Tag Archives: Ukraine

The Threat of Russian Hybrid Warfare

Posted on in Russia title_rule

On several occasions lately it has been reported that there is a concern with Russia possibly conducting a so called hybrid warfare on European countries. In Finland the flow of migrants coming from the Middle East via Russia is what some consider a form of hybrid warfare. Military researcher Antti Paronen says the vast numbers of asylum-seekers in Europe could be used as a means to keep the Finns and European West off balance and push certain pressure points. Parallels have been drawn between the Somali migrants that overwhelmed Finland after the break-up of the Soviet Union, and the alleged trafficking situation with Afghani migrants that is going on presently in Finnish Lappland. Steering the flow of mass migration is a typical method in the arsenal of the so-called “grey phase” of hybrid warfare. To the Bulgarians the concept of hybrid warfare also include cyber-crime. The Defence Minister, Nikolay Nenchev, has noted that state institutions are taking cyber-crimes more seriously. This comes at a time when attacks have increased lately. Bulgarian institutions such as the National Revenue Agency and the Education Ministry have reportedly been targets of repeated hack attacks over the past months. These attacks have been linked to Russia, by Ukrainian news agencies. Chief of Defence of the Bulgarian Armed Forces has warned that the line between peace and war in the case of hybrid wars is not always clear, and that this is a dangerous thing and often a challenge for states. At the same time, the Latvians have also spotted signs of hybrid warfare directed at them, allegedly from Russia. Instead of migrant flows or cyber-crime the Latvians are considering propaganda. This is not a concern of Latvia alone, but affects several countries throughout Europe. The director of the Latvia-based NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence, has said that indications of ongoing hybrid warfare are becoming stronger in Central Europe and Scandinavia. Despite cuts to the Russian budget, propaganda projects like the Kremlin-funded Sputnik news agency, which recently opened a Latvian branch, is still receiving government funds. This could be a signal of an increased Russian budget for producing and using state-propaganda. Sputnik set up a website in Latvian in early February, 2016. The Latvian Security Police said it serves as evidence to Russian attempts to spread propaganda. Such websites can be blocked but there are always tricks to bypass such blocks, not to mention that this might bring up some questions about democratic values. Therefore encouraging people to ignore the websites is the best thing to do as of now. That seems to be where the challenge lies in the case of so called hybrid warfare, because of its nature there is no obvious way to counter it. There is no discussion that adversaries have developed creative uses of the “full-spectrum” of warfare, including the use of regular and irregular tactics across all dimensions of war. In the last decade, some of the most important military forces and coalitions in the world, have attempted to address and counter so-called hybrid threats. This has turned out to be difficult, mostly because there is no agreed upon definition of the word hybrid. It is widely understood as a mixture or a blend of conventional/unconventional, regular/irregular, and information and cyber warfare. In theory any strategy of conducting warfare can be hybrid as long as it is not limited to a single method. Perhaps it is unnecessary to define it, but rather a need to consider war for the complexity that it is and counter each strategy with the appropriate counter measure. Hybrid defence for hybrid threats.

Tagged as: , ,

Ukraine Situation Update (24 July 2015)

Posted on in Uncategorized title_rule

Despite the Minsk II ceasefire agreement officially still being in full effect since mid-February, eastern Ukraine has had to cope with a new wave of violence that started in June and which increased in intensity in July, 2015. During the last week of June the foreign ministers of Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany met in an effort to revive high-end diplomatic efforts to bring an end to the conflict between the governmental forces and the pro-Russian militants in eastern Ukraine. A statement released by the French foreign minister at the end of the meeting disclosed that the ministers agreed that a quick de-escalation of hostilities is imperative to allow the negotiation of a viable peace deal that would arrange a series of political, security, humanitarian and economic issues that arose with the creation of the rebel regions in eastern Ukraine.

