English LCCC Newsbulletin For Lebanese, Lebanese Related, Global News & Editorials
For March 02/2022
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
#elias_bejjani_news

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/aaaanewsfor2021/english.march02.22.htm

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006

Bible Quotations For today
You are the salt of the earth, but if the salt has lost its flavor, with what will it be salted? It is then good for nothing, but to be cast out and trodden under the feet of men
Matthew 5/11-20: “Blessed are you when people reproach you, persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven. For that is how they persecuted the prophets who were before you. “You are the salt of the earth, but if the salt has lost its flavor, with what will it be salted? It is then good for nothing, but to be cast out and trodden under the feet of men. You are the light of the world. A city located on a hill can’t be hidden. Neither do you light a lamp, and put it under a measuring basket, but on a stand; and it shines to all who are in the house. Even so, let your light shine before men; that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven. “Don’t think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn’t come to destroy, but to fulfill. For most certainly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen stroke shall in any way pass away from the law, until all things are accomplished. Whoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and teach others to do so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but whoever shall do and teach them shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, there is no way you will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on March 01-02/2022
What Are The Religious Concepts Of The Ash Monday/Elias Bejjani/February 28/2022
Corona - Health Ministry: 1986 new Corona cases, 13 deaths
Aoun Meets U.S. Treasury Team, Expresses Keenness on Forensic Audit
President Aoun discusses stages of completing economic recovery plan with IMF delegation
Berri holds talks with US Treasury delegation and UK’s DSAME, bids Australian Ambassador farewell
Mikati meets UN Special Coordinator and British delegation, holds meeting with IMF
Army Chief meets UK Defence Senior Advisor to the Middle East
First batch of Lebanese nationals from Ukraine arrives in Beirut after midnight coming from Bukharest
Salam meets IMF delegation, says food security Lebanon’s top priority
Derian tackles developments with Chinese Ambassador
Bou Habib Says Aoun, Miqati Supported Statement Condemning Russia
Raad Slams Presidential Hopeful who 'Cooperated with Israel in 1982'
Hizbullah Strongly Denies Israel Destroyed One of Its Drone Depots
Nasrallah Says Ukraine War a 'Lesson' for Those who Trust U.S.
Verdict for American in Ghosn Scandal Expected Thursday
US officials target corruption, terror funding in Beirut talks
An open letter about the Lebanon crises to the UN’s António Guterres/Makram Rabah/Al Arabiya English/March 01/2022
Will the international community bolster electoral fraud in Lebanon?/Elie Abouaoun/The Arab Weekly/March 01/2022

Titles For The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on March 01-02/2022
Russian Forces Step up Attacks on Ukraine’s Civilian Areas
Ukraine Appeals for More Help from Israel, Which Eyes Ties to Moscow
Britain Rejects Calls for Ukraine No-Fly Zone
Russia's Kharkiv Strike Chills Ukraine
NATO Says No Need to Change Nuclear Alert Level
Ukraine’s Kharkiv Struck by Cluster Bombs, Experts Say
Turkey closes Bosphorus, Dardanelles straits, blocks Russian warships
Iran’s Supreme Leader Criticizes US over Ukraine Crisis
Russia's Syria Intervention Provided Hints for Ukraine War
Tehran, Damascus Hold Security Coordination Meeting to Confront US Moves
Eleven Killed as Fire Rips through Syria Shopping Mall
Israel Freezes Palestinian Evictions in East Jerusalem
U.N. Slaps Expanded Arms Embargo on Yemen's Houthi Rebels
Canada to refer the situation in Ukraine to International Criminal Court
Canada condemns fraudulent constitutional referendum in Belarus
Canada/Message from Cardinal Collins re: Reduced COVID-19 Restrictions

Titles For The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on March 01-02/2022
Vladimir Putin, Tyrant/Waller R. Newell/The Tablet/March 01/2022
Germany, in Historic Reversal, Abandons Pro-Putin Russia Policy/Soeren Kern/ Gatestone Institute/March 01/2022
Ukraine’s Brave Stand Against Putin Upends Germany’s Pro-Russia Policy/Jermy Stern/The Tablet/March 01/2022
Putin Has Already Caused a Revolution in Germany/Andreas Kluth/Bloomberg/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
The new world after Russia's invasion of Ukraine/Khairallah Khairallah/The Arab Weekly/March 01/2022

