Kamikaze drone strikes are exacerbating disarray within Kiev’s incursion force, the Russian military has said The Russian Defense Ministry has circulated videos it says depict kamikaze drone strikes on the forces remaining from Ukraine’s incursion into Russia’s Kursk Region. Kiev launched the incursion last August, […]
Bruno Kahl has claimed an early resolution to the conflict between Moscow and Kiev could amplify security threats to the EU Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Timoshenko has hit out at German intelligence chief Bruno Kahl after he claimed that resolving the conflict with Russia […]
Three years of hostilities have made Kiev more dependent on the West than ever The recent failed negotiations between Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and US President Donald Trump mark a significant break from past patterns. Over the last three years, Washington’s unwavering support for Kiev […]
The foreign minister has suggested that recent statements by France and the UK about the possibility are meant to heat up the conflict Moscow is not considering the possibility of a NATO peacekeeping force being deployed to Ukraine, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in […]
The foreign minister has suggested that recent statements by France and the UK about the possibility are meant to heat up the conflict
Moscow is not considering the possibility of a NATO peacekeeping force being deployed to Ukraine, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in a press conference in Qatar on Wednesday.
US President Donald Trump had previously claimed that he had discussed the issue of “some form of peacekeeping” with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin. Speaking after a meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron, Trump claimed that Putin had “no problem” with the idea as long as it’s “acceptable to everybody.”
Lavrov, however, stated that the Russian side has not been consulted on the matter.
“We cannot consider any options. I don’t know what Macron said, but Trump… said that the decision to deploy peacekeeping forces is possible only with the consent of both parties, apparently meaning us and Ukraine. No one has asked us about this,” Lavrov said.
He went on to say that the idea of deploying foreign troops to Ukraine is being pushed by “the Europeans, primarily France and also the British,” and suggested that this is being done to “further heat up the conflict and stop any attempts to calm it down.”
Lavrov also claimed that the EU is intentionally seeking to derail the Ukraine peace process, pointing to Brussels’ recent announcement of new military aid packages for Kiev, as well as their continued encouragement for Ukrainian forces to keep fighting. He added that Macron’s demands to introduce an urgent ceasefire before negotiating any form of settlement of the conflict is “deceit” and only aims to “pump Ukraine with weapons again.”
The foreign minister insisted that any discussions about a peacekeeping force in Ukraine are “empty” and that the main priority right now should be to resolve the underlying issues of the conflict – including the attempts to drag Kiev into NATO in order to deploy Western military infrastructure to the country which could be aimed at Russia.
On Tuesday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also dismissed Trump’s claim that Russia would accept NATO troops in Ukraine as part of a peace deal. He stressed that any sort of presence of armed forces from NATO countries, even under the EU flag, is “completely unacceptable.”
Russia’s envoy to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, has stated that Moscow would only ever accept a foreign troop deployment to Ukraine as part of a UN Security Council mandate.
“’Peacekeepers’ cannot operate without a mandate from the UN Security Council,” he said in an interview earlier this month, adding that any other military contingents on the ground would be treated as regular combatants.
Many citizens are weary and yearn for peace, the elected head of a frontline city has said A Ukrainian official from the frontline city of Krasnoarmeysk has questioned Kiev’s narrative that the majority of citizens wish to continue fighting Russia. He urged Ukrainian leader Vladimir […]
Many citizens are weary and yearn for peace, the elected head of a frontline city has said
A Ukrainian official from the frontline city of Krasnoarmeysk has questioned Kiev’s narrative that the majority of citizens wish to continue fighting Russia. He urged Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky to prioritize peace, stressing that both civilians and military personnel are exhausted by the conflict.
Krasnoarmeysk (known in Ukraine as Pokrovsk) is a strategically important settlement in the Donetsk People’s Republic, a Russian region in Donbass that Kiev claims under its sovereignty. After the escalation of the conflict in 2022, the Ukrainian government installed a military administration to take over civilian self-governance.
