Ukraine: US Lies, Provocation, Broken Promises, Fake News

[Anthea]

Putin presses Trump on Donetsk
offers to freeze South front

At the Alaska summit, Vladimir Putin urged Donald Trump to accept Ukraine's withdrawal from Donetsk in exchange for freezing fighting in southern regions, though no deal was reached

Russian President Vladimir Putin used his summit with US President Donald Trump in Alaska to push for territorial concessions in Ukraine, according to a report in the Financial Times.

Citing four people familiar with the discussions, the paper said Putin demanded that Ukraine withdraw from the eastern Donetsk region as a condition for ending the war. In exchange, the Russian leader suggested he could freeze the frontlines in southern areas, including Kherson and Zaporozhye, if Moscow's "core demands" were met.

The Alaska summit, held on Friday, was the first in-person meeting between the two leaders since Trump's return to the White House, with territorial issues at the center of the discussions and suggestions of a possible halt to fighting in other contested regions if Russia’s demands were acknowledged.

Push for Peace Framework

The discussions went beyond territorial issues. According to reports, Trump advocated for a comprehensive peace agreement rather than a temporary ceasefire, telling European partners that "a Peace Agreement… and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up" was the only viable path forward. The approach diverges from the stance taken by Kiev and several EU capitals, who view any territorial trade-offs as unacceptable.

Putin, for his part, has repeatedly affirmed that a lasting settlement must address the "root causes" of the war, including NATO's role in Eastern Europe and Ukraine's right wing (NAZI) political alignment.

Although the meeting produced no formal deal, both leaders described the exchange as productive. Trump called the talks "very productive," while Putin, speaking to senior officials in Moscow on Saturday, characterized the Alaska visit as strategically important. "The visit was timely and extremely useful," he said. He added that Russia respects the US's position on the Ukraine conflict, which he said Moscow seeks to end peacefully.

No Agreement Yet, But Diplomatic Shift

Despite the absence of a signed accord, the summit is being interpreted as a potential turning point. For Moscow, it provided an opportunity to test US willingness to accept territorial changes, while for Washington it signaled Trump's interest in pursuing a peace framework that could reshape the Western approach to the war.

European leaders and Ukraine, however, have expressed unease at being sidelined in the process, with concerns that any US-Russia deal made without Kiev could undermine the legitimacy of future peace efforts.

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/pol ... outh-front

[Anthea]

Declassified: CIA’s covert
Ukraine invasion plan

The war is not new—it’s the result of decades of Western plans to use Ukraine as a proxy against Russia

On 7 August, US polling giant Gallup published the remarkable results of a survey of Ukrainians. Public support for Kiev “fighting until victory” has plummeted to a record low “across all segments” of the population, “regardless of region or demographic group.”

In a “nearly complete reversal from public opinion in 2022,” 69% of citizens “favor a negotiated end to the war as soon as possible.” Just 24% wish to keep fighting. However, vanishingly few believe the proxy war will end anytime soon.

The reasons for Ukrainian pessimism on this point are unstated, but an obvious explanation is the intransigence of President Volodymyr Zelensky, encouraged by his overseas backers - Britain in particular. London’s reverie of breaking up Russia into readily exploitable chunks dates back centuries, and became turbocharged in the wake of the February 2014 Maidan coup.

In July that year, a precise blueprint for the current proxy conflict was published by the Institute for Statecraft, a NATO/MI6 cutout founded by veteran British military intelligence apparatchik Chris Donnelly.

In response to the Donbass "civil war", Statecraft advocated targeting Moscow with a variety of “anti-subversive measures”. This included “economic boycott, breach of diplomatic relations,” as well as “propaganda and counter-propaganda, pressure on neutrals.”

The objective was to produce “armed conflict of the old-fashioned sort” with Russia, which “Britain and the West could win.” While we are now witnessing in real-time the brutal unravelling of Donnelly’s monstrous plot, Anglo-American designs of using Ukraine as a beachhead for all-out war with Moscow date back far further.

In August 1957, the CIA secretly drew up elaborate plans for an invasion of Ukraine by US special forces. It was hoped that neighbourhood anti-Communist agitators would be mobilized as foot soldiers to assist in the effort. A detailed 200-page report, Resistance Factors and Special Forces Areas, set out demographic, economic, geographical, historical, and political factors throughout the then-Soviet Socialist Republic that could facilitate or impede Washington’s quest to ignite local insurrection, and in turn the USSR’s ultimate collapse.

The mission was forecast to be a delicate and difficult balancing act, as much of Ukraine’s population held “few grievances” against Russians or Communist rule, which could be exploited to foment an armed uprising. Just as problematically, “the long history of union between Russia and Ukraine, which stretches in an almost unbroken line from 1654 to the present day,” resulted in “many Ukrainians” having “adopted the Russian way of life”. Problematically, there was thus a pronounced lack of “resistance to Soviet rule” among the population.

The “great influence” of Russian culture over Ukrainians, “many influential positions” in local government being held “by Russians or Ukrainians sympathetic to [Communist] rule, and “relative similarity” of their “languages, customs, and backgrounds," meant there were “fewer points of conflict between the Ukrainians and Russians” than in Warsaw Pact nations.

Throughout those satellite states, the CIA had to varying success already recruited clandestine networks of “freedom fighters” as anti-Communist Fifth Columnists. Yet, the Agency remained keen to identify potential “resistance” actors in Ukraine:

“Some Ukrainians are apparently only slightly aware of the differences which set them apart from Russians and feel little national antagonism. Nevertheless, important grievances exist, and among other Ukrainians there is opposition to Soviet authority which often has assumed a nationalist form. Under favorable conditions, these people might be expected to assist American Special Forces in fighting against the regime.”

‘Nationalist Activity’

A CIA map split Ukraine into 12 separate zones, ranked on “resistance” potential, and how “favorable population attitudes [are] toward the Soviet regime.” South and eastern regions, particularly Crimea and Donbass, rated poorly. Their populations were judged “strongly loyal” to Moscow, having never “displayed nationalist feelings or indicated any hostility to the regime,” while viewing themselves as “a Russian island in the Ukrainian sea.”

