Daily Archives: May 8, 2023

Francis Fukayama is a U.S. political scientist at Stanford University. He is perhaps best known for his 1992 essay The End of History, in which he argued that the struggle between ideologies was at an end.

RFE/RLs Georgian Service interviewed Fukuyama after his recent appearance at the Economic Policy Research Center in Tbilisi.

Fukayama talked about the right time for real negotiation between Moscow and Kyiv, what each side stands to lose, and how Georgias neutrality really benefits Russia.

Since the beginning of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Vazha Tavberidze of RFE/RL's Georgian Service has been interviewing diplomats, military experts, and academics who hold a wide spectrum of opinions about the war's course, causes, and effects. To read all of his interviews, click here.

RFE/RL: Lets begin with discussing Russias war on Ukraine. In the grand scheme of things, whats at stake there?

Francis Fukuyama: I think that the ground for a massive Russian failure has already been laid by the Ukrainians and their completely heroic ability to defend themselves.

We are currently at a stage in the war where there's been a pause; the Russians had been losing a tremendous number of people trying to take this one small town, Bakhmut, in the Donbas. But everybody's awaiting a Ukrainian offensive, and I think that's going to be critical for the way that this war may come to an end. Because if the Ukrainians can liberate these two oblasts in the south, particularly Kherson and Zaporizhzhya, then I think you'd be in a position for a real negotiation. And you could see a kind of cease-fire, armistice, that might have some chance of holding for a while.

Right now, I think if you had a peace negotiation, it would be very bad for Ukraine, because it would really give the Russians a good slice of Ukrainian territory. And that would not be a good situation.

RFE/RL: What fate do you envision for [Russian-occupied] Crimea in the event of any eventual negotiations?

Fukuyama: Well, I think that it could be an actual big point of Russian vulnerability. Because if the Ukrainians are able to liberate Kherson Oblast, they will basically have cut Crimea off [from other Russian-occupied land], you know. There's one rail line that goes from Russia into Crimea, and there's the strait bridge, and they'd be in a position to really cut both of those arteries. And they don't have to invade Crimea at that point, they can simply hold all of the Russian forces there hostage. And that is a big vulnerability that Ukraine would then have over Russia.

RFE/RL: From a geopolitical perspective, if Russia in any negotiations has to concede Crimea, can it be called anything but a loser, even by the domestic audience in Russia?

It would have been nice if the Georgian government had taken a clear position in support of Ukraine. I think that neutrality really benefits Russia.

Fukuyama: Well, if they have to concede Crimea, it's hard to see how Putin survives that, given how much they've invested in taking it back. So yes, I think they will be in a very tough situation. But the thing is that the Ukrainians don't even have to take back Crimea. They can cut it off. And any moment, they can apply a lot of pressure that the Russians will feel. And so it would be a very big, strategic advantage for them to be able to do that.

RFE/RL: What I was getting at is, let's take your scenario: They don't take Crimea, but they kind of lay siege to it, then there are negotiations and Russia is asked to give up Crimea. Can Russia agree to that in negotiations?

Fukuyama: Politically, it would be quite difficult. There's also a question of whether Ukraine would be willing to concede part of the Donbas [region of eastern Ukraine], because in many respects, it would be a nightmare for them to actually have to govern the Donbas under current circumstances. (Editors note: Russian forces or their separatist Ukrainian proxies since 2014 have controlled wide swaths of the heavily Russian-speaking Luhansk and Donetsk regions, where they have been accused of killing, expelling, and persecuting pro-Kyiv residents.)

So both sides at that point have vulnerabilities and things to lose. And that means that you could have a more realistic kind of negotiation at that point. But I don't really see either side formally agreeing either to concede Crimea or to concede the Donbas. And so I think you'd have to have a more informal kind of arrangement.

Francis Fukuyama in conversation with RFE/RL's Vazha Tavberidze

RFE/RL: You wrote more than a year ago that Russia is heading for an outright defeat in Ukraine. So, more than one year on, how has this prediction aged, do you think?

Fukuyama: At the time that I wrote that, Russian troops were still trying to besiege Kyiv and bring about the fall of [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelenskiys government. Since that time, [Russian troops] had to withdraw from northern Ukraine; theyve had to withdraw from Kharkiv; they then had to withdraw from [the city of] Kherson, and so they showed incredible weakness.