The Latest English LCCC Lebanese & Lebanese Related News & Editorials published on March 01-02/2022
What Are The Religious Concepts Of The Ash Monday/مفاهيم اثنين الرماد الإيمانية
Elias Bejjani/February 28/2022
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/72716/elias-bejjani-what-is-the-ash-monday/

Ash Monday is the first day of Lent and It is a moveable feast, falling on a different date each year because it is dependent on the date of Easter. It derives its name from the practice of placing ashes on the foreheads of adherents as a sign of mourning and repentance to God.
On The Ash Monday the priest ceremonially marks with wet ashes on the worshippers’ foreheads a visible cross while saying “Remember that you are dust, and to dust you shall return (genesis03/19)”.
Worshippers are reminded of their sinfulness and mortality and thus, implicitly, of their need to repent in time.
Ash Monday (Greek: Καθαρά Δευτέρα), is also known as Clean and Pure Monday.
The common term for this day, refers to the leaving behind of sinful attitudes and non-fasting foods.
Our Maronite Catholic Church is notable amongst the Eastern rites employing the use of ashes on this day.
(In the Western Catholic Churches this day falls on Wednesday and accordingly it is called the “Ash Wednesday”)
Ash Monday is a Christian holy day of prayer, fasting, contemplating of transgressions and repentance.
Ash Monday is a reminder that we should begin Lent with good intentions and a desire to clean our spiritual house. It is a day of strict fasting including abstinence not only from meat but from eggs and dairy products as well.
Liturgically, Ash Monday—and thus Lent itself—begins on the preceding (Sunday) night, at a special service called Forgiveness Vespers, which culminates with the Ceremony of Mutual Forgiveness, at which all present will bow down before one another and ask forgiveness. In this way, the faithful begin Lent with a clean conscience, with forgiveness, and with renewed Christian love.
The entire first week of Great Lent is often referred to as “Clean Week”, and it is customary to go to Confession during this week, and to clean the house thoroughly.
The Holy Bible stresses the conduct of humility and not bragging for not only during the fasting period, but every day and around the clock.
It is worth mentioning that Ashes were used in ancient times to express grief. When Tamar was raped by her half-brother, “she sprinkled ashes on her head, tore her robe, and with her face buried in her hands went away crying” (2 Samuel 13:19).
Examples of the Ash practices among Jews are found in several other books of the Bible, including Numbers 19:9, 19:17, Jonah 3:6, Book of Esther 4:1, and Hebrews 9:13.
Jesus is quoted as speaking of the Ash practice in Matthew 11:21 and Luke 10:13: “If the mighty works done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.”
Below are the Maronite Church Readings On The Ash Monday
Ash Monday/You are dust, and to dust you shall return
Genesis 03/03/19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return
Fasting/Lay Up Treasures in Heaven
Matthew 06/1621/And when you fast, do not look gloomy like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces that their fasting may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, that your fasting may not be seen by others but by your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you. “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God
02 Corinthians 05/20-21/Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
02 Corinthians 06/01-07/Working together with him, then, we appeal to you not to receive the grace of God in vain. For he says, “In a favorable time I listened to you, and in a day of salvation I have helped you.”Behold, now is the favorable time; behold, now is the day of salvation. We put no obstacle in anyone’s way, so that no fault may be found with our ministry, but as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way: by great endurance, in afflictions, hardships, calamities, beatings, imprisonments, riots, labors, sleepless nights, hunger; by purity, knowledge, patience, kindness, the Holy Spirit, genuine love; by truthful speech, and the power of God; with the weapons of righteousness for the right hand and for the left;
N.B: The above piece was first published in year 2000/It is republished with Minor changes

Corona - Health Ministry: 1986 new Corona cases, 13 deaths
NNA/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022 
In its daily report on the COVID-19 developments, the Ministry of Public Health announced on Tuesday the registration of 1986 new infections with the Coronavirus, which raised the cumulative number of confirmed cases to-date to 1070696.The report added that 13 deaths were recorded during the past 24 hours.

Aoun Meets U.S. Treasury Team, Expresses Keenness on Forensic Audit
Naharnet/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
President Michel Aoun met Tuesday a delegation from the U.S. Treasury, in Baabda. "Lebanon will continue to combat corruption, money laundering and terror financing operations," Aoun told the delegation.
He added that one of the most prominent manifestations of Lebanon's fight against corruption is "the insistence on achieving a forensic audit of the central bank accounts."Aoun had held a meeting, last week, with a delegation from New York-based audit firm Alvarez & Marsal, few days after Parliament approved, in a legislative session, a draft law that extended the lifting of banking secrecy related to the forensic audit into the central bank’s accounts. Alvarez & Marsal had launched an audit of the accounts of Lebanon’s central bank in September 2020, but was forced to pull out two months later because the central bank failed to hand over necessary data. Aoun said in October that the company had resumed its work.

