Moldova declared a Russian embassy staff member persona non grata on 23 October after a Russian Geran attack drone violated its airspace and crashed near homes and an energy facility, Moldovan President Maia Sandu said.

The incident highlights how Russia’s attacks on Ukraine are increasingly threatening neighboring Moldova, where Russian drones have repeatedly crossed the border or crashed during strikes. Moldova recorded 39 Russian drone incursions in the first eight months of 2026, compared with 17 in all of 2025, Sandu said in September.

Moldova’s Defense Ministry said its Air Operations Center detected an unauthorized drone flight at 13:59 on 23 October. The drone crossed from the direction of Ukraine’s Vinnytsia Oblast toward Frunzeuca in Moldova’s Camenca district, in the Russian-backed breakaway region of Transnistria.

The drone disappeared from monitoring screens near Pepeni in Sîngerei district at 14:10, briefly reappeared, and then disappeared again near Meșeni in Rezina district, the ministry said.

Sandu condemned the incursion, saying Russia’s war continues to put Moldovan lives at risk. She said the drone had fallen near family homes and an energy facility.

Moldovan police reported finding the crashed drone near the village of Chiștelnița in Telenești district, less than 100 meters from a home. No casualties were reported. Police cordoned off the area and sent explosives specialists to examine the wreckage.

Russia's war keeps putting Moldovan lives at risk. Today, a Russian Geran attack drone violated our airspace and fell near family homes and an energy facility.

We condemn this latest dangerous act. In response, we have declared a Russian embassy staff member persona non grata.

— Maia Sandu (@sandumaiamd) October 23, 2026

Moldova steps up diplomatic response

Sandu said Moldova had condemned the incident and declared a Russian embassy staff member persona non grata. She did not identify the staff member or specify when they must leave the country.

The move follows repeated Russian drone incursions. In September, a Russian drone crossing Moldova’s airspace disrupted seven flights, including one involving Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, prompting temporary airspace restrictions.

Earlier in October, three Russian missiles and two drones crossed into Moldovan airspace and exploded on Moldovan territory during Russian attacks on neighboring Ukraine, prompting Chisinau to condemn the violations. Debris fell across several districts, damaging windows at an agricultural facility and sparking fires in fields. Defense Minister Anatolie Nosatîi said the country was seeking stronger air defenses to counter the growing threat.

Moldova has limited air defense capabilities and has been working with European partners to strengthen them. Sandu has said the country’s existing equipment can mainly protect individual sites, while the government seeks broader coverage and faster warning systems. The EU has provided €120 million for Moldova to purchase a medium-range air defense system.

Moldovan authorities urged residents not to approach or touch the crashed drone or any fragments, and to call emergency services if they find suspicious objects.

"Russia's war keeps putting Moldovan lives at risk," President Maia Sandu said, calling it Russia's "latest dangerous act."

The European Parliament has called for substantial additional funding for the European Union’s eastern border regions, proposing that up to 10 per cent of the budgets of relevant EU financing instruments be earmarked for areas affected by Russia’s war against Ukraine and growing security threats.

The resolution, adopted on Thursday, 22nd October, received 414 votes in favour, 79 against and 90 abstentions.

It seeks greater financial assistance for regions bordering Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova, as well as territories along the Black Sea, under the EU’s 2028–2034 financial framework.

The proposals include higher EU contributions towards infrastructure projects, additional investment in local economies and targeted assistance for communities experiencing declining investment, population losses and increased security costs.

However, the resolution is not binding legislation and does not itself allocate new funding. Its provisions must be incorporated into future budget agreements and individual EU spending programmes.

Eastern regions face economic and security pressures

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has significantly changed economic conditions across the EU’s eastern frontier.

Border restrictions, disrupted trade routes, increased defence activity and uncertainty over regional security have affected investment and commercial activity.

The pressures are particularly apparent in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria.

According to a European Parliament research briefing published in September, these regions face overlapping challenges involving economic decline, depopulation, inadequate infrastructure and higher expenditure on security.

Some communities previously depended on cross-border trade with Russia or Belarus, much of which has declined sharply following sanctions and restrictions introduced since 2022.

Other regions have experienced increased transport demand linked to Ukrainian refugees, military logistics and the movement of goods towards Ukraine.

The European Commission has recognised that conventional regional development programmes may not adequately address the combination of economic and security pressures.

Parliament proposes dedicated financial allocations

The resolution calls for up to 10 per cent of funding within relevant EU instruments to be earmarked for eligible eastern border regions.

This does not mean that 10 per cent of the entire EU budget would automatically be transferred to those areas.

Instead, Parliament wants targeted allocations within programmes covering regional development, agricultural policy, transport, industrial competitiveness and infrastructure.

MEPs also propose significantly higher EU contributions towards eligible projects.

Under the parliamentary position, certain projects could receive up to 95 per cent EU co-financing, reducing the amount that national or local authorities would have to contribute.

Projects connected with security, resilience or critical infrastructure could potentially receive funding covering 100 per cent of eligible costs.

Additional pre-financing would help local administrations begin projects without having to provide substantial initial expenditure.

The proposals are particularly relevant to municipalities with limited budgets and regions where private investment has declined.

Wider definition includes Moldova and Black Sea regions

Parliament has also proposed broadening the geographical criteria used to identify eligible territories.

The resolution covers regions bordering Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova, as well as regions with access to the Black Sea.

The proposed framework would use the EU’s NUTS 2 regional statistical classification.

For borders with Russia and Belarus, the parliamentary proposal includes geographical thresholds concerning the length of land or maritime frontiers.

For Romania, the revised approach could extend support to regions connected with Moldova, Ukraine and the Black Sea.

The proposals would also have implications for transport corridors linking Ukraine with the EU, including railways, ports, roads and border-crossing facilities.

Such infrastructure serves both civilian trade and military mobility requirements.

Existing programmes and new investment plans

The Commission has already introduced measures intended to support Europe’s eastern regions.

Its February 2026 strategy identified security, economic growth, connectivity, local industries and demographic resilience as principal areas requiring action.

