Ukraine

Subterms

    More stories

    • 275 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

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

      by

      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

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Ukraine Braces for Russian Assault in Kursk Using North Korean Troops

      by

      Several thousand North Korean soldiers have arrived in Russia’s western Kursk region, where they are expected to support Moscow’s efforts to dislodge invading Ukrainian forces.Ukraine is bracing for assaults involving North Korean soldiers who arrived last week in Russia’s western Kursk region, where they are expected to support Moscow’s efforts to dislodge Ukrainian forces who invaded in August.The NATO secretary general, Mark Rutte, on Monday confirmed that North Korean troops had been deployed in the Kursk region, saying it represented “a dangerous expansion” of the war. Ukrainian and American officials said last week that several thousand North Korean troops had arrived in the area.They are part of a larger contingent of up to 10,000 troops that North Korea is preparing to deploy on the Russian side of the front, according to the authorities in Kyiv and Seoul. Military experts say that is too small a number to affect the overall situation on the broader battlefield, where both sides have deployed hundreds of thousands of soldiers, but potentially enough to help Moscow reclaim its territory in the Kursk region.“As their numbers grow, I expect their impact to be seen by the progress of a steady Russian counterattack,” said John Foreman, a former British defense attaché in Moscow and Kyiv.It is unclear, however, how exactly North Korean troops will support Russia’s counterattack in the Kursk region. Analysts say the soldiers could be used in direct attacks or to guard areas behind the combat zone, thus freeing up Russian troops for assaults, but their effectiveness in battle is untested and could be hampered by coordination issues with the Russians.On Friday, President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine said the North Korean troops were expected to enter combat operations early this week. A Ukrainian soldier fighting in the Kursk area said he had been warned by his commanders that an assault could be imminent.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

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Russia Is Winning Back Territory Taken by Ukraine in Its Summer Offensive

      by

      Moscow’s forces have been recapturing some villages and land taken in a Ukrainian incursion into Russia. The advances could undermine Kyiv’s hopes of pushing Russia to the negotiating table.Russia has recaptured a few villages in its western borderlands that Ukraine invaded over the summer, threatening Kyiv’s hold on territory it views as crucial leverage for pushing Moscow toward negotiations to end the war.In recent days, Russian troops have intensified efforts to dislodge Ukrainian forces from the bulge of territory they seized in Russia’s western Kursk region, launching several assaults spearheaded by armored vehicles. Battlefield maps compiled by independent groups using satellite images and combat footage indicate that Russian forces have driven a wedge into the western edge of the Ukrainian bulge, recapturing at least three villages.“In general, the situation in Kursk is not so good,” DeepState, a group with close ties to the Ukrainian Army that analyzes combat footage, said on Sunday. Ukrainian forces “are taking stabilization measures, but it is extremely difficult to reclaim what has been lost.”Emil Kastehelmi, a military analyst for the Finland-based Black Bird Group, said that some elements of Russian units had “managed to advance relatively far into the Ukrainian rear, which caused issues and losses for Ukraine.”To be sure, Ukraine still holds roughly 300 square miles of Russian territory, according to the Black Bird Group, down from about 400 square miles in the first weeks of its cross-border assault in the Kursk region, which was launched in early August. The offensive had two primary objectives: to force the Kremlin to divert troops from other parts of the front to respond to the attack, thereby easing pressure on Ukrainian forces; and to capture territory that Moscow will seek to reclaim, potentially forcing it to come to the negotiating table.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

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Ukraine’s Parliament Approves Biggest Tax Hike of War to Support the Army

      by

      The authorities are resorting to a politically unpopular move as they scramble to raise funds for the grueling military effort against Russia.The Ukrainian Parliament voted on Thursday to approve its biggest tax hike since Russia’s full-scale invasion began more than two years ago, resorting to a politically unpopular move to raise funds for its grueling war effort.The bill increases a tax on personal income that raises money for military expenditure, raising the rate to 5 percent, from 1.5 percent. It also retroactively doubles taxes on bank profits, to 50 percent for this year, and raises taxes on the profits of other financial institutions to 25 percent, from 18 percent, among other provisions.The tax rise approved on Thursday will help to fund a $12 billion military spending increase for this year. Yaroslav Zhelezniak, deputy chairman of the parliamentary committee on finance, tax and customs policy, called it a “historic tax increase.”The move is likely to hit hard in Ukraine, where people have already seen their economic well-being plummet because of the war. But the authorities argue that they have no choice if Ukraine is to sustain its fight against Russia, which has ramped up its own military expenditure. President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine is expected to ratify the bill in the coming days.Oleksii Movchan, a member of Mr. Zelensky’s party and the deputy chairman of the parliamentary committee on economic development, acknowledged that the bill was “unpopular.”“We will be hated, but we don’t have any other option,” he said. “It’s about our survival in this war.”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

