Among the thousands of fans in the stands at Europe’s biggest soccer games are a few people operating undercover. Trained volunteer observers listen for racist chants and watch for extremist symbols on banners.

“You have to be aware of the environment and fit in without standing out. You have to be discreet,” one observer, who has worked at games involving some of soccer’s best-known clubs and national teams, told The Associated Press.

“Obviously nothing gets published on social media. You have to be anonymous. You have to just sort of blend in. Don’t engage in conversations with anybody.”

A way to improve soccer

The observer, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the job requires it, is part of a program run on behalf of European soccer’s governing body, UEFA, by the Fare Network, a prominent anti-discrimination group. Fare monitors about 120 games per season in Europe’s main three men’s club competitions, executive director Piara Powar told the AP, and more around the world in national team events like World Cup qualifying.

Evidence from the program, including photos taken surreptitiously from the stands, is used in disciplinary cases against clubs or national teams whose fans display racist behavior in European competitions like the Champions League.

It’s not a career, but a way to make soccer better for the future, the observer said.

Observers work on a volunteer basis, with expenses covered, and are expected to keep tabs on hardcore fan groups’ social media to track where incidents may occur.

Inside the stadium, an observer watches the stands for signs of racist, homophobic, sexist or other discriminatory chants or banners, while also keeping an eye on the action on the field, which shapes what happens among fans.

“If you get a disgruntled fan base and they’re getting beaten 5-0 and they get knocked out of a competition that they felt that they were going to progress in, then that could be another catalyst,” the observer said. “You have to constantly read the situation as it unfolds.”

Observers are expected to be familiar with symbols used by nationalist groups, especially the logos and number codes — like 88 for Heil Hitler — they use to send surreptitious messages.

Games are given risk ratings to determine how many observers are needed, and up to three observers can work at the highest-risk games.

Sometimes a game rated “medium-risk” can “blow up in your face” unexpectedly, the observer added. That sets off a scramble to document the evidence and send it to a UEFA delegate in the stands — not always easy on overloaded stadium Wi-Fi.

That documentation can then be used by the UEFA disciplinary unit for “further investigation and possible proceedings,” the European soccer governing body said in a statement to the AP.

Sometimes feeling ‘ill at ease’

Hooliganism incidents have decreased in European soccer in recent decades, but some fan groups have a reputation for racist behavior and violence. For security reasons, the identity of the observers at a game are known to as few people as possible.

The observer described feeling “ill at ease” in some situations, but never in personal danger. Observers are not expected to infiltrate close-knit, hardcore fan groups, but to watch from a distance.

“You need to get as close as you can, but be as far away as your safety requires,” the observer said.

Fare’s work isn’t always welcome.

In a case at the Court of Arbitration for Sport over a banner at a 2019 game that was judged to contain a coded racist message, Georgian club Dinamo Tbilisi sought to challenge Fare’s assessment, arguing that the observer collecting the evidence was “professionally trained to recognize potentially racist symbols and is therefore biased.”

The panel rejected the argument and pointed out that even if the banner’s message wasn’t clear to most fans, it still broke rules against racist messages.

Like referees, Fare observers can’t work at games involving clubs they support. The observer said the goal is to make the atmosphere at games safer and more inclusive for the future.

Over several years working games, the observer has seen change for the better, but so far only “baby steps.”

“It’s a professional endeavor. It’s not going for the sake of it,” the observer said.

“I’m indifferent to the results. When a goal’s scored, sometimes I have to stand up to feign excitement, but they are teams that I have zero emotional moments with.”
…

your ad here

Tour de France organizers have set up an anti-COVID protocol for this year’s race, with riders and team staff banned from signing autographs and eating out of their hotels, a source with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters Saturday. 

Riders and staff members were allowed out of their hotels last year. Access to the paddock at the start of the stages was open to reporters until midway through the race, when organizers decided to close it to “fight against the propagation of COVID-19.” 

Access to the paddock will be allowed when the Tour starts in Bilbao, Spain, on June 29, with everyone required to wear a mask. 

“For all the team members: Respect a confinement – Limit the interactions outside the race bubble. No eating out. Respect social distancing at the hotel,” the chart, seen by Reuters, said. 

“Do not get too close to the spectators – Social distancing, no selfies, no autograph.” 

On Friday, France reported 3,204 COVID-19 cases in the country. At this time last year, there were about 25,000 reported daily cases in France. 

Giro d’Italia organizers last month set up an anti-COVID protocol near the halfway point of the race after overall leader Remco Evenepoel pulled out after testing positive for coronavirus. 
…

your ad here

Thousands gathered in Warsaw on Sunday, the 34th anniversary of Poland’s first postwar democratic election, for a protest march the liberal opposition has billed as a test of its ability to end nearly eight years of nationalist rule later this year.

Opinion polls show an election due after the summer will be closely fought, with Russia’s war in neighboring Ukraine giving a boost to the Law and Justice (PiS) government which has emerged as a leading voice against the Kremlin in Europe.

The opposition has struggled to galvanize support despite widespread criticism at home and abroad of the PiS, which has been accused of eroding the rule of law, turning state media into a government mouthpiece and endorsing homophobia.

The government of Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki denies subverting any democratic norms and says its aim is to protect traditional Christian values against liberal pressures from the West and to make the economy more fair.

Donald Tusk, head of the Civic Platform grouping and former European Union council chief, had called on supporters to join Sunday’s march. 

“I want the (government) to start being afraid on June 4 and for people to see they have power and they can change things,” he told Newsweek in an interview published on Monday. “I want to give people faith in their strength.”

In 1989, the partially free vote on June 4 handed victory to a government led by the Solidarity trade union and triggered a series of events culminating in the fall of the Berlin Wall that November.

On Sunday, hundreds of buses were arriving in Warsaw to bring supporters from across the country. Some said they were motivated by a row over legislation proposed by PiS to weed out undue Russian influence from the country.

The opposition sees the legislation as a government attempt to launch a witchhunt against political opponents.

In an unexpected turnaround, President Andrzej Duda, a PiS ally, said on Friday he would propose amendments to the law, which has already drawn criticism from lawyers and opposition politicians, as well as the U.S. State Department and European Commission.

The EU’s executive said it could effectively ban individuals from holding public office without proper judicial review.

“It’s beyond comprehension,” said Andrzej Majewski, 48, from Slupca in western Poland.
…

your ad here

President Tayyip Erdogan signaled Saturday his newly elected government would return to more orthodox economic policies when he named Mehmet Simsek to his Cabinet to tackle Turkey’s cost-of-living crisis and other strains.

Simsek’s appointment as treasury and finance minister could set the stage for interest rate hikes in the coming months, analysts said, a marked turnaround from Erdogan’s longstanding policy of slashing rates despite soaring inflation.

After winning a runoff election last weekend, Erdogan, 69, who has ruled for more than two decades, began his new five-year term by calling on Turks to set aside differences and focus on the future.

Turkey’s new cabinet also includes Cevdet Yilmaz, another orthodox economic manager, as vice president, and the former head of the National Intelligence Organization Hakan Fidan as foreign minister, replacing Mevlut Cavusoglu.

Erdogan’s inauguration ceremony at Ankara’s presidential palace was attended by NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and other dignitaries and high-level officials.

The apparent U-turn on the economy comes as many analysts say the big emerging market is heading for turmoil given depleted foreign reserves, an expanding state-backed protected deposits scheme, and unchecked inflation expectations.

Simsek, 56, was highly regarded by financial markets when he served as finance minister and deputy prime minister between 2009 and 2018.

Analysts said that after episodes in which Erdogan pivoted to orthodoxy only to quickly return to his rate-cutting ways, much would depend on how much independence Simsek is granted.

“This suggests Erdogan has recognized the eroding trust in his ability to manage Turkey’s economic challenges. But while Simsek’s appointment is likely to delay a crisis, it is unlikely to present long-term fixes to the economy,” said Emre Peker, a director at Eurasia Group covering Turkey.

“Simsek will likely have a strong mandate early in his tenure, but face rapidly increasing political headwinds to implement policies as March 2024 local elections draw near,” Peker added.

Erdogan’s economic program since 2021 stresses monetary stimulus and targeted credit to boost economic growth, exports and investments, pressing the central bank into action and badly eroding its independence.

As a result, annual inflation hit a 24-year peak above 85% last year before easing.

The lira has lost more than 90% of its value in the last decade after a series of crashes, the worst in late 2021. It hit new all-time lows of more than 20 to the dollar after the May 28 vote.

Turkey’s longest-serving leader, Erdogan won 52.2% support in the runoff, defying polls that predicted economic strains would lead to his defeat.

His new mandate will allow Erdogan to pursue the increasingly authoritarian policies that have polarized the country, a NATO member, but strengthened its position as a regional military power.

At the inauguration ceremony, attended by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, Erdogan struck a conciliatory tone.

“We will embrace all 85 million people regardless of their political views. … Let’s put aside the resentment of the election period. Let’s look for ways to reconcile,” he said.

“Together, we must look ahead, focus on the future, and try to say new things. We should try to build the future by learning from the mistakes of the past,” he said.

Erdogan became prime minister in 2003 after his AK Party won an election in late 2002 following Turkey’s worst economic crisis since the 1970s.

In 2014, he became the country’s first popularly elected president and was elected again in 2018 after securing new executive powers for the presidency in a 2017 referendum.
…

your ad here

Pope Francis warned the Vatican’s missionary fundraisers Saturday not to allow financial corruption to creep into their work, insisting that spirituality and spreading the Gospel must drive their operations, not mere entrepreneurship. 

Francis made the comments in a speech to the national directors of the Vatican’s Pontifical Mission Societies, which raise money for the Catholic Church’s missionary work in the developing world, building churches and funding training programs for priests and nuns. Deviating from his prepared remarks, Francis appeared to refer to a recent Associated Press investigation into financial transfers at the U.S. branch of the Pontifical Mission Societies: The former head oversaw the transfer of at least $17 million from a quasi-endowment fund and donations into a nonprofit and private equity fund that he created and now heads. The initiatives provide low-interest loans to church-run agribusinesses in Africa. 

“Please don’t reduce POM to money,” Francis said, referring to the Italian acronym of the Pontifical Mission Societies. “This is a medium, a means. Does it require money? Yes, but don’t reduce it, it is bigger than money.” 

He said if spirituality isn’t driving the Catholic Church’s missionary efforts, there is a risk of corruption. 

“Because if spirituality is lacking and it’s only a matter of entrepreneurship, corruption comes in immediately,” Francis said. “And we have seen that even today: In the newspapers, you see so many stories of alleged corruption in the name of the missionary nature of the church.” 

The Vatican has said it is seeking clarity on the transfers at the U.S. branch, which appear to be fully legal since the previous board approved them. The AP investigation uncovered no evidence of corruption, though a legal investigation commissioned by the branch’s new national director, Monsignor Kieran Harrington, suggested the former head may have omitted information, or glossed over Vatican concerns, in his presentations to the board that ultimately approved the transfers, officials said. 

The legal review determined that the transfers were approved in ways consistent with the board’s powers and bylaws at the time, the society said in a statement to the AP. After the review, Harrington replaced the staff and board of directors who approved the transfers, and overhauled its bylaws and statutes, to make sure nothing like it ever happens again. 

In emailed comments responding to questions from the AP, the former head of The Pontifical Mission Societies in the U.S., the Rev. Andrew Small, strongly defended the transfers and investments as fully approved and consistent with the mission of the church and the organization. 

He acknowledged Harrington’s new administration reflected the Vatican’s “skepticism” about the social justice nature of his nonprofit Missio Corp., and private equity fund, in that they focused on food security, as opposed to the traditional idea of “evangelization” that is the primary and stated mission of The Pontifical Mission Societies. 

“I didn’t agree with the apartheid between pastoral and humanitarian work of the church then and I don’t in my current position,” Small said in an email response April 26. “On the ground in Africa, these distinctions aren’t relevant as they try to find income to survive.” 

Small is now the No. 2 at the Vatican’s child protection advisory board, which Francis created to provide a response to the clergy sexual abuse scandal. He did not respond to further questions from the AP Saturday about Francis’ comments. 

Small’s boss as head of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, Boston Cardinal Sean O’Malley, also did not respond to questions from AP about the transfers or the implications for the commission, which is itself raising money for its child protection programs. 

O’Malley spokesman Terrence Donilon said Thursday and Friday that the cardinal was travelling this weekend and unavailable to comment. 

In a message to members of the commission last week after the AP story was published, O’Malley said he was aware of Small’s work when he was national director of The Pontifical Mission Societies “and have come to know the work he did in developing Missio Invest.” 

“Adverse media attention is never easy, whatever its motivation. However, I have said publicly and frequently that, at least in terms of sexual abuse in the church, the media has played a vital role in helping, or maybe shaming, the church into being more open and transparent in its work as well as its commitment to improving its handling of cases and its welcome and care of victims and survivors,” O’Malley wrote in the message seen by the AP. 

“We will continue to monitor the situation and respond accordingly,” O’Malley said, adding his appreciation for the commission’s “great progress” in signing recent agreements with Vatican offices and local churches on collaborations. 
…

your ad here

Latest developments:

Britain’s Defense Ministry said Saturday in its daily intelligence update on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine that Russia’s VDV or airborne forces have assumed “an increasingly important role” in Bakhmut. While the VDV’s pre-invasion elite status is now “much degraded,” the entire Russia force will likely be “less flexible” in reacting to operational challenges because of the VDV’s deployment to Bakhmut.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Friday that joining NATO is the best security guarantee for Ukraine but acknowledged that “it would be impossible” for his country to join the alliance before the war ends. In a joint briefing in Kyiv with Estonian President Alar Karis, Zelenskyy said Ukrainians “will not pull any NATO country into a war."
The U.S. State Department said it is revoking the visas of Russian nuclear inspectors, denying pending applications for new monitors and is canceling standard clearances for Russian aircraft to enter U.S. airspace due to Russia's “ongoing violations” of the last arms control treaty remaining between the two countries.
Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin escalated his feud with Moscow’s military brass by alleging that Russian forces were given orders to blow up his men by planting anti-tank mines in areas that could only be targeting Wagner mercenary forces. "It was not necessary to plant these charges in order to deter the enemy,” he said. “Therefore, we can assume that these charges were intended to meet the advancing units of Wagner," he said.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says Ukraine is ready to launch a counteroffensive against Russia.

In a Wall Street Journal report published Saturday, the Ukrainian leader said, “We strongly believe that we will succeed.”

“I don’t know how long it will take,” he said, “but … we are ready.” He said he wished he had more Western weapons, “but we can’t wait for months,” but Zelenskyy did not reveal a date for the counteroffensive.

In addition, Zelenskyy said he is a bit apprehensive about the outcome of the U.S. presidential election in 2024 because a less supportive administration could win.

Meanwhile, in his daily speech, the Ukrainian president addressed the need for a stronger air defense system through further development, supply and production of the “necessary missiles” in Ukraine. “The Ukrainian air shield must continuously have all it needs. We are engaged in the coalition of Patriot systems and the coalition of modern fighters — actively every day,” he said.

Regarding the long-awaited F-16 fighter jets, U.S. Army General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said they won’t be ready for Ukraine’s upcoming counteroffensive.

Upon his arrival in France earlier this week, Milley said “everyone recognizes Ukraine needs a modernized air force,” but regarding the delivery of F-16s, “it’s going to take a considerable amount of time.”

At a Friday news conference, Zelenskyy also commented on Ukraine’s coming counteroffensive, saying it is “not a movie” and adding that it is not easy to publicly describe how it will unfold.

“The main thing is for Russia to see it, and not only see it, but feel it. Specifically, we are talking about the forces that have occupied our territory,” he added. The Ukrainian president said liberating Ukrainian territories is the main goal of the counteroffensive, and that when that starts to occur, “you will understand what is happening.”

Blinken: Russian pullout required

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Friday that a “just and lasting” peace deal in Ukraine must include the withdrawal of Russian troops for all Ukrainian-held territories.

“A cease-fire that simply freezes current lines in place and enables [Russian President Vladimir] Putin to consolidate control over the territory he seized and then rest, rearm and reattack: That is not a just and lasting peace,” Blinken said.

Speaking in Helsinki, the capital of Finland, NATO’s newest member, Blinken said such a violation of the United Nations Charter would send Moscow and “other would-be aggressors around the world” the wrong message.

Blinken added that the United States will encourage peace efforts by other nations as long as they uphold the U.N. Charter and Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence.

New START nuclear treaty

The Biden administration is retaliating after Russia suspended the New START nuclear treaty. The State Department announced Thursday it is revoking the visas of Russian nuclear inspectors, denying pending applications for new monitors and canceling standard clearances for Russian aircraft to enter U.S. airspace.

The State Department said it was taking those steps and others in response to Russia’s “ongoing violations” of New START, the last arms control treaty remaining between the two countries.

“The United States is committed to full and mutual implementation of the New START treaty,” it said. “Consistent with that commitment, the United States has adopted lawful countermeasures in response to the Russian Federation’s ongoing violations of the New START treaty.”

Russia suspended its participation in the New START treaty in February in a move that the U.S. said was “legally invalid.”

Allowing inspections of weapons sites and providing information on the placement of intercontinental and submarine-based ballistic missiles and their test launches are critical components of New START, which then-Presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev signed in 2010.

Some information in this article came from The Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France-Presse.
…

your ad here

The governor of Russia’s Belgorod region said four people were killed Friday in two separate Ukrainian shelling attacks on towns near the border, while officials in nearby regions reported overnight drone attacks.

Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov wrote on Telegram that shelling had struck the town of Maslova Pristan, some 15 kilometers from Ukraine’s northern Kharkiv region, and that fragments had struck passing cars.

“Two women were traveling in one of them. They died from their injuries on the spot,” he said.

Gladkov later said two people had been killed and six injured when rockets hit the town of Sobolevka, 125 kilometers to the southeast of the first incident. The victims had been standing outside close to residential buildings, he said.