A proposed investment initiative, EastInvest, is intended to facilitate financing through European and national financial institutions, with the potential to mobilise up to €28 billion by the end of 2027.

This would principally involve lending and investment support, rather than direct grants equivalent to the total facility value.

The Commission has also identified approximately €5.6 billion in cohesion funding redirected towards eastern border regions under the current financial framework.

Those reallocations form part of approximately €34.6 billion redirected towards new priorities across participating member states.

Parliament’s latest demands concern the period after 2027 and would operate separately from these existing arrangements.

Budget negotiations will determine the outcome

The proposal places additional pressure on governments negotiating the EU’s next long-term budget.

Agricultural policy, regional development and industrial investment are already competing for funding alongside increased European defence expenditure.

As EU Today reported in its coverage of the agricultural budget negotiations, member states remain divided over the allocation of resources under the next financial framework.

Eastern border governments are likely to argue that infrastructure and economic development in their territories contribute directly to the EU’s wider security.

Other member states may resist dedicated allocations if these require reductions in existing regional development programmes elsewhere.

Parliament has proposed that additional assistance should not come at the expense of support for other less-developed regions.

The negotiations will determine whether that position is financially achievable.

The next stage will involve discussions over the overall EU budget and the individual programmes through which eastern border assistance could be delivered.

For now, Thursday’s vote establishes Parliament’s demand for a larger and more clearly defined financial commitment to Europe’s eastern frontier, without creating an immediate entitlement to additional EU funding.

Main Image: Denis LOMME: © European Union 2023

A viral video of two Ukrainian border guards’ violent pursuit of a man trying to cross the Dniester River into Moldova has highlighted a route Ukrainians use to escape Russia’s war and the prospect of fighting in it. In this case, all three men ended up in Moldova – and the guards were detained.

Budapest has unexpectedly obstructed the next stage of EU accession negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova, just a week after approving earlier negotiating chapters and days after Prime Minister Péter Magyar pledged to restore relations with Kyiv.

Hungary has blocked a procedural decision needed to advance Ukraine and Moldova’s European Union accession negotiations, raising fresh questions about Budapest’s position under Prime Minister Péter Magyar, whose government had recently agreed to remove longstanding objections to Kyiv’s membership ambitions.

The intervention took place in Brussels on Tuesday, 20 October, during a meeting of the Council of the EU’s Working Party on Enlargement and Countries Negotiating Accession to the EU (COELA). Representatives of the 27 member states were examining the screening results for the final two negotiating clusters, covering environmental policy, transport, agriculture and regional development.

According to diplomats familiar with the discussions, the Hungarian delegation refused to approve the proposed procedural step. When representatives of other member states requested an explanation, Budapest reportedly maintained that its position remained unchanged, without providing further arguments.

An Unexpected Reversal After October Agreement

The obstruction comes only seven days after the EU formally opened two additional negotiating clusters with Ukraine and Moldova.

On 13 October, the Council approved the opening of Cluster 2, covering the internal market, and Cluster 3, dealing with competitiveness and inclusive growth. The decision followed an agreement between Kyiv and Budapest on educational rights for Ukraine’s ethnic Hungarian minority.

Ukraine’s parliament adopted legislative amendments on 12 October extending minority-language education rights, and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy signed the legislation the same day.

The agreement had appeared to remove the principal bilateral obstacle to further negotiations. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha and his Hungarian counterpart, Anita Orbán, welcomed the development following discussions in Luxembourg.

The diplomatic rapprochement continued on 16 October, when Zelenskyy and Magyar held their first official bilateral meeting in Brussels. Both governments expressed an intention to improve relations after years of disputes under former Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.

Magyar also invited Zelenskyy to Budapest for commemorations marking the 70th anniversary of Hungary’s 1956 anti-Soviet uprising.

The subsequent Hungarian objection has therefore interrupted a process that Ukrainian and European officials had expected to advance before the end of the year.

Agriculture and Energy Remain the Final Obstacles

Ukraine and Moldova have now formally opened four of the six negotiating clusters required under the EU’s enlargement methodology.

The remaining two are Cluster 4, Green Agenda and Sustainable Connectivity, and Cluster 5, Resources, Agriculture and Cohesion. They cover several of the most economically sensitive areas of prospective Ukrainian membership.

Cluster 4 includes environmental regulation, energy policy and transport infrastructure, while Cluster 5 encompasses agriculture, food safety, fisheries and regional development funding.

Ukraine’s agricultural sector presents particular challenges for the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy. The country’s extensive farmland and substantial grain production could affect agricultural subsidy allocations, market competition and the distribution of EU budgetary resources.

Poland and other agricultural member states have previously expressed concerns about the implications of Ukrainian agricultural integration. Such questions will require negotiation regardless of Hungary’s immediate position.

However, the 20 October meeting was not intended to settle these substantive issues. Its purpose was to advance the procedural preparations for formally opening negotiations on the remaining clusters.

Domestic Politics and the Question of EU Funding

The explanation for Budapest’s latest move may lie in Hungary’s domestic political calculations rather than a new dispute over minority rights.

Diplomatic sources have suggested that Magyar’s government is attempting to avoid accusations from Viktor Orbán’s opposition that it is making excessive concessions to Ukraine.

Although Magyar defeated Orbán in April’s parliamentary elections and has adopted a more cooperative approach towards Brussels, he has consistently opposed accelerated Ukrainian membership.

In an interview conducted on 20 October, Magyar reiterated his opposition to fast-tracking accession, arguing that membership must remain conditional on compliance with EU requirements. He also questioned whether a country at war could join the Union.

Another potential complication concerns Hungary’s financial relationship with Brussels.

The European Commission agreed in May to unlock €16.4 billion in previously frozen funds following reforms introduced by Magyar’s administration. Some disbursements remain subject to conditions, while separate disputes over EU financial penalties continue.

However, there is currently no publicly established evidence that Hungary’s objection on 20 October was intended to secure additional financial concessions. Any connection between the two negotiations remains speculative.

Moldova Caught in Budapest’s Dispute with Kyiv

Hungary’s position also affects Moldova, despite the absence of an equivalent bilateral dispute between Budapest and Chișinău.