There does appear to be a little bit of a stalemate at the moment, but I think [the Ukrainian military] is going to break out of that. So my general confidence in Ukraines ability to defend itself is still there, but it has taken a longer time than I was hoping for at that point.

RFE/RL: Onto Georgia now -- and, to echo the first question, we started with Ukraine, what's at stake for Georgia in the Russian invasion of Ukraine?

Fukuyama: Well, everything's at stake for Georgia. There's a fork in the road that Georgia is at right now, where it can continue its effort to become part of Europe, part of the EU, possibly even join NATO, or it can go in the Russian direction. And there are forces in Georgia politically pulling it in both directions.

But whether it goes down one path or the other will heavily depend on what happens in Ukraine, because the stronger Russia is, the more the Russian path is determined.

And conversely, if Russia is really set back in Ukraine, every time [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is weakened, every country around Russia has more freedom of action. So I think that Georgias fate is bound up in this Ukraine war.

RFE/RL: Similar to many others, you're vocally critical about what you call insufficient support from Georgia to Ukraine. And not to play a devil's advocate here, but let me ask you what they could and should have done to, you know, not deserve such criticism?

Fukuyama: Well, it would have been nice if the Georgian government had taken a clear position in support of Ukraine. I think that neutrality really benefits Russia. And quite frankly, there are a lot of reports and evidence that Georgia is actually quietly helping Russia evade the sanctions that have been imposed by Europe and by the United States.

RFE/RL: Something that the Georgian government vehemently denies.

Fukuyama: Well, yeah, that's the problem: that this government is really not transparent about its motives and what it's actually doing. And so it can play a double game where it claims to be neutral but, in fact, is really helping one side rather than the other. And I think that's the consequence of the kind of pro-Russian tilt that this government has.

RFE/RL: You said during your speech that as long as [former Prime Minister and founder of the ruling Georgian Dream party Bidzina] Ivanishvili and company stay in power, EU membership for Georgia would be unthinkable. Let me ask you a theoretical question: Had Ivanishvili and the Georgian Dream displayed more of a Western bent in foreign policy, say, for example, toward Ukraine, would that have changed things? Would Georgias European future be more realistic then?

Fukuyama: I think it would have been more realistic. I think that what they've been doing is everything they can to make sure that they're not taken into the European Union. And so that's why I think they're mistreating [imprisoned ex-President] Misha Saakashvili, because that's something that's going to anger the Europeans. If he dies in their captivity, that's going to be an obstacle. And that's a real problem. Because all the poll data [and other] evidence suggests that an overwhelming number of Georgians are in favor of the European path and not the Russian path; and so the government really needs to figure out how to block that, and I think that's what they're seeking to do. And that means that the policy on the part of Europe and the United States has to be one that's not directed against Georgia as a whole country, but reallyit has to be directed at the government that is causing this shift towards Russia.

See the rest here:

Francis Fukuyama: It Would Be Hard For Putin To Survive Losing Crimea - Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty

Books

The novelist and press secretary to the Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny talks about imprisonment, survival and writing under the regime

In May 2018 Kira Yarmysh found herself in jail for a second time. Yarmysh press secretary to the Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny had called for people to attend an anti-government rally in downtown Moscow. Its title: Hes Not Our Tsar. The tsar in question Vladimir Putin was about to be inaugurated as president for a fourth term.

The Moscow authorities refused to sanction the rally. What happened next was predictable. Riot police arrested hundreds of people. Later that month Yarmysh turned up at a police station seeking the release of a fellow campaigner. She was herself detained and held overnight. A court gave her 25 days behind bars for administrative violations.

Yarmysh was held in a special detention centre on Simferopol Boulevard, in the south-west of the capital. At the same time Navalny was locked up for similar imaginary violations. On our release we were discussing how it was for both of us, she says, speaking over Zoom from a location outside Russia. He suggested I write a book about it. It was my lifelong dream to write fiction.

Her debut novel, The Incredible Events in Womens Cell Number 3, came out in 2020 in Moscow, and appears in June in an English translation. Its early pages are filled with the kind of details you might expect: an absurd court hearing, a 10-day stretch in a seedy, crumbling penal centre run by callous or indifferent guards. But the novel turns out to be strange and unexpected. Its main character, Anya, locked up for taking part in an anti-corruption rally, is prone to supernatural visions. It is unclear if shes hallucinating, or sharing a cell with fates and furies.

