RT news channel in spotlight in UK over pro-Russia slant on Ukraine crisis

Calls for channel that is describing invasion as ‘special military operation’ to have licence revoked

Still from an RT broadcast as Russian troops invaded Ukraine. Photograph: RT


Jim Waterson Media editor
THE GUARDIAN

Fri 25 Feb 2022

As Russian troops pushed into Ukraine on Thursday, viewers of the RT news channel learned a new vocabulary.

Rather than an invasion, the Russian actions were described on air as a “special military operation”. Instead of seizing territory from another nation, viewers were told that troops were trying to “liberate” land from Ukraine on behalf of two Russian-backed breakaway states.

And if there was any doubt about the justification used by Vladimir Putin for his war, then RT’s British presenter Rory Suchet – the son of the former ITN journalist John Suchet – explained to viewers that the objective was “to defend the Donbas” in the face of Ukrainian aggression.

The Kremlin-funded rolling news channel, which has long delighted in its own pariah status, has again come under intense scrutiny in the UK for its willingness to follow the narrative of the Russian government. The Labour leader, Sir Keir Starmer, demanded RT’s broadcast licence be revoked, telling the House of Commons the organisation once known as Russia Today was Putin’s “personal propaganda tool”. He added: “I can see no reason why it should be allowed to continue to broadcast in this country.”

However, this has also raised concerns about opening up a tit-for-tat media expulsion battle with Russia, which last year kicked out the BBC’s Russia correspondent Sarah Rainsford.

“There is too much focus on the television channel – its impact is minimal,” said Prof Stephen Hutchings of the University of Manchester, who is writing a book on Russian media that focuses on RT. “The television channel almost has symbolic value. They can’t claim to be an international broadcaster on a par with CNN and BBC without a television channel. But really their most impactful output is online and on social media and YouTube.”

The media regulator, Ofcom, which in extreme circumstances can revoke the licences of television channels, is actively monitoring RT’s output for potential breaches of the broadcasting code. But there is no ban on partisan current affairs broadcasting in the UK, as long viewers are also exposed to some alternative viewpoints – the same rule that allows a channel such as GB News to broadcast with a rightwing slant.

The Ofcom chief executive, Melanie Dawes, made clear this week that while RT could not broadcast “one-sided propaganda” on Ukraine, it was “acceptable for broadcasters to present issues from a particular perspective provided that alternative views and opinions are also represented”.

It was RT’s failure to meet this standard in its coverage of the Salisbury poisonings that led to RT being fined £200,000 by Ofcom in 2019 – but deciding where to draw the line is an art rather than a science. The regulator also takes into account viewer expectations of a channel when considering how to enforce its rules – essentially making the assumption that if you are watching RT then you are expecting to see a strong pro-Russian viewpoint reflected in its coverage.

There are also bigger forces at play. The expectation is that if RT is taken off air in the UK, then the BBC’s Russian services will be quickly binned by the Kremlin – the same fate that befell the German public broadcaster Deutsche Welle when the German media regulator took RT off air earlier this month. In any eventuality, there would be nothing to stop RT continuing to produce online content for a British audience, free from regulation, while claiming to have been silenced.

This has led to BBC sources raising concerns that removing RT’s broadcast licence would be unhelpful, given how few viewers RT has in the UK. The channel took the unusual decision to pull out of the Barb audience rating system in late 2019. However, RT’s final viewing figures suggested it was only reaching about 79,000 Britons a day and the average viewer watched for less than a minute – giving it an audience comparable with an obscure satellite film channel.

It has increasingly become a pariah outlet that struggles to book mainstream politicians and guests. The former Scottish first minister Alex Salmond, who has hosted a show on RT since 2017, this week said he would stop making the programme “until peace is re-established”.

Hutchings said his research found RT often carried more diverse viewpoints than its critics acknowledged – but that this changed at moments of crisis. “When Russia’s interests are perceived to be at stake everyone comes behind the central approved narrative. A small group of elite media executives meet with the Kremlin on a weekly basis and they agree the broad agenda and then that’s fed down to the head of news who will translate that into a set of narratives.”

He said that while the “Kremlin is determining the narrative” of RT, if Ofcom suspended the channel’s British broadcast licence due to political pressure then it could be counterproductive. “It’s playing the Russian game. We are a society that claims to follow due process.”

Ukraine and the importance of resistance

While Ukrainians may be overwhelmed by the Russian military, this is not the contest that will determine the outcome of this conflict, argues John Raine. It is whether the Russians can be made to pay a visible and material cost for territorial expansion through effective, armed resistance.


25th February 2022

Speculation on the course of the conflict in Ukraine may not be as valuable as an acknowledgement of what has happened so far. In short, the campaign about which the United States, the United Kingdom and others long warned has unfolded; and as predicted. It is on a known trajectory. To stall and reverse that trajectory, more will be required than sanctions. Ukrainian resistance will be vital.

Undeterred and on trackSo far, Putin has proved susceptible neither to deterrence nor to the strategic logic that many hoped would prevent him from embarking on such a flagrant act of aggression. But more importantly, he has situated his move against Ukraine within a menacing narrative of ‘rolling back NATO’. He has acted aggressively against a neighbouring nation as the first step in a strategy of expansion and restoration of the Soviet dominium. That raises the stakes beyond the fate of Ukraine’s sovereignty.

Putin has had reasons to be confident. He has spent decades modernising the Russian armed forces, redesigning and reconfiguring them for this type of campaign, then testing and tempering systems, men and equipment in combat in Syria. Moreover, he faces in Ukraine a country whose military capabilities are both far weaker than his own, and based largely on familiar and easily countered Russian equipment. He has also, and crucially, received a clear indication from Western nations that they will not deploy militarily inside Ukraine. He has been constantly reminded that the West will be bound, for political reasons, to sanctions as its vector of response. Having abandoned ambitions for inclusion and influence from within since 2008, sanctions and exclusion have no purchase on Putin’s strategic calculus. While he is free to choose his weapons, his opponents have only one that does not, in his eyes, represent a risk, let alone a deterrent.

But Putin has risks and vulnerabilitiesPutin’s biggest risk is that he has miscalculated Ukrainian ability to inflict material harm on his armed forces through resistance. In the echo-chamber of the Russian security community, it is likely he has been briefed that a strategy of strike, fix and retire, such as that executed in Georgia, can be applied in Ukraine. In this plan, Ukraine can be broken and subordinated by an overwhelming but brief invasion sufficient to set up a puppet regime. It will not have to be occupied. But a resistance that mauls Russian forces would be deeply damaging to Putin and oblige him to adapt. He may intend to withdraw his forces before this can happen, but an effective, early resistance will force him to leave forces in country to protect a puppet regime. Those forces will in turn present targets. Sustained resistance will draw them into conflicts, low-intensity asymmetric street-to-street fighting, which Putin will be keen to avoid. His superior firepower is less of an advantage unless he is prepared to be dragged into another Grozny. Human casualties are one of the few consequences that he will find difficult to manage at home.

His second risk is that a coalition materialises against Russia that squeezes it ‘de tous azimuts’. The coalition currently hinges around unprecedented levels of unity within the two key multilateral organisations, NATO and the European Union, and support from nations of less or no strategic value to Russia. China holds a large key. Putin will be banking on Xi Jinping to remain neutral if not complicit. While this may be holding Xi will, as the conflict develops, not necessarily remain easy with what Putin does inside Ukraine. His priorities are elsewhere. He will do nothing to damage his preparations for the 20th Communist Party National Congress coming up this year in which he will seek his third term as chairman. Too close an association with an ostracised Russian leader will bring unnecessary risk. The diplomatic task is to convert any Chinese unease into pressure from the East. It is the very large valve that Putin is banking on staying open.

