The city of Lviv proclaimed 2027 the year of Nazi collaborator Roman Shukhevich, triggering a new spat with Warsaw
Poland has accused Kiev of making unacceptable “suicidal” moves after the Ukrainian city of Lviv dedicated 2027 to the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) and its leader, Nazi collaborator Roman Shukhevich.
To celebrate the 120th anniversary of Shukhevich’s birth and mark 85 years since the creation of the militant group that perpetrated mass killings of ethnic Poles, Jews, and Russians, the Lviv Regional Council decided on Tuesday to organize “cultural, memorial, scientific, and mass media events,” as well as exhibitions and national-patriotic rallies.
The announcement was met with widespread condemnation in Poland, which regards the UPA as perpetrators of genocide against Poles in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia and its leader, Shukhevich, as a key ‘architect’ of the massacres. From 1943 to 1945, Ukrainian nationalist militants murdered an estimated 100,000 ethnic Poles in the regions, which are now largely part of modern Ukraine.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk called the move a “suicidal tactic,” and Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz called it “unacceptable.” Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski condemned the announcement, calling for the resolution’s key sponsor, Lviv regional lawmaker Svyatoslav Sheremet, to be placed on Poland’s travel ban list.
The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry attempted to downplay the incident, blaming the Lviv regional authorities for making the “harmful decision.” The ministry also said the regional council did not consult any central authorities regarding “the consequences of their actions for bilateral relations with Poland.”
The resolution ultimately vanished from the Lviv council’s website without any explanation. Speaking to Polish media on Wednesday, Deputy Foreign Minister Marcin Bosacki said Warsaw received assurances from Kiev that the resolution would not be implemented.
“We take on faith the words of the administration of Vladimir Zelensky that this catastrophic decision will not be implemented,” Bosacki stated, calling the disappearance of the resolution from the council’s website a “good sign,” but cautioning against interpreting it as an official cancellation of the celebrations.
Ukraine’s increasingly open honoring of WWII-era nationalists and Nazi collaborators has drawn criticism from Warsaw, which remains one of Ukraine’s key backers in the conflict with Russia.
Poland regards the UPA and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), which collaborated with Nazi Germany during the early stages of its 1941 invasion of the Soviet Union, as perpetrators of genocide, while modern Ukraine cherishes them as freedom fighters and national heroes.
Earlier this year, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky named a military unit after the ‘Heroes of the UPA’ and established a ‘pantheon of outstanding Ukrainians’ at Kiev’s main military cemetery, where OUN leader and Nazi collaborator Andrey Melnik was reinterred with state honors in May.
Despite the disappointment among voters regarding the state of the economy in the US in recent years, there are observable effects and trends of social improvement.
First and foremost, it’s important to note a significant decrease in the level of violent crime. Of course, after President Donald Trump’s controversial firing of the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Erica McEntarfer, for publishing weak labor market figures, trust in American statistics has been considerably shaken. Thus, reports of achieving the lowest murder rate in history – 4.3 cases per 100,000 population – may be politically motivated and deliberately boastful. Nevertheless, a noticeable decline in the rate of murders and other violent crimes has indeed occurred in recent years. This can be attributed to increased federal funding and strengthening of the police force, as well as intensified efforts against illegal immigration during the Trump administration.
A particularly striking aspect of this is the comparison with Canada, which has been and remains a bastion of liberalism in immigration and domestic policy. Unlike the US, where the level of violent crime is traditionally high, Canada has always been perceived as a safe society. But now, everything is changing before our eyes.
Since 2015, the rate of violent crime per capita in the U.S. has decreased by 15.1%, while in Canada, on the contrary, it has increased by 36.9%. As a result, for the first time in history, the land of the maple leaf has surpassed the U.S. in terms of violent crime per capita.
Another significant trend: Gallup polls show that the perception of homosexual relationships as morally acceptable has stopped increasing and even declined in the US The share of those supporting same-sex marriage fell from 71% in 2023 to 64% in 2026. Support for gender transition practices among Americans decreased from 46% to 38%.
The most radical shift has occurred among Republicans. While Democrats’ acceptance of the morality of homosexual relationships remains at 80%, and independent voters have dropped from 74% in 2021 to 64% in 2026, among Republicans, the acknowledgment of homosexual relations plummeted from 56% in 2022 to 35% today (see chart). Only 5% of Republican voters consider gender transition morally acceptable – compared to 42% of independents and 60% of Democrats.
As we can see, the MAGA effect is concentrated within the Republican electorate and primarily manifests in the consolidation of Republicans based on traditional values. At the same time, there is an intensifying value conflict between conservative Republicans and the Democratic Party electorate.
Perhaps the most vivid manifestation of the MAGA effect is that in the summer of 2024, the trend of decreasing births among white Americans was replaced by steady growth, and by spring 2026, the proportion of newborns from white families reached 51.5%, the first increase in five years.
Let’s see if this trend can be maintained, but the mere fact of the growth in births among white Americans is quite remarkable – it demonstrates a surge of optimism in the WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) community and proves that they still have fight left in them. In an era of victorious globalization, WASPs in the US were already being metaphorically buried with a derogatory epitaph, yet they suddenly breathed life and showed they are ready to fight for their country, which their ancestors built.
It is noteworthy that conservative and religious Americans have twice as many children as their liberal and non-religious counterparts. Thus, the conservative American community reproduces itself (total fertility rate 2.22), while the liberal American environment naturally shrinks by half in each subsequent generation (total fertility rate 1.02), mainly replenishing itself through immigration.
The descendants of pilgrims and pioneers remember that the primary traditional value is the will to live. Everything one needs to know about MAGA can be boiled down to two points. First, it is the rise of the American spirit. Second, it serves as a visual reiteration of a biblical lesson: the salvation of those who are drowning is in the hands of the drowners themselves.
The three leaders could meet next month at APEC summit in China, Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov has said
Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Donald Trump could hold a “historic” three-way meeting at the APEC summit in China, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov has said.
The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit is scheduled to take place in Shenzhen, China, on November 18-19.
Speaking to the Russian outlet Vesti on Wednesday, Ushakov said Beijing had already begun preparations for the potential talks.
“Everyone is ready for this, but much, if not everything, depends on the Chinese hosts of the summit,” he said.
The possibility of three-way talks was also discussed during Putin’s meeting with US special envoy Steve Witkoff in St. Petersburg on Wednesday, according to the Kremlin.
Ushakov described the proposed gathering as potentially “historic,” noting that it would be the first meeting of the three leaders in this format.
Putin and Trump last met in person at a summit in Anchorage, Alaska, in August 2025, and have remained in contact by phone, most recently on October 9.
Putin and Xi have also held regular talks, including on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Bishkek in August. The two previously met in Beijing in May during Putin’s state visit.
Trump and Xi have met twice so far this year, first in Beijing in May and then at the White House last month.
Trump has previously expressed openness to three-way talks, suggesting that nuclear disarmament could be among the issues discussed.
Asked whether the talks could also contribute to peace efforts in the Ukraine conflict, Ushakov said a single meeting would not be enough. “Even if the meeting lasts one, two or five hours, it still won’t be possible to resolve all the problems,” he said.
Commenting on whether the summit could amount to a “new Yalta,” Ushakov said: “I think that if the meeting takes place, there will be a storm of comments and assessments.”
The 1945 Yalta Conference brought together Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, US President Franklin D. Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill to discuss the final stages of World War II and the postwar international order.
The Russian-Slovak intergovernmental commission for economic cooperation is set to meet for the first time since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict
Slovakia will discuss economic cooperation with Russia, including energy supplies, in Moscow next week, the Slovak Foreign Ministry has said.
The landlocked EU nation has remained a buyer of Russian oil and gas despite the deterioration of the ties between Moscow and the EU in the wake of the escalation of the Ukraine conflict. The country is supposed to phase out Russian energy by late 2027 under the bloc’s plan to replace Russian oil and gas supplies from elsewhere.