In fact, as the study recorded, during and after World War 1, Germany created a fascist puppet state in Ukraine:

Inhabitants of Donbass strongly resisted Ukrainian nationalists and at one point created a separate republic, independent of the rest of Ukraine. In the following years, they defended Soviet rule and Russian interests, often attacking the Ukrainian nationalists with more zeal than the Russian leaders themselves.

During the German occupation in the Second World War, there was not a single recorded case of support for the Ukrainian nationalists or Germans

Still, invading and occupying Crimea was considered of paramount importance. On top of its strategic significance, the peninsula’s landscape was forecast as ideal for guerrilla warfare. The terrain offered “excellent opportunities for concealment and evasion,” the CIA report noted.

While “troops operating in these sectors must be specially trained and equipped,” it was forecast that the local Tatar population, “which fought so fiercely” against the Soviets in World War II, “would probably be willing to help” invading US forces.

Areas of western Ukraine, including former regions of Poland such as Lviv, Rivne, Transcarpathia, and Volyn, which were heavily under control of “Ukrainian insurgents” - adherents of Stepan Bandera - during World War II, were judged most fruitful “resistance” launchpads.

There, “nationalist activity was extensive” during World War II, with armed militias opposing “pro-Soviet partisans with some success.” Conveniently, too, the mass extermination of Jews, Poles, and Russians by Banderites in these regions meant there was virtually no non-ethnic Ukrainian population left.

Furthermore, in the post-war period, “resistance to Soviet rule” had been “expressed on a great scale” in western Ukraine. Despite “extensive deportations”, “many nationalists” remained in Lviv et al, and “nationalist cells” created by Bandera’s “task forces” remained dotted around the country.

For example, anti-Communist “partisan bands” had taken up residence in the Carpathian Mountains. The review concluded, “It is in this region [US] Special Forces could expect considerable support from the local Ukrainian population, including active participation in measures directed against the Soviet regime.”

It was also determined that “Ukrainian nationalist, anti-Soviet sentiment” in Kiev was “apparently moderately strong,” and elements of the population “might be expected to provide active assistance to Special Forces.” The capital’s “large Ukrainian population” was reportedly “little affected by Russian influence,” and during the Russian Revolution, “provided greater support than any other region for Ukrainian, nationalist, anti-Soviet forces.” Resultantly, “uncertainty about the attitudes of the local population” prompted Moscow to designate the Ukrainian SSR’s capital, which it remained until 1934.

The CIA document further offered highly detailed assessments of Ukrainian territory, related to their utility for warfare. For example, “generally forbidding” Polesia - near Belarus - was noted to be “almost impossible” to traverse during spring. Conversely, winter provided “most favorable to movement, depending on the depth to which the ground freezes.” Overall, the area had “proved its worth as an excellent refuge and evasion area by supporting large-scale guerrilla activities in the past.” Meanwhile, “swampy valleys of the Dnieper and Desna rivers” were of particular interest:

“The area is densely forested in its north-western part, where there are excellent opportunities for concealment and maneuver…There are extensive swamps, interspersed with patches of forest, which also provide good hiding places for the Special Forces. Conditions in the Volyno-Podolskaya Highlands are less suitable, although small groups may find temporary shelter in the sparse forests.”

‘Strongly Anti-Nationalist’

The CIA’s invasion plan never formally came to pass. Yet, areas of Ukraine forecast by the Agency to be most welcoming of US special forces were precisely where support for the Maidan coup was the highest.

Moreover, in a largely unknown chapter of the Maidan saga, fascist Right Sector militants were bused en masse to Crimea prior to Moscow’s seizure of the peninsula. Had they succeeded in overrunning the territory, Right Sector would’ve fulfilled the CIA’s objective, as outlined in Resistance Factors and Special Forces Areas.

Given what transpired elsewhere in Ukraine following February 2014, other sections of the CIA report took on a distinctly eerie character. For instance, despite its strategic position facing the Black Sea, the Agency warned against attempting to foment anti-Soviet rebellion in Odessa.

The agency noted the city is “the most cosmopolitan area in Ukraine, with a heterogeneous population including significant numbers of Greeks, Moldovans and Bulgarians, as well as Russians and Jews.”

As such: “Odessa…has developed a less nationalistic character. Historically, it has been considered more Russian than Ukrainian territory. There was little evidence of nationalist or anti-Russian sentiment here during the Second World War, and the city…was in fact controlled by a strongly anti-nationalist local administration during the conflict.”

Odessa became a key battleground between pro- and anti-Maidan elements from the moment the Maidan protests erupted in November 2013. By March the next year, Russophone Ukrainians had occupied the city’s historic Kulykove Pole Square, and were calling for a referendum on the establishment of an “Odessa Autonomous Republic”.

Tensions came to a head on May 2, when fascist football ultras - who subsequently formed the Azov Battalion - flooded Odessa and forced dozens of anti-Maidan activists into the Trade Unions House, before setting it ablaze

In all, 42 people were killed and hundreds were injured, while Odessa’s anti-Maidan movement was comprehensively neutralized. In March this year, the European Court of Human Rights issued a damning ruling against Kiev over the massacre.

It concluded local police and fire services “deliberately” failed to respond appropriately to the inferno, and authorities insulated culpable officials and perpetrators from prosecution despite possessing incontrovertible evidence. Lethal “negligence” by officials on the day, and ever after, was found to go far “beyond an error of judgment or carelessness.”

The ECHR was apparently unwilling to consider that the lethal incineration of anti-Maidan activists was an intentional and premeditated act of mass murder, conceived and directed by Kiev’s US-installed fascist government. However, the findings of a Ukrainian parliamentary commission point ineluctably towards this conclusion.

Whether, in turn, the Odessa massacre was intended to trigger Russian intervention in Ukraine, thus precipitating “armed conflict of the old-fashioned sort” with Moscow that “Britain and the West could win” is a matter of speculation.

https://english.almayadeen.net/articles ... asion-plan

[Anthea]

Economist and public policy expert Jeffrey Sachs

Jeffrey Sachs delivered a fiery and factual speech earlier in 2025

A speech that’s turning heads across Europe and beyond ahead of the high-stakes Trump, Putin meeting in Alaska.

Sachs lays out why understanding both Russia’s and Europe’s positions is crucial to ending the Ukraine war — a message that has taken on new urgency as Trump’s stance on Ukraine rattles allies and rivals alike.

