“Ukraine – Russia”

Senior officials in Ukraine are increasingly alarmed at the president’s reliance on Andriy ­Yermak, his chief of staff

At a Nato airbase in Belgium, President Zelensky celebrated his greatest achievement by greeting five of Ukraine’s new F-16 pilots. Looming over his shoulder, carefully positioned for the cameras last week, appeared the man who represents his greatest flaw.

As Zelensky’s first elected term drew to a close, senior government, military, law enforcement and diplomatic sources, many of whom requested anonymity, expressed alarm at his growing dependence on Andriy ­Yermak, his chief of staff, who is ­accused of amassing personal power and usurping democratic processes.

First, a warehouse in east London being used to supply aid to Ukraine burned down. Weeks later, an Ikea in Vilnius, Lithuania, mysteriously caught fire.

Swedish investigators were already looking into the possibility that several railway derailments could have been caused by a state-backed saboteur.

Then an inferno engulfed the largest shopping centre in Warsaw, Poland’s capital. It was Donald Tusk, the Polish prime minister, who began joining the dots to suggest the West was under attack by Russian espionage.

Wouldn’t it be easier to just give up Ukraine to Russia? That way the war could end and peace would ensue, some believe.

Doing so would grant the Kremlin a frightening gift. I don’t mean the political victory in Russia, or even the military triumph of reaching the EU’s borders. I’m talking about everything that Moscow will come to possess if it is allowed to take full control of its neighbour.

Volodymr Zelensky has criticised US President Joe Biden on Sunday for not doing enough in allowing US weapons to be fired into Russia as Ukraine faces the threat of a renewed invasion.

The Ukrainian president thanked Mr Biden for giving Kyiv permission to strike inside Russian territory with American munitions but said restrictions – including on the use of long-range Atacms – should also be dropped.

In a rare rebuke of his US ally, he said: “Is that sufficient? No. Why? Because I have given you the example of airfields from which Russia is permanently firing, in calm, knowing that Ukraine will not fire back because it has no corresponding systems and no permissions.”

Why has Europe dithered until the ostensible eleventh hour to mobilize, and, with calls to allow NATO weapons to strike inside Russia, in such a potentially risky way?

European defense policy is in disarray, as the continent edges toward likely escalation with a nuclear-armed Russia. Calls for Ukraine to use North Atlantic Treaty-supplied weapons to strike inside Russia juxtapose with proposals from President Macron and Germany’s Olaf Scholz that climate policies are the solution to Europe’s problems. Meanwhile, European trade with Russia continues via Kazakhstan. Urgently needed is clarity.

President Biden has given Ukraine the green light to use US-provided weapons to hit some targets in Russian territory, according to a US official.

“The President recently directed his team to ensure that Ukraine is able to use US-supplied weapons for counter-fire purposes in the Kharkiv region so Ukraine can hit back against Russian forces that are attacking them or preparing to attack them,” the US official said Thursday.

The official noted, however, that Ukraine will not be allowed to use long-range US weapons to hit military targets deep inside Russian territory.

Is Sleepy Joe having his hand held as we are being slow walked into a wider war.

Pressure is growing on US President Joe Biden to allow Ukraine to use West-supplied weapons to strike Russian territory.

A number of US allies this week signalled they were open to this possibility, after months of concern about escalation.

Russia’s Vladimir Putin has warned of “serious consequences”, especially for what he called “small countries” in Europe.

Ukraine’s fight isn’t merely for its existence as a nation – it’s a battle for the very fabric of the global order.

Yes, it’s about safeguarding European security – a rallying cry heard in countless statements from Western officials, often accompanied by assurances of limited air defence and ammunition – but as Ukraine continues to lose ground, towns, and lives, the West’s response is tepid, with its only firm stance drawn around Nato borders, where geopolitical interests overshadow humanitarian concerns.

Flying through an area of Western Russia twice the size of Texas, hundreds of Ukrainian drones attacked oil refineries and tank farms in five cities last week. In Russia-controlled Crimea, American-supplied missiles hit the main air base. The Army Tactical Missile System rockets damaged the two-mile concrete runway and destroyed $1 billion worth of matériel — one air defense system, four war jets, and the base fuel tanks.

Russia is increasingly using “glide bombs” – cheap but highly destructive ordnance – to advance its offensive in Ukraine.

More than 200 of them are thought to have been used in just a week to pound Ukraine’s northern town of Vovchansk during Russia’s current cross-border advance near Kharkiv.

If you want a reminder of the security threats faced by the world today, take a look at how much governments have hiked defense spending. Global military budgets reached $2.44 trillion (€2.25 trillion) last year, nearly 7% higher than in 2022. It was the steepest year-on-year rise since 2009, recorded during the second year of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

For every man, woman and child, world military spending is now at its highest since the end of the Cold War — at $306 per person.

With Kyiv unprepared to fight such a large-scale conflict, Western countries ramped up military aid to Ukraine, while other escalating tensions with Russia and in the Middle East and Asia also prompted governments to shore up their defenses, unlike any time since World War II.