Category Archives: Putin

But that reality apparently has not sunk in. If anything, Mr. Putin has grown more belligerent, focusing new fire on Mariupol as Russian forces seek to secure all of the Donbas region in the coming weeks. He has insisted to visitors like Mr. Nehammer that he remains determined to achieve his goals.

While Russian casualties have been high and Mr. Putins ambitions have narrowed in Ukraine, American intelligence assessments have concluded that the Russian president believes that the Wests efforts to punish him and contain Russias power will crack over time. With the help of China, India and other nations in Asia, he appears to believe he can avoid true isolation, just as he did after the annexation of Crimea in 2014.

Now, American officials are girding for what increasingly feels like a long, grinding confrontation, and they have encountered repeated reminders by Mr. Putin that the world is messing with a nuclear weapons power and should tread carefully.

On Wednesday, after providing warnings to the Pentagon that a missile test was coming a requirement of the New START treaty, which has four years remaining Mr. Putin declared that the launch should provide food for thought for those who, in the heat of frenzied aggressive rhetoric, try to threaten our country.

In fact, the missile, if deployed, would add only marginally to Russias capabilities. But the launch was about timing and symbolism: It came amid the recent public warnings, including by Mr. Burns, that there was a small but growing chance that Mr. Putin might turn to chemical weapons attacks, or even a demonstration nuclear detonation.

If Mr. Putin turns his sights on the United States or its allies, the assumption has always been that Russia would make use of its cyberarsenal to retaliate for the effects of sanctions on the Russian economy. But eight weeks into the conflict, there have been no significant cyberattacks beyond the usual background noise of daily Russian cyberactivity in American networks, including ransomware attacks.

Continued here:

Russias Missile Test Fuels U.S. Fears of an Isolated Putin - The New York Times

The 360 shows you diverse perspectives on the days top stories and debates.

Sweden and Finland, two European nations that have long valued strategic neutrality, appear to be inching closer to joining NATO in response to Russias invasion of Ukraine.

The security landscape has completely changed, Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson told reporters last week at a meeting with her Finnish counterpart, Sanna Marin. Anderssons recent comments represent a significant shift in her view on the value of NATO membership. Early last month, she said that Sweden joining the alliance would further destabilize this area of Europe and increase tensions.

Anderssons change in opinion is indicative of evolving views among the citizens of both countries in reaction to the steady stream of horrifying news out of Ukraine. In a recent poll, 68% of Finns said they support joining NATO, up from just 24% last year. For the first time ever, a majority of Swedes said they also favor joining, according to a poll released this week.

Although both nations have deep cultural and economic ties with Europe, Finland and Sweden have historically declined to pursue NATO membership even as more than a dozen countries in eastern Europe have joined the alliance since the fall of the Soviet Union. Swedens resistance is rooted in its policy of neutrality, which dates back to the early 1800s. After fighting off a Soviet invasion during World War II, Finland established a formally neutral position, largely to avoid provoking further aggression.

Formed in the aftermath of World War II, NATO is a military alliance built on the principle of collective defense meaning that all NATO countries agree to come to the defense of any individual member that comes under attack. Russia considers NATO to be a direct threat, and Russian President Vladimir Putin said the possibility that Ukraine might join motivated his decision to launch the Russian invasion. Russias Foreign Ministry has warned of serious military and political consequences if Sweden and Finland join the alliance.

Story continues

Supporters say there are clear benefits to adding Sweden and Finland to NATO. They argue that the invasion serves as a startling reminder of how dangerous it can be for countries on Russias borders. If they were NATO members, the two Nordic countries would have the force of some of the worlds most powerful militaries including the U.S. as a bulwark against any Russian incursion.

Some defense analysts believe NATO and its members have plenty to gain by bringing in Sweden and Finland. Though both nations are relatively small, experts say their militaries are still formidable. The two countries would also provide a valuable strategic foothold along Russias northwest flank, particularly along Finlands 830-mile border with Russia. Others say expanding NATO would be yet another nonmilitary means of punishing Putin for his assault on Ukraine.

But skeptics worry about potential retaliation from Putin, particularly at a time when hes vulnerable and liable to lash out. Some also argue that increasing NATOs foothold along Russias border would create opportunities for conflict that could spiral into another world war.

There are also those who believe that NATO shouldn't exist at all. Some on the right believe that the alliance allows smaller nations to neglect their own defense capabilities, knowing that major powers will come to their rescue. Observers on the far left, on the other hand, say that anything that promotes military force over nonviolent forms of collaboration is ultimately harmful to the world.

There are two major steps that need to be taken before Sweden and Finland could become part of NATO. First, their Parliaments would have to formally vote to join. Then, the legislatures of each of the 30 current NATO countries would have to approve their membership a process that has taken about a year in the recent past.