President Aoun discusses stages of completing economic recovery plan with IMF delegation
NNA/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
President of the Republic, General Michel Aoun, informed the International Monetary Fund delegation, that “Lebanon has no interest in delaying the completion of the financial and economic recovery plan, which imposes on the official authorities concerned with preparing this plan, to expedite their work because any delay will not be in the interest of Lebanon, especially the financial and banking sector”.
President Aoun’s positions came while meeting an IMF delegation, headed by Mr. Ernesto Rigo Ramirez, this afternoon at the Presidential Palace.
In the meeting, the President asserted that the reforms requested by the international community, both in terms of reforming the tax system to be more fair and efficient, governance and the banking system, and the laws and regulations that sponsor the work of the Banque du Liban, the Banking Control Commission, the Special Investigation Commission and the financial markets, “Require clear and practical decisions because the choice of waiting is costly for the citizen and the state alike”.
The President also stressed that the international community clearly demands that there be credibility in the work of the various Lebanese institutions, as well as the speedy adoption of the 2022 budget bill.
On the other hand, the IMF delegation confirmed that the contacts made by the government still need the expedition of achieving practical results imposed by the accuracy of the economic situation in the country, and to be frank to the Lebanese that any delay will not be in their interest, knowing that what is required at this stage is the approval of a comprehensive economic plan.
The delegation pointed out the need to inform citizens of the reality of losses in the Lebanese financial system, especially the gap in the accounts of the Banque du Liban.
The IMF delegation included: Mr. Robert Tchaidze, Ms. Svetlana Cerovic, Director of the International Monetary Fund's Lebanon Office, Ms. Najla Nakhle, and from the Executive Director's Office, Ms. Maya Choueiri. -- Presidency Press office

Berri holds talks with US Treasury delegation and UK’s DSAME, bids Australian Ambassador farewell
NNA/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
House Speaker, Nabih Berri, on Tuesday welcomed at his Ain al-Tineh residence a delegation representing the US Treasury, which included Acting Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Paul Ahern, and US Ambassador to Lebanon, Dorothy Shea. Speaker Berri also welcomed Australian Ambassador to Lebanon, Rebekah Grindlay, who paid him a farewell visit marking the end of her diplomatic mission in Lebanon. During the visit, the pair discussed Lebanese-Australian bilateral relations. Berri also broached local and regional developments, as well as Lebanese-British relations with visiting UK Defence Senior Advisor to the Middle East and North Africa (DSAME), Air Marshal Martin Sampson, in the presence of British Ambassador to Lebanon, Ian Collard. On another level, Speaker Berri called on parliamentary committees to hold a joint session on Wednesday at 10:30 a.m..

Mikati meets UN Special Coordinator and British delegation, holds meeting with IMF
NNA/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022 
The Grand Serail on Tuesday witnessed a series of diplomatic meetings with Prime Minister Najib Mikati, who met with United Nations Special Coordinator for Lebanon, Joanna Wronecka.  After the meeting, the UN’s Wronecka said: "Today, I visited PM Mikati to follow up on developments in Lebanon and to inform him about a session to be held by the UN Security Council on March 17, in which I will present a report on Lebanon." She added, "During the meeting, we’ve discussed the impending elections, the negotiations that Lebanon is conducting with the International Monetary Fund, and internal preparations for elections in Lebanon; the meeting was fruitful." Regarding the content of the report that she will submit to the Security Council, Wronecka said, “I submit three reports to the Security Council per year, and this time the report will be submitted immediately before parliamentary elections; consequently, the focus of the international community will be on elections,” she added.  “There are points in the report that will be submitted to the Secretary-General that will be discussed, including respect for Resolution 1701, what has been done in this regard, and whether there are positive developments that have been observed,” Wronecka concluded.  Mikati separately met with a British delegation that included UK Defence Senior Advisor to the Middle East and North Africa, Air Marshal Martin Elliot Sampson, Lieutenant Jack Butler, and British Military Attache, Colonel Lee Sanders. The meeting was also attended by British Ambassador to Lebanon, Ian Collard. Later during the day, the Prime Minister held a meeting with an International Monetary Fund delegation headed by Ernesto Ramirez Rigo, with whom he discussed the procedures and decisions taken thus far, the draft laws that will be presented, and the findings of the financial and economic recovery plan. Mikati finally had an audience with the Secretary-General of the Arab Parliament Union, Fayez Shawabki, who briefed Mikati on the role of the union in terms of coordination between Arab parliaments.

