The EU suspects sabotage caused the damage to the Nord Stream gas pipelines last month, and Russia has come under suspicion, but it is not known for definite who was to blame.
The head of the alliance has promised that a planned attack on NATO’s energy sources will be faced with a “united and determined response.”
Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg pledged to boost the protection of critical infrastructure in response to the damage to the Nord Stream gas pipelines.
The EU believes three leaks in the pipelines last month were the work of sabotage and suspicion has fallen on Russia, but it is not known for sure who was responsible.
Mr Stoltenberg said NATO has doubled its presence in the Baltic and the North Sea to more than 30 ships supported by aircraft and undersea activities.
In a speech on Tuesday, he also said the alliance is monitoring Russia’s nuclear forces closely as the country was “losing on the battlefield” in Ukraine.
Meanwhile, Moscow has issued a fresh warning to the West over its involvement in the Ukraine war.
Deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov said Russia will take adequate countermeasures in response to the West’s “growing involvement”.
In the comments reported by the state-owned RIA news agency, he said: “We warn and hope that they realise the danger of uncontrolled escalation in Washington and other Western capitals.”
Russian bombs have rained down on Ukraine, killing at least 14 people on Monday.
Vladimir Putin said the strikes were in retaliation for its “terrorist action” against Russian territory – the attack on the Kerch Strait Bridge in occupied Crimea – but Ukraine has rejected this claim of “provocation”.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has vowed to make the battlefield “more painful” for Russian troops in response to the rocket attacks and said air defence was the “number one priority”.
Despite remarkable Ukrainian battlefield successes – both early on in the war with the defence of Kyiv and more recently with counterattacks in Kharkiv and Kherson regions – the war could continue for decades to come, one expert said.
Sky News security and defence analyst Professor Michael Clarke said the war is likely to be a “generational struggle” and could be a “forever conflict” until “something changes in European security or Russia”.
Mr Clarke said the current crisis in Ukraine was the “second war” and the first war was witnessed in 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea.
He added: “My feeling is next year there will be a ceasefire in which the Ukrainians will be better placed and that ceasefire will be unstable and it will break down and there will be a third war and then a ceasefire and a fourth war.
“We’re dealing here with an existential struggle because the Russian establishment thinks that Ukraine has no right to exist and they won’t change their mind in the short-term.
“This is likely to be a generational struggle. Let’s say it’s going to last 30,40 or 50 years.”
According to a Gazpromofficial, 2015 saw the discovery of a NATO mine destroyer near the Nord Stream 1 offshore gas pipeline.
The spokesperson, Sergei Kupriyanov, said the device was pulled out and rendered harmless by the Swedish arm forces.
Earlier today, Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson said it would not share findings of an investigation into the explosions of the Nord Stream gas pipelines with Russian authorities or Gazprom.
A Swedish crime scene investigation of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines from Russia to Europe has found evidence of detonations and prosecutors suspect sabotage.
Last week Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin sent a letter to the Swedish government demanding that Russian authorities and Gazprom be allowed to be involved in the investigation.
And today, Ms Andersson said Sweden would not share the findings of the explosions that took place in the Swedish economic zone, with Russian authorities.
“In Sweden, our preliminary investigations are confidential, and that, of course, also applies in this case,” she told reporters.
However, Ms Andersson said Sweden had no power to stop Russian vessels from visiting the sites of the explosions now that the crime scene investigationwas concluded.
The defence editor of the Economist says today’s attacks on Ukraine were likely planned to lower civilian morale and tax the nation’s military capabilities.
Shashank Joshi, speaking to the BBC, claimed that Russia had demonstrated by the destruction of vital infrastructure that it intended to keep the Ukrainian economy “on its knees,” regardless of any victories Ukraine may have on the battlefield.
“It also, as a secondary objective, I suspect diverts military resources onto the home front,” he said.
“If you look at the disruption of transport, infrastructure, energy… it’s going to make [fighting the war] that little bit more difficult.”
But Joshi also said that Russia had already been running short of missiles, and appeared to have used up some 80-100 on Monday.
“They have to save some, of course, in case the war escalates, in case they have to fight Nato, fight the West,” he said.
“So I don’t think Russia can keep up this pace of strikes in perpetuity, and they’ll have to resort to weapons that are not suited to [these kinds of attacks].”
The invasion of Ukrainehas been an aggressive play by an expansionist neighbour and led to global condemnation of the Russians. But it has also got some asking – could Taiwan be next?
Could we see another victim of an ambitious power trying to increase its global clout?
The self-governing island, formed by nationalists who managed to escape the grip of Communist China, has long been the target of Beijing. The Chinese government has always viewed it as a breakaway province it must ultimately re-unify.
Until now, the manpower, money, and influence that it would require has kept China at bay. But some fear President Xi, eyeing an unprecedented third term, now has the ability and the ambition to do something drastic in a bid to carve out his legacy.
After speaking to a wide cast of characters in Taiwan, that still seems an unlikely scenario in the immediate future – even amongst the most anxious and invested parties we heard from.
It would be hugely risky – an enormous logistical undertaking that could easily destabilise China’s relationship with others in the region.
And if China was watching as closely as some suspect, surely Ukraine is a deeply cautionary tale. Nevertheless, Russia’s exploits have highlighted how fragile peace is when you’re dealing with an unpredictable power.
America has also played a big part in the escalating tension. Nancy Pelosi’s visit in August was diplomatically explosive.