The war in Ukraine has made it obvious why Sweden and Finland should join

Who can blame the Finns and the Swedes for wanting to jump right in? After seeing what's happening to Ukraine, they dont want to be the next Ukraine. And its clear that Putin does not want to challenge any of the NATO countries directly. Kevin Baron, Defense One executive editor, to MSNBC

Russia probably isnt willing to go to war to keep Sweden and Finland out of NATO

Putin views Finland and Sweden differently than Ukraine because of their different histories. Ukraine is seen as part of an imagined Russian world by Putin. Sweden and Finland are, therefore, less comparable to Ukraine, beyond their proximity to Russia. Thomas O Falk, Al Jazeera

Adding new NATO members is a sound, nonmilitary way to punish Russia

It would be a dramatic reversal of fortunes and would demonstrate the agility of the liberal democratic countries in applying the diplomatic element of power, well below the threshold of war, that gray-zone space in which Russia and, for that matter, China has been so nimble in the recent past. Michael Miklaucic, The Hill

Both countries would bring plenty of benefits to the NATO alliance

Finland and Sweden wouldnt be alliance freeloaders. Their strategic location in the Baltic Sea could be critical in a wider conflict with Russia. Finland already punches above its weight militarily, and wealthy Sweden can afford its announced defense-spending increases. A secure Europe better capable of defending itself serves American interests. Editorial, Wall Street Journal

Ukraine is a reminder of our responsibility to protect each other

Ukraine is a game-changer in European security. The real threat to fellow member-states leaves us all with no option but to look again at how we see our responsibilities to one another. Editorial, Irish Times

NATO membership would have saved Ukraine

If only NATO was more popular amongst Ukrainians and properly marketed as a security guarantee against Russia, Ukraine could have been saved from eight or more years of violence and suffering. The lesson to be learned is that NATO did not enlarge far or fast enough. Daniel Ramallo, National Interest

Russia might attack to keep Sweden and Finland out

Would Russia seriously consider an attack on Finland or Sweden? While it may seem unlikely, the West should not underestimate the possibility that Mr. Putin, feeling isolated, backed into a corner, and under a time constraint, may make an otherwise rash decision. Sascha Glaeser, Washington Times

A greater NATO presence on Russias border increases the odds of catastrophic conflict

Finlandif it allows NATO bases, troops, and weaponry within its borderscould permanently heighten the hair-trigger environment that now exists between the Kremlin and Washington. Michael Hirsh, Foreign Policy

NATOs expansion after the Cold War inspired Putins invasion of Ukraine

If there had been no decision to move NATO eastward to include Ukraine, Crimea and the Donbass would be part of Ukraine today, and there would be no war in Ukraine. John Mearsheimer, political scientist, to New Yorker

NATO makes the world less safe

To the degree that this rudderless security pact has made war easier, more salable, and more attractive for Western leaders than diplomacy, the alliance has been a liability to peace and stability. Chase Madar, The Nation

Greater militarism will never create a path to peace

Europe goes ahead and arms itself to the teeth to protect itself. So therefore, [Russia says] we have to arm ourselves to the teeth to defend ourselves from the onslaught of this extraordinarily powerful force against NATO. I mean, if anybodys observing this from outer space, theyd be cracking up in laughter. Noam Chomsky, linguist and political commentator, to Intercept

The U.S. shouldnt sign up to protect even more weak countries

We have to understand that nothing is done in a vacuum, and for Finland and Sweden to be added to NATO adds a burden to the entire alliance. And it adds yet another level of potential risk for the United States. Daniel Davis, foreign policy expert, to The Hill

Is there a topic youd like to see covered in The 360? Send your suggestions to the360@yahoonews.com.

Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: Alexey Nikolsky/Sputnik/AFP via Getty Images (2)

Continue reading here:

Is it worth provoking Putin to add Sweden and Finland to NATO? - Yahoo News

NEW YORK (AP) Nearly two months into the Russian-Ukraine war, the Kremlin has taken extraordinary steps to blunt an economic counteroffensive from the West. While Russia can claim some symbolic victories, the full impact of Western sanctions is starting to be felt in very real ways.

As the West moved to cut off Russias access to its foreign reserves, limit imports of key technologies and take other restrictive actions, the Kremlin launched some drastic measures to protect the economy. Those included hiking interest rates to as high as 20%, instituting capital controls and forcing Russian business to convert their profits into rubles.

As a result, the value of the ruble has recovered after an initial plunge, and last week the central bank reversed part of its interest rate increase. Russian President Vladimir Putin felt emboldened and proclaimed evoking World War II imagery that the country had withstood the Wests blitz of sanctions.

The government wants to paint a picture that things are not as bad as they actually are, said Michael Alexeev, an economics professor at Indiana University who has studied Russias economy in its transition after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

A closer look, however, shows that the sanctions are taking a bite out of Russias economy:

The country is enduring its worst bout of inflation in two decades. Rosstat, the states economic statistics agency, said inflation last month hit 17.3%, the highest level since 2002. By comparison, the International Monetary Fund expects consumer prices in developing countries to rise 8.7% this year, up from 5.9% last year.

Some Russian companies have been forced to shut down. Several reports say a tank manufacturer had to stop production due to a lack of parts. U.S. officials point to the closing of Lada auto plants a brand made by the Russian company Avtovaz and majority-owned by French automaker Renault as a sign of sanctions having an effect.

Moscows mayor says the city is looking at 200,000 job losses from foreign companies shutting down operations. More than 300 companies have pulled out, and international supply chains have largely shut down after container company Maersk, UPS, DHL and other transportation firms exited Russia.

