Geopolitical News from the modern world



admin has 17 articles published.

Russia is looking for a fresh attack in Central Asia

in EUROPE by

Russia is looking for a fresh attack in Central Asia to distract the attention from the war in Ukraine. Kremlin needs a weak target to bully or to destroy, whilemany people in Russia start questioning the effectiveness of the regime

As the progress of Russia’s invasion to Ukraine has slowed drastically, with Kremlin’s military obviously stunned by Ukraine’s heavy resistance, tensions start to rise inside Russia itself. While Vladimir Putin is still enjoying the unprecedented support of the Russians, more and more people in Russia are starting to question the effectiveness of what they call “a special military operation in Ukraine”. With the consequences of the international sanctions beginning to influence the everyday life of common people and, more importantly, news of tens of thousands Russian soldiers KIA or maimed known to their families, the topical question of the society changes from “why not?” to “what for?”.

While political and military experts worldwide agree that the main goal for the Russian Federation is to occupy eastern and southeastern regions of Ukraine with the follow-up of freezing the conflict and boggling down the diplomatic negotiations, the next step of Kremlin may be completely unexpected. 

The thing is, most people in Russia had a strong belief that the Ukrainian war would end in a swift and bloodless victory. The idea have been promoted by the propaganda-infused notion of an undefeatable Russian army lead by highly professional generals, which is being shattered now. The disillusionment of the commons does not concern Vladimir Putin as much asthe disappointment of the zealous followers of the “Russian world” ideology, many of which are members of extremist, paramilitary groups. That is a serious headache for the Kremlin, and this ache intensifies with every occupied territory left, with every comrade eliminated by the Ukrainian army. People like the infamous ex-FSB Igor Strelkov, a Russian veteran of the Donbass separatist movement, openly claim that the Russian orthodox nationalists will never acknowledge any result of the Ukrainian war but the occupation of the whole country. Moreover, Strelkov claims that the top brass in Moscow, namely the Defense Minister S.Shoygu, is unfit to coordinate the Russian troops, while some politicians in Moscow are planning to betray Russia and to sign a disadvantageous peace treaty. Kremlin cannot allow leaving in peace people like Strelkov after the war, nor can they prosecute him for being an ultra-patriot. 

Another problem is the reaction of the world community, which stands united in the goal to isolate the Russian Federation politically and to shut down its economy completely. The resolve of the US and their allies is getting stronger with each piece of news on Russia’s atrocities in Ukraine, with Moscow’s forces firingindiscriminately and using weapons of mass destruction on civilians.

That is why Russia’s decision-makers are frantically searching for an answer of how to distract the attention of the “angry mob” both inside and outside their borders. 

Russia has already faced similar consequences in 2014, right after the occupation of the Crimea and support of the insurgents in the east of Ukraine. Their next move, namely starting a military operation in Syria, surprised most of the international community and conditioned the US and the EU to revise their attitude towards Moscow. This illustrates some of Vladimir Putin’s basic principles: whatever you do, keep the initiative and surprise your opponents. 

Besides, Russia’s political and economic influence on the international arena has dwindled to its historical minimum, and the energy exposure level is in the process of being taken away. The only remaining instrument of influence for Moscow is a military threat. Besides, the Russian army has once again to prove itsability to defeat organized troops. One may think about Russia repeating the war in Georgia of 08.08.08, but in that region there is nothing for Russia to gain and everything to lose. 

On the contrary, Central Asia countries look like a perfect target for Russia’s new invasion. First, the countries are rich in resources, not only oil and gas, but also rare mineral ores. Second, there are a lot of Russians and Russian citizens living in post – soviet countries like Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. Defending Russians, the orthodox religion and the Russian language remain the main justification of the aggression by the Kremlin. Besides, the armies of these countries are much weaker than that of Ukraine, therefore easier to defeat. 

As of late, there have been numerous allegations about attacks on the Russian natives in Kazakhstan. Consider these, for example: hereherehere and here.

That may be a coincidence, but one should not be utterly surprised if after the Victory Parade on the 9th of May 2022 in Moscow Vladimir Putin will start to apply pressure on the new president of Kazakhstan and talk about the historical injustice that the country of Kazakhstan even exists. 


By Jacob Koppel, Estonian military expert and observer.

