Monday, February 21, 2022

Putin Orders Troops to Ukraine After Shocking Declaration

Barbie Latza Nadeau, Allison Quinn, Noor Ibrahim
Mon, February 21, 2022

SERGEY BOBOK

Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered Russian “peacekeeping” troops to the pro-Kremlin regions of Luhansk and Donetsk after unilaterally declaring that the two chunks of Eastern Ukraine should be considered independent states.

The dramatic escalation, which many fear could lead to all-out war, followed an address to his nation on Monday, in which the Russian president formally announced “the immediate recognition” of the pro-Kremlin regions of Luhansk and Donetsk—which stretch over 6,500 miles—as independent of Ukraine.

In a decree released shortly after his speech, the president ordered Russia's defense ministry to “ensure ….. implementation by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation of functions to maintain peace on the territory of the Donetsk People’s Republic.”

Before his formal recognition of the break-away states, Putin had spent the better part of his address lambasting Ukraine, NATO, and the U.S. for failing to address “security threats” raised by the Kremlin in recent months. He baselessly accused Ukrainian forces of perpetuating “genocide” and blamed Kyiv for any future “continuation of bloodshed” in those regions.



“If Ukraine was to join NATO it would serve as a direct threat to the security of Russia,” the Russian leader said. He undermined Ukraine as a country that has “never had a tradition of genuine statehood,” accused the U.S. of “blackmailing” Russia with threats of sanctions, and warned of Western efforts “to try to convince us over and over again that NATO is a peace-loving and purely defensive alliance,” adding, “we know the real value of such words.”

Though Putin did not directly address growing fears that Russia is planning to invade Ukraine, he appeared to be laying the groundwork for war by characterizing a potential Russian military offensive as an act of self-defense. Moscow “has every right to take retaliatory measures to ensure its own security,” he said. That is exactly what we will do.”

The move follows a spectacularly bizarre meeting by Russia’s Security Council, where Putin appeared like a mob boss testing his underlings, as officials, one after another, spoke out in favor of recognizing the self-proclaimed republics.

It was another grotesque spectacle on a day when the drum beats of war grew deafening. The aggressive and totally unjustified territorial claim followed a series of apparent false-flag operations where the Russians tried to blame Ukrainian forces for a number of attacks.

The Russian military claimed that five so-called “saboteurs” were assassinated early Monday after crossing into Russia from Ukraine.

The report mirrors almost exactly what the Biden administration warned could be “false flags” or trigger points that Russia will respond to as a pretext to launch its invasion.

“As a result of clashes, five people who violated the Russian border from a group of saboteurs were killed,” the Russian military said in a statement, according to Reuters. No Russians died in the alleged border infraction. Russia also said Ukraine had destroyed a border outpost used by the FSB (Federal Security Service) in early morning shelling.

Russia has also claimed in recent days that Ukrainian forces are staging attacks on Luhansk and Donetsk.

Ukraine has denied any such incursion or attacks took place. The Minister of Foreign affairs, Dmytro Kuleba, took to Twitter Monday to dismiss the claims with big red ‘X’s denying an attack on Donetsk or Luhansk, or that it sent saboteurs over the Russian border, or that it shelled Russian territory or border crossings.



After the latest round of supposed Ukrainian aggression, the leaders of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics published video appeals pleading with Putin to recognize their independence, as they claimed Ukrainian forces were preparing to attack.

Despite a flurry of last-minute attempts at diplomacy—including talk of a summit between presidents Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin—all hell seems soon to break loose in Ukraine.

Monday, Biden’s national security advisor Jake Sullivan warned that Russia’s imminent attack on Ukraine will be “extremely violent” and that it could begin literally at any moment.

“We believe that any military operation of this size, scope and magnitude of what we believe the Russians are planning will be extremely violent,” he told NBC Today show on a frenzied circuit of morning TV on President’s Day. “It will cost the lives of Ukrainians and Russians, civilians and military personnel alike.”

He told the network that new intelligence garnered in recent days suggest “an even greater form of brutality because this will not simply be some conventional war between two armies.” He went on to say Russia will target the Ukrainian people “to repress them, to crush them, to harm them.”

He then appeared on ABC Good Morning America, telling them that “all signs look like President Putin and the Russians are proceeding with a plan to execute a major military invasion of Ukraine.” That plan was bolstered over the weekend with Russian military hardware painted with an ominous white “Z” lettering rolling toward strategic points along the Ukrainian frontier. “We have seen just in the last 24 hours further moves of Russian units to the border with no other good explanation other than they’re getting in position to attack.”


Over the weekend, French President Emmanuel Macron invited Biden and Putin to a summit, which Biden signaled he would attend on the condition that Russian not invade Ukraine, but the Kremlin called reports of any such meeting “premature.”

As Sullivan reiterated that any attack on Ukraine would be met with the “full force of American and Allied might,” unsubstantiated news reports of ceasefire infractions along the border continue unabated. Video posted on Twitter showed a fuel station burning on the front line in Eastern Ukraine as civilians fled against a backdrop of gunfire.

The European Union, which will feel the impact of an eventual war first-hand, approved an emergency package with $1.36 billion to support Ukraine through loans, according to a statement by the European Union Council released Monday. “It intends to provide swift support in a situation of acute crisis and to strengthen Ukraine’s resilience.”


Russia orders troops into eastern Ukraine

Nabih Bulos
Mon, February 21, 2022

A temporary refugee shelter in Taganrog, Russia, on Monday. (Associated Press)

In an almost-hourlong address that alternated between furious anti-Western rhetoric and the excoriation of Ukraine as a puppet nation, Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday recognized two Ukrainian breakaway republics as independent, a move certain to further incite animosities with the West and escalate fears of an invasion that could ignite fighting reminiscent of World War II and redraw the map of Eastern Europe.

Putin's speech to the Russian people drew swift rebuke and condemnation from Washington and across European capitals. President Biden and the European Union announced economic sanctions aimed at cutting trade and business with the breakaway enclaves. By day's end, with Moscow ordering troops into the republics, it appeared diplomacy was failing and the region was veering inexorably toward war.

Sitting back in his chair behind a wooden desk equipped with a bank of telephones and a computer, Putin began a speech that detailed Ukraine’s origins and its territorial evolution across history. He said, in essence, Ukraine was a Bolshevik-constructed amalgam created entirely by Russia.

"Ukraine was never a true nation," he said.


In his telling, Ukraine had now become a Western puppet, a corruption-riddled government that has delivered only "bankruptcy in a country that produced rockets and space technology" back when the country was one of the Soviet Union's republics. The blame, he said, lay with Western organizations and governments that had effectively plundered the country's resources and left the state with no power.

"There's just no independent Ukrainian state," he said.