China was so infuriated by the US House Speaker touching down in what it views as Chinese territory, that Beijing embarked on its biggest-ever military drills around Taiwan.
Many on the island now claim that almost daily incursions into its skies and waters are the new normal.
In Central Taiwan, we witnessed a military drill – up to 400 soldiers working in searing heat,firing Howitzers. Taiwan insists these exercises are not a reaction to any recent moves by China, but it is also a little more real.
President Tsai, who we followed on the campaign trail, certainly isn’t capitulating – far from it.
At rehearsals for National Day, where Taiwan flexed its military muscle, the theme was a strong nod to national security. “Protect soil, guard country,” the banners read.
We met civilians preparing for the worst, building survival kits at home. There’s been a huge spike in people attending self-defence and first aid courses recently. We heard from others trying to improve shelters.
Then there are the cyber warriors taking on fake news. Drones are the latest threat. Taiwan thinks they represent psychological warfare, a “grey zone” tactic it must confront.
But unpicking propaganda, verifying footage and working out where drones came from, who’s flying them and where they’re landing, is very difficult.
And it’s easy to misread the dynamics.
Kinmen Island, where China is easily visible, has been described as akin to Korea’s DMZ. But it doesn’t feel like a place with a bunker mentality. In fact we also met lots of people who really enjoy living so close to the mainland. Until the pandemic, they’d love to take a 30-minute ferry over to shop there.
Chinese tourists in turn would come to Kinmen to watch historic re-enactments of darker days, when Kinmen was under bombardment by the Chinese.
Now, it’s more a conflict curiosity shop than an anxious outpost. Many share a language and cultural affinity with mainlanders.
On a cliff edge on one of Kinmen’s islands sits a 3 storey high wall of speakers. It looks out over a narrow strip of water to China, just two kilometres away at its narrowest point.
Housed in concrete, the tower used to blast songs and propaganda messages across the sea. Today, it still plays a song by Tawainese pop idol, Teresa Teng, but the volume is much lower these days.
It’s become a tourist attraction on the island, a place for snapping selfies and remembering a darker time when the island was under attack from China.
Kinmen is Taiwan’s literal frontline.
Roy Chen has come with his wife, Vicky, and a group of friends to celebrate his 40th birthday. He was in the army for 18 months and is prepared to fight again for his country, if China invaded Taiwan.
“We don’t really care about the history between China and Taiwan. It happened a very long time ago”, he says. “Taiwan is Taiwan, China is China. It’s different countries.”
“If China really wants to get Taiwan, it’s easy. But he cannot get our people, our hearts, our spirit”.
Roy’s friend, Nina Wu, agrees. “We fight for our freedom and we love our people and the country.” she says. “We don’t want to become a part of China.”
In a humid warehouse south of Taipei, four men in military fatigues and body armour are poised to attack.
Peering through the sights of their airsoft rifles, they exchange hand signals and quick glances before kicking a door open and firing.
These men aren’t soldiers. They’re just practising military skills with replica guns. Skills that Ping-yu Lin, 38, hopes he will never need.
He thinks everybody needs to be prepared for an attack from China “in their own way”, and that an attack could happen in “three to five years”.
“After the Ukraine war, we start to think it’s rising, the threat is rising. And some of us are starting to prepare ourselves. Compared with China we are small. And we need more friends, more allies.”
Ping-yu is a father of three and worries about Taiwan’s future. He believes there’s a lot at stake if China were to invade.
“Taiwan will lose everything in our democracy and our society, our property, our lives… in the current climate we can’t take peace for granted.”
In the glaring heat of an autumn day, it’s a welcome relief to step inside the gloom of the Zhaishan tunnels.
We walk along the edge of the subterranean channels, looking down into the clear green waters.
The cold war era caves were built by hand to shelter ships from Chinese view.
For 56-year-old Hsi-Tein Lee, they were home for more than a year.
He joined Taiwan’s army when he was 18, in the 1980’s.
“The tension between Taiwan and China was at a high level.” he tells us. “As a kid under 20, I was very nervous and scared. I was worried that the war would break out at any time, and I had to sacrifice my life to the country. I was terrified.”
Hsi-Tein doesn’t miss those days, and has no desire to return to them.
“Everybody thinks that Taiwan and China should keep the peace” he says. “It’s good that people enjoy freedom. It’s not wise to promote Taiwanese independence or to provoke China’s armed forces.”
The start of the war in Ukraine had a massive impact on manyTaiwanese. The reality of a neighbour invading has prompted many to consider a future conflict on their shores.
Enoch Wu wants to prepare civilians for any disaster, whether that’s an earthquake – or war. Frontline Alliance runs emergency response training and since the start of the war in Ukraine, their classes are packed.
“One of the biggest lessons from Ukraine is that our world can be turned upside down just like that” he tells us.
“You know, people don’t appreciate how incredibly fragile peace is, and especially when you live next to a volatile ruler, a dictatorship who can act on a whim to attack and invade another country, an autocratic government that is not accountable to its people or to the international community.”
The 41-year-old believes that Taiwan has been living under an “existential threat” from China for decades. He says his parents fought for democracy in Taiwan, and now their children have to protect it.
“We are unfortunately facing our biggest generational challenge of national survival”, he says. “It’s up to us now to maintain and protect this way of life.”
Enoch Wu is concerned about the Chinese military build up and is calling for a NATO-style collective security agreement.
