Foreign
If Putin wins, expect the worst genocide since the Holocaust
- /home/naijuinz/public_html/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 27
https://naijablitznews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/vadimir-putin.jpg&description=If Putin wins, expect the worst genocide since the Holocaust', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
- Share
- Tweet /home/naijuinz/public_html/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 72
https://naijablitznews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/vadimir-putin.jpg&description=If Putin wins, expect the worst genocide since the Holocaust', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
Today, Karolina Hird of the Institute of the Study of War in Washington DC considers the price for ordinary Ukrainians.
Over 800 days into Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, it is easy to see the war as merely lines and colour-coding on a map. While the lines and the military movements they represent matter, those abstractions obscure the human realities behind those lines.
To be clear from the start: Russia is actively, undeniably carrying out a genocide to destroy Ukrainian identity and independence. It does this by utilising ethnic cleansing campaigns, sexual violence, and the mass deportation of Ukrainian children as part of a “forced Russification” effort. I have been following this from Washington ever since the war began.
As such, if Russia wins, the worst genocide on European soil since the Holocaust is almost guaranteed.
The Kremlin has loudly proclaimed its intent to destroy Ukraine as a state and a nation. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s 2021 essay “On the historical unity of Russians and Ukrainians,” called Ukrainians a confused people, unjustly and forcibly torn away from Russia by nefarious external forces. The Kremlin-controlled Russian Orthodox Church frequently espouses the “trinity doctrine,” the idea that Ukrainians (and Belarusians) belong to the Russian “nation” and must be “reunified.”
Russian politicians and pundits frequently call Ukraine an “artificial concept” and a “fake country” that does not deserve to exist. Russia has adopted a whole-of-government approach to build the narrative that Ukraine and Ukrainians have no right to exist as a sovereign people in a sovereign state.
Given these officially stated aims, are the genocidal actions Russia has taken to pursue them any wonder? The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines genocide as acts committed “with intent to destroy, in whole or in part” a specific group.
The destruction need not be accomplished physically – actions taken to destroy a group’s identity without killing all members of the group also constitute genocide. The Russian genocidal project includes horrific acts of violence, to be sure, including summary executions, sexual assaults, arbitrary detentions, and torture. It includes the forcible deportation of children from Ukraine to Russia, which the Genocide Convention explicitly specifies also constitutes genocide.
The deportation of Ukrainian children is a key component of Russia’s genocidal project – one that would only be extrapolated if Russia were to win the war and the rest of the country were seized by force. The Ukrainian government has verified the deportation of 19,546 Ukrainian children as of April 29, 2024. The true number is likely much, much higher considering that Ukrainian officials can only verify the deportation of children who have someone to vouch for their identity, leaving orphans and children without guardians unaccounted for.
The Kremlin has facilitated and celebrated the deportation of children to Russia, claiming it offers children an opportunity to rest and rehabilitate after living in a war zone (which Russia created by invading Ukraine). These children are subject to Kremlin-approved re-education programmes along Kremlin-accepted social, linguistic, and cultural lines and sometimes forced into military training.
Russian authorities have deported children to “rest” and “relaxation” camps throughout Russia, one of which in Russia’s Primorsky Krai is closer to Alaska than to Ukraine. High-ranking Kremlin officials, including Putin’s Commissioner on Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova, have personally adopted deported Ukrainian children. She now has an arrest warrant, issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Tens of thousands of Ukrainian young people are growing up under Russian military occupation, forcing them to abandon their language, culture, and history as the Kremlin seeks to destroy “in whole or in part” Ukrainian identity. This would become an entire generation were Moscow to subjugate Ukraine. Those already living under Russian occupation suffer daily efforts by Russian occupation authorities to strip them of their Ukrainian identity.
Russian authorities co-opted the school system in occupied Ukraine under the euphemism of bringing it up to the “Russian standard”: teaching only the Kremlin-approved version of Russian history in which Ukraine has no independent identity and depriving children of access to Ukrainian-language education. Russian occupation authorities also use schools to militarise children, instilling in them Russian “military-patriotic ideals” and establishing a direct pipeline into Russian military–affiliated organisations to facilitate their future recruitment into the Russian military to fight against their compatriots.