Sobolevka is 14 kilometers from the border with Ukraine. Russian officials have in recent days reported intensified attacks from northern Ukraine.

Pro-Ukrainian forces have repeatedly shelled the town of Shebekino over the past week, Russian officials said. All road and rail travel in the district had been suspended until June 30, Gladkov said.

More than 2,500 people were being evacuated from the Shebekino area, he said, given that it was not safe to be there.

The governor of the Bryansk region, north of Belgorod, said four homes had been damaged by shelling, while the head of neighboring Kursk region said some buildings had been damaged in an overnight drone attack.

Long-range drones also hit two towns in the Smolensk region overnight, the local governor said.

Reuters could not independently verify the reported attacks.

Russia’s Defense Ministry said its forces had repelled on Thursday three cross-border attacks by what it said were Ukrainian “terrorist formations” into the Belgorod region.

Ukraine denies its military is involved in the incursions and says they are conducted by Russian volunteer fighters.
…

your ad here

Elizabeth Abosch was in Moscow working on her dissertation when Russia invaded Ukraine last February.

What struck the American doctoral candidate the most about the Moscow suburb where she lived at the time was how “everyone was going on as normal,” she told VOA. “For the most part, I really felt safe.”

“It was like nothing had happened at all. And so that was eerie. Whereas I was constantly in this emotional fight-or-flight state,” she said.

Working on a dissertation in the country that Abosch had devoted her career to was a long time coming. At first, leaving seemed out of the question.

“I was really in denial for about a week, a week and a half, because I thought this would be over very quickly,” she said. But by the beginning of March, Abosch knew she had to leave.

A student at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign, Abosch is among many Western scholars in the field of Russian and Soviet studies whose careers and lives have been upended by the war in Ukraine.

The war has made it nearly impossible for Western researchers to travel to Russia, multiple academics told VOA.

That limited access has the potential to impede the West’s understanding of Russia for years, they said, and it may also be an indirect boon to Russian propaganda.

Russia’s Washington embassy did not reply to VOA’s email requesting comment.

Abosch, who studies the history of song in the Soviet Union, said she can still conduct research from outside the country. But for others, on-the-ground access is a necessity.

Hiroaki Kuromiya, professor emeritus at Indiana University in Bloomington, said access to Russia “has been absolutely critical” for his research.

“Without access to Russian scholars and the Russian archives, much of my scholarly work over the past three decades would have been simply impossible,” he told VOA.

Now based in Massachusetts, Kuromiya is the author of books including Freedom and Terror in the Donbas: A Ukrainian-Russian Borderland, 1870s–1990s and The Voices of the Dead: Stalin’s Great Terror in the 1930s.

“Few Western scholars have dared to travel to Russia since February 2022 for obvious reasons of safety,” he said.

Kuromiya was among 500 Americans whom Russia banned from entering the country in mid-May. Former U.S. President Barack Obama, VOA acting director Yolanda Lopez, and several journalists and lawmakers were also on the list.

“I was prepared for this eventuality. Although it’s a pity that I can no longer work in the Russian archives, I continue to pursue my academic research in many different venues,” he said.

Kuromiya said he felt proud that Moscow banned him from entering the country.

“I must have gotten something right in my work,” he said. “Being banned from entry into Russia as a result is a trifle for me in the face of today’s monumental events.”

But outright bans against scholars like Kuromiya are relatively rare. A combination of other factors makes it difficult to travel to Russia, academics said.

Western institutions don’t want to fund research trips to Russia, and academics are concerned about sanctions. Personal safety is another issue, and it has also become risky for Russian universities to sponsor Western academics.

“This is very clearly going to have a profound impact on the type of projects people do,” a U.S.-based historian of Stalinism told VOA. He requested anonymity for fear of potential repercussions for his extended family in Russia.

Ironically, the historian said, most of the formal barriers to academic access to Russia are coming from the West.

The Kremlin would probably welcome foreign academics who are friendly to Moscow, he said. “Now would be a great time to be a useful idiot because they [the Russian government] would be very happy to point out, ‘See, we’re open for business,’” the historian said.

There’s a risk, Abosch said, that limited research access to Russia may contribute to a void in the West’s understanding of the country. Russian propaganda, always plentiful, may fill the vacuum, she said.

“I think it certainly helps Russian propaganda. I think a goal of this kind of obstacle would definitely be to create separate spheres of discourse,” Abosch said. Without Western academics studying Russia on the ground, “it would be easier for the government to fix its own narrative,” she added.

For years, the Kremlin has engaged in rewriting or distorting the country’s history, particularly about World War II, to maintain a hold on power and justify acts of aggression like the 2014 annexation of Crimea and the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, historians and analysts have said.

“The devil works hard, but Russia works harder laundering its historical reputation,” Kimberly St. Julian-Varnon, a doctoral candidate at the University of Pennsylvania, told VOA.

The plight of foreign scholars parallels that of foreign reporters, according to Anastasia Edel, a Russian-born American writer who teaches history at the University of California at Berkeley.

Since the war, dozens of foreign correspondents have left Russia over safety concerns — and for good reason.

Evan Gershkovich, an American Wall Street Journal reporter, has been detained for over two months on accusations of espionage — charges that he, his employer and the U.S. government vehemently deny.

Blocked or limited access makes it harder for reporters and scholars to document what’s happening in Russia and to provide audiences with an alternative to Russian disinformation, according to Edel.

“It’s going to be particularly bad for citizens of Russia because they just won’t have any alternative sources beyond the Kremlin propaganda,” Edel said.

“My big concern is we’re going to go backwards in our understanding of modern Russia,” St. Julian-Varnon said.

Kuromiya shared a similar view, saying that “the current situation is having a very negative impact on our understanding of Russia.”

“Like many governments, Russia seeks to control truth, while scholars are dedicated to revealing truth,” he said.
…

your ad here

Two influential Democratic senators are urging the Biden administration to change course and back the establishment of a U.N.-sanctioned special tribunal to hold Russian leaders accountable for the 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

On Wednesday, Democrats Ben Cardin and Tim Kaine, both prominent members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, introduced a resolution calling on the administration “to use its voice and vote in international institutions to support the creation of a special international criminal tribunal to hold accountable the leaders of the Russian Federation who led and sanctioned aggression in Ukraine.”

The resolution supports a long-standing Ukrainian demand: a special tribunal for Russia’s “crime of aggression.” The U.N. General Assembly would have to greenlight the proposed tribunal, terms of which Ukraine and the United Nations would negotiate.

Different treatment

The crime of aggression – defined as “planning, preparation, initiation or execution” of an act of aggression, such as an armed invasion – is distinct from war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide.

The International Criminal Court can prosecute those other crimes, but not the crime of aggression. Its jurisdiction over this crime extends only to countries that have ratified the Rome Statute that established the court. Russia, like the United States, is not a party to the treaty.

That is why Ukraine and its allies have been pushing for an alternative mechanism to hold Russian leaders accountable.

In March, the Biden Administration proposed an “internationalized tribunal” within Ukraine’s judicial system but with outside support.

International elements

“We envision such a court having significant international elements — in the form of substantive law, personnel, information sources and structure,” Beth van Schaack, the State Department’s top diplomat for global criminal justice, said in announcing the administration’s endorsement.

The court could initially function outside Ukraine, elsewhere in Europe, she said.

The U.S. plan has the support of the Group of 7 bloc of nations but faces opposition from Ukrainian officials who say implementing it would require a constitutional amendment that is impractical during wartime.

Ukrainian officials say a U.N.-sanctioned, Nuremberg-style tribunal would close a “gap in accountability” in international law and, unlike a court based in Ukraine, enjoy international legitimacy. Last month, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy renewed his call for such an initiative, which is supported by several small European countries.

“If we want true justice, we should not look for excuses and should not refer to the shortcomings of the current international law but make bold decisions that will correct the shortcomings of those norms,” Zelenskyy said in a speech at The Hague last month.

In March, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin, accusing him of forcibly deporting hundreds of Ukrainian children to Russia. But the warrant was for Putin’s involvement in alleged war crimes, not the crime of aggression.

Russia has blasted the arrest warrant and questioned the legitimacy of a special tribunal.

Legal experts say the U.S. plan hinges on Ukrainian support. They also say Putin and his inner circle will escape prosecution as long as they remain in power.

“I’m worried that by supporting this sort of hybrid model, the message that the U.S. sends is that it cares about accountability for aggression in a way that protects the architects of the crime,” said Rebecca Hamilton, an associate professor of law at American University, Washington College of Law,

A State Department spokesperson said the department does not comment on proposed legislation or resolutions and referred VOA to van Schaack’s testimony.

“As Ambassador… Van Schaak has expressed: There can be no peace without justice in Ukraine. Justice for the millions who have had their lives disrupted and destroyed, as a result of the senseless, unprovoked, and illegal war of territorial conquest launched by Vladimir Putin,” the spokesperson said.

The last time the crime of aggression was prosecuted was in the 1940s when German and Japanese leaders were tried in Nuremberg and Tokyo for what the International Military Tribunal called the “supreme international crime.”

At a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Wednesday, Senator Cardin criticized the Biden Administration’s plan. A Ukraine-based tribunal, Carden said, would face questions about “perceived impartiality” and potential claims of immunity from Russian officials.

Under international law, no national court can prosecute another country’s head of state or equivalent officials.

“I don’t know how you overcome that with the method you’re pursuing,” Cardin told van Schaack, referring to the court’s perceived impartiality.

Obstacles

Van Schaack responded that the Administration opted for a hybrid model because a U.N.-backed tribunal would face legal and practical hurdles of its own.

Legally, the U.N. General Assembly may lack the authority to set up a court with jurisdiction over Russia’s leaders.

Practically, “there are some serious concerns about whether we have the votes within the General Assembly to create a body of this nature,” she said.

But Cardin pushed back, urging the administration to enlist international support.

“It cannot be a sole U.S. effort,” Cardin said. “It has got to be a collective action. You’ve got to nurture this before you take it to a vote.”

A Cardin spokesperson said other senators might join as co-sponsors of the resolution but so far only Cardin and Kaine have signed on. She said in an email to VOA that there is no fixed date for a vote on the resolution.

Hamilton said the Cardin-Kaine resolution is significant because it is “a strong signal that [Congress] wants to go in a different direction from the one that the administration is proposing.”

“And I think it may also be significant for the proponents of an international tribunal, outside of the U.S. and in particular Ukraine, to hear that there are parts of the U.S. system that at least would support a truly international tribunal,” Hamilton, a former lawyer in the prosecutorial division of the International Criminal Court, said in an interview.
…

your ad here

Two influential Democratic senators are urging the Biden administration to change course and back the establishment of a U.N.-sanctioned special tribunal to hold Russian leaders accountable for their invasion of Ukraine.

On Wednesday, Democrats Ben Cardin and Tim Kaine, both members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, introduced a resolution calling on the administration “to use its voice and vote in international institutions to support the creation of a special international criminal tribunal to hold accountable the leaders of the Russian Federation who led and sanctioned aggression in Ukraine.”

The resolution advances an idea long favored by Ukraine: a special tribunal for Russia’s “crime of aggression,” which would be recommended by the U.N. General Assembly and negotiated between Ukraine and the United Nations.

Different treatment

The crime of aggression is treated differently in international law from war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide. Those other crimes are being investigated by the International Criminal Court in The Hague and Ukrainian prosecutors, with the support of the United States.

But the Biden administration favors another approach to prosecuting the crime of aggression, which is defined as the “planning, preparation, initiation or execution” of an act of aggression, such as an armed invasion.

While the ICC has authority to investigate war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, its authority to prosecute the crime of aggression extends only to countries bound by the Rome Statute that established the court. Russia, like the U.S., is not a signatory.

In March, Beth van Schaack, the top U.S. diplomat for global criminal justice, announced Washington’s endorsement of an “internationalized” tribunal for Russia, embedded in Ukraine’s judicial system but drawing on outside support.

International elements

“We envision such a court having significant international elements — in the form of substantive law, personnel, information sources and structure,” van Schaack said.

The court could initially operate outside Ukraine, elsewhere in Europe, she said.

The U.S. proposal is backed by the G-7 countries, but faces resistance from Ukrainian officials who say implementing it would require a constitutional amendment that is unfeasible during wartime.

Last month, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy renewed his call for a special ad hoc tribunal sanctioned by the U.N. General Assembly. Such a tribunal would close what Ukrainian officials have called a “gap in accountability” in international law.

“If we want true justice, we should not look for excuses and should not refer to the shortcomings of the current international law but make bold decisions that will correct the shortcomings of those norms,” Zelenskyy said in a speech at The Hague last month.

The last time the crime of aggression was prosecuted was in the 1940s when German and Japanese leaders were tried in Nuremberg and Tokyo for what the International Military Tribunal called the “supreme international crime.”

In March, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin over the abduction of children from Ukraine. The arrest warrant was for war crimes in Ukraine, not the crime of aggression.

Critics of the U.S. proposal say a Ukraine-based tribunal would face questions about its impartiality and resistance from Russian officials who could claim immunity. Under international law, no national court can prosecute another country’s head of state or equivalent officials.

“I don’t know how you overcome that with the method you’re pursuing,” Cardin told van Schaack during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Wednesday, referring to the court’s perceived impartiality.

Obstacles

Van Schaack responded that a U.N.-backed tribunal faces legal and practical hurdles.

Legally, the General Assembly may lack the authority to set up a court with jurisdiction over Russia’s leaders.

Practically, “there are some serious concerns about whether we have the votes within the General Assembly to create a body of this nature,” she said.