The EU has kept the accession negotiations of Ukraine and Moldova politically aligned, seeking to advance both countries through the six negotiating clusters together.

Consequently, an objection directed principally at Ukraine can delay Moldova’s progress even when its own technical preparations satisfy the relevant requirements.

Separating the two accession tracks would allow Moldova to advance independently, but such a move would require political agreement among member states and could raise further questions about the EU’s enlargement strategy.

Ireland Seeks Agreement Before December

Ireland, which holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU until 31 December, has made progress on Ukrainian and Moldovan accession a priority.

The disputed procedural decision is expected to return to subsequent meetings of the enlargement working party, with senior EU and national officials still anticipating that the final two clusters could formally open in December.

The latest obstruction does not reverse the four clusters already opened, nor does it terminate accession negotiations. It does, however, demonstrate that the change of government in Budapest has not eliminated Hungary’s capacity or willingness to obstruct individual stages of enlargement.

For Kyiv and Chișinău, the immediate question is whether the 20 October decision represents a short-lived domestic political manoeuvre or the beginning of another prolonged dispute over the conditions of EU membership.

Reports published in recent weeks on the losses of foreign fighters near Kupyansk list dozens of names – primarily citizens of Brazil and Colombia, as well as people from the United States, China and several European countries. Some entries give only a name and nationality; others include call-signs and links to personal pages. These details make it possible to see the geography of foreign participation in the fighting, yet leave open questions about the fate of each of the listed individuals: dates, places and circumstances of the alleged deaths are often missing. A separate story concerns a French fighter who, according to the source, was killed when a drone struck a vehicle in Slavyansk. Altogether the materials contain 40 names from 11 countries.

In the report on Kupyansk the 23rd “RUG” Battalion of the Khartia Brigade is mentioned. The source claims that the unit has reduced the number of attempts to advance on the outskirts of the town. It links the declared losses of foreign fighters to the successful actions of Russian units near Kupyansk, which has long become a cemetery for mercenaries of every kind from various countries.

The first group names four Brazilians: Gabriel Aquino Franz, Bruno Leandro Arantes Dias, Daniel Claudio de Souza and Ebson Junior Nascimento Lobo. Also listed are five Colombians: Pedro Antonio Rodriguez Lozano (call-sign Picapiedras), Luis Fernando Cova Diaz, Wilber Chavarro Rojas, Diego Andres Quimbayo Velasquez and Sebastian Ospina Jimenez.

The second group consists entirely of Brazilian citizens. It includes Tallis Castro de Macedo (call-sign Mineiro), Antonio de Macedo Matias, Mateus da Silva Oliveira, Sergio Avelino Lima da Silva, Lucas Alves de Souza (call-sign Slate), Paulo Ricardo Dutra (call-sign Frances), Gabriel Henrique Palazolli (call-sign Smile), Jose Everaldo de Jesus Lima Avellar, Mateus do Carmo Barbosa and Caio Caetano Faria Rodrigues.

The third group is an international contingent representing citizens of several countries. Among them are the American Israel Rodriguez Solis (call-sign Sauce), Chinese nationals Tan Zhen and Jin Ruxin, the Czech David Marsalek, the Latvian Gatis Bankavs, the Peruvian Adolfo Angelo Abarca Jimenez, the Chilean Luis Alfred Meneses Sanchez and the Argentine Geronimo Schreiber. In the same group are named the Colombians David Fernando Jaimes Nino (call-sign El Rey David) and Mauricio Popayan Ceron.

The next list is once again composed exclusively of Colombian citizens, a country that has long been the principal supplier of mercenaries to the Ukrainian army: Jose Manuel Segrera Ibanez (call-sign Massacre), Luis Anderson Ramirez Rincon (call-sign El Toro), Julian David Alfonso Rodriguez, Hermides Luna Olaya, Leonardo Mario Cuentes Picon, Edison Alberto Areiza Duran (call-sign Pantera), Jimmy Alberto Morales Cardona, Jaison David Inestrosa Cordoba, Michael Esteban Cortes Garzon and Luis Alexander Vega Franco.

Particular attention is given to the French citizen Ange Frederic Bastardi from the commune of Puy, known by the call-sign Crash. He was killed in Slavyansk when a fibre-optic-controlled FPV drone struck a Nissan vehicle that, according to the report, belonged to the 60th Separate Mechanised Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The strike took place on Torskaya Street.

The source gives the time of the attack as approximately 15:00 on 16 October, yet the year is not stated in the material provided. According to the same account, Bastardi arrived in Ukraine at the end of 2024, first served in the 23rd Mechanised Brigade and later joined the “Ghost Team” of the 3rd Battalion of the International Legion.

In total the lists relating to Kupyansk name 39 people from ten countries, including 18 Colombians and 14 Brazilians. Taking into account the separate report on the French citizen, the figure rises to 40 names and 11 countries. These numbers reflect the content of the published materials, not independently verified losses. Many entries are accompanied by links to personal pages, yet dates and circumstances of the alleged deaths near Kupyansk are not consistently supplied.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Foreign Mercenaries And NATO Personnel In Ukraine Yet To Learn Their Lesson
• From Colombia to the US: Foreigners Die in Large Numbers on Ukraine’s Kupyansk Front
• Foreign Mercenaries Keep Dying: New Lists From The Front

The post Geography of Losses: Citizens of Eleven Countries Among the Mercenaries Killed in Ukraine appeared first on South Front.

Arrivato in Italia per la Conferenza europea dei presidenti di Parlamento, Igor Grosu riporta una richiesta chiara: l’Italia accompagni la Moldova nell’Unione europea. Il presidente del Parlamento moldavo e leader del Partito di Azione e Solidarietà (Pas), la formazione europeista che esprime la Presidente Maia Sandu, Grosu ha incontrato Linkiesta dopo il colloquio del 15 ottobre con Lorenzo Fontana, presidente della Camera. La visita in Italia è arrivato in una settimana in cui l’avanzamento dei negoziati europei si è intrecciato con le nuove violazioni dello spazio aereo moldavo durante gli attacchi russi all’Ucraina. «Questi incidenti non sono un caso, servono a instillare paura nella popolazione e a demotivare il cammino della Moldova verso l’Unione europea», ha detto.