However during July it was proved that the meeting did not succeed in decreasing the tensions between the two sides in Ukraine. The new violations were confirmed from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) that warned on July 3 that a growing presence of heavy weaponry on the government controlled side of Donbass territory put governmental forces in violation of the terms of the demarcation line. It also noted the augmented movement and use of military equipment by the Ukrainian forces. According to OSCE Deputy Chief Monitor, Alexander Hug, the same processes were noted in the self-proclaimed People’s Republic of Donetsk, where there was an increase in military equipment around Komsomolskoe. OSCE also reported that it had documented shelling on the buffer-zone areas in eastern Ukraine.

However, the biggest part of the hostilities are taking place in Donetsk, where between July 11 and 17 six people died as a result of hostilities, and 13 people were wounded, among them 11 civilians and two soldiers. In addition to that, six people were reported missing and illegally detained during the same period. Donetsk’s ombudswoman, Darya Morozova, reported that the number of people detained by the Ukrainian side has reached 1,500. She added that while prisoner exchanges have been effected between Ukraine and the rebel forces of Donetsk and Lugansk peoples republics, Kiev has refused to include many of the political as well as military prisoners it is holding. The tension between the two sides intensified further since the new wave of violence in Donetsk resulted in civilians deaths and the destruction of the city’s infrastructure. The National Defence and Security Council of Ukraine said that the pro-Russian militants has concentrated heavy weaponry in three major points around Donetsk: in the village of Spartak, at the now-destroyed Donetsk airport, and in the Kievskiy district of the city. According to the Council the separatists used these points to launch heavy shelling of both Ukrainian positions and residential areas on July 19. The shelling resulted in the deaths of four civilians —including a 9-year-old girl— and four others were injured in Ukraine-controlled territory. Additionally, the Ukrainian military reported that in the last 24 hours one Ukrainian soldier has been killed and seven others have been wounded. Apart from the deaths, the shelling caused the destruction of at least four residential blocks in the city of Donetsk. The separatist group, the self-described Donetsk People’s Republic, confirmed that 19 buildings were damaged including a hospital. Further destruction had been caused on July 18 when another person died and three were injured in a massive fire in the central part of the city, without the official causes of the fire being disclosed. On July 19 and after the news of new shelling and the destruction in Donetsk, Eduard Basurin, a spokesman for the Donetsk People’s Republic, said the Republic had agreed to withdraw 100-millimeter weapons to locations 3 kilometres from the front line. The media quoted Basurin saying that the decisions was dictated under the ‘’unswerving desire and the will to establish peace in the Donbass’’.

At the same time, the first week of July, a Ukrainian group that supports the Ukrainian government published a video captured by drone aircraft and it was reported that it shows a Russian military encampment in eastern Ukraine. There have been many claims concerning the Russian army’s involvement in eastern Ukraine however Russia has denied any direct involvement. If the video is proved to be legit it would be the first tangible proof of Russian army’s involvement in eastern Ukraine fighting along the pro-Russian militants. The video was posted on YouTube by Dnipro-1, a volunteer defence force. It included English subtitles and claims the encampment is in the village of Solncevo, in Ukraine’s Donetsk region. The video points out T-72 tanks, construction equipment and large tents, raising questions about whether a headquarters has been established for command and control. However. the authenticity of the video is still under doubt and there have not been any official commends regarding the footage.

On top of these incidents, the Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, said that the threat of criminal violence has ‘’significantly risen’’ in Ukraine, describing the country awash with trafficked weapons. The crisis enables criminal to thrive and benefit from the instability. He said weapons were being trafficked from the conflict zone. With police resources focused on the east, “there will be an increase in grievous and especially life-threatening crimes” in other parts of Ukraine. Poroshenko and the government hope a new police force, which was trained by U.S. and Canadian forces, will help combat widespread corruption in Ukraine, which is on the brink of bankruptcy after years of economic mismanagement.