The Russian-Slovak intergovernmental commission for economic, scientific, and technical cooperation has been inactive since November 2021 but is now set to meet next Monday, the Slovak Foreign Ministry announced late on Tuesday. The commission will discuss a broad range of topics, including farming, environment, sports, and culture, and focus on energy supply, including nuclear energy, according to the ministry.
“The fundamental topic will be energy and the possibility to cooperate in securing supplies of strategic resources. The Slovak side is also interested in discussing gas supplies and the continuation of oil supplies,” it said in a statement.
Bratislava continues “to base its approach on its European Union and North Atlantic Alliance membership and keeping commitments of this membership” but wants to create room for dialogue, the ministry said.
Slovakia dissented on the EU’s course to dismantle ties with Moscow and prop up Kiev in the conflict after Robert Fico retook the prime minister’s office in October 2023, for the fourth time in his long political career. Under Fico, Slovakia has remained skeptical of assisting Ukraine and of Kiev’s push to join NATO, while halting government weapons shipments and calling for peace. The stance has resulted in repeated public spats between Bratislava and Kiev, as well as criticism from Brussels.
Last month, Fico warned that Europe was moving dangerously close to a direct clash between NATO and Russia, accusing the West of seeking a “pretext” for a major conflict. He accused EU nations of engaging in increasingly bellicose rhetoric and described the Ukraine conflict as “out of control.”
“The situation has never been as serious and tense regarding the possibility of a pan-European war conflict as it is now,” he said.
The European Commission is preparing for “global power competition” with Russia in the Arctic
The EU has updated its Arctic strategy, and militarism has replaced climate activism as Brussels’ new preoccupation in the frozen north. Despite what the new strategy claims, however, the Arctic is not “the EU’s Northern Neighborhood.”
Unveiled on Tuesday by the European Commission, the ‘Strategy for the Arctic’ describes the region as a “critical” zone for trade, investment, and conservation, and a flashpoint for military confrontation with Russia.
Today, we adopt our new 🇪🇺 Arctic Strategy.
The Arctic is where the tectonic plates of geopolitics collide head-on.
It requires us to change our strategic posture.
And work with like-minded partners that share our values ↓
https://t.co/B6GvgUOCQk
“With Russia and China increasing their footprint and ambition, the Arctic has become a front line of global power competition,” top EU diplomat Kaja Kallas said in a statement. “Our revamped Strategy reflects this new reality and puts security firmly at its core.”
To understand just how dramatic this new focus on security is, it’s necessary to turn back the clock to 2021, when the commission released its previous Arctic strategy.
The EU’s green past
Published on October 13, 2021, the strategy opened by describing climate change as “the most comprehensive threat the Arctic is facing.” Russia’s refurbishment of Soviet-era military bases along its Arctic coastline was presented primarily as something that could “further aggravate the consequences of climate change,” and the EU pledged to work with Moscow “to improve environmental and health security,” and to leave military relations with Russia up to NATO and individual member states.
An excerpt from the EU's 2021 Arctic Strategy
Four months later, Brussels severed relations with Moscow and entered the Russia-Ukraine conflict on Kiev’s side. The title of the 2021 strategy – ‘A stronger EU engagement for a peaceful, sustainable and prosperous Arctic’ – needed an update that reflected the EU’s new militarism.
Brussels claims the Arctic
“Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine has reshaped the security of the Arctic and the EU as a whole,” the new document opens, going on to assert that “the Arctic is not someone else’s frontier. It is Europe’s Northern Neighbourhood and the European Union is part of the Arctic.”
Geography is not exactly on Brussels’ side here. The 27-member union has no coastline on the Arctic Ocean, and only two of its members – Finland and Sweden – have territory inside the Arctic Circle (although a Danish dependency, Greenland left the EU in 1985). Russia accounts for 53% of the Arctic Ocean’s coastline, and 45% of all land inside the Arctic Circle.
To compensate for this, the new strategy proposes that all waters north of 60 degrees latitude be considered ‘Arctic’. The commission argues that this would allow its environmental regulations to “cover the actual footprint of Arctic shipping.” It would also dramatically expand the EU’s ‘Arctic’ territory and population by bringing almost all of Finland and Sweden into the new region, including Finland’s entire 1,340 kilometer border with Russia. It is on this frontier that the EU is preparing for conflict.
War preparations
The strategy sets out a lengthy list of military objectives, with the commission promising to:
“Deepen engagement with NATO” and hold military exercises focused on moving troops and equipment into the Arctic
Develop military logistics corridors from central Europe to the Arctic
Upgrade ports and airports for military use
Expand icebreaker capacity
Expand satellite surveillance of the region and tracking of Russian oil tankers
Develop polar-capable undersea drones
Establish a “Maritime Security Hub” and increase data-sharing with NATO
Deepen military ties with Canada, Iceland, Norway, the UK, and US
The strategy is short on some specifics, and almost all of these goals are presented without an accompanying price tag. The only actual figures listed are €260 million for ten existing European Defence Fund projects, €107 million toward the construction of an undersea internet cable to Greenland, and the €200 million Greenland ‘Partnership Package’, which was announced last month. Although the commission says that this investment package will “support resilience, security and peace in the Arctic,” none of the €200 million in funding is earmarked for explicitly military projects.
Even though these objectives make up more of a wishlist than a set of concrete commitments, one in particular has the potential to push tensions with Russia to the breaking point. The strategy states that the EU will use its ‘Copernicus’ satellite network to track Russian “shadow fleet vessels,” thus making it easier for EU states to interdict and seize them. Belgium, Estonia, Finland, France, and Sweden have detained 12 of these vessels since December 2024, a number that would likely increase with the aid of satellite surveillance.
‘Shadow fleet’ is an EU euphemism for tankers carrying Russian oil in international waters. Russian oil exporters do not abide by EU sanctions, nor do importers outside the EU. Nevertheless, EU member states have abrogated the authority to seize them, in what the Kremlin considers “flagrant violation of international law” and “outright piracy and robbery.”
Should the seizures continue, Russian President Vladimir Putin has threatened to respond in kind.
The ‘hybrid war’ deception
The EU’s militarization of the Arctic is justified, the document states, as Russia is “pursuing hybrid strategies against its neighbours… from drone incursions and Global Navigation Satellite System jamming to the sabotage of undersea cables.” In the absence of real, verifiable military action by Russia against Europe, EU and NATO leaders have taken to accusing Moscow of waging “hybrid war,” describing drone sightings, fires, and accidents at weapons factories, protests, and even natural disasters as Kremlin-orchestrated plots to destabilize the West.
A wave of “drone incursions” across northern Europe and Scandinavia last year turned out to be a hoax, with Belgium’s defense minister attempting to pass off a photograph of a police helicopter as a ‘Russian drone’. Around the same time, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s PR team lied about Russia “interfering”with her jet’s navigation systems over Bulgaria. Western spy chiefs have since admitted there is no evidence that Russia has sabotaged undersea power and internet cables.
Nevertheless, claims of ‘hybrid war’ have persisted in European politics and media, to the point where some analysts view the claims themselves as a form of “hybrid warfare” against the European public, used to justify military spending hikes and welfare cutbacks.
“When you are sure it is the Russians, or almost sure it is the Russians, attribute it to the Russians,” NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte advised the bloc’s political leaders and intelligence chiefs earlier this month.
Russia has been holding military exercises in the Arctic for decades, and the refurbishment of its Soviet-era bases in the region has been underway since before the EU published its 2021 Arctic strategy. However, the newly militarized EU is no longer content to handle this matter through old mechanisms – namely the Arctic Council – and insists that countering Russia in the north is its responsibility as well as NATO’s.