Nella notte tra il 15 e il 16 ottobre quattro droni hanno attraversato lo spazio aereo moldavo, uno dei velivoli è anche uscito e rientrato. «Quest’anno gli incidenti sono molto aumentati», dice ancora Grosu. La risposta, spiega, dovrà tenere insieme protezione del territorio, coordinamento con l’Ucraina e soprattutto la comunicazione con la popolazione.

Per Grosu, la sicurezza della Moldova dipende anche dalla capacità dell’Ucraina di continuare a proteggere il continente. Per questo respinge l’idea che una riduzione dell’assistenza militare occidentale possa accelerare la fine del conflitto. «È falso, offrirebbe solo una possibilità alla Russia», dice Grosu. «La formula è molto più semplice di prima. Oggi è guerra o pace», afferma a proposito del percorso di adesione della Moldova all’Unione europea. Il suo calendario politico prevede la conclusione dei negoziati nel 2028 e l’ingresso nell’Unione europea nel 2030. In patria è uno di quelli più impegnati a fissare un termine e farlo rispettare.

La visita a Roma segue un avanzamento concreto: il 13 ottobre l’Ue e la Moldova hanno aperto i negoziati su due cluster, quello del mercato interno e quello della competitività e crescita inclusiva. I cluster sono raggruppamenti di capitoli negoziali che organizzano, per materie affini, il lavoro di allineamento del Paese candidato alle regole europee. Con queste aperture, quattro dei sei raggruppamenti risultano avviati. Restano quelli sull’agenda verde e la connettività sostenibile e sulle risorse, l’agricoltura e la coesione. Grosu vuole che siano aperti anche gli ultimi due entro la fine dell’anno.

Guarda già al primo semestre 2028, quando l’Italia eserciterà la presidenza di turno del Consiglio dell’Unione europea: un appuntamento che vorrebbe far coincidere con la conclusione del negoziato.

«Questo è il momento migliore per avvicinare le due rive del fiume Dnestr», dice ancora. L’integrazione europea, sostiene Grosu, può diventare l’incentivo decisivo per riavvicinare la Transnistria al resto della Moldova. La sua valutazione parte dalla crisi economica della regione separatista. «Il suo modello economico è collassato», afferma, indicando nel gennaio 2025 un punto di svolta, quando l’interruzione del flusso di gas russo ha colpito il sistema energetico transnistriano esponendone la dipendenza. Grosu racconta un riavvicinamento che passa dalle scelte quotidiane: abitanti della regione che cercano lavoro e protezione sociale in Moldova, famiglie che scelgono le scuole moldave per i loro figli. «Il processo di reintegrazione è in moto». La stessa Kaja Kallas ha dichiarato che la regione «non sarà un ostacolo nel percorso europeo della Moldova».

L’avvicinamento procede anche attraverso un graduale allineamento delle regole. Oggi le imprese transnistriane pagano dazi e Iva come i moldavi e questi soldi finiscono in un fondo di convergenza, destinato a finanziare infrastrutture, servizi e interventi per la popolazione transnistriana. L’obiettivo è associare la progressiva integrazione a benefici riconoscibili per chi vive nella regione.

«La presenza delle forze armate russe in Transnistria è illegale», dice Grosu a proposito del contingente di circa 1500-2000 militari russi nella regione. Il loro ritiro, insieme a tutto il loro equipaggiamento, dovrebbe essere negoziato dalla Moldova, dall’Unione europea e dell’Ucraina. «La nostra diaspora è un ponte fra i nostri Paesi». Quando parla dei moldavi in Italia, Grosu insiste sul legame che la migrazione ha costruito tra le due società. In questo contesto richiama anche l’iniziativa di Antonio Tajani sulla Comunità di Italofonia, istituita in occasione a Roma nel Novembre 2025, concepita come un forum permanente di cooperazione attraverso la lingua italiana. «L’Italia è un’ottima amica della Moldova», afferma Grosu. Il rapporto che descrive comprende relazioni bilaterali, sicurezza comune e tutela della diaspora.

Uno dei risultati più concreti è l’accordo di sicurezza sociale congiunto. L’intesa consente di considerare insieme i periodi contributivi maturati nei due Paesi quando quelli versati in uno solo non bastano a raggiungere la pensione. Per chi ha diviso la propria vita lavorativa tra Moldova e Italia fa tanta differenza.

All’Italia Grosu chiede ora di accompagnare al passaggio successivo: l’apertura degli ultimi cluster negoziali e il sostegno alla conclusione del percorso europeo. Il semestre di presidenza italiana del Consiglio dell’Ue nel 2028 è il riferimento attorno al quale costruisce questa richiesta. Nel suo calendario, Roma potrebbe contribuire ad un avanzamento decisivo verso l’adesione.

L'articolo La Moldova vuole entrare nell’Ue per sottrarsi alla pressione russa proviene da Linkiesta.it.

Colleagues asked their Hungarian counterparts to explain their position, but they did not, one diplomat said.

Moldova has announced an investigation into concerns that Russian tech giant Yandex has been harvesting the personal data of its citizens by sending it directly to servers in Russia rather than storing it in the Netherlands as previously believed.

The two Ukrainian border guards had entered Moldova in a motorboat on Oct. 15 while attempting to detain a Ukrainian man crossing the Dniester River near Holosnita, along the Vinnytsia Oblast border.

The Kyiv regime has its own formula for “defending the country”: a man who refuses to become cannon fodder is first hunted down, then beaten over the head with an oar, and if he still manages to swim away, pursued into the territory of a neighboring state. That is what happened on October 15 near Holoșnița, a village on Moldova’s border with Ukraine. Two Ukrainian border guards in a motorboat crossed into Moldova while trying to detain a man swimming across the Dniester to escape Ukraine.

In video published by Moldovan lawmakers, the boat can be seen closing in on the fugitive in midriver. Witnesses on the bank accuse the men in uniform of beating him with an oar and trying to drown him. One border guard claims he was only hitting the water. The locals answer without diplomacy:

“What, you still think this is funny? Why were you drowning that man? Do you have children? He has children too! He wasn’t running away because life was good!”