Putin also touched on Ukraine’s geopolitical importance and was adamant that if Ukraine was ever granted NATO membership it would be a "direct threat" to Russia. He recited with growing fury — as if a speech out of the Cold War — the list of countries that had joined NATO and were now close enough to Russia's border to present a danger. He dismissed assurances that Ukraine’s membership was a far-away prospect, if it happened at all.

“OK, not tomorrow, but what about after tomorrow?” he said.

“What does that change for the change for the historical prospects? Nothing.”

For those reasons, he said, "I consider it necessary to make a long overdue decision: to immediately recognize the independence and sovereignty of the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic," Putin said, using the official name of the two Russian-created enclaves. He asked Russia's Federal Assembly to support the decision, and ratify the treaties "of friendship" and — critically — "mutual assistance" with both republics.

"And from those who seized and hold power in Kyiv, we demand an immediate cessation of hostilities," he said. "Otherwise, all responsibility for the possible continuation of the bloodshed will be fully and wholly on the conscience of the regime ruling on the territory of Ukraine."

Putin watched as separatist leaders Denis Pushilin and Leonid Pasechnik signed the decree. Putin then — with a slight smirk — scribbled his signature on the papers.

Waves of reproach and outrage came quickly, especially among European leaders for whom Putin’s words invoked the ghosts of some of the continent’s most bloody episodes, from World War II to the Balkans wars of barely a single generation ago.

And U.S. officials, who have for weeks been predicting such actions of conquest from Putin, announced they were imposing new sanctions designed to inflict pain on anyone attempting to do business with the enclaves — although it was unclear how many American businesspeople are investing in the region. The sanctions are more limited than measures the U.S. and Europe have been threatening if Putin invaded Ukraine.

While Biden administration officials huddled in consultations, the president spent more than a half-hour on the telephone with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, the White House said, reassuring him of U.S. support. Zelensky confirmed the call and said he and Biden discussed "the events of the last hours" and that he'd also taken a call from British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

"Putin’s address tonight, together with the military forces around Ukraine, represents the most outrageous rejection of the rules based order for European peace we’ve seen since WWII," Henry Bolton, a British international security expert and former politician, said on Twitter. "He’s threatened Ukraine’s right to exist and may well fabricate the excuse for a full invasion."

In Washington, where the cause of Ukrainian sovereignty has attracted rare bipartisan support, a group of lawmakers who attended last week's critical Munich security conference vowed unity and resolve in opposing "Russian aggression."

"No matter what happens in the coming days, we must assure that the dictator Putin and his corrupt oligarchs pay a devastating price for their decisions,” the group said in a statement.

The independence declaration could have massive consequences: The separatists claim all the Donbas region as territory for their republics. But they control only part of it. If they intend to take the full territory with Russian help, it would lead to full-on clashes between Ukrainian and Russian troops, setting the stage for an escalation sure to embroil Western nations.

Putin's announcement came after a meeting with his security council, which urged him to demand independence for the republics. The meeting followed Russia’s assertion that Ukrainian army units had breached its border Monday, another in a series of claims the West fears will provide Russia with a supposed justification for an invasion of its neighbor.

Putin's new strategy would mean the end of the Minsk agreements, the much-reviled accords — signed after Russia-backed separatist forces surrounded several thousand Ukrainian soldiers — that have maintained a threadbare cease-fire in the Donbas since 2015. But more immediately, it could also provide the cover for Moscow to begin its blitz into Ukraine.

Russia’s forces seem poised to strike for just such a moment. Some 150,000 troops and a large-scale arsenal of Russia's top land, air and sea materiel is now assembled on Ukraine’s borders. Moscow has repeatedly denied it has plans for an invasion but has warned that Western failure to engage with its security demands, including a pledge never to allow Ukraine to join NATO, would trigger a “military-technical response." The Kremlin has not elaborated on what that would mean.

Frenzied shuttle diplomacy — chiefly from French President Emmanuel Macron, engaging in as diplomatic broker with President Biden and Putin — has failed to stop what appears to be an inevitable path to war.

The Russian leader has previously accused the Ukrainian government of pursuing "genocide" in Donetsk and Luhansk, the vast majority of whose populations are ethnic Russians. The U.S. and NATO have accused Moscow of planning so-called false flag operations in the area to justify an all-out invasion of Ukraine.

On Monday, Russia’s military said it killed five saboteurs crossing into its territory from Ukraine and destroyed two Ukrainian army combat vehicles. But the Ukrainian military dismissed those claims, which were reported by Russian state news agencies, as “completely fake.”

Since 2014, fighting between Kyiv's forces and the Russia-backed secessionists in Donetsk and Luhansk, which make up Ukraine's Donbas region, has killed more than 14,000 people. A cease-fire has been breached multiply by both sides. In recent weeks, as Russian troops massed near Ukraine's borders, Russian-aligned media and digital actors have churned out constant stories of Ukrainian atrocities against ethnic Russians as part of a disinformation campaign to paint the government in Kyiv as a cabal of violent far-right nationalists.

White House national security advisor Jake Sullivan said on NBC's “Today” show Monday that a Russian invasion of Ukraine would be "extremely violent" and appeared to be days, if not hours, away. The Biden administration has insisted for several days that a Russian assault was imminent.

"This will not simply be some conventional war between two armies. It will be a war waged by Russia on the Ukrainian people to repress them, to crush them, to harm them," Sullivan said. "We believe the world must mobilize to counter this kind of Russian aggression should those tanks roll across the border."

Sullivan said Biden remained open to a summit with Putin — which Macron has tried to broker — but downplayed the likelihood that one would occur. Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken is scheduled to meet with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Thursday — as long as there has been no invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. says.

"Every indication we see on the ground right now in, terms of the disposition of Russian forces, is that they are in fact getting prepared for a major attack on Ukraine," Sullivan said. "We will go the extra mile on diplomacy, but we are also prepared with our allies and partners to respond decisively if Russia attacks."

The Russian army’s Southern Military District — which operates in areas neighboring Ukraine — said Monday that troops and border guards had prevented an incursion of what it called a “sabotage and reconnaissance group” coming in from Ukraine into Russian territory.

"Five violators of the Russian Federation's border from a sabotage and reconnaissance group were eliminated in an armed clash," said a statement from the army, according to the Russian news agency Interfax. The statement said the incursion occurred around 6 a.m. near Mityakinskaya, a Russian border village about 22 miles east of the city of Luhansk.

During the clash, a pair of Ukrainian army vehicles entered Russian territory but were destroyed by Russian military units using anti-tank systems, the statement said, adding: "No Russian Armed Forces and Federal Security Service members have been hurt."

A spokesman for the Ukrainian military's Joint Forces Operation rejected the Russian allegations, saying that “all information about a possible incursion by a reconnaissance group is false. We haven’t done any assault operations. It’s completely fake.”