Russia is facing a historic default on its bonds, which will likely freeze the country out of the debt markets for years.

Meanwhile, Treasury officials and most economists urge patience, saying that sanctions take months to have their full effect. If Russia cant get appropriate amounts of capital, parts or supplies over time, that will cause even more factories and businesses to shut down, leading to higher unemployment.

It took nearly an entire year after Russia was sanctioned for seizing Ukraines Crimea peninsula in 2014 for its economic data to show signs of distress, such as higher inflation, a decline in industrial production and a slowdown in economic growth.

The things that we should be looking for to see if the sanctions are working are, frankly, not easy to see yet, said David Feldman, a professor of economics at William & Mary in Virginia. Well be looking for the price of goods, the quantity of goods they are producing and the quality of goods. The last being the hardest to see and probably the last to appear.

Transparency into how sanctions are affecting the Russian economy is limited, largely because of the extraordinary lengths the Kremlin has taken to prop it up. In addition, its largest sector oil and gas is largely unencumbered due to European, Chinese and Indian reliance on Russian energy.

Benjamin Hilgenstock and Elina Ribakova, economists with the Institute of International Finance, estimated in a report released last month that if the European Union, Britain and the U.S. were to ban Russian oil and natural gas, the Russian economy could contract more than 20% this year. Current projections forecast a 15% contraction.

While the EU has agreed to ban Russian coal by August and is discussing sanctions on oil, theres been no consensus among its 27 nations so far about halting oil and natural gas. The European Union is far more reliant on Russian supplies than Britain and the U.S., which have banned or are phasing out Russian oil. In the meantime, Russia gets $850 million a day from Europe for its oil and gas.

The U.S. and its allies have argued that they have tried to tailor sanctions to affect Russias ability to wage war and financially hit those in the highest echelons of government, while leaving everyday Russians largely unaffected.

But Russians have noticed a spike in prices. Residents of one Moscow suburb said 19-liter jugs of drinking water they regularly order have become nearly 35% more expensive than before. In supermarkets and stores in their area, the price for 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) of sugar has risen 77%; some vegetables cost 30% to 50% more.

Local news sites in different Russian regions in recent weeks have reported that multiple stores are shuttered in malls after Western companies and brands halted operations or pulled out of Russia, including Starbucks, McDonalds and Apple.

The Kremlin and its allies on social media have repeatedly pointed to the recovery of Russias ruble as a sign that Western sanctions arent working. The ruble crashed to around 150 to the dollar in the early days of the war but recovered to around 80 to the dollar, about where it was before the invasion. A gauge of weekly inflation by Rosstat has shown inflation slowing, but that is not surprising after the central bank raised interest rates as quickly as it did.

Russias central bank had doubled its benchmark interest rate to support the rubles plunging value and stop bank runs. It dropped the rate to 17% from 20% this month and signaled it might lower it further.

This isnt the first time Russia has thrown its full force behind defending the rubles value as a symbol of resistance against the West. Throughout the 1970s and 80s, the Soviet Union had an official exchange rate of one ruble equaling about $1.35, whereas the black-market exchange rate was closer to four rubles to the dollar. The Russian debt crisis of the late 1990s also was caused partially by the Kremlins active defense of the currencys value.

U.S. Treasury officials have dismissed the significance of the rubles recovery.

The Russian economy is really reeling from the sanctions that we put in place, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said, adding that the rubles value has been artificially inflated by central bank intervention.

If and how Russia wins the economic war will come down to whether the Kremlin can drive division in the West, causing the sanctions to become patchy and less effective. At the same time, Russia will have time to develop alternatives for goods it can no longer access, a concept known as import substitution.

Looking back at the 2014 sanctions, the Congressional Research Service said in January that the impact on Russia was modest only because the U.S. effectively acted alone. This time, there are multiple international actors.

But Alexeev, the Indiana University professor, sees one glaring gap.

As long as Russia can continue to sell oil and gas, they will muddle through this, he said.

__

This story corrects the name of the university to Indiana University.

___

Hussein reported from Washington. White House reporter Joshua Boak contributed from Washington.

___

Follow all AP stories on Russias war on Ukraine at https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine.

Read the original post:

Sanctions hit Russian economy, although Putin says otherwise - The Associated Press

When Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, daily anti-war demonstrations and protests broke out across Russia, while a number of public figures, both cultural and political, released statements in opposition to the war.The protests were met with widespread repression by the Russian authorities, however, with Russian human rights group OVD-info having claimed that 14,906 people were detained from the start of the war in February to March 13.March 6 saw the most mass arrests in post-Soviet history, as Russian took to the streets to voice their opposition to Putins brutal Ukraine invasion.

The Kremlin has continued its initial response and cracked down on protest by rolling-out censorship laws most commonly seen in authoritarian regimes.

Putin clampeddown on external news and comments about the warby blocking access to Facebook, Instagram and major foreign news outlets.

Those accused of spreading false information about the invasionare now subjectto up to 15 years in prison.

Many critics argue that Putins crackdown on free speech may be due to hisfear that he could be ousted from power..