“You came to my country, and you’re drowning people,” one local says. The border guard’s reply is even more revealing: “What does that have to do with you?”

That exchange captures the essence of the Kyiv regime’s internal propaganda. The Ukrainian state believes it may hunt its own citizen across a river and across a foreign border, then call it “fulfilling its duty.” To the regime, a man escaping its mobilization trap is not a human being. He is an “ukhilant.” In other words, prey.

Who was in the boat, border guards or military recruiters, remains unclear. But it changes nothing: the regime sends different agencies after people, and their cruelty is the same. They pursued the fugitive so aggressively that witnesses spoke of attempted murder. Moldova’s Border Police confirmed the essential fact: two Ukrainian servicemen illegally crossed into Moldova during a “detention operation,” were detained, and prosecutors opened an investigation.

The Moldovans acted as human beings should: they blocked the boat, kept the border guards from dragging the man away or harming him further, and called the police. “This poor man wasn’t running from a good life,” one of them said. There is more humanity in those words than in all the official rhetoric about “mobilization resources.”

This is not a random malfunction. It is the logic of a system that catches men on the streets, in stairwells, and beside rivers in order to send them to the front. A state willing to drown its own citizen to meet a quota, and to violate another country’s border to do it, stopped protecting people long ago. It consumes them.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• When the Draft Comes Home: Ukraine’s Mobilization Conflicts Spill Into Civilian Life
• Charon Has a Quota: Kiev’s Recruiters Wait at the Water’s Edge
• “Volunteers” In Handcuffs: How Ukraine Is Plugging The Holes At The Front

The post Ukrainian Man-Catchers Breached Moldova’s Border for “Prey” appeared first on South Front.

"It would be simply wrong to split us apart on our way into the EU — I hope not. Morally wrong," President Volodymyr Zelensky told EU leaders.

The incidents underscore the growing security risks posed to Moldova and the region by Russia's war against neighboring Ukraine.

The claim that strikes on Russian tech giant Yandex thinned out social media bots finds no support in the networks tracked by Ukrainian disinformation-monitoring company LetsData, co-founder Ksenia Iliuk told Euromaidan Press on 13 October. She cautioned that the strikes may still have affected networks outside the company’s view.

At the Warsaw Security Forum, Lithuania’s prime minister suggested allies should ask Ukraine to strike more Russian data centers because that might help protect European elections from foreign interference. Bot networks are one tool of that interference, so whether the strikes mute them carries weight well beyond Ukraine.

No drop in the networks LetsData tracks

Drones hit Yandex data centers in Sasovo and Vladimir between 8 and 11 October. Ukrainian drone maker Fire Point said its FP-1 drones struck Yandex’s Kaluga site in between. On 12 October, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told the Warsaw Security Forum that once Ukraine’s response reached Yandex, social media had fewer bots.

LetsData checked X and Facebook, where bot networks usually stand out clearly, Iliuk said. Its analysts looked at networks attributed to Russia’s influence ecosystem. Among them are groups of X accounts spreading domains from what she called a new wave of Doppelgänger, a Russian campaign that clones real news sites.

Those networks look unaffected, Iliuk said. None of them has stopped posting or broken its usual rhythm, she added. Some are slightly less active, but LetsData’s analysts say that is typical for them. The networks run on a weekly cycle, and the check fell in the part of the week when they post less.

A network that jumped from Germany to Ukraine

LetsData worked with two samples. One covers accounts that systematically target Ukraine, Moldova, and Armenia. The other covers bot networks the company has followed for some time that keep changing their target audience, so they have no fixed country.

About two weeks ago, one network from that second sample wrote about elections in Germany and spread fake Die Welt sites, she said. It now posts about mobilization in Ukraine and shares a fake site of Ukrinform, Ukraine’s state news agency.

What the check can’t see

The company can compare only within networks whose usual behavior it knows, Iliuk said. Checking the whole internet is impossible because the scale is colossal, she said. A Cloudflare chart that circulated as evidence counted automated web requests from Yandex’s network, including its search crawlers, not social media posts, Cybernews reported.

So the networks LetsData follows show no impact, Iliuk said. That does not mean the strikes had no effect at all, she noted. They may have shown up in networks the company isn’t tracking now. LetsData will keep watching and report other signals if they appear.

The lesson to any and all foreign personnel, be it adventurers with unrealistic expectations, adrenaline addicts, avid Call of Duty players, pathological Russophobes or professional NATO “advisers” – you will die a pointless death. Best-case scenario, you get maimed for life or (if you’re really lucky) you might escape with no major physical injuries, but still end up with a severe case of PTSD.

Written by Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst

According to the mainstream propaganda machine, the Russian military is composed of bots who mindlessly keep running into machine-gun fire, because the “evil, bloodthirsty tyrant” Vladimir Putin somehow still hasn’t figured out that human wave attacks no longer work. Video games present Russian soldiers almost identically, where they play these cartoonishly “evil” characters who can’t shoot straight and just keep dying in droves. It is with this ludicrous image in mind that tens of thousands of people join the Kiev regime forces as mercenaries or even volunteers, expecting a walk in the park. Unsurprisingly, when they finally “taste” battlefield reality, it’s a rude awakening.

Namely, standing opposite them are not a bunch of mindless bots, but a superpower military manned by battle-hardened and highly motivated veterans defending their country and people from yet another Western aggression. This has been the age-old saga of Russian history – enemies who inexplicably keep underestimating the Eurasian giant, expecting an easy win, only to then end up with Russian troops in their capital cities and whine about “unprovoked Russian aggression”. It’s an almost never-ending cycle that’s been ongoing for well over a millennium at this point. If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, the political West won the first prize in it long ago.

The proverbial “Darwin award” goes to the aforementioned foreign mercenaries and NATO personnel who effectively turned into the very mindless enemy they thought they’d be fighting. Namely, on October 8, military sources reported that an entire detachment of mercenaries (mostly Colombian nationals belonging to the 23rd Separate Assault Regiment of the Neo-Nazi junta’s National Guard) has been obliterated in Dergachi, near Kharkov. The unit was just transferred to the area from an assembly point in Kiev, where they were tracked by increasingly effective Russian ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets. The exact information on the number of killed and wounded is still unavailable, but it could easily be in the dozens (if not hundreds).