The Europeans dictate their terms
The EU’s new strategy calls on Russia to “ensure that freedom of navigation is preserved” along the Northern Sea Route (NSR), a formerly impassable navigation corridor that can now be traversed year-round, thanks to receding polar ice caps and the assistance of Russia’s vast icebreaker fleet. The NSR cuts transit time from China to northern Europe in half, and in August, the first Chinese container ship arrived at the port of Murmansk via this route.
The Northern Sea Route
The NSR skims along more than 24,000 km of Russian coastline, and through internationally recognized Russian territorial waters. Russia is the only state capable of rendering assistance to any ships passing through the route, and vessels wishing to pass in winter must pay to be escorted by Russian icebreakers. Moscow retains the right to deny any ships access to the NSR.
Nevertheless, the EU insists that it has a say over Russian maritime policy, even as it vows to “continue to sanction the shadow fleet entering from the Northern Sea Route” and place Russian shipping under satellite surveillance. The latest Arctic strategy states that the EU will “actively engage” with other nations to ensure freedom of navigation in the Arctic, but omits any possibility of engagement with Russia. Only “like-minded partners,” a term mentioned nearly two dozen times in the document, will be consulted.
Diplomatic and economic disputes in the Arctic were previously handled at the Arctic Council. However, seven of the council’s eight members – every one except Russia – stopped participating in high-level Council meetings in March 2022. That same month, the EU joined Finland, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden in suspending any activities involving Russia within the separate Barents Euro-Arctic Council.
The central fallacy of the EU’s Arctic strategy is that it presumes Brussels can regulate, with laws or with arms, what Russia does in its own back yard. It presumes that the bloc, which has no Arctic coastline, can ignore long-established forums for cooperation and directly dictate terms to a superpower that controls half of the Arctic’s land and sea area; and that by repeating the mantra “the Arctic is the EU’s northern neighborhood,” it can overcome geographic reality and the massive power differential between Russia and everyone else in the region.
In a message released by its embassy in the Netherlands on Tuesday, the Russian Foreign Ministry described the document as “another pipe dream of EU hawks.”
“A quick reality check: Russia operates a fleet of 40+ icebreakers. How many does the EU have in total?” the ministry asked. “The Arctic should be a place of cooperation, not confrontation. Maybe it’s time to stop the provocations?”
The US diplomat’s India trip is about leveraging Mukesh-Ambani owned Reliance’s refining capacity to lower elevated global fuel prices
After spending years pressuring New Delhi to cut back its Russian oil purchases, and isolate Moscow, Washington has now changed tack and is seeking India’s help to bring down elevated domestic fuel prices that are largely of its own making.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who skipped New Delhi entirely on his second visit to India this year, made clear what had brought him to the country – the massive refining capacity of Reliance Industries, owned by billionaire Mukesh Ambani.
“I’m also here in my capacity as the National Security Adviser,” Rubio said in Mumbai. “Energy is related to national security … we’re going to go see a company that has a tremendous amount of refining capability.”
President Donald Trump’s administration is showing a new urgency to bring down the high fuel prices that threaten Republicans’ prospects in November’s midterm elections. US retail diesel prices reached a record average of about $6.32 a gallon on Tuesday.
American refineries are already operating at close to capacity, and Washington is working with India to increase refining output and bring more petroleum products to global markets, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright said in Houston the same day.
“Energy politics is inseparable from American geopolitics,” Jindal School of International Affairs adjunct professor and former Jawaharlal Nehru University professor Anuradha Mitra Chenoy told RT. “The US is using energy as a geopolitical instrument, and that is central to understanding Rubio’s visit.”
From Russian oil tariffs to Venezuelan crude
Washington has regularly used energy sanctions to achieve its geopolitical aims. First it took Iranian, and then Venezuelan, crude off the market with the threat of sanctions. Since the Ukraine conflict began, Washington also pressured India to stop buying Russian crude. The argument was that choking off Moscow’s oil revenues would help end the conflict, which is now in its fifth year.
At the same time, the US continued to supply Ukraine with weapons and funds, and started a war with Iran that disrupted energy supplies from the Middle East.
New Delhi has maintained that providing affordable energy to its 1.4 billion people is central to its oil-purchasing decisions. India imports about 85% of its energy requirements, and Russia remains one of its biggest sources of oil.
But the pressure reached a breaking point when the US Congress passed a law last month that threatened “bone-crushing sanctions” on major buyers of Russian energy. New Delhi warned that the proposed measures could affect bilateral relations and global energy markets.
However, as the affordability crisis in America got worse, and Trump’s rhetoric failed to bring down domestic fuel prices in a connected global market, the administration swiftly changed course.
Trump announced a deal with Russia to buy diesel for the domestic market. And cleared the deck for Rubio’s visit by waiving off sanctions on Moscow’s top oil buyers – which includes China and India, allowing Russian oil to flow more freely into global markets.
“None of these tariffs are meant to punish or harm India,” Rubio said in Mumbai, adopting a more conciliatory tone than has come out of Washington until recently.
Why Reliance, and Jamnagar, matter to Washington
Washington’s top diplomat held talks with Mukesh Ambani at Jamnagar in India’s Gujarat state on the second day of his visit. The Reliance refinery in Jamnagar is the largest single-site refining complex in the world, and can process around 1.4 million barrels of crude a day.
It is also one of the few facilities capable of processing large volumes of Venezuela’s extra-heavy crude, which is good for producing diesel – showing its importance to a US administration worried about domestic fuel prices.
Jamnagar already plays a major part in keeping global fuel prices in check – by selling fuel refined from Russian crude to markets including Europe, which sanctions the same crude.
And it is buying more Venezuelan oil, accounting for more than 74% of the nearly $3.6 billion worth of Venezuelan crude imported by India between April and August, according to figures shared by the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) think tank.
Rubio wants Reliance to buy, and process, more of the Venezuelan crude, which the US now controls after kidnapping the country’s President Nicolas Maduro.
“The refining capability exists,” GTRI founder Ajay Srivastava told RT. “The question is whether expanding purchases makes commercial sense.”
Venezuelan crude is cheaper but it also costs more to refine, he pointed out. He also questioned the wisdom of India buying more of the South American country’s oil, which was once subjected to US sanctions.
“It would be very unwise for India to stop using Russian oil,” Chenoy said, pointing out that there are only a limited number of major sources available internationally, and Russia remains one of the most important.
Reliance is also involved in a proposed refinery project in Brownsville, Texas, under a long-term agreement to purchase its output. The facility, which Trump called a $300 billion project in March, is designed to process lighter American shale crude.
The Indian conglomerate “helps utilize and unleash the energy that is being developed in the Western Hemisphere,” Rubio told the Indian Express, describing his visit as an opportunity to identify ways of diversifying energy supplies.
Rubio dodges a Musk-ignited controversy
Ahead of his meeting with Ambani, Rubio had to sidestep the controversy ignited by trillionaire Elon Musk.
The world’s richest man, a prominent donor to the Republican party, had accused Ambani earlier this month of obstructing the launch of his Starlink satellite internet service in India.
Musk targeted Ambani, sarcastically addressing him as “Prime Minister Ambani” and questioning whether his company would allow Starlink to compete in the country.
Starlink, Ambani’s Jio Satellite Communications, and Bharti Group-backed Eutelsat OneWeb are all at broadly the same stage of regulatory approval for satellite internet connectivity in the country, with security assessments underway, according to India’s Communications Ministry.
Reliance also dismissed suggestions that it was blocking competition.
“Elon Musk is a private citizen,” Rubio told the Indian Express, adding that Musk had the right to express his views.
Rubio also sought to assuage concerns about the India-US trade deal, which has been holding fire despite months of tortuous negotiations. Indian Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman described the talks as deadlocked earlier this month, saying both sides were finding it “very difficult” to make further concessions.