Violent incidents were reported in western Ukraine opening a new security crisis for the Ukrainian President. On July 11, two fighters of Ukraine’s Right Sector far-right paramilitary group were killed and four wounded in a shootout in Ukraine’s western town of Mukachevo. Earlier on in the day, Ukrainian media reported that one person was killed and nine injured in Mukachevo, after some unidentified people seized a local sport complex and exchanged gunfire with police. Anton Herashchenko, an adviser to the Ukrainian interior minister, said that three attackers were killed and three policemen and four civilians were injured in Mukachevo. The mayor of Mukachevo later added that a total of 10 people were injured during the shootout, including five civilians and five members of law enforcement agencies. Alexander Sachko, the head of the Right Sector group in the Zakarpattia region confirmed that the group’s members were involved in the incident and said that the local police opened fire on them without warning.

In the meantime, Kiev has also to handle protests taking place in the capital with the people protesting high housing and public utilities prices, which have skyrocketed 88 percent since last year worsening an already difficult period for the Ukrainian people. Utility rates, including water and heating prices, have grown three-fold in Ukraine due to a rise in the price of gas since April 1, 2015. Electricity prices are being increased in accordance with a five-stage program, due to be completed by March 1, 2017. Amid the tension, Kiev has suspended Russian gas purchases after a breakdown in talks aimed at keeping supplies running for three to six months. It will be the second time in less than a year that Russian fuel supplies have stopped running to Ukraine. Moscow hiked prices after Kremlin-backed leader Viktor Yanukovych was ousted in February 2014.

In another wave of protests, about 1,000 Ukrainian pro-government fighters and far-right supporters have marched through the centre of the Ukrainian capital burning tyres and wearing balaclavas and demanding that the government ends the ceasefire accord and declare war on pro-Russian rebels in the east. Many in the rally were from volunteer battalions and were dressed in their battle fatigues. They said they had returned from fighting Russian forces and demanded an end to all diplomatic relations with Russia.

To the present the crisis in eastern Ukraine has resulted in over 6,400 people been killed since the start of Kiev’s anti-terror operation” and the seizure of large parts in eastern Ukraine by the rebels. A total of 1.35 million Ukrainians are now designated as internally displaced persons, according to UN estimates. Five months after the Minsk II ceasefire accord that was destined to be the base for a viable and peaceful solution in Ukraine, it seems that peace is as far away as ever.

Tagged as: , , , , ,

Series of Mysterious Deaths Plague Yanukovych’s Former Allies

Posted on in Ukraine title_rule

Oleg Kalashnikov, a former Ukraine deputy and a member of Party of Regions was shot dead in Kiev at the entrance of his apartment on 15 April. According to the Interior Ministry’s statement, police are investigating his death as a murder. Kalashnikov had participated in protests in support of the pro-Moscow former President Yanukovych. This incident is the latest in a series of deaths involving allies of deposed President Yanukovych. Seven other Ukrainian officials died under mysterious circumstances this year. According to the Ukrainian authorities, all of them took their own lives in the past weeks, something that has raised many suspicions. These suspicions are encouraged since the deaths took place in a really short timeframe, targeting people that were associated with ex-President Yanukovych and under mysterious circumstances with the majority of the victims being under investigation by the Ukrainian authorities.

The first in the line of these deaths was Oleksiy Kolesnyk, ex-head of Kharkiv’s regional government, who was found hanged on January 29. It was followed by Serhiy Valter, who was a major in the south-eastern city of Melitopol, and was found hanged on February 25. Similarly to Chechetov that was killed only three days later, he had been accused of abuse of office and he was under investigation. Oleksandr Bordyuh, a former police deputy chief in Melitopol connected to Mr Valter, was also found dead at his home the next day. Similarly, Mykhaylo Chechetov, who was the deputy chairman for the Party of the Regions, died after he allegedly jumped from a window in his 17th-floor flat on February 28. The authorities claimed that he left a suicide note. He was one of the most prominent politicians under Yanukovych’s rule. Before his death he was accused by the new government of abuse of office and fraud and he was under investigation. He had been arrested a few days earlier as part of the investigation against him related to a series of laws passed in a controversial vote in January 2014 to crack down on the massive Maidan protests. He was suspected that he falsified the results of the vote. He paid bail and went home on February 23. Several hours before his death, Ukraine’s prosecutor general told the local media that new charges were being prepared against him. Only nine days later, Stanislav Melnyk’s death followed. He was an ex-MP in Yanukovych’s Party of Regions and the manager of several businesses in the separatist-minded eastern city of Donesk, and he was found dead by his wife in his bathroom on March 9. The authorities reported that they retrieved a suicide note that was asking for forgiveness. He was also under investigation and was facing charges of abuse of power.