The intention was never to write a political manifesto. My idea was to make the story as interesting as I could, and to add a mystical layer, Yarmysh says. The novel mixes fantasy with flashbacks and foreboding gothic moments, as Anya recalls her adolescence and student life. The books translator, Arch Tait, describes this genre blend as unprecedented in Russian writing about life in prison.

Incarceration is a rich theme in Russian literature, going back to the 17th century, and ranging from Dostoevskys The House of the Dead, based on his experience of exile to Siberia, to communist-era accounts, such as Solzhenitsyns One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, depicting the hidden world of the Soviet forced labour camp. Yarmysh read Solzhenitsyns novella at school, while growing up in the southern city of Rostov-on-Don. She says she prefers Dostoevsky to Tolstoy, though Nabokov is her favourite writer. As a teenager she enjoyed Galsworthys The Forsyte Saga and Joseph Hellers Catch-22. A brilliant pupil, she studied journalism at the prestigious Moscow State Institute of International Relations, as does Anya in her novel.

This carceral literary tradition is largely a male one. I wanted to write something new, and definitely from the female perspective, she explains. Anyas five cellmates are modelled on the women with strong beliefs Yarmysh met during her time in detention. They come from different strata of Russian society: a professional mistress, an addict; and a veteran of the penal system. All are locked up on petty charges.

This cell community is a microcosm of the new Russia, two decades after Putin came to power. I was trying to capture Russian life as I knew it, Yarmysh observes. There is no other place in the country right now where people of such different backgrounds can meet. Prison unites people more than any other institution. You can find yourself in prison for almost anything.

Yarmysh became Navalnys press secretary in 2014. Since then, she has spent more than a month behind bars. Her first five-day stay was in January 2018, after she retweeted a link to Navalnys YouTube channel. Prison conditions before the invasion of Ukraine were comparatively benign. The warders were actually quite friendly, she says. Her status as a female political prisoner made her a novelty. Though she experienced sexism, with catcalls from male inmates when she went to exercise in the yard, and crushing boredom.

The Russian publication of The Incredible Events in Womens Cell Number 3 nearly led to the cancellation of the Moscow book fair. Yarmysh was under house arrest for inciting public protests. The organisers moved her event from a large venue to a small one, and then dropped it apparently on the grounds that love scenes featuring Anya and her best friend, Sonia, were gay propaganda. The book is still available in Russia, its jacket covered by an opaque film, she says.

In August 2021 she left the country. She acknowledges the Kremlin allowed her to cross the border, in a gap between her latest conviction and the verdict being enforced. By this point Navalny was back in jail. He survived a poisoning attempt in Siberia, recuperated in Berlin and returned to Moscow. It was an extraordinary act of bravery, and a direct challenge to Putins faltering authority.

The Kremlin now appears to be killing Navalny. He has dramatically lost weight possibly as the result of further recent poisoning and says he is being starved. Yarmysh communicates with him by letter. She says for now he is relatively all right. The guards put a prisoner with hygiene issues in his cell; he complained, and prosecutors are now seeking to punish him with another trumped-up criminal case.

Since last years invasion, Russias opposition has practically ceased to exist. Yarmysh and other senior figures from Navalnys Anti-Corruption Foundation are in exile or prison. Criticism of the war on social media can mean a 10-year sentence. The Kremlin has branded Yarmysh a foreign agent, a catch-all term that has been applied to activists, investigative reporters and human rights organisations.

Russia is a dictatorship, and highly authoritarian, she says. At the regimes core, she argues, is corruption. Its the main cause of the war. She says Putin has created an outer enemy to distract people from their problems and to stay in power. She doesnt think a plurality of Russians back the invasion, and says: People are unsatisfied. Its scary to be vocal about whats happening. They prefer not to think about it.

Most Ukrainians have little time for Russian liberals and accuse them of being closet nationalists. They point to Navalnys flip-flopping over whether Crimea should be returned to Ukraine and hold all Russians accountable for their failure to stop Putin, and for Bucha. Does Yarmysh understand this hostility? Im not in a place to tell Ukrainians how they should act or think. Putin invaded their country. They have every right to be angry, she responds.