Prospects of the Normandy Format as a key mechanism of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict regulation

in EUROPE by

For already seven years, the Ukrainian issue has been one of the cornerstones in the aggravation of relations between the West and Russia. The conflict situation in the Eastern European region, unprecedented from the times when the USSR collapsed, has been marked with different dynamics during seven years of a war and may soon remain without platforms for negotiations. Although they are not enough efficient, but one should consider that the Minsk and Normandy formats are of political importance conditionally restraining the rapid escalation in eastern Ukraine. From Russia’s point of view, the Minsk and Normandy formats of negotiations were diplomatic environments where the Kremlin tried to put pressure on Ukraine and impose its geopolitical interests not only on Kyiv, but also on Paris and Berlin. However, consistent and firm support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity by Germany and France have urged Russia to find ways out of the diplomatic imbroglio. It seems that by slamming the door in front of his colleagues, Putin will try to achieve his goals in other ways.

By their very nature, the Minsk and Normandy formats are stillborn, as the demands the Kremlin has been advancing are unacceptable to Ukraine by definition. The thing is their implementation is a direct threat to statehood that Kyiv will not allow. Periodically reduced tensions, decreased artillery attacks and partially resolved humanitarian issues are only sporadic results. By the look of things, the unresolvedness of this conflict on a parity basis, if such a wording may be tolerated, stems from the point that Moscow will not be satisfied with Ukraine out of its control. Therefore, the Kremlin seeks to keep Ukraine close to itself through the so-called LDPR, given that Russia’s influence on the decision-making process in Kyiv is bottlenecked like never before.

Difficult not to notice that such a narrative is clearly traced in demands that Russia has been directing to Ukraine through these formats. The official position of the Kremlin is that there is an “internal conflict” in Ukraine, and the occupied separate districts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions are Ukrainian territory that should be reintegrated into Ukraine. In addition to this, Russia demands the reintegration through amendments to the Constitution on the basis of broad autonomy for LDPR. To all appearances, Russia seeks to impose on a unitary state a form of government that meets Moscow’s interests – federalization. By the way, this is how Lavrov has recently misspoken. Moreover, Moscow has been actively claiming the inclusion of the so-called Steinmeier formula into the Ukrainian Constitution. This includes an amnesty for the militants, holding elections to occupied regions without first disarming the local separatists, restoring Ukraine’s control over the border after the elections, and consolidating the special status of self-government over these territories. It is obvious that in such conditions Russia will have a tool to influence state decision-making processes, and Ukraine will become a puppet of the Kremlin, as it was before 2013.

The instrumentalization of the LDPR as a Trojan horse is confirmed by a careful review of Russia’s actions in the Donbas in the political, economic, cultural, ideological, and informational aspects. For example, Russia not only politically supports the LDPR, but also tries to shape their subjectivity by encouraging Ukraine to engage in a direct dialogue with them. The narrative that the Ukrainian authority should have the direct communication with the LDPR is key to legitimization of these entities and removing Russia`s position from the status of the party to the conflict to a neutral mediator. However, any attempt by the Kremlin to deplete its role as a participant in the conflict has not been successful during these seven years. Apparently, attempts to tie the uncontrolled Ukrainian territories with Russia in the political sphere is being performed through rapid passportization of the population there. According to Ukrainian authorities, more than 600,000 Russian passports have been issued to Ukrainian citizens. And there is no another option to construe it as a gross violation of the Minsk agreements and de facto devaluing their political component. With the passportization, the Kremlin cements its presence in the Donbas and, at any given time, can use it as a casus belli for an armed invasion to distract the Ukrainian authority from a decision that is unfavorable to the Kremlin.

The Kremlin forges ties between Donbass and Russia in an economical sphere as well. On November 15, Putin issued a decree according to which the movement of goods from the LDPR can be carried out on the same terms as goods of Russian origin, and the Ukrainian enterprises, appropriated after the occupation of these regions, will be able to participate in state tender procedures in Russia. This decision is a proof of the contiguous violation of the Minsk agreements by Russia due to paragraph 8 of the Minsk agreements in which full restoration of socio-economic ties between Ukraine and occupied territories anticipated. However, with this decree, the Kremlin integrates so-called ORDLO into the Russian economic space, destroying any preconditions for implementation of paragraph 8. It is noteworthy that the text of the decree does not mention the naming “Luhansk People Republic” or “Donetsk People Republic”. By this, Russia has been attempting to covertly legalize these pseudo-state entities, but not recognizing them in direct. Evidently, this has been doing, again, to preserve preconditions for returning occupied territories to Ukraine.