Ruslan Trebushkin, who served as the mayor of Krasnoarmeysk since 2015 and was last reelected in 2020, has disputed Kiev’s claims that “most Ukrainians want war,” saying that in reality, “most residents desire peace.”
“People do not want to fight; they are tired,” Trebushkin said in a video address on Facebook on Monday.
The military administration rebuffed his remarks on Tuesday, affirming its commitment to “hastening victory” and loyalty to Zelensky, adding: “we cannot afford to yield to reckless political statements or show cowardice.”
A native of Donbass and former Ukrainian MP, Trebushkin addressed the public in Russian, which the Ukrainian government is seeking to remove from public life, even though many citizens consider it their native language. He referenced conversations with local residents who have chosen to remain in the city despite the conditions and risks.
Zelensky has insisted that peace negotiations with Moscow must occur from a “position of strength,” though the situation on the battlefield has complicated this goal. Russian forces have steadily gained ground, with intensive fighting currently underway for Krasnoarmeysk – a critical logistical hub for Ukrainian troops.
Last year, Ukraine revamped its military conscription system to bolster recruitment, but the efforts have reportedly fallen short of expectations. Meanwhile, active-duty units face challenges such as widespread desertion, low morale, and increasing shortages of weapons.
The Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday that by summer, the combat effectiveness of the Ukrainian army could seriously degrade without American support. US President Donald Trump has stated that Washington is currently not providing any new military assistance to Kiev.
Capital punishment has been under a moratorium in the country since 1996 and President Vladimir Putin has ruled out its reintroduction Nearly half of all Russians are in favor of reinstating the death penalty, according to a survey published by the All-Russian Public Opinion Research […]
Capital punishment has been under a moratorium in the country since 1996 and President Vladimir Putin has ruled out its reintroduction
Nearly half of all Russians are in favor of reinstating the death penalty, according to a survey published by the All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM) on Wednesday.
The death penalty was initially suspended in Russia in 1996 when the country sought to join the Council of Europe. In 1999, Russia’s Constitutional Court placed a moratorium on the measure and extended it indefinitely in 2009. Legally, however, the practice has never been fully abolished. After Moscow withdrew from the Council of Europe in 2022, debates around lifting the moratorium were reignited among Russian politicians, lawmakers, and public figures.
In its latest study, which surveyed some 1,600 Russians over the age of 18 earlier this month, VCIOM found that capital punishment was still a significant issue for most respondents (73%). It also reported that the number of those for whom the topic is “extremely important” has grown from 28% in 2010 to 36% in 2025.
According to the poll, nearly half of respondents (49%) said they were in favor of reinstating the death penalty while only around a quarter (26%) said it would be better to maintain a moratorium. Just 15% of respondents argued that capital punishment should be completely abolished, while 10% said they were unsure.
Pollsters noted that the older the respondents were, the more likely they were to support reinstating the death penalty. Among those born between 1948 and 1967, 62% argued in favor of lifting the moratorium.
Retaining the moratorium saw the most support among those born between 1982 and 2000, while the complete abolishment of the measure was mostly backed by those born after 2001.
The topic of the death penalty remains a point of contention in Russian society, although President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated that it would not be reintroduced. In December, he stressed that despite public calls to return the measure, Moscow is not seeking to bring back capital punishment and is instead looking to further liberalize the national penal code in order to reduce the number of convicts.
A number of Russian lawmakers have also pointed out that returning the death penalty would be legally impossible as the ban was issued by the Constitutional Court, whose decisions cannot be overturned by either chamber of Russia’s parliament.
The head of Russia’s Constitutional Court, Valery Zorkin, has explained that under the Russian Constitution, everyone has the right to life and therefore is guaranteed “the right not to be sentenced to death.” He has suggested that the return of the measure would require the adoption of a new constitution.