Army Chief meets UK Defence Senior Advisor to the Middle East
NNA/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022 
Lebanese Army Commander, General Joseph Aoun, on Tuesday received at his Yarzeh office, UK Defence Senior Advisor to the Middle East and North Africa, Air Marshal Martin Sampson, in the presence of British Ambassador to Lebanon, Ian Collard, and British Military Attaché, Colonel Lee Sanders. Discussions reportedly touched on means of cooperation between the armies of the two countries.

First batch of Lebanese nationals from Ukraine arrives in Beirut after midnight coming from Bukharest
NNA/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022 
The first batch of Lebanese nationals evacuated from Ukraine will arrive at Beirut’s Rafic Hariri International Airport, coming from Bucharest, at about 2.30 a.m., after being hosted by the Lebanese Businessman in Romania, Dr. Mohammad Murad, at his own expense in one of his hotels there. Murad indicated that "a new batch will leave Bucharest for Beirut soon, after completing the necessary procedures,” adding that 40 people will leave the Romanian capital tonight.

Salam meets IMF delegation, says food security Lebanon’s top priority
NNA/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022 
Minister of Economy and Trade, Amin Salam, on Tuesday met with an International Monetary Fund delegation, which highlighted the paramount importance of approving the competition law, deeming it a necessary positive step to move forward with the required reforms in line with the Fund's program in Lebanon. The mission also expressed its willingness to provide support for its implementation. For his part, Minister Salam stressed that Lebanon’s top priority was to maintain food security, especially in light of the crisis in Ukraine.

Derian tackles developments with Chinese Ambassador
NNA/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022 
Grand Mufti of the Lebanese Republic, Sheikh Abdel Latif Derian, on Tuesday welcomed at his Dar Al-Fatwa residence Chinese Ambassador to Lebanon, Qian Minjian, who paid him a protocol visit upon assuming his new duties in Lebanon. Talks between the pair took stock of the situation in the region. They’ve also discussed the best means to strengthen cooperation between Lebanon and China.

Bou Habib Says Aoun, Miqati Supported Statement Condemning Russia
Naharnet/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
A statement issued by the Foreign Ministry condemning Russia's invasion of Ukraine reflects the official stand of the Lebanese state, Foreign Minister Abdallah Bou Habib said. Bou Habib told al-Joumhouria newspaper, in remarks published Tuesday, that the statement expressed the official position of Lebanon "and specifically that of President Michel Aoun and Prime Minister Najib Miqati.""The president called me to congratulate me," Bou Habib said, denying that Aoun had disavowed the statement. "Nor did Prime Minister Najib Miqati disavow," the foreign minister added. Bou Habib went on to say that no political forces were consulted and that the matter was not discussed in Cabinet. "You can imagine what could have happened if the ministers were asked to take a united position on the matter," Bou Habib stated. The statement had sparked controversy in the Lebanese political arena, with many parties openly criticizing it, most notably Hizbullah and its allies. The Russian Ambassador to Lebanon said the statement will not affect the relations between Lebanon and Russia, while the Ukrainian Ambassador thanked Lebanon for its support in a press conference on Monday. "Hizbullah and Free Patriotic Movement chief Jebran Bassil have the right to object," Bou Habib said. "Lebanon is a democratic country," he added. Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah blamed Tuesday the United States for the war. He said Washington has pushed for the current scenario, accusing the West of double standards in dealing with the Ukraine crisis. Bou Habib stressed that Lebanon's statement does not carry hostility to Russia. "We are keen on common interests and bilateral relations with Moscow," he assured.