Yarmysh, however, does not believe average Russian citizens can be blamed for the horrors taking place in Ukraine. Responsibility lies with the Kremlin and its generals. She points out that western leaders also turned a blind eye to Putins crimes, emboldening his misdeeds. Of detention centre staff, she says: I wouldnt say they were evil. They were complicit.

Controversially, Yarmysh opposes the cancellation of Russian icons such as Pushkin. Putin has used Pushkin and the concept of Russky Mir a common cultural, spiritual and language space to justify his attack on Kyiv. Statues of the poet have been toppled across Ukraine, and streets renamed, as part of a process of decolonisation. Ukrainian writers say the response is an attempt to free the country from an imperial Russian lens.

There has been a similar purging of Bulgakov. The novelist was educated in Kyiv and opposed Ukrainian independence. Yarmysh suggests these literary targets are misplaced. I cant see how Pushkin is to blame. Putin is to blame, she says. Of course they are using Russian cultural names to justify all the things they do. It doesnt mean Russian culture is bad because of this. Pushkin cant protest. If he were alive today he would.

Now 33, and based in a European country, Yarmysh radiates optimism. She has published a second novel, Harassment, and is working on a third. Her good humour seems counterintuitive: Putins grip on power is as strong as ever; there is little prospect of change or democracy coming to Russia in the near future; and the biggest war in Europe since 1945 rages on, snuffing out the lives of civilians and soldiers.

But she is convinced good will eventually prevail, after a long, dark and autocratic night. Historical justice is on our side. Putin is old. His regime is obsolete. It will definitely go. I dont know when this will happen, she says. But, when it does, something new and bright will come instead.

Luke Hardings Invasion: Russias Bloody War and Ukraines Fight for Survival is published by Guardian Faber. To support the Guardian and Observer order your copy at guardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may apply

{{topLeft}}

{{bottomLeft}}

{{topRight}}

{{bottomRight}}

{{.}}

More here:

Justice is on our side, and Putin is old: Navalnys press secretary Kira Yarmysh - The Guardian

AMSTERDAM, May 4 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin must be brought to justice for his war in Ukraine, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said on Thursday in The Hague, calling for a new international tribunal for the "crime of aggression."

"We're going to set up a specific tribunal... to show that these people are not untouchables," Zelenskiy told a press conference, underlining that the invasion itself should be seen as the "primary offence" committed by Moscow.

Zelenskiy's declaration was made during his surprise visit to The Hague, known as the capital of international justice. But it was largely symbolic - the idea of such a court has some support, but there is little prospect Moscow, which denies wrongdoing in Ukraine, would participate.

In March, the International Criminal Court, a permanent war crimes tribunal that Zelenskiy also visited on Thursday, issued an arrest warrant for Putin for suspected deportation of children from Ukraine, which would be a war crime.

But the ICC does not have jurisdiction to try any crime of aggression in Ukraine. The United Nations defines the crime of aggression as "invasion or attack by the armed forces of a state (on) the territory of another state, or any military occupation".

The European Commission supports the creation of a separate international centre for the prosecution of the crime of aggression in Ukraine, and the U.S. has said it would like to see such a tribunal, though the allies differ over what form it should take.

"We all want to see a different Vladimir here in The Hague, the one who deserves to be sanctioned for his criminal actions here, in the capital of international law," Zelenskiy said in a speech earlier in the day, referring to Putin.

[1/6]Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy delivers a speech titled "No Peace Without Justice for Ukraine", in the Hague, Netherlands May 4, 2023. REUTERS/Yves Herman/Pool

"I'm sure we will see that happen when we win, and we will win," he said.

Major legal and practical questions remain as to how a legitimate aggression tribunal could be established, either by a group of countries supporting it or with approval from the U.N. General Assembly.

Russia is not a member of the ICC and rejects its jurisdiction. It denies committing atrocities during its conflict with Ukraine, which it terms a "special operation" to "demilitarise" its neighbour.

Earlier in the day, as he left the ICC after a visit of just under an hour, Zelenskiy, dressed in his trademark khaki, waved at a Ukrainian family standing outside the ICC building as they shouted "Slava Ukraini" - or Glory to Ukraine.

The Netherlands has been a strong supporter of Ukraine, with Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte in February saying he did not rule out any kind of military support for Kyiv as long as it did not bring NATO into conflict with Russia.

