More stories

  • in

    Ukrainians ask what I’m hearing about our country on the US campaign trail. The truth? We’re all but forgotten | Nataliya Gumenyuk

    Around a month before the US elections, in the Kharkiv region, I sat down with a group of Ukrainian infantry soldiers together with the American historian Timothy Snyder. I suggested they ask questions of him not only as an American historian, but also as an American citizen.The servicemen were curious about the upcoming election, but mainly the chances of receiving significant military aid any time soon. They expressed pity that many Americans still don’t understand that the Ukrainian fight is not just about us. It’s in the world’s interests to support the fight against blatant breaches of the international order.The anxiety of the American elections is felt more strongly in Kyiv among Ukrainian officials and civil society leaders because Ukraine has become a partisan issue, and part of US domestic politics. These groups have been trying for years to be on good terms with both Democrats and Republicans in the US. This was especially true during the long delays in Congress over the vote for security assistance to Ukraine. But engaging with the Maga camp has become difficult. This only got worse when it was revealed what Donald Trump’s vice-presidential candidate, JD Vance, said in 2022: “I gotta be honest with you, I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine one way or another.” During the race, Vance has characterised Vladimir Putin as an “adversary” and “competitor”, rather than an enemy, and has generally argued that the US should be focusing on China, not Russia.Then there are the claims from Trump that he could end the war in “24 hours”, presumably with a phone call to Putin. To be honest, these sort of statements don’t worry Ukrainians that much since they don’t sound remotely realistic. There are no signs the Russian president is changing his goal to destroy Ukraine as a state. What people are really worried about is the slowing down, or even stopping, of US military assistance.In Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, one of the most important battleground states, I had a chance to talk to various Ukrainian Americans, including those from the older, more conservative diaspora, who have traditionally voted Republican. They shared strong anti-communist sentiment in the past but today are more united around ideas of faith and family values. Some of them told me they were worried by Vance’s remarks. Still, their arguments would alight elsewhere: it was the Democrat Barack Obama who didn’t firmly react to the Russian occupation of Crimea in 2014 and refused to provide military aid. Some of those narratives can be heard among conservative Ukrainians back home, too.Ukrainians often ask me what exactly the candidates are saying about our country on the campaign trail. I had to reply that, honestly, Ukraine wasn’t being explicitly mentioned at the rallies, at least the ones I attended. In Saginaw, Michigan, a manufacturing town, Vance didn’t mention Ukraine even once, mainly warning about the risks of local workers losing their jobs because of Chinese electric vehicles. Kamala Harris, at a campaign rally in the university town of Ann Arbor, spoke of Trump’s fascination with authoritarian leaders like Putin.Trump himself, speaking in Pennsylvania, did say at least three times that he wouldn’t spend taxpayers’ money on wars “in countries you have never heard of and don’t want to hear of”. The audience loudly cheered.After Joe Biden dropped out of the race, some people in Kyiv hoped that he could now afford to be less cautious and use his remaining time in office to accelerate support for Ukraine. The speculation was that he would want a positive foreign policy legacy to leave behind, amid the retreat from Afghanistan and tragedy unfolding in the Middle East. By October, it became clear that the current US administration wasn’t planning on doing anything big before the election.Some measures were taken. On 23 October, Washington finalised its $20bn portion of a $50bn loan to Ukraine backed by frozen Russian assets. This will be placed alongside a separate $20bn EU commitment and $10bn split between Britain, Japan and Canada. It is supposed to be repaid with the earnings from the more than $300bn in sovereign Russian assets that were immobilised in February 2022 and are mostly held in Europe.But in the long run, the lives of Ukrainian soldiers depend not just on the funds for military aid but on specific types of weapons. President Zelenskyy has spent recent months lobbying in the west for his “victory plan”, which would involve the US providing long-range missiles to Ukraine, which could strike deep inside Russia – something western powers have been reluctant to approve. His argument is that this may not just turn the tide on the battlefield, but take away the burden from those suffering the most – Ukrainian infantry. Without that, the Ukrainian army is left to rely on exhausted footsoldiers. Whether or not this plan has any chance of progressing will depend in large part on who wins next week.Right after landing in New York, a US colleague asked me if “it was all over for Ukraine if it didn’t receive US assistance after the elections”. I was puzzled by the way the question was asked. I explained that it might be extremely difficult to preserve the lives of Ukrainians if, say, Trump is elected, but it wouldn’t mean the Ukrainian army will stop trying to defend its fellow citizens or simply give up.Travelling from one swing state to another, I detected an extreme sense of anxiety among many Americans. It was so palpable, I felt the need to comfort them. Whatever happens, on the morning of 6 November, life in Ukraine will go on. The same will be true in the US. But it doesn’t mean things will be easy. Ukrainians have learned in recent years that worrying can be a luxury; the best option is to commit yourself to working hard to avoid the worst-case scenario, and fighting for what’s right.

    Nataliya Gumenyuk is a Ukrainian journalist and CEO of the Public Interest Journalism Lab

    Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here. More

  • in

    European voters – even some on far-right – want Harris victory, poll finds

    Most western Europeans – and even many who vote for far-right parties – would like Kamala Harris to win the US presidential election, polling suggests, but fewer are confident that she will and most expect violence if Donald Trump is not elected.The YouGov Eurotrack survey of voters in the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and Denmark found that the Democratic vice-president was the preferred winner in every country , with sizeable majorities in favour of Harris in all except Italy.Denmark’s voters were the most eager to see Harris in the White House at 81%, followed by 71% in Germany, 65% in Spain, 62% in France and 61% in the UK; the 46% of Italians who shared the same view was still almost double the percentage of those who instead opted for Trump.Unsurprisingly, support for the Democratic candidate was strongest among Europe’s left-leaning and centrist voters, reaching 80% to 90% among backers of parties such as the Social Democrats and the Greens in Germany, Sumar in Spain, Emmanuel Macron in France, the Social Democrats in Sweden, and the Liberal Democrats in the UK.However, those who recently cast their votes for traditional centre-right parties also preferred Harris over Trump, by often significant margins: 89% of Venstre voters in Denmark, 78% of Christian Democrat (CDU/CSU) voters in Germany, 66% of People party voters in Spain and 58% of Conservative party voters in Britain.And even among western Europeans who recently voted for far-right, nationalist and populist parties, sizeable numbers of respondents in all seven countries said they would rather see Harris elected president than her Republican rival.Trump was the favoured candidate of far-right voters in Spain, the UK, Germany and Italy, with 54% of Vox voters (against 23% who preferred Harris), 51% (27%) of Reform UK voters, 50% (36%) of Alternative for Germany voters in Germany and 44% (32%) of Brothers of Italy voters saying they wanted the former president to secure a second term.But among far-right Sweden Democrat voters, 49% said they would prefer Harris in the White House against 31% who favoured Trump, while 46% who voted for Marine Le Pen in the second round of France’s 2022 presidential election said they would rather the US Democratic party candidate won, against 31% who preferred Trump.Western Europeans were less sure, however, that their wish would become reality. The general expectation was that Harris would emerge victorious on 5 November, but the numbers were lower, ranging from 43% in Italy, 46% in Sweden and the UK, 47% in France and 52% in Spain to 61% in Germany.Asked whether they considered the outgoing Democratic president, Joe Biden, had done a great, good, average, poor or terrible job, the most common assessment across the countries surveyed was “average”, with percentages of people sharing that view ranging from 39% in Britain to 46% in Spain and 47% in Germany.They mostly think Harris would do a better job, with the most widely-held belief in each country being that the current vice-president would make either a “great” or a “good” head of state. About 37% of Italians held that view, climbing to 45% in Spain, 57% in Germany and a high of 64% in Denmark.Expectations were markedly worse for Trump. In each country, the most common view – ranging from 48% in Italy, through 59% in France and 69% in the UK to 77% in Denmark – was that the Republican candidate would make a “poor” or “terrible” president.If Trump is defeated at the ballot box next week, western Europeans expect violence. As many as 73% in Denmark think there will “definitely” or “probably” be violence if Harris wins, with between 62% and 67% sharing the same assessment in most of the other countries surveyed.Italy was again the exception, with the poll, carried out over a period of 10 days in mid-October, suggesting only 47% thought violence was likely. But there, too, the percentage was greater than the 32% who thought violence was unlikely. More

  • in

    Airbus, With Eye on U.S. Race, Says It Will Be Ready for Higher Tariffs

    The giant European airplane maker’s chief executive said it would pass along any higher charges to its customers.Airbus, the world’s largest commercial airplane manufacturer, said on Wednesday that it was preparing for the possibility that the United States would impose new tariffs on all imports, and that the company would deal with the higher charges by passing them along to its airline customers.In a call with reporters, Airbus’s chief executive, Guillaume Faury, said the European company was monitoring the U.S. presidential election next week and would be prepared for the possibility of a new 10 percent tariff. Former President Donald J. Trump, the Republican candidate, has made sweeping tariffs a critical plank of his economic platform if he wins.Mr. Faury said any new tariff would be passed along to Airbus’s airline customers, in much the same way that Airbus dealt with a tariff that Mr. Trump put on European aircraft in 2020 as part of a long-running airplane subsidy dispute.“So that’s something we will be discussing with our customers” if necessary, Mr. Faury said. “But it puts them in a difficult place of adding an additional cost on what they have ordered and what they’re procuring,” he said. “That’s basically mainly a decision of the state that has to be borne by the companies.”He added: “So we are prepared. We know what it feels like. We don’t believe that’s helping aviation and the competitiveness of the airlines and the aviation industry, but it’s something we would be able to manage.”Airbus on Wednesday announced a 22 percent jump in its net profit for the first nine months of the year despite major problems in its supply chain. Mr. Faury said that Airbus’s net profit rose to 983 million euros, or $1.1 billion, through September, and that its third-quarter adjusted earnings before interest and taxes were €1.4 billion.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    ECB Cuts Interest Rates Again as Eurozone Inflation Slows

    Policymakers who set interest rates for the 20 countries that use the euro have lowered rates in back-to-back meetings for the first time since 2011.The European Central Bank cut interest rates on Thursday for the third time in about four months, as inflation in the eurozone has cooled faster than expected and economic growth has been sluggish.Policymakers who set interest rates for the 20 countries that use the euro lowered their key rate by a quarter point, to 3.25 percent. Thursday’s decision came just five weeks after a cut at the bank’s previous meeting, and on a day that a report showed the eurozone’s inflation rate slowing to 1.7 percent in September, falling below the bank’s 2 percent target for the first time in more than three years.“The disinflationary process is well on track,” Christine Lagarde, the president of the central bank, said at a news conference in Ljubljana, Slovenia.The rate move was also influenced by weaker-than-expected economic data in the past few weeks. Whether it was the inflation data or surveys of economic activity, “it is the same story,” she said: “It’s all heading in the same direction — downwards.”After years of trying to force inflation down with high interest rates, central bankers around the world are walking a tightrope as they consider how quickly to cut interest rates. Lowering rates too fast could reignite simmering inflationary pressures, but keeping rates too high for too long risks slowing the economy substantially and inflation becoming too weak.In recent weeks, policymakers have suggested that rate cuts could be more aggressive as inflation has slowed significantly and economic growth has been lackluster. Last month, the U.S. Federal Reserve cut rates by a half-point, paving the way for quicker or bigger rate cuts in Europe, analysts said. On Wednesday, traders increased their bets that the Bank of England would pick up the pace of its rate cuts after data showed inflation in Britain fell to 1.7 percent in September, below the bank’s 2 percent target.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Walgreens Says It Will Close 1,200 Stores

    The pharmacy giant said it would close the stores over the next three years and plans to “redeploy” the majority of the workers at the closed stores.Walgreens plans to close about 1,200 stores over the next three years, its parent company said on Tuesday, in an effort by the struggling pharmacy giant to cut costs and change focus.The chain, which is owned by Walgreens Boots Alliance, announced the closures in its latest quarterly earnings report, released on Tuesday.The closures will allow Walgreens to “respond more dynamically to shifts in consumer behavior and buying preferences,” Tim Wentworth, the chief executive of Walgreens Boots Alliance, told investors during an earnings call on Tuesday.There are more than 8,000 Walgreens stores in the United States, Mr. Wentworth said, and about 6,000 of those stores were profitable.“While the decision to close the store is never an easy one, we feel confident in our ability to continue to serve our customers,” Mr. Wentworth said, “and we intend to follow our historic practice to redeploy the majority of the work force in those stores that we closed.”About 500 of the closures will take place in the current fiscal year, which runs through September 2025, but the company did not say where they would occur.The company reported an operating loss of nearly $1 billion in the three months through August, roughly twice as much as the loss in the same period last year. Its stock price jumped more than 10 percent in early trading on Tuesday, as the results were slightly better than analysts had expected.Walgreens said in June that it would most likely close a significant amount of stores as part of a plan to turn around its business in the United States. At the time, Walgreens said spending by lower-income consumers in particular was lagging, driven by high inflation and depleted savings. The closures announced on Tuesday include 300 stores that had previously been approved to shut under that plan.Mr. Wentworth said that the company was also making changes to how it stocks its stores, by being “more selective” with the brands it carries, as well as expanding its own brands. This, he said, would enable the company to be “a destination for categories for which we believe we are uniquely positioned to lead, like health and wellness and, specifically, women’s health.” More