In the next couple of days, Oleksandr Peklushenko, a Ukrainian former regional governor and an ally of the ousted Ukrainian President Yanukovych, was found dead on March 12. According to the Ukrainian authorities, he was shot in the neck and police claimed that initial enquires point to suicide. Peklushenko was the governor of the southern region of Zaporizhzhya from 2011 to 2014. He was suspected of arranging for demonstrators to be dispersed by pro-government thugs at the height of the protests against Yanukovych’s rule in January 2014, and he was facing charges of abuse of power. Sergei Melnychuk, who was a prosecutor in the southern port town of Odessa died ten days later on March 22. Police initially claimed that it was a suicide. But it soon emerged that alarmed neighbors had called the police after they heard noises that indicated a struggle coming from his house. Pathologists found that he had been badly beaten before he fell from his ninth-floor balcony. The same day, Odessa prosecutors registered his death as murder instead of police’s claims for his death being a suicide. They arrested a former police officer who they described only as ‘’citizen K’’.

On top of these deaths two other incidents were added to this puzzle. The first one concerned Yanukovych’s 33-year-old son who was found dead after his car apparently fell through ice on Russia’s Lake Baikal on March 20. The second and most recent one concerns the death of the journalist Oles Buzyna, who was widely known for his pro-Russian views. He was gunned down by masked assailants in a drive-by shooting, just one day after Kalashnikov was shot dead on April 16.

Viktor Yanukovych’s Party of Regions, dormant since his deposition, said in a statement that the death of Peklushenko and others was a consequence of ‘’political reprisals’’ by the new government, accusing it of employing terror practices against its opponents. The Opposition Bloc, the country’s major opposition party, also shares the same opinion calling these deaths as ‘’bloody terror against opposition politicians and journalists’’. Despite Kiev’s rejection of the allegations that claim that these incidents are connected, there have been calls for a thorough probe that will help extinguish any lingering suspicions that these top figures of the previous regime are being extrajudicially punished. The Ukrainian judicial authorities seem to endorse the government’s opinion that these deaths may be motivated by ‘’fear of being held responsible’’ since they were under investigation.

Police were initially quick to classify the majority of these deaths as suicides. However, in recent weeks and in the absence of credible investigations and the rapid succession of the deaths within the wider context of Ukraine’s political situation, there have been suspicions that some of these deaths were politically-motivated killings, since the majority of the deaths took place amid mysterious circumstances and there were open investigation queries against these political figures.

Tagged as:

Ukrainian Ceasefire Agreement

Posted on in Ukraine title_rule

The leaders of Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany met in Minsk, Belarus on February 11 to negotiate a plan that could guarantee a lasting peace in eastern Ukraine. The new round of peace talks were viewed with much scepticism due to similar unsuccessful efforts in the past. The arrival of 2015 brought the collapse of the tenuous ceasefire that took hold in Ukraine on September 5, 2014, which had brought a lull to fighting that had raged for nearly five months and which killed over 2,500 people. Despite the fact that an official ceasefire was in place the violations started within days of signing after multiple reports that claimed that near the big coastal city of Mariupol and Donetsk airport intense fights took place between the Ukrainian forces and the pro-Russian militants. Officially, the ceasefire collapsed after five months on January 2015. The fact that the ceasefire was considerably fragile became more apparent when the head of the self-styled Luhansk People’s Republic declared that the ceasefire agreement does not mean that their objective to secede from Ukraine is off the table. The short-lived ceasefire coincided with the conclusion of the NATO summit in Wales, where Western leaders announced the creation of a rapid-response force to protect eastern European member states. During the summit several NATO members promised precision weapon systems to Ukraine and the Obama administration pledged $60 million of non-lethal military aid for Ukraine’s military. Under these circumstances it is not difficult to comprehend Russia’s reservedness to stick to the agreement and the final collapse of the ceasefire in January 2015. After the collapse of the ceasefire the battles between the government forces and the separatists resumed full force.