But Cardin pushed back, urging the administration to mobilize international support.

“It cannot be a sole U.S. effort,” Cardin said. “It has got to be a collective action. You’ve got to nurture this before you take it to a vote.”

A Cardin spokesperson said other senators might join as co-sponsors of the resolution, but so far only Cardin and Kaine have signed on. She said in an email to VOA that there is no fixed date for a vote on the resolution.

A State Department spokesperson said the department does not comment on proposed legislation or resolutions and referred VOA to van Schaack’s testimony.

Rebecca Hamilton, an associate professor of law at American University Washington College of Law, said the Cardin-Kaine resolution is significant because it is “a strong signal that [Congress] wants to go in a different direction from the one that the administration is proposing.”

“And I think it may also be significant for the proponents of an international tribunal, outside of the U.S. and in particular Ukraine, to hear that there are parts of the U.S. system that at least would support a truly international tribunal,” Hamilton, a former lawyer in the prosecutorial division of the International Criminal Court, said in an interview.
…

your ad here

SpaceX’s Starlink, the satellite communications service started by billionaire Elon Musk, now has a Defense Department contract to buy those satellite services for Ukraine, the Pentagon said Thursday.  

“We continue to work with a range of global partners to ensure Ukraine has the resilient satellite and communication capabilities they need. Satellite communications constitute a vital layer in Ukraine’s overall communications network and the department contracts with Starlink for services of this type,” the Pentagon said in a statement.

Starlink has been used by Ukrainian troops for a variety of efforts, including battlefield communications.  

SpaceX, through private donations and under a separate contract with a U.S. foreign aid agency, has been providing Ukrainians and the country’s military with Starlink internet service, a fast-growing network of more than 4,000 satellites in low Earth orbit, since the beginning of the war in 2022.

The Pentagon contract is a boon for SpaceX after Musk, the company’s CEO, said in October it could not afford to indefinitely fund Starlink in Ukraine, an effort he said cost $20 million a month to maintain.

Russia has tried to cut off and jam internet services in Ukraine, including attempts to block Starlink in the region, though SpaceX has countered those attacks by hardening the service’s software.

The Pentagon did not disclose the terms of the contract, which Bloomberg reported earlier on Thursday, “for operational security reasons and due to the critical nature of these systems.”
…

your ad here

Russia said it was evacuating hundreds of children from villages because of intensifying shelling in the border region of Belgorod, where the situation was deemed alarming by the Kremlin.

More than a year into its invasion of Ukraine, Russia is now seeing stepped-up attacks on its soil, including an unprecedented incursion last week in the southern region of Belgorod and a drone attack on Moscow on Tuesday.

Authorities began evacuating children from the border districts of Shebekino and Graivoron, regional Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov said on Telegram.

Gladkov said the first 300 evacuated children will be taken to Voronezh, a city about 250 kilometers further into Russia. And more than 1,000 more children will be moved to other provinces over the coming days, he added.

A correspondent for state-run agency RIA Novosti near Voronezh said buses had arrived with around 150 people on board.

Gladkov said the situation was growing worse in the village of Shebekino, where he reported more shelling during the day that injured four people but didn’t cause any deaths.

On Tuesday, one person was killed and two others were wounded in a strike on a center for displaced people in the region. Several oil depots have also been hit in recent weeks.

The attacks have come as Kyiv says it is preparing for a major offensive against Moscow’s forces.

“The situation is quite alarming,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said about shelling in the region.

“We have not heard a single word of condemnation from the West so far,” Peskov said.

The Kremlin has accused Ukraine — and its Western backers — of being behind the increasing number of reported attacks.

On Tuesday, the foreign ministry said the West was “pushing the Ukrainian leadership towards increasingly reckless acts” after a drone attack on residential areas in Moscow.

The Russian defense ministry said that eight drones were used in the attack, adding that five of them were downed and three disabled.

At least three buildings were lightly damaged, including two high-rise residential buildings in Moscow’s affluent southwest.

Ukraine, which has seen almost nightly attacks on its capital, denied any “direct involvement.”

The United States said it did not support any attack inside Russia, instead providing Kyiv with equipment and training to reclaim its territory.

AFP journalists went to the regional capital city, which is also called Belgorod, over the weekend.

Residents confessed to a certain amount of worry, but a sense of fatalism prevailed.

“What can we do? We just shout ‘Oh! and ‘Ah!’ What will that change?” said retired teacher, 84-year-old Rimma Malieva.

Most people AFP spoke to said they trusted the authorities to fix the weaknesses laid bare by the latest raid.

Evgeny Sheikin, a 41-year-old builder, still said “it should not have happened.”
…

your ad here