It also seems obvious that the Kremlin is cleaning up its Ukrainian identity by banning Ukrainian language and literature, state symbols, and instilling a pro-Russian interpretation of history through injections of ideologues and mythologists from the times of the Russian Empire and the USSR. In other words, Russia is building a piece of the “the Russian world” that should be part of Ukraine and countervail the right wing that emerged in Ukrainian society and politics after the annexation of Crimea and the external separation of Donbass.

What comes to an information absorption, the Kremlin is doing the same thing in LDPR as within its own country, namely spreading propaganda and misinformation. Long before 2014, Russian-controlled territories began to turn into information ghettos. At the moment, Russian propaganda is flourishing in LDPR, active demonization of Ukraine is going on and the usual exploitation of the antithesis “Ukrainian officials – fascism, Russian ones – anti-fascism”, by analogy with the period in World War II after 1941, has been actively operated. In recent months, there has been an increase in rhetoric among Russian officials. It seems that Russian propaganda has fallen on military rails, which strangely coincides with the augmentation of a 100,000 Russian troops near Ukraine’s borders and obstructionism in the Normandy and Minsk formats.

In view of the above, the conclusion is that the Kremlin is openly cunning when it accuses official Kyiv of malicious non-compliance with the Minsk agreements. Russian diplomacy, led by Putin, has failed to convince its French and German counterparts of its neutrality in the war in eastern Ukraine. And the Kremlin’s actions against Donbass indicate a systematic failure to fulfill its obligations to Minsk, so any attempt by Kyiv to politically and diplomatically regain territory is doomed. Russia’s profanation of Minsk is further supported by the fact that Moscow has refused to extend the mandate of the OSCE observation mission at the Russian checkpoints “Gukovo” and “Donetsk” on the border with Ukraine after September 30. Moreover, in mid-October, it physically blocked staff members of the OSCE mission through DPR proxies. This is further evidence that Russia is slowly moving away from international formats for resolving the conflict.

A similar situation one could observe in Russia’s position in the Normandy format. The reason for the disruption of the meeting of the foreign ministers of Germany, France, Ukraine and Russia, which was to take place in November this year, was the Kremlin’s position. Being aware beforehand that no one could accept that, the Kremlin has put forward obviously unacceptable preconditions for the parties to meet and has proposed a draft final statement with such phrasing as “internal conflict”, “decisions coordination with the authorities of LDPR” etc. Mainly, Moscow blames Ukraine for the failure, because the latter, according to Putin and Lavrov, has not fulfilled liabilities according to the Minsk agreements. Lavrov has also explicitly stated that Russia will consider the meeting as expedient, only if Kyiv fulfills previous agreements. It is quite obvious that the Kremlin is aware of the impossibility of such concessions from Ukrainian part; therefore, it sees the futility in promotion of its own interests within the the Normandy Quartet. The Kremlin emphasized this with an eloquent gesture when it published the diplomatic correspondence of Russian, German and French ministers on the Russian Foreign Ministry website. In the international community, such action is considered as blatant violation of diplomatic protocol and confirmation of Russia`s disinterest in this format as well.

To conclude,  Russia is trying to move out of the international formats established to resolve the conflict in eastern Ukraine. Despite direct statements that ORDLO is Ukrainian territory, Russia is doing everything to cement its influence there. The West’s consolidated position on the Ukrainian issue in international platforms makes it impossible for Russia to impose its interests through them. This diplomatic impasse encourages the Kremlin to seek other ways, and one such a way could result in flaming the World War III.

Potential Threats For Europe On The Back Of Russian Offensive Politics


Events that have been occurring in recent months in Eastern Europe have brought this region back to the international agenda. The Belarusian migrants blackmail of Poland and Latvia, the Russian gas blackmail to ramNord Stream-2 down the EU’s throat on their own termsalong with an augmentation of 90,000 Russian troopsnear the eastern border of Ukraine should be considered with a comprehensive approach applied. In experts’ opinion, actions of the Belarusian and Russian regimes, which are headed by Bonnie and Clyde of post-Soviet politics, are clearly aimed at fixing the presence of the Kremlin’s interests in the region and claiming its turf in relations with the West. Concurrently, tensions that Russia creates in Eastern Europe have been taking place against the background of the ongoing aggression against Ukraine, which in itself is a prerequisite for a sharp increase in the boiling region.