The bloc has doubled down on military support for Kiev as the political landscape around the conflict is starting to shift, the Russian foreign minister has said The EU is seeking to derail the Ukraine peace process by pushing the country to continue fighting against […]
The bloc has doubled down on military support for Kiev as the political landscape around the conflict is starting to shift, the Russian foreign minister has said
The EU is seeking to derail the Ukraine peace process by pushing the country to continue fighting against Russia, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said.
Speaking at a press conference in Qatar on Wednesday, Lavrov weighed in on a resolution drafted by the US calling for a “swift end” to the Ukraine conflict, which was approved by the UN Security Council on Monday. The document, which was supported by Russia and China, excluded strong language denouncing Moscow. The resolution also came after US President Donald Trump refused to condemn Russia over the Ukraine conflict while blaming Kiev for failing to prevent the hostilities.
The Russian foreign minister said that as soon as the political landscape regarding the conflict began to shift, “Europe immediately tries to undermine this trend, announces new large packages of military aid to Kiev, incites it to continue military actions.”
Lavrov went on to state that “Europe’s role in fomenting crises and its reputation in this area, which it has acquired over centuries, remains unchanged,” adding that the EU’s approach to the conflict is “hopelessly outdated and failing.”
Last week, Politico reported that the EU is preparing a military aid package worth at least €6 billion ($6.3 billion) for Ukraine, with the magazine’s sources claiming that it could potentially balloon to €10 billion as the bloc’s members “dig into their inventories to see what they can send.” Meanwhile, Trump said on Tuesday that the US is not currently supplying Ukraine with any defense assistance.
Russia has condemned the Western arms shipments to Ukraine, warning that they only prolong the conflict without changing the outcome.
Moscow must resist the illusion of a new romance with Washington When Vladimir Putin launched Russia’s military operation in February 2022, he made it clear that the conflict was not merely about Ukraine. It was about Moscow’s broader struggle against the “entire so-called Western bloc,” […]
Moscow must resist the illusion of a new romance with Washington
When Vladimir Putin launched Russia’s military operation in February 2022, he made it clear that the conflict was not merely about Ukraine. It was about Moscow’s broader struggle against the “entire so-called Western bloc,” shaped in the image of the United States. In his speech that day, he described Washington as a “systemically important power,” with its allies acting as obedient followers, “copying its behavior and eagerly accepting the rules it offers.” Three years later, the nature of this Western order has become central to the outcome of the conflict.
The return of Donald Trump to the White House has shaken the transatlantic alliance. Trump’s America is no longer playing by the old rules. It is dismantling decades-old structures that defined Western dominance. His aggressive rhetoric against Western Europe, his attacks on NATO, and his open disdain for Ukraine have left European leaders scrambling. Some analysts, such as Stephen Walt, believe that America’s allies will eventually unite against Trump’s unpredictability. Putin, however, maintains that these European leaders will ultimately “stand at their master’s feet and wag their tails,” regardless of their grievances. The question is: what does this shifting dynamic mean for Russia?
Good with evil
Trump’s radical foreign policy moves have stunned observers. The American president has openly dismissed Ukraine, reducing it to a “burden” that Washington should no longer carry. For Trump, Western Europe is a parasite living off American largesse. His rhetoric, infused with anti-elitist populism, turns the usual Western mantras of democracy and human rights against the very nations that long championed them. The spectacle is grotesque, even for seasoned political analysts.
Trump’s disdain for Ukraine is not driven by geopolitical strategy but by domestic calculations. His focus is China, not Eastern Europe. He wants to redirect American attention to trade imbalances, the Arctic, Latin America, and the Indo-Pacific. Yet, Ukraine, framed by Joe Biden’s administration as the defining battle between “good and evil,” has become an ideological lightning rod. The Biden White House staked everything on a victory over Russia. Trump, in typical fashion, seeks to destroy that narrative, turning it inside out.