“China took over the South China Sea, rock by rock, and now it’s militarised.. They’ve never hid their intentions. And I think we need to not be naive.”
In Taipei, you get the sense it is now forged its own identity and the horse feels like it’s well and truly bolted. In the past, some saw the economic appeal of China.
Now you get a sense of a gaping gulf between the two societies. Gay marriage is legal in Taiwanand many young people we spoke to, including those about to embark on military service, believe there’s no going back. They’re proud of Taiwan – they see it as a progressive nation with an increasingly distinct character.
They weren’t preoccupied with worries about war. But it’s everything in between that concerns others – the multitude of ways China could and likely will try to exert its influence.
And there is plenty it could do to derail the path Taiwan has set for itself – without a full-scale invasion.
DISCLAIMER: Independentghana.com will not be liable for any inaccuracies contained in this article. The views expressed in the article are solely those of the author’s and do not reflect those of The Independent Ghana
Source: SkyNews, Cordelia Lynch and Rachel Thompson
Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, says remarks by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy recommending that NATO undertake preventative strikes on Russia validate the need for a “special operation” in Ukraine.
“By doing so, (he) essentially presented the world with further evidence of the threats posed by the Kyiv regime,” Mr Lavrov said.
“This is why a special military operation was launched to neutralise them.”
For context: During an Australian think tank last night, Mr Zelenskyy said he believed strikes were necessary to preclude any use of nuclear weapons.
He did not go into detail about what kind of strikes he meant and made no reference to any need for nuclear strikes.
The Ukrainian leader also urged the world to “show strength” following the annexation of four Ukrainian regions.
He told the think tank: “The head of Russia is now carefully analysing the world’s reaction to the sham referenda he organised on Ukrainian soil and to the announcement of the annexation of our territory.
“He is interested in whether he still has the potential for escalation. If the world’s reaction is weak now, Russia will come up with some new escalation.”
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov denounced Mr Zelenskyy’s comments as “an appeal to start yet another world war with unpredictable, monstrous consequences”, according to RIA news agency.
Turkey’s foreign ministryhas said it rejects Russia’s annexation of four regions in Ukraine, adding the decision is a “grave violation” of international law.
Turkey, a NATO member, has conducted a diplomatic balancing act since Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24.
Ankara opposes Western sanctions on Russiaand has close ties with both Moscow and Kyiv, its Black Sea neighbours. It has also criticised Russia’s invasion and sent armed drones to Ukraine.
The Turkish ministry said on Saturday it had not recognised Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, adding that it rejects Russia’s decision to annex the four regions, Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhia.
Ukraine has submitted an application for accession to NATOunder an accelerated procedure, President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said in an address on September 30.
The announcement came after meetings of Ukraine’s top military and security councils and after Russian President Vladimir Putin signed decrees to formally seize four Ukrainian territories partially occupied by Moscow.
Commenting on Putin‘s statements about occupied or partially occupied regions of Ukraine “joining Russia,” Zelensky said Russia is “trying to steal what does not belong to it.”
“We have a solution. First, only the path of strengthening Ukraine and expelling the occupiers from our entire territory will restore peace. We will go this way,” he said.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg says Russia’s recent actions on the war in Ukraine represent “the most serious escalation” since Moscow launched its invasion in February.
Stoltenberg cited Russian President Vladimir Putin’s partial military mobilization, his “irresponsible nuclear saber-rattling,” and decrees signed on September 30 illegally annexing more Ukrainian territory.
Speaking at a news conference in Brussels, Stoltenberg condemned the Russian “land grab” of four Ukrainian provinces in decrees signed by Putin earlier at a Kremlin ceremony. He said the move was “illegal and illegitimate,” calling it the “largest attempted annexation of European territory by force since World War II.”
NATO allies “do not, and will not, recognize any of this territory as part of Russia,” he said.
Putin’s move is a sign of weakness, Stoltenberg said, adding that the Russian leader has “utterly failed” in his strategic objectives.
He also said that Russia faces “severe consequences” if it uses nuclear arms in Ukraine, and reaffirmed NATO’s “unwavering support” for Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.
He said Ukraine has the right to retake Ukrainian territory, and NATO allies support Ukraine’s right to choose its own path.
If Russia were to win in Ukraine, he said it would be catastrophic for the country and dangerous for NATO.
But he remained noncommittal on Ukrainian membership in NATO, which President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said Ukraine will immediately seek on an expedited basis. Stoltenberg said it is a decision that requires a consensus of all 30 allies, and the focus should remain on helping Kyiv’s war effort.
Source: Radio Free Europe via Reuters, AFP and dpa
The most right-wing government in Italy since World War Two is anticipated to be formed by Ms. Meloni.
Giorgia Meloni, a leader of the far right, has declared victory in the Italian election and is on track to become the nation’s first female prime minister.
The most right-wing government in Italy since World War Two is anticipated to be formed by Ms. Meloni.
That will alarm much of Europe as Italy is the EU’s third-biggest economy.
However, speaking after the vote, Ms Meloni said her Brothers of Italy party would “govern for everyone” and would not betray people’s trust.
“Italians have sent a clear message in favour of a right-wing government led by Brothers of Italy,” she told reporters in Rome, holding up a sign saying “Thank you Italy”.
