Headline

German Caution On Arms To Ukraine Rooted In History, Energy

Published

4 years ago

February 1, 2022

Editor

Germany’s refusal to join other NATO members in providing weapons to Ukraine has annoyed some allies and raised questions about Berlin’s resolve in standing up to Russia.

The issue rose to the fore over the weekend following a report that Berlin had gone so far as to block Estonia from supplying old German howitzers to Kyiv to help defend itself against Russian troops massing near the Ukrainian border.

Germany’s stance on arms supplies does “not correspond to the level of our relations and the current security situation,” Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said on Twitter.

Speaking to reporters Monday in Berlin, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz denied a decision had been made on the howitzers and insisted that his country stands with its NATO and European Union allies in opposing any Russian incursion into Ukraine.

“Should this situation occur, we will jointly act,” he told reporters. “There would be a high price.”

Still, while Germany would continue to provide help to Ukraine, there would be one exception, he said: “We don’t provide any lethal weapons.”

That stance, criticized in Kyiv and — less loudly — in Washington and London, has caused consternation among some in Germany who worry that their country may not be considered a reliable partner.

“How many in Berlin are actually aware how our seemingly confused Ukraine policy harms not just (Germany) but the entire EU?” asked Wolfgang Ischinger, Germany’s former ambassador to the United States and now head of the annual Munich Security Conference.

Experts say Germany’s position is partly rooted in its history of aggression during the 20th century.

“There’s the obvious legacy of Germany’s own militarization in Europe during two World Wars that has led many German leaders to view any military response as the last resort,” said Rachel Ellehuus, deputy director of the Europe, Russia and Eurasia program at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.

That attitude could backfire, she said. “The current government does not seem to grasp that sending defensive weapons to Ukraine might actually deter further Russian aggression.”

And while Germany has pointed to its restrictive position on arms exports to conflict zones in the past, analysts say the rule has not been consistently applied.

“There have always been borderline cases here, such as the Kosovo war or support for the Kurds against IS in Syria,” said Sabine Fischer, a senior Russia expert at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs.

The debate over German weapons is unfolding days after the head of the German navy resigned following criticism at home and abroad for comments he made on Ukraine and Russia. Speaking Friday in India, Vice Admiral Kay-Achim Schoenbach said it was important to have Russia on the same side as the EU against China and suggested that Russian President Vladimir Putin deserved “respect.”

With Scholz’s Social Democrats are steeped in the legacy of Cold War rapprochement pursued by his predecessor Willy Brandt, his governing partner the Greens are rooted in a tradition of pacifism. That means two out of Germany’s three governing parties would balk at the idea of supplying arms to a non-NATO country in a conflict with Russia. But letting Estonia pass on the old Soviet-designed 122-mm D-30 howitzers to Ukraine might be an acceptable compromise.

German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock made clear that, qualms about exporting arms to Ukraine aside, Berlin takes a dim view of Russia’s recent behavior.

“In recent weeks, more than 100,000 Russian troops with tanks and guns have gathered near Ukraine for no understandable reason. And it’s hard not to see that as a threat,” she said during a visit to Moscow.

Speaking alongside her Russian counterpart, Baerbock acknowledged the “suffering and destruction that we Germans brought upon the peoples of the Soviet Union” during the Nazi era, but warned that Germany was willing to consider tough steps if Russia acts against Ukraine.

This includes calling into question the future of the new Nord Stream 2 pipeline meant to bring natural gas from Russia to Germany.

Such a move against its biggest energy supplier would come at a high price for Germany, too.

With plans to switch off its last three nuclear power plants this year and phase out the use of coal by 2030, Germany’s reliance on gas will increase in the short term until enough renewable energy comes online, said Georg Zachmann, a senior fellow at the Bruegel economic think tank in Brussels.

Yet German officials believe that being a large customer of Russian gas can give it leverage, as Moscow won’t want to harm its reputation as a reliable supplier.

Germany’s neighbors, however, aren’t convinced that tactic will work.

“For almost three decades, Germany has been pushing for a more inclusive approach to Russia based on the Wandel durch Handel (change through trade) approach. But it didn’t change Russia,” said Slawomir Debski, director of the Polish Institute of International Affairs, a think tank in Warsaw.

But the bickering now among NATO and EU allies doesn’t help either, he said.

If Berlin wants to focus on putting economic pressure on Moscow while others provide military aid to Ukraine, such a ‘good cop, bad cop’ approach could work, said Debski, “provided there is part of an agreed allied strategy and agreement on the fundamental endgame.”