A third risk for Putin is that he loses the initiative in all aspects of his campaign. So far he has succeeded in retaining the initiative militarily, stepping up deployments incrementally according to his own timeline. He has felt neither shock nor awe, nor material cost so far. The signalling ahead of likely consequences, which was intended to deter, has instead appeared to him to leave him free to make the next move when he chooses. It has also reassured him that the consequences are manageable. An exception has perhaps been in the narrative where the muscular use of intelligence by Washington and allies has won them escalation dominance, at least outside Russia, and forced Moscow on to the back foot. The lesson from this may be that a sudden, sharp and unheralded move against him in other domains, and one not within the familiar repertoire, would place him in the uncomfortable and unfamiliar position of having lost the initiative. He will be forced to adapt, a strength neither he nor his armed forces have cultivated, and he will be denied the strategic momentum he currently enjoys.

In the immediate future, however, it is likely that the current momentum will be sufficient to carry him through the next phases of his plan politically, the seizure of power, and to the geographical limits of his incursion. Neither international opposition nor Ukrainian resistance will mobilise with sufficient speed and effect now to arrest the momentum.

The significance of armed resistance, and the challengesBut while the Ukrainians may be overwhelmed by the Russian military, this is not the contest that will determine this conflict. It is whether the Russians can be made to pay a visible and material cost for territorial expansion through effective, armed resistance. Given NATO’s refusal to deploy force inside Ukraine, only an effective Ukrainian resistance will be able to do this. Supporting and enabling resistance will become critical, but that is not as easy as the rhetoric of support and solidarity that has come from Western leaders. Delivering material support will be a test of political appetites, legal parameters and the specialist capabilities required for fighting through third parties. This is a test that the broad anti-Assad coalition, featuring key NATO players, failed in Syria. Among the lessons to be learned from Syria are the vital importance of supplying weapons systems and of sustained and dedicated effort over time. That will require investing effort and political capital in creating the necessary legal and political frameworks. It will be damaging for Ukraine’s allies to signal support they prove unable to deliver, or to deliver and not stay the course. The US-led coalition walked away from partners in Syria and Kurdistan. It now has an opportunity to restore its global credibility as a partner to allies fighting asymmetric wars.

There is more at stake in Ukraine than there was in Syria. If Ukrainian resistance is successful, it could turn what Putin hopes to be his opening move in the restoration of the wider Soviet dominion, into his last throw as a rogue dictator. It is worth investing in its success.


Author

John Raine
Senior Adviser for Geopolitical Due Diligence

John Raine CMG OBE is researching current and emergent themes that cross geographic boundaries, namely the use of proxies, the use of non-kinetic force as a means of projecting power, and the potential of alternative approaches to conflict resolution. In addition, he is looking at how an understanding of these themes can help governments, armed forces and multinational businesses to mitigate risk.

Background

John joined the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office in 1984, where he served for 33 years. His overseas postings included Kuwait, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Baghdad and Islamabad. In addition to bilateral and multilateral diplomatic work, he worked extensively with UK Armed Forces on deployed operations in Afghanistan and Iraq and, in the UK, on strategy and future capabilities. As a senior member of the national security community he contributed to the design and implementation of UK defence and security strategy, and managed relationships with a wide range of international security partners.

Nine ways the Russo-Ukrainian war might impact Haiti

BY THE HAITIAN TIMES

FEB. 25, 2022

Former Haitian Minister of Foreign Affairs Richard Casimir (r) stands with representatives of the Community of Latin American Countries and Caribbean States in May, 2013, in Moscow. 

Photo from Haiti Libre.

As Russia continues its invasion into Ukraine, questions are being raised about how the conflict will affect the world at large. Here’s a brief list of the ties both countries have to Haiti and how the Russo-Ukrainian war might impact the Caribbean country.

Ties to Russia and Ukraine
A small community of Haitians is in Moscow, comprising mainly students at the University of Peoples’ Friendship, as of 2018. Some Haitians also study at other universities.
In 2019, relations between Haiti and Russia expanded after Bocchit Edmond, then Haiti’s Foreign Minister, announced plans to make visits between Russians and Haitians visa-free to each country. It’s unclear whether these plans were implemented.
In January, Ukraine announced its own visa measures to Haiti, which allows Haitian citizens to stay in Ukraine for 30 days.

Potential impact on Haiti
Russia exports $6.78 million worth of supplies to Haiti, including wheat, plastic pipes and medical instruments. A lack of these items, particularly medical instruments, would continue to hurt Haiti further.
According to economist Enomy Germain, the Russia-Ukraine conflict will increase inflation in Haiti. Haiti is already experiencing high inflation rates, soaring from 19.7% in October of last year to 24.6% a month later.
The conflict would disrupt global supply chain issues, which is already a problem. As of last year, Haiti was suffering from a lack of lumber, automobiles, shoes and bikes, among numerous items.
Food insecurity will also be impacted, according to Germain. Currently, food insecurity is at its highest level ever in Haiti, as 4.4 million people, or over 30% of the population, do not have access to food.
Fuel prices in Haiti have soared in recent months. As the conflict broke, the cost of crude oil surged in several countries. This worldwide trend is expected to greatly impact Haiti, already plagued by fuel scarcity.

COLLATORAL DAMAGE...OR NOT

Ships Shelled in Black Sea as Invasion Sparks Maritime Chaos

Alex Longley, Archie Hunter and Ann Koh, Bloomberg News

BC-Ships-Shelled-in-Black-Sea-as-Invasion-Sparks-Maritime-Chaos , Alex Longley, Archie Hunter and Ann Koh

(Bloomberg) -- Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has brought turmoil to commodities markets as the conflict ensnares merchant shipping.

At least two merchant ships have been reportedly hit since Russian forces began the attack on its neighbor this week. Insurers are either not offering to cover vessels, or they’re demanding huge premiums to do so. 

That has compounded oil trading and shipping markets that were already -- with a few exceptions -- leery of doing Russian deals while people figure out the sanctions risk of buying the nation’s crude. Trade lawyers said that commodities from Russia should ultimately keep flowing, but that caution is likely in the near term and the situation is fast-changing.

“I’ve been a shipbroker for more than 30 years and nothing in that time compares to the chaos we’re seeing now,” said Halvor Ellefsen, a tanker broker at Fearnley A/S in Oslo. “I just hope it resolves as peacefully as possible.”

Vital Region

The Black Sea is a critical region for agricultural traders and oil traders alike. Ukraine and Russia together account for more than a quarter of the global trade in wheat and about a fifth of corn. That trade was thrown into chaos after Ukraine’s ports closed in the wake of Russia’s invasion.

Russia’s Black Sea oil port of Novorossiysk, along with a nearby terminal, handle the best part of 2 million barrels a day of crude -- roughly the same as what gets exported from the entire North Sea. Tanker brokers, owners and oil traders said there was immediate caution about doing business with Russia after the invasion because of concern about a sanctions backlash from the West. 

The price of the nation’s flagship Urals crude plunged on Thursday to a record discount to Dated Brent, a benchmark price for physical oil transactions all over the world. Oil freight transportation costs from Russia’s main western ports soared because of owners’ reticence about collecting the nation’s cargoes.

On Thursday, the U.S., U.K. and European Union all announced measures targeting Russia after its invasion of Ukraine. While they could impede trade with Russia, they won’t stop it.

Among the most significant pieces of sanctions documentation was a General License issued by the Office of Foreign Asset Control that authorizes payments for energy. And “energy” spans everything from oil to wood. 

A few companies have been tempted by how cheap Russian oil has gotten. Indian oil refineries snapped up 6 million barrels of the nation’s crude from Black Sea ports -- far more than they have done in recent years. 

Ships Damaged

The shipping news, though, suggests insurers have reason to be careful, with at least two merchant ships damaged in the conflict, and unconfirmed reports of a third.

On Thursday, a carrier chartered by Cargill Inc. was hit while sailing in Ukrainian waters in the Black Sea. The vessel was empty when the incident occurred and taken to safety, the company said. On Friday, a chemical tanker called Millennial Spirit, under the flag of Moldova was hit by a shell in the Black Sea, the country’s naval agency said in a statement on website. 

Cargill didn’t confirm the name of the vessel. Istanbul-based YA-SA Holding said earlier that Yasa Jupiter, a Marshall Island-flagged bulker it owns, was slightly damaged by a shell after unloading coal at the Ukrainian port of Odessa. It was unclear whether the ship was deliberately targeted or who fired the shell, and the vessel is heading under its own power to the closest port for a damage assessment, YA-SA said.