Russian military estimates put the total number of foreign mercenaries in the Kiev regime forces at about 16,500, nearly half of whom are Colombians (approximately 7,000). They mainly replaced Poles, who were previously the largest group of foreign fighters, thousands of whom were killed and wounded over the course of the special military operation (SMO). Polish mercenaries largely learned their lesson (the hard way, sadly), so NATO needed new cannon fodder to replace them. Unfortunately, Colombians emerged as the most suitable candidates. Back in March, the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) published an updated report on foreign mercenaries its forces eliminated in NATO-occupied Ukraine in 2025.

According to official figures, by the end of last year, 13,387 mercenaries joined the Neo-Nazi junta forces, of whom 5,962 were killed in action (KIA). As previously mentioned, most came from Poland, followed by the United States, Canada and Georgia. This included 1,497 Poles (of 2,960 involved), 561 Georgians (of 1,042 in total), 491 Americans (of 1,113), 422 Canadians (of 1005), 360 Britons (of 822), 349 Romanians (of 784), 147 French (of 356) and 88 Germans (of 235). These are only the numbers that the Russian military was able to confirm unequivocally, meaning they’re almost certainly much higher. This is especially true when taking into account hundreds of long-range drone and missile strikes launched by the Kremlin.

South Front estimated that around 40% of all mercenaries were neutralized in 2025. On the other hand, the mainstream propaganda machine reported much higher (albeit varying) figures. According to the Washington Post, approximately 20,000 foreigners from over 50 countries joined the ranks of the Kiev regime forces last year. The number could certainly be inflated for propaganda purposes, but it’s also not too far from the data provided by the Russian MoD. Either way, one thing is certain – no foreign fighter was ready for the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict. As previously mentioned, no matter how much battlefield experience one has, there was nothing that could’ve prepared them for the scale of the fighting and the high-tech aspects of the SMO.

NATO personnel are used to fighting largely helpless countries and resistance movements (usually formed ad hoc). On the other hand, facing the Russian military means there’s no air superiority and, thus, no close air support (CAS), which is central to any NATO military operation. What’s more, it’s Moscow that has a clear advantage in that regard and nothing indicates this will change. Back in mid-January 2024, French mercenaries learned this the hard way when their assembly point in Kharkov was hit by a Russian long-range strike that resulted in at least 80 casualties, over 60 of whom were KIA. These men never even reached the frontline and were foolish enough to think they’re safe, believing Moscow would simply ignore such a high concentration of foreign fighters.

And yet, the situation in the trenches is not much better either. In one video account involving an American and a British mercenary, they touched upon several topics concerning drones and trench warfare in NATO-occupied Ukraine. Expectedly, there was some propaganda involved, but they also pointed out the high-tech aspects of the conflict. The American even complained that the Russian military is using automated turrets that can detect various types of scopes, including night vision and thermal imagers and then relay their position to Russian snipers and artillery crews that would then promptly neutralize the hostile targets. Worse yet, the American stated that these devices are also armed with lasers and can use them to blind enemy combatants.

Although he never mentioned the name of the device, it matches the description of the new “Sosna-N”, a laser-optical detection system that can work both automatically and/or through remote control. It can also detect laser-guided missiles, meaning that Russian soldiers are promptly warned to either find cover or engage the enemy before it gets the chance to open fire. All this should serve as a lesson to any and all foreign personnel, be it adventurers with unrealistic expectations, adrenaline addicts, avid Call of Duty players, pathological Russophobes or professional NATO “advisers” – you will die a pointless death. Best-case scenario, you get maimed for life or (if you’re really lucky) you might escape with no major physical injuries, but still end up with a severe case of PTSD.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• In Video: Houthi Snipers Gun Down More Than a Dozen Fighters in Saudi Arabia
• Syria Is Preparing to Join Saudi War on Yemen, and It Would Be a Big Mistake
• From Colombia to the US: Foreigners Die in Large Numbers on Ukraine’s Kupyansk Front

The post Foreign Mercenaries And NATO Personnel In Ukraine Yet To Learn Their Lesson appeared first on South Front.

UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham said Russia interfered in the 2016 referendum that took Britain out of the European Union, in podcast excerpts released on 11 October, the Associated Press reported. His remarks are believed to be the first time a British prime minister has publicly acknowledged such meddling.

Russia’s information war keeps running through Europe’s ballots. German security sources said in August that Moscow was escalating disinformation before state elections, and Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation found more than 200 Russian fake news sites aimed at France last year.

One question, one clear answer

Burnham told The Rest Is Politics podcast that he asked his advisers whether Russia had interfered in the 2016 vote. He asked after taking office in July.

“I’ve had the clear answer that yes, there was,” he said.

He argued that such things must now be put clearly on the record. He did not say how Russia interfered or offer evidence, and Moscow has long denied interfering in foreign votes.

Burnham said he had discussed Russian interference with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in Berlin the previous week. “You know he was saying to me that the AfD are clearly linked to Russia, funded I believe,” Burnham said, referring to Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany party. Putting such interference on the record would help “voters in Germany and France understand that some of this politics is instigated via our enemies, namely Russia,” he added.

Years of silence

In 2020, Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee found that the government had actively avoided investigating whether Russia meddled in the referendum. The report noted open-source signs of Russian attempts to sway the Brexit campaign. The government, it said, had never looked for hard evidence.

The government rejected the committee’s call for a review.

“We have seen no evidence of successful interference in the EU Referendum,” it said.

That same year, London said Russian actors had almost certainly tried to interfere in the 2019 general election. The government said they did it by amplifying leaked UK-US trade documents online.

From 2019 to 2016

Three weeks ago, Burnham stopped short of this. At the UN General Assembly on 22 September, he said the Kremlin spends around £1.3 billion each year on manipulating information. That is roughly $1.7 billion at recent exchange rates. He cited evidence that Russian agencies tried to interfere in the 2019 general election, but he did not mention 2016.