Speaking Monday at a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels, Baerbock said the German government’s priority is to deescalate the situation over Ukraine, dampening allies’ calls for military support to Kyiv and swift new sanctions against Moscow.

“Berlin will have to deal with the criticism that is now coming from Ukraine, other European countries and Washington,” Fischer said.

“At the same time, Germany remains an important player in the negotiations surrounding the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and, I predict, will continue to support sanctions and other measures in the future.”

Headline

Eswatini Jails 10 Africans Deported From US

Published

9 hours ago

October 6, 2025

Editor

The African kingdom of Eswatini said it received and jailed 10 more deportees from the United States on Monday as part of a US scheme to expel undocumented migrants.

Eswatini took in a first group of five men in July, with Ghana, Rwanda, and South Sudan also accepting US deportees in recent months in a programme criticised by rights groups.

The tiny southern African nation agreed in May to accept up to 160 deportees in exchange for $5.1 million to “build its border and migration management capacity”, according to a deal signed with the United States and seen by AFP.

Its correctional services department said in a statement Monday it “confirms the arrival of ten (10) third country nationals from the United States of America”.

It did not give details but said they had been “securely accommodated in one of the country’s correctional facilities” and the government would “facilitate their orderly repatriation”.

A US-based attorney representing some of the deportees said the new group included “three Vietnamese, one Filipino, one Cambodian”.

The lawyer, Tin Thanh Nguyen, represents two of the Vietnamese nationals who arrived Monday.

“One of my clients … tried to assert a reasonable fear of harm being deported to Eswatini, but ICE (US Immigration and Customs Enforcement) ignored him and put him on the plane anyways,” he told AFP.

He also represents a Vietnamese and a Laotian who were part of the first group which also included nationals from Cuba, Jamaica and Yemen.

– ‘Legal black hole’ –

The deal that Eswatini signed with the United States on May 14 says that the US deportees may include third country nationals “with criminal backgrounds and/or who are designated suspected terrorists”.

Washington said the first group of men had been convicted of crimes in the United States, including child rape and murder, but their lawyers told AFP that all five had long finished serving their sentences.

Eswatini jailed them in its maximum security Matsapha Correctional Centre which is notorious for holding political prisoners and for overcrowding.

One of them, a 62-year-old Jamaican who had reportedly completed a sentence for murder in the United States, was sent back to his country around two weeks ago.

Nguyen said Eswatini was a “legal black hole” and the deportees were denied legal counsel.

His two clients had been detained since mid-July without a charge, he said.

“I cannot call them. I cannot email them. I cannot communicate through local counsel because the Eswatini government blocks all attorney access,” he told AFP.

Lawyers and civil society groups in Eswatini have gone to court to challenge the legality of the detentions.

A local lawyer on Friday won a court ruling allowing him to visit the four men still detained, but the government immediately appealed, suspending the ruling.

US President Donald Trump has overseen a drastic expansion of the practice of deporting people to countries other than their nation of origin, notably by sending hundreds to a notorious prison in El Salvador.

But rights experts have warned the deportations risk breaking international law by sending people to nations where they face the risk of torture, abduction and other abuses.

Human Rights Watch last month urged African governments to refuse to accept US deportees and to terminate deals already in effect, saying they violated global rights law.

Eswatini, formerly known as Swaziland and landlocked by neighbours South Africa and Mozambique, has been led by King Mswati III since 1986 and his government has been accused of human rights violations.

Headline

Russian Strikes Kill Five In Ukraine, Cause Power Outages

Published

1 day ago

October 5, 2025

Editor

Russian strikes Sunday on Ukraine killed five people and badly damaged energy infrastructure, temporarily severing power supplies to tens of thousands and prompting neighbouring Poland put ground defence on high alert.

Russia has stepped up strikes on energy networks, increasing fears Moscow would resume its widespread campaign of attacks on power facilities, which have plunged millions into darkness in past winters.

Russian forces fired 496 drones and 53 missiles at Ukraine, the majority of which were shot down, according to the Ukrainian air force.

“Sadly, five people were killed. My sincere condolences to everyone who lost loved ones to this terror,” Ukraine’s leader Volodymyr Zelensky said.

Strikes killed four people near Lviv, which lies in western Ukraine and is hundreds of kilometers from the front line, and has been largely spared the attacks that have hit cities further east.

“Near Lviv, an entire family of four was killed in their home, including a teenage girl,” Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiga said.

Emergency services released photos showing firefighters battling flames in a destroyed building, and helping elderly residents to safety.
Attacks also killed one person in the southern region of Zaporizhzhia and wounded people near the eastern front, local authorities said.
“Russians once again targeted our infrastructure -– everything that ensures normal life for our people,” Zelensky said.

