: at the end of a religious service in New York, an organist, on a large instrument, intones “La Grande Porte de Kiev”, or Kyiv. He follows it with a soft, prayerful “Abide with Me” (“Abide with me, fast falls the eventide”).

I’m not sure I’ve ever had a more moving musical experience.

• A friend wrote to me saying, “What is ‘Kiev’ instead of ‘Kiev’? Is this politically correct? I covered this topic in 2019: “A Name of One’s Own: Ukraine Journal, Part I.” I quote a bit:

I always wrote “Kiev”. But it is a fighting word – a fighting spelling – for Ukrainians. They say “Kiev”. It’s not a question of fuss. It is in fact a question of importance.

For an excellent article on this subject, try Peter Dickinson, here.

Briefly, “Kiev” is a transliteration of the capital’s Russian name; “Kiev” comes from Ukrainian.

However, I will persist in writing “the hen of Kiev” and “the great gate of Kiev” (the part that ends Mussorgsky’s text). Pictures at an exhibition).

• Casey Michel is an investigative journalist with particular knowledge of the “post-Soviet space”. He is an expert on global financial corruption – the dark world of oligarchs and their maneuvers. Putin’s regime floats on oceans of silver. However, this money is usually not found in Russia. Much of it is here in the United States of America. I podcasted with Casey Michel last week. Interesting stuff — here.

• I’m not entirely comfortable calling Putin’s assault on Ukraine a “war”. I appreciated what Mitt Romney said, “This is not a war. This is not a battle between two armies. This is a brutal invasion of a free democratic people by an authoritarian thug, and there is no justification for it.

• I also liked this, from Romney:

I join the world in awe of the real heroes: brave President Zelensky, brave Ukrainian soldiers, citizen armies, mothers cradling their frightened children, and journalists risking their lives to bring us the truth. God bless them and God bless us to never forget.

Romney voted to convict President Trump in Trump’s first impeachment trial – the trial over Trump’s dealings with Zelensky. At the time, Romney was the only person in US history to vote against a president from his own party in an impeachment trial.

Romney is despised by both left and right, but not by some of us.

“Traitor! Traitor!” chanted Trump rallyers on a plane, directing their chant at Romney. He and they were traveling from Salt Lake City to Washington on January 5, 2021. The next day, addressing his rally, Trump mocked Romney: “I wonder if he enjoyed his flight last night.”

• “Ukrainian teacher and volunteer Julia cried while waiting to be deployed to fight Russian troops around Kiev on Saturday.” I quote the New York Times, here. This woman, Julia, said, “I just want to live in our country, and that’s it.

His words go straight to the point, don’t they? “I just want to live in our country, and that’s it.”

• Putin’s forces are committing war crimes — many of them — in Ukraine. The Hague will have a lot of work to do. I have no illusions that anyone will be brought to justice. I hope, however, that war crimes will be documented – beyond obfuscation by propagandists and liars.

• In cities across Russia, people are risking their lives to protest Putin’s war on Ukraine. What brave people they are. I imagine that right now a lot of Russians are feeling shame: shame at what the government that governs them is doing to their neighbor. This shame, this revulsion could leave Putin’s dictatorship even more shaken than it is.

• In Belarus too, people are protest. The risks that these people take, in a police state. The bravery they show. Incredible.

• Every day, every hour — with every blow he strikes — Putin strengthens Ukrainian identity and Ukrainian resolve. May his crimes turn against him in many ways, including his ousting in Moscow.

• The Ukrainians make the Kremlin propaganda lie – propaganda you hear echoed in the West, including the United States: Ukraine is not a real country. You can’t really detach it from Russia. The people of western Ukraine are arrogant: they want to join the European Union and NATO; people from the East feel Russian and want to join Russia. Any push for democracy is just a CIA project. All this exercise.