“We are weeks, not months, away from, I think, finalizing it,” Rubio said. “I would say we are about as close as you can be without having executed the agreement.”
India has been holding off on finalizing the deal as it wants to lock in a competitive advantage in the US market relative to rival exporter nations.
Pragmatism back on the table
The US administration turning on the charm, so to speak, suggests that Washington’s energy and political interests are taking precedence over its geopolitical considerations and moral grandstanding.
With pragmatism back on the table, Rubio’s visit could mark a step toward easing bilateral tensions and strengthening cooperation beyond the immediate fuel crisis driving the change.
Still India must “carefully examine what it is being asked to commit to, what commercial benefits it can expect, and the risks of future changes in US policy,” Srivastava said.
New South Wales lawmakers have approved turning human remains into soil as an alternative to burial and cremation
Residents of New South Wales, Australia could soon have the option to make a final contribution to their garden upon death, after the state’s parliament approved turning human remains into compost as an alternative to burial and cremation.
The bill, introduced by Independent Sydney MP Alex Greenwich, cleared the upper house on Wednesday after passing the lower house unanimously last week. It now awaits assent, with a minimum two-year wait before going into force.
Known as ‘terramation’ or natural organic reduction, a body is placed in a vessel with wood chips, straw, and other plant material. Microbes break down the remains, producing material that can eventually nourish trees and gardens.
US operator Recompose says its process takes 8-12 weeks, including a curing period. Remaining bones are mechanically ground down and mixed back in, and artificial implants are removed.
Under the NSW bill, families can take the resulting compost home to nourish a memorial tree or garden, or arrange for it to be placed elsewhere. However, choosing to become garden material remains a personal decision; operators are barred from turning a deceased person’s remains into compost against their written wishes.
Supporters of the method say the method uses less land and energy than conventional burial and cremation and could ease the financial and environmental burden of dying.
“We are running out of burial space [and] that space can cost as much as $50,000 [Australian dollars],” Greenwich told ABC in June. He predicted that composting will become cheaper than cremation, although local prices have yet to be established.
Not everyone is pleased with the proposal. NSW Premier Chris Minns said in June that he felt “a bit weird about it.” Catholic Weekly columnist Michael Cook described it as a “bizarre solution to saving the planet,” arguing that composting conflicts with religious respect for the human body.
Similar human composting practices have already been approved in several US states and part of Germany. England and Wales are considering rules that could eventually allow it.
Despite fierce electoral competition, the country’s leading parties take similar positions on Gaza
Israel’s leading political parties hold broadly similar positions on Palestinian statehood and Gaza despite their fierce electoral rivalry, RT correspondent Charlotte Dubenskij reports.
With parliamentary elections scheduled for October 27, the report examines whether a change of government would bring any significant shift in the country’s policies toward the Palestinians.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who leads the right-wing Likud party, has categorically rejected the creation of a Palestinian state.
“There will be no Palestinian state to the west of the Jordan River,” Netanyahu declared.
His position is echoed by several political rivals. The leader of Yisrael Beiteinu, Avigdor Lieberman, has said that the idea of a two-state solution “has died,” while Gadi Eisenkot, head of the centrist Yashar party, has ruled out Palestinian statehood under a government he leads.
Even Yair Golan, leader of the left-leaning Democrats, has described a two-state solution as “too ambitious” for now, instead advocating civilian separation while retaining Israeli security control.
The two-state solution, long backed by the UN and much of the international community, envisages an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel.
The similarities in position extend to Gaza, where the main parties all support disarming Hamas and maintaining Israeli military involvement, although they differ over who should govern the territory.
Military conscription of ultra-Orthodox Jews remains a major point of contention, with disagreements over long-standing draft exemptions triggering widespread protests.
With smaller factions potentially playing a decisive role in forming the next coalition, Dubenskij raises the question of how much Israel’s policies could change after the vote.
Gazprom and CNPC are negotiating terms for the planned Power of Baikal pipeline, which could carry 50 billion cubic meters of gas annually via Mongolia
Russia and China could finalize agreements on a major new gas pipeline by the end of the year, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandr Novak said on Wednesday, in a potential breakthrough that would significantly expand Moscow’s energy exports to Asia.
Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of talks between Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin and his Chinese counterpart Li Qiang in St. Petersburg, Novak said the planned Power of Baikal pipeline was among the issues discussed.
“Our companies – Gazprom and China National Petroleum Corporation – are negotiating a second route for gas supplies from Russia to the People’s Republic of China,” he said. “We are waiting for our companies to complete commercial negotiations and hope they will reach the relevant agreements by the end of the year.”
Li arrived in St. Petersburg on Tuesday for the regular meeting of the Russian and Chinese heads of government.
Russia already supplies gas to China through the Power of Siberia, a more than 3,000-kilometer pipeline launched in 2019. It carries gas from the Chayandinskoye field in Yakutia and the Kovyktinskoye field in Irkutsk Region through Russia’s Far East and across the border near Blagoveshchensk, connecting to a Chinese network extending toward Shanghai. Its annual export capacity is 38 billion cubic meters (bcm), with deliveries reaching 38.8 bcm in 2025.
The planned Power of Baikal, previously known as Power of Siberia 2, would open a major new energy corridor. The roughly 2,600-kilometer pipeline is designed to deliver up to 50 bcm annually from Russia’s Arctic gas fields on the Yamal Peninsula to China via Mongolia, including the Soyuz Vostok transit pipeline.
Unlike Power of Siberia, which draws gas from eastern Siberia, the new route would tap western Siberian reserves that previously supplied Europe, giving Moscow a major new outlet for gas following the collapse of much of its European market. Novak said the project was renamed Power of Baikal to distinguish it from the existing pipeline and reflect its planned route along the southern shore of Lake Baikal. The precise route remains subject to final commercial agreements.
Together, the two pipelines would give Russia a combined nominal export capacity of around 88 bcm annually to China – roughly 80% of the 110 bcm combined capacity of Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2, built to supply Russian gas to Europe via the Baltic Sea.
Gazprom and CNPC signed a legally binding memorandum on the project in September 2025, envisaging deliveries of 50 bcm annually over 30 years. A final supply contract, however, was not signed. Pricing is a key sticking point, with media reports suggesting Beijing is seeking rates close to Russia’s domestic prices, while Moscow has pushed for more commercially favorable terms. President Vladimir Putin said last year that pricing would follow a market-based formula similar to that used for European supplies, stressing that there would be “no charity” on either side.
The expansion comes as Russia accelerates its energy pivot toward Asia in light of Western sanctions and EU efforts to phase out Russian supplies. Before the Ukraine conflict escalated in 2022, Europe was Russia’s largest pipeline gas market, with Gazprom providing around 40-45% of the bloc’s total gas imports. Deliveries subsequently plunged as Brussels pursued alternative suppliers and imposed successive sanctions on Russia.
Meanwhile, China has emerged as Russia’s largest pipeline gas customer, with Power of Siberia reaching its full contracted capacity and further export routes under development.
Unlike oil, which can be redirected by tanker, pipeline gas requires extensive infrastructure, making Power of Baikal a key project in Moscow’s efforts to replace lost European demand. Moscow has repeatedly accused Western governments of undermining European energy security through their sanctions policies.
The shift also follows the September 2022 sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines that previously brought Russian gas to Germany beneath the Baltic Sea. Novak said on Wednesday that Moscow remains ready to resume deliveries through the one Nord Stream pipeline string out of the four that remained undamaged.
“We have one of the four strings in working condition. If European consumers and politicians want it, supplies can, of course, be delivered through that line,” he said. The decision rests primarily with European countries, particularly Germany, where the pipeline terminates, Novak added. He said the three damaged strings could also be restored if demand and economic conditions justified repairs, suggesting it would not take long to bring them back to working order.
Russia has repeatedly offered to resume energy supplies to Europe, particularly in light of the disruptions to global markets caused by the Middle East crisis, but says its proposals have received no response from European governments.