Read More:Horror as Irishman kicked to death on Malaga beach

According to human rights reporter Amanda Taub, who visited Russia to assess the strength of Putins regime, the President fears that frequent demonstrations could see his closest allies turn on him.

The president reportedly believes he could suffer the same fate as Viktor Yanukovych, his Ukrainian counterpart who was removed from office in the Maidan Revolution in 2014 after a series of protests.

In 2015, writing for Vox, Ms Taub said:: To Putin, Yanukovychs fate is a reminder of the danger protests could pose to his own regime, not by unseating it directly via a mass uprising, but in causing Russian elites to push out Putin themselves.

And that lesson has not been lost on the opposition either: Every single opposition figure I met with in Russia spoke of the need to split the elite in order to bring down Putins regime.

Putin, [former opposition politician Vladimir] Ryzhkov explained to me, is afraid that popular protests could cause him to suffer a similar fate that he could be ousted from power via Maidan technology.

Although Putin tends to couch those fears in warnings of foreign coups or CIA plots when he speaks publicly, his concern is that another mass protest movement could force him into a similarly impossible choice between popular support, political control and the loyalty of different factions of Russias elite.

Ms Taub continued: Putin is probably right to be concerned.

He simply cannot maintain his power without the support of Russias elites, the powerful factions within Russias security forces, business community, and political elite which provide vital support to Putins regime.

Don't Miss:Putin may be influenced by fascist and 'deranged' philosopher[OPINION]Olaf Scholz skewered for pretend Ukraine support 'Putin's ally'[INSIGHT]Evidence of smuggled UK tech ending up in Putins bombs RUSI[ANALYSIS]

Their support for Putin is pragmatic, not ideological.

If they sense that his control is slipping, or that Putin can no longer protect their interests, then they will abandon him, just as Ukraines elites abandon Yanukovych.

In December 2011, tens of thousands of Russians streamed onto Moscows streets to protest against Putins regime.

At the time, Russians had been particularly exercised by the 2011 legislative elections, which had been fixed in favour of Putins ruling party, United Russia.

For a short while it appeared Putin may have been losing his grip on the Kremlin, but the protest movement never garnered broad support.

Many of the activists who led the opposition groups were exiled or put into prison.

Since, Putins government has cracked down on all forms of dissent.

Ms Taub wrote: Even though Putin emerged from that crisis of legitimacy, he was clearly deeply shaken by the protests.

It wasnt just the protestors who believed their marches could shake Putins hold of power: Putin himself seemed worried about the same thing.

When Ms Taub asked Vladimir Ryzkhov, who is now a professor at Moscows Higher School of Economics, why Putin had cracked down so harshly on dissent after the 2011 protests, the former opposition leader suggested that the President had an insecure grip on power.

Mr Ryzkhov said: You know I had a very interesting conversation with Putin two years ago. It was a meeting with him and a small group of opposition leaders in 2013.

There was an open part, after that, a 20-minutes closed part. And I asked him, Why do you turn the screw so hard? Because you did it so strongly that the atmosphere is increasing pressure from inside

And he said, very sincerely, that, You know, Vladimir he has known me for many years You know Vladimir, I am afraid that if I turn back a little bit, Russia could be extremely destabilised.

He really believes that only through this hard line is it possible to keep control of this huge country. Thats his mind.

Go here to see the original:

Putin 'afraid' protest could see him abandoned by allies and 'ousted from power' - Express

Just over a week ago, Joe Biden acted like Joe Biden and called the Russian campaign in Ukraine a genocide leaping ahead of our major allies, our State Department and the available facts.

The comment prompted head-shaking from people nervous about American escalation and praise from people seeking it (notably, the president of Ukraine). I am generally on the side of the nervous people: In a conflict with a nuclear power there is always an interest in reducing the existential stakes, and accusations of genocide should be made only with the clearest possible evidence, just as calls for regime change (Bidens previous Bidenism, which had to be walked back) should be made, well, practically never.

But unlike the talk of regime change, which the Kremlin takes seriously because it assumes the United States wants to plot a color revolution in Moscow itself, the accusation of genocide might seem to Vladimir Putins ears much more like a flourish than a threat. After all, theres nothing in recent history to suggest that the term is used by Western powers with real consistency or certainty, or in a way that engenders a consistent American response.

This is not for want of argument and effort. The experience of the 1990s, when America stood back from the massacre of Tutsis in Rwanda and then (eventually) intervened from the air to stop ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia, seemed to yield templates for how the Pax Americana or the rules-based international order ought to work. When genocide was threatened, there was a responsibility to protect the endangered population. When genocide was determined to have taken place, there was a responsibility to place the responsible parties before an international court.

But reality has not yielded to this idealistic framework. Instead we have cases, as in Iraq and Libya, where dictators were punished for either past or threatened atrocities but they faced rough justice, not The Hague, and the American-led military interventions that toppled them were widely seen as unwise or disastrous. We have cases, as in Sudans Darfur region and now with the Rohingya in Myanmar, where the genocide label was affixed but there was no American military response. We have a case like the Second Congo War, where mass killings and atrocities went on for years without a determination of genocide or, indeed, without much Western attention being paid at all.