This is an important video and needs to be watched in full

phpBB [video]

Direct Link:

https://www.youtube.com/live/OEvqDnalOKA?feature=shared

[Anthea]

US halts intel sharing on
Russia-Ukraine peace talks

The Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, recently issued a directive instructing the US intelligence community to withhold all information regarding Russia-Ukraine peace talks from allied intelligence partners

According to a memo dated July 20 and signed by Gabbard, agencies were ordered not to share sensitive material with the “Five Eyes” alliance, a longstanding intelligence-sharing partnership between the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Multiple US intelligence officials, speaking anonymously due to the sensitive nature of the matter, confirmed the order.

The directive classified all related assessments as “NOFORN,” meaning no foreign dissemination was allowed. Only information already made public could be shared, and distribution of classified materials was restricted to the originating agencies. The order did not appear to affect diplomatic channels outside of intelligence operations or military coordination unrelated to the peace talks, such as battlefield support to Ukrainian forces.

When contacted by CBS News, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence redirected inquiries to the White House, which offered no response.

Five eyes partnership

Steven Cash, a former CIA and Department of Homeland Security officer, explained the broader implications of the decision. “In general, the value of the Fives Eyes intelligence partnership is that when we are making and they are making policy decisions, we can both augment each other's intelligence and therefore know more about the plans, intentions, and capabilities of our adversaries,” he said. He added that the alliance has traditionally operated on the assumption that all members are “sitting on the same side of the table with some other adversary on the other side.”

The Five Eyes partnership dates back to a secret post-World War II pact between the US and UK, later joined by Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Over the decades, the network became a central pillar of Western intelligence-sharing. However, some former officials now warn that Gabbard’s directive could strain this relationship, discouraging cooperation and eroding trust built over decades.

National security contributor Sam Vinograd emphasized the potential consequences: “Shutting our most trusted partners off from intelligence assessments could have a chilling effect on critical intelligence sharing if our partners believe they're being shut out of key access, including on key matters in their region.” She cautioned that allied nations might develop alternative intelligence channels without US involvement, undermining future collaboration.

Others, however, argue that such measures are not unusual. Ezra Cohen, a former acting undersecretary of defense for intelligence, noted that information is often withheld between Five Eyes members. “There is a lot of information we do not share even with our Five Eyes partners, and it works in the reverse,” Cohen explained. He suggested criticism of Gabbard’s directive reflects broader political opposition rather than a true breach of norms.

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/pol ... ks-with-al

[Anthea]

Moscow continues to maintain
dialogue with Washington

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov reaffirmed ongoing confidential contacts with Washington and praised Donald Trump's mediation efforts

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Wednesday said Moscow continues to maintain dialogue with Washington through established channels, while stressing that discussions on Ukraine must remain confidential to achieve results.

"As for our contacts with the Americans, they continue through channels that are also well known," Peskov told reporters, adding that Russia considers it unhelpful to isolate the talks from the broader political context. "We believe that the work should continue to be conducted in a non-public format. This is the only way to achieve results," he noted.

Peskov also underscored the significance of US President Donald Trump's involvement in efforts to end the conflict. "We highly appreciate and also hope that the peacekeeping and mediation efforts on the part of the President of the United States will continue. We believe that these efforts are very important and can really help in the settlement," he said.

His comments come as US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff prepares to meet with Ukrainian representatives in New York, amid reports that Washington is pushing to maintain momentum in talks with Moscow. Trump has warned of an "economic war" if Russia fails to commit to negotiations, even as analysts note that Moscow has been sending mixed signals about its readiness for compromise.

Talks require preparation

The Kremlin spokesman confirmed there are still no fixed dates for the next session of negotiations between the Russian and Ukrainian delegations. "We cannot yet name the exact dates," he said, noting that both sides remain in touch.

"The Russian side maintains its determination to resolve the Ukrainian conflict, preferably by peaceful political and diplomatic means. For this, reciprocity from Ukraine is certainly necessary," he added.

According to Peskov, discussions between the delegations continue to focus on security guarantees, which remain a key element in any settlement framework. He stressed that any potential summit between Russian and Ukrainian leaders would require careful groundwork to be meaningful. "Any other contacts [between Russia and Ukraine] at a high or top level, as we have repeatedly said, should be well prepared so that these contacts become effective," he explained.

The spokesman further confirmed that Russian President Vladimir Putin and Trump recently held talks in Alaska. "Once again, it probably would not be superfluous to repeat that a very meaningful, constructive, useful and necessary conversation took place in Alaska between our two presidents," he said.

Issues related to Ukraine were discussed "in continuation of the work being done by the Russian side and in continuation of the peacekeeping efforts being undertaken by Trump and members of his administration," Peskov explained.

Diplomacy amid offensives

Meanwhile, Russia's Defense Ministry announced that the Vostok group of forces has taken control of the settlement of Zaporizke in the Dnipropetrovsk region. The ministry described the advance as a tactical gain that removed another Ukrainian defensive position.

On the battlefield developments, Western officials warn that progress in diplomacy remains fragile. European capitals continue to push their "coalition of the willing" initiative launched earlier this year to secure Ukraine's sovereignty and back any eventual peace framework.

Ukraine, however, has voiced concern that its role is being sidelined in direct US-Russia contacts, while ex-President Volodymyr Zelensky has accused Moscow of "sending negative signals" about the future of the process.

Peskov reiterated Moscow's stance that its military operation is targeting only combat-related infrastructure. He pointed to Putin's refusal to strike Ukraine's presidential offices in Kiev as proof of restraint. "In this light, I would like to recall that our armed forces, they are attacking military, near-military targets. This position of the president, it remains consistent and will certainly continue to be maintained," he said.

Peskov rejected Western claims that Russia
provoked the conflict, blaming NATO expansion

"We believe that these efforts [of US President Donald Trump] ... are truly capable of helping to resolve this complex, long-standing conflict that was not provoked by us," he said, adding that Moscow views the prospect of European troops in Ukraine negatively.