During the weeks-long surge in violence many soldiers and civilians lost their lives and all the peace talks collapsed before they came into an agreement with the two sides accusing each other of sabotaging the talks. Amid the increasingly heavy fighting in eastern Ukraine, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande, abruptly announced a summit with the Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow, Russia. The French and German leaders had previously met the Ukrainian President, Petro Poroshenko, in Kiev where they discussed the steps necessary for the Minsk agreement to start working towards a peaceful resolution of the crisis. The increase in diplomatic efforts came as the US secretary of state, John Kerry, also met the Ukrainian President and other top officials in Kiev. The meeting between the leaders of Russia, France and Germany was held on February 6 behind closed doors and discussed a paper with peace proposal details that the two Western leaders brought with them in Moscow. The meeting was followed by a phone conference between the three leaders that took place on February 8 and which led to the Minsk peace talks on February 11. The marathon peace negotiations between Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany resulted in a new ceasefire deal for eastern Ukraine. During the negotiations heavy fighting took place in an effort from the two fighting sides to gain as much territory as possible in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions before the ceasefire started. The key points of the ceasefire agreement for eastern Ukraine are:

  • Immediate and full bilateral ceasefire. The ceasefire was going to take effect in parts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions from 00:00 local time on 15 February.
  • Withdrawal of all heavy weapons by both sides. That entails the creation of a buffer zone of at least 50km equally separating both sides for artillery systems of 100mm calibre or more; 70km for multiple rocket systems and 140 km for the heaviest rocket and missile systems such as Tornado, Uragan, Smerch and Tochka. Also, the Ukrainian forces have to withdraw all the heavy weapons from the current frontline. The separatists have to withdraw theirs from the line of 19 September 2014. According to the agreement, heavy weapons withdrawal must start no later than day two of the ceasefire and be completed within two weeks of February 15. The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) will assist in the process.
  • Effective monitoring and verification regime for the ceasefire and withdrawal of heavy weapons. This part of the agreement is going to be carried out by the OSCE from day one, using all necessary technology such as satellites and radar.
  • From day one of the withdrawal begin a dialogue on the holding of local elections. In line with the Ukrainian law on temporary self-rule for parts of Donetsk and Luhansk. There will also be a dialogue on those areas’ political future.
  • Pardon and amnesty by banning any prosecution of figures involved in the Donetsk and Luhansk conflict.
  • Release of all hostages and other illegally detained people. On the basis of ‘’all for all’’. To be completed at the latest on the fifth day after the military withdrawal.
  • Unimpeded delivery of humanitarian aid to the needy, internationally supervised. In eastern Ukraine a humanitarian crisis currently takes place as the Ukrainian government stopped sending medical aid in these areas.
  • Restoration of full social and economic links with affected areas. Including social transfers, such as payment of pensions. To that end, Ukraine will restore its banking services in districts affected by the conflict.
  • Full Ukrainian government control will be restored over the state border, throughout the conflict zone. To begin on the first day after local elections and be completed after a comprehensive political settlement by the end of 2015. The local elections in rebel-controlled Donetsk and Luhansk regions will be based on Ukrainian law and constitutional reform.
  • Withdrawal of all foreign armed groups, weapons and mercenaries from Ukrainian territory. This part of the agreement is going to be monitored by OSCE. All illegal groups are going to be disarmed.
  • Constitutional reform in Ukraine, with adoption of a new constitution by the end of 2015. A key element of which will be decentralisation and adoption of permanent laws on the special status of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.