And then we have the recent case of Chinas oppression of its Uyghur minority, which our State Department declared to be a genocide in early 2021 a declaration that did not exactly lead to serious international consequences for the regime in Beijing.

This last example is especially relevant for Russias invasion of Ukraine, in the sense that it answers a question raised by Bidens genocide comment. If a nuclear-armed power commits crimes against humanity in territory that it controls, will the United States go to war to stop it? Go ask the Uyghurs. Or, for that matter, the Chechens, who certainly suffered as much from Russian cruelty as the Ukrainians, without anyone suggesting that we might risk a nuclear war for their sake.

But this cold observation is not a counsel of despair. The idea of a lawbound, process-driven international approach to genocide or any war crime was always just a fantasy. But a more realistic calculus still leaves room to do what you can to make sure that mass murderers pay a price. You just have to tailor your approach and accept that you arent establishing a universal rule.

Both the Rwandan and Bosnian genocides, for instance, ended with the genocidaires suffering a devastating military defeat but at the hands of rebel Rwandan and Croat armies, respectively, not United States or United Nations ground troops. The end of the Islamic States depredations, meanwhile, happened with U.S. military support, but with the Iraqi Army as a key actor on the ground.

This suggests that where there is a plausible local military actor to lead the effort, international support can tip the scales against war criminals. Where there isnt, sometimes you can play a longer game: Years after the Darfur genocide, the Sudanese dictator Omar Hassan al-Bashir may finally face an international tribunal after being toppled in a coup.

But then, too, sometimes all you can do is bear witness. We werent going to invade the U.S.S.R. to avenge the Holodomor or put Mao Zedong on trial for the Great Leap Forward, and we shouldnt expect to see Xi Jinping in the dock, either.

The situation in Ukraine is its own distinctive case. It is very unlikely that Putin will fall from power; it would be insane for us to try to force regime change. At the same time, there is a military on the ground thats proven capable of countering him, with international support but without direct U.S. intervention.

And this good news, however provisional, seems like what our president should be stressing the real situation, not the escalatory hypothetical.

Is Putin committing genocide? Not yet, folks, and right now, with our support, the Ukrainians are making sure he doesnt get the chance.

Read the original post:

Opinion | It will neither rattle Putin nor change our obligations in the war. - The New York Times

Former US cyber diplomat Chris Painter with then foreign minister Julie Bishop in 2013.Credit:DFAT

Days before Russias invasion, Australia joined the UK and US in publicly attributing a distributed denial-of-service attack on Ukraines banking sector to a Russian-linked group. (DDOS attacks involve shutting down a network with a flood of information.) Foreign Minister Marise Mayne has said Australia is providing cyber security assistance to Ukraines war effort, which Australias Cyber Security Centre includes training for Ukrainian officials. Online security experts from the US, UK and the EU have been assigned jobs maintaining the firewall barricades against Russian online attacks.

Russia may not want to do further damage to Ukraines digital infrastructure if they can one day use it themselves.

If Russia hopes to fully exploit assets such as the Azovstal steel plant in Mariupol, it will want to make sure the infrastructure is up [and running] so it can be used when they take over, says Painter.

A photo taken in February of the Azovstal metallurgical plant on the outskirts of Mariupol.Credit:AP

Maybe Russia is holding its biggest weapons in reserve, waiting for an escalation to use them, Painter said. In March, US President Biden warned of the potential that Russia could conduct malicious cyber activity against the United States as a response to the unprecedented economic costs imposed by democracies on Russia. The trigger point could still come.

A Joint Cybersecurity Advisory published by the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency about destructive malware that is targeting organisations in Ukraine on February 28, 2022.Credit:AP

Russias cyber expertise gave it a tremendous advantage when it hacked rival nations in peacetime. In wartime, with actual violence on the ground in Ukraine, cyberattacks are perhaps redundant. Russias current strategy of reducing Ukrainian cities to rubble doesnt really require an online component.

The ruins of an apartment building in Kharkiv. Credit:Kate Geraghty

The reason for the lack of a bigger Russia-driven cyber aggression may be in plain sight: Maybe the Russian planning at the cyber level was not as good as expected, said Painter. The same way Russias military stunned the world by bungling the invasion strategy, perhaps Putins cyber troops dont live up to their reputation.

Russia has struggled on the battlefield in Ukraine. In cyberspace, there hasnt been a discernable expansion of conflict.Credit:AP

Highlighting any supposed Russian weakness in the cyber realm could be risky.

What we know is happening in cyberspace speaks volumes about the struggle for power between the democracies and Russia. There has been a shift in the way democracies contend with cyber threats. Only a few years ago, democracies shied away from blaming nations for cyberattacks for fear of inviting unwanted diplomatic repercussions. Thats changed.

For example, for years experts warned of the need for companies and governments to act collaboratively against cyber aggressors. Now, they finally are - and not just because of Ukraine.

Loading

Whats extraordinary is in the last few weeks is the kind of unanimity that the West has had to come together against Russia, said Painter. It bodes well in the cyber realm too.

Ironically, what pushed the change was not the threat of war in Ukraine but the epidemic of ransomware attacks, Painter said.