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/pol ... engage--kr

[Anthea]

Ukraine record 110,000+ AWOL cases

Over 110,000 Ukrainian military desertion cases were recorded in 2025, surpassing prior years

More than 110,000 cases of unauthorized abandonment of a military unit were registered in the Ukrainian armed forces in the first seven months of 2025, a number that exceeds the total from the previous three years since the conflict began, according to the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine, as reported by the Ukrainska Pravda news portal.

Unauthorized abandonment of a military unit was registered in 6,988 cases in 2022 and 18,628 cases in 2023, while 110,511 such cases have already been registered in just the first seven months of 2025, according to the Tuesday report. The report added that the total number of AWOL (absent without official leave) cases from 2022 to 2025 is 202,997.

Separate records are reportedly kept under the article "Desertion", under which a total of 50,058 criminal proceedings were registered from 2022 to July 2025.

According to the Hromadske broadcaster, at least 25 mobilized soldiers have died within the walls of Ukrainian military registration and enlistment offices since 2022, while adding that law enforcement officials have acknowledged the fact of a violent death in only two of those cases.

This comes as prospects of a ceasefire in Ukraine remain uncertain, and threats of escalating economic warfare against Russia continue, most recently by US President Donald Trump.
Trump rules out world war, hints at sanctions against Russia

On August 26, US President Donald Trump stated that the war in Ukraine will not escalate into a world war but warned that Russia could face severe economic consequences if a peace deal is not reached.

"I'd like it [Ukraine conflict] to stop. I want to get it to stop. And it will not be a world war, but it will be an economic war, and an economic war is going to be bad, and it's going to be bad for Russia. And I don't want that now," the US president announced during a cabinet meeting in Washington

He emphasized that Washington would not pursue a military confrontation but was prepared to use economic sanctions against Moscow, stating, "We have economic sanctions," and adding, "I am talking about economics because we're not going to get into a world war."

Trump added that he had "something very serious" in mind when it comes to the economic measures he plans to impose on Russia should negotiations fail.

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/pol ... ighest-sin

[Anthea]

Trump officials say Europe secretly
blocking end to Ukraine war

Trump aides accuse Europe of undermining Ukraine peace efforts while publicly backing the US

Senior White House officials claim that while some European leaders are publicly endorsing US President Donald Trump’s push to end the war in Ukraine, they are privately undermining progress made since the Alaska summit.

The White House has tasked the Treasury Department with drafting a list of potential sanctions that European nations could impose on Russia. Among the measures under discussion are a complete halt to oil and gas purchases, as well as secondary tariffs on India and China similar to those already enforced by the US.

Trump aides argue that two weeks after his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, little has been achieved toward peace. They place the blame not on Trump or Putin, but on European allies they accuse of fueling unrealistic expectations for Kiev.

A senior White House official told Axios, “The Europeans don’t get to prolong this war and backdoor unreasonable expectations, while also expecting America to bear the cost. If Europe wants to escalate, that will be their choice, but it risks snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.”

Europe pressures Kiev to wait, Trump pushes for direct talks

Trump’s team claims, that European leaders are encouraging Ukrainian Dictator Volodymyr Zelensky to hold out for what they call a “better deal", a stance the White House views as worsening the war.

US officials note that Britain and France have been more constructive, but they accuse other major European states of expecting Washington to shoulder the costs while contributing little themselves. One senior official remarked, “Getting to a deal is the art of the possible. Some Europeans continue to operate in a fairy-tale land that ignores the fact it takes two to tango.”

Trump has repeatedly stressed that a direct Putin-Zelensky summit is the necessary next step. However, Moscow has so far refused, and Kiev has rejected talks about territorial concessions unless Russia shows willingness to negotiate.
Frustration inside the White House

The lack of progress has visibly irritated Trump. During a recent Cabinet meeting, he expressed exasperation.

Everybody is posturing. It’s all bullshit

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Thursday, “Perhaps both sides are not ready to end it themselves. The president wants it to end, but the leaders of these two countries must want it as well.”

Meanwhile, Russian airstrikes on Kiev and Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian oil refineries underscore the deepening conflict rather than any move toward peace.

European response to US criticism

European officials pushed back against US claims. A senior European figure involved in the talks told Axios there is “no gap” between their discussions with Trump and their actual strategy, insisting European states are already preparing new sanctions against Russia.

Despite this, some US officials privately view Europe as a growing obstacle, even though Trump held what appeared to be a cordial meeting with European leaders and Zelensky just weeks ago.

On Friday, Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff met Zelensky’s chief of staff Andriy Yermak in New York, Axios reported. They discussed the possibility of a Putin-Zelensky meeting, and Yermak extended an invitation for Witkoff to visit Kiev.

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/pol ... to-ukraine

[Anthea]

Germany not considering
troop deployments to Ukraine

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz ruled out current plans for ground forces in Ukraine, stressing talks focus on security guarantees and financial support while Russia warned NATO troops would be unacceptable

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has rejected speculation that Western soldiers could be sent to Ukraine, stressing that current talks in Europe are focused on security guarantees and political assurances rather than ground deployments.

In an interview with ZDF television, Merz dismissed suggestions raised in Paris and London. "At the moment, no one is talking about ground forces in Ukraine... I attend all these negotiations, and I know what we are talking about," he said

When asked whether a truce might be reached in 2026, Merz was cautious but hopeful. "I have not given up hope that we will achieve this. However, I have no illusions," he noted.

According to Bild, Berlin has already shelved the option of sending Bundeswehr troops if a ceasefire emerges. Instead, the German government is preparing to provide financial assistance to sustain Ukraine's armed forces in the post-war period.

Troop Plans Denied

The chancellor's remarks follow US President Donald Trump's statement after an August 18 summit in Washington, where he claimed that France, Germany, and the UK were considering troop deployments. Trump noted that no US forces would be involved during his presidency. European officials later clarified that any foreign presence under discussion was tied to a post-ceasefire arrangement, not combat operations. A joint UK-French-German communiqué explicitly spoke of being "ready to deploy a reassurance force once hostilities have ceased."

Still, German officials remain wary of overextension. Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul warned that such a mission would "probably overwhelm us", citing the Bundeswehr's existing obligations, including its permanent brigade deployment in Lithuania. Military associations in Berlin have also said that a serious multinational mission could require tens of thousands of troops, raising questions about feasibility.