On the Millennial Spirit, a fire broke out, destroying equipment and lifeboats were destroyed, and forcing the cew to abandon ship only in their life jackets, the navel agency said.

“We are seeing activity where vessels are being struck,” said Munro Anderson, founding partner at security advisory Dryad Global. “Any vessel that is sitting off Ukraine waters should have left long ago. It is a warzone, we’ve been saying that for 48 hours. Any vessel in Ukraine waters needs to leave immediately, broadcasting clearly on AIS and making their intentions known.”

©2022 Bloomberg L.P.

Chemical Tanker in Black Sea Hit by Shelling, Crew Abandons Ship

Olga Tanas, Bloomberg News

    

, Photographer: Marcelo del Pozo/Bloomberg

(Bloomberg) -- A chemical tanker was hit by shelling in the Black Sea near Ukraine, forcing 10 sailors to leap overboard and seriously injuring two.

The Millennial Spirit, a Moldova-flagged vessel, burst into flames in neutral waters on Friday and its lifeboats were destroyed, the nation’s naval agency said on its website. The sailors, who abandoned ship wearing lifejackets, were rescued by Ukrainian authorities.

The incident comes a day after a Cargill Inc.-chartered vessel crossing the Black Sea was damaged by shell fire, the first confirmed instance of physical damage related to commodity trading in the region. The source of shelling was unknown in both events.

The back-to-back assaults show the increasing danger faced by commodity haulers amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Ukraine and Russia together account for more than a quarter of the global trade in wheat and about a fifth of corn.   

Cargo ship Namura Queen hit by rocket off Ukraine - local agent

02/25/2022 | 

LONDON (Reuters) - The cargo ship Namura Queen was hit by a rocket off the shore of Ukraine in the Black Sea on Friday, causing a fire on board, a local shipping agent said.

"According to the information of the traffic control and the service of the Harbor Master at 12:55 at anchorage point No.358 a rocket hit the stern of the mv 'NAMURA QUEEN'," Ukrainian shipping agent Stark Shipping said.

"The ship flying the flag of Panama was heading to the Pivdennyi port (ex. Yuzhny) to load grain ... There was a fire on the ship, the P&O STAR tug moved to the rescue. The situation is under control," it added.

(Reporting by Julia Payne)

© Reuters 2022

Amnesty International accuses Russia of indiscriminate attacks against civilians

25 FEBRUARY 2022


The prominent human rights organisation, Amnesty International, has accused Russia of indiscriminate attacks against civilians during its current invasion of Ukraine.

In its report, Amensty International says that, "the Russian invasion of Ukraine has been marked by indiscriminate attacks on civilian areas and strikes on protected objects such as hospitals.

Amnesty International said today, after documenting three incidents that it believes to have killed at least six civilians and injured at least 12 more. Indiscriminate attacks violate international humanitarian law (the laws of war) and can constitute war crimes.

“The Russian military has shown a blatant disregard for civilian lives by using ballistic missiles and other explosive weapons with wide area effects in densely populated areas. Some of these attacks may be war crimes. The Russian government, which falsely claims to use only precision-guided weapons, should take responsibility for these acts,” said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General.


The Russian military has shown a blatant disregard for civilian lives by using ballistic missiles and other explosive weapons with wide area effects in densely populated areasAgnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General

“The Russian troops should immediately stop carrying out indiscriminate attacks in violation of the laws of war. The continuation of the use of ballistic missiles and other inaccurate explosive weapons causing civilian deaths and injuries is inexcusable.”

Indiscriminate attacks

Amnesty International’s Crisis Evidence Lab analyzed digital evidence—including photos, videos and satellite imagery— of three such attacks carried out in the early hours of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on 24 February. The attacks occurred in Vuhledar, Kharkiv and Uman.

Amnesty International’s Crisis Evidence Lab analyzed digital evidence—including photos, videos and satellite imagery— of three such attacks carried out in the early hours of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on 24 February

In the deadliest strike documented by Amnesty International, at approximately 10.30 am local time, a ballistic missile struck near a hospital building in Vuhledar, in Donetsk region, eastern Ukraine, killing four civilians and wounding ten more. According to a local source who spoke to Amnesty International researchers, two women and two men were killed, and six healthcare workers were among the injured. Analyzing photos of the weapon scrap linked to the incident, Amnesty International’s weapons investigator determined that a 9M79 Tochka ballistic missile was used in the attack. These weapons are extremely inaccurate, regularly missing their targets by half a kilometre or more and should never be used in populated areas.

Another of the attacks was carried out at approximately 8 am local time, in the Kharkiv region, northeastern Ukraine. The likely target was the nearby Chuhuiv Air Base, but instead Russian weapon struck a residential block, causing extensive fire damage and apparently killing at least one male civilian and injuring at least two civilian women. A single large crater in the ground between apartment buildings indicates the weapon was most likely a single large missile or rocket.

In another attack occurring at 7 am on the 24 February in Uman, Cherkasy region, a civilian man appears to have been killed by a strike that also damaged a nearby restaurant.

UN General Assembly must hold an emergency meeting

If the Security Council is paralyzed through veto, it is up to the entire membership to step upAgnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General

Amnesty International’s verification of the use of indiscriminate attacks by the Russian forces in their military operations in Ukraine, provides irrefutable evidence of violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law.

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is scheduled to meet later today to discuss the situation and Russia will most likely veto any resolution put forward by other member states. Therefore, Amnesty International is calling for an emergency meeting of the United Nations General Assembly.

“If the Security Council is paralyzed through veto, it is up to the entire membership to step up,” said Agnès Callamard.

“We call on the UN General Assembly to meet in an emergency session and adopt a resolution denouncing Russia unlawful attack and calling for an end to all violations of humanitarian law and human rights. The lives, safety and well-being of millions of civilians is at stake.”


source: commonspace.eu with Amnesty International

Putin must face war crime charges


RUSSIA / COMMENTARY
Amanda Paul
Date: 25/02/2022

Sanctions must be beefed up immediately, while Putin must face war crime charges for Russia’s ongoing premeditated invasion of Ukraine and attack on the free world.

In the early hours of 24 February, Russia launched a brutal assault on Ukraine. Its air and ground forces entered the country from multiple directions, targeting strategic infrastructure and cities by both conventional and non-conventional (i.e. cyberspace) means. Over 100,000 Ukrainians have fled to nearby EU member states and Moldova. At the time of writing, Russian forces are carrying out a massive assault on the capital of Kyiv.

Putin’s blatant act of aggression is not simply a result of his delusional imperialistic ambitions and desire to conquer a democratic Ukraine. The West’s abject failure to adequately respond to Putin or learn lessons from his previous flagrant acts of aggression, including the 2008 war against Georgia and subsequent invasion of Ukraine in 2014, is also to blame.

While it is impossible to say how long this war will last, what is certain is that it will have major consequences for Ukraine, Europe and the global order. The steps that the West now takes to support Ukraine and push back against Russia are crucial.

There is no time to waste.

Fighting for survival

Ukrainians – both soldiers and citizens – continue to resist Russian aggression and defend their nation. If Putin intends to install a puppet regime and/or occupy the country long-term, it will not be easy. Ukrainians will not simply lie down and accept this. Civil disobedience is likely to be widespread. It could lead to a large resistance movement and/or insurgency that inflicts significant damage on the Russian military and morale. The West should make sure to support any such Ukrainian resistance.

As Ukraine fights for its survival, its partners must provide the country with the highest level of political support and economic, military and humanitarian assistance. They should also share intelligence on Russian military movements, which would be crucial for Kyiv. A major support package for those most affected is imperative. We must not forget that Ukrainians are already hurting from the pandemic.

Russia must be crippled by sanctions. To have any impact, they must be devastating and, unfortunately, impact the lives of every single Russian to have any chance of eroding Putin’s grip on power. The Russian people need to understand that this war will take them to a very dark place; that they are living in a pariah state thanks to the lies and falsehoods spread by Putin. Rifts need to appear in Russia’s security apparatus.

Protests over the war have already erupted in Russia. Despite knowing that arrests and repression are almost certain, such protests are likely to grow as the impact of sanctions starts to bite.

Crushing the Russian economy will also hurt Western business. But this is a necessary price to pay to stop Putin and the worse damage he could inflict. The same applies to ordinary citizens in the West. With the possibility of rising energy and food bills, national and EU-led large-scale information campaigns should be organised on social media platforms to explain to the general public what is at stake.

Crank up sanctions now

The sanctions placed by the EU, US and other G7 partners on 24 February cover the financial, energy and transport sectors, dual-use goods and export controls. They will certainly impact Russian armament and export financing, among other areas. The most important sanctions are those on Russian state banks and public debt, which will sap Russia’s reserves and raise its capital costs. A number of Putin’s buddies, including Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu and Chief of Staff Sergei Ivanov, and oligarchs were also sanctioned.

The EU called for the urgent preparation and adoption of an additional individual and economic sanctions package that also covers Belarus, which is guilty of allowing its territory to be used to wage war. And while Putin has taken many measures to sanction-proof Russia, they will not be enough to cushion the pain effectively.

However, not only did these sanctions come late, they are insufficient. The screws must be tightened, and quickly. Especially now that some countries have decided to stand with a brutal dictator. Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan travelled to Russia to discuss a gas deal with Putin the day Russia launched its invasion. Moreover, China’s decision in the aftermath of the West’s announcements of its sanctions to lift all wheat import restrictions on Russia clearly demonstrates the challenges ahead. China missed an opportunity to do the right thing. Much more can and should be done.

Given the gravity of the situation, sanctions should be, at the very least, as harsh as those placed on Iran. This should include removing Russia from SWIFT, the global payments network. The fact that this has not already happened – primarily due to Italy, Germany, Hungary and Cyprus – has left Ukrainians gobsmacked.

Sanctions need to hit more of those closest to Putin, including in the Presidential Councils, the defence and security service, and his top advisors. Furthermore, there is no reason why any Russian oligarch – inside or outside Russia – should be left unsanctioned. All their assets, including those of their families, should be frozen immediately.

War crimes

Crucially, Putin and his cronies responsible for planning and implementing this war should not only have their assets frozen – something the EU is currently preparing for – and be sanctioned but also charged with war crimes. An unprovoked war against a peaceful sovereign state, which has already resulted in hundreds of deaths, including civilians, deserves no less.

Not only should there be large-scale coordinated expulsions of Russian intelligence officers from embassies across Europe and its allied countries, but Russia should also be expelled from the human rights organisation Council of Europe.

Equally important, the EU must immediately ramp up its efforts to reduce its dependence on Russian gas. Despite the gas crises of the past decade, the EU has still not significantly reduced this dependence. Indeed Germany’s collaboration with Russia to construct the giant Nord Stream 2 pipeline undermined this effort. While this project has now been expunged, the decision to go ahead in the first place was short-sighted and foolish. Time and time again, Russia weaponises gas and will almost certainly do so again.

A now-or-never moment

The world has now entered a new, and perilous, era in its history; a period of sustained contestation between Russia and the West. This makes it more important than ever that Putin, his cronies and people bear the consequences for the brutal assault on the people of Ukraine and the European continent.

If the West demonstrates sufficient political will, resolve and nerve, Putin’s aggression against Ukraine will cost Russia dearly. слава україні!

Amanda Paul is a Senior Policy Analyst in the Europe in the World programme at the European Policy Centre.

The support the European Policy Centre receives for its ongoing operations, or specifically for its publications, does not constitute an endorsement of their contents, which reflect the views of the authors only. Supporters and partners cannot be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.

France worried about potential military aggression against Moldova and Georgia

25 FEBRUARY 2022


French Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jean-Yves Le Drian, is worried that Russia might also invade Moldova and Georgia. "We are worried about the rest", the minister said in a radio interview according to international news agencies.

Le Drian denounced "a Russian drift toward interference" in other countries, noting Putin's repeated insistence of his country's alleged historical grievances since the fall of the Soviet Union.

French officials have warned that the crisis could quickly escalate along NATO's eastern flank in Europe, warning that Putin could also test the West's resolve by seeking to take control of the breakaway region of Transnistria, which has declared independence from Moldova, or other former Soviet territories.

On Thursday (24 February), EU leaders also spoke out about protecting Moldova and Georgia at the emergency summit in Brussels. They stressed that they "stand by both countries' sovereignty and territorial integrity", reports ANP.

source: commonspace.eu with agencies
photo: A column of Russian armored vehicles seen on their way to the South Ossetian capital Tskhinvali somewhere in the Georgian
breakaway region, South Ossetia, in 2008. AP

DEEP STATE THOTS

Ukraine and Using the Righteousness of our Cause Creatively

FEBRUARY 25TH, 2022 

BY GREGORY SIMS 

OPINION — Putin’s invasion of Ukraine will generate immediate waves on the intel front, especially in HUMINT operations. Some effects will follow established patterns, but the nature of modern society will add new twists, if we have the imagination to exploit them.

Many Russians will accept Putin’s line that Russia is simply “disarming and de-nazifying” Ukraine, but many others will see through this charade to the reality that they are invading a fraternal country that was not a genuine security threat, and this will be a tipping point for some.

As happened after the USSR crushed uprisings in Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968, and the crackdown on Solidarity in Poland in 1981, U.S. and Western intelligence services will be poised to receive volunteers and defectors from the Russian national security establishment repelled by this turn of events. History shows they will come, and even just a few can make a massive difference. It’s bread-and-butter HUMINT.

What’s new is the maturation of highly competent non-state, citizen-driven investigation and intelligence entities, such as Bellingcat. Many Russians with access to military, intelligence, technological, or political secrets revolted by Putin’s war on Ukraine, and perhaps feeling complicit because of their work, would still never entertain the concept of offering their information to a foreign intelligence service. They might, however, feel more inclined to leak their knowledge to one of the new non-governmental intelligence organizations instead, to protest and influence events in a way they can more comfortably rationalize with their patriotism. Western intelligence services should not begrudge this because ultimately it serves the same purpose as clandestine intelligence–exposing the secret plans, intentions, and capabilities of an aggressor.

And why not take it a step further. In announcing his decision to invade, Putin personally called on Ukrainian soldiers to lay down their weapons and go home. Perhaps President Biden could do him one better during his next address. Here’s how I imagine a message from the President, “To all Russian military personnel and those working in military and intelligence areas, I am sure many of you are as outraged as the rest of the world at your leader’s barbaric and deadly decision. I urge you to join the cause of freedom and help undermine this attack by joining forces with us. If you fly a warplane or helicopter, land it in Ukraine and surrender. If you drive a tank or carry a gun, surrender under a white flag. If you operate missiles or artillery, make them non-operational, or if you have knowledge of the most critical secrets needed for your government to continue this war, in the name of God help stop it by exposing them, either to our governments or to the media. If it is possible, come in person. You will be welcomed. It is your duty as a civilized human being.”

A move like this will put them on their heels and force them to keep a wary eye on their own. Our biggest asymmetric advantage is the righteousness of our cause. We should use it creatively.

Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief

Gregory Sims served in the CIA’s Clandestine Service for over thirty years, including multiple field tours as Chief and Deputy Chief of CIA stations. He is currently retired and living in Huntsville, AL. He can be found on LinkedIn.

View all articles by Gregory Sims

NO DECAPITATION

A plea to the free world, US and Israel: Tell Putin that Zelensky must not be harmed

Ukraine’s president fears he is Russia’s ‘number one target’ and his wife and children are number two. Our pledged support for Ukraine must include demanding their safety

By DAVID HOROVITZ

Today

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, interviewed by The Times of Israel's David Horovitz in his office in Kyiv, on January 18, 2020 (Press service of the Office of the President of Ukraine)

Russia “has marked me down as the number one target,” Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky warned in a video message early Friday. “My family is the number two target. They want to destroy Ukraine politically by destroying the head of state.” He reportedly told EU leaders in a video call late Thursday that it might be the last time they see him alive.

Having interviewed Zelensky barely two years ago in his presidential offices in Kyiv, and with my heart going out to him and his people, I want to issue what is both a personal and a principled plea to the US, the free world, and emphatically Israel’s leadership, too, to do their best to ensure that he is not targeted.

President Joe Biden on Thursday stressed that while American troops would not be deployed to fight Russia in Ukraine, the United States “will support the Ukrainian people as they defend their country.” In a conversation with Zelensky on Thursday, he condemned the Russian invasion and, similarly, promised “to provide support and assistance to Ukraine and the Ukrainian people.”

In a phone call of his own with Zelensky on Friday, Israel’s Prime Minister Naftali Bennett “offered Israel’s assistance with any humanitarian aid needed,” the Prime Minister’s Office announced, “and said that he stands by the people of Ukraine in these difficult days.”

In these surreal hours, as the mighty Russian military moves to crush its neighbor, the words of solidarity and promises of support and assistance, however heartfelt and well-intentioned, ring a little hollow.

Biden has drawn a clear line between Ukraine, a would-be NATO member, and those countries that are already included in the alliance — the former receives backing short of direct military assistance, while “every inch” of the latter will be defended “with the full force of American power.”

Under Bennett, a rather wobbly line has been drawn. His foreign minister, Yair Lapid, on Thursday condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as “a grave violation of the international order.” Bennett himself has avoided such directly critical language — trying to walk a tightrope between a principled position in support of a friendly state facing obliteration, and Israel’s crucial interest in maintaining viable relations with a Russia that is so influential in our region, so significant a world power, and the host of so large a Jewish community. I hope the foreign minister’s comments will prove sufficient to place Israel on the right side of history.

One vital and highly symbolic area in which the US, Israel and other principled international powers can and should urgently speak out, however, is in making plain to Russia’s President Vladimir Putin that no harm must befall Zelensky — the duly elected Ukrainian president who is leading his nation and his people through this crisis.

Zelensky has sought to reform Ukraine, to bring it closer to the free world, to root out corruption. He had also sought to foster a viable relationship with Putin’s Russia — in vain, as these terrible unfolding events are proving.

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, interviewed

 by The Times of Israel in his office in Kyiv, on January 18, 2020

 (Press service of the Office of the President of Ukraine)

When I interviewed him, Zelensky spoke lovingly and admiringly of the State of Israel, where he had appeared as a comedian in his previous, pre-political life: “I respect Israel as hugely special, especially given all the sensitivities around it — the unity of Israel, the unity of the nation,” he marveled. “The Jews managed to build a country, to elevate it, without anything except people and brains. The Jewish people in Israel are a unique people, a unique population. It has economic strength. There are many countries in the world that can protect themselves, but Israel, such a small country, can not only protect itself, but facing external threats, can respond.”

We know exactly what Zelensky is going through now — trying to protect his country from an external threat that has closed in on his capital; a president who happens to be Jewish defending against an invader who claims to be striving for the “denazification of Ukraine” and who on Friday urged the Ukrainian army to overthrow a leadership of “terrorists…, drug addicts and neo-Nazis.”

In his Friday video message, Zelensky vowed: “I will stay in the capital. My family” — his wife Olena and their two children — “is also in Ukraine.”

The notion that the elected leader of a democratic country dragged into a war might be targeted for assassination by the enemy is beyond unthinkable, but then so is everything that is playing out in Ukraine right now.

The very least that the US-led free world can do is try to guarantee Zelensky’s safety and freedom — which means impressing that imperative on Putin. Biden, Bennett and other world leaders have pledged their support for the Ukrainian people; here’s the most resonant family on whose behalf to start showing it.

On Putin, the Jews and the Future of the World

Russian dictator Vladimir Putin is benign in his attitude towards Jews. But as Jews living in the West, we owe it to ourselves and our fellow citizens to oppose Putin’s imperial project with every fiber of our beings.

Russian President Vladimir Putin. Credit: Photographer RM/Shutterstock.

FEATURED COLUMN
BEN COHEN

(February 25, 2022 / JNS) Jews and dictators normally don’t get along. History is replete with examples of strongmen who reviled the Jewish communities in their midst. Many of their names spring easily to mind, like Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini, along with the Assads, Saddam Husseins and Gaddafis of the Middle East, all of whom regarded Jews as being at the heart of the devilish conspiracies against their totalitarian dystopias.

More fundamentally, societies ruled by unaccountable, opaque politicians preserve themselves by finding enemies where none exist. That is another reason why Jews, easily visible and practically powerless, too readily come into the frame, though other minority groups have proven vulnerable to this strategy too.

Still, not every dictator is an anti-Semite or Jew-hater. Arguably the first modern dictator was Oliver Cromwell, the “Lord Protector” of England following the overthrow of the Stuart Monarchy during the English Civil War of the 17th Century. Once in power, the fiercely anti-Catholic Cromwell invaded Ireland, carrying out horrific massacres of civilians, while at home he instituted an austere puritan rule that included bans on dancing and Christmas celebrations. But as a God-fearing Protestant who revered the Hebrew Bible, Cromwell was well-disposed to Jews, inviting the community to return to England almost 400 years after they were expelled by a decree of King Edward I.

Russian dictator Vladimir Putin has all of Cromwell’s ruthlessness — along with the ruthlessness exhibited by more contemporary autocrats — and he is similarly benign in his attitude towards Jews, despite ruling over the nation that gave us the Pale of Settlement, the Black Hundreds, the fabricated “Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” the Doctors’ Plot and numerous other episodes of violent, dangerous hatred of Jews. But rather than copying that playbook, Putin has gone in the opposite direction, officially frowning upon anti-Semitism while nurturing close relations with both Israel and loyal Jewish leaders around Russia. What’s striking is that this approach coexists with his imperial, aggressive foreign policy, symbolized by the brutal invasion of Ukraine and the active cultivation of shrill anti-Western conspiracy theories — conditions in which anti-Semitism normally thrives.

How did this situation come about? On a personal level, Putin is certainly unaffected by the Biblical fervor that drove Oliver Cromwell to welcome Jews into his midst. Over the years, various stories have surfaced about the positive influence of Jews whom Putin befriended during his career, along with more outlandish theories holding that he himself is Jewish, but those provide a very limited and tendentious understanding of why he apparently regards Jews with favor.
Subscribe to The JNS Daily Syndicate by email and never miss our top stories

“Anti-Jewish Conspiracy Theories in Putin’s Russia,” a paper published in the Fall 2019 edition of the academic journal Antisemitism Studies, offers more worthwhile insights into the transformation of what Russians used to call their “Jewish policy.”

“Under the current political regime, spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories is out of fashion,” wrote its author, Ilya Yablokov.

Surveying the three decades that followed the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, Yablokov arrived at a critical observation. During the 1990s, when Russia was in economic free-fall but liberal democracy seemed to be in the ascendant, both antisemitic discourse and hate crimes targeting Jews were rife. But in the early 2000s, with Putin already ensconced in place and authoritarian rule encroaching, the antisemitic invective of the various neo-pagans, ultranationalists and communists who littered the previous decade was replaced with a shift towards conspiracy theories focused on the West. Within 20 years, wrote Yablokov, “anti-Western conspiracy theories were a popular trope used to explain events both in Russia and globally, to justify action against the political opposition, and to shift blame for the Kremlin’s unpopular policies.”

The political utility of obsessively attacking the West along with the Kremlin’s own commitment to, as Yablokov puts it, “preserve the image of Russia as a nation that cherishes its multi-ethnic character,” obviates any need for anti-Semitism as a mobilizing tool in the Putin era. As Yablokov argues, that amounts to “rare good news from Russia.”

Yet it does not follow that Jews (unless they happen to be resident in Russia) should be on the spectrum from neutral to positive in their attitudes to Putin. Following the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945, Jews finally enjoyed an unprecedented flowering, cemented by the establishment of a Jewish democratic state and the confident participation of Diaspora Jewish communities in the political, cultural and commercial lives of their countries. Such a flowering was — and remains — possible only within the framework of liberal democracies like the U.S. and Western Europe for one very good reason. Liberal democracy enables Jews to organize as a community, and to speak out without fear, without needing an authoritarian protector to lord it over them.

However, a protector is exactly what the 200,000-odd Jews who live in Russia have in Putin. Due to that, their position is far more precarious than ours in America. As Yablokov points out, while anti-Semitism in Russia has taken a back seat under Putin, it is still present — and can be invoked should conditions suit. Moreover, Putin already has a nasty habit of citing Nazism and the Holocaust to justify his aggression against Ukraine, and he has cynically highlighted the historic antisemitism in Ukraine to bolster his delegitimization campaign against his neighbor. That rhetoric is sure to intensify, and any Jewish discomfort with Putin’s appropriation of the Holocaust for his war strategy will not be regarded sympathetically in the Kremlin.

As Jews living in the West, we owe it to ourselves and our fellow citizens to oppose Putin’s imperial project with every fiber of our beings. This is one occasion when we cannot look to Israel for guidance, because the Jewish state has its own set of interests to balance with the Russians; the hardnosed realpolitik that has often characterized Israeli foreign policy is no less appropriate in this context after all. But Diaspora communities know full well the benefits of the liberal democratic order that Russia and its ally China have dedicated themselves to destroying. As we enter a new phase of great power conflict, we must treasure that knowledge in both heart and mind, and act upon it.

Ben Cohen is a New York City-based journalist and author who writes a weekly column on Jewish and international affairs for JNS.

UK 

PUNISHING OLIGARCHS

Roman Abramovich handed $450m dividend from Russian mining group

Chelsea FC owner holds 29% stake in Evraz amid warning that profits could be hit by sanctions after invasion of Ukraine

Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich owns Chelsea football club.

 Photograph: Richard Sellers/Sportsphoto


Rob Davies
@ByRobDavies
Fri 25 Feb 2022 

The London-listed Russian steel and mining business Evraz has given investors a $1.55bn (£1.2bn) dividend, worth approximately $450m to its shareholder Roman Abramovich, but warned profits could be affected by economic sanctions aimed at the Kremlin and its allies.

The company reported a 45% rise revenues to $14.1bn in 2021, primarily from the sale of steel but also from coal, while pre-tax profit more than trebled from $1.3bn to $4.2bn.

The result was founded on rising prices, amid soaring demand for steel as the global economy rebounds from the impact of Covid-19.

However, the company, whose operations are largely based in Russia, warned it could suffer the effects if the UK, US and Europe step up sanctions against Russian entities in response to Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

Evraz has not been included on the list of sanctioned Russian companies, such as the airline Aeroflot and VTB Bank.

Speaking on a conference call, at which journalists were not permitted to ask questions, the chief finance officer, Nikolay Ivanov, said it was too soon to say whether the company would be affected by sanctions, including any impact on its lending banks.

“Currently, we are analysing the impact of potential sanctions imposed just last night,” he said. “We believe it will not have significant impact on the company.”

However, in its annual report, Evraz said “policies adopted by the Russian government” had increased uncertainty and the risk of the imposition of sanctions, which could have an adverse affect on the business.

The company has also run a simulation of how sanctions could affect profits, including the potential loss of all exports outside the Russian-influenced Commonwealth of Independent States.

It said it could be forced to defer dividends, which would potentially mean a cut in the annual income of the billionaire owner of Chelsea football club, Abramovich, who owns 29% of Evraz.

The company gave investors a dividend of $1.55bn this year, of which Abramovich is entitled to just under $450m.

Sign up to the daily Business Today email or follow Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk<br>

Abramovich has not been a target for sanctions. Contacted by the Guardian last week, lawyers for the billionaire said Evraz did not fit the criteria for potential designation for sanctions. They added: “It would be ludicrous to suggest that our client has any responsibility or influence over the behaviour of the Russian state.”

Evraz has previously held multiple assets in Ukraine but disposed of them in 2018.

Referring to the war in its financial results, the company said: “While there have not been direct impacts on the group to date, the board continues to monitor the situation in Ukraine and the response of international governments.”

The Guardian has approached Evraz for further comment.

Shares in Evraz were up almost 20% on Friday afternoon, making it the top riser on the FTSE 100.

VTB Capital suspended from London Stock Exchange
Ukraine port closure hits exports at UK-listed Ferrexpo
Ukraine invasion: latest updates

Ukraine invasion: UK MP calls for sanctions on Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich

Abramovich, who made much of his wealth from state-owned assets acquired after the collapse of the Soviet Union, has repeatedly denied having ties to Russian President Vladimir 

The New Arab Staff
25 February, 2022

Roman Abramovich bought English football club Chelsea FC in 2003 [UEFA via Getty]

A UK Labour MP urged the British government on Thursday to seize the assets of Russian billionaire and Chelsea FC owner Roman Abramovich, because of his ties to the Russian state.

Speaking at the House of Commons on Thursday, Labour MP Chris Bryant used his parliamentary privilege to read aloud from a document he said was published by the UK Home Office in 2019.

According to Bryant, the document said Abramovich was “of interest… due to his links to the Russian state and his public association with corrupt activity and practices”.

"Surely Mr. Abramovich should no longer be able to own a football club in this country?”, Bryant asked.

Replying to Bryant, senior minister Mark Spencer said the government had taken "very strong action against high-profile Russian individuals who are of concern".

Abramovich, who made much of his wealth from state-owned assets acquired after the collapse of the Soviet Union, purchased English football club Chelsea FC in 2003. He has repeatedly denied having ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

RELATED
Live updates: Russian invasion reaches Ukraine capital Kyiv
Live Story
The New Arab Staff & Agencies

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced sanctions on three Russian billionaires earlier this week, after Putin said he recognised two Ukrainian breakaway regions.

Johnson incorrectly told the House of Commons that Abramovich was already facing British sanctions.

The billionaire’s daughter, Sofia Abramovich, took to Instagram to share a post criticising Putin.

“The biggest and most successful lie of Kremlin’s propaganda is that most Russians stand with Putin,” read the graphic she shared on her Instagram story on Friday, originally posted by @russia.reality.

Russia launched a ground invasion of Ukraine on Thursday. Russian troops have reached the outskirts of the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv.

Companies under Abramovich’s control have previously been accused of donating tens of millions of dollars to an Israeli settler organisation accused of forcing Palestinian families out of occupied East Jerusalem.

Buyers Circle Abramovich’s Prized Chelsea

Football Club

David Hellier and Giles Turner, Bloomberg News

(Bloomberg) --

Suitors of Chelsea FC are on high alert that billionaire Roman Abramovich is to sell the storied English football club, people familiar with the matter said.

Sports investors and private equity firms, including some from the U.S., have began to draw up potential takeover offers for the London team, the people said, asking not to be identified discussing confidential information. Chelsea has already fielded one enquiry this month, one of the people said. 

It comes as governments around the world respond to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine with a range of punishing sanctions against Russia, its companies and super-rich. Abramovich is not currently on the U.K.’s sanctions list.

A representative for Chelsea declined to comment, while a spokesperson for Abramovich could not be reached for comment.

Abramovich has a net worth of about $13 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, having built his fortune from dividends and sales of privatized assets acquired from the former Soviet Union. British foreign secretary Liz Truss this week refused to rule out adding Abramovich to a refreshed list of sanctioned individuals. 

The 55-year-old is best known in Britain as the owner of Chelsea, which he bought in 2003. Since then he’s invested millions turning it into one of England and Europe’s most successful teams. Last year, Chelsea won the prestigious UEFA Champions League title and this month added the Club World Cup to its trophy cabinet. 

Chris Bryant, a member of Britain’s opposition Labour Party, told the House of Common this week that Abramovich shouldn’t be allowed to own an English football club.

Chelsea is valued at about 1.9 billion euros ($2.1 billion), according to KPMG, meaning any takeover could be one of the largest in the European game. Those studying possible bids for Chelsea are awaiting more clarity on the situation from the U.K. government before deciding whether to make formal approaches, according to the people.

American investors would show “significant” interest in Chelsea if it came up for sale, said Jeff Moorad, whose MSP Sports Capital has invested in McLaren Racing. The club is “one of the true global brands,” he said in an email.

©2022 Bloomberg L.P.

Russian Billionaires Lose $39 Billion in a Day on Ukraine Attack

Ben Stupples and Blake Schmidt
Thu., February 24, 2022

(Bloomberg) — Russia’s wealthiest individuals were already feeling the squeeze from escalating tensions between the nation and Ukraine.

It got much worse for their net worth after Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine. In less than 24 hours, they lost $39 billion — more than they had up to that point this year.

The damage was across asset classes. Russia’s benchmark MOEX Russia Index closed 33% lower in Moscow, the fifth-worst plunge in stock market history in local currency terms. It marked the first time since 1987’s Black Monday crash that a decline of that magnitude hit a market worth more than $50 billion.

UBS Group AG, meantime, triggered margin calls on some wealth management clients that use Russian bonds as collateral for their portfolios after cutting the lending value of some debt from the country to zero, people with knowledge of the matter told Bloomberg News. The Swiss wealth manager says it caters to half of the world’s billionaires.

One of the worst security crises in Europe since World War II threatens to deepen market declines in the region, but especially in Russia, which has been hit with sanctions by the U.S. and U.K. A handful of billionaires, including Gennady Timchenko, are also subject to penalties for their ties to Putin, though there are calls for widening the potential targets.

“There are a lot of people in the U.S. and Europe who want to hit them directly,” Chris Miller, co-director of the Russia and Eurasia program at Tufts University’s Fletcher School, said of Russian billionaires in an interview. “I don’t think there’s any good news in the sanctions for them.”

Vagit Alekperov, the chairman of Lukoil, saw the sharpest decline in his net worth. It was slashed by almost a third in a day, falling by about $6.2 billion to $13 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Shares of the Moscow-based oil producer slumped about 33% on Thursday.

Alexey Mordashov, chairman of the steelmaker Severstal, lost $4.2 billion on Thursday, bringing his fortune to $23 billion. Vladimir Potanin, president of Norilsk Nickel and currently Russia’s richest person, lost $3 billion.

Alekperov and Timchenko have each lost about $10 billion this year, or more than 40% of their fortunes. Those are the biggest percentage declines among the Russian billionaires tracked by the Bloomberg wealth index.

Who are some of the high-profile Russians facing international sanctions?

By Emily Rauhala,
Sammy Westfall and
Claire Parker
February 23, 2022

The United States, Britain and the European Union all imposed new sanctions against Russia this week, in a coordinated bid to punish Moscow for its military invasion of Ukraine.

The measures target a range of companies, banks and powerful individuals in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s inner circle.

On Thursday, President Biden announced a second round of sanctions against Russia’s two largest financial institutions, multiple state-owned enterprises and a handful of Russian elites. Prime Minister Boris Johnson also told Parliament on Thursday that his government was launching the “largest and most severe package of economic sanctions that Russia has ever seen.”

Earlier this week, the European Union said it was freezing the assets of a number of prominent entities and individuals linked to the Kremlin. E.U. officials also announced early Friday a sweeping new sanctions package they said would affect everything including Russia’s oil sector and the ability of Russian diplomats to obtain visas to the bloc.

Here are some of the most high-profile Russian individuals and entities Western nations have placed on sanctions lists so far.

Internet Research Agency

The Internet Research Agency is a Russian company based in St. Petersburg and financed by Yevgeniy Prigozhin, a Kremlin-linked businessman already under E.U. and U.S. sanctions for his ties to the Wagner mercenary group. The European Union this week listed Prigozhin’s wife and mother as sanctions targets for their involvement with businesses owned by Prigozhin.

The agency engages in online influence operations and was at the center of Silicon Valley’s investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. It was also named in a sweeping 2018 Justice Department indictment as the hub of a major effort to trick Americans into following and promoting Russian-led propaganda aimed at swaying voters toward then-Republican candidate Donald Trump.

“The Americans are very impressionable people, and they see what they want to see,” Prigozhin told Russia’s RIA Novosti state news agency in response to the indictment.

The E.U. said in a note published in its official journal that the Internet Research Agency “conducts disinformation campaigns targeting Ukraine’s agenda by influencing elections or perceptions of the annexation of Crimea or the conflict in Donbas.”

“In this capacity, the Internet Research Agency is responsible for actively supporting actions which undermine and threaten the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine,” the note said.

Prigozhin’s first foray into business was a hot-dog stand. In a series of food-related ventures in the 1990s, he opened a fast food cafe, then food marts and upscale restaurants in Russia’s major cities. He later became known as “Putin’s chef” after founding a catering company that scored a $1.6 billion contract to source 90 percent of food orders to Russian soldiers in 2012.

Maria Zakharova
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman 

Maria Zakharova is a veteran Russian communications officer who worked as a press secretary for Russia’s mission to the United Nations before landing at the Foreign Ministry in 2008. She has served as the director of the ministry’s Information and Press Department since 2015, giving press briefings on the state of Russian foreign affairs.

The E.U. list calls her “a central figure of the government propaganda” and noted that she “promoted the deployment of Russian forces in Ukraine.”

In a Feb. 16 briefing, Zakharova repeatedly criticized what she called Western “disinformation media” about Russian aggression and the prospect of war in Ukraine.

“Sorry, I was held up for a minute. I was double-checking whether we are invading or not. We’re not invading!” she said at the start of her briefing.

In a Facebook post the same day, Zakharova asked the “mass media of disinformation” in the West “to reveal the schedule of our ‘invasions’ for the upcoming year. I’d like to plan my vacations.”

Anton Vaino

SPYMASTER

Anton Vaino is a foreign service veteran and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s chief of staff. He served as a Russian diplomat in Tokyo before becoming more heavily involved in domestic political matters.

Very little is known about Vaino, even though he is Putin’s top aide. When he was appointed in 2016, the BBC reported that he had not given any press interviews and that his public biography was slim.

The E.U. listed him, saying he plays “an active role in Kremlin decision-making process by taking part in the Russian ‘Security Council’ and influencing the elaboration of decisions by the president in the field of Russia’s defense and national security.”

Sergei Shoigu
Russian Defense Minister 

Sergei Shoigu is Russia’s minister of defense and his official biography lists him as “Army General, Hero of the Russian Federation.” He has served as defense minister since 2012 after a stint as governor of Moscow.

In a speech in December, Shoigu accused the United States and NATO of “purposefully increasing the scale and intensity” of military training activities near Russia and bolstering the military development of Ukraine. On Monday, Shoigu said Ukraine had stepped up shelling of separatist-controlled areas of the Donbas region in the east. He told Putin that Ukraine may be preparing to take them back by force — charges Kyiv denied.

The E.U. sanctioned him, saying that under Shoigu’s “command and orders, Russian troops have held military drills in the illegally annexed Crimea and have been positioned at the border.” The minister is “ultimately responsible for any military action against Ukraine,” the official sanctions note said.

Publishing what they called “rare pictures” of Shoigu, the Siberian Times in 2016 showed the defense minister in a gray hooded sweatshirt, painting a landscape from life. The outlet said that Shoigu is a “renowned collector of Chinese and Japanese samurai swords” and a known expert on Russia during the time of Peter the Great, and that he speaks nine languages fluently.

Margarita Simonyanre
Margarita Simonyan, the head of the Russian television channel RT

Simonyan is the editor in chief of RT, an English-language television news network formerly known as Russia Today. She also heads the news outlet Rossiya Segodnya, a Kremlin-backed news agency that operates Sputnik and RIA Novosti. The State Department last month called both RT and Sputnik “critical elements in Russia’s disinformation and propaganda ecosystem.”

The European Union, which this week placed her on a sanctions list, said that “through her function, she promoted a positive attitude to the annexation of Crimea and the action of separatists in Donbas.”

The state-funded media outlet has also been linked to disinformation campaigns and Russian propaganda.

After Facebook temporarily blocked RT from posting content to its page in Jan. 2017, Simonyan said she was “not surprised … if the Department of State could block oxygen to us, they would do it.”

After a back-and-forth between the U.S. Justice Department and RT over the media outlet’s registration with U.S. authorities as a foreign agent, Simonyan in 2017 announced that she was “forced to choose registration” — but said she’d “continue to fight this as long as it’s possible.”

Andrey Sergeyevich Puchkov and Yuriy Alekseyevich Soloviev

Andrey Sergeyevich Puchkov and Yuriy Alekseyevich Soloviev are high-ranking executives at VTB Bank, which is Russia’s second-largest lender. The U.S. Treasury Department blacklisted both executives on Thursday.

The administration targeted VTB Bank as well as Sberbank, cutting them off from being able to process payments through the U.S. financial system. The institutions conduct around $46 billion in foreign exchange transactions each day, about 80 percent of which is in U.S. dollars.

“The vast majority of those transactions will now be disrupted,” the Treasury Department said in a statement.

The E.U. also listed several individuals linked to VTB this week, including Denis Aleksandrovich Bortnikov, deputy president and chairman of VTB Bank management board.

In a note published in the E.U.'s official journal Wednesday, the bloc said that Bortnikov uses his position to “legitimize his father’s shadow/illegal income.” His father, Alexander Bortnikov, is director of Russia’s Federal Security Service, or FSB.

Kirill Shamalov

Among the new additions to Britain’s sanctions list is Kirill Shamalov, whom the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has described as “Russia’s youngest billionaire … previously married to Putin’s daughter Katarina.”

Shamalov, 39, is a shareholder and deputy chair of the management board at Russian government-affiliated petrochemicals company Sibur — a role in which he “is or has been involved in obtaining a benefit from or supporting the Government of Russia,” according to British authorities.

The U.K. sanctions list describes him as having “close links to President Putin and the Kremlin.” That could be because he was married for five years to Katerina Tikhonova, who is widely acknowledged outside official circles as Putin’s daughter. (Putin has never publicly identified his children.)

During their marriage, the couple reportedly lived a lavish lifestyle that featured a seaside villa in Biarritz, France, and drew allegations of corruption.

War in Ukraine: What you need to know

The latest: Russian forces press closer to Kyiv as U.S. warn it could fall soon as Ukrainians flee to train stations.

Maps: Russia’s assault on Ukraine has been extensive with strikes and attacks across the entire country. We’re tracking the invasion here.

The invasion: Photos and videos show what the situation on the ground looks like. Here’s what we know about why Russia has attacked Ukraine.

How we got here: The conflict playing out between Russia and Ukraine is one marked by land borders and shaped by strategic influence. These four maps help explain the deep roots of the conflict and where things stand right now.

The response: U.S. targeted major Russian banks and tech sector with sweeping sanctions and export controls following Ukraine invasion. Global leaders were quick to condemn Russia’s actions and call for a decisive response. In some corners, responses were somewhat muted.

Read our full coverage of the Russia-Ukraine crisis.

It’s Putin’s tale of two cities – London for his oligarchs, Kyiv for his bombs

Our capital pulls its punches when it comes to penalising Russia’s richest, but Putin shows no such mercy to Ukraine

Vladimir Putin at the Russian Interior Ministry headquarters in Moscow, February 2020.

 Photograph: Mikhail Svetlov/Getty Images

Marina Hyde
Fri 25 Feb 2022

If I look out of the window as I’m writing this, I can see the grand, stuccoed Russian embassy in London, which some years ago mounted a large screen on the wall outside, on which it likes to broadcast its frequently obnoxious Twitter feed to passersby. If I look at the television screen in the room in which I’m sitting, I can see a despairing Ukrainian woman throwing her broken windows from her apartment building in the aftermath of a shelling. So yes: it was the best of times, it was the worst of times.

This afternoon, when I walk down to the opticians, I will pass some large, unconvincingly spontaneous graffiti that recently appeared on someone else’s wall. It reads: “There is no Russian interference in elections.” (Kids, eh?) Next, I will pass two vast houses that I know to be owned by oligarchs – one of whom is Roman Abramovich – and two others that are heavily rumoured to be. Some of these properties are on a street that also hosts various ambassadorial residences, and they are therefore protected obligingly around the clock by multiple armed British police officers.

Russia-Ukraine latest news: Kyiv ‘ready to talk about ceasefire’; explosions heard in capital

Just a tiny snapshot from a London that is uniquely placed to hurt Russia’s richest and most powerful – the class who could ultimately help decide how long Vladimir Putin sticks around. Yet London continues to pull its punches. In a mirthless sort of way, I enjoyed Boris Johnson thundering on Thursday that “oligarchs in London will have nowhere to hide”. Righto. That same morning, Andrey Guryev, the reported owner of Witanhurst, London’s second largest house after Buckingham Palace, could be seen on telly at Putin’s meeting of the oligarchs in the Kremlin. Not a great hiding place – but then, perhaps Andrey knows the seeker is so quarter-arsed he doesn’t actually need one. London’s fight against oligarchs reminds me a lot of Russia’s fight against doping in sports. Some real through-the-looking-glass stuff.

Anyway, I say that Guryev is the “reported owner” of Witanhurst, because even that simple fact remains extraordinarily difficult to establish, to say nothing of more controversial information. For so many of these Russian persons of interest, the internet management alone is a full-time job. But then, there are so very many full-timers. In a few weeks you will be able to buy the brilliant Oliver Bullough’s new book, Butler to the World, in which he details how the UK became the servant of some of the world’s worst individuals. To help the oligarchs, the kleptocrats and the gangsters, Londongrad boasts a whole humming, interconnected professional class of reality-launderers specifically designed to service them – lawyers and lobbyists and education consultants and all sorts of others who imagine themselves to work for respectable businesses. But don’t.

I thought of them when I read an article by Marta Shokalo, editor of the BBC’s Ukrainian service, written in the hours after the invasion began on Thursday. She described hearing the explosions in Kyiv and, later, getting her 10-year-old son up and dressed. “We had some breakfast, sitting as far from the windows as we could,” she wrote, “but he was so scared he vomited.” Reading this yesterday before supper with my own children I felt such a deep, painful sympathy for her. There is no one working to launder reality for her child. There is no army of sharp-suited professionals lavishing painstaking hours on making all the bad stuff go away for Ukrainian children, two of whom were reportedly killed in the past 24 hours by Russian strikes on civilian targets. It is their misfortune – their tragedy – to live at the sharp end of Vladimir Putin’s wickedness, while the megarich who exist in grotesque symbiosis with the Russian president have their every rough edge smoothed off in this capital they most adore to call home. Or, as Bullough now asks: “Why are we preferring Russian oligarchs over Ukrainian kids?”

Why indeed? I don’t want to go out on a limb here, but Britain’s professed attempt to deter Putin with sanctions was arguably hindered by not imposing any even remotely irksome sanctions until after he’d actually invaded Ukraine. Less “stop or we’ll shoot”, more “shoot or we’ll stop”. For so long now, the urgency and gravitas that successive governments have brought to this problem are epitomised by Gavin Williamson’s comment that “Russia should go away and should shut up”.

Boris Johnson claims the UK is rooting out dirty Russian money. That’s ludicrous

Oliver Bullough

That, you might recall, came in the wake of Putin deploying a nerve agent on our soil. Even now, just typing those words is a proper mindmelt. Not one month before, the wife of Putin’s former deputy finance minister had successfully bid £30,000 at a Tory party fundraiser to have dinner with Williamson at the Churchill war rooms. Indeed, this same woman, Lubov Chernukhin, has spent a fortune buying time with politicians, including £160,000 to play tennis with David Cameron and Boris Johnson. The year after Salisbury, she paid £135,000 for “a night out with Theresa May”. (I know, I know – second prize was two nights out with Theresa May.) We’ve even seen a picture of this soiree, thanks to trigger-happy Instagrammer Liz Truss, who came along for the fun, along with several other senior Tory women. The future foreign secretary genuinely captioned the picture: “And it’s ladies night #cabinetandfriends #girlpower.” As one fellow attender fumed of Truss, she’d “dropped them in it for the sake of a few likes”.

Which sounds like the words of someone who’d prefer that their money-grubbing and influence-peddling happened in secret. In Londongrad, of course, they would be in positively multitudinous company. As Putin closes in physically on Ukraine’s capital, our own capital has yet to properly instigate a reckoning with itself. Instead, the people with power to hit his cronies where it hurts still prefer to just shut up and go away.

Marina Hyde is a Guardian columnist