Ransomware gangs trick an organisation into downloading software that locks up the sensitive data of the victim organisation. It is unlocked only if a ransom is paid. These cyber criminals, many linked to rogue nations, have grown increasingly sophisticated in recent years.

When Russia or China is spying or stealing secrets, ordinary people dont care, but when people are standing in line for gas because of cyber disruptions [in the form of ransomware], or because they cant get a hamburger because meat couldnt be delivered, that makes it a different priority.

The epidemic of ransomware worsened in the year leading up to Russias invasion of Ukraine.

The operations of JBS, the worlds biggest meat processor in Brazil, the US and Australia were hit by the ransomware in May 2021, forcing the company to pay out $14.2 million. It was later attributed to REvil (short for ransomware evil), a Russian-speaking ransomware gang.

Canberra has now made it mandatory for companies hit with a ransomware attack to divulge the information to the government, allowing for better coordination.

Once Biden took office in 2021, he elevated ransomware to the top of the G7 agenda as well as in his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

At that meeting, Biden warned Putin about cyberattacks and reminded him of the USs significant capabilities. With democracies shields already raised against the scourge of ransomware, when Russia invaded Ukraine, governments and businesses were coordinating closely on cyber matters.

Loading

Ransomware has made cybersecurity more of a political priority, said Painter, who has worked in the space in government and industry for 30 years. This conflict has made it even more of a real national priority.

Its making sure that were protected and acting together to dissuade further aggression.

Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on whats making headlines around the world. Sign up for the weekly What in the World newsletter here.

Continued here:

Seven reasons Putin hasnt launched a cyberwar in Ukraine - yet - Sydney Morning Herald

Bush and Putin share a laugh together at the Crawford Summit on November 15, 2001Reuters

Former US President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin briefly bonded in 2001.

They held a summit in a rural Texas town of 705 people where Bush owns a nearby ranch.

Putin and his wife stayed at the ranch, and later, the two presidents took questions from local students.

Two months after the September 11 attacks, Russian President Vladimir Putin joined former US President George W. Bush in a rural Texan town of 700 people, where Bush owns the nearby Prairie Chapel ranch. The two leaders also spoke at a high school, after winding down at the ranch, according to NPR.

The now-unimaginable meeting took place in Crawford, Texas, on November 15, 2001, and was billed as the Crawford Summit, with both presidents less than a year into their first terms in office.

It was an era when Putin admired Bush and Russia was trying to normalize relationships with the West after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. The meeting reflected a positive moment in American and Russian relations and a glimpse of Putin early in his rise to power in Russia.

"We had a great dinner last night; we had a little Texas barbecue, pecan pie, a little Texas music. And I think the President really enjoyed himself," Bush told the students, according to the George W. Bush White House archives. "I told him he was welcome to come back next August to get a true taste of Crawford. He said, fine, and maybe you'd like to go to Siberia in the winter."

During his speech, Bush mentioned that Putin and his wife Lyudmila stayed the night at his Prairie Chapel ranch.

"It's my honor also to introduce President Putin to Crawford. I bet a lot of folks here, particularly the older folks, never dreamt that an American President would be bringing the Russian President to Crawford, Texas." Bush said. "A lot of people never really dreamt that an American President and a Russian President could have established the friendship that we have. We were enemies for a long period of time."

Story continues

Bush added that "we're working together to break the old ties, to establish a new spirit of cooperation and trust so that we can work together to make the world more peaceful." His speech largely focused on combatting terrorism and seeing Russia as a partner in that fight.

Bush and Putin share a laugh together at the Crawford Summit on November 15, 2001Reuters

"On our way here, we didn't expect at all that things would be so warm and homey as they were at the ranch of President Bush here," Putin said. "Yesterday, we had a surprise, but today's meeting is yet another and very pleasant surprise, indeed, for us. Indeed, in any country, the backbone of any country is not only the people who live in the capitals but also and mostly, the people who live hundreds and thousands of miles from the capital."

Putin's comments largely lauded Russian contributions to the US and highlighted shared cultural histories by way of migration.

Students then asked questions about the US invasion of Afghanistan, a war that was only two months old at the time. One student asked the two leaders, " How do you think the fall of the Taliban government will affect women's rights?"

Bush spoke first, saying that "there's no question the Taliban is the most repressive, backward group of people we have seen on the face of the Earth in a long period of time, including and particularly how they treat women."

Bush and Putin in front of a Texas mural at the Crawford Summit on November 15, 2001Reuters

He told the students he wanted Putin to speak on the topic of human rights as well. Putin answered next, saying that "in Afghanistan, this phenomenon has taken an extreme form, and the disrespect of human rights has acquired extreme dimensions."

"Overall, women in Afghanistan are basically not treated as people," Putin said.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Read the original:

Putin once spoke with George W. Bush at a rural Texas high ...

Russia-Ukraine War Updates: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Monday said Russias large-scale offensive in the eastern Donbas region had begun. We can now confirm that Russian troops have begun the battle for the Donbas, which they have been preparing for a long time. A large part of the Russian army is now dedicated to this offensive, he said on Telegram. No matter how many Russian soldiers are brought here, we will fight. We will defend ourselves.