A West at war with itself
The Trump phenomenon has thrown the Western alliance into turmoil. Western Europe is grappling with its dependence on the United States. Some European leaders talk of “strategic autonomy,” yet they lack the means to achieve it. Others hope to outlast Trump and return to familiar ground. But the old order is crumbling. Washington’s interference in European elections – once a tool of Western hegemony – is now being deployed by Trumpists to push their own agenda. For Trump’s allies, the European Union is an extension of “Biden’s America,” and their mission is to dismantle it from within.
The transatlantic crisis mirrors past ideological battles. In some ways, this resembles the Kulturkampf of 19th-century Germany – the struggle between Otto von Bismarck’s secular state and the Catholic Church. In today’s world, globalist liberals play the role of the papacy, while populists like Trump assume Bismarck’s mantle.
For Russia, this internal Western fracture offers an opportunity – but also a trap. Moscow finds itself ideologically closer to Trump’s America than to the liberal EU. But aligning too closely with Trump carries risks. The upheaval in the United States is not about Russia; it is about America’s own identity crisis. Moscow must be careful not to become a pawn in Washington’s domestic battles.
The past three years have brought a geopolitical shift: the emergence of what some call the “world majority” – countries that refuse to take sides in the Ukraine conflict and seek to benefit from the West’s decline. Unlike during the Cold War, Washington has failed to rally the Global South against Russia. Instead, many non-Western nations are deepening ties with Moscow, unwilling to follow Washington’s lead.
Meanwhile, within the Western bloc, a new shift is unfolding. Trump’s America is no longer the same force it was during the Cold War. Russia and the US now speak with a degree of mutual courtesy unseen in years. The timing is symbolic, coinciding with the anniversary of the Yalta Conference, where Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin shaped the post-war world. But while this thaw is notable, Russia must be wary of overcommitting to a new alignment with Washington.
Avoiding the temptation of a new ‘partnership’
The West is locked in an existential struggle over its future. Russia must recognize that one faction – the Trump administration – has found it useful to engage with Moscow, but only temporarily. Aligning too closely with Trump’s America risks alienating the very “world majority” that has bolstered Russia’s position globally.
Historically, Russia has often sought Western recognition, sometimes at its own expense. The perception that Moscow always seeks to be acknowledged by the West persists. If Russia rushes to embrace Trump’s overtures while turning its back on its non-Western partners, it will reinforce the stereotype that it craves Western validation above all else. This would be a strategic blunder.
The Ukraine conflict is not about creating a new world order; it is the final chapter of the Cold War. A decisive Russian victory would solidify Moscow’s place as a key power in a multipolar world. But if Russia fails to capitalize on this moment – if it falls into the trap of a new Western engagement – it risks losing its strategic gains.
The world is not returning to the old Cold War dynamic. Trump’s attempts to redefine Western alliances are part of a broader, chaotic transformation of global politics. China, the European Union, and Russia all face internal and external pressures that will shape the coming decade. The United States, despite Trump’s ambitions, cannot reshape the world alone.
For Russia, the challenge is clear. It must maintain its independence, avoid entanglements in the West’s ideological battles, and continue building relationships with the non-Western world. Russia has weathered three years of Western sanctions, diplomatic isolation, and economic warfare. Now, as the West fractures, Moscow must chart its own course – resisting the pull of a “new romance” with Washington.
In this unpredictable landscape, only nations with internal stability and strategic patience will emerge as winners. Russia’s path forward lies not in returning to the past, but in shaping a future where it stands as a sovereign force in an increasingly fragmented world.
This article was first published by the magazine Profile and was translated and edited by the RT team.
Only 30% of those who fled the country are “seriously” considering returning home, Aleksey Chernyshov has said The majority of Ukrainians who left the country over the past three years will not return to their homeland even after the military conflict ends, Minister of National […]
Only 30% of those who fled the country are “seriously” considering returning home, Aleksey Chernyshov has said
The majority of Ukrainians who left the country over the past three years will not return to their homeland even after the military conflict ends, Minister of National Unity Aleksey Chernyshov has said, according to local media reports.