Pledging "unwavering support," Rutte said there were "no taboos" on sending F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine, and that discussions were underway with other countries on the matter, before adding: "We are not there yet."

Russia has stepped up attacks as Ukraine prepares for a counteroffensive to try to retake Russian-occupied land in the south and east. Russian shelling in the frontline southern region of Kherson killed at least 23 civilians on Wednesday.

Reporting by Bart Meijer; Editing by Andrew Heavens

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

View post:

Putin and his invasion should be on trial in The Hague, says ... - Reuters

China has swooped.

After watching the war with great interest for 14 months, and repeatedly demonstrating support and friendship for Russia's Vladimir Putin, China's President Xi Jinping has made his move.

It was a magnificent sunny spring morning in Ukraine's capital, Kyiv, on April 26 when Xi deigned to speak to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Since the war began 15 months ago, Xi has remained one of the few major world leaders not to have bothered to have a conversation with Zelenskyy, whose country is fighting to survive under attack from Russia.

Instead, he has engaged in photo opportunities with Putin, even when it was clear to the world that Russia was relentlessly hitting residential buildings in Ukraine with missiles and drones.

Indeed, Xi and Putin held a meeting at the Beijing Olympics three weeks before Putin's decision to invade Ukraine in February last year.

It defies believability that, as Moscow was amassing soldiers along the Ukraine border, the two men would not have discussed Putin's by-then well-developed plan to invade his neighbour.

So for all these reasons the phone call on April 26 is hugely significant.

It's clear from the content of the conversation released afterwards by both sides that Xihas offered something that he knows the United States cannot offer.

Based on statements by both sides, the conversation was in two parts.

The first part was typical of world leaders who have had little contact with each other some diplomatic niceties and an expression by both sides that they wanted to have a closer bilateral relationship.

But the real significance of the call came in something Xi said towards the end.

He mentioned, almost as if in passing, that he wanted to send a diplomatic envoy to both Kyiv and Moscow to try to bring an end to the war.

And it was not just any envoy. It was China's former ambassador to Moscow, Li Hui. Clearly, Li would have significant contacts in the Kremlin which he can bring to any peace talks with Ukraine's leadership.

And as quickly as the idea was raised by Xi it was accepted by Zelenskyy.

Xi would have known that he was offering something that the US simply cannot offer. Washington would be unable to deliver Putin to a negotiating table, albeit an indirect one of shuttle diplomacy.

One senior US official gave an interesting response to the call. Washington's ambassador to Beijing, Nicholas Burns, stated: "What we need to see from China, is to push Russia to withdraw its troops, so that Ukraine can have all of its territory back and can be fully sovereign again in all aspects of that word. "

One of the interesting aspects of that statement is that it is a senior US official endorsing China playing the role of mediator.

Recently, whenXi brokered a peace agreement of sorts between Saudi Arabia and Iran, he would have known as with the Ukraine envoy offer that he was offering something that the US cannot offer. Washington could deliver Riyadh to a negotiating table but it certainly could not deliver Tehran.

The rapidly changing geopolitical world has been shown starkly by the war in Ukraine. Russia is one of China's closest allies and Iran is one of Russia's closest allies.Xi is using his newly consolidated arc of influence.

Iran is as complicit in the killing of civilians in Ukraineas is Russia. The Shahid drones, which Iran is enthusiastically providing to Russia, are regularly used to fly into residential buildings, loaded with explosives.

In this war, Russia is not the only country that could be found guilty of war crimes. Iran could,too.

When Iranian customs officers sign the forms for their shiploads of drones to go to Russia, they know exactly what those drones are off to do.

Iran cannot satisfy quickly enough Russia's voracious demand for these high-tech birds of death. So much so that Moscow has recently earmarked $US6 billion ($8.9 billion) to manufacture its own drones to top up those coming from Iran.

It's clear from being here that Ukraine has become very well armed in recent months. The majority of the promised military support from NATO countries has arrived.

According to NATO secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg, about 97 per cent of what has been promised has arrived.

Part of the new-look Ukrainian fighting machine is 230 of the best tanks available and 1,550 infantry fighting vehicles. And on top of all that, Ukraine now has one of the best air-defence systems in the world, forged by 15 months' experience and backed up by state-of-the-art technology such as the US-made Patriot air-defence system.