The thread of destruction and eradication runs through daily life in occupied Ukraine. Russian occupation officials have discussed forcibly deporting or summarily executing civilians who display characteristics deemed to be pro-Ukrainian or anti-Russian. Russian administrators use the threat of withholding access to basic goods and services to coerce Ukrainians to give up their Ukrainian passports for Russian ones, permanently changing the Ukrainian spelling of their names to the Russian version. Russian economic “enrichment” and infrastructure “development” projects cripple the ability of occupied areas to exercise economic self-sufficiency, generating devastating dependencies on the Russian federal government and driving a wedge between Kyiv and occupied territories.
Again, this constitutes genocidal behaviour, even when it is not exterminating people.
That said, Russia’s efforts to destroy Ukraine include ethnically-cleansing occupied Ukraine by replacing Ukrainians with Russian citizens. Russian officials claim that Russia has “accepted” over 4.8 million Ukrainians, including 700,000 children, since the beginning of the war.
There is no way to verify this number, but it emphasises the scale of movement to Russia from Ukraine since 2022, all of which occurred in the coercive context of Russian military occupation. The Kremlin is repopulating occupied Ukraine with Russian citizens to fundamentally alter its demographics and complicate future reintegration efforts. Based on examples of similar ethnic cleansing in the past, many will have inevitably died as a consequence. And that is before one even considers the blatant executions of innocent civilians by Russian soldiers, or the deliberate targeting of civilian population areas.
International legal procedure is set up to deal with atrocities after they happen. This is why Russian war crimes in Bucha, Izyum, Kherson City, and other liberated settlements have received widespread international attention and condemnation, and deservedly so. This is why the ICC has issued arrest warrants for Putin and Lvova-Belova, as their crime of facilitating the deportation of children is visible and evident.
The international humanitarian community is less effective, however, at addressing what happens daily behind the frontlines. In many cases, Russia’s genocidal project in Ukraine is banal, mundane, and hard to track and prove. But every aspect of Russia’s occupation of Ukraine is deliberate and flows from Putin’s initial justification for the invasion. It is meant to make real the Kremlin lie that Ukraine has no right to exist and that there is no such thing as a Ukrainian people.
Ukraine is fighting a war for the survival of the Ukrainian people. Russia’s genocidal project is the purpose of Russia’s military operations, and Ukraine’s supporters must not separate the two. Should Ukraine fall to Russia on the battlefield, the rest of its people will fall victim to the genocidal project Russia is conducting in the lands it already controls, which “only” constitutes about 20 per cent of the country’s legal territory. Imagine how many millions would be victims of this abhorrent behaviour if it reaches 30 per cent, 40 per cent, or even 100 per cent.
Indeed, many military experts would argue that Nazi-style tactics would be the only way to quell a population so vehemently opposed to Russia’s control. We would see horrors unfold daily.
We must face this reality squarely and stop blithely talking about offering “territorial” concessions to “stop the fighting” without forcing ourselves to confront the horrors that such concessions will inflict on the people living in those lands.
Putin’s invasion was never about seizing limited bits of land. It was always about destroying a people. Ukraine’s supporters must therefore recommit themselves to the project of saving this people and showing that they will resist and defeat aggression and genocide on this scale.
Karolina Hird is Russia Deputy Team Lead and Analyst at the Institute for the Study of War in Washington DC.
She has contributed to the Telegraph’s daily podcast ‘Ukraine: The Latest’, your go-to source for all the latest analysis, live reaction and correspondents reporting on the ground. With over 85 million downloads, it is considered the most trusted daily source of war news on both sides of the Atlantic.
You can listen to one of her extended interviews on Russian war crimes here.
Foreign
Iran demands war damages compensation for reopening Strait of Hormuz
Iran on Saturday gives conditions for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, including compensation for war damages, complicating a potential deal to open the waterway essential to the world economy.