    • 50 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      America Needs a President

      by

      Last week’s column was devoted to uncertainties about how the next president would handle the deteriorating situation in Ukraine, where America’s proxy and ally is slowly losing ground to Russia, while the United States seems trapped by its commitment to a maximal victory and unable to pivot to a strategy for peace.One could argue that the Middle East suddenly presents the opposite situation for the United States: After the last two weeks of warmaking and targeted assassinations, the position of our closest ally seems suddenly more secure, while our enemies look weaker and more vulnerable. Israel is dealing blow after blow to Hezbollah and Iran’s wider “axis of resistance,” the Iranian response suggests profound limits to their capacities, and the regional balance of power looks worse for America’s revisionist rivals than it did even a month ago.Look deeper, though, and both the strategic deterioration in Eastern Europe and the strategic improvement in the Middle East have something important in common. In both cases, the American government has found itself stuck in a supporting role, unable to decide upon a clear self-interested policy, while a regional power that’s officially dependent on us sets the agenda instead.In Ukraine this is working out badly because the government in Kyiv overestimated its own capacities to win back territory in last year’s counteroffensive. In the Middle East it’s now working out better for U.S. interests because Israeli intelligence and the Israeli military have been demonstrating a remarkable capacity to disrupt, degrade and destroy their foes.In neither case, though, does the world’s most powerful country seem to have a real handle on the situation, a plan that it’s executing or a clear means of setting and accomplishing its goals.Or as The Wall Street Journal reported this week, as Israel takes the fight to Hezbollah, “the Biden administration increasingly resembles a spectator, with limited insight into what its closest Middle East ally is planning — and lessened influence over its decisions.”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

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Vance Criticizes Ukraine’s President a Day After His Meeting With Trump

      by

      A day after former President Donald J. Trump met with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, his running mate, Senator JD Vance of Ohio, criticized the Ukrainian president Saturday during a campaign stop in Pennsylvania.Speaking in Newtown, Pa., near Philadelphia, Mr. Vance opened his speech by criticizing Mr. Zelensky for having toured an ammunition factory in Scranton with the state’s governor, Josh Shapiro, a Democrat.“He came to campaign with the Democratic leadership of this country,” Mr. Vance said in Newtown. “We spent $200 billion on Ukraine. You know what I wish Zelensky would do when he comes to the United States of America? Say thank you to the people of Pennsylvania and everybody else.”In fact, Mr. Zelensky did use his visit to the plant to thank the United States for its support, as well as to thank the workers in Scranton for manufacturing artillery shells to support Ukraine. Mr. Zelensky told the 400 workers churning out shells to support the war effort that they “have saved millions of Ukrainians.” He added in a message on social media that “it is in places like this where you can truly feel that the democratic world can prevail.”The visit to the munitions factory had scandalized Republican lawmakers, who accused the trip’s organizers of engaging in partisan campaigning ahead of the election. Mike Johnson, the Republican speaker of the House, called for Ukraine to fire its ambassador to Washington over the episode.Mr. Vance has been a vocal opponent of American aid to Ukraine. Mr. Zelensky called Mr. Vance “too radical,” in a recent interview in The New Yorker for making remarks he saw as suggesting that Ukraine give up territory in exchange for a peace deal with Russia. That prompted Mr. Vance to hit back from the campaign trail in Michigan on Wednesday, saying, “I don’t appreciate Zelensky coming to this country and telling the American taxpayer what they ought to do.” More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump-Zelenskyy feud escalates as Republicans demand envoy’s removal