On top of that,NATO and the US are running a sophisticated satellite-based systemfrom neighbouring Poland that alerts Ukraine the moment Russian MiG jets are loaded with missiles and preparing to take off from Russia or Belarus.

This means that, on some occasions, Ukraine's air-defence systems have up to an hour's notice of likely incoming fire of missiles and drones.

My own assessment is that apart from wanting to replace Washington as the international deal-maker, China is realising that Russia is in deepening military trouble and wants to help its ally.

It's not out of the question that Putin may have asked Xi to try to bring the parties to a table given hisproblems, but neither China nor Russia is saying that.

But what is indisputable is that China is making its move regarding Ukraine.

And as it does so, Beijing has two agendas: the first is to try to eclipse the US. The second is to try to help Russia.

More here:

China is making its move in Ukraine, and the US has no chance of matching it - ABC News

Oliver Stone

The firebrand director talks about his new documentary on nuclear power, his distaste for Joe Biden and his continued support of the Russian president

Oliver Stone is rolling deep. The veteran film-maker shows up for an interview with the Guardian with a support team of two: Joshua S Goldstein, a professor who will serve as a real-time factchecker-cum-footnote-provider, as well as a therapist, a twinkly eyed woman who happens to be Goldsteins wife. People can get very emotional when theyre reacting to the topic of their film, she explains of her role. Im here in case anyone needs my help.

Her de-escalation services will not end up being required, but it is admittedly comforting to have an emotional support professional on hand for an interview with the legendary firebrand that is Oliver Stone. As it turns out, the director isnt looking for a sparring match or a conspiracy theory soapbox. Dressed in a beautifully tailored dark blazer, red pocket square and crisp white shirt, the Natural Born Killers and Wall Street director, who has been giving promotional interviews since dawn, is a gracious if not entirely relaxed interview subject, scribbling mysterious notes onto the margins of a printout while he fields questions.

Nuclear Now, based on a book that Goldstein co-wrote, makes an impassioned case for nuclear energy. Forget wind and solar power being enough, the film tells us. Nuclear is the answer to a world on the verge of losing the race against the climate crisis. Stone reckons its his 30th film and 10th documentary, but he thinks of them all as interconnected parts; his lifes work is making movies about the undiscovered lies that people wouldnt admit. Since serving in Vietnam, and briefly driving a taxi, he has been devoted to making movies that prod at our prevailing narratives, be it that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the assassination of John F Kennedy or that nuclear is a dirty word.

Stone brings up his 12-hour docuseries The Untold History of the United States. Chapters [of the docuseries] attacked American history they keep teaching at school and I wish they were teaching my version of it, because I think its a lot more accurate than the bullshit youre getting, he says gruffly. Nuclear Now stands apart from anything else Stone has made because its his first work about an object, not a person. And therein lay the challenge. Theres no sexy chick in the movie, he says with a note of chagrin. Its not like highly original film-making. Its about assembly, editing, writing.

A deep conviction that set in after reading the book that Goldstein co-wrote with Staffan A Qvist, a Swedish nuclear engineer, impelled Stone to bring the message to the masses. He started by asking Goldstein to write a fictional treatment of the subject matter. Goldsteins face lights up at the memory and he goes into Hollywood pitch mode something to do with a female nuclear dynamo, the American president, a villainous Texan senator, an activist daughter. It was all over the place from the US to Korea and Russia, ending with a chase scene in Saudi Arabia. Stone called the climax a made for TV bullshit ending, Goldstein recalls. It wasnt good, Stone grumbles. They worked on several drafts of a documentary script, a series of versions zig-zagging between their sensibilities until they landed on one that they agreed was suitably informative and entertaining (you can guess who was yanking it in either direction). Stone appears on screen, the reliably blazer-clad student who travels the world to meet with scientists and engineers and a nuclear power influencer who is the projects closest thing to a Julia Roberts.

Were getting it all wrong, and in the face of climate change, nuclear isnt only an option its the only option, intones Stone, who says he considers Marie Curie, the Polish physicist known for her work on radioactivity, worthy of sainthood. The truth is, we had solutions, and we fucked it up. It all went wrong in the mid-20th century, when nuclear power and nuclear war were conflated and Hollywood started churning out sci-fi movies with phosphorescent freaks and nuclear bomb-wielding villains. By the early 1970s, environmentalists were warning of the hazards of nuclear anything, and sounding alarms about nuclear waste that had the American public in a tailspin.