An estimated over 5 million Ukrainians are still living abroad, three years since the conflict escalated. Kiev wants them back as it seeks to address the country’s imploding demographics, boost conscription and generate human resources for the post-conflict reconstruction.
The minister reportedly claimed on Tuesday that 30% of Ukrainians currently abroad are “seriously considering coming back” when the security situation stabilizes, according to Ekonomicheskaya Pravda.
“We also clearly understand that a significant portion of Ukrainians will not return,” the national unity minister said. “They have decided to stay where they are. This is not a catastrophe, it must be acknowledged.”
Chernyshov said that Kiev is developing measures to encourage people to return and cited statistics indicating that Ukraine loses 300,000 people annually for reasons unrelated to the conflict.
“For post-conflict recovery and doubling Ukraine’s GDP within 10 years, it will be necessary to attract between 3.1 to 4.2 million repatriates and immigrants,” he noted.
A study by the Ukrainian think tank Center for Economic Strategy (CES) published last week found that around 5.2 million Ukrainian refugees remain abroad, of which 60% plan to settle outside their homeland. Meanwhile, the share of those considering returning home had dropped to 43% by the end of 2024, compared to 74% in December 2022.
The exodus peaked in March 2022, when around 2.5 million people left the country within weeks. Since then, the outflow has slowed, with around 300,000 people departing Ukraine last year, the CES said. The agency estimates that up to 2.7 million Ukrainians may choose to remain abroad permanently, even after the conflict ends.
The majority of refugees are women and children, while Germany and Poland are the most popular destinations, a Eurostat report published earlier this month showed. The report also revealed that the share of adult men fleeing Ukraine has jumped by nearly 10% over the past year amid the massive mobilization campaign.
This prolonged emigration could have devastating consequences for Ukraine’s economy. CES projects it could reduce the country’s annual GDP by 5.1% to 7.8%.
According to the think tank, the primary reasons Ukrainians are not currently returning home include the ongoing security threats, destroyed housing, low living standards, and difficulties in securing employment in Ukraine.
The belligerence of Kiev’s EU backers will only push them into greater isolation, the Russian Foreign Ministry has said The aggressive position of Ukraine’s EU backers makes them unfit to take part in the peace process, the Russian Foreign Ministry said on Tuesday. Their desire […]
The belligerence of Kiev’s EU backers will only push them into greater isolation, the Russian Foreign Ministry has said
The aggressive position of Ukraine’s EU backers makes them unfit to take part in the peace process, the Russian Foreign Ministry said on Tuesday. Their desire to push divisive narratives will only harm their own relations with the international community, it added.
The actions of the EU nations that actively support Ukraine show that they have “embarked on a path of militarism” and “lost the right” to take part in efforts to resolve the Ukraine conflict, according to the Foreign Ministry.
It was commenting on two competing resolutions on Ukraine that were submitted to the UN General Assembly on Monday to mark the third year of the conflict between Moscow and Kiev. One of them was initiated by Kiev and its EU backers and condemned Russia.
Moscow blasted the document for “recycling baseless accusations and ultimatums against Russia, selective citation of the UN Charter” and ignoring the root causes of the conflict. According to the ministry, the resolution was aimed at increasing international support for the ‘Zelensky peace formula’ – Kiev’s plan for resolving the conflict based on a set of demands and preconditions that Russia has called unacceptable.
The document received record low support in the UN General Assembly, the Foreign Ministry said, adding that more than half of the UN members did not back it. The resolution was endorsed by 93 nations and opposed by 18, with 65 abstentions. The remaining members of the 193-strong body did not vote.