Meanwhile, Trump's wider peace plan, reported by The Telegraph, includes the idea of using American private military contractors in Ukraine as part of a long-term security arrangement, a strategy aimed at avoiding US troop deployments while keeping American involvement. The plan also ties security to Ukraine's rare earth minerals, continued arms sales, and a possible European-led reassurance force scaled down from earlier proposals of 30,000 troops.

Russia has sharply opposed these ideas. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has warned that any NATO-linked presence on Ukrainian soil, "under any designation, including peacekeepers," would be seen as a threat and "not be accepted under any circumstances." Moscow has also floated China as a potential guarantor in a future ceasefire, an idea rejected by Europe and Kiev.

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/pol ... eployments

[Anthea]

Azov expansion poses challenge
for Ukraine's peace prospects

An analysis by Alex Vershinin for Responsible Statecraft warns that Ukraine's Azov formation, now expanded into corps-level forces of up to 80,000 troops, poses a major challenge to both battlefield dynamics and future peace negotiations with Russia

An analysis published by writer Alex Vershinin for Responsible Statecraft on Tuesday examines how Ukraine's Azov formation has grown from a fringe militia into one of the country's most powerful fighting forces, raising difficult questions for the battlefield and for future peace talks with Russia

According to Vershinin, Russia's push northeast of Pokrovsk forced Kiev to commit the newly enlarged Azov Corps to the frontlines. Many observers were surprised to see Azov fielding corps-level commands, one under the National Guard and another within the regular army, numbering between 40,000 and 80,000 troops.

"Most remember it as a single regiment of about 1000 men and are shocked to find it has grown into two multi-brigade structures of over 20,000–40,000 soldiers each," he notes.

From Mariupol Militia to Corps-Level Force

Azov's origins date back to the 2014 battle for Mariupol, where its founder, Andriy Biletskyi, and his fighters gained notoriety. The unit's adoption of Nazi-inspired symbols such as the Wolfsangel and Black Sun, alongside Biletskyi's history of far-right rhetoric, cemented Azov's reputation as extremist.

At one stage, US law even barred military aid from reaching Azov because of these associations. Although the unit was integrated into Ukraine's National Guard in 2014 to professionalize it, concerns about ideology have persisted.

Despite this controversy, Azov earned respect for disciplined combat performance, particularly during the battle of Mariupol and later in the Azovstal steel plant siege. Its commanders became known for making tactical withdrawals when operations were deemed unwinnable, such as pulling out of Avdiivka in 2023, allowing Azov to preserve its veteran core while building a reputation for offensive success. By 2025, Azov leaders had been promoted to oversee entire corps, including brigades and the Kraken special forces regiment, making it a decisive element of Ukraine's armed forces.

Vershinin warns that Azov's rise complicates peace efforts. Moscow has consistently framed "denazification" as a war aim, citing formations like Azov as justification. Yet Ukraine is unlikely to disband units that now make up roughly 10% of its fighting strength and remain among the few formations capable of sustained offensive operations. This reality could obstruct any settlement, particularly as Azov veterans hold influence beyond the battlefield.

These concerns come as international diplomacy seeks to revive peace talks. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has floated Geneva as a venue for ceasefire negotiations under a "coalition of the willing," while Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has said that Presidents Putin and Zelensky are "not yet ready" for direct talks. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been lobbying for stronger Western involvement and renewed talks with President Trump, but progress remains limited. European leaders are even considering a NATO-enforced buffer zone inside Ukraine, though Kiev may resist such concessions.

Risks for Ukraine and Europe

Vershinin concludes that unless Western powers address Azov directly in negotiations, peace efforts risk collapse. "The evolution of Azov from a single militia battalion to two combat corps of the Ukrainian Security Forces poses a significant challenge to post-war Ukraine," he writes, warning that the group's size, ideology, and autonomy could destabilize both a future settlement and Europe's broader security order.

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/pol ... -prospects

[Anthea]

Russia will fight on if peace talks fail

Putin warned Russia will escalate militarily if peace talks fail, as Trump's diplomacy stalls, Europe debates troop roles, and Moscow demands recognition of freed Ukrainian territories

Russian President Vladimir Putin declared on Wednesday that Moscow would press on with its military campaign in Ukraine if current efforts to secure a peace agreement collapse, speaking as he wrapped up a state visit to China.

Despite fresh diplomatic activity led by US President Donald Trump, who hosted both Russian and Ukrainian leaders in August, negotiations remain deadlocked. Putin insisted there was still "light at the end of the tunnel" but warned that his forces would advance if talks falter. "Let's see how the situation develops. If not, then we will have to resolve all our tasks militarily," he said.

The Kremlin leader also questioned the legitimacy of Ukrainian Dictator Volodymyr Zelensky, ruling out a near-term meeting. Still, he claimed to have made an offer through Washington: "Donald (Trump) asked me for such a meeting, I said: 'Yes, it's possible, let Zelensky come to Moscow.'" A source previously indicated that Zelensky had rejected a similar initiative.

Putin added that Moscow was open to adjusting the format of talks, saying Russia was prepared to raise the level of its representation if required. "If it will be necessary to raise the level of delegations, we are ready for it," he told reporters in Beijing.

European divisions and coalition talks

The remarks come as European powers debate their own role in Ukraine. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently rejected speculation about Bundeswehr deployments, stressing Berlin's focus on financial assistance and security guarantees. By contrast, French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer are due to co-chair a September 4 summit of the "Coalition of the Willing" in Paris with Zelensky, aiming to craft a multinational security framework once a ceasefire is in place.

While Trump has promised no US troops will serve in Ukraine, he has suggested a mix of European reassurance forces and American private contractors could provide long-term security. Russia has condemned such ideas, with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warning that any NATO-linked presence in Ukraine "under any designation" would be unacceptable.

Territorial red lines

A central obstacle remains Russia's insistence that any peace deal must recognize its sovereignty over Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, Zaporozhye, and Crimea. Ukraine has rejected these demands outright, vowing to reclaim all seized land before discussing political arrangements. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiga denounced Moscow's stance as "old ultimatums," calling instead for new sanctions to "sober Moscow up."