Tehran has imposed an effective blockade of the strait since the United States and Israel struck Iran in late February, and wants to charge tolls for passage, attacking ships it accuses of attempting to circumvent its preferred route.
Continued attacks in the strait, which was free to transit before the war, led to the collapse of an April ceasefire. Mediators have since urged both sides to return to the terms of a June memorandum.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said discussions with Oman over transit and management of the strait were “approaching the final stages”, but added the reopening of Hormuz “is subject to other conditions and compensation for the violation” of the June agreement.
Security chief Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr on Saturday laid out a list of demands for reopening the strait, including an end to the “war and aggression against Iran and its allies in Lebanon, Palestine, Yemen, and Iraq”.
He also demanded the lifting of a parallel US naval blockade of Iran, the end of sanctions, the release of frozen assets and compensation for wartime damage, according to remarks reported by Tasnim news agency.
Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, meanwhile, said Hormuz’s reopening had “nothing to do with the negotiations between Iran and Oman”, adding that the “enemy is forced to accept Iran’s conditions for the opening of the strait”.
The comments came as transit through Hormuz has dropped significantly, with Iran targeting ships it accuses of skirting its preferred route through Iranian waters.
The United Arab Emirates’ foreign ministry on Saturday condemned what it called a “hostile Iranian attack that targeted a tanker belonging to ADNOC (Abu Dhabi National Oil Company) with a missile while it was transiting the Strait of Hormuz, without causing casualties”.
Later on Saturday, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) said a ship was hit by a projectile off Oman in the Strait of Hormuz, causing a fire that was extinguished but no casualties. It was unclear whether they were referring to the same ship.
On Friday, ADNOC had put out a statement saying that since the start of the war, 15 of its vessels had been attacked in Hormuz, “including three vessels this week alone”.
Oman’s foreign ministry on Saturday condemned “repeated attacks on vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz”, without naming Iran.
It also said that “ongoing negotiations regarding navigation arrangements in the Strait of Hormuz are proceeding in a positive and constructive atmosphere”, and urged against any actions that might jeopardise the progress.
The previous Iran-US deal — meant to serve as a jumping-off point for negotiations on a permanent settlement — had said Iran and Oman would hash out future arrangements for the strait in discussion with other Gulf countries and “in line with the applicable international law”.
International law generally forbids tolling in such waterways.
Security agreement
Turkey’s foreign minister said Saturday he expected Egypt to join a joint defence agreement between Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan designed to stabilize the region, calling the country a “natural partner on all issues”.
“I believe that at the next stage Egypt will also be among us in the alliance. We already act toward one another as if we were alliance members,” Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said in an interview.
A drone struck US assets at an Egyptian port on the Mediterranean last month, marking the first drone attack on Egyptian territory since the outbreak of the Iran war.
Fidan said the agreement does not target a specific country.
“There is no common threat that we have put in writing,” he said, according to the news agency.
Pakistan’s foreign ministry said Friday the pact meant an attack on any member would be regarded as an attack on all, adding it was “intended to strengthen collective deterrence”.
AFP
Foreign
Spain imposes border checks on Italy over migrant dispute
Spain on Saturday started border checks on travellers arriving from Italy, responding to similar measures Rome imposed following an unprecedented migrant rush into the Spanish north African enclave of Ceuta.
“I don’t see a lot of the word ‘diplomacy’ used in these decisions, not by the Italian government, nor by the Spanish government,” said one 36-year-old Italian tourist, Maria Celeste Grillo, who had just flown into Madrid.
She said she had not seen any added checks as she stepped off the plane, but found their implementation “sad”.
Spain announced Friday it would proceed with the heightened controls, citing “persistent irregular migration pressure” facing Italy — deepening a row between the EU partners and NATO allies.
Spain’s left-wing government has complained that Italy’s hard-right government on July 31 unfairly imposed one month of border checks on travellers from Spain — suspending the EU’s Schengen Area visa-free travel arrangements — because of the Ceuta influx.