The competing resolution put forward by the US, which initially only expressed sorrow for the loss of life in the conflict and called for a sustainable peace, was “turned into yet another anti-Russian pamphlet” through “obnoxious” amendments introduced by Kiev’s EU backers, the ministry stated.
“The meaning of the initiative was distorted to a point when even its US authors could not endorse their own document,” the Russian statement said. The EU nations’ delegates tried to delay the vote on a similar US-sponsored resolution at the UN Security Council, it added.
These actions run counter to the will of the international community, Moscow said, warning that Kiev’s EU backers could end up isolated due to their belligerent stance.
The EU and some of its member states stepped up their aggressive rhetoric this month after Moscow and Washington announced plans to restore ties and work on resolving the Ukraine conflict. On Monday, the bloc adopted its 16th package of Ukraine-related restrictions, marking the anniversary of the launch of the Russian military operation against Kiev in February 2022.
Shortly after assuming office in January, US President Donald Trump pivoted Washington’s stance on Ukraine. Trump recently claimed that Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky is responsible for escalating the conflict and declared that Zelensky’s participation in meetings between Washington and Russia is unnecessary.
Top EU diplomat and former Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas accused the US of adopting a “Russian narrative” under the new administration and stated that Brussels should “support Ukraine right now more than ever.”
Some members of the bloc want to hand the funds to Kiev immediately, while others suggest using them as leverage in peace talks The EU is reportedly divided over the fate of approximately €200 billion ($209 billion) in Russian sovereign assets, Politico reported on Tuesday. […]
Some members of the bloc want to hand the funds to Kiev immediately, while others suggest using them as leverage in peace talks
The EU is reportedly divided over the fate of approximately €200 billion ($209 billion) in Russian sovereign assets, Politico reported on Tuesday. The funds, primarily held by Euroclear in Brussels, have been frozen since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022.
According to the outlet, since Brussels was left out of discussions between the US and Russian delegations in Saudi Arabia earlier this month, some EU member states have started calling for the immediate transfer of Moscow’s frozen funds to Kiev. Others, however, have argued that the assets should be retained as a bargaining tool in future negotiations with Moscow.
Those who support the seizure of Russia’s assets include the Baltic and Nordic states, as well as Poland, the Czech Republic, and the EU’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, according to Politico. They have argued that the frozen funds should be used to help Ukraine rebuild and sustain its war effort, especially if Washington decides to halt its support for Kiev.
“I don’t take the argument that it’s legally problematic… we need [the] political will to do it,” Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys told Politico in an interview.
Previously, Kallas had also suggested that Russia’s money should be used for the reconstruction of Ukraine before being handed back over to Moscow, noting that she doubts there will be “anything left over.”
However, other EU nations, including France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, believe that these funds should be kept as a bargaining chip. Some officials have also raised concerns that an outright confiscation of Russian funds could set a dangerous precedent and spook international investors.
”If you were to unfreeze [the assets] and give [them] to Ukraine, you don’t have it anymore and you can’t use it as a bargaining chip,” one anonymous EU diplomat told Politico.
Western allies froze about $300 billion in assets belonging to the Russian central bank shortly after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict three years ago. The bulk of the funds, around $213 billion, is being held in the Brussels-based clearinghouse Euroclear.
Russia has repeatedly condemned the freezing of its assets and has warned that seizing them would amount to “theft.” The Kremlin says that any attempt to transfer the funds to Ukraine would lead to severe economic and legal consequences for the EU, including reciprocal actions that could tap the income from frozen Western assets held in Russia.
The US president had claimed that Russia would accept the presence of troops from members of the military bloc in the country The Kremlin has contradicted a claim by US President Donald Trump that Russia would “accept” the placement of troops from NATO countries in […]
The US president had claimed that Russia would accept the presence of troops from members of the military bloc in the country
The Kremlin has contradicted a claim by US President Donald Trump that Russia would “accept” the placement of troops from NATO countries in Ukraine under a possible peace deal.
When pressed by journalists on Monday about Russian President Vladimir Putin’s opinion on the possibility of Western troops deploying to Ukraine, Trump said “He will accept that. I have asked him that question.”
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists on Tuesday however that Moscow’s position has not changed since Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s description the week before of the “presence of armed forces from NATO countries, even under the EU flag or as part of national contingents” as “completely unacceptable” to Moscow.
Trump insisted he had “specifically asked [Putin] that question” regarding the deployment. “He has no problem with it,” he said while talking to the press following his meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron in Washington.
Trump and Putin spoke by phone for more than an hour earlier in February. According to both sides, the conversation involved a wide range of topics, including the ongoing Ukraine conflict. However, neither side mentioned any understandings reached at that time that could be linked to the deployment of Western troops to Ukraine.
Russia would only accept a foreign troop deployment to Ukraine as part of a UN mandate, Vassily Nebenzia, Moscow’s envoy to the international body, told RIA Novosti earlier this month. “‘Peacekeepers’ cannot operate without a mandate from the UN Security Council,” he said at that time, adding that any other military contingents on the ground would be treated as regular combatants.
Moscow has warned that it would treat any troops entering Ukraine without Russia’s consent amid its ongoing conflict with Kiev as legitimate targets.
Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council, meaning it can veto any resolution to send foreign troops to Ukraine.
Several senior European leaders, most notably French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, have been floating the idea of sending military personnel to Ukraine. According to a Wall Street Journal report, the two nations were considering deploying up to 30,000 “peacekeepers” to the nation, depending on whether Moscow and Kiev could reach a peace deal. The plan was also dependent on whether the US would agree to contribute to the effort in a limited military capacity, the report said.
The Trump administration has repeatedly stated that European NATO members should bear the brunt of security guarantees for Kiev. Earlier in February, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ruled out deploying American troops to Ukraine as part of any agreements on security guarantees.
Singer Shaman is facing accusations of advancing the Kremlin’s political agenda through his patriotic music The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) has announced the indictment of pop singer Shaman, real name Yaroslav Dronov, for “glorifying” his country’s army. Kiev has previously categorized Russian entertainers, including […]
Singer Shaman is facing accusations of advancing the Kremlin’s political agenda through his patriotic music
The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) has announced the indictment of pop singer Shaman, real name Yaroslav Dronov, for “glorifying” his country’s army. Kiev has previously categorized Russian entertainers, including children, as tools in information warfare.
The SBU’s statement on Tuesday claims that Shaman is part of a “Kremlin-controlled group of performers” furthering government actions in the conflict with Ukraine. A linguistic analysis of Dronov’s comments allegedly supports the agency’s accusation that he is engaging in “information sabotage.”
Following an investigation conducted alongside the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office, the SBU aims to “hold the propagandists of Ruscism accountable,” the statement added, employing a term that equates pro-Russian policies with fascism.
While the SBU did not disclose its course of action, the charges against Dronov carry a potential prison sentence of up to eight years. The agency has also been linked to politically motivated assassinations, such as the killing of Russian journalist Darya Dugina in August 2022.
Ukrainian authorities have consistently criticized prominent Russian artists for allegedly promoting Moscow’s interests. Earlier this month, Kiev’s Center for Countering Disinformation described the viral pop song ‘Sigma Boy’ as a weapon in the “information war,” claiming it enhances Russia’s global image. Sung by 11-year-old Betsy (Svetlana Chertishcheva) and 12-year-old Maria Yankovskaya, the song praises the titular ‘sigma boy’ as a dance partner that every girl would like for herself.
In apparent response to Ukraine’s designation, the Russian military produced an orchestral cover of the hit, dedicating it to active-duty service members dubbed in the updated lyrics as “real” sigma boys sought after by girls as they return home victorious.
Shaman’s music similarly evokes patriotism, with his signature track titled ‘I Am Russian’ celebrating the pride of belonging to the Russian community.