Theres not an issue [with nuclear waste], its completely handleable, especially compared to the waste of gas, oil and coal, my God, Stone says. It gets safer over time because of radioactive decay, his right-hand man chimes in. Which you cant say about the arsenic, lead mercury that are in solar panels or any number of other things. The film points out that there have been far fewer casualties related to nuclear disasters at Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and Fukushima than the fatal levels of air pollution produced around the world by coal and other fossil fuels.

Stone still leaves the science to Goldstein, but becomes animated when talk turns to fear-mongering. Politicians could get votes by making people afraid. And then its hard to reverse yourself after many years and say: Well, actually, weve changed our mind now. And we see that climate change is the bigger threat and that actually what we told you about this is sort of overhyped. Of course he read all the scholarly articles making the case against nuclear. When you read them, its so concentrated. Its like taking a dose of acid, the director says. Thankfully Goldstein was on speed-dial, at the ready to review the science and put Stones doubts to rest. Goldstein points across the office at a red Exit sign and brings up that it contains small traces of tritium, the same compound in the tanks at the Fukushima power plant. They have a short half life and they dont accumulate in your body, he says. Its like the most innocuous thing.

Stone lives in Los Angeles and has three Oscars, but does not consider himself part of the Hollywood firmament. His feeling of alienation appears to have intensified with this project. The movie business has not been kind to nuclear at all from Silkwood, The China Syndrome, and all the horror movies of the 50s, he says, going on to weigh in on the way mainstream cinema has veered off course. I like the glamour of the old movies. You know, I want to see Elizabeth Taylor and I want to see Brigitte Bardot. Marilyn Monroe. I want to see stars! Such movie-making has become harder to pull off in a culture that is heavy on the show-all social media and light on the mystique. I respect reality, but I dont want to see it necessarily. I like to see heightened reality.

Stones media diet is as idiosyncratic as you might expect. He follows Rumble, the Peter Thiel-backed right-leaning video platform; RT, the Russian state-owned news service; and Al Jazeera. He cops to reading the Guardian every once in a while, although I dont like their rightward tilt of recently. A copy of the New York Times is sticking out of his bag, on a day when the paper published a glowing review of Stones new film. He reads the paper with skepticism, he says. Im reading to see what they think. And what does he think? I would say extreme middle, is how he identifies his position on the American political spectrum. Its a rather catchy but meaningless term, no? The truth matters to me and were digging for the truth, he says elliptically. I think I happened upon a very important subject, which is climate change. And Im grateful for that. It could be my last film, you know, because Im at that age where I can keel over tomorrow. (Stones forthcoming documentary about Brazilian president Luiz Incio Lula da Silva is almost ready.)

At 76, Stone is four years younger than Joe Biden, who many say is too old to run for a second term. Stone doesnt want to weigh in on the presidents age and his fitness for re-election. But he will share what he thinks of the guy. My favorite president was John Kennedy, so if you look at the two Irishmen sideways, youll find that John Kennedy is a peace lover. And you find that Joe Biden is a cold warrior in the worst sense of the word.

The last time the Guardian US profiled Stone, he had just completed a strangely sympathetic 4 hour-long documentary about Vladimir Putin (at the time he said the Russian people have never been better off). Have his feelings about the Russian leader changed in the especially troubling years since? I think Russia is doing a great job with nuclear energy, he says after a moments thought. China is also a leader in that field, although I never was able to penetrate into China, which was a shame for the movie I wish we had. But Putin is a great leader for his country and the people love him. And that is as far as he is willing to go. Hes gone far enough already.

{{topLeft}}

{{bottomLeft}}

{{topRight}}

{{bottomRight}}

{{.}}

Link:

Oliver Stone: Putin is a great leader for his country - The Guardian

Rehearsal before the May 9 parade in Moscow

It reads that Rahmon will go to Moscow on an official trip at Putin's invitation and will take part "in the celebrations dedicated to the 78th anniversary of Victory Day."

Read also: Russia cancels military parades out fear it would highlight the scope of Russian losses not safety, UK intel

Earlier, the press secretary of Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, Ruslan Zheldibay announced on his Facebook page that the Kazakh leader would attend the parade in Moscow.