She is set to win around 26% of the vote, ahead of her closest rival Enrico Letta from the center-left. Mr Letta told reporters on Monday that the far-right victory was a “sad day for Italy and Europe” but his party would provide a “strong and intransigent opposition”.
Ms Meloni’s right-wing alliance – which also includes Matteo Salvini’s far-right League and former PM Silvio Berlusconi’s center-right Forza Italia – will take control of both the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies, with around 44% of the vote.
Four years ago, Brothers of Italy won little more than 4% of the vote but this time benefited from staying out of the national unity government that collapsed in July.
The party’s dramatic success in the vote disguised the fact that her allies performed poorly, with the League slipping below 9%, and Forza Italia even lower.
Their big advantage, however, was that where they were able to put up one unified candidate in a constituency, their opponents in the left and centre could not agree a common position and stood separately.
Giorgia Meloni appears certain to become prime minister but it will be for the president, Sergio Mattarella, to nominate her and that is unlikely to happen before late October.
Although she has worked hard to soften her image, emphasizing her support for Ukraine and diluting anti-EU rhetoric, she leads a party rooted in a post-war movement that rose out of dictator Benito Mussolini’s fascists.
Earlier this year she outlined her priorities in a raucous speech to Spain’s far-right Vox party: “Yes to the natural family, no to the LGBT lobby, yes to sexual identity, no to gender ideology… no to Islamist violence, yes to secure borders, no to mass migration… no to big international finance… no to the bureaucrats of Brussels!”
The center-left alliance was a long way behind the right with 26% of the vote and Democratic Party figure Debora Serracchiani argued that the right “has the majority in parliament, but not in the country”.
In truth, the left failed to form a viable challenge with other parties after Italy’s 18-month unity government fell apart, and officials were downbeat even before the vote. The Five Star Movement under Giuseppe Conte won a convincing third place – but did not see eye to eye with Enrico Letta even though they have several policies in common on immigration and raising the minimum wage.
Turnout fell to a record low of 63.91% – nine points down in 2018. Voting levels were especially poor in southern regions including Sicily.
Italy is a founding father of the European Union and a member of Nato, and Ms Meloni’s rhetoric on the EU places her close to Hungary’s nationalist leader Viktor Orban.
Her allies have both had close ties with Russia. Mr Berlusconi, 85, claimed last week that Vladimir Putin was pushed into invading Ukraine while Mr Salvini has called into question Western sanctions on Moscow.
Ms Meloni wants to revisit Italian reforms agreed with the EU in return for almost €200bn (£178bn) in post-Covid recovery grants and loans, arguing that the energy crisis has changed the situation.
Italy is already the second most indebted country in the eurozone and Prof Leila Simona Talani of King’s College London believes the next government will face a clutch of serious issues.
“They have no experience economically. Tax cuts will be a problem, so Italy will have less revenue and it’s heading for a recession, so it’ll face problems with the financial markets and with Europe. How will they find the money to tackle the rising energy prices?”
IMAGE SOURCE,REUTERS Image caption, There was little cause for joy at Enrico Letta’s Democratic Party headquarters on Sunday night
The Hungarian prime minister’s long-serving political director, Balazs Orban, was quick to congratulate Italy’s right-wing parties: “We need more than ever friends who share a common vision and approach to Europe’s challenges.”
In France, Jordan Bardella of the far-right National Rally said Italian voters had given European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen a lesson in humility. She had earlier said Europe had “the tools” to respond if Italy went in a “difficult direction”.
However, Prof Gianluca Passarrelli of Rome’s Sapienza University told the BBC he thought she would avoid rocking the boat on Europe and focus on other policies: “I think we will see more restrictions on civil rights and policies on LGBT and immigrants.”
Ms Meloni wants a naval blockade to stop migrant boats from leaving Libya, and Matteo Salvini is known to covet the job of an interior minister which he held three years ago. However, he is currently on trial for barring a boat from docking as part of his policy to close ports to rescue boats.
This election marks a one-third reduction in the size of the two houses, and that appears to have benefited the winning parties.
The make-up of the Chamber and Senate is not yet clear but a YouTrend projection said the right-wing alliance would hold as many as 238 of the 400 seats in the lower house and 112 of the 200 seats in the upper house.
In an effort to fortify its eastern defenses against Russia’s offensive in Ukraine, a group of NATO member states have started two days of training exercises in the Baltic Sea region.
Air forces from Hungary, Germany, the Czech Republic, Italy, Turkey, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and the United Kingdom are taking part in the exercises. NATO candidate Finland is also involved in the drills.
“The exercise series integrates more than two dozen fighter and support aircraft and NATO airborne early warning aircraft with NATO and national command and control centres,” NATO said in a statement.
“The realistic drills train Allied forces to deter and – if needed – defend against any aggression,” it added.
President Vladimir Putinissued an order to mobilize soldiers, stepping up Moscow’s apparent military operation in Ukraine.
On Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin authorized a “partial mobilization” that would call up 300,000 Russian citizens who were in the military reserves to serve in Ukraine.
The incident came a day after a series of synchronized actions towards annexation referendums in Russian-occupied Ukrainian territory, and it signaled a dramatic uptick in Russia’s conflict with Ukraine.
Putin spoke in Russian in the televised address. The quotes below have been translated into English.
Partial mobilization
“In such a situation, I consider it necessary to make the following decision, which is fully appropriate to threats we face. Namely, in order to protect our motherland, its sovereignty, and territorial integrity, and to ensure the safety of our people and people in the liberated territories, I consider it necessary to support the proposal of the defense ministry and the General Staff to conduct a partial mobilization in the Russian Federation.”