Raad Slams Presidential Hopeful who 'Cooperated with Israel in 1982'
Naharnet/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
Head of Hizbullah’s parliamentary bloc MP Mohammed Raad warned Tuesday that some consider “the person who cooperated with the Israeli invasion in 1982” to be “the qualified and eligible candidate for the presidential post,” in apparent jab at Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea. “They want to return us to the Israeli era after we got rid of it. Their arrogance has reached this extent!” Raad added. “Despite the pride, dignity and superiority over the enemy, some want to return us to the Israeli era, but this time he is using the Arab stance as an excuse,” the lawmaker want on to say, referring to Geagea.
“During the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, this person and his camp were against Arabs and they are the ones who wanted to bring the Israelis so that they rule our country Lebanon, but today they have taken all Arabs to their side and they have become with the Israelis,” Raad charged. As for the upcoming parliamentary elections, the Hizbullah legislator said the issue is not about seats but rather about the “political” implications of these elections. “Will the elections bring a President who would achieve our national sovereignty or a President who would find it easy to sign agreements with the enemy,” Raad added.

Hizbullah Strongly Denies Israel Destroyed One of Its Drone Depots
Naharnet/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
Hizbullah on Tuesday strongly denied a media report claiming that Israel had recently destroyed a drone depot belonging to the group. “Hizbullah strongly denies the reports about a Zionist force entering into one of the resistance’s drone depots and destroying it,” the group said in a statement, describing the reports as totally baseless. Hizbullah expert Qassem Qassir, who is close to the party, has claimed in a report published Tuesday on the Asas Media news website that Israeli commandos had recently “managed to infiltrate and destroy one of Hizbullah’s drone depots.”“Hizbullah only discovered this operation after the commandos returned to where they came from,” Qassir quoted “sources informed on the Hizbullah-Mossad war” as saying. “Hizbullah possesses accurate information about the enemy’s readiness to carry out other operations in Lebanon and Syria, with the aim of destroying the workshops where long-range missiles are being transformed into precision-guided missiles,” the sources added. The sources also said that Israel wants to destroy Hizbullah’s drone factories. “The drones that the enemy is sending are gathering information about these targets, and sometimes special operations to strike the arms and missile factories are being conducted without being announced,” the sources added. In response, Hizbullah has intensified its drone overflights in Israel’s airspace and is gathering intel about the movements of the Israeli army and Mossad, the sources said. The sources added that Hizbullah might also set up ambushes for the Israelis similar to the 1997 Ansariyeh Ambush. Kuwaiti newspaper al-Rai had also recently quoted U.S. diplomatic sources as saying that Israel has carried out “sabotage and espionage operations that targeted sensitive Hizbullah posts inside Lebanese territory.”Israeli elite commandos managed to “destroy secret facilities inside those posts and to seize important information related to Hizbullah’s arms program and the means of communication between its combat units,” the U.S. sources added. “Over the past months, Israeli elite forces conducted operations in various areas of Lebanon and entered into Hizbullah posts. These forces left messages to Hizbullah asking it to dismantle what is present in the manufacturing plants,” the sources went on to say. The Kuwaiti daily also suggested that Hizbullah sent the ‘Hassan’ drone deep into Israel “in response to the intelligence breaches that were made by the Israeli elite units.”In an annual speech last month, Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah had warned Israel against carrying out any operations inside Lebanese territory. “Should the enemy dare to carry out a certain operation in search of our missiles, it might face an ‘Ansariyeh 2’ operation,” Nasrallah said, referring to Israel’s 1997 botched landing on Ansariyeh’s shore in which 12 of its troops were killed.

Nasrallah Says Ukraine War a 'Lesson' for Those who Trust U.S.
Naharnet/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on Tuesday said those who “trust and count on the United States” should draw a “lesson” from the Ukraine conflict. “Washington has done everything to push for the current scenario,” Nasrallah said in a televised speech commemorating slain Hizbullah leader Abbas al-Moussawi. “The United States is responsible for what is happening in Ukraine and it incited in this direction,” he added. “Today the world only respects the strong and it is has remained silent in the face of U.S. violations,” Nasrallah noted. He added that the West is showing “double standards” in dealing with the Ukraine crisis compared to its stances regarding “the U.S. wars.” “Western countries are doing everything against Russia except for direct combat,” Hizbullah’s leader went on to say, accusing the U.S. of “putting conditions that are complicating” the Ukraine-Russia confrontation.