Zheldibay wrote that in addition to the parade in Moscow, Tokayev would visit the Rzhev Memorial in Russias Tver Oblast to honor the memory of Kazakh soldiers of the 100th and 101st infantry divisions, and the mass grave in the village of Trubino, where his uncle Kassym Boltaev is buried.

Read also: May 1 parade in Moscow cancelled due to "terror attacks" threat

The Russian side invited the heads of the CIS member states to this event," the statement said.

The website of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan also posted a short message saying that Pashinyan would attend the Victory Day celebrations in Moscow at Putin's invitation.

On April 24, the Russian newspaper Vedomosti reported that the only foreign leader expected to attend the May 9 Victory Day celebrations in Moscow was Kyrgyzstan's President Sadyr Japarov.

After that, the Kremlin tried to justify international isolation on May 9 by saying that "no one was invited."

Read also: Putin cancels Victory Day parades as Ukraine invasion continues to unravel opinion

Most regions of Russia decided against holding a military parade on May 9 so as not to "provoke" Ukrainians.

According to UK intelligence, one of the reasons for the cancellation of the May 9 parades in Russia is the heavy losses of the Russian army.

In 2022, not a single foreign leader came to Moscow to celebrate Victory Day. The Kremlin also claimed that no one was invited at the time.

Were bringing the voice of Ukraine to the world. Support us with a one-time donation, or become a Patron!

Read the original article on The New Voice of Ukraine

The rest is here:

At last minute, three more heads of state decide to attend Putin's parade - Yahoo! Voices

Italy

Fears appointing Paolo Scaroni as Enel CEO would undermine US and EU attempts to curb Russian influence

An energy industry veteran who nurtured close ties with Vladimir Putin and has criticised sanctions against Russia over its invasion of Ukraine has emerged as the frontrunner to chair Italys biggest utility company.

Paolo Scaroni is the preferred candidate of the ruling coalition government of Giorgia Meloni to chair Enel.

Scaroni was CEO of the company, in which the Italian government is the largest shareholder, from 2002-2005 after being nominated by the former prime minister, Silvio Berlusconis, second administration. He went on to become CEO of the energy company Eni, a role he used to orchestrate several big deals with the Kremlin-controlled Gazprom that led to Italys reliance on Russian gas.

Meloni, who has positioned herself as a staunch Atlanticist and supporter of Ukraine, is believed to have relented to pressure from her junior coalition partners, Berlusconi a longtime friend of Putin and Matteo Salvini, the leader of the League, over Scaronis nomination.

Meloni tried until the very end to fend off those names but eventually she had to cave in, said a former senior official at Italys finance ministry. She has been scared about the idea of having Scaroni there because he undermines her own political narrative.

There are fears that Scaronis appointment would directly undermine US and European efforts to curb Russian influence and stop Putins war in Ukraine, as well as weaken efforts to reduce demand and cap prices on Russian energy exports.

Since the war in Ukraine he has said a price cap on gas is unachievable, and that Italy needs Russian gas for at least another 10 years, the former treasury official said. He has also publicly railed against the Russian sanctions. As chairman, he would have sweeping powers to make good on these views. If Scaroni becomes Enels next chairman, Putin will have a friend in one of Europes most influential companies.

Alan Riley, a geopolitics expert and senior fellow at the Atlantic Council Global Energy Center, said Scaroni was an unwise pick. While other European countries had struck deals with Gazprom, none were as long or as costly as Italys, which left Italy scrambling to diversify energy sources after the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

From the point of view of energy security and European consumers, it was an immensely costly mistake, and so do you really want to have the people responsible for getting us into this mess to be back at the top of major European companies? Riley asked. The other concern is that theyll go back to business as usual the moment theres a ceasefire.

Riley said Scaronis nomination was a negative signal about the direction Italy wanted to take its energy policy and how serious it was about supply diversification.

Another controversial nomination is Flavio Cattaneo, the Meloni governments pick for Enel CEO. In an interview with Il Foglio newspaper in December, Cattaneo criticised Enels investments in renewables in the US.

Enel shareholders will cast their votes on board appointments on 10 May.

{{topLeft}}

{{bottomLeft}}

{{topRight}}

{{bottomRight}}

{{.}}

View post:

Pro-Putin businessman emerges as pick to chair Italys biggest energy firm - The Guardian