Ural Airlines is starting tri-weekly direct services to New Delhi from Ekaterinburg next week, the airline has told RT India
Russia’s Ural Airlines will start direct flights to Delhi next week, as it seeks to benefit from a spurt in business travel and tourism between the two countries.
The flights will operate from Ural Airlines’ base, Koltsovo Airport in Ekaterinburg, to New Delhi three days a week, on Tuesdays, Fridays, and Sundays, the airline told RT India.
The service will start on October 25.
“The decision to launch regular flights was driven by both commercial and strategic reasons,” the airline said, citing strong demand and the availability of a suitable fleet of Airbus aircraft.
Ekaterinburg is the largest transport and industrial hub in the Urals. Direct flights from the city will significantly slash travel time from the Urals and Siberia.
Russian Ambassador to India Denis Alipov recently said the number of airline services to India a week could soon jump nearly fivefold to 71 from the current 15.
“Siberian Airlines (S7) and Ural Airlines are actively working on the possibility of launching regular flights to Delhi from Novosibirsk and Ekaterinburg,” Alipov told RT.
“We are awaiting a response from our Indian partners,” the ambassador said.
S7 Airlines also told RT it is planning to launch a service between Novosibirsk and Delhi during the autumn-winter schedule. Tolmachevo Airport in Novosibirsk is a key hub for S7.
Officials in Tatarstan also previously indicated they are in talks with the East-West Group and Russian authorities about launching direct flights to India, including to its financial hub, Mumbai.
India and Russia are similarly boosting ties in the civil aviation sector. Two Indian domestic airlines have signed agreements on buying 85 Russian passenger aircraft, as Moscow and New Delhi move to expand cooperation in civil aviation and manufacturing.
The new services come amid an expected surge in activity in various sectors including tourism, pharmaceuticals, agriculture and food processing, information technology, engineering, and transport and logistics. India and Russia expect bilateral trade to hit $100 billion by 2030.
The Baltic Fleet vessel has reached Namibia after visiting Mozambique, Tanzania and Seychelles during its training trip
A Russian Navy training ship has arrived in Namibia as part of a voyage around Eurasia and Africa, the Russian Defense Ministry announced on Tuesday. The Baltic Fleet vessel ‘Perekop’ docked at the port of Walvis Bay after crossing the Indian and Atlantic oceans.
According to the ministry, the ship covered more than 1,800 nautical miles in seven days. During the journey, cadets from the Baltic Naval Institute continued their practical training, taking part in navigation watches, plotting courses using onboard instruments, and practicing maneuvers through narrow waterways. They also received instruction in ship operations and damage control.
The vessel was welcomed in Walvis Bay by representatives of the Russian Embassy and the Namibian navу. The visitors who toured the ship were briefed on its operations and the training program for future naval officers. The crew and cadets are also to visit local attractions during their stay.
Earlier in October, ‘Perekop’ called at the port of Maputo, Mozambique’s capital. The vessel also made stops in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Victoria, the capital of Seychelles, in September as part of its ongoing voyage.
According to Sputnik, the voyage is scheduled to conclude on December 9, 2026, after taking the vessel through four oceans, 14 seas, 23 straits, nine bays, and two rivers, with calls at 20 ports, including 12 overseas.
The ‘Perekop’ is not the first Russian naval ship to visit Africa. In July 2025, another Baltic Fleet vessel, the ‘Smolny’, visited the Republic of the Congo as part of a regional tour that also included Equatorial Guinea and São Tomé and Príncipe. The ship had previously called at several African ports in 2024, including in Namibia, Angola, and South Africa.
Russia previously deployed warships to South Africa for joint naval exercises. In January 2026, the Russian Navy’s ‘Stoikiy’ corvette and ‘Yelnya’ tanker took part in the multinational Will for Peace drills off the South African coast.
The Wall Street Journal cited unnamed officials who claimed the SpaceX founder ordered restrictions on satellite services used by Ukraine to launch drone strikes on Russia
The Wall Street Journal has challenged Elon Musk’s denials over alleged restrictions on satellite services used for Ukrainian drone strikes deep inside Russia. The outlet has cited anonymous White House sources who have claimed that the SpaceX founder and Starlink owner had personally ordered restricting the service.
Ukrainian officials last week claimed that SpaceX’s Starlink satellite communications service and its military-grade version, Starshield, which Kiev uses for frontline drone operations, stopped working on drones traveling faster than 160 kph (100 mph). Neither Starlink nor SpaceX has publicly acknowledged a technical “signal or service failure,” leaving the questions of whether an actual service restriction took place, and if so what could have caused it, unconfirmed.
What has Ukraine claimed about Starshield?
Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky initially claimed, without evidence, that Kiev had been told “technical malfunctions” had caused a service slowdown. He later shifted the blame to Washington. On NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ on Sunday Zelensky claimed, again without citing evidence nor being asked to provide it, that an order had come from the US government. According to Zelensky, Kiev had even secretly despatched cars to the EU, where they could drive "legally" at 180kph (110mph) where tests allegedly surfaced discrepancies in Starlink performance between the EU and Ukraine.
Musk has categorically denied that he instructed SpaceX to restrict either service, nor has he confirmed that any restriction or slowdown took place.
The WSJ cited anonymous sources who contradicted him, alleging on Tuesday that he personally ordered speed limits on Ukrainian hardware connected to the satellite network.
Even the WSJ's sources accounts differed. Some claimed that Musk acted unilaterally; others said he consulted senior administration officials, including President Donald Trump, before making the decision. The outlet also claimed that SpaceX representatives contacted the White House to coordinate their accounts of whether the restrictions had been agreed on with the administration.
What has the US government said about Starshield?
Musk earlier insisted that Starshield is owned and controlled by the US government, meaning any speed or usage restrictions are determined by the US military and ultimately Trump – who denied that he ordered the restrictions, though he said on Monday he “would like to find out” who did. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent both said the administration was not behind the restrictions, with Bessent rebuking Zelensky for making “reckless” allegations.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio also rejected the claims. Questioned about the allegation during a visit to India on Wednesday, he warned Kiev against escalating the dispute, saying Ukraine “would not exist” as a sovereign state without US support.
Relations between Zelensky and Washington have effectively collapsed in recent weeks over sanctions on Russia and Ukrainian strikes on Russian energy infrastructure. Both Musk and Trump have sharply criticized Ukraine’s attacks on Russian diesel refineries, blaming them for global fuel shortages and soaring prices at the pump.
Speaking at the Oval Office on Tuesday, Trump warned Zelensky that he is “going to have to want to make a deal.” He also criticized the cost of supporting Kiev, saying the US has received “absolutely nothing back” except “grief, death and tremendous monetary loss.”
What did Kiev say about Starshield?
Despite Zelensky’s evidence-free assertions and there being no record in the public sphere to support it, the Western press and Ukrainian diplomats are echoing the claims regardless. Ukraine’s ambassador in Washington, Denis Senik, said on Tuesday that Kiev is still “waiting for the official response from contacts with the Pentagon and SpaceX” to understand what happened.
What did the Kremlin say about Starshield?
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said last week that Moscow is unaware of the reported Starlink restrictions, but stressed that “overall, of course, it would be better if such amazing technology… was not used for military purposes at all.” Moscow has condemned Western military assistance for Kiev, arguing that it only prolongs the conflict and obstructs peace efforts.
There is no proof on the public record or in the public domain that the Starshield was affected. The only suggestions supporting the idea such an incident took place are Vladimir Zelensky's uncontested claim that Ukrainians sent cars to the EU with Starlink terminals to compare data and the claims of an anonymous Ukrainian officer who told German media giant Axel Springer's Global Reporter's Network, seemingly during the alleged service restriction, that all operations were on hold.