More than 70,000 migrants had crossed from Morocco into the Ceuta enclave on July 30 and 31, though almost all of them subsequently returned to Morocco within 48 hours.
The inflow alarmed European nations, especially right-wing ones urging tougher rules on irregular migrants. However, rules for Ceuta mean migrants cannot travel onward to continental Europe without passing another layer of border checks.
Spain’s interior ministry said the new checks on incoming travellers from Italy would apply until September 7.
AFP
Foreign
Court Halts Trump’s White House Ballroom Project, President Kicks
An appeals court on Friday upheld an order halting work on Donald Trump’s proposed White House ballroom, enraging the US leader and setting up another Supreme Court battle over the limits of presidential authority.
The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, which had allowed construction to continue while it considered the case, agreed with a lower court that such a massive White House overhaul required the explicit consent of Congress.
It stayed its own decision for two weeks to give Trump time to ask the Supreme Court to intervene.
The Republican president lashed out after the 2-1 ruling, calling it “horrendous, politically motivated, and unlawful”.
The two majority judges were appointed by Democratic presidents, while the dissenting judge was nominated by Trump himself.
The President vowed in a lengthy social media post to immediately appeal to the Supreme Court.
“This decision, made after much of the work has been done and paid for, is a National Security Threat at the highest level. It is also a National Disgrace,” Trump said in another post on his Truth Social platform on Friday night.
Trump initially touted the construction of the ballroom as necessary to host galas but has since repeatedly pointed to the concurrent addition of an underground military bunker and other security features.
Under the district judge’s initial order, work was to be allowed to continue only on a limited set of structures, including those that were underground.
“This holding has nothing at all to do with whether the proposed ballroom is desirable or not as a matter of policy. This ruling does not even necessarily mean that the Defendants may not ultimately construct the ballroom,” the majority wrote on Friday.
“What it does mean is that the Defendants may not do so during the district court’s expeditious litigation without securing Congress’s authorisation, as the Constitution and laws require.”
Trump, who has repeatedly complained that the White House lacks sufficient space for grand galas such as state dinners, unilaterally ordered construction of the massive ballroom.
Work on the project began last year with the sudden demolition of the White House’s entire historic East Wing.
Since then, photographs have shown significant work on a basement complex, with some concrete walls rising above ground level.
Trump has insisted that the ballroom will be privately financed, but media reports in June showed that significant taxpayer funds were going towards the project, which could cost as much as $600 million.
While the White House initially cited a $200 million price tag for the project, it quickly doubled the estimate to $400 million.
The ballroom is just one of Trump’s pet projects aimed at leaving his mark on Washington by the time he leaves office in 2029, along with a renovation of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool and other parks, as well as the construction of a gigantic arch.
Several of the projects have similarly faced legal challenges, but the ballroom project would be the first to reach the Supreme Court.
-
News12 hours agoWe’re aware of your coded meetings with Lulu-Briggs, 𝐏𝐢𝐝𝐨𝐦𝐬𝐨𝐧, CRP uncovers ex-MD of NDDC, Nunieh
-
News7 hours agoConfusion as Shekau’s son surfaces in Boko Haram ranks
-
News12 hours agoPolice neutralize suspected gang leader over murder of Imo monarch, recover arms
-
Foreign11 hours agoIran demands war damages compensation for reopening Strait of Hormuz
-
News12 hours agoZamfara PDP guber candidate, Gusau celebrates Umar Bature on his birthday, says he’s a visionary team player, bridge builder
-
News7 hours agoTroops waste kidnapper, rescue kidnapped farmer
-
News12 hours ago16 rescued, several feared trapped as residential building collapses in Kano
-
Sports11 hours agoWAFCON 2026: Super Falcons suffer shock defeat as Cameroon gets automatic ticket for World Cup

Warning: Undefined variable $user_ID in /home/naijuinz/public_html/wp-content/themes/zox-news/comments.php on line 49
You must be logged in to post a comment Login