Moscow’s actions give the idea that the logic of Russia’s foreign policy is to link supranational ambitions with its own potential to fulfil them. The Kremlin tries to countervail the power insufficiency by hybrid tools and concealment or distortion its own role in geopolitical adventures. It seems that without the latter, Moscow would risk to end up in an open confrontation with the West with corresponding consequences of it and, ultimately, the unequivocal marginalization of its position. It is notorious that Eastern Europe, and especially Ukraine, is a key region for Russia’s geopolitical positioning in terms of geographical, historical, cultural and economic factors. Therefore, to maintain the predominant influence is the Kremlin’s main task. The impression is that the strategy chosen to achieve this is not an export of “soft power”, but the”multiplicity of conflicts” providing creation of a belt of controlled chaos (Nagorno-Karabakh – Abkhazia and South Ossetia – LDNR – Transnistria). This is designated to form a buffer zone between Russian and Euro-Atlantic spheres of influence and precedes the former Soviet republics from Euro-Atlantic integration by definition.

Identification of these algorithms underlying inRussia’s foreign policy provokes thought that the Kremlin is not interested in a peaceful settlement of the conflict in eastern Ukraine, inasmuch as puppet “Luhansk People’s Republic” and “Donetsk People’s Republic” are considered only as levers of pressure on Kyiv. In the same context, Minsk-1 and Minsk-2 were only a platform where Russia have tried to squeeze as much concessions as possible from demoralized Ukraine. Meanwhile, Ukraine has utilized it to stop the Russia`s and its pickpocket militants offensive in Donbas. The imposition of the Minsk Agreements on Kyiv and the coercion to fulfill obviously unacceptable demands, which could destroy pillars of its statehood, were accompanied with significant military pressure from Russia. Noteworthy is that the so-called “Debaltseveboiler” occurred after the signing of Minsk-2 in February 2015.

That fact that the Kremlin strives for keepingDonbass as a spot of controlled chaos, by analogy with Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Transnistria, is logically corresponded to Russia’s line not to incorporate these entities into the federation, as it did with Crimea. The Kremlin officially considers the occupied regions of Donbass as the Ukrainian territory, and misrepresents the war in Eastern Ukraine as an internal conflict. It would appear that Moscow`s motivation is to push the LDPR back into the federalized Ukraine under special conditions and to determine the domestic political agenda there, including its Euro-Atlantic course. Under such circumstances, Kyiv’s control over these territories would be nominal, for the Kremlin has significantly exhausted the possibility of returning Ukrainian identity to the occupied regions after 7 years of the aggressive anti-Ukrainian propaganda, demonization, administration from Moscow, and most importantly the LDPR passportization. In view of this, Putin will have almost unlimited opportunities to curb the sovereignty of Ukraine.

It is impossible to ignore Russia’s intention to maximize its geopolitical efficiency through hidden orchestration and distortion of its role in the Russian-Ukrainian war in the diplomatic sphere. According to the Geneva Conventions, the Minsk process itself cannot be construed a negotiation process, since any conflict ends with the signing of an agreement. That is why, the Minsk agreements, from an international legal point of view, are the result of armistice negotiations, both in terms of records and the context, namely the use or threat of use of force (Article 52 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties). Moreover, Russia has signed them along with Ukraine as a party to the conflict; therefore, it hascommitted itself to them. Attempts by top leaders of the Russian Federation to disown the record on paper by putting forward the DNR and LNR convince in aforementioned. The ambivalence of Moscow’s position is, by claiming that the LDPR and Ukraine, but not Russia and Ukraine, are parties to the conflict, the Kremlin also acknowledges that it has a direct influence on the militants. Since unrecognized “people’s republics” are not parties to the Geneva Conventions, nor are they represented in the Trilateral Contact Group, which isestablished in result of Minsk agreements, much less in the Normandy format, Russia is considered as the party to the conflict under international law.

Numerous international documents anticipatesRussia as a belligerent party in Donbas. On December 30, 2020, the same PACE, where the Kremlin triumphantly returned its delegation after blackmail bymembership fees on June 25, 2019, adopted Resolution №2325 on the state of the monitoring procedure, in which Russia is clearly called the party to the Minsk agreements and the party to the conflict in Donbass. Thus, it is obliged to cease the annexation of Crimea (paragraph 3.8) together with military intervention in eastern Ukraine and backup of the local paramilitary formations in any form (paragraph 4.9).

The rhetoric and diplomatic actions of the Russian authority suggest that the Kremlin stubbornly neglectsinternationally recognized rules and is not going to abide by the agreements, as this would probably mean curbing its interests. And Putin, in fact, has made it clear having established the primacy of national law over international one by amending Art. 79 of the Constitution. It seemsthat, Russia is trying to escape liability for its actions, in particular, for crashing MH17 performed by militants in the occupied territory. Evidently, the ongoing trial in this case will not end in favor of Russia. For these reasons, the Kremlin will continue the streak and control the escalation in eastern Ukraine through the LDPR. There is full of revelations that Moscow provides the “people`s republics” with appropriate weapons, ammunition and military equipment for this purpose. “Weapons of the War in Ukraine”, a three-year research performed byConflict Armament Research, provides profoundevidence that rifles, MANPADS, grenade launchers, ammunition and equipment have appropriate serial numbers pointing at Russian origin of them. Tracking Russian-made UAV components used by militants has revealed that their supply channels are independent Russian distributors of electronics and components serving Russian law enforcement and security entities.

The fact is that Russia’s destabilization in Ukraine and Eastern Europe is generally accompanied by political pressure and the imposition of its own will. As mentioned earlier, Russia hides behind LDPR to relinquish its role as the party to the conflict, and calls for a direct dialogue between Ukraine and “people`s republics.” Thus, the Kremlin is trying to legitimize pseudo-state formations and encapsulate them in Ukraine. Interestingly, the situation is similar in Belaruswith its rapidly fading subjectivity. Without exaggerationto say, Russia has been masterminding the currentmigration crisis in the eastern EU`s boarder throughMinsk. Applying Erdogan’s methods of pressure on the EU, the Kremlin is creating a new point of controlled chaos, but hiding behind Belarus this time. As for now,the Lukashenko regime has lost the last vestiges of legitimacy in the eyes of the civilized world after witch-hunt because of protests, and subsequently is falling pray of upcoming anschluss with Russia. It is therefore not surprising that Russia again calls on the EU to engage indirect dialogue with Minsk, and even offers to pay the latter for deterring migrants that Belavia purposefully transports from the poorer countries of the Middle East and North Africa through Russia. Needless to say thatafter the Protasevich case, European countries closed their airspace for this brainchild of Lukashenko.

It is not unreasonable to assume that the current destabilization of Ukraine and the EU’s eastern border is the Kremlin`s approbated modus operandi. Russia has been using time-tested methods of pressure to achieve its foreign policy goals. And the most important thing in the use of hybrid tools is the concealment or distortion of itsrole in destructive actions, ie the so-called “confrontational without being competitive” approach. Such Russia’s approaches to foreign policy obviously strengthen belief that there would be no reconciliation or stabilization of relations between the West and Russia on a consensual or compromise basis, given the fact that the Russian geopolitics is based on confrontation, not development through cooperation. The Ukrainian case examplifies it clearly.

Russian destructive impact on the economy of Ukraine


Starting from the date of Ukrainian-Russian conflict it is not secret for anyone, that the Russian Federation leverages every opportunity to wage its trade and economic war against Ukraine. Russia continues to use financial pressure, energy blackmail, transit and transport blockade, ousting Ukrainian producers from traditional markets, discrediting our companies on international markets, investment penetration into Ukrainian markets via front firms. There is data that the Russian Federation has developed a “register” of Ukraine’s so-called “pressure points”, the main purpose of which is to inflict the greatest possible damage to the economy of our country. The central place in the lists is occupied by the flagships of domestic industry, Ukrainian ports and transport infrastructure, fuel and energy companies, the defense industry. Keep Reading

Beirut, 100 morti e mille feriti per esplosione


Una esplosione devastante nella zona del porto di Beirut ieri nel tardo pomeriggio ha distrutto una vasta area della capitale.

Ad esplodere sarebbe sttonun magazzino dove era posto sotto sequestro un ingente quantitativo di Nitrato sequestrato dalle autorità libanesi.

Il ministro degli interni Mohammed Fahmi ha riferito che da una prima ricostruzione il nitrato di ammonio sarebbe stato posizionato nel magazzino dopo esser stato sequestrato da una nave mercantile nel 2014.

Nei video disponibili in rete si vede molto bene che l’esplosione ha provocato una grande nuvola arancione tipica del rilscio di un gas tossico e nel Paese e’ forte la preoccupazione anche per le tossine presenti ora nell’aria.

Il ministro della salute libanese Hamad Hasan ha consigliato a chiunque possa di andare via da Beirut.

Nell’esplosione sono stati coinvolti anche alcuni militari italiani della missione UNIFIL

Un militare italiano del contingente ha riportato lievi ferite.

È stato lo stesso militare a informare direttamente i familiari sul suo stato di salute.

Sul posto, in stretto coordinamento con le forze di sicurezza libanesi, sono intervenuti i soccorsi del Sector West di Unifil che stanno provvedendo all’evacuazione del personale.

100 i morti provocati dalle esplosioni Lo ha reso noto la Croce Rossa libanese. I feriti sono oltre 4.000. Ma è purtroppo ancora un bilancio provvisorio. Media locali parlano anche di centinaia di dispersi sotto le macerie.

Russia in Crimea: Current Risks and New Challenges

in EUROPE by

By Prof. Borys Babin.  

Attempt of annexation and ongoing occupation of Crimean peninsula by Russian Federation (RF) caused not the crisis of modern international law and relations systemonly. It started also the system of negative processes in areas of militarisation, nuclearisation, international criminal traffic, navigation and aviation safety, connected with Crimea. Systematic violation of religious, linguistic and cultural rights of Crimeans, also as the racial discrimination of the Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars in region, brutal violation of personal human rights are sustainable factor for all six years of Russian occupation the peninsula. Keep Reading

Parade amid pandemic — geopolitics or international crime?


Over the past 24 hours, from April 1 to 2, Russia officially reported 771 new coronavirus cases (although few still believe the official data released there), which brings the total count to 3,548 with 30 deaths. Meanwhile, preparations are ongoing for the May 9 Victory Parade on Red Square, with a large-scale rehearsal being part of it.
Despite the rapidly developing pandemic, the scale of which in Russia has been concealed for several months, as well as the lack of necessary equipment, medications and professionals to fight the coronavirus, Moscow is not suspending its propaganda projects. And it’s pretty clear that Victory Day parade is not about paying tribute to the Soviet soldiers killed in World War II but primarily the propaganda stunt to promote the “greatness” of the Russian army.
Video of a major rehearsal was posted on social networks (, shocking users.
The fact is that during the event involving several thousand Russian troops, not one was seen wearing personal protective gear. No face masks in sight, not to mention gloves to protect hands or goggles to protect a mucous membrane of the eyes.
On the other hand, it seems that the issue of holding a large-scale parade has already been agreed directly in the Kremlin. After all, today, Putin’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov told reporters that there have been no decisions to change plans for the Victory Parade in Moscow on May 9 because of the coronavirus!
It should be noted that the Red Square parade scheduled for May 9 is set to take place precisely at the time when the coronavirus epidemic in Russia will reach its peak, according to experts. As international organizations state that Russia isn’t effectively countering Covid-19, while hiding its failures through propaganda efforts and rigged stats on the epidemic scale, this peak period could lead to truly catastrophic consequences.

Russia attempts to avoid responsibility for the crash of MN 17


The trial of four men accused of murder over the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 in Ukraine in 2014 will be adjourned until June 8 to give defense lawyers more time to prepare, judges at the hearing in the Netherlands ruled on March 23. The MH17 criminal trial resumed at the District Court of The Hague on Monday, March 23, to prosecute four suspects over their alleged responsibility for the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17. While the public and the media was not allowed to attend due to coronavirus measures, the hearing was streamed online. Keep Reading

Kremlin’s plan to “save” Italy, or a tombstone for another EU member state

in DEFENCE/Senza categoria by

As we know, Russia recently sent its aid to Italy, the country suffering from a raging coronavirus. The move raised plenty of questions — regarding the appropriateness of this “aid”, which won’t be critical in the fight against Covid-19, as well as the moral aspect, given the concealment of the epidemic in Russia, where experts and equipment, now deployed to a distant NATO Ally, would be of a much greater benefit. (By

Keep Reading

0 £0.00
Go to Top
× How can I help you?