The ceasefire agreement was also signed by the two main rebel leaders, from Donetsk and Luhansk. The agreement includes an annex on the detail of the autonomy foreseen for their fiefdoms. To the present more than 5,000 people have been killed due to the fighting. The Ukrainian President has claimed publicly that if this new effort for ceasefire and a peaceful solution to the crisis fails then he will not hesitate to introduce martial law, not only in eastern Ukraine but in the whole country. Introduction of martial law means that Ukraine’s army get to control the streets and impose curfews, ban parties and other organisations, as well as mass gatherings, conduct searches and introduce censorship. It is also permitted to claim property of businesses and private individual if the need arise. Despite the ceasefire there are reports that the fighting in eastern Ukraine continues. Days after the official commence of the ceasefire there were reports about government’s and separatists’ shelling in several areas, including around the rebel-held city of Donetsk, claiming that the ceasefire exists in name only. The shelling was also confirmed by OSCE who is charged with monitoring ceasefire. The ceasefire breaches were also reported during a new meeting between the leaders of Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany on February 19 where they reconfirmed their support on the measures agreed on February 12 in Minsk. Only four days after the ceasefire came into effect the pro-Russia militants ignored the agreement and stormed Debaltseve, a strategic town in eastern Ukraine that they had surrounded, forcing thousands of government troops to flee. The Ukrainian forces suffered major losses, both in equipment and human life. After these incidents the Ukrainian President won approval from Ukraine’s National Security and Defence Council to invite UN-mandated peacekeepers into the country to monitor the front line, a decision that was met with strident opposition from the pro-Russian militants.

With the battle around the rail hub of Debaltseve ending with the withdrawal of Ukrainian government forces and completion of the first prisoners’ exchange on February 21, there are some hopes that the tenuous truce in eastern Ukraine may hold. A new round of meetings to stop the fragile ceasefire from shattering have started with the foreign ministers of Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany meeting in Paris on February 24 to review the situation on the ground since the accord was signed. Despite the efforts and Russia’s statements that the agreement is ‘’an international legal document’’ approved by the UN Security Council it contains some clauses that reinforce its fragility, such as Ukraine’s obligation to resume pension payments to the inhabitants of the Russia-backed regions despite the economic crisis that it faces. Also, Kiev takes on the border of rebuilding the war-ravaged region shouldering a huge economic burden. Additionally, the agreement establishes the right of the Donbass breakaway areas to establish their own people’s militias. Finally, through the agreement a powerful fifth column is created inside Ukraine as the Donbass will have the right to be represented in Ukraine’s legislature. This could enable Russia to use the Donbass to resurrect Russian ‘’soft power’’ in the context of Ukraine’s post-conflict economic crisis. The ceasefire agreement is a remarkable effort to find a solution but it seems to serve more in the creation of a frozen conflict than a viable base for the peaceful resolve the Ukrainian crisis.

Tagged as: , , ,

US Urges Russia to Stop “Intimidating” Ukraine

Posted on in Ukraine title_rule

United States President Barack Obama has urged Russia to stop “intimidating” Ukraine and to cut the number of troops it has deployed to its eastern border.  The statement by Mr Obama comes as ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych called for a national referendum to determine each region’s “status within Ukraine.”

Speaking on Thursday, Mr Obama stated that the move by Russia may “be an effort to intimidate Ukraine, or it may be that Russia has additional plans.”  He added that President Vladimir Putin had been “willing to show a deeply-held grievance about what he considers to be the loss of the Soviet Union.”  He also warned that the Russian leader should not “revert back to the kinds of practices that were so prevalent during the Cold War,” adding “I think there’s a strong sense of Russian nationalism and a sense that somehow the West has taken advantage of Russia in the past.”

Russia is believed to have deployed a force of several thousand troops close to Ukraine’s eastern frontier.  Although the Kremlin has stated that it has no plans to take over the eastern regions of Ukraine, tensions in Ukraine and in other former Soviets states have continued to rise.