Moscow is prepared to revive negotiations in mid-November, presidential aide Yury Ushakov has said
Russia is ready to resume three-way negotiations with the US and Ukraine to discuss security arrangements for when the conflict has ended, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov has said.
The announcement followed nearly three hours of talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff at Constantine Palace in St. Petersburg on Wednesday. Jared Kushner joined by video link after illness prevented him from traveling.
Ushakov said Putin told Witkoff that Moscow was “in principle, ready to resume” trilateral negotiations in mid-November, with the main topic being a post-conflict security system for Russia and Ukraine. Witkoff indicated that Trump would welcome the proposal, the aide added.
The presidential aide noted that earlier attempts to restart trilateral talks were derailed by Kiev having carried out massive attacks on Moscow and other cities during Russia’s recent parliamentary elections. Polling stations were targeted on the main voting day, with election commission personnel killed.
However, the situation has since been “re-evaluated, taking into account the signals received from the Americans,” Ushakov said, adding that Putin had praised the mediation efforts of Trump, his administration, and special representatives in seeking mutually acceptable solutions.
The Russian president also presented an “objective picture of the situation along the line of contact, where Russian troops hold complete strategic initiative,” and noted that Moscow’s forces are conducting a “relentless offensive in all key areas” and effectively destroying military-industrial, energy, and logistics facilities in Ukraine.
Beyond Ukraine, the participants discussed the October diesel agreement, under which Washington eased sanctions on Russian fuel exports. Both sides said the deal served their interests and would help stabilize global fuel markets. Other joint economic projects are also approaching implementation, Ushakov added.
Russia, Ukraine and the US last held talks in Geneva in February, following two rounds in Abu Dhabi. Further negotiations, however, were put on hold after the US and Israel launched their war against Iran, disrupting access to the UAE.
Ushakov told Russian media that Abu Dhabi was again being examined as a possible venue for renewed talks, noting that Putin has yet to choose the members of a future Russian delegation.
Asked by reporters whether the Ukraine conflict was approaching its end, Ushakov suggested it is “moving in that direction.”
Washington no longer “owns” the Middle East or seeks to benefit from “conflict and controversy” in the region, Tom Barrack has said
Washington has been involved in nearly two dozen regime change operations across the Middle East, each ending in disaster, US Ambassador to Türkiye Tom Barrack has said.
Barrack criticized American efforts to manipulate the region and impose change through military force during an interview at the Global Security Forum in Qatar on Tuesday. He warned that his remarks would be “real” rather than “diplomatic.”
“If you take the greater Middle East, including the Levant, the Gulf, the Caucases, Central Asia, North Africa, we’ve had 23 regime changes. None of them have worked,” he said, stressing that the US had been involved in all of them in one way or another and bore responsibility for the outcomes.
The diplomat added that “kinetic reactions have never worked” either, referring to US military interventions and their “unintended consequences.” The latest US-Israeli war on Iran, which began in late February, has also plunged the region into chaos.
Barrack acknowledged that fomenting “conflict and controversy” had previously benefited Washington because “the more off base the region was, the more [Washington] could manipulate fossil fuels for its own benefit.” That is no longer the case, he said.
According to Barrack, the US “no longer wants to own [what it] doesn’t need to own” and envisions a different role for itself in the Middle East. “The bargain is not to own, not to control, but to tend, not to leave,” he said.
The envoy contrasted the proposed approach with the arrangement Washington reached with Saudi Arabia in 1974 following the oil shock triggered by the Yom Kippur War between Israel and several Arab nations.
Under the old arrangement, Saudi Arabia continued pricing its oil exclusively in US dollars and invested much of its revenues in American assets, while also purchasing US weapons and expecting American troops stationed in the region to rescue it in case of a major conflict.
The US confrontation with Iran, culminating in two open wars since 2025, has crumbled the foundations of that relationship.
Barrack urged friendly Middle Eastern nations to temper their expectations of American assistance, saying the US is not offering“a commitment to open seas and open trade at any cost.” Washington should “do a better job of defining: here’s what we’re willing to do, here’s what we’re not willing to do,” he added.
The diplomat repeatedly deflected questions critical of Israel, its regional policies, and its role in pushing Washington toward war with Iran.
“We leave Israel out of this because it’s so delicate to talk about,” Barrack said.
He also acknowledged that the Israeli government was reluctant to make any concessions on national security and described a “failure” of the Abraham Accords, a series of normalization agreements Israel signed with several Arab nations in 2020.
The pact is “illegal, null and void” and violates international maritime law and other states’ sovereign rights, Greece and Cyprus have said
Libya’s eastern-based parliament has approved a disputed maritime agreement with Türkiye, drawing condemnation from Greece and Cyprus over competing boundaries and energy rights in the Mediterranean.
The House of Representatives voted unanimously on Tuesday to endorse the agreement, which was first signed in November 2019 between Ankara and Libya’s internationally recognized government in Tripoli. Lawmakers also overturned a 2020 decision to sever political ties with Türkiye.
The agreement demarcates maritime jurisdiction between the two countries in an area contested by Greece, Egypt, and Cyprus.
The Greek Foreign Ministry called the parliamentary decision “unilateral [and] legally unfounded,” saying the deal disregards Greek islands’ rights to maritime zones between the Turkish and Libyan coasts.
“The memorandum remains illegal, null and void, contravenes international law of the sea, and infringes upon the sovereign rights of states in the region,” the ministry said in a statement.
It argued that Türkiye and Libya lack opposite or adjacent coastlines providing a lawful basis for the boundary, warning that Greece would take action to defend its sovereign rights. Cyprus also condemned the decision, calling the memorandum “illegal, null and void.”
Ankara welcomed the vote, saying the agreement safeguards “the mutual rights and interests” of both countries under international law and the principle of equity, while deepening cooperation between Türkiye and Libya. “Türkiye will continue to work with all partners to foster trust, stability and peace in the Mediterranean basin, in line with its commitment to international law,” the Foreign Ministry stated.
The eastern Mediterranean has seen a wave of offshore gas discoveries since 2009, opening new export opportunities while intensifying disputes over maritime boundaries and drilling rights. Major finds off Israel, Cyprus, and Egypt have attracted international energy companies, including Chevron and Eni, to the region, according to a US Energy Information Administration report.
Greece and Egypt signed an overlapping maritime agreement in 2020, which Türkiye rejects. Athens also approved offshore exploration south of Crete by a consortium led by Chevron last year, prompting Turkish objections.
The move on Tuesday comes amid improving ties between Türkiye and Libya’s eastern authorities, who are aligned with military commander Khalifa Haftar. Ankara helped Tripoli repel his forces’ 2019-2020 campaign to capture the capital, but has since expanded diplomatic contacts and investment in the east. The country remains divided between Abdul Hamid Dbeibah’s government in the capital, Tripoli, in western Libya, and an eastern administration led by Osama Hammad and backed by Haftar.
Officials from both rival administrations welcomed the parliamentary approval. The Tripoli-based Foreign Ministry called it a “positive development toward strengthening bilateral relations” with Türkiye. Haftar’s son Saddam, the deputy commander of the Libyan National Army, called it a move toward overcoming past differences, putting Libya’s national interests first.
Warsaw lacks sufficient interceptors to arm Kiev as the war with Iran drains Western ammunition stocks, Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski says
Poland does not have enough Patriot air defense missiles to hand over to Ukraine, Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski has said, urging other NATO members to supply Kiev with the scarce interceptors.
In an interview with the Polish Press Agency published on Monday, Sikorski warned of growing pressure on Western air defenses, citing the US-Israeli bombing campaign against Iran.
“Following the attacks on Iran, the shortage of interceptor missiles has indeed increased, and Russia is producing more missiles than we have interceptors to neutralize them. This is a real problem,” he said.