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/pol ... e-ahead--p

[Anthea]

Ukraine moves to ban Orthodox Church

With this move, Ukraine is escalating a complex religious and political struggle amid the ongoing war

The Ukrainian government is moving to ban the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), alleging that it remains affiliated with Moscow despite claiming independence from the Russian Orthodox Church.

The decision targets one of the two major branches of Orthodoxy in Ukraine, underscoring the country’s ongoing efforts to sever all remaining Russian influence amid the broader conflict.

The action follows a law passed by Ukraine’s Parliament last year outlawing the Moscow-based Russian Orthodox Church and authorizing the government to prohibit any religious organization with ties to it.

A formal petition has now been submitted to the courts to ban the UOC’s activities. If the court rules in favor of the government, the Church will have the right to appeal. The legal process could be finalized within months, according to the UOC's legal representatives.

Legal action targets Kiev metropolis and leadership

The primary target of the government’s action is the UOC’s Kiev Metropolis, the central governing body of the Church, led by Metropolitan Onufry. The government has already revoked Onufry’s Ukrainian citizenship.

According to Ukrainian law, affiliated institutions such as monasteries and regional eparchies may also face sanctions, including the loss of access to state-owned religious properties.

The move is based on findings by the State Service of Ukraine on Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Conscience (DESS), which claimed that the UOC had not sufficiently demonstrated a break from the Russian Orthodox Church.

The UOC, which historically had centuries-old ties with Moscow, denounced Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and declared its independence from the Russian Orthodox Church that same year

The Church reiterated its independent status in 2025 and took liturgical steps to underscore its break, including omitting Patriarch Kirill’s name from religious services.

Despite these measures, the government argues that the UOC has not amended its governing documents or taken legal steps to finalize its independence. The DESS claims the Church remains a de facto extension of Moscow.

“This is not a religious organization, but a branch of an aggressor state,” read a headline on the DESS’s official website.

UOC lawyer Robert Amsterdam rejected the accusation, saying the findings “intentionally ignored” the Church’s efforts, such as establishing parishes abroad for Ukrainian refugees. He described the government's actions as politically motivated.

Religious freedom debate grows amid US and UN criticism

The ban attempt has drawn international attention. The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights warned in 2024 that the law could unjustly penalize entire religious communities based on the actions of a few individuals.

The US Commission on International Religious Freedom raised similar concerns but emphasized that Russia remained the most significant threat to religious freedom, particularly in occupied areas.

The issue has also become part of the debate over US aid to Ukraine, particularly under President Donald Trump's administration, which has taken a more critical stance toward continued assistance.

Orthodox identity in Ukraine remains divided

According to a 2024 survey by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology, roughly 70% of Ukrainians identify as Orthodox.

However, most align with the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, which received official recognition as independent in 2019 from Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople.

The Russian Orthodox Church disputes Bartholomew's authority to grant such recognition, viewing Ukraine as within its jurisdiction.

This division continues to deepen amid the war, as the role of religious institutions becomes increasingly politicized. Ukrainian officials insist the issue is not about faith but about national security and institutional independence from Russia.

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/pol ... moscow-tie

[Anthea]

Foreign troops in Ukraine
legitimate targets for destruction

Security guarantees for Russia and Ukraine remain disputed as leaders set conditions for future peace, while the Kremlin signals openness to further dialogue with Washington

Post-conflict security guarantees must be developed for both Russia and Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday during a plenary session of the Eastern Economic Forum (EEF) in Vladivostok.

“If agreements are reached, let no one doubt that Russia will implement them in full. And we will respect those security guarantees, which, of course, must be worked out for both Russia and Ukraine,”

The Russian leader added that no party has yet raised the issue of guarantees with Moscow at a serious level. He also warned that the presence of foreign military personnel in Ukraine would remain unacceptable, calling such troops “legitimate targets for destruction” during ongoing hostilities.

Zelensky: Guarantees must begin before fighting ends

On his part, Ukrainian Dictator Volodymyr Zelensky, speaking at the Cernobbio Economic Forum in Italy on September 5, urged that security guarantees for Ukraine be implemented immediately, without waiting for a ceasefire.

His comments came a day after the “Coalition of the Willing” summit, where he and European leaders discussed a multinational reassurance force, along with commitments of weapons, logistics, and training.

“The first step to ending any war is a ceasefire,” Zelensky said. “If pressure increases, not decreases… if there are security guarantees and sanctions, this will naturally push Putin in the right direction.”

He stressed that guarantees must cover not only military aid but also economic assurances, amid warnings that without binding commitments, Russia could regroup and renew its offensive.

French President Emmanuel Macron stated after the Paris summit that 26 countries were prepared to send troops or provide other support, though only after a ceasefire is reached.

However, Moscow has firmly rejected the idea of foreign contingents in Ukraine. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said such forces would be incapable of ensuring Kiev’s security.

Kremlin: Second round of Putin-Trump talks possible

Amid the debates over security guarantees, the Kremlin signaled that a second round of talks between President Putin and Trump could take place soon.

“Of course, it is possible. I have no doubt that if the presidents consider it necessary, their meeting can be organized very quickly. Just as the meeting in Alaska was organized quickly,” Peskov told AiF in an interview.

He confirmed that working-level contacts remain ongoing between Moscow and Washington.

Peskov also addressed speculation that Russia is “turning eastward” in response to strained relations with the West.

“Russia is not going to turn around anywhere. That would be a mistake. It was actually in the East,” he said, underlining Moscow’s longstanding view of itself as a Eurasian power.

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/pol ... destructio

[Anthea]

US strips Eastern Europe of
military support amid war

The United States is withdrawing much of its military support from Eastern Europe, a move widely seen as pressure on European allies to increase their defense spending in the Russia-Ukraine war, the Financial Times reported

A Lithuanian Defense Ministry official said on Friday that the US Department of Defense informed European countries last week that military support under a program known as Section 333 will be cut to zero from the next fiscal year.

According to the White House, the decision reflects Washington’s confidence in Europe’s recent efforts to strengthen its military capabilities.

Officials said the step is intended to encourage Europe to assume “more responsibility for its own defense.”

European countries have sharply increased military spending since the beginning of the war in Ukraine. The United States has long urged NATO members to meet or exceed defense spending targets, and officials say this adjustment in US military aid is part of that broader push.