The strikes cut power to over 110,000 subscribers across several regions, Ukraine’s emergency services said, with the hardest hit being Zaporizhzhia.

– ‘Gas, heat and light’ –
Overnight, more than 73,000 people in Zaporizhzhia were left without electricity, regional head Ivan Fedorov said, though power had been partially restored by the afternoon.

Ukraine’s state-run gas company Naftogaz network also reported damage to its network.
“These maniacal terrorist strikes are aimed solely at one thing — depriving Ukrainians of gas, heat, and light,” Naftogaz CEO Sergii Koretskyi said in a statement.

The Russian army said it launched an attack “against enterprises of the military-industrial complex of Ukraine and gas and energy infrastructure facilities that ensured their operation.”

Russian attacks have also rattled Ukraine’s European allies after a spate of alleged Russian airspace violations into Europe.

NATO boosted its defences along its eastern borders throughout the month as it accused Moscow of testing the alliance’s air defences with drone incursions into several members and by flying military jets in Estonian airspace.

Overnight Poland’s armed forces said on X that they had mobilised planes and put ground defences on high alert to secure the country’s airspace, especially in areas close to Ukraine.

Ukraine also said Russia was intensifying a campaign of air strikes on its railway network in an attempt to isolate frontline communities ahead of winter.

Russia launched drones at two passenger trains in Ukraine’s northeastern Sumy region on Saturday, killing one person and wounding dozens, according to Ukrainian officials.

Headline

Badenoch Unveils Strict UK Immigration Plan, Targets 150,000 Yearly Deportations

Published

1 day ago

October 5, 2025

Editor

Kemi Badenoch, leader of the United Kingdom’s Conservative Party, has unveiled an aggressive immigration reform plan aimed at detaining and deporting 150,000 illegal migrants annually, in what she described as the “toughest reforms Britain has ever seen” in border policy. The announcement was made in a video message posted on her X account on Sunday.

The plan, dubbed the Radical Borders Plan, envisages the establishment of a new Removals Force modelled after the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which would replace the current Home Office Immigration Enforcement unit. According to Badenoch, the Removals Force will have a mandate to remove all illegal entrants, foreign criminals, and undocumented migrants, while also monitoring illegal work. She stated, “My message is clear: if you’re here illegally, you will be detained and deported.”

Badenoch sharply criticised previous administrations, accusing both Conservative and Labour governments of failing to manage the migration crisis effectively. “Successive governments have failed on immigration. Labour promised to smash the gangs. Instead, in just a year, they delivered record small boat crossings, over 50,000 illegal arrivals, 32,000 people in asylum hotels, billions wasted. It’s pure weakness. Britain needs a serious, credible plan and the backbone to deliver it,” she said.

The proposed plan includes several controversial measures. Asylum claims from illegal entrants would be banned, the Human Rights Act repealed, and the United Kingdom withdrawn from the European Convention on Human Rights. Badenoch added that all new illegal arrivals would be deported within a week, with legal obstacles to mass removals removed and visa sanctions imposed on countries that refuse to repatriate their citizens. She also pledged to “shut down the asylum hotel racket,” which she said would save taxpayers billions and restore public confidence in the UK’s border controls.

The Removals Force, if approved, will operate with an annual budget of £1.6 billion, double that of the current Immigration Enforcement unit, funded by savings from the closure of asylum hotels and other measures within the asylum system. The force will have sweeping powers, including the use of facial recognition technology without prior warning, and will integrate closely with the police. Priority for removals will include new illegal entrants, foreign criminals, failed asylum seekers, visa over-stayers, and others identified as residing in the UK illegally.

In an interview on BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, Badenoch faced criticism for her refusal to specify the destinations to which deported migrants would be sent. She responded, “I’m tired of all of these irrelevant questions about where they should go. They will go back to where they should be or another country, but they should not be here.” When pressed further, she added, “They will go back to where they came from.”

According to the Conservative Party document detailing the plan, the proposed measures are intended to increase removals from the current 34,000 per year to approximately 150,000, marking a five-fold increase in enforcement activity. The party argues that the reforms are necessary to address what it describes as uncontrolled migration and to strengthen public trust in the country’s border system.

Badenoch’s announcement has intensified the ongoing debate in the UK over immigration policy, balancing border security with human rights considerations. Critics have expressed concern over the repeal of the Human Rights Act and the use of facial recognition technology without oversight, while supporters have welcomed the proposed measures as a decisive step in tackling illegal immigration.

The Radical Borders Plan is expected to be submitted for parliamentary consideration in the coming months, with its implementation contingent on legislative approval and coordination with existing law enforcement structures.