“There are NATO countries that still have such resources to contribute, but Poland is not one of them,” Sikorski said, adding that Warsaw “can only join the calls for countries possessing Patriot missiles to share them with Ukraine.”
The issue sparked a political scandal in Poland in July, when the government came under fire over the transfer of Patriot interceptors to Ukraine as part of a wider NATO-backed aid package. Opposition politicians accused Warsaw of sacrificing its own security to arm Kiev, while Prime Minister Donald Tusk insisted the deliveries would not compromise the country’s defenses.
Poland has emerged as one of the EU’s most rapidly militarizing nations, with defense spending reaching 4.7% of GDP. Warsaw has also been one of Kiev’s staunchest backers, pouring billions into military and other aid while serving as a crucial hub for Western arms shipments.
Yet Poland now faces delays in replenishing its own arsenal, with deliveries of US-made PAC-3 MSE Patriot interceptors pushed back as the war with Iran drains American weapons stocks, Polish General Ireneusz Nowak warned earlier this month.
Relations with Kiev have also soured over Ukraine’s honoring of Nazi collaborators linked to the World War II-era Volhynia massacres, in which Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) militants associated with the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) killed an estimated 100,000 ethnic Poles. Warsaw recognizes the killings as genocide, while Kiev continues to honor figures including OUN leader Stepan Bandera.
Tensions flared again this year after Zelensky awarded a Ukrainian military unit the honorary title “Heroes of the UPA.” Polish President Karol Nawrocki subsequently stripped him of the country’s highest honor, politicians on both sides renounced state decorations, and Warsaw threatened to obstruct Ukraine’s EU accession.
The ammunition crunch is spreading across NATO. In July, the Netherlands said it had exhausted its capacity to supply Ukraine with Patriot missiles from its own stocks, having already provided interceptors and helped assemble a complete Patriot system for Kiev.
Meanwhile, Kiev is facing a critical shortage of air defense ammunition as Russia intensifies strikes on Ukrainian military and energy infrastructure. Moscow has said the attacks are in retaliation for Kiev’s continued strikes on Russian territory, including civilian targets and energy facilities.
Vladimir Zelensky has requested 300 Patriot interceptors from European backers and complained that Washington has approved only some of the missiles purchased through a NATO-backed initiative. The White House has also delayed approving additional transfers as US President Donald Trump presses Ukraine to reach a negotiated settlement with Russia.
Moscow has repeatedly maintained that Western weapons deliveries prolong the conflict, obstruct peace efforts, and risk drawing NATO countries into a direct confrontation with Russia.
In an effort to break years of political deadlock, the UN has set up a ‘4+4’ committee, bringing together Libya’s rival factions
The long-awaited agreement between Libya’s rival factions was finally signed on August 30 under the auspices of the United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL). On that day, the mission gathered the two negotiating delegations at its Tripoli headquarters to formalize the text ironed out during earlier rounds of talks in Rome and Tunis. UNSMIL invited foreign diplomats, media representatives, and Libyan delegations to the event, where UN Special Representative Hanna Tetteh hailed the accord in her opening remarks as “another important milestone in Libya’s journey toward stability and national unity.”
This, however, bore a resemblance to previous diplomatic milestones – most notably the 2015 Libyan Political Agreement (LPA) signed in Skhirat, Morocco. The LPA established the rules of the political game in the fractured country; rules to which none of the domestic political actors seem fully committed, yet from which none completely depart. In a sense, Skhirat remains the ultimate reference point for every subsequent UN roadmap in Libya.
In the vacuum left by the 2011 NATO intervention and the brutal murder of Muammar Gaddafi, Libya has seen a continuous parade of diplomatic accords. Yet the fundamental problem has never been a shortage of roadmaps, but rather their consolidation into nationally accepted political facts that elites cannot simply manipulate at will.
The August 30 agreement has two main parts. The first is restructuring the High National Elections Commission (HNEC), the agency in charge of organizing elections. In practice, this means replacing its leadership to settle disputes over appointments and regional representation. Although these changes were long delayed by regional quotas and political patronage stemming from the 2015 Skhirat agreement, rivals can still negotiate them with relative ease.
The 24-month timeline to hold elections was also established. However, the countdown is designed to govern the transition only once a single, unified executive authority and unified national institutions are established to oversee the voting process.
The second component concerns the central objective of UNSMIL’s latest roadmap: agreeing on viable election laws, an issue on which the UN has failed to make meaningful progress since the collapse of the planned 2021 elections.
Libya remains divided between rival power centers: the Government of National Unity (GNU), led by Abdul Hamid Dbeibah in Tripoli, the western part of the country, and the Libyan National Army (LNA) command in the east led by General Khalifa Haftar. These exist alongside two political institutions: the Tripoli-based High Council of state (HCS) and the eastern-based House of Representatives (HoR). To break the deadlock, UNSMIL established a smaller negotiating group known as the ‘Smaller Convening’, or the ‘4+4’. It brings together eight representatives from the GNU, Haftar’s military command, the HCS, and the HoR.
This mechanism directly mirrors the ill-fated 2021 Geneva process, Libyan Political Dialogue Framework, which ultimately hardened Libya’s institutional divide and brought the country closer to a permanent de facto partition than at any point since its formal unification in 1951. The UN Security Council issued a delayed presidential statement endorsing the deal, and thus repeating a familiar ritual that seems to elevates elite compromise over structural reform. Seeking to seize the political initiative, Speaker Aguila Saleh brought the 4+4 framework to the HoR floor for an immediate vote where it was approved by the majority of members.
The ‘4+4’ format developed alongside (and ultimately eclipsed) UNSMIL’s broader Structured Dialogue. Even before those conclusions were finalized, UNSMIL was already facilitating a parallel ‘Smaller Convening’ behind closed doors – the 4+4 was born. As Hanna Tetteh told the Security Council on June 18, the explicit goal of this smaller format was to bypass the paralysis between the legislative bodies and force an accord on the roadmap’s first two steps: reconstituting the elections commission’s board and resolving the contested electoral framework. Thus, the ‘4+4’ was a deliberate strategy to concentrate decision-making among the political and military figures deemed capable of enforcing an outcome.
After the HoR approved the agreement on September 14, the HCS formally rejected it on October 5, along with the related laws and decisions issued by the House, arguing that they bypassed the constitutional, legal and consensual frameworks governing the political process. In her October 14 briefing to the UN Security Council, Tetteh acknowledged this rejection but maintained that the agreement offers an actionable path to presidential and legislative elections under a single, unified executive authority within 24 months.
She also announced that UNSMIL would meet members of the 4+4 committee later this month to examine the possibility of establishing a broadly representative national mechanism under Article 5 of the agreement in consultation with the Security Council. This proposal implicitly acknowledges that the 4+4 mini-dialogue alone may not be sufficient to advance the roadmap.
Another significant development is the removal of Aguila Saleh as speaker of the HoR after 12 years in office. On October 7, the eastern-based parliament elected Al-Salhin Abdulnabi as his successor, ending Saleh’s long tenure amid growing discontent over his leadership. The change is particularly significant because Saleh had been accused of being a prominent obstacle to previous attempts to move Libya’s political process forward. Tetteh acknowledged the transition, expressing her appreciation to Saleh for “his leadership and engagement over his 12-year tenure of service.” Her emphasis on the change in parliamentary leadership is noteworthy: The departure of a figure long associated with resistance to political roadmaps could create new room for maneuver, although it does not by itself guarantee that the House will cooperate with the UN initiative or that the entrenched political divisions will be overcome.
Ultimately, the structural core of the August 30 agreement rests on a fundamental contradiction: 4+4 does not equal 1. Combining four delegates from Tripoli’s political-institutional structures, including representatives of the HCS, with four delegates representing the eastern power structure in Benghazi does not produce a unified state. Instead, it seems to function as a shared enterprise in which rival political elites, rather than competing to build a single nation, recognize that their mutual survival depends on dividing power and maintaining exclusive control over the state apparatus.