European leaders voice concerns over US move

Despite Washington’s reassurances, European Union officials expressed concern that the US decision could be perceived by Moscow as a sign of weakness. Some worry that such a perception might embolden Russia while undermining European unity in support of Ukraine.

The Lithuanian Defense Ministry's Director of Policy, Vaidotas Urbelis, told reporters on September 5, “Officially, last week the US Defense Department informed countries that from the next financial year this budget line would be reduced to zero for all European states.”

“There is no formal letter on paper. These are conversations, certain pieces of information and statements, but we see the overall picture. [...] Next year’s budget has not even been adopted. That means the actual sums will only be clear once both chambers pass it and the US president signs it, so we still have to wait a couple of months," Urbelis added.

The reduction of US military support comes as the war in Ukraine enters its third year, with Russia showing no signs of winding down. Analysts warn that scaling back American involvement could shift the balance of deterrence in Eastern Europe at a critical time.

Macron's promise of EU post-Ukraine war support

At a summit on Thursday, September 4, French President Emmanuel Macron said that 26 European countries “are ready” to take part in a postwar peacekeeping mission in Ukraine, highlighting Europe’s growing willingness to play a more active role in regional security.

“The day the conflict stops, the security guarantees will be deployed," Macron told reporters.

Following the summit, Macron stated, “We have today 26 countries who have formally committed, some others have not yet taken a position, to deploy a ‘reassurance force’ troops in Ukraine, or be present on the ground, in the sea or in the air.”

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/pol ... ukraine-wa

[Anthea]

The Ukrainian neo-Nazi who knew too much?

The daylight assassination of Ukrainian ultranationalist Andriy Parubiy raises deeper questions: was it mere revenge, or a silencing of a man who carried explosive secrets about Maidan, Odessa, and Kiev’s descent into fascism?

On August 30th, Andriy Parubiy was shot dead in broad daylight in Lviv, Ukraine. A key figure in the foreign-fomented Maidan putsch and a prominent and influential politician locally for many years, he was mourned by a welter of British, European, and US officials.

Within three days, Parubiy’s murderer was arrested and pleaded guilty. Wholly unremorseful, the assassin claimed his actions were “revenge on the state” for his son having disappeared - presumed dead - while fighting in Bakhmut in 2023.

Yet, there is almost certainly more to this story than meets the eye. In the immediate aftermath of Parubiy’s slaying, claims emerged he had months earlier requested formal protection from the SBU, only to be rebuffed. This prompted some outcry, forcing Kiev’s security services to issue a statement explaining why Parubiy’s demand was refused.

Curiously though, a press conference has since been convened at which the SBU and local law enforcement contradictorily denied he had ever asked any state authority to be safeguarded.

Whatever the truth of the matter, Parubiy took an enormous number of sensitive secrets to his grave, which a great many individuals and organisations have a significant interest in remaining concealed forever. A longstanding, outspoken ultranationalist, in 1991 he cofounded the openly Neo-Nazi Social-Nationalist Party - later rebranded Svoboda - and from 1998 - 2004 ran its paramilitary wing, Patriot of Ukraine. The unit, like its parent political party, aggressively advocated insurrectionary violence, and espoused virulent, genocidal hatred of Russia and Russians.

Parubiy was a key figure in Kiev’s US-orchestrated 2004 Orange Revolution. His role in the Maidan coup and all that followed, which sent Ukraine hurtling towards war with Moscow, was considerably more outsized. After the protests erupted in November 2013,

Parubiy founded the “Maidan Self-Defense Force”. While ostensibly responsible for protecting purportedly peaceful demonstrators from riot police, the Force acted in close coordination with fascist paramilitary group Right Sector. The latter routinely engaged in incendiary, savage acts to provoke adverse responses from law enforcement.

The protests ended with elected President Viktor Yanukovych fleeing Ukraine on February 22, 2014. This followed the sniper massacre of demonstrators in Kiev’s Freedom - now Maidan - Square. Government forces - were blamed for the bloodshed, triggering an avalanche of international condemnation, and threats from Paribuy’s Maidan Self-Defense to storm the President’s residence and take power by force if he didn’t resign.

Yanukovych’s government was replaced by a fascist-riddled unelected administration, hand-picked by the US State Department’s Ukraine point-person Victoria Nuland

Parubiy was appointed National Security and Defense Council chief, overseeing the launch and execution of Ukraine’s “Anti-Terrorist Operation”, a savage crackdown on the country’s Russian-speaking population.

He also instituted moves to integrate the country into NATO’s defence and security structures, in advance of formal membership. While Parubiy initially retained his position under elected, far-right President Petro Poroshenko, he resigned in August 2014 after the Minsk Agreements intended to achieve peace in Donbass were signed, believing the dispute could only be resolved via “force”.

Parubiy’s bellicosity only intensified when the proxy war erupted in February 2022. In the conflict’s early days, he forcefully argued against any negotiation with Moscow, and instead urged Kiev to “destroy the Russian Empire.” In the meantime, the Maidan massacre officially remained unsolved.

This deficiency was so marked, suspicion abounded even among Ukrainian investigators as official probes into the killings were being deliberately sabotaged. There were certainly many figures within the country who wanted the truth obscured and buried - Andriy Parubiy perhaps foremost among them.

‘Sacred Victims’

In October 2023, a Kiev court finally made a ruling on the Maidan massacre, in a trial that began in 2016. Of five police officers on trial accused of the atrocity, one was acquitted outright, another sentenced to time served for alleged “abuse of power,” while three were convicted in absentia on 31 counts of murder and 44 counts of attempted murder. The verdict means no Ukrainian official from the time has been in any way legally punished over the incident today.

Nonetheless, the verdict conclusively ruled out the involvement of Russian elements in the mass shooting - a conspiracy theory promoted heavily by pro-Maidan elements for many years, including Parubiy

Even more significantly, in at least 28 of the 128 shootings of protesters evaluated during the trial, the court found the “involvement of law enforcement officers has not been proven,” and therefore the involvement of “other unknown persons” in the killings “cannot be ruled out.” Which is an extraordinary understatement.