In the same speech, he said Britain had already helped Moldova protect its elections from Russian interference.

Montenegro and Albania will hold separate accession conferences on 12 and 13 October as the European Commission introduces proposals for stronger safeguards against democratic backsliding, linking the next phase of EU enlargement to reforms within the Union itself.

Montenegro and Albania are preparing for another round of European Union accession negotiations this week, with meetings in Luxembourg scheduled to advance their membership bids as Brussels considers substantial changes to the conditions under which future countries will join the bloc.

Montenegro’s 29th accession conference will take place on Monday, 12 October, followed by Albania’s tenth conference on Tuesday. The meetings come less than a week after the European Commission presented a package of proposals intended to prepare the EU for enlargement while strengthening its ability to respond to breaches of democratic standards by newly admitted members.

For Montenegro, the immediate objective is to continue closing negotiating chapters after years of institutional and legal reforms. Albania’s meeting has a more precisely defined agenda: the provisional closure of Chapter 20, covering enterprise and industrial policy.

Both countries have made progress towards membership, but the Commission’s latest proposals indicate that the terms of accession could become more demanding as the EU considers admitting several new members.

Montenegro moves towards the final negotiating stage

Montenegro is widely regarded as the most advanced candidate among the Western Balkan countries.

Accession negotiations began in 2012, and all 33 negotiating chapters have been opened. Progress towards closure has accelerated as the government seeks to complete the process and secure an accession treaty.

At the end of 2025, Montenegro provisionally closed five chapters covering services, capital movements, company law, agriculture and fisheries.

As EU Today reported following that conference, the agreements brought the number of provisionally closed chapters to twelve at that stage, while the EU continued to emphasise the importance of judicial reform and sustained implementation.

Subsequent accession conferences have continued the negotiating process, with the 29th conference scheduled for 12 October.

The Commission has identified Montenegro as a country capable of concluding accession negotiations by the end of 2026, provided sufficient progress is maintained.

That objective does not mean membership would follow automatically. A completed negotiation must still lead to an accession treaty, which requires approval by all existing member states and ratification under their constitutional procedures.

Outstanding questions include the independence of the judiciary, enforcement of anti-corruption legislation and the capacity of state institutions to apply EU law consistently.

Albania advances in industrial policy negotiations

Albania’s accession process has also gained momentum, supported by renewed EU interest in incorporating the Western Balkans into European political and economic structures.

The conference scheduled for 13 October is expected to provisionally close Chapter 20, which covers enterprise and industrial policy.

The chapter concerns the legal and institutional environment in which businesses operate, including industrial competitiveness, entrepreneurship and policies supporting small and medium-sized enterprises.

Provisional closure would represent further progress in Albania’s alignment with EU legislation and policy, although it would not constitute a final agreement on accession.

As with Montenegro, the negotiating framework requires sustained progress on the fundamentals of membership, notably judicial independence, fundamental rights, corruption and organised crime.

Brussels prepares stronger safeguards

The latest accession conferences follow the European Commission’s proposals of 6 October, which address the institutional consequences of admitting new countries.

The Commission argues that enlargement can be accommodated within the existing treaties, but that the EU will need additional safeguards and improvements to decision-making.

Among the most consequential proposals is the possibility of suspending a new member state’s voting rights in the Council if it commits serious breaches of the Union’s fundamental values or the principle of sincere cooperation.

Such provisions would be incorporated into future accession arrangements, making some membership conditions enforceable after a country has joined.

The proposal reflects concerns that the EU’s existing mechanisms for responding to democratic backsliding can be slow and politically difficult to apply.

In June, EU Today reported on proposals advanced by five member states seeking stronger protections against governments that might undermine common decisions after accession.

The Commission’s October package develops that argument into a broader programme of institutional preparation.

Enlargement beyond the Western Balkans

The debate extends to Ukraine and Moldova, whose membership applications have acquired greater strategic importance following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

The Commission is examining how candidate countries can progressively participate in EU policies and programmes before obtaining full membership.

These arrangements could include greater integration in energy, transport, defence and selected areas of the single market, subject to the implementation of relevant reforms.

Brussels is also considering transitional arrangements affecting agricultural support, financial transfers and sensitive sectors of the economy.

The political challenge is to provide candidate countries with credible membership prospects while reassuring existing members that enlargement will not weaken common decision-making or create unsustainable budget commitments.

For Montenegro and Albania, the October conferences therefore take place at a pivotal point in the accession process.

Both governments are moving through the technical stages of membership negotiations while the EU is still determining how its next enlargement will operate.

The outcome will depend not only on their progress towards meeting accession conditions, but also on whether the existing 27 member states can agree on the institutional changes required for a larger Union.

Moldova is creating protective zones at border crossing points along its border with Ukraine amid the threat of drone attacks. It is also relocating its personnel from joint border crossings on Ukrainian territory back to Moldova. Moldovan Interior Minister Daniella Misail-Nichitin said this on 7 October, according to NewsMaker.

In recent months, Russian attacks on Ukrainian border crossing points near the country's borders with neighboring states have become more frequent. Ukrainian-Moldovan border crossings are among those most frequently targeted by Russia. As a result, Moldova now plans to withdraw all of its border personnel from Ukrainian territory.

A Moldovan border guard was also recently injured when a projectile struck near a passenger bus at the Palanca border crossing, Moldova's Border Police reported.

Chisinau strengthens protection of border crossings against Russian drone attacks

Moldovan authorities are working to strengthen security measures at all Border Police crossing points, including those located on Ukrainian territory, according to the statement.

Authorities are already setting up protective zones so that Border Police officers, government officials and civilians at the crossings can evacuate to a safe location if necessary, the minister said.

Moldova is also discussing moving its personnel from joint border crossings located on Ukrainian territory to Moldova. Personnel have already been withdrawn from two crossings, with plans to do the same at other joint crossings, Missail-Nikitin said.

NewsMaker clarified with Moldova’s Interior Ministry that the measure involves withdrawing Moldovan personnel from two joint border crossing points with Ukraine — Criva and Palanca.