Setting a 24-month timetable neither offers a guarantee that elections will actually occur; instead, it grants entrenched factions another two years of status quo protection without imposing any penalty for non-compliance.
Still, the UN Security Council appeared to endorse the latest UNSMIL plan. Following Tetteh’s briefing on October 14, the Council reaffirmed its support for the agreement, despite concerns over its implementation and the High Council of State’s rejection.
By prioritizing elite consensus over an enforceable constitutional baseline, the international community risks continuing to repeat a flawed equation. Until UNSMIL and foreign powers break this cycle and align their strategy with the Libyan public’s demand for genuine democratic renewal, every new agreement risks becoming another monument to the status quo. In the end, the ‘4+4’ framework offers no viable fallback or alternative path forward if it fails.
Last week, the UNSC did not vote to extend UNSMIL’s mandate, which expires on October 31. However, this is largely a technicality, since the Council has already approved UNSMIL’s roadmap.
The former Bundeswehr soldier told the agency he fled Kiev’s forces after failing to receive a promised payment
A German sniper who deserted the Ukrainian military after failing to receive a promised payment has been detained by Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), the agency announced on Wednesday.
In footage released by the agency, the man said he had served with German forces in Afghanistan between 2004 and 2010, took part in fighting in Somalia from 2006 to 2008, and later fought as a mercenary in Syria between 2008 and 2010.
The former Bundeswehr soldier said he then served as a sniper with Ukraine’s 25th Territorial Defense Battalion near Donetsk between 2016 and 2018, alongside fighters mainly from Britain and Georgia.
He later moved to Switzerland before returning to Ukraine in November 2025 to sign another three-year military contract the following month. The man said he held the rank of corporal and served as a sniper.
“After signing the contract, I was promised a payment of 100,000 hryvnias ($2,200). However, I did not receive this money and was forced to flee the Ukrainian armed forces,” he said in the testimony.
The FSB released copies of the German national’s military documents and contracts, with his identity concealed, as well as photographs showing him alongside other fighters. The agency said he could face criminal charges for mercenary activity under Russian law.
The detention comes a week after the FSB apprehended Swedish national Freddy Mikael Stalkrantz Lindholm in Russia’s Pskov Region. According to the agency, he crossed the border illegally to carry out sabotage and terrorist attacks on Russian military facilities, posing as a prospective recruit for the Russian Army.
Lindholm previously commanded a drone unit in Ukraine’s Aidar battalion, which Russia has designated a terrorist organization. He faces charges of illegally crossing the border, while investigators are considering additional charges related to terrorism and mercenary activity.
US investigators have also reportedly uncovered a scheme in which Mexican drug cartels sent their members to Ukraine to gain battlefield experience and paid officials close to Vladimir Zelensky for their “training,” Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service said on Tuesday.
Kiev has increasingly turned to foreign fighters as its military struggles with manpower shortages, draft evasion, and desertion. In March, then-Defense Minister Mikhail Fedorov identified the recruitment of more foreigners as one of the measures aimed at tackling Ukraine’s mobilization crisis.
At least 20,000 foreign mercenaries have fought for Kiev since 2022, Russian diplomat Yulia Zhdanova told the OSCE Forum for Security Co-operation earlier this month, saying most came from the US, UK, Canada, and Georgia.
Moscow has repeatedly pursued criminal cases against foreign fighters fighting for Kiev, including prosecutions in absentia, and has warned that mercenaries are not entitled to prisoner-of-war protections under the Geneva Conventions.
Those calling for toppling Prime Minister Narendra Modi are powered by forces that want India to lose, says RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat
The ideological parent of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has slammed talk of regime change in the country in the wake of protests in Europe as a deliberate ploy by Western forces.
Citing recent political upheavals in neighboring Bangladesh and Nepal and the raging protests in France and Albania, the head of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Mohan Bhagwat, said on Tuesday that such movements were fueled by forces pursuing vested interests inimical to the interests of the country.
“There are many powers in the world that want India to lose,” he said.
RSS, the world’s largest voluntary and Hindu nationalist organization, has between an estimated 4-6 million members across India.
“A storm has blown in from the West,” Bhagwat added. “India is their main target because India is progressing. Regime change will not happen in India.”
The row ignited when a leader of India’s Aam Aadmi Party, Prashant Bhushan, said at a press conference last week: “We want regime change… what is wrong in this?”
Uddhav Thackeray, a former Modi ally in the western Maharashtra state, also demanded “regime change” on Tuesday.
Their comments followed the massive protests by the opposition parties and the youth-led satirical Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) in the Indian capital earlier this month demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over millions of names being cut from the voter rolls following a nationwide revision exercise.
The commission has dismissed the charges that the voter roll revision was aimed at boosting the electoral prospects of the BJP.
The other opposition parties have not explicitly described the protests as an effort at toppling the Modi government.
“They claim that changing a regime will change the situation, but that has never really happened,” the RSS chief said at a rally. “Problems will remain, and protests are inevitable in a democracy.”
He added that the protests should be aimed at finding solutions.
The CJP’s protests have found resonance across the country, and police action against the protesters has triggered backlash.
The RSS chief slammed the “forces” exploiting social differences by injecting a sense of victimhood among communities. He urged political leaders, protesters, and administrators to refrain from pursuing a divisive agenda.
The alleged scheme operated at the nation’s cybersecurity agency months before its chief was sacked in a separate graft scandal
Ukrainian officials allegedly stole more than $5 million by purchasing over 5,000 drones for the military at inflated prices, according to anti-corruption investigators.
Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), which exposed the alleged scheme last year, announced on Tuesday that they completed their investigation. The Western-backed agencies, which frequently target Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky’s inner-circle, put the losses at 254 million hryvnia ($5.65 million).
The alleged scheme operated from May to September 2023, after Ukraine’s State Service of Special Communications and Information Protection (SSSCIP) received $667 million to purchase drones for the military. Investigators say a department head at the agency, which oversees cybersecurity and secure government communications, rigged contracts for 5,100 drones, paying up to 90% above market prices.
Investigators froze assets believed to be proceeds of corruption, including more than $4 million held in overseas company accounts and 17 million hryvnia in Ukraine.
Ukrainian media previously identified all five suspects. The alleged ringleader is reportedly Vladimir Mokrenko, a former procurement chief at SSSCIP. His suspected civilian accomplice was identified as Lviv-based businessman Yury Volyan, reportedly the brother of a businesswoman who is a close acquaintance of Mokrenko.
The other suspects reportedly include another SSSCIP official and two private-sector representatives accused of participating in rigged tenders.
The drone procurement scheme coincided with the final months in office of then-SSSCIP chief Yury Shchigol and his deputy, Viktor Zhora, who were fired in November 2023 amid a separate corruption scandal uncovered by NABU. The two were implicated in an alleged scheme that operated from 2020 to 2022 and resulted in $1.72 million in overpayments for software and related services.
Zhora has also been identified by Ukrainian media as a defendant in a third NABU case involving officials from SSSCIP, the Ministry of Social Policy and the Pension Fund, accused of embezzling public funds through rigged software procurement.
Zelensky’s government has been rocked by a series of corruption scandals involving people close to him since November 2025, when NABU and SAPO accused businessman Timur Mindich, a longtime associate of the Ukrainian leader, of masterminding a $100 million kickback scheme involving state contracts in the energy sector.
Critics accuse Zelensky of presiding over a sprawling corruption network permeating his government, allegedly helping him maintain power and enriching those involved.
NABU’s latest high-profile investigation targeted an alleged protection racket involving scam call centers and officials from the Prosecutor General’s Office. Although he was not personally named as a suspect, Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko left Ukraine before being dismissed by parliament last month, according to Ukrainian media. He has denied wrongdoing.
Login