Verdict for American in Ghosn Scandal Expected Thursday
Associated Press/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
A Tokyo court will hand down a verdict Thursday in the criminal trial of Greg Kelly, an American and former executive at Japanese automaker Nissan. Kelly was charged with financial wrongdoing in under-reporting the compensation of Carlos Ghosn, his former boss and Nissan ex-chairman.
WHAT IS HAPPENING?
The presiding judge will read the verdict at the Tokyo District Court. A panel of three judges has heard the proceedings. The trial began in September 2020 and its last session was in October. Jury trials in Japan are only for murder and other more heinous crimes.
WHAT ARE THE CHARGES?
The charges center around a pay cut of about 1 billion yen ($10 million) a year that Ghosn voluntarily started taking from 2010. Kelly and Ghosn both were arrested in late 2018. The pay cut in effect halved his pay after disclosure of high executive pay became mandatory in Japan. Kelly and his lawyers say the compensation was never decided on or paid. The prosecutors argued it was promised and should have been reported. The unreported pay was recorded in documents seen by only a handful of Nissan officials and was never presented to or approved by the board. Kelly has said he never saw them.
WHAT IS THE POSSIBLE PUNISHMENT?
Prosecutors have demanded two years in prison. The maximum penalty for violating the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act over eight years is up to 15 years in prison. Kelly says he is innocent. If he gets a suspended sentence, he won't have to serve time and return to the U.S. The conviction rate in Japan exceeds 99%.
WHERE IS GHOSN?
Ghosn led a turnaround at Nissan Motor Co. after he was sent to Japan by Nissan's French alliance partner Renault in 1999. He was admired in Japan as a star executive for years. Ghosn jumped bail in late 2019, fleeing the country for Lebanon, the country of his ancestry. Lebanon has no extradition treaty with Japan. Ghosn says he is innocent. He has been writing books and making movies from Lebanon.
SO WHY THE DOWNFALL?
Testimony during the trial, including by two Nissan executives who got plea bargains, highlighted fears that Nissan would lose its leverage in the alliance with Renault. Others in the company suspected Ghosn would be behind such a move. Ghosn has said he always defended Nissan's interests. The relationship between Nissan and Renault remains unchanged. Renault owns 43% of Nissan, while Nissan, which makes the Leaf electric car and Infiniti luxury models, owns 15% of Renault.
AND WHO IS KELLY?
Kelly was hired by Nissan in the U.S. more than 30 years ago, before Ghosn joined the company. He oversaw legal affairs and human resources. In 2012, Kelly became the first American on Nissan's board. At the time of Kelly's arrest he was in semi-retirement in Tennessee. He was lured into returning for what Nissan said was a business meeting. Kelly told The Associated Press he was only trying to retain Ghosn in legal ways. "It should have been resolved at the corporate level at Nissan. It's not a criminal matter," he said.

US officials target corruption, terror funding in Beirut talks
Najia Houssari?Arab News/March 01, 2022
Aoun tells Treasury team fight against financial crime ‘will continue unabated’
BEIRUT: A US Treasury delegation on Tuesday held talks with officials in Beirut on the Lebanese government’s cooperation in combating money laundering and corruption, as well as the crisis in the Lebanese banking sector.
The delegation — headed by Paul Ahern, principal deputy assistant secretary at the US Treasury; his deputy Eric Meyer; and a group of experts in financial crime — was following up discussions the previous day on combating terror financing, and illicit drug and smuggling operations,
President Michel Aoun told US officials that Lebanese laws “are applied firmly and accurately in this field, and international financial institutions testify to that.”Aoun said: “Lebanon actively participates in international efforts to combat money laundering, and plays its role in the Financial Action Group for this purpose in the Middle East region. It also established the National Coordination Committee for Combating the Financing of Terrorism and the National Anti-Corruption Commission.”
The Lebanese leader pledged that the fight against corruption “will continue unabated during the remainder of the presidential term,” and cited the forensic audit of the central bank’s accounts as “one of its most prominent manifestations.”Aoun said that the capital control bill targeting foreign transfers and cash withdrawals from banks in Lebanon is due to be approved by parliament before its mandate ends in May.He also thanked the US for its support for Lebanon’s army , as well as humanitarian, development, health and educational assistance. The US delegation on Monday met Parliamentary Speaker Nabih Berri, Prime Minister Najib Mikati and Interior Minister Bassam Mawlawi to discuss the fight against terror financing, and drug and smuggling operations, as well as the country’s preparations for parliamentary elections in May.
Talks focused on sanctions against Hezbollah and figures close to the party over illegal finance operations. According to Lebanon’s Almarkaziya news agency, the meeting discussed the continuing investigation into Riad Salameh, the central bank governