Europe

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      France’s Presidential Election 2022: Your Questions, Answered

      by

      The French are choosing their president in April, an election that is crucial for France and key for Europe. President Emmanuel Macron is favored to win, but the race has gotten closer.PARIS — The French are going to the polls this month to choose their president, who holds the most powerful office in France and has considerable control of domestic and foreign policy, in one of the European Union’s most populous and influential member states.The war in Ukraine has dominated news coverage in France and largely overshadowed the campaign. President Emmanuel Macron has been accused of using his status as a wartime leader and Europe’s diplomat in chief to avoid facing his opponents and cruise into a second term, with some critics worrying that the lopsided campaign has lacked substantive debate.But the race has opened up recently with a surge from his main challenger, Marine Le Pen, the far-right leader with an anti-E.U., anti-NATO and pro-Russia platform that would reverberate globally if she won.Here is what you need to know about the vote, which will be held over two rounds on April 10 and April 24.What’s at stake?France, a nation of over 67 million people, is the world’s seventh-largest economy, the world’s most visited country, one of five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and a nuclear power. It is a founding member of the European Union and a key driver of its policy. France’s next president will have to help the country navigate two forces currently buffeting Europe: a brutal Russian invasion of Ukraine that has displaced millions on the continent’s doorstep, and a pandemic-related economic recovery that is straining supply chains.A refugee family from Ukraine waiting to board a train to Budapest from a town in eastern Hungary in March.Mauricio Lima for The New York TimesWhile right-wing forces have largely won France’s culture wars in recent years, voter surveys show that French voters are now primarily concerned with the growing cost of living. The next president will have to juggle those worries with other long-term issues on voters’ minds, like France’s clean energy transition, the sustainability of its generous welfare model, fears of immigration and hand-wringing over the place of Islam in the country.Broad disillusionment with politics has also become a major source of concern, with worries that this election could see the lowest voter turnout for a presidential race in decades.What are the powers of the French presidency?French presidents have formidable powers at their disposal — more than most Western leaders, with fewer of the checks and balances that limit the executive branch in other countries.Learn More About France’s Presidential ElectionThe run-up to the first round of the election has been dominated by issues such as security, immigration and national identity.On the Scene: A Times reporter attended a rally held by Marine Le Pen, the far-right French presidential candidate. Here is what he saw.Challenges to Re-election: A troubled factory in President Emmanuel Macron’s hometown shows his struggle in winning the confidence of French workers.A Late Surge: After recently rising in voter surveys, Jean-Luc Mélenchon could become the first left-wing candidate since 2012 to reach the second round of the election.A Political Bellwether: Auxerre has backed the winner in the presidential race for 40 years. This time, many residents see little to vote for.Unlike British prime ministers or German chancellors, who are chosen by the parties that control the most seats in Parliament, French presidents are elected directly by the people for five-year terms. Shortly after that election, France returns to the polls to vote for representatives in the National Assembly, the more powerful house of Parliament, where terms also last five years.Having both of those elections on the same five-year cycle strongly increases the likelihood that France will vote in lawmakers who back their newly elected president, meaning French presidents do not need to worry as much as some other leaders about internal party turmoil or midterm elections. France’s prime minister, as the head of government, plays an important role in the constitutional system, as does Parliament. But the president, who appoints the prime minister, sets much of France’s agenda.Who is running?There are 12 official candidates, but polls suggest that only a handful have a shot at winning.The current favorite is Mr. Macron, 44, a former investment banker who was elected in 2017 with little political experience and is running for a second term. He was elected on the ruins of France’s traditional political parties with a strong pro-business platform. He overhauled the labor code, eliminated a wealth tax and reformed the national railway company. But his reformist zeal was tempered by massive strikes over his pension reform plans, Yellow Vest protests and the coronavirus pandemic. The war in Ukraine put him ahead in the polls but his lead has dwindled recently, to roughly 25 percent in voter surveys.President Emmanuel Macron this month in Nanterre, near Paris.Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesMr. Macron’s main challenger is Ms. Le Pen, 53, the perennial far-right leader who is running for the third time and who lost to him in 2017. She leads the National Rally, a movement long known for antisemitism, Nazi nostalgia and anti-immigrant bigotry that she has tried to sanitize and turn into a credible, governing party. Ms. Le Pen has faced criticism of her past sympathy for President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, but inflation and rising energy prices play well into her protectionist platform. She is currently polling in second place, with about 20 percent support in voter surveys.Marine Le Pen last year in La Trinité-sur-Mer.Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesSeveral candidates are jostling for third place and polling between 10 and 15 percent, hoping for a last-minute surge that would send them into the second round of voting.Jean-Luc Mélenchon, 70, is the leader of the far-left France Unbowed party, and the left-wing candidate best positioned to reach the runoff. A veteran politician and skilled orator known for his fiery rhetoric and divisive personality, he has vowed to invest in green energy, lower the legal retirement age, raise the monthly minimum wage and redistribute wealth by taxing the rich. He also wants to radically overhaul France’s Constitution to reduce presidential powers.Jean-Luc Mélenchon in January in Bordeaux.Philippe Lopez/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesValérie Pécresse, 54, is a politician who presides over the Ile-de-France region of France, an economic and demographic powerhouse that includes Paris. She is the candidate for Les Républicains, the mainstream French conservative party. Several of her economic proposals, like raising the legal retirement age to 65, are similar to Mr. Macron’s. But in an election where more radical voices have set the tone of the debate on the right, she has taken a hard turn on issues like immigration and crime, leaving her struggling to stand out from other right-wing candidates.Valérie Pécresse, center right, in February in Mouilleron-en-Pareds.Loic Venance/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesÉric Zemmour, 63, is a far-right writer, pundit and television star who has been a fixture in the French media for years but whose campaign, with echoes of Donald J. Trump, has scrambled French politics. He is a nationalist who conjures images of a France in steep decline because of immigration and Islam, and he has been convicted multiple times for running afoul of laws that punish defamation or acts provoking hatred or violence on the basis of race and religion. His prospects have recently been fading.Éric Zemmour on Sunday in Paris.Yoan Valat/EPA, via ShutterstockThe remaining candidates are polling in the single digits and have little chance of reaching the runoff. Among them are Anne Hidalgo, 62, the mayor of Paris and the candidate for the moribund Socialist Party, and Yannick Jadot, 54, the candidate for the Green party, which has struggled to make headway despite growing support in France for environmental causes.How does it work?A candidate who gets an absolute majority of votes in the first round of voting is elected outright, an unlikely outcome that has not occurred since 1965 — the first time a French president was chosen by direct popular vote. Instead, a runoff is usually held between the top two candidates.French election regulations are strict, with stringent limits on campaign finances and airtime, and with financial and logistical support from the state that is intended to level the playing field. (Still, many news outlets are owned by the rich, giving them an avenue to influence elections.)Campaign spending is capped to roughly 16.9 million euros for candidates in the first round, or about $18.5 million, and roughly €22.5 million for those who reach the second one. Those who flout the rules — like Nicolas Sarkozy, France’s former right-wing president — face fines and criminal penalties.Private companies cannot make campaign donations, and individuals can only donate up to €4,600 for the entire election. Candidates are reimbursed for a portion of their campaign expenditures, and the state pays for some expenses.Airtime is closely regulated by France’s media watchdog. At first, television and radio stations must ensure candidates are given exposure that roughly matches their political importance, based on factors like polling, representation in Parliament and prior election results. When the campaign officially starts, two weeks before the vote, all candidates get equal airtime. Campaigning on voting weekends is banned.Preparing envelopes with the presidential candidates’ ballot papers and program leaflets last month in Matoury, French Guiana.Jody Amiet/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesWhat comes next?At 8 p.m. on Election Day, April 10, the French news media will work with pollsters to publish projected results based on preliminary vote counts. That will give a good indication of who is expected to make it into the second round, but if the race is close, projections might not become clear until later. Official results will be available on the Interior Ministry website.The two runoff candidates will face off in a televised debate before the second round of voting, on April 24. If Mr. Macron isn’t re-elected, the new president will have until May 13 to take office. Attention will then shift to the elections for the National Assembly. All seats there will be up for grabs, in a similar two-round system of voting, on June 12 and June 19. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      US disrupts global ‘botnet’ controlled by Russian military intelligence, DoJ says

      by

      US disrupts global ‘botnet’ controlled by Russian military intelligence, DoJ saysAttorney general also announces charges against Russian oligarch Konstantin Malofeyev for sanctions violations The US has disrupted a global “botnet” controlled by Russia’s military intelligence agency, Attorney General Merrick Garland announced on Wednesday.A botnet is a network of hijacked computers used to carry out cyberattacks. “The Russian government has recently used similar infrastructure to attack Ukrainian targets,” Garland told reporters at the justice department.“Fortunately, we were able to disrupt this botnet before it could be used. Thanks to our close work with international partners, we were able to detect the infection of thousands of network hardware devices.“We were then able to disable the GRU’s [the military intelligence agency] control over those devices before the botnet could be weaponised.”The attorney general also announced charges against Russian oligarch Konstantin Malofeyev for sanctions violations. He said the billionaire had been previously identified as a source of financing for Russians promoting separatism in Crimea and providing support for the so-called Donetsk People’s Republic in eastern Ukraine.“After being sanctioned by the United States, Malofeyev attempted to evade the sanctions by using co-conspirators to surreptitiously acquire and run media outlets across Europe,” Garland said.The indictment is the first of a Russian oligarch in the US since the Russian invasion of Ukraine.In a related move, a federal court in the southern district of New York unsealed a criminal indictment against TV producer John Hanick, 71, a US citizen charged with violations of sanctions and false statements because of his work for Malofeyev over several years.Matthew Olsen, assistant attorney general of the justice department’s national security division, said: “The defendant Hanick knowingly chose to help Malofeyev spread his destabilizing messages by establishing, or attempting to establish, TV networks in Russia, Bulgaria and Greece, in violation of those sanctions.”Last month Garland, who is America’s top law enforcement official, announced the launch of Task Force KleptoCapture, an interagency law enforcement task force dedicated to enforcing the sweeping sanctions against Russia over its invasion of Ukraine.He vowed on Wednesday: “Our message to those who continue to enable the Russian regime through their criminal conduct is this: it does not matter how far you sail your yacht, it does not matter how well you conceal your assets, it does not matter how cleverly you write your malware or hide your online activity.“The justice department will use every available tool to find you, disrupt your plots and hold you accountable.”Garland, whose grandparents fled antisemitism at the border of western Russia and eastern Europe more than a century ago, acknowledged horrific images that emerged from Bucha in Ukraine his week. “We have seen the dead bodies of civilians, some with bound hands, scattered in the streets. We have seen the mass graves. We have seen the bombed hospital, theatre and residential apartment buildings.“The world sees what is happening in Ukraine. The justice department sees what is happening in Ukraine. This department has a long history of helping to hold accountable those who perpetrate war crimes.”He noted that one of his predecessors, Attorney General Robert Jackson, later served as a chief American prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials after the second world war. “Today, we are assisting international efforts to identify and hold accountable those responsible for atrocities in Ukraine and we will continue to do so.”TopicsMerrick GarlandFBIRussiaUkraineEuropeUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Blinken: growing evidence of Russian atrocities in Ukraine a ‘punch to the gut’

      by

      Blinken: growing evidence of Russian atrocities in Ukraine a ‘punch to the gut’Secretary of state promises US will join allies in documenting atrocities and hold perpetrators accountable Growing evidence of Russian war crimes in Ukraine are “a punch to the gut”, the US secretary of state Antony Blinken said on Sunday, promising that America would join its allies in documenting the atrocities to hold the perpetrators accountable.A retreat of Russian forces around Kyiv has revealed evidence of atrocities against civilians as Ukrainian troops and journalists have moved back into a broad swathe of suburbs and towns around the capital.“We can’t become numb to this. We can’t normalize this. This is the reality of what’s going on every single day as long as Russia’s brutality against Ukraine continues,” Blinken said on CNN’s State of the Union.“You can’t help but see these images as a punch to the gut. We said before Russia’s aggression we thought it was likely that they would commit atrocities. Since the aggression we’ve come out and said we believe that Russian forces have committed war crimes, and we’ve been working to document that to provide the information that we have to relevant institutions and organizations that will put all of this together.“There needs to be accountability for it,” he added.Jens Stoltenberg, the Nato secretary general, echoed Blinken’s stance on the same program, saying the international community was sickened by the horrific images emerging from Ukraine, including the apparent execution-style killings of unarmed citizens.“It is a brutality against civilians we haven’t seen in Europe for decades and it’s horrific, and it’s absolutely unacceptable that civilians are targeted and killed,” Stoltenberg said.“It just underlines the importance that war must end, and it is [Russian president Vladimir] Putin’s responsibility to stop the war.”Asked about holding Putin and Russia’s military leaders accountable, Stoltenberg said: “It is extremely important that the international criminal court has opened an investigation into potential war crimes, that all facts are on the table, and that those responsible are held accountable. So I strongly welcome the investigation.”Blinken said it appeared Russia was withdrawing forces from the Kyiv region, but he warned its military was likely preparing to strike elsewhere in Ukraine, or even planning to return to the capital at a later date.“It’s too early to say what that actually means because they could be regrouping and restocking and replenishing, and then coming back to Kyiv. It’s also very possible that what we’re seeing is what it seems to be, a focus to the east and the south,” he said.“[But] the will of Ukrainian people is clear. They will not be subjected to a Russian occupation, whether that’s in and around Kyiv or whether that’s in the east and the south.“Here’s the problem. In the meantime, the terrible death and destruction that you started with is going to continue and that’s why it is so urgent that Russia end this war of aggression, and we do everything that we can to support the Ukrainians.”Blinken would not be drawn on the details of US military aid being sent to Ukraine, but said the aim was “to make sure they have the systems they need”.“That includes many different weapons systems,” he said. “Let me give one example, between the United States and our allies and partners, for every Russian tank, there are or soon will be, more than 10 anti-tank systems.“That’s what’s been happening. It’s been incredibly effective because of the courage and bravery of Ukrainian forces.”In a later interview on NBC’s Meet the Press, Blinken said Russia was regrouping after having “been dealt a devastating setback” by Ukraine’s resistance.“Russia had three goals going into this: to subjugate Ukraine to its will, to deny its sovereignty and its independence; to assert Russian power; and to divide the west, divide the alliance,” he said. “And on all three fronts, it’s failed. Ukraine is now more united. A sovereign, independent Ukraine is going to be there a lot longer than Vladimir Putin’s on the scene.“Russian power has actually vastly diminished, its military has greatly under-performed, its economy is reeling. And, of course, Nato, the west, are more united than in any time in recent memory.”Asked about the prospect of easing sanctions as part of peace negotiations, Blinken said the issue was in Russia’s hands.“The purpose of the sanctions is not to be there indefinitely. It’s to change Russia’s conduct. And if as a result of negotiations, the sanctions, the pressure, the support for Ukraine, we achieve just that, then at some point the sanctions will go away. But that is profoundly up to Russia and what it does going forward.”TopicsAntony BlinkenUS foreign policyUS politicsRussiaUkraineEuropenewsReuse this content More

    • 213 Shares99 Views

      in UK Politics

      Infosys to close Russia operations as Rishi Sunak under growing pressure over family’s stake in IT firm

      by

      Indian IT firm Infosys , in which Rishi Sunak’s wife owns shares worth hundreds of milllions of pounds, is to close its operations Russia following pressure over its continued presence in the country amid Vladimir Putin’s war on Ukraine.The company is to halt its business in Moscow, where it is thought to have nearly 100 employees, The Independent understands.Mr Sunak has faced repeated questioning over his family links to the firm, which was founded by the chancellor’s father-in-law and in which his wife, Akshata Murthy owns a 0.91 per cent stake reportedly worth nearly £700m.Earlier on Friday Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer urged Mr Sunak to “come clean” over whether his family had benefitted from any Russia-related interests since Moscow’s invasion.Lesia Vasylenko, a Ukrainian MP, said this week that profits made by company operating in Russia should be viewed as “bloody money”.Infosys declined to comment on the closure of its Moscow operations but sources told the BBC that the company was finding replacement roles abroad for its staff in Russia.In a statement earlier this week, the firm said it had fewer than 100 members of staff in Moscow who service global clients based in Russia.“We do not have any active business relationships with local Russian enterprises,” the company’s statement said.Founded in 1981 by Narayana Murthy and six other engineers, Infosys is now one of India’s largest companies, employing some 267,000 people across more than 50 countries. Having previously served as chief executive, Mr Murthy stepped down from the board in 2012 to take the position of chairman emeritus.Speaking to BBC Newscast on Thursday, Mr Sunak said he felt “nothing but enormous pride and admiration for everything that” his father in law has achieved and that “no amount of attempted smearing is going to make me change that”.The chancellor – who has previously told British firms to “think very carefully” about making any investments potentially beneficial to Mr Putin’s regime – hit out at the questioning he has faced in recent days, calling it “very upsetting and, I think, wrong for people to try and come at my wife”.Mr Sunak compared the criticism of his wife to the Will Smith Oscars scandal, saying: “At least I didn’t get up and slap anybody, which is good.”But on Friday, Sir Keir suggested it was “a fundamental question of principle” whether Mr Sunak’s household was “benefitting from money made in Russia when the government has put in place sanctions”.“That is in the public interest for us to have an answer to — I’m not attacking their family, I don’t agree with that way of politics,” the Labour leader told Sky News.“But I do want to know if the chancellor’s household is benefiting from money from a company that’s investing in Russia when the government is saying quite rightly that nobody should be doing that”.He added: “I would have thought the chancellor would actually want to come clean on this and say ‘actually I can be very, very clear that my household doesn’t benefit from any money that’s come in any way from Russia during this invasion of Ukraine.“It’s a simple question, I think he should just answer it. It would actually help his wife if he just answered the question”.A spokesperson for the chancellor told The Independent that Ms Murthy is “one of thousands of minority shareholders” in Infosys, adding: “It is a public company and neither her nor any member of her family have any involvement in the operational decisions of the company.” More

    • 263 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘I know how much it hurts’: Biden to release US oil in bid to lower gas prices – as it happened

      by

      Key events

      Show

      4.21pm EDT

      16:21

      Closing summary

      4.17pm EDT

      16:17

      ‘Incontrovertible evidence that this [war] has been a strategic disaster for Russia’ – White House

      3.15pm EDT

      15:15

      Biden: Putin may be in ‘self-isolation’

      2.48pm EDT

      14:48

      Romney: $10bn ‘agreement in principle’ over Covid relief

      1.56pm EDT

      13:56

      Biden confirms draw on oil reserves to lower gas prices

      11.44am EDT

      11:44

      Pelosi wants inquiry on Russia’s ‘crimes against children’

      9.33am EDT

      09:33

      Oil prices plunge as Biden mulls 180m barrel release

      Live feed

      Show

      Show key events only

      From

      1.56pm EDT

      13:56

      Biden confirms draw on oil reserves to lower gas prices

      Joe Biden says his plan to release 1m barrels daily from the US strategic oil reserves will: “Ease the pain families are feeling right now, end this era of dependence and uncertainty and lay a new and new foundation for true and lasting American energy independence.”
      The president is speaking live at the White House to announce the move, which he said would last up to six months and which will represent the largest ever draw ever on the country’s emergency supplies.
      “I know how much it hurts,” he said of rising gas prices that have followed the decision by the Russian president Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine.
      “Putin’s price hike is hitting Americans at the pump.” More

    • 63 Shares129 Views

      in World Politics

      What Is Vladimir Putin’s Endgame?

      by

      After a series of horrific events, I am sat wearing four layers of clothing while penning this piece. Other than at the time I was writing the article, “Is Moscow Turning Off the Gas Tap?” — when the heating was coincidently not working at my office — I decided to turn off my radiator on purpose.

      Ending the War in Ukraine

      READ MORE

      Ridiculous as it might sound, it is my tiny attempt to act against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, to somehow fight this sense of helplessness, being forced to watch the events unfold, without being able to do much.

      Building Up to War in Ukraine

      It all started a couple of days before February 24, which is when Russia invaded Ukraine. I was preparing for a trip to Kyiv to check on my friends in the Ukrainian capital. Following the latest developments, I tried to find any information that would confirm what the Russian ambassador to the EU had stated on February 16. Vladimir Chizhov said there would “be no escalation in the coming week, or in the week after that, or in the coming month.” Saying one thing and doing another has long been part of the Russian political playbook. Yet the cynicism in saying that wars in Europe “rarely start on a Wednesday” — in reference to US intelligence reports — just to actually invade eight days later is unacceptable.

      On Sunday, February 20 at around 10 pm, I ultimately decided not to set the alarm for later that night in order to arrive at the airport on time. I went to bed with a heavy heart and a sense of cowardice: I decided not to travel to Kyiv. I felt as if I had betrayed the Ukrainian people, especially my friend, who assured me that everything was fine and everyone was calm. Over the next few days, I tried to drown out the voice in the back of my head saying, “You should have gone” by repeating this mantra to myself: If you bring an umbrella, it will not rain.

      Embed from Getty Images

      And then we all heard the news. I can only imagine how it must have felt to be actually woken up by air raid sirens — it’s unfathomable. I saw a map of Ukraine showing where the Russian bombs hit. I reached out to friends and colleagues in these places. So far, they are fortunately all fine. I admire their strength and bravery for remaining in Ukraine.

      Back in the office in Vienna, I sat with my colleagues. While we tried to at least grasp what this meant for all of us, we began to realize that this was not just another crisis; this was a decisive development in history. This is war in Europe. It is not the first conflict in Europe since the end of World War II. It is not even the first in Ukraine; the country has been at war since 2014. Back then, during the Revolution of Dignity, the Euromaidan, Ukrainians gave their lives for democracy, our democracy.

      That is precisely why it is only logical for Ukraine to apply for membership in the European Union. Although there is no shortcut to joining the EU, under certain circumstances, it can become possible. Membership in the union should not only remain symbolic. I have written more about this here. In fact, I have been arguing with colleagues about granting such rights to all eastern partnership target countries since 2009. This would, of course, not have prevented anything today. Other actions might have, such as reducing the import dependency on natural resources after the Russia–Ukraine gas crisis of the same year.

      But there is no use in dwelling on the past. Instead, I want to think about the future. Therefore, I have compiled five different scenarios about how the situation in Ukraine could develop. None of them must become a reality, and some of them, hopefully, will not.

      1: All-out (Nuclear) War

      Nuclear war is certainly the worst-case scenario for all sides. An increasingly frustrated and isolated Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia, decides to use tactical nuclear weapons to submerge the Ukrainian resistance. Even if it will “only” involve non-nuclear attacks continuing the obliteration of whole cities and committing war crimes, the democratic international community seriously asks themselves if they can allow this to happen.

      Even if they do, the probability that Putin will stop at the border with Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, the Baltics or Finland is delusional. Consequently, NATO, sooner or later, has to get involved, resulting in World War III.

      I believe that we are actually already at war since February 24 but haven’t realized it yet. It might also continue as a war of attrition and continue indefinitely.

      2: Novorossiya

      This second scenario refers to what Putin himself mentioned in one of his infamous television Q&As in 2014. It has been used in various contexts, with reference to Alexander Dugin, but also as an idea raised by the so-called People’s Republics in Donetsk and Luhansk of the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine. The planned confederation was ultimately not implemented.

      Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries

      The reference dates back to a more or less geographically same area referred to as “New Russia” during the Soviet era until the turn of the century. In any case, Putin mentioned the cities of Kharkiv, Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson, Mykolaiv and Odessa — essentially the whole Black Sea coast of Ukraine, linking up the Russian Federation with Transnistria. Since the Transnistria War in 1992, Russian troops have been stationed in the breakaway territory, which is officially part of Moldova.

      This scenario involves the creation of many more “people’s republics,” which are under the influence — politically and economically — of the Kremlin and dependent on it. Recognition of such republics by Moscow or even integration into the Russian Federation is also a possibility.

      Further separatist regions beyond Ukraine are also declared, expanding Russian influence even more. This takes place mostly in the Caucasus, but also in the direction of the former spheres of influence of the Soviet Union.

      3: Fragmentation

      In a more hopeful scenario, Putin’s aggression leads to destabilization within the Russian Federation. While having to devote a majority of the country’s military capacities but also attention and political capital toward Ukraine, old separatist attempts resurface.

      The control over Chechnya is substantially weakened due to the de-facto defeat of Ramzan Kadyrov’s forces. But also further disintegration occurs. Not necessarily violently, but more economic-based toward dependence of Siberia on China or Vladivostok on Japan. The resulting fragmentation and volatility have major consequences for the whole neighborhood but also geopolitically.

      4: Coup d’état

      There have been (too optimistic) rumors about a possible coup being planned by the Federal Security Service (FSB) of Russia. Leaks from the “Wind of Change” lead to an ousting of Putin and his closest circle.

      While it cannot be ruled out, there should not be any false hope. If the security forces and/or the military carry out a coup d’état, we will not see any democratic regime change.

      Most likely, the people belonging to the closest circle of power are replaced, but the mafia system continues with a new godfather who ends the war but distributes the spoils. It is also possible that we will see a military hard-liner taking charge, which could then end in scenario one.

      5: Democratic Revolution

      The most optimistic, but unfortunately most unlikely, scenario would foresee the sanctions against Russia and the isolation of the federation as leading to the people bringing regime change and possibly democratization.

      Embed from Getty Images

      In a Maidan-style occupation of the Red Square, Putin is unable to suppress the opposition any longer. It takes a lot of time to account for past actions, reconciliation and anti-corruption measures, but the missed opportunity of the 1990s is finally taken up. Coupled with the enlarged EU economic and security cooperation, there is now a counterpart to the geopolitical volatility caused by China’s ambitions and the political instability of the United States.

      The Outlook

      Regardless of which direction the situation takes (although I most certainly have a preference), it is necessary to be prepared for all eventualities. It is a good sign that there has been enough awareness for Ukraine as well as the necessity to think about the economic requirements to rebuild after the war.

      Nevertheless, it is possible to achieve peace, especially with regard to the importing of oil and gas from Russia. Far too often, we are focused on the immediate costs and do not look at the possibilities. A transition to renewable energy is more necessary than ever, but the hesitancy has kept us dependent on Moscow. Just imagine what the situation would have looked like if a transition had been sped up in 2009.

      Hopefully, we have finally learned the lesson. After all, the price we pay is just money. Ukraine is paying with its life, its infrastructure and, ultimately, its future.

      *[Fair Observer is a media partner of the Institute for the Danube Region and Central Europe.]

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More