The verdict noted “quite sufficient” evidence indicated “categorically” many shots were fired at protesters from Freedom Square’s Hotel Ukraina, which was “territory…not controlled by law enforcement agencies.” Unmentioned in the judgment, Hotel Ukraina was used as a base of operations by Svoboda throughout the Maidan unrest, its leaders - including Parubiy - coordinating chaos on the streets below. Many Svoboda operatives were based on the hotel’s 11th floor. Snipers in this area were observed by a BBC reporter.

However, copious witness evidence heard throughout the long running trial indicated Hotel Ukraina was not the only building or area from which protesters were being fatally shot, proven to have been occupied by opposition elements - not government forces - at the time. Of particular note was the testimony of Nazar Mukhachov, a Maidan Self-Defense commander and adviser to Parubiy. He gained access to government-collected evidence related to the massacre, and conducted his own investigation.

The results of Mukhachov’s probe into the mass killing amply indicated “third forces” linked to the Maidan leadership were responsible for shooting both protesters and police, from sites - including Hotel Ukraina - occupied by opposition elements. He declared Parubiy et al required “sacred victims” in order to seize power. Mukhachov’s account is especially forceful and persuasive, given his Maidan Self-Defense position, the fact he continues to support the Maidan coup, and remains a committed ultranationalist.

Meanwhile, Stanyslav Shuliak, a riot police commander during the Maidan protests, recorded how numerous officers observed snipers shooting from Maidan-controlled locations. Resultantly, security services negotiated with Maidan Self-Defense representatives to investigate these areas, but Parubiy denied their requests.

Even more damningly, numerous witnesses testified to having caught armed individuals known or suspected of shooting at protesters during the massacre. After capture, these individuals were handed over to Parubiy’s Maidan Self-Defense - only for them to be released without consequence or explanation, and typically never seen again.

‘A Corpse’

In the immediate aftermath of Parubiy’s death, popular Ukrainian news outlet Strana interviewed a number of his associates. Intriguingly, while most blamed the “hand of the Kremlin” for his liquidation, others “[did] not exclude the internal political background of the murder” - namely, Parubiy may have been liquidated due to “expectations of some future political upheaval in the country.” After all, as an anonymous source told Strana, “Andrei knew well how to arrange a Maidan.”

The threat of impending “political upheaval” in Ukraine is very real. Every day, Moscow’s forces relentlessly advance in Donbass. Vast casualties, desertion, and failed recruitment drives mean Kiev’s manpower shortage is so dire: women - some of them pregnant - now fill frontline combat roles.

Europe has been reduced to buying weapons from Washington to equip their proxy, while Donald Trump has firmly ruled out NATO membership, or the return of lost territory. The proxy war has unambiguously been lost for some time

Despite this, ex President Volodymyr Zelensky remains publicly committed to maximalist - and wholly unattainable - battlefield goals, including recapturing Crimea. He has strong grounds for maintaining this farcical facade publicly.

In July, Zelensky’s attempt to take US-run “anti-corruption” bodies under his government’s control sparked mass protests, demands for his resignation from even his strongest Western supporters, and vitriolic condemnation from powerful elements within the country. Among the loudest voices was Andriy Biletsky, founder of the notorious Neo-Nazi Azov Battalion.

In an August interview with The Times, Biletsky repeatedly criticised Zelensky and ruled out any negotiations with Russia, outlining a personal “vision for the future” for perpetual war with Moscow, in which Ukraine became a “permanently militarised society” and Europe’s “army and arsenal.” His comments were echoed mere days later in a comparable puff piece in the same outlet, in which popular YouTuber and former head of Right Sector’s Odessa branch Serhii Sternenko openly threatened the Ukrainian President’s life:

“If…Zelensky were to give any unconquered land away, he would be a corpse - politically, and then for real. It would be a bomb under our sovereignty. People would never accept it…At the end, there will only be one victor, Russia or Ukraine…If the Russian empire continues to exist in this present form then it will always want to expand. Compromise is impossible. The struggle will be eternal until the moment Russia leaves Ukrainian land.”

Sternenko was centrally involved in the May 2014 Odessa massacre, which killed dozens of anti-Maidan activists and injured hundreds more. Another key Right Sector figure implicated in the hideous incident was Demyan Hanul, assassinated in March.

The fascist paramilitary group described the slaughter as a “bright page of our national history.” In advance, Andriy Parubiy and 500 members of his Maidan Self-Defense were deployed to the city, strongly suggesting the industrial scale incineration of Russian-speakers was a premeditated, intentional act of mass murder

In the Odessa massacre’s wake, prominent Svoboda representative Iryna Farion - whose room in Hotel Ukraina served as a sniper’s nest during the Maidan false flag massacre - cheered the killings, declaring “let the devils burn in hell…Bravo!”

She herself was murdered in July 2024, despite being under intensive SBU surveillance. It’s certainly quite some coincidence that, at a time the walls are evidently closing in on Zelensky, three individuals who could testify to the events that brought the Maidan regime into being are now dead.

https://english.almayadeen.net/articles ... w-too-much

[Anthea]

Protests continue against
ex-President Zelensky in Kyiv

A new law effectively strips the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) of their independence and places them under the control of the prosecutor general. The move makes it easier for the government to control which cases are pursued.

Why It Matters

The protests mark a rare public outcry against the wartime leader. The backlash signals a potential erosion of trust in Zelensky's administration, particularly from civil society groups and reform advocates who have been instrumental in Ukraine's post-2014 efforts to clean up government institutions and align with Western democratic norms.

NABU and SAPO are institutions long supported by international donors and the European Union as being pivotal to Ukraine's eligibility for continued foreign aid and potential accession to the European Union.

What To Know

Dmytro Koziatynskyi, a veteran of the Russia-Ukraine war, rallied hundreds of Ukrainians for the protests. He called the bill an "assault on the anti-corruption framework," according to Ukrainska Pravda.

He added: Time is not on our side. … We must take to the streets and urge Zelensky to prevent a return to the dark days of Yanukovych.

Viktor Yanukovych, a former president of Ukraine, was removed from office in 2014 following weeks of protests.

Ukraine's parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, voted for the law on July 22, despite the heads of NABU and SAPO imploring Zelensky to veto it.

"I'm surprised this has happened. It looks like some madness. I don't know what their motives are," protester Veronika Mol told The Guardian. "People are the power in Ukraine. Not the president or government. It's terrible we still have to remind them."