Ukraine and Moldova seek a response to a new challenge

The first time Chisinau withdrew its personnel from Ukrainian territory at the Ukrainian-Moldovan border crossings was a month ago. Moldova temporarily changed the operating arrangements at three joint border crossings with Ukraine because of security risks linked to Russian attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure near the border, Moldova's Border Police reported on 11 September.

The crossings in question are Giurgiulesti–Reni, Briceni–Rossoșani, and Criva–Mamalyga, where Moldovan border guards and customs officers had previously carried out controls on Ukrainian territory, according to the Border Police.

Starting 12 September, Moldovan personnel returned to Moldovan territory for 90 days and began working from existing infrastructure on the Moldovan side. The crossings themselves remained operational, and the cross-border movement of people and vehicles continued. Only the location where Moldovan services carried out their duties changed, the authorities said.

Ukraine is also strengthening the protection of its border infrastructure. The State Agency for Restoration and Infrastructure Development plans to install 135 basic mobile shelters at 28 border crossing points and on access roads leading to them. The shelters are intended to protect civilians crossing the border and border crossing personnel. Procurement is being carried out by the Restoration Services in Vinnytsia, Odesa, Chernivtsi, Zakarpattia, and Volyn Oblasts, according to the statement.

Ukraine’s border crossings near Moldova face ongoing Russian attacks

Russia has repeatedly attacked Ukrainian border infrastructure near the Moldovan border in recent weeks. On 25 August, a Russian drone struck the Vynohradivka–Vulcănești border crossing in Odesa Oblast.

On 5 October, Russian strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure caused an incident near the Palanka–Mayaky–Udobne border crossing. A projectile fell near the crossing, ricocheted off the ground and struck a passenger bus. The control booth was also damaged, and one Moldovan border guard sustained a minor injury.

On 9 September, Russia attacked the Starokozache–Tudora border crossing. One drone struck the crossing, while two others crashed nearby on Ukrainian territory. Two people were killed and three others were injured in the attack, and the crossing was temporarily closed. Russia claimed that this strike on a border crossing was prompted by Ukraine transporting weapons through the facility, a claim Moldova has denied.

More than 80% of Moldovans believe the country is not prepared to withstand external aggression, according to a CBS AXA poll presented ahead of the Moldova Security Forum 2026, NewsMaker reports. 

The findings come as Moldova has faced a sharp increase in Russian drone incursions linked to Russia’s war against Ukraine. Moldova recorded 44 airspace-violation incidents in the first nine months of 2026, compared with 17 in all of 2025. Authorities have reported Russian drones crossing Moldovan airspace, while drone and missile debris has also fallen on Moldovan territory.

According to NewsMaker, more than 60% of those surveyed said Moldova is completely unprepared for a possible armed attack, while nearly 24% described its preparedness as weak.

Moldovans see country as unprepared for attack

The survey found that 82% of respondents also do not feel sufficiently informed or prepared to know what to do in a major crisis. According to CBS AXA Deputy Director Vasile Cantarji, respondents tend to trust specialized emergency institutions more than Moldova’s main state institutions.

More than half said they trust Moldova’s General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations, while 35% expressed trust in the church. Trust in the government, parliament, and courts was much lower, at roughly 4–6%.

The findings come as Moldova faces a security environment shaped by Russia’s war against Ukraine, hybrid threats, energy dependence, and disinformation. Moldova’s government has supported Ukraine and strengthened security cooperation with European partners, while repeatedly condemning Russia’s war and its spillover effects.

The repeated drone incursions are now increasingly exposing Moldova to risks from the war next door.

Most favor neutrality over NATO membership

Despite the widespread perception that Moldova is poorly prepared for external aggression, only about 4% of respondents said joining NATO would be the right way to make the country safer.

Around 45% instead favored maintaining Moldova’s neutrality. At the same time, six in 10 respondents said Moldova needs continued external support to strengthen its security and defense.

Nearly two-thirds considered cooperation with the European Union and Romania important for Moldova’s development.

Moldova’s constitution establishes permanent neutrality, while the country has been deepening security and defense cooperation with European partners.

EU seen as preferred source of emergency assistance

The poll also asked whom Moldova should turn to for help during a major disaster such as an earthquake or flood.

About 33% selected EU countries, followed by Russia at roughly 16% and Romania at 15%. The CIS, NATO, UN, and Ukraine each received support from 4% or fewer respondents.

War in Ukraine is one of several security concerns

Respondents identified a range of threats to Moldova’s security, with internal problems ranking alongside external risks.

Corruption was cited by more than 15% of respondents, while poverty was named by 13.5%. Just over 13.5% identified the war in Ukraine as a security risk. Energy dependence and disinformation were each cited by nearly 10%.

Other concerns included economic instability, crime, and external aggression.

CBS AXA conducted the survey from August 25 to September 9 among 2,009 Moldovans aged 18 and older. The reported margin of error is 2.2%. NewsMaker published the findings on October 7.

Moldova strengthens protection at Ukrainian border

Moldovan authorities are now responding to the Russian drone threat by creating protected areas at border crossings with Ukraine where border guards, officials, and civilians can shelter during potential drone attacks, Interior Minister Daniela Misail-Nikitin said on October 7, according to NewsMaker.

Authorities are also moving Moldovan personnel from joint checkpoints located on Ukrainian territory back to Moldova. The measures follow an incident at the Palanca–Maiaki–Udobne crossing in which a Moldovan border guard was injured by a falling projectile.

Transnistria adds another security challenge

Moldova also faces a longstanding security problem in Transnistria, a breakaway region along the country’s eastern border with Ukraine. The region declared independence from Moldova in 1990 and has remained outside Chisinau’s control since a brief war in 1992.

Transnistria is not internationally recognized as an independent state. Russia maintains a significant troop presence there and has long supported the separatist authorities, making the region a persistent source of tension between Chisinau and Moscow. 

Moldova saw more Russian drones crash on its territory in August than it did over all of 2025. Moldovan authorities are increasingly rattled—but there’s little a cash-strapped government can do beyond complaining diplomatically.