• Sweden sends 5,000 anti-tank weapons to Ukraine. “So what?” you say. For Sweden, this is a very important step. The Swedes, along with the Finns and others, are well aware of the threat from Putin’s Russia. In 2017, I submitted a report from Stockholm: “Sweden, abruptly awakened: the defense posture of a ‘nation of peace’”.

• The President of Taiwan, Tsai Ing-wen, tweeted photos of Taiwanese cities, illuminated in the colors of the Ukrainian flag. “Our country and our people #StandWithUkraine against Russian aggression,” she wrote. I doubt anyone in the world – except perhaps the Balts – feels a stronger sense of solidarity with the Ukrainian people than the Taiwanese right now.

• All over Europe, Putin has his fanboys and his fangirls, his defenders and his apologists. They tend to be scrambling right now – because the war is not going well for Putin, at least in terms of propaganda. At least in terms of image. A title of Politics says, “Putin’s European cronies have to swallow their words.” the articlecaption: “The Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine is a great embarrassment for European politicians who got too close to Putin.”

Take Matteo Salvini. He’s the guy who wore a Putin T-shirt in Red Square. His party has created a “Friends of Putin” group in the Italian parliament. They signed a “friendship and cooperation” agreement with Putin. (“A historic deal,” Salvini said.) Salvini is a darling of the “national conservative” crowd, which gathered in Rome two years ago.

Well, Salvini was just filmed delivering a bouquet of flowers to the Ukrainian embassy. Isn’t that sweet? If the war went well for his son Putin, Salvini would convey his congratulations to the Russian embassy.

• Even Viktor Orbán in Hungary says he won’t block EU sanctions against Putin. When Putin visited Budapest in 2017, Orbán said: “We all feel – it’s in the air – that the world is in the process of a profound realignment”. For his part, Putin hailed Hungary as an “important and reliable partner of Russia in Europe”.

The relationship may be on the rocks — for now.

• In the 1970s, we had an expression in American culture: “scared straight”. Young people – budding criminals – met ex-prisoners, who recounted the horror of their lives. As a result, young people would be “directly frightened”.

For many years, many Americans and others have played kisses with the authoritarians, semi-authoritarians, and would-be authoritarians of Europe. (Latin America too.) Maybe the assault on Ukraine will scare them. Perhaps autocracy will lose some of its luster. Maybe the old maligned liberal democracy isn’t so bad after all.

• Right here is a report: “I will stand with Russia”: pro-Putin sentiment is spreading online. Candace Owens reportedly said, “Ukrainians are dying because of the Biden family’s criminal ties and insistence on stoking conflict in the region. She has millions of followers, and many like her too. They have a serious influence on the global American understanding. I mean, how could they not?

• You may be familiar with Snake Island. Right here is a report: “On the island of snakes in Ukraine, a provocative last stand against Russian forces.” The article begins,

As the Russian military pounded targets across Ukraine with an array of bombs and missiles, a small team of Ukrainian border guards on a rocky, desolate island received an ominous message: Give up or be attacked.

“I am a Russian warship,” said a voice from the invaders, according to a communications recording. “I ask you to lay down your arms and surrender to avoid unnecessary bloodshed and death. Otherwise, you will be bombarded.

The Ukrainians responded boldly.

“Russian warship”, was the reply, “fuck you”.

The Russians opened fire, eventually killing 13 border guards.

• For years Vladimir Putin talked about what he wanted to do to Ukraine. A lot of these guys are very blunt – the Iranian mullahs, the ruling Kim family in North Korea, etc.

I think of the story of the Holocaust survivor who, shortly after the war, was asked, “What is the greatest lesson you have learned?” He replied, “When someone says they want to kill you, believe them.”

• A few years ago, Robert Kagan, this eminent foreign affairs historian and analyst, wrote a book with the striking title: The jungle grows back. It does. To eternal vigilance there is no alternative – no good alternative. Eternal vigilance is tiresome, God knows. And expensive. But letting our guard down – militarily, civilizationally? More expensive.

Stop an expansionist dictator as soon as you can. Because this guy won’t stop. He can only to be stopped.

MOSCOW, Feb 21 (Reuters) – Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Monday he would rule within hours on the request for recognition of two regions in eastern Ukraine held by Russian-backed separatists. as independents – a move that could give Moscow a reason to openly send in troops. Read more

Separately, Moscow said Ukrainian military saboteurs tried to enter Russian territory in armed vehicles, killing five, a charge dismissed as “fake news” by Kiev.

The developments fit a pattern repeatedly predicted by Western governments, who accuse Russia of preparing to fabricate a pretext to invade Ukraine by blaming Kiev for the attacks and relying on calls for help from the separatist proxies.

Washington says Russia has now amassed a force of 169,000 to 190,000 troops in the region, including pro-Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine.

Russia denies any plan of attack against its neighbor, which broke with Moscow rule with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. But it has threatened unspecified ‘military-technical’ action unless ‘she receives sweeping security guarantees, including the promise that Ukraine never will. join NATO.

European financial markets slumped on signs of heightened confrontation, after briefly advancing on glimmers of hope that a summit could offer a way out of Europe’s biggest military crisis in decades. The price of oil – Russia’s main export – rose, while Russian stocks and the ruble plunged.

In a televised meeting of his Security Council, which normally meets behind closed doors, Putin reiterated Russia’s demands, insisting it was not enough for the West to say Ukraine was not wasn’t ready to join NATO just yet.

He also said he would make a decision “today” on the request made hours earlier by the leaders of the Lugansk and Donetsk regions, which broke away from Kyiv’s control in 2014. read more

Shelling has intensified since last week along a long front line between rebels and Ukrainian forces in eastern Ukraine. Rebels abruptly began transporting tens of thousands of civilians to Russia on Friday, accusing Kiev of planning an attack, which Ukraine denies as propaganda.

Ukraine and the West view the rebels as proxies for Russia and have warned for weeks that Moscow could use them to build a war case. Washington says it is absurd to suggest that it would be Kiev that would choose to step up now, with Russian troops massed on its border.

THE “WORST CASE SCENARIO” OCCURS

The televised meeting of the Security Council in Moscow allowed Putin and his top advisers to present their case.

Dmitry Medvedev, vice president of the Security Council, told the meeting that it was “obvious” that Ukraine did not need the two regions and that a majority of Russians would support their independence. Russia already offers passports to residents of the two regions and Medvedev said there are now 800,000 Russian citizens there.

Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu appeared to raise the stakes even further by claiming that Ukraine – which renounced nuclear weapons after gaining independence from the Soviet Union – had greater ‘nuclear potential’ than Iran. or North Korea.

After talks in Brussels with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said Western countries were preparing for a “worst-case scenario”. Airlines Lufthansa, KLM and Air France have all canceled flights to Kyiv. Read more

Hours earlier, French President Emmanuel Macron held out hope for a diplomatic solution, saying Putin and his US counterpart Joe Biden had agreed in principle to meet.

Putin said Macron told him Washington had changed its stance on Russia’s security demands, without specifying how.

The White House said Biden agreed to the meeting “in principle,” but only “if an invasion did not occur.”

Washington, which leads the NATO alliance, has flatly rejected the idea of ​​excluding Ukraine for good or reversing NATO’s eastward expansion of the past three decades, but has proposed talks on weapons deployments and other security issues.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said a call or meeting between Putin and Biden could be arranged at any time, but there were no concrete plans for a summit yet.

Macron’s office and the White House said details would be ironed out by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov later this week.

Lavrov confirmed he planned to meet Blinken in Geneva on Thursday, and said there had been progress in security talks with the West. Blinken said any meeting would be canceled if Russia invaded.

“NOT WITHOUT US”

Ukraine said it must be included in any decision to resolve the crisis and had seen warnings online that hackers were preparing to launch cyberattacks on government agencies, banks and the military Tuesday.

“No one can solve our problem without us,” senior security official Oleksiy Danilov said during a briefing.

The Russian military said a group of saboteurs crossed the Ukrainian border near the Russian city of Rostov on Monday morning, followed by two armored vehicles that came to evacuate them. He said five members of these forces were killed when Russian forces pushed them back. Read more

Ukraine said the report was fake news and that no Ukrainian forces were present in the Rostov region.

Western countries say they are preparing sanctions that would hit Russian businesses and individuals. People familiar with the matter said that could include banning US financial institutions from processing transactions for Russian banks. Read more

Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer said the European Union package would include halting certification of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany, which is awaiting German and European regulatory approval.

Ukraine called for the immediate imposition of sanctions, saying it would be too late to wait for an invasion. But the United States and Europe have said they will not act before an invasion because the threat of sanctions should act as a deterrent.

EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said he would only call an extraordinary meeting to agree sanctions “when the time comes”.

Reporting by Reuters Writing by Kevin Liffey Editing by Peter Graff and Frank Jack Daniel

Our standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

With all eyes on Donbass, a disputed territory on Ukraine’s eastern border with Russia, recent developments have opened the door to a simultaneous attack on multiple fronts that would include, according to US intelligencethe Ukrainian capital.

Last Friday, Biden publicly affirmed his belief that Putin had already made the decision to invade Ukraine and that his military efforts would be focused on Kyiv. He didn’t say “Donbass”, he said “Kiev”, in what should be understood as a very thoughtful way of measuring words.

So far, the border scrambles point to a scenario similar to that experienced in February and March 2014 with Sevastopol and, subsequently, the entire Crimean peninsula. Undercover agents infiltrate to wreak havoc, so-called autonomous militias form and only come in to finish the job.

Now it works for local invasions. It could be used to join Donetsk, for example, but that doesn’t seem to be what Biden was insinuating with his statements or Boris Johnson when he warned of “the worst war situation since World War II” on Saturday. For that, Putin would have to go straight to Kiev, invade the capital, kick out the government, enter with the tanks and establish a protectorate over the rest of the country without needing, perhaps, to occupy every city along the way.

All this is very difficult to do from the Donbass. US intelligence believes they are already 190,000 soldiers located around Ukraine’s various borders with Russia and Belarus; the majority, in fact, on the eastern frontier. As high as the number may seem, it is not clear whether they could travel the 593 kilometers between Donetsk and the capital unopposed. Ukraine would have time to prepare its defense and stand up. If Putin wants to seize the capital as quickly as possible and thus ward off any attempt to react, it is normal for him to do so from Belarus.

In this sense, the latest news this Sunday is worrying: after finishing the maneuvers with the Belarusian army this weekend, it seems that the thirty thousand soldiers assigned to Baranovichi, just two hundred kilometers from the border with Ukraine, will remain on the ground with the consent of Putin’s puppet and the Belarusian dictator, Alexander Lukashenko.

If Putin really intends to invade Ukraine in its entirety, he will normally do so from at least three fronts, for which he needs large contingents of troops on all three: Donbass, of course, and the eastern border in general; Belarus, to go in a straight line towards Kiev, and Crimea, to establish a fast connection along the coast of the Black Sea to Odessa.

False Flag War

How to justify an attack of such magnitude is another thing: that same Friday, social networks were filled with videos published by various pro-Russian communication agencies in which alleged attacks by the Ukrainian army were shown (their consequences rather broken glass, falling structures, screaming civilians…) while the separatist leaders of the river basin Donetsk They asked the population to cross the border with Russia to avoid an alleged massacre ordered by the government of Volodymyr Zelensky.

The problem with these videos is that they were fake, recorded, in fact, two days before. We guess there was gunfire in the Donbass on Friday afternoon because even the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Joseph Borrellgave the news for good in statements to Agencia Efe.

However, the extent of these possible shootings or launching of projectiles – qualifying them as “bombardments”, as Borrell did, seems indeed excessive -, remains to be determined in an area which has known a constant civil and military conflict for eight years. .

The international community has taken this series of fake news for what it probably is: the first steps towards a “false flag” war in which a false conflict is created and a military attack is justified to solve what you have. even invented.

There is no evidence that the Ukrainian military is increasing pressure on pro-Russian separatists. On the contrary, the Kiev government itself denounces more than fifty shares militias which would mean a break in the peace agreements signed in Minsk between Russia and Ukraine.

That Vladimir Putin is forcing the situation on Ukraine’s eastern border is obvious. At the time he said the troop withdrawal was about to begin and there is no evidence that this happened either. They are always there, on alert, waiting for orders. during weeks, United States regularly announces the imminence of an attack that does not occur.

Despite the criticism and the wear and tear on public opinion this produces, it may not be a bad idea: by warning of your enemy’s intentions, by trying to anticipate his actions, you are delaying them in a way . Putin not only wants to end the conflict in Ukraine by force, but to convince the world that “he has no other choice”.

Every time Biden or any other NATO member explains how and when this attack is going to happen, they kind of spoil Putin’s narrative. Let’s see how long this situation can last.

The end of the Olympic truce

Although Kiev seems to live in absolute calm, back to work after a pleasant weekend in relatively good weather, the threat of having 30,000 Russian troops two hundred kilometers away – could be even less if Lukashenko allows them to move on Belarusian soil to the border itself – is the most disturbing. It is not even known whether the Belarusian troops could mingle with the Russians and thus increase the contingent. They would never recognize him anyway.

In principle, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken plans to meet his Russian counterpart this week. The place and date have not yet been determined. Blinken even publicly considered the possibility that the invasion begin before the two can meet. One of the hypotheses considered in this last month of conjecture was that Russia wanted to respect the “Olympic truce” as a sign of respect for the Chinese government, organizer of the Winter Olympics in Beijing. These Games ended on Sunday.

Does this mean the attack is imminent? This implies, at the very least, that Russia only needs a spark to blow up the barrel of dynamite. The diplomatic solutions that Zelensky continues to ask for are running out: Blinken asked if the United States would recognize Russian sovereignty over Crimea and Donbass as an emergency solution to avoid a war, the Secretary of State replied with a ” no” categorically.

Let us remember that, while we Europeans are particularly concerned about the situation in the east of our continent, the United States sees further: recognizing Russia’s sovereignty over independent territories or over that of another country would make its very difficult diplomatic position in the event of an invasion of Taiwan by part of China, which Xi Jinping has been alluding to for more than a year.

Follow the topics that interest you

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the world was “watching in disbelief” following the biggest troop buildup in Europe since “the darkest days of the Cold War”.

“The very reason for the creation of the European Union is that we wanted to end all European wars,” von der Leyen said on Saturday at the Munich security conference.

She added that the events “could reshape the whole international order”.

Highlighting Ukraine’s recent celebration of 30 years of independence, von der Leyen said there is a whole generation of Ukrainians born and raised in a free country who now “face daily aggression and interference external”.

“This is what the Kremlin’s policy means in practice, instilling fear and calling it security, demanding to deprive 44 million Ukrainians from freely deciding their own future, to deny the right of a free country to independence and self-determination,” she added.

“The consequences of this approach matter far beyond Ukraine.”

Talk about Russia and China, von der Leyen said, “They are looking for a new era, as they say, to replace the existing international rules.”

Meanwhile, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said Moscow was trying to roll back history and recreate its sphere of influence.

“The current crisis demonstrates the importance of the transatlantic relationship for European security,” Stoltenberg said at the Munich security conference on Saturday.

“If the Kremlin’s goal is to have less NATO on its borders, it will only get more NATO and if it wants to violate them, it will always get an even more united alliance,” Stoltenberg said, declaring earlier that NATO was a defensive alliance. and “will take all necessary measures to protect and defend”.

“Over the past few years, our security environment has fundamentally changed for the worse. Peace cannot be taken for granted. Freedom and democracy are competitive and strategic competition is increasing.