  • in

    Athens Democracy Forum: Young Activists on What Drives Them

    Six young people from around the world who attended the Athens Democracy Forum spoke about what drives them and the challenges they face.Young people from around the world who actively champion democracy are an integral part of the global effort to gain, preserve and protect freedoms. The following six were among the group of young activists who attended and participated in the Athens Democracy Forum last week.Before the forum began, we interviewed them by phone, video and email about their work and experiences. Their responses were edited and condensed.Persiana AksentievaLaettersPersiana AksentievaHamburg, Germany; 28; Youth fellow, International Youth Think TankBorn in Sofia, Bulgaria, Ms. Aksentieva has spent the last five years advocating democracy in Europe. An International Youth Think Tank fellow, she recently traveled to Sofia and spoke to high school students about the importance of voting. She also works for a beauty and personal care company in Hamburg.Nicole KleebAnsichtssache Britta SchröderNicole KleebBerlin; 27; Project manager, Bertelsmann StiftungMs. Kleeb works for Bertelsmann Stiftung, a social reform foundation, in Gütersloh, Germany, as well as in youth engagement in democracy throughout Europe. She also leads the foundation’s #NowEurope initiative that encourages young people to vote and volunteers as vice president for the Young German Council on Foreign Relations.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Fears of a Global Oil Shock if the Mideast Crisis Intensifies

    The threat of an escalating conflict between Israel and Iran has created an “extraordinarily precarious” global situation, sowing alarm about the potential economic fallout.As the world absorbs the prospect of an escalating conflict in the Middle East, the potential economic fallout is sowing increasing alarm. The worst fears center on a broadly debilitating development: a shock to the global oil supply.Such a result, actively contemplated in world capitals, could yield surging prices for gasoline, fuel and other products made with petroleum like plastics, chemicals and fertilizer. It could discourage investment, hiring, and business expansion, threatening many economies — particularly in Europe — with the risk of recession. The effects would be potent in nations that depend on imported oil, especially poor countries in Africa.The possibility of this calamitous outcome has come into focus in recent days as Israel plots its response to the barrage of missiles that Iran unleashed last week. Some scenarios are seen as highly unlikely, yet still conceivable: An Israeli strike on Iranian oil installations might prompt Iran to target refineries in Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates, both major oil producers. Iranian-supported Houthi rebels claimed credit for an attack on Saudi oil installations in 2019. The Trump administration subsequently pinned the blame on Iranian forces.As it has done before, Iran might also threaten the passage of tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, the critical waterway that is the conduit for oil produced in the Persian Gulf, the source of nearly one-third of the world’s oil production. Such a move could entail conflict with American naval ships stationed in the region.That, too, is currently considered to be improbable. But the upheaval in the region in recent months has pushed out the parameters of possibility, rendering imaginable scenarios that were once dismissed as extreme.As Israel plots its next move, it has other targets besides Iranian oil installations. Iran would have reason for caution in crafting its own retaliation. Broadening the war to its Persian Gulf neighbors would invite a punishing response that could push Iran’s own economy — already bleak — to the brink of collapse.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Ship in Need of Repairs Has Explosive Cargo, but No Dock

    The MV Ruby has meandered around Europe’s northwestern coastline under a cloud of suspicion over its thousands of tons of Russian fertilizer.The MV Ruby has languished off the coast of Britain for more than a week, its hull cracked, its propeller damaged. Yet no port will let the ship dock, fearing that the thousands of tons of Russian fertilizer it carries could lead to a disastrous explosion.Over the weekend, the MV Ruby remained 14 miles off the coast of Kent, in southeastern England, where it has been since last month.For weeks now, the ship has sailed around northern Europe’s coastline, looking for a friendly port. But no country has allowed it to approach, fearing a repeat of the explosion in 2020 in Lebanon that destroyed the Port of Beirut and killed more than 190 people.The ship is reportedly ferrying 20,000 tons of ammonium nitrate, a substance used for fertilizer. An explosion of 2,750 tons of ammonium nitrate devastated the Lebanese port and was felt as far away as Cyprus in the Mediterranean. The MV Ruby may be carrying more than seven times as much.The ship’s stalled journey underscores the distrust and suspicion that vessels linked to Russia have faced since the start of the war in Ukraine. While the MV Ruby is registered in Malta and owned by a Maltese company, Ruby Enterprise, and is managed by Serenity Shipping, which is based in the United Arab Emirates, the Russian fertilizer it is ferrying has caused some governments to worry that the ship may be a Trojan horse, sent to sabotage vital shipping and port infrastructure.The ship’s managers and some maritime authorities have tried with little success to assure the public that the cargo poses no threat.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More