      by

      The US House speaker, Mike Johnson, has demanded that Ukraine fire its ambassador to Washington as the feud between Donald Trump and Volodymr Zelenskyy escalated and Republicans accused the Ukrainian leader of election interference.In a public letter, Johnson demanded that Zelenskyy fire the Ukrainian ambassador, Oksana Markarova, over a visit to a munitions factory in Scranton, Pennsylvania, last week where the Ukrainian president thanked workers for providing desperately needed shells to his outgunned forces.Johnson complained that Markarova had organised the visit to the Scranton Army Ammunition Plant as a “partisan campaign event designed to help Democrats”. The event was attended by the Pennsylvania governor, Josh Shapiro, a Democrat who has campaigned in support of Kamala Harris.“The facility was in a politically contested battleground state, was led by a top political surrogate for Kamala Harris, and failed to include a single Republican because – on purpose – no Republicans were invited,” Johnson wrote in a letter on congressional letterhead addressed to the Ukrainian embassy.“The tour was clearly a partisan campaign event designed to help Democrats and is clearly election interference,” the letter continued. “This shortsighted and intentionally political move has caused Republicans to lose trust in Ambassador Markarova’s ability to fairly and effectively serve as a diplomat in this country. She should be removed from her post immediately.”On the same day, Trump in a campaign event in North Carolina attacked Zelenskyy directly and accused him of “refusing” to negotiate a peace deal with Vladimir Putin.“The president of Ukraine is in our country. He is making little nasty aspersions toward your favourite president, me,” Trump said. “We continue to give billions of dollars to a man who refuses to make a deal: Zelenskyy.”The accusations against Zelenskyy came after a controversial interview with the New Yorker in which he questioned Trump’s plan to end Ukraine’s war with Russia and sharply criticized Republicans’ vice-presidential candidate, JD Vance, as “too radical”.Vance had earlier said a peace in Ukraine could entail Russia retaining the Ukrainian land it had occupied and the establishment a demilitarised zone with a heavily fortified frontline to prevent another Russian invasion.“His message seems to be that Ukraine must make a sacrifice,” Zelenskyy said in the interview with the New Yorker. “This brings us back to the question of the cost and who shoulders it. The idea that the world should end this war at Ukraine’s expense is unacceptable. But I do not consider this concept of his a plan, in any formal sense.”After addressing the United Nations general assembly on Wednesday, Zelenskyy is expected to travel to Washington to present his “victory plan” to Joe Biden at the White House.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn his letter, Johnson also referred to Ukrainian officials criticizing Trump and Vance in remarks to the media.“Additionally, as I have clearly stated in the past, all foreign nations should avoid opining on or interfering in American domestic politics,” he said. “Support for ending Russia’s war against Ukraine continues to be bipartisan, but our relationship is unnecessarily tested and needlessly tarnished when the candidates at the top of the Republican presidential ticket are targeted in the media by officials in your government.”Other top Republicans had criticized Zelenskyy this week after his remarks about Trump and Vance were published.“I don’t mind him going to a munitions plant thanking people for helping Ukraine. But I think his comments about JD Vance and President Trump were out of bounds,” said the Republican senator Lindsey Graham, according to US-based Punchbowl News.“With conservatives, it’s going to hurt Ukraine,” Graham said. More

    • 100 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      An Escape from the Front Line in Ukraine

      by

      An excerpt from one of the most ambitious stories in The Times Magazine’s history.Today, The New York Times Magazine published one of the most ambitious stories in its long history — an account of a Russian military officer’s desertion and escape. Sarah Topol spent over a year and a half investigating the Russian military and reporting in eight countries across four continents.In the story, the officer — identified by a pseudonym, Ivan — feigns a serious back injury to escape the front in Ukraine and eventually defect. He uses a cane to make that story convincing. Now, he must retrieve his passport, which is locked with other officers’ passports in the H.R. office of his base in Russia. Each passport has a paper slip in it, logging various personal details. He buys a fake version of the passport online: good enough to fool the military, but not to fool anyone at the borders he needs to cross.So Ivan devises a plan to get his hands on the real one — and swap it with the fake. Here’s how he does it.Ivan knew the office from years of worthless paperwork and reports. The H.R. manager sat at a desk on the right side of the room. Next to him was a six-foot-high metal safe with three drawers. They were unlocked with a key. The passports were kept in folders inside the drawers.To complicate matters, Ivan could use only one arm — the other would be holding the cane as part of his act. So he had to walk in, with his cane in his left hand, take the passport out of his pocket and somehow swap it for the fake. He would also need to remove the paper slip from the original and place it into the duplicate before returning it. How could he do all that with just one hand?The H.R. manager’s desk faced the room. Ivan would have to find a way to reach into his pocket while holding both the cane and the passport. No, that wouldn’t work. He would need to find a way to sit down, put down his cane so he could have two free hands and then reach into his pocket — but that motion could be seen from the side or the back.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