A new classified intelligence assessment has also concluded that it is more likely than previously that Russian forces will enter eastern Ukraine.  Although US intelligence officials have emphasized that nothing is certain, they have indicated that over the past three to four days, there have been several worrying signs.  According to one official, “this has shifted our thinking that the likelihood of a further Russian incursion is more probable than it was previously thought to be.”  The build up along Russia’s eastern border with Ukraine is reminiscent of Moscow’s military moves before it went into Chechnya and Georgia in both numbers of units and their capabilities.

The assessment makes several new points including:

  • Troops on Russia’s border with eastern Ukraine, which exceed 30,000, are “significantly more” than what is needed for the “exercises” Russia says it has been conducting, and there is no sign the forces are making any move to return to their home bases.
  • The troops on the border with Ukraine include large numbers of “motorized” units that can quickly move.  Additional Special Forces, airborne troops, air transport and other units that would be needed appear to be at a higher state of mobilization in other locations in Russia.
  • Russian troops already on the border include air defence artillery and wheeled vehicles.

According to US intelligence officials, there is additional intelligence that even more Russian forces are “reinforcing” the border region.  All of the troops are in  positions for potential military action.  The US currently believes that Russia may decide to enter eastern Ukraine in order to establish a land bridge into Crimea.  The belief is that Russian forces would move toward three Ukrainian cities:  Donetsk, Kharkiv, and Luhansk in order to establish land access into Crimea.  According to US intelligence information, Russian forces are currently positioned in and around Rostov, Kursk and Belgorod.

In response to growing unrest amongst Western leaders, a Russian security official has also stated that intelligence measures are now being stepped up in order to counter Western threats to Moscow’s influence.  Alexander Malevany, deputy head of the Federal Security Service (FSB) was quoted as saying “there has been a sharp increase in external threats to the state.  The lawful desire of the peoples of Crimea and eastern Ukrainian regions is causing hysteria in the United States and its allies.”  He added that Russia was taking “offensive intelligence measures” to counter Western efforts to “weaken Russian influence in a region that is of vital importance to Moscow.”

Meanwhile on Thursday, Ukraine’s highly-divisive opposition leader, and former premier Yulia Tymoshenko, announced her plans to run in the presidential polls which have been set for 25 May 2014, following last month’s fall of a pro-Kremlin regime.   The dramatic announcement completes a highly improbable return to national politics that underscores the scale of changes that have shaken the former Soviet republic in the past few weeks.

Speaking to reporters shortly after walking into a pressroom, the 53-year-old confirmed “I intend to run for president of Ukraine.”  In 2010, Tymoshenko, one of the most charismatic and outspoken leaders of Ukraine’s 2004 pro-democracy Orange Revolution, lost a close presidential poll to Victor Yanukovych after heading two pro-Western cabinets that became embroiled in fighting and eventually lost popular support.  During her speech, Tymoshenko attempted to paint herself as a compromise figure who could look after the interests of her older supporters but who could also be able to find common ground with the Russian speakers who are now looking towards the Kremlin for assistance.

Shortly after the 2010 vote, her political downfall was rapid and seemingly fatal as Yanukovych’s government quickly launched a series of criminal probes against his political rival.  This led to a controversial trial over Tymoshenko’s role in agreeing to a 2009 gas contract with Russia that many Ukrainians though came at too high a cost.  In October 2011, she was convicted of abusing her power and was subsequently sentenced to seven years in prison, a sentencing that Western nations denounced as the use of selective justice.

However on 22 February 2014, the day the Ukrainian parliament ousted Yanukovych for his role in the deaths of nearly 100 protesters in Kiev earlier that month, she emerged triumphantly from a state hospital, where she had spent most of her sentence under guard.  Hours after her release, she arrived at the protest square in the heart of Kiev, which had also served as the crucible of the 2004 pro-democracy movement that had propelled her political career.  However the crowd’s reception of Tymoshenko was guarded, a sign of their growing weariness of the corruption allegations that had been made against her.  Many now believe that the pro-Western government movement that Tymoshenko once headed is now looking towards a new generation of leaders who played a more prominent role in the latest protests and who now hold key position sin the new interim government.

Tagged as: , , , , , ,