In Moscow, the deputy chairman of the security council, Dmitry Medvedev, told Putin that if Russia went ahead and recognized Donetsk and Luhansk as independent republics, it would face "unprecedented pressure" internationally but that there was no choice. He said Russia's previous recognition of the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia had been a lesson to the West that Russia could not be ignored, according to a translation of Medvedev's comments by the Al Jazeera news channel.

Putin said the use of Ukraine "as an instrument of confrontation with our country poses a serious, very big threat to us." Moscow's priority, he said, was "not confrontation, but security."

Times staff writers Erin B. Logan, Jennifer Haberkorn, Eli Stokols and Tracy Wilkinson in Washington and Henry Chu in London contributed to this report.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.


Putin's Baseless Claims of Genocide Hint at More Than War


Max Fisher
Sun, February 20, 2022

A protester throws a Molotov cocktail at riot police near Independence Square in Kiev, Ukraine, Feb. 20, 2014. (Sergey Ponomarev/The New York Times)

Moscow, in another escalation toward a possible invasion of Ukraine, is issuing a growing drumbeat of accusations, all without evidence, that center on a single word.

“What is happening in the Donbas today is genocide,” President Vladimir Putin of Russia said Tuesday, referring to Ukraine’s east.


Senior Russian officials and state media have since echoed Putin’s use of “genocide.” Russian diplomats circulated a document to the United Nations Security Council accusing Ukraine of “exterminating the civilian population” in its east.


On Friday, Russia-backed separatists, who control parts of Ukraine’s east, claimed that Ukraine’s military was about to attack, and ordered women and children to evacuate. Extensive coverage on Russian state media portrayed Russian minorities as fleeing a tyrannical Ukrainian military, and President Joe Biden called such incidents ploys fabricated as pretext for a Russian invasion.

The Kremlin has long asserted that Ukraine’s government persecutes ethnic Russians and Russian-speaking citizens. The charge, backed by lurid and false tales of anti-Russian violence, served as justification in 2014 for Russia’s annexation of Crimea and its invasion of eastern Ukraine.

The recent resurgence of such language, now voiced directly by Putin, indicates what analysts and Western governments say may again be a prelude to invasion.

But invocations of genocide represent more than just a superficial casus belli. They reflect Moscow’s sincere belief that, in a world dominated by a hostile West, it is the rightful protector of Russian populations throughout the former Soviet republics.

In that worldview, any break from Moscow’s influence within its sphere constitutes an attack on the Russian people as a whole — particularly in Ukraine, which Putin considers effectively Russian.

Claims of genocide, then, are a way to assert Russia’s sovereignty throughout an ethnic Russian empire that extends well beyond its formal borders — and a right to control that empire with force.

Clashes of Civilizations


“There’s a long history of use and abuse of genocide rhetoric in post-Soviet countries,” said Matthew Kupfer, an analyst based in the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv, who has studied Moscow’s use of such claims.

Since the Soviet Union fell, and with it the ideological basis of its constituent states, those countries have reorganized their identities around the memory of World War II.

Genocide, as a symbol of the Nazis, became shorthand for anything deemed “absolute evil,” Kupfer said, making opposition to that evil a national imperative.

In the turmoil of 1990s Russia, nationalist writers like Sergei Glazyev won large audiences by calling Western policies an “economic genocide” against the Russian race.

And when relations between Moscow and some of its former satellites broke down in the mid-2000s, charges of genocide became the language of confrontation.

Pro-democracy uprisings in several former Soviet republics installed new governments, which championed their newly dominant non-Russian majorities.

Ukraine’s leaders, for instance, moved to elevate the Ukrainian language’s official status starting in 2004 and to label a devastating famine in the 1930s as a deliberate Soviet campaign of genocide.

Some Russian nationalists returned the charge, accusing those new governments of plotting to marginalize or even exterminate the Russian minorities within their borders.

As Russian nationalists rose in influence — in 2012, Putin appointed Glazyev as a senior adviser on regional matters — a view took hold in Moscow that any threat to its influence over former Soviet republics imperiled the Russian race as a whole.

In 2014, Ukrainians again revolted, initially over their president’s decision to reject a trade deal with the European Union, in favor of one with Russia.

The protests snowballed into demands to turn away from Russia and embrace a fully separate Ukrainian identity, which confirmed Moscow’s worst fears of a threat to Russian influence. Kremlin allies again leveled accusations of genocide, at first mostly as a generic expression of condemnation.

This became more than rhetorical as Moscow exploited Ukraine’s demographic divisions, in which Russian speakers were, at first, wary of Kyiv’s moves toward Europe.

Russia invaded the mostly Russian region of Crimea and backed militants in Ukraine’s mostly Russophone east, presenting itself as protecting populations to which it held a special responsibility.

Sectarian division served Moscow’s agenda, which meant that so did the specter of Ukrainian atrocities against the Russian minority.

State media saturated Russian homes with false stories, including ones about mass graves filled with Russian minority civilians and a 3-year-old boy crucified by Ukrainian forces that had retaken a separatist-held town. Russian citizens’ support for Moscow’s incursions surged.

The Russian World

Putin, seizing on Moscow’s successes acting as protector of Russians in Ukraine, began energetically championing what he termed the “Russian world.” In his telling, it is a sphere of influence rooted in ethnicity — an ethnicity that faces continuing threats of genocide.

This new mission solves several problems for Putin. It presents Russia’s interventions in neighboring states, typically to weaken unfriendly governments or prop up friendly ones, as defensive.

It tells Russian citizens, who have suffered under eight years of Western-led sanctions in retaliation for Russia’s aggression toward Ukraine, that they are sacrificing for a heroic struggle akin to World War II. It gives them a great empire to once more feel pride in.

And, maybe most important, it provides an ideological justification for a government, otherwise associated with corruption, that offers citizens fewer rights or opportunities.

As Moscow’s challenges have grown, so have its claims of a great struggle to protect the Russian race, often centered on Ukraine.

In 2015, as Russia’s economy cratered, Putin criticized Ukraine’s efforts to isolate Russia-backed separatists: “It smells of genocide,” he said. His government pledged to investigate the “genocide of the Russian-speaking population” in Ukraine.

And, in 2018, amid diplomatic crises that left Russia internationally isolated, a Kremlin-allied lawmaker accused Ukraine of seeking “a genocide against Russian people in the Donbas” while Russia’s foreign minister warned of “genocide through sanctions.”

The claims were hardly bluster alone. Many coincided with a military escalation in Ukraine, either by Russian armed forces or pro-Moscow separatists.

But each round also revealed a Kremlin growing steadily more paranoid and confrontational as its sphere of influence has come under greater pressure from crisis in Belarus, an uprising in Kazakhstan and an increasingly hard-line stance toward Moscow in Ukraine.

An Uncertain Escalation

In December, with Russia’s military beginning to build up on Ukraine’s borders, Putin repeated a familiar justification, saying the situation in Ukraine’s east “looks like genocide.”

“Claims of ‘genocide’ of Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine have been a constant background hum on Russian state propaganda channels” ever since, said Alexey Kovalev, a Russian journalist who heads a fact-checking organization.

But, unlike in 2014, Kovalev has written, Russians do not appear to be responding. There has been little of the past groundswell of outrage or sympathy.

Russian views of Ukraine, once fiercely hostile, are 45% favorable and 43% negative, a recent poll found. Although Russians widely backed the 2014 invasions of Ukraine, they express little enthusiasm for another.

“People are kind of burned out from Ukraine being on TV all the time,” Kupfer said. Although state media has pushed some tales similar to those in 2014, it has done so more sparingly.

“It may simply be that they recognize war will not be popular with the public,” Kupfer added of the Kremlin.

Tellingly, Russian claims of genocide during this crisis have often been aimed abroad, rather than at home, and come from figures with diplomatic weight.

In a Facebook post Thursday, Russia’s ambassador to the United States cited long-debunked “atrocities” in Ukraine to accuse the United States of abetting “a policy to force the Russian-speaking population out of their current places of residence.”

Thomas de Waal, a Russia expert for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, called such high-level comments “worrying” and said they indicated an “official rhetorical escalation.”

As with so many of Russia’s recent provocations, de Waal said, it is difficult to say whether such statements are intended to telegraph, or merely feint at, a Russian invasion of Ukraine.

In either case, the escalation may reflect the national mission increasingly central to Putin’s Russia: a strong, defiant protector of Russians abroad who will never be safe without it.

© 2022 The New York Times Company


Putin may launch invasion of Ukraine in Donbas, analysts say


·Contributor

In two ominous signs that Vladimir Putin may be readying an invasion of Ukraine, the Russian president on Friday signed a decree calling Russian military reservists to active training, while pro-Kremlin leaders in two breakaway “Russian-occupied” territories in eastern Ukraine ordered mobilization of men ages 18 to 55 to fight against their fellow Ukrainians.

Ukraine’s Donbas region, which holds the two Russian-controlled territories — Donetsk and Luhansk — has been the site of intensified shelling as well as gas line explosions and a car bombing on Friday. Women, children and the elderly in the area have been ordered to evacuate to Russia. Kremlin-backed separatist leaders in Donbas dubiously assert that the Ukrainian army is to blame for the open hostilities, while the U.S. believes they are so-called false flag operations committed by the separatists themselves that Russia may use to justify actively invading Ukraine’s East.

Former Russian Deputy Minister of Energy Vladimir Milov, now an opposition politician living in Lithuania, views eastern Ukraine as key to Putin’s strategy.

“I believe Putin’s ultimate aim, or one of his ultimate aims, is to formally put the Russian flag in the occupied territories of Donbas,” he told Yahoo News. “It would be a relatively low-cost exercise that would be presented as another geopolitical victory.”

Unlike many other analysts, however, Milov thinks Putin may not venture further than Donbas. “To occupy a large part of Ukrainian territory, including major cities like Kyiv, Putin would need 300,000 to 400,000 full-scale combat-ready troops,” he said. “Russia does not have that amount.”

Ian Bond, a former British diplomat in Russia and current foreign policy director of the think tank Centre for European Reform, told Yahoo News that if Putin’s goal is to seize Donetsk and Luhansk, it “would significantly damage Ukraine’s economy because they’ve got a lot of heavy industry there.” But given Russia’s influence over the region already, limiting an invasion to those areas of Donbas would be “a bit of a consolation prize,” Bond said, that might not “justify the impact on the Russian economy that Western sanctions might have.”

Map of Ukraine, including Russian-controlled areas of the Donbas region. (Yahoo News)
Map of Ukraine, including Russian-controlled areas of the Donbas region. (Yahoo News)

Further ratcheting up tensions, on Saturday Russia’s military conducted drills for its strategic nuclear arsenal across various parts of Russia and in the Black Sea. Meanwhile, shelling continued in Donbas, where several members of Ukrainian President Volodymry Zelensky’s party, including the minister of the interior, were forced to take cover in shelters, according to Ukrainian media.

Like the pro-Russian separatists, Putin has baselessly accused Ukrainians in Donbas of committing genocide in the eastern part of the country. Military analyst Gustav Gressel of the European Council on Foreign Relations said Putin will likely try to use that as a pretext for invading the region.

“I’d keep a close eye on that front,” Gressel told Yahoo News. “My guess is the Russians will try to provoke an escalation.”

Brussels-based analyst Roland Freudenstein, vice president of the think tank GLOBSEC, has been observing with increasing concern Ukraine’s divided Donbas region, site of a Moscow-backed proxy war that’s killed 14,000 over eight years, as a possible site of a Russian invasion. Freudenstein points to indicators such as the vote last Tuesday in the Duma, the Russian Parliament, calling upon Putin to recognize Donetsk and Luhansk as independent from Ukraine as well as the “increase in genocide propaganda by the Russians saying that Ukrainian military is attacking Russian-speaking civilians in Donbas.”

But with the world waiting to see what Putin will do next, some analysts believe Russia may not be content to limit its military strike to Donbas.

While stressing that he’s “not a military man,” Bond said he was looking at the possibility of an attack on Kyiv. Russia might also “make amphibious landings along the Black Sea coast near Odessa,” he added, thereby “effectively cutting off Ukraine from the sea.” Cities along the Black Sea, where over 30 Russian warships have been conducting military exercises over the past week, are seen as vulnerable by other analysts as well.

Civilians from Donetsk and Lugansk
Civilians from Donetsk and Lugansk, located in Donbas region, at a camp after their evacuation to Rostov, Russia, Feb. 19, 2022. (Fedor Larin/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

Andrii Klymenko, a defense analyst with Ukraine’s Black Sea Institute of Strategic Studies, told Yahoo News via a translator, that he also views Odessa as a potential target. He sees it as a possible site of a false flag operation “that would distract attention” from what he sees as the likely first moves of a Putin offensive: declaring independence for the Donetsk and Luhansk occupied areas, and securing more territory, with the help of amphibious troops, in Donbas and the Sea of Azov, including perhaps the Ukrainian port city of Mariupol, which is crucial to Ukrainian maritime trade.

Robert, a European military and cybersecurity expert focused on Russia, who requested that his real name not be used for this article, also sees the Black Sea as a high-risk zone. “This idea of tanks rolling through Ukraine to me is a bit like movies of the Second World War,” he told Yahoo News. “Things could look very differently now — with an attack coming from the Black Sea trying to take Mariupol.”

Like others, including Bond and Gressel, Robert sees Kharkiv, a northeastern Ukrainian city of 1.4 million sitting 22 miles from the Russian border, as another potential site of invasion. If Russia took the city that is a center of industry, science and technology, “it would be a severe blow to Ukraine,” he said. Like Gressel, he suspects that Russian infiltrators are planning to stir up anti-Ukrainian protests or false flag operations there, giving Russia a reason to invade.

On the other hand, notes Centre for European Reform’s Ian Bond, Putin might use diplomatic pressure from France and Germany, who helped engineer the controversial ceasefire agreement called the Minsk Protocol, which Ukraine and Russia interpret differently, to try to whip Ukrainians into a frenzy, when all reports are they are calm and ready to fight Russia.

“If I’m Putin, I want to get people panicking and thinking there’s no point in fighting because they’re just going to get steamrolled.” Putin, he said, “could use the next few next days to ramp up diplomatic pressure, and get the French and Germans telling Zelenksy, ‘You’re not going to get any help from NATO, you need to fulfill the Minsk Agreements the way Russia wants them fulfilled.’”

“I’m sure,” Bond added, “Putin would rather achieve his objectives without having to go to war. But to do that, he’d have to increase the level of threat to the point where the opposition surrenders without having to fight.”

A member of the Donetsk People's Militia
A member of the Donetsk People's Militia stationed in the rural town of Staromikhailovka, west of Donetsk. (Valentin Sprinchak\TASS via Getty Images)

Former NATO analyst Edward Hunter Christie, now senior fellow at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, thinks that the West should skip the talk about diplomacy at this stage. “Western nations should probably start to impose sanctions already,” he told Yahoo News.

Zelensky agrees. “We don't need your sanctions after the bombardment will happen and after our country will be fired at or after we will have no borders, or after we will have no economy,” the Ukrainian president told CNN on Saturday. “Why would we need those sanctions then?”

Waiting around for Putin to reveal his next move only plays into Russia’s hands, Christie said.

“It's much better to make clear to the Russian Federation that we don’t believe anything they say, we don’t want to do business with them, we will cancel many projects, we will not start new commercial projects with them, we will deliberately reduce economic exchanges with them as much as possible. And we should minimize diplomatic exchanges with them,” Christie said. “Engaging in diplomatic discussions with Russia is a waste of time.”


MAYDAY, MAYDAY
Lithium-ion batteries are fueling the fire on a burning cargo ship full of Porsches

MARINHA PORTUGUESA/HANDOUT VIA REUTERS
All this water and nothing to put the fire out with.

Published February 21, 2022

The cargo ship Felicity Ace is aflame from bow to stern with a lithium-ion battery fire that can’t be put out with water alone.

The fire has been burning since Wednesday (Feb. 16), as the ship drifts in the Atlantic about 200 miles southwest of Portugal’s Azores Islands. Its 22-person crew abandoned ship and was rescued on Thursday.


The ship left Germany on Feb. 10 and headed for the US with about 4,000 Porsches, Bentleys and other luxury cars aboard, and some of those were electric vehicles. It’s not clear if the batteries contributed to the fire starting in the first place—a greasy rag in a lubricant-slicked engine room or a fuel leak are the usual suspects in ship fires—but the batteries are keeping the flames going now. A forensic investigation will take months to determine the cause.

On Saturday, João Mendes Cabeças, captain of the port of Faial, the nearest Azorean island, told Reuters that the batteries in the ship’s cargo are “keeping the fire alive.” Cabeças added that reinforcements with specialist equipment to extinguish the fire were on their way. At the time of the interview, the fire hadn’t reached the ship’s fuel tank, but was closing in.

Large quantities of dry chemicals are needed to smother lithium ion battery fires, which burn hotter and release noxious gases in the process.

Pouring water onto the Felicity Ace wouldn’t put out a lithium-ion battery fire, Cabeças told Reuters, and the added water weight could make the ship more unstable.
Lithium-ion batteries pose a special fire risk

Electric vehicle fires are rare, but pose their own kind of flammability risk, and one that becomes heightened as EVs go mainstream. Large numbers of EVs grouped together, as when they are transported by cargo ship, or electric buses parked in an overnight lot, raise the risk that one flaming battery could ignite a chain reaction in adjacent batteries. According to a research proposal at the National Academy of Sciences’ Transportation Research Board, “Lithium-ion battery fire risks are currently undermanaged in transit operations.”

There have been more than 35 large lithium-ion battery fires since 2018, Paul Christensen, an expert in lithium fires, told the Financial Times, including a 13-ton Tesla megapack storage battery in Victoria Australia that burned for three days. An electric ferry in Norway caught fire in 2019, and in April 2021, a battery fire at a Beijing mall killed two firefighters.

In addition, car-carrying ships and ferries can face higher risks from fires, according to insurer Allianz Global’s head of marine risk. Due to the internal areas not being divided to make it easier to transport cars, when a fire starts it can spread more easily.

Firefighters struggle to douse fire on luxury cars vessel off Azores islands


 Ship Felicity Ace burns more than 100 km from the Azores island


Sun, February 20, 2022

LISBON (Reuters) - Firefighters are struggling to put out a fire that broke out on Wednesday on a vessel carrying thousands of luxury cars, which is adrift off the coast of Portugal's Azores islands, a port official said, adding it was unclear when they would succeed.

The Felicity Ace ship, carrying around 4,000 vehicles including Porsches, Audis and Bentleys, some electric with lithium-ion batteries, caught fire in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean on Wednesday. The 22 crew members on board were evacuated on the same day.

"The intervention (to put out the blaze) has to be done very slowly," João Mendes Cabeças, captain of the nearest port in the Azorean island of Faial, told Reuters late on Saturday. "It will take a while."

Lithium-ion batteries in the electric vehicles on board are "keeping the fire alive", Cabeças said, adding that specialist equipment to extinguish it was on the way.

It was not clear whether the batteries sparked the fire.

Volkswagen, which owns the brands, did not confirm the total number of cars on board and said on Friday it was awaiting further information. Ship manager Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Cabeças previously said that "everything was on fire about five meters above the water line" and the blaze was still far from the ship's fuel tanks. It is getting closer, he said.

"The fire spread further down," he said, explaining that teams could only tackle the fire from outside by cooling down the ship's structure as it was too dangerous to go on board.

They also cannot use water because adding weight to the ship could make it more unstable, and traditional water extinguishers do not stop lithium-ion batteries from burning, Cabeças said.

The Panama-flagged ship will be towed to a country in Europe or to the Bahamas but it is unclear when that will happen.

(Reporting by Catarina Demony in Lisbon; Additional reporting by Victoria Waldersee in Berlin; Editing by Barbara Lewis)
Guest Opinion: Russians rightly unsettled by NATO's eastward creep


W.D. Ehrhart
Bucks County Courier Times
Sun, February 20, 2022

The headlines these days are ominous.

“Russia warns of retaliation if its demands are not met.”

“U.S. allies are stepping up to counter Russia’s Ukraine threats.”

“Blinken: No concessions in response to Russia on Ukraine.”

“Will there be a war over Ukraine?”


It’s enough to keep you awake at night. Russia may no longer be the Soviet Union, but it’s still the original Evil Empire: unrepentantly aggressive, a bully, eager to needle the West at every opportunity, willing to risk war to achieve its selfish aims.

Or so our government and our mainstream media would have us believe. But once again — as Americans have always been so adept at — we ignore the facts in order to present ourselves as the righteously aggrieved.

At the end of World War II, the Soviet Union quickly gobbled up all of eastern Europe, installing sympathetic governments and creating the Warsaw Pact. Proof positive of Communist aggression.

But during that war, the Soviet Union lost 27,000,000 soldiers and civilians — more than half of all casualties suffered by all of the nations involved in that war. I am not for a moment arguing that Joe Stalin was a nice guy, but he was protecting his country from future depredations by a hostile West by making sure that the next time the West attacked Russia, they’d have to kill a lot of other people before they actually got to the Russians.


Ukrainian Military Forces servicemen of the 92nd mechanized brigade use tanks, self-propelled guns and other armored vehicles to conduct live-fire exercises near the town of Chuguev, in the Kharkiv region, on February 10, 2022. - Russia's deployment for a military exercise in Belarus and on the borders of Ukraine marks a "dangerous moment" for European security, NATO's chief said on February 10, 2022.More

And then there was the Cuban missile crisis. Imagine the gall of those war-mongering Russians (O.K., Soviets) to put nuclear missiles only 90 miles from our very shores. Talk about naked aggression. How much more blatant can you get?

Only years later did we learn that just prior to the Soviet introduction of missiles into Cuba, the U.S. had installed ballistic nuclear missiles in Italy and Turkey. So the U.S. is not threatening Russia with missiles on or near its borders, but when the Russians reciprocate, they’re obviously completely unjustified.

And what did Nikita Khrushchev ask for in return for removing the missiles from Cuba? Simply that the U.S. remove its missiles from Italy and Turkey. And he didn’t even demand that we admit we’d put missiles there in the first place. So the American missiles were quietly removed while the whole dangerous affair was portrayed as a great American victory and proof that we could and would stand up to the Russian bully.

And that brings us to the current crisis. There is a good deal of disagreement as to whether or not the U.S. promised Russia after the breakup of the USSR that NATO would not try to expand to include former members of the Warsaw Pact. But promise or not, it must surely be unsettling to anyone living in Russia that NATO now includes three former Soviet Socialist Republics, all with borders on Russia, and six former Warsaw Pact nations, several of these bordering directly on Russia.

Once again, don’t mistake me. I am not saying that Vladimir Putin is a nice guy. But I’d like to know how Americans in general and the U.S. government in particular would respond if Russia signed a military alliance with Canada and Mexico. By way of NATO, we’ve already done much the same thing to Russia, and now we want to include Ukraine in NATO as well?

Moreover, what purpose does NATO serve these days? NATO stands for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Turkey is in the North Atlantic? Albania is in the North Atlantic? And Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia? And then consider that nations like Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Turkey make American democracy look like the Golden Age of Athens.

I have no illusions, and certainly no expectation, that the Biden administration will muster the courage to choose the sensible and reasonable course of action here: promise Putin that Ukraine will never be part of NATO in return for a Russian promise not to invade Ukraine.* After the pummeling Biden got for ending our forever war in Afghanistan, I expect he feels enormous pressure to demonstrate that he’s really a tough leader who won’t back down from aggression.

And of course, if we do go to war with Russia, most of you reading this won’t actually be doing anything or going anywhere at all. It’ll just be that tiny little 1% of our citizenry who will bear the blood price while the rest of us stand up and remove our hats for the Star-Spangled Banner at basketball games and hockey matches.

But I can tell you one bunch that's going to be really happy to see the U.S. and Russia go to war: that would be the Chinese. I just hope it doesn’t go nuclear.

*Here’s another fact few Americans know: ever since 1918, the Russians have never once broken any treaty they’ve signed with the U.S., though the U.S. has broken a number of the treaties it’s signed with the USSR/Russia.


W.D. Ehrhart, Ph.D., received the Purple Heart Medal, Navy Combat Action Ribbon, and a Division Commander’s Commendation for his service as a Marine in Vietnam. He grew up in Bucks County and now lives in Bryn Mawr.


This article originally appeared on Bucks County Courier Times: Russians rightly unsettled by NATO's eastward creep
MONTY PYTHON MEETS TUCKER CARLSON
Russian State TV Is So Ridiculous Right Now It Looks Like a Farce

Julia Davis
Sun, February 20, 2022

Mikhail Klimentyev/Sputnik/AFP via Getty Images

Anyone watching nothing but Russian state television would never know President Putin has massed his troops on the border of Ukraine, that Kremlin-controlled separatists shelled a kindergarten full of children and Russian forces are in position for an offensive against its beleaguered neighbor. On Kremlin-funded networks, the vision of events is presented not only upside down, but backwards. Panicked pundits blame the United States and Ukraine for the escalation, claim that Russia doesn’t want the war and theatrically ponder: “Why won’t somebody stop Biden?”

Chairman of the International Committee of Russia’s State Duma, Leonid Slutsky alleged that the president of the United States is painting “an absolutely inverted picture of the situation around Ukraine” and accused Joe Biden of misrepresenting “the alleged readiness of the Russian Federation to invade Ukraine.” Slutsky added that “the American president, talking about the “villain-Russia,” the very Russia that today accepts and saves the civilian population of the LPR and DPR, seems like a real character from [Lewis Carroll’s topsy-turvy children’s book] Through the Looking-Glass.”

And yet, it is Russia who has turned white into black, and black into white. If there were not so many lives hanging in the balance, you would describe current Russian state TV as a darkly comic farce.


Mysterious ‘Z’ Painted on Russian Tanks Closing in on Ukraine Border

Events on the ground are unfolding just as the American president had warned, based on the information provided by U.S. intelligence agencies. U.S. Ambassador to the OSCE Michael Carpenter said that according to U.S. assessments, Russia has placed somewhere between 169,000 and 190,000 troops near Ukraine’s borders—up from 100,000 at the end of January.

Having massed its troops and armaments on the Ukrainian border, Russia stands ready to invade Ukraine. On Friday, Kremlin-controlled heads of the self-proclaimed “republics” in Eastern Ukraine (LPR and DPR) started unprovoked evacuations of civilians to Russia, followed by suspicious explosions in the region. Russia’s state media immediately—and baselessly—blamed the Ukrainian military. State TV channel Rossiya-24 reported: “Let’s address the emergency event that took place several minutes ago.” The correspondent present on the scene said, “Everyone is trying to figure out what happened here.” The headline read: “The Ukrainian army struck the gas pipeline in Luhansk.”

What makes this all the more bizarre is that the U.S. had publicly predicted these very tactics.

Just as the U.S. administration had warned, Russian authorities now appear to be readying themselves for the re-invasion of Ukraine under false pretexts. One of the main pretexts aggressively promoted by the Kremlin and Russia’s state media is the unfounded allegation of “genocide” of Russian speakers by the Ukrainian military. Back in December of 2021, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed: “What is happening in Donbas right how we know and see very well, it’s very reminiscent of genocide.” By February, the state media and Russian officials went full bore with their accusations of “genocide” in Ukraine.

According to a report by the Wall Street Journal, Russian officials circulated a document at the UN Security Council meeting on Thursday, accusing the Ukrainian government of the “genocide of the Russian-speaking population of Donbas.”

Speaking before that UN Security Council meeting, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that according to the information obtained by the U.S. intelligence agencies, Russia was planning to use a false flag attack in Eastern Ukraine, followed by baseless accusations of “genocide” in the region. Blinken pointed out: "Russia may describe this event as ethnic cleansing or a genocide, making a mockery of a concept that we in this chamber do not take lightly, nor do I take lightly, based on my family history."

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz's dismissal of Moscow's assertion of “genocide” in the eastern Ukraine’s region of Donbas enraged Russian officials. On Saturday, Russian Foreign Ministry scolded Scholz and Germany as a whole: “It is not for German leaders to laugh at the issues of genocide. This is unacceptable, given the historical experience of Germany in matters of massacres against people and the spread of misanthropic ideology.” Russian state TV went even further, with the host of 60 Minutes Olga Skabeeva cynically asserting: “Germans have different ideas about genocide. They’ll have to start burning people in ovens, and maybe then they’ll concede: ‘Yes, it’s genocide.’”

Russia’s state media is spreading claims of Ukraine allegedly shelling the regions of Donbas and on Saturday alleged that the Ukrainians shelled Russia’s Rostov Region, located near the border with Ukraine. The Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Lieutenant General Valery Zaluzhny, denied all of Russia’s accusations, stating in part: “It should be noted that the artillery units of the Joint Forces are located in areas of withdrawal at a distance of more than 21 km from the line of contact, which exceeds the maximum firing range of multiple rocket launchers "Hail" and 122-mm guns in service with the Armed Forces of Ukraine."

Anticipating false accusations from the Kremlin, Ukrainian authorities allowed access to a number of local and international journalists. NBC’s Richard Engel noted: “The separatists are claiming Ukrainians are attacking and besieging them. I’ve walked up and down those trenches for the last several months. Saw no signs of ongoing or impending Ukrainian offensive. None.” Meanwhile, streams of state media news reports claim that Ukraine is aggressively shelling Donbas, alleging “the most intensive bombardments by the Ukrainian military in recent months.”

In a bizarro world of Russia’s state media, America—which has been painstakingly attempting to prevent an escalation—is the true aggressor. Appearing on 60 Minutes on Friday, lawmaker Oleg Morozov lamented: “I’m hoping there are people next to Biden, next to Scholz, next to the British PM, who will look at the scenarios and say, ‘If the big war with Russia’s participation were to start, it will cost Europe dearly. Think about that!’ That is my last hope, that the fear of this unpredictable situation will stop these hotheads.”

Igor Korotchenko, a member of the Russian Defense Ministry’s Public Council and editor-in-chief of the National Defense magazine, exclaimed: “The United States want this war. Their main goal is to take over Europe’s energy market. Biden could care less about the victims and their suffering, about Europe’s losses. He is realizing the plans of the American establishment.” Summarizing the grotesque new theme in the Kremlin’s war on truth, Korotchenko theatrically pleaded with European leaders: “Stop Zelensky! Stop Biden!”

Inflation pinch: Moroccans protest soaring fuel, other costs







A woman takes photos with her mobile phone while people gather to protest against price hikes and commemorate the anniversary of the 2011 Arab Spring protests, in Rabat, Morocco, Sunday, Feb 20, 2022. 
(AP Photo/Mosa'ab Elshamy)

TARIK EL-BARAKAH
Sun, February 20, 2022

RABAT, Morocco (AP) — Thousands of Moroccans staged nationwide protests Sunday to complain about the soaring prices of fuel and other essential commodities.

The North African kingdom is the latest of several countries to see public anger erupt over high global energy prices, which are driving decades-high inflation numbers around the world.

The Moroccan demonstrations coincide with the 11th anniversary of the wave of protests known as the Feb. 20 movement, inspired by the Arab Spring pro-democracy uprisings that took place around the region in 2011.

In the capital of Rabat, a protest took place outside the parliament building. Holding placards, protesters chanted slogans against the government for its failure to keep spiraling prices under control, leading more people to fall into poverty.

Police were deployed in force around the protest site.

Smaller demonstrations broke out in other cities where protesters demanded that government immediately intervene to improve the people’s purchasing power.

The minister delegate in charge of the budget, Fouzi Lekjaa, noted that the government has adopted multiple measures to alleviate the strain on Moroccan households, but acknowledged they remain “insufficient.”

The government blamed the spike in prices of basic goods on a combination of the global post-pandemic economic recovery and the increase in prices of grains and oil products on international markets.

The country is also reeling from the consequences of its worst drought in decades.

The national average rainfall for this rainy season so far is just 7.5 centimeters (3 inches), which is 64% lower than a normal year, according to a statement by the royal palace. It said 10 billion dirhams ($1 billion) have been allocated to mitigate the drought's impact on the agricultural sector and the economy as a whole.

The sting of high energy prices and resulting inflation is being felt around the world, piling financial stress on governments, businesses and households. Countries are scrambling to address expensive utility bills and rising prices for food as farmers and supermarkets pass along their costs to customers, many of whom are facing a cost-of-living crisis.
The Nigerian artwork challenging British history in St Paul's

Mon, February 21, 2022
In this article
Victor Ehikhamenor
Nigerian visual artist, writer, and photographer

Artist standing in front of the creation

A leading Nigerian artist tells writer Molara Wood why his new installation at London's St Paul's Cathedral is important, as the world-famous building re-evaluates its memorials to historical figures including the admiral who led the campaign that resulted in the looting of the Kingdom of Benin.

Short presentational grey line

Spotlights pick out the rhinestones in Victor Ehikhamenor's giant rosary-bead tapestry so that it sparkles, brightening up part of the crypt in the 17th Century cathedral.

This image of the oba, or king, of Benin dominates the space, through which thousands of visitors pass every week, and draws the eye.


Next to it - barely readable and tarnished through time - is a much smaller brass memorial plaque in honour of Admiral Sir Harry Holdsworth Rawson, who led a punitive expedition in 1897 to the West African kingdom of Benin.

He oversaw the British soldiers and sailors who destroyed a centuries-old civilisation, looting and burning down the oba's palace in what is now Benin City in the Nigerian state of Edo.

Their looted treasures - thousands of metal sculptures and ivory carvings made between the 15th and 19th Centuries and collectively known as the Benin Bronzes - are now at the centre of a debate about the return of artefacts taken during the colonial era.

But as his plaque recalls, Rawson was revered at the time for his exploits right across the British Empire.


Sculptures looted by British soldiers from the Kingdom of Benin in 1897 have ended up across the world

Through memorials to hundreds of historical British figures, St Paul's presents a version of the past. But in an ongoing art project the cathedral authorities are attempting to bring new perspectives.

Ehikhamenor's 12ft-tall work (3.7m), Still Standing, was specially commissioned as part of the 50 Monuments in 50 Voices project to tell different stories.

"There is something very powerful about seeing an oba standing there next to the panel memorialising the Benin campaign," the cathedral's chancellor, Dr Paula Gooder, told the BBC.

The work is also a reminder of "the enduring legacies and losses of colonial war", the exhibit's co-curator Prof Dan Hicks said.

St Paul's has decided not to get rid of any of its monuments, recognising that "people had different values" in the past, and instead wants to "engage in a conversation with history," Dr Gooder explained.


"To the British people [Rawson] was a hero, to the family he was a hero, but it could also be that to some other people he was a war criminal"", Source: Victor Ehikhamenor, Source description: Artist, Image: Victor Ehikhamenor

Ehikhamenor is in no doubt as to his role in that conversation.

"To the British people [Rawson] was a hero, to the family he was a hero, but it could also be that to some other people he was a war criminal," the artist said.

He feels that in the whole debate about reparations and the push for the looted artefacts to be returned home to Nigeria, Rawson's "painful" role in the whole affair has been forgotten.

"Sometimes we have to remind people that [atrocities] happened."

Ehikhamenor is from the same Edo culture and artistic tradition as the bronzes, and his piece is inspired by Oba Ovonramwen, the Benin monarch who was exiled by the British in 1897.

The installation depicts a larger-than-life figure of the oba standing in full regalia, and with the instruments of his power.

"This is me reawakening Oba Ovonramwen and every other person that was violated during that oppressive attack on the Benin Kingdom," said the artist.

Five-thousand beads

Still Standing is a reference to the fact that for Ehikhamenor "the kingdom is still standing, the culture is still standing, we as a people are still standing".

The work was created late last year in Ehikhamenor's studio in Lagos, Nigeria, and involved three months of continuous work by the artist and a team of four assistants.

Rosary beads and a replica Benin Bronze can be seen in this detail from Still Standing


"I call them The Kingmakers," Ehikhamenor said of the team.

They were young women who played mainly Yoruba gospel music while they worked on the piece, stitching all the elements together, as the image of the oba gradually materialised on the monumental cloth-work.

"There's no way people are going to see it and not feel the joy and feel something that they cannot understand," said the artist.

To create the work, 5,000 rosary beads, traditionally used to aid Catholic devotion, were stitched onto lace, along with rhinestones and bronze statuettes.

Prominent among the miniatures hanging on the work is a replica of the 16th Century mask of Queen Idia, the most famous of the Benin Bronzes.

The mask is coated in chalk, another strong feature of the entire work, harking back to the artist's childhood memory of his grandfather's invocations with ritual chalk at the sighting of the new moon.

"Chalk is very important to Benin Kingdom," Ehikhamenor declared.
'History is a moving train'

He started using the rosary in his studio practice in 2017, to raise questions around what is a religious item and what is art, what is held sacred and what is stigmatised as demonic.

"Our art has been demonised for so long. So, now, my thing is: if you see a work that is made from the rosary, are you going to say it's demonic?

"The Edo artist has always dwelled on duality; this world, the other one; past and present."

Ehikhamenor is one of the leading voices in the clamour for the repatriation of looted art, but he shies away from the activist label, insisting that: "When you're asking for your father's patrimony, you're not an activist; you're just asking for what belongs to you."

Still Standing was created in this vein.

On display in a building this is at the heart of the British establishment, it is not a lecture, nor is it forcing any particular stance on people.

But the radiance of the piece commands attention, challenging the viewer to take another look at a historical episode, and consider the continuing impact of the destruction of the ancient Benin Kingdom.

For Ehikhamenor, the past should always be up for review.

"History is constantly changing. In as much as people like to think that history is fixed, history is a constantly moving train."

Short presentational grey line

Molara Wood is a writer and journalist based in Lagos.
#BOYCOTTCOP27
US, Egypt launch group to prepare for COP27 climate summit


Egypt USU.S. climate envoy John Kerry, second from left, chairs his delegations during a meeting with Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry at the foreign ministry headquarters in Cairo, Egypt, Monday, Feb. 21, 2022. 
(AP Photo/Amr Nabil)

BY SAMY MAGDY
Mon, February 21, 2022

CAIRO (AP) — The United States and Egypt on Monday launched a joint working group to prepare for the next climate change summit in November, the American envoy for climate issues said.

Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry said the group is focused on the United Nations' COP27 conference in Egypt's Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh. He said the country has already begun its preparations for the meeting.


Kerry said other world tensions, including the ongoing Ukraine crisis, “will not change the reality of what is happening every day with respect to our climate," and called the issue an “international threat for all of us.”

“There are no politics in this. There is no ideology in this. This is not anything to do with some of the issues” of concern for the U.S. administration, Kerry said at a news briefing in Cairo with Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shukry. Neither official took questions from reporters.

Kerry, who also met with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi, was referring to conflicts in the Middle East and likely Egypt’s human rights record, which has drawn criticism from the U.S. and other western governments.

Shukry said they discussed priorities and goals of the Egyptian-chaired COP27, including making funds available to developing counties to implement the Paris 2015 agreement on climate change.

The former U.S. senator and secretary of state, who landed in the Egyptian capital on Sunday, is expected to speak at the American University in Cairo on the future of international climate action in the leadup to COP27, the State Department said.

Kerry said that the U.S. was also working with Egypt on its own transition to a clean energy future.

In June, Kerry announced an increase in U.S. funding to help Egypt convert to solar energy and move away from fossil fuels, a major source of energy in the country of over 100 million people.

In recent years, the government of President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi has taken steps to convert to renewables, seizing the advantage of the country’s optimal solar and wind conditions for energy harvesting.

But the government has faced criticism from environmental activists for razing green spaces and cutting down tens of thousands of trees for infrastructure projects, especially in Cairo where a gigantic cloud of air pollution often hovers.

All images
City in Egypt
Sharm el-Sheikh is an Egyptian city on the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula, in South Sinai Governorate, on the coastal strip along the Red Sea. Its population is approximately 73,000 as of 2015. Sharm El Sheikh is the administrative hub of Egypt's South Sinai Governorate, which includes the smaller coastal towns of Dahab and Nuweiba as well as the mountainous interior, St. Catherine and Mount Sinai. The city and holiday resort is a significant centre for tourism in Egypt, while also attracting many international conferences and diplomatic meetings.
Wikipedia