“We are talking about partial mobilization. That is, only citizens who are currently in the reserves and, above all, those who have served in the armed forces, have military skills and relevant experience. Only they will be subject to conscription.”
Fighting the West
“Today our armed forces are operating across a front line that exceeds 1,000 km, opposing not only neo-Nazi formations but the entire military machine of the collective West.”
“NATO is conducting reconnaissance across the south of Russia. Washington, London, and Brussels are directly pushing Kyiv to move military action to our country. They are openly saying that Russia should be defeated on the battlefield by any means.”
Nuclear weapons
“Nuclear blackmail has also been used. We are talking not only about the shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant – encouraged by the West – which threatens to cause a nuclear catastrophe but also about statements from senior representatives of NATO countries about the possibility and permissibility of using weapons of mass destruction against Russia: nuclear weapons.
“I would like to remind those who make such statements about Russia that our country also possesses various means of destruction, and in some cases, they are more modern than those of NATO countries. When the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, we, of course, will use all the means at our disposal to protect Russia and our people.
“This is not a bluff. And those who try to blackmail us with nuclear weapons should know that the weathervane can turn and point towards them.”
“Citizens of Russia can be convinced that our territorial independence and freedom will be provided, and I emphasize this one more time, with all means that we have at our disposal.”
Referendums
“Parliaments in the People’s Republics of the Donbas as well as the civil-military administrations in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions have decided to hold referendums on the future of the territories and have appealed to Russia to support such a step. We will do everything to ensure safe conditions to hold the referendums so that people can express their will.
“We will support the decision on their future, which will be made by the majority of residents in the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson.”
West trying to ‘destroy’ Russia
“In its aggressive anti-Russian policy, the West has crossed every line. We constantly hear threats against our country and our people.”
“The purpose of this West is to weaken, divide and ultimately destroy our country. They are already saying that in 1991 they were able to break up the Soviet Union, and now the time has come for Russia itself that it should disintegrate. And they have been planning it for a long time.”
“The West is not interested in a peaceful solution and making compromises; they just want to break all negotiations.”
Nelson Mandelawas once asked why he still had relationships with, among others, Fidel Castro and Yasser Arafat, the Cuban and Palestinian leaders who had been branded terrorists by Western powers. The revered South African statesman replied that it was a mistake “to think that their enemies should be our enemies.”
This stance has largely typified some African nations’ response to the Russia-Ukraine war. Across the continent, many appear hesitant to risk their own security, foreign investment and trade by backing one side in this conflict.
While there has been widespread condemnation of the attacks on Ukrainian civilians and their own citizens fleeing the warzone — from countries such as Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya — there has been a much more muted response from some key African nations.
Countries on the continent find themselves in a delicate position and will not want to get drawn into proxy battles, says Remi Adekoya, associate lecturer at England’s University of York.
“There’s a strong strand of thought in African diplomacy that says African states should maintain the principle of non-interference and so they shouldn’t get caught up in proxy wars between the East and the West. As some states did get caught up in proxy wars during the Cold War, for instance,” Adekoya told CNN.
One influential voice that has made it clear he will not make an enemy out of Russian leader Vladimir Putin is South African President Cyril Ramaphosa.
While addressing his country’s parliament Thursday, he said: “Our position is very clear … there are those who are insisting that we should take a very adversarial stance and position against, say Russia. And the approach that we have chosen to take … is we are insisting that there should be dialogue.”
After initially releasing a statement calling for Russia to immediately pull its forces out of Ukraine, South Africa has since laid the blame for the war directly at NATO’s doorstep for considering Ukraine’s membership into the military alliance, which Russia is against.
“The war could have been avoided if NATO had heeded the warnings from amongst its own leaders and officials over the years that its eastward expansion would lead to greater, not less instability in the region.” Ramaphosa said in parliament Thursday.
Former South African President Jacob Zuma also earlier issued a statement saying Russia “felt provoked.”
“Putin has been very patient with the western forces. He has been crystal clear about his opposition of the eastern expansion of … NATO into Ukraine … and is on the record about the military threat posed to Russia by the presence of the forces … it looks justifiable that Russia felt provoked,” Zuma said in a statement issued by his foundation on March 6.
South Africa has strong ties to Russia and Ramaphosa has written about being approached to be a mediator in the conflict given its membership of BRICS — a group of emerging economies comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
The ties between the two countries also date back to apartheid times when the former Soviet Union supported South Africa and the African National Congress party in their liberation struggles. “Those favors have not been forgotten,” said Adekoya.
South Africa was one of 17 African nations to abstain on the UN resolution demanding that Russia immediately withdraw from Ukraine on March 2. It took a similar stance during Putin’s annexation of Crimea in 2014.
Nigeria and Egypt were among the 28 African nations that voted to condemn Russia, while eight others didn’t submit a vote. Eritrea was the only African country that outrightly voted against the resolution.
Zimbabwe’s foreign ministry said in a statement it was unconvinced that the UN resolution was driven towards dialogue, rather “it poured more fuel to the fire, thus complicating the situation.”
‘Strongman leadership’
Many of the countries that abstained from the UN vote are authoritarian regimes. They see Putin’s unilateral decision to invade Ukraine as a show of power and ego that they can appreciate and align with, Yetunde Odugbesan-Omede, a political analyst and professor at New York’s Farmingdale State College, told CNN.
One of those who have spoken out prominently in support of the Russian leader is Lt. Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba, the influential son of Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni.
His father has ruled Uganda with an iron fist for 36 years and there has been speculation that Kainerugaba is a would-be successor when the 78-year-old Museveni eventually stands down.
Kainerugaba tweeted that: “The majority of mankind (that are non-white) support Russia’s stand in Ukraine. Putin is absolutely right!”
Some African countries have also hesitated in speaking out against Russia because they want to “keep their options open if they face existential threats or some kind of revolution in their own country in the future,” said Adekoya.
“They saw Putin keep Assad in power in Syria because if not for Russia’s intervention, Assad’s regime would have fallen long ago,” he added.
Adekoya also pointed out that some of the muted response stems from what is perceived as Western hypocrisy.
Kenya’s UN Security Council representative Martin Kimani gave a powerful speech on the brink of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Kimani drew a parallel between Ukraine’s emergence as an independent state after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the experience of post-colonial states in Africa, criticizing Vladimir Putin’s buildup of forces and his support for redrawing Ukraine’s borders by recognizing the breakaway statelets of Donetsk and Luhansk.
“Kenya rejects such a yearning from being pursued by force,” he said, referring to Russia’s recognition of the two territories as independent states. “We must complete our recovery from the embers of dead empires in a way that does not plunge us back into new forms of domination and oppression.”
During the speech, he also mentioned other nations on the Security Council who had breached international law and faced no sanctions. He didn’t mention them by name, but he was talking about the US and UK who invaded Iraq in 2003 … and were never really held to account,” Adekoya said.
“There are many people in many parts of the world who would like to see other regions gaining strength and would like to see the end of Western domination of the world order, putting it simply … of course, no right-thinking person in Africa or anywhere in the world looks at what is going on in Ukraine now and thinks that it’s a good thing … but many people do see the hypocrisy,” he added.
Establishing stronger ties
In recent years, Russia has established itself as one of Africa’s most valuable trading partners — becoming a major supplier of military hardware with key alliances in Nigeria, Libya, Ethiopia and Mali.
Africa accounted for 18% of Russian arms exports between 2016 and 2020, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) think tank.
Some analysts say the support or non-censure of Russia speaks to a wider sentiment in parts of Africa that Western policy positions do not always work in their favor.
“The message that Moscow is pushing is that if you are tired of the paternalistic way the West approaches you, we are going to be your security partners. It will be a relationship of equals,” Aanu Adeoye, a Russia-Africa analyst at Chatham House, told CNN.
Unlike many of its European counterparts, Russia is not a former colonial power in Africa and so has a wider scope of opportunity in making soft power moves that aim to challenge Western dominance on the continent.
The Soviet Union also had client relationships with many African states during the Cold War, and Moscow has looked to revive some of those ties.
Before the invasion, Russian state media outlet RT announced plans to set up a new hub in Kenya with a job ad that said it wanted to “cover stories that have been overlooked by other organizations” and that “challenge conventional wisdom about Africa.
Yet Africa has often been at the heart of the tussle for influence in the great power competitions between key geopolitical players such as the US, China and Russia.
Some countries are trying to leverage this position in a variety of ways.
Odugbesan-Omede explained that Tanzania, for example, has identified the current situation as a chance for its energy industry to profit. “Tanzania’s President, Samia Suluhu Hassan, sees this an opportunity to look for markets to export gas,” she said.
“Tanzania has the sixth largest gas reserve in Africa. While some African countries will sustain some economic shock from the Russian-Ukraine fight, others are trying to weather the storm by looking for new avenues of profitability,” Odugbesan-Omede added.
Some worrying developments have been emerging in the Balkans over the weekend, with Kosovo’s government accusing neighboring Serbia of trying to destabilize the country as ethnic Serbs blocked roads and conducted other incidents in the north, ostensibly in a dispute over vehicle license plates and identity cards.
Officials in Kosovo had decided to resume the practice of requiring vehicles that enter from Serbia to replace Serbia license plates with Kosovo plates, with the reverse required by Serbia for vehicles from Kosovo that go to Serbia.
Kosovo also is planning to block its ethnic Serb minority from using only the Serbian identity cards when crossing the border.
And a Kosovo government statement said many “aggressive acts” occurred on Sunday, including the blocking of roads and shooting in the northern areas dominated by ethnic Serbs – and suggested they were incited by Serbia.
Kosovo was part of Serbia until an armed uprising in 1998-1999 by the territory’s ethnic Albanian majority triggered a bloody crackdown by Serbs. A NATO bombing campaign to force Serbia’s troops out of Kosovo ended the war.
But Serbia refuses to recognize Kosovo’s 2008 declaration of independence – a refusal shared by Vladimir Putin’s Russia, who has repeatedly expressed support for Serbia.
Kosovo’s Prime Minister Albin Kurti and President Vjosa Osmani blamed Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic for the protests.
“Vucic and (Petar) Petkovic are the main responsible persons for the riots,” Kurti wrote on Facebook. Petkovic is Belgrade’s official in charge of Kosovo.
Osmani also wrote on Facebook that “Vucic’s efforts to destabilize Kosovo” would fail.
Indeed, an MP from Mr. Vucic’s ruling party said Serbia would need to begin the “denazification of the Balkans” – using near-identical language to that routinely employed by the Kremlin as a widely derided justification for its invasion of Ukraine.
In comments that echo the views of increasing numbers of geopolitical commentators, Ms. Osmani said just days ago that she believed Mr. Putin could be seeking to use her country as a means of widening his own conflict while destabilizing the continent.
“Putin’s aim is to expand the conflict in other parts of the world,” she said.
“Since his aim has constantly been to destabilize Europe, we can expect that one of his targets might be the Western Balkans.”
It comes amid increasing instability in another of Serbia’s neighboring countries, Bosnia.
There, the radical leaderof pro-Serbian factions, Milorad Dodik, triggered a political crisis by withdrawing his party from national institutions.
Experts have said Mr. Putin has also been working with Serbia there to exacerbate ethnic divisions between Croats, Bosniaks, and Serbs.
The West risks entering a nuclear war because it is not talking enough to Russia and China, the UK’s national security adviser has said.
Sir Stephen Lovegrove said rival powers understood each other better during the Cold War, and that a lack of dialogue today made miscalculations more likely.
“In the obligatory Churchill quotation, we want jaw-jaw, not war-war,” he said.
He added that we were in a “new age of proliferation” in which dangerous weapons were more widely available.
It came ahead of a phone call between US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping, the first call between the two leaders since March.
They are expected to discuss ongoing tensions over Taiwan and Trump-era tariffs on Chinese imports.
Sir Stephen was delivering a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington DC, focusing on the implications of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and what he called a “much broader contest unfolding over the successor to the post-Cold War international order”.
He said that, throughout the decades of the Cold War, the Western powers benefitted from negotiations that “improved our understanding of Soviet doctrine and capabilities – and vice versa”.
“This gave us both a higher level of confidence that we would not miscalculate our way into nuclear war,” he said.
“Today, we do not have the same foundations as others who may threaten us in the future – particularly China.
“Trust and transparency built through dialogue should also mean that we can be more active in calling out non-compliance and misbehaviors where we see them.”
Sir Stephen continued that the risk of an “uncontrolled conflict” was being heightened by Russia’s repeated violations of its treaty commitments as well as the pace of China’s expansion of its nuclear arsenal and its apparent “disdain” for arms control agreements.
He also spoke of the danger associated with the rapid advance of technology and the number of states now developing arms such as land-attack cruise missiles.
He said there was “no immediate prospect of all of the major powers coming together to establish new agreements”, so the Nato powers could focus on “work of strategic risk reduction”.
“We should take early action to renew and strengthen confidence-building measures to… reduce, or even eliminate the causes of mistrust, fear, tensions and hostilities,” he said.
“[Such measures] help one side interpret correctly the actions of the other in a pre-crisis situation through an exchange of reliable and uninterrupted information on each other’s intentions.
“Confidence and trust grow when states are open about their military capacities and plans.”
The threat of nuclear war hung over the Cold War. At times in the early 1960s and early 1980s there were risks it might flare hot.
But overall, structures were put in place – like arms control negotiations and hotlines – for the two sides to talk.
But many of those same guard-rails are not around now, as tensions grow between the West, Russia and China.
New technologies like cyber-attacks could quickly escalate a conflict in unpredictable ways, while new types of delivery systems may tempt countries to use nuclear weapons in different ways.
And hanging over all of this is the concern that more countries are seeking to develop their own weapons.
Altogether, that leads to the fear that this emerging and unstable world could be more dangerous than that of the past.
The West must prepare to continue supporting Ukraine in a war lasting for years, Nato’s chiefhas warned.
Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the costs of war were high, but the price of letting Moscow achieve its military goals was even greater.
His comments came as UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson also warned of the need to brace for a longer-term conflict.
Both Mr Stoltenberg and Mr Johnson said sending more weapons would make a victory for Ukraine more likely.
“We must prepare for the fact that it could take years. We must not let up in supporting Ukraine,” the Nato chief said in an interview with German newspaper Bild.
“Even if the costs are high, not only for military support, also because of rising energy and food prices.”
The Western military alliance chief said that supplying Ukraine with more modern weapons would increase its chances of being able to liberate the country’s eastern Donbas region, much of which is currently under Russian control.
For the last few months Russian and Ukrainian forces have battled for control of territory in the country’s east – with Moscow making slow advances in recent weeks.
Writing in the Sunday Times, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson accused Russia’s Vladimir Putin of resorting to a “campaign of attrition” and “trying to grind down Ukraine by sheer brutality.”
“I’m afraid we need to steel ourselves for a long war,” he wrote. “Time is the vital factor. Everything will depend on whether Ukraine can strengthen its ability to defend its soil faster than Russia can renew its capacity to attack.”
The prime minister, who visited Ukraine’s capital on Friday, said supplies of weapons, equipment, ammunition, and training to Kyiv needed to outpace Moscow’s efforts to rearm itself.
Ukrainian officials have spoken bluntly in recent days about the need to boost the supply of heavy weapons to the country if Russian forces there are to be defeated.
On Wednesday the country’s Defence Minister, Oleksiy Resnikov, met some 50 countries in the Ukraine Defence Contact Group in Brussels to ask for more arms and ammunition.
The country’s Western allies have so far offered it major weapons supplies but Ukraine says it has only received a fraction of what it needs to defend itself and is asking for heavier arms.
Russian officials often criticise Nato military support for Ukraine and in an interview last week with the BBC the country’s Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, cited the prospect of Ukraine joining the Western alliance as a reason for the invasion in the first place.
“We declared a special military operation because we had absolutely no other way of explaining to the West that dragging Ukraine into Nato was a criminal act,” Mr Lavrov told the BBC.
Ukraine is not a member of Nato and although it has expressed a wish to join there is no timeframe for this.
Sweden and Finland have the “full, total and complete backing” of the US in their decision to apply for Nato membership, President Joe Biden says.
Both countries submitted their applications to be part of the Western defence alliance this week, marking a major shift in European geopolitics.
To join the alliance, the two nations need the support of all 30 Nato member states.
But the move by the Nordic nationshas been opposed by Turkey.
Speaking alongside Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson and Finnish President Sauli Niinisto at the White House on Thursday, Mr Biden called Sweden and Finland’s applications “a watershed moment in European security”.
“New members joining Nato is not a threat to any nation,” he said. The president added that having two new members in the “high north” would “enhance the security of our allies and deepen our security co-operation across the board”.
Russia has repeatedly said it sees Nato as a threat and has warned of “consequences” if the block proceeds with its expansion plans.
Turkey has accused both Sweden and Finland of hosting suspected militants from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a group it views as a terrorist organisation.
However, both Nato Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg and British Defence Minister Ben Wallace have expressed confidence that these concerns will eventually be addressed.
Mr Biden’s comments came as the US Senate voted to approve a new $40bn (£32bn) bill to provide military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine. It is the biggest emergency aid package so far for Ukraine.
The bill – which was passed by the House of Representatives with broad bipartisan support on 10 May – was expected to be passed earlier this week, but was blocked by Kentucky Republican Rand Paul over a dispute about spending oversight.
But the Republican’s Senate leader Mitch McConnell dismissed these concerns and told reporters that Congress had a “moral responsibility” to support “a sovereign democracy’s self-defence”.
“Anyone concerned about the cost of supporting a Ukrainian victory should consider the much larger cost should Ukraine lose,” Mr McConnell said.
Last week, Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin and Secretary of State Antony Blinken urged Congress to approve the package and warned that the US military only had enough funds to send weapons to Kyiv until 19 May.
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky praised the aid package as “a significant US contribution to the restoration of peace and security in Ukraine, Europe and the world”.
The package brings the total US aid delivered to Ukraine to more than $50bn, including $6bn for security assistance such as training, equipment, weapons and support.
Another $8.7bn will be allocated to replenish stocks of US equipment already sent to Ukraine.
Turkey’s president has restated his opposition to Finland and Sweden joining Nato – just hours after they said they would seek membership.
Recep Tayyip Erdogan said the two Nordic nations should not bother sending delegations to convince Turkey, a key Nato member, of their bids.
He is angered by what he sees as their willingness to host Kurdish militants.
Without the support of all Nato members, Sweden and Finland cannot join the military alliance.
On Monday, Sweden said Europe was living in a dangerous new reality, referring to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Russian President Vladimir Putin said the move by Finland and Sweden to join the 30-member military alliance did not threaten Moscow directly – but stressed that any expansion of military infrastructure would trigger a response from the Kremlin.
At a news conference on Monday, Mr Erdogan said Turkey opposed the Finnish and the Swedish bids to join Nato, describing Sweden as a “hatchery” for terrorist organisations.
“Neither of these countries have a clear, open attitude towards terrorist organisation. How can we trust them?” the Turkish president said.
Turkey accuses the two Nordic nations of harbouring members of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a group it views as a terrorist organisation, and followers of Fethullah Gulen, who Ankara accuses of orchestrating a 2016 coup attempt.
All member states must agree that a new country can join Nato, therefore Sweden and Finland require Turkey’s support in their bid to join the military alliance.
Mr Erdogan said Swedish and Finnish delegations should not bother going to Ankara, Turkey’s capital, to convince it to approve their Nato bid.
His government has also pledged to block applications from countries that have imposed sanctions on it.
In 2019, both Nordic nations slapped an arms embargo on Ankara after its incursion into Syria.
Speaking in parliament in Helsinki on Monday, Finnish Foreign Minister Pekka Haavisto said he was surprised by Turkey’s stance, but added that his government was not interested in “bargaining” with Mr Erdogan.
Finland formally announced its bid to join Nato last week.
It was joined by neighbour Sweden on Saturday in a move that will end the Scandinavian country’s centuries-long military non-alignment.
“Nato will strengthen Sweden, Sweden will strengthen Nato,” Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson said at a briefing on Monday.
She said Europe was now living in a dangerous new reality, referring to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
“We are leaving one era behind us and entering a new one,” Ms Andersson told lawmakers during a debate in Stockholm, also on Monday.
She said a formal application could be handed within several days and would be synchronised with Finland. Nato has signalled its willingness to admit the two new members.
However, Ms Andersson stressed that Sweden did not want permanent Nato bases or nuclear weapons on its territory.
Norway, Denmark and Iceland – all Nato members – immediately said they were ready to support Sweden and Finland by all means necessary if they came under attack.
The UK, also a Nato member, has already given security guarantees to Sweden and Finland to cover the transition period.
Monday’s announcement by Sweden came as Nato began one of its biggest exercises in the Baltic region, involving some 15,000 troops. Named “Hedgehog”, the drills in Estonia involve 10 countries, including Finland and Sweden.