Fighting has intensified in eastern Ukraine after Russia withdrew troops from the region around the capital Kyiv and refocused its efforts on the Donbas region that pro-Moscow separatists have partly controlled since 2014.

Shortly before Zelenskys address, the regional governor of the eastern Lugansk region Sergiy Gaiday also announced the beginning of Russias much-anticipated attack. Its hell. The offensive has begun, the one weve been talking about for weeks. Theres constant fighting in Rubizhne and Popasna, fighting in other peaceful cities, he said on Facebook.

Indias exports to Russia have resumed with containers carrying goods including tea, rice, fruits, coffee, marine products and confectionery shipping out last week, Economic Times quoted people with knowledge of the matter. The report stated that banks led by Russias largest lender, Sberbank, are facilitating settlement of bilateral trade moving largely through ports in Georgia. The transactions are happening through Sberbank, Ajay Sahai, director general and CEO, Federation of Indian Export Organisations, was quoted as saying. We have just shipped 60 containers of non-basmati rice to Russia, each weighing 22,000 kg, said Ashwin Shah, director at Shah Nanji Nagji Exports, a leading exporter of rice to Russia. Payment for our rice is being handled by Russia-based Alfa Bank. Bank of Maharashtra is our Indian bank.

Russias Military Sites Now Visible on Google: Google Maps made Russias strategic facilities visible to users Monday, revealing the details of the countrys military infrastructure, The Moscow Times reported. Now everyone can see [Russian military infrastructure] with a resolution of about 0.5 meters per pixel, tweeted the Ukrainian armed forces. Satellite images of military facilities are traditionally blurred, or displayed in lower quality, by Google Maps to protect their classified status. The move comes amid strained relations between Russia and US tech giant Google.

Russian shelling killed at least eight civilians in eastern Ukraine on Monday, according to local authorities. Regional governor of the eastern Lugansk region Sergiy Gaiday said four people died as they tried to flee the city of Kreminna in Lugansk, which Russian forces captured on Monday.

Russia claims arms depot hit: Russias army says it has destroyed a large depot of foreign weapons recently delivered to Ukraine near the western city of Lviv one of 16 Ukrainian military sites it claims to have destroyed on Monday. Russian planes in the morning struck a logistics centre holding large batches of foreign weaponry, delivered to Ukraine over the past six days by the United States and European countries, and destroyed them, says Russian defence ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov.

Eight Killed in East: Russian strikes have killed at least eight civilians in the embattled eastern Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Lugansk, local authorities say. Four died as they tried to escape the city of Kreminna which Russian forces captured earlier on Monday, Lugansk regional governor Sergiy Gaiday says on Telegram. Four others died in Russian bombing in the neighbouring region of Donetsk, says regional governor Pavlo Kyrylenko.

7 Killed in Lviv, 3 in Kharkiv: Five powerful Russian missiles hit the western city of Lviv, killing at least seven people and wounding eight, local officials say. Russian shelling in Kharkiv, Ukraines second-largest city, killed at least three people.

EU Condemns Indiscriminate Strikes: The European Union condemns indiscriminate and illegal shelling of civilians by Russian forces, in a statement by EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell. Attacks on Lviv and other cities in western Ukraine show that no part of the country is spared from the Kremlins senseless onslaught, he said.

Putin Honours Bucha-linked Brigade: Russian President Vladimir Putin bestows an honorary title on a brigade accused by Ukraine of war crimes and mass killings in the town of Bucha. A decree signed by Putin gives the 64th Motor Rifle Brigade the title of Guards for defending the Motherland and state interests and praises the mass heroism and valour, tenacity and courage of its members.

Tycoon Seeks Prisoner Exchange: Russian state television broadcasts a video of two men it says are captured Britons, asking to be exchanged for Viktor Medvedchuk, a recently captured wealthy Ukrainian tycoon close to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Ukraines security services then put out a video of Medvedchuk asking to be exchanged for Ukrainian civilians and soldiers trapped in the strategic besieged Ukrainian port of Mariupol.

Civilian Evacuations Paused: Ukraine says it is halting civilian evacuations from the frontline towns and cities in the east of the country for a second day. In violation of international humanitarian law, the Russian occupiers have not stopped blocking and shelling humanitarian routes, Deputy Prime Minister Iryna Vereshchuk posts on social media Monday.

Nearly 5 mn Fled Ukraine, Says UN: More than 4.9 million Ukrainians have fled their country following the Russian invasion, says the UNs refugee agency, the UNHCR. It says 4,934,415 Ukrainians have now quit the country, up more than 65,000 on the previous day.

Moscow Job Losses: Some 200,000 employees of foreign companies in Moscow could lose their jobs due to sanctions over Russias military campaign in Ukraine, the citys mayor says. Sergei Sobyanin says authorities had last week approved a $41-million programme to support employment in the Russian capital.

Russian troops have dropped bunker bombs on the Mariupol steel plant, the commander of Azov Regiment of the National Guard, Denys Prokopenko, said. Russian occupational forces, and their proxy know about the civilians, and they keep willingly firing on the factory, Prokopenko added.

A senior Pentagon official on Monday confirmed that the first shipment of the USD 800 million military packages arrived at the Ukraine border. There have been four flights from the United States arriving into the theatre just yesterday, the official said, as quoted by The Guardian. This is a part of the new defence aid tranche signed by US president Joe Biden last week, which includes the supply of helicopters, Humvees, and armoured personnel carriers.

Read all the Latest News , Breaking News and IPL 2022 Live Updates here.

See the original post:

Russia-Ukraine War Latest Updates: Google Maps Unblurs ...

Eighty yearsago this Monday, in the early months of World War II when Japan was gobbling up much of Asia after sinking Americas battleship fleet at Pearl Harbor,16 B-25bombers under the command of Lt. Col. James H.Doolittlelaunched from the aircraft carrier USS Hornet to strike Tokyo in a daring, one-way raid.Little physical damage was done. But thepsychological effectwas massive.The invulnerability of Japan promised by the senior military was shattered.

It is a good thing that Russian President Vladimir Putin, like many Americans today, is probably not well versed in this history.With the sinking of his Black Sea Fleet flag ship, theMoskva, presumably by UkrainesNeptunecruise missiles (or utterincompetenceby the crew), Putin needs some shock and awe of his own to recover from this equivalent of the Doolittle raid.What might that be?

Given theinfluxof presidents and prime ministers to Kyiv in support of the Zelensky government and the magnificent Ukrainian resistance, the White House is considering dispatching a senior representative.No doubt President Biden is carefullyevaluatingwhether he should make that trip.Or would sending the vice president orsecretariesof state or defense be appropriate?

If Biden were to go, most Americans would likely support him. But serious blowback would be inevitable.The president would be at personal risk.If he were to be targeted or killed, what would be the response, if one existed?

Republicans would label such a trip as reckless in the extreme. Should disaster occur, many will ask if the vice president is ready or capable of assuming the duties of chief executive and commander in chief.And if anyone other than the president were chosen, given all theother heads of state and government who have made the trek to Kyiv, would that comparison be politically damaging to Biden?

From Putins perspective, how might the Kremlin exploit such a visit regardless of who represented the U.S.?Even a Cabinet secretary would be a tempting target.As Ukraines army has done its best inkilling Russian generals, Putin would like to even the score.

In war, assassination of heads of state has been exceedingly rare.Winston Churchill reportedly believed that after the U.S. entered World War II and the battle had reversed,killing Hitlerwas a bad idea.The fuhrer was the Allies best weapon in that his so-called genius had turned to gotterdammerung.Killing Hitler might have led to a successor who sought peace and thus derail the aim of unconditional surrender.

The most successful example in World War II of a directed assassination against a major leader was the plan to intercept and shoot down the aircraft carrying Japans senior admiral and the architect of Pearl Harbor,Isokuro Yamamoto,in 1943 over the South Pacific.The plan worked perfectly as envisaged by the U.S. Pacific Fleet commander, Admiral Chester Nimitz.

From Putins perspective, clearly Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is aprime target.If Zelensky were killed, who would replace him? And would a successor have the samecharisma to rally the nation and the West?And if President Bidenwere also in Kyiv, would that not raise the ante?

Obviously, any visit by an American dignitary would be wrapped in the utmost secrecy and security. But suppose that Russian intelligence assessed that there was a probability of a Biden visit at a certain time and date. Given the huge losses Russian forces have suffered and theMoskvadebacle, how might former KGB Lt. Col. Putin evaluate his options?

Unlike AmericasSEAL Team Sixthat dispatchedOsama bin Ladenin 2011, Putin does not have that option.Hence, the only certain, or near certain, means to ensure elimination of the presidents could be through anuclear attackobliterating Kyiv and killing possibly hundreds of thousands of people.In Putins mind, could such a barbarically stunning act so paralyze any U.S. and NATO response and force a victory in Ukraine, however defined and regardless of whether Biden were there?

Dangerous in the extreme, such a decision could provoke a thermonuclear war.One of the more frightening aspects of this ghastly invasion is that this scenario is no longer confined to fiction or Hollywood action films. And a further nagging problem for President Biden is that if he does not go to Kyiv and there was serious speculation he might, clearly his adversaries and critics would challenge his courage.

Oh, for the days of Jimmy Doolittle!

Harlan Ullman, Ph.D, is senior adviser at Washington, D.C.s Atlantic Council and the primary author of shock and awe. His latestbook is,The Fifth Horseman and the New MAD: How Massive Attacks of Disruption Became the Looming Existential Danger to a Divided Nation and the World at Large.

Read the rest here:

Putins gambit: To kill a president | The Hill

1. Ukraine Latest: Putin Popularity Still High as Russian Elite Question War's Toll  Bloomberg
2. A growing number of Kremlin insiders are questioning Putin's war in Ukraine, and believe it will set Russia back decades: report  Yahoo News
3. Putin Purges Advisors but He's Responsible for Misinformation  Business Insider
4. Lonely Putin Is Losing Control of His Own Spiraling Minions  The Daily Beast
5. Analysis: War, economy could weaken Putin's place as leader  The Associated Press - en Espaol
6. View Full Coverage on Google News

See more here:

Ukraine Latest: Putin Popularity Still High as Russian Elite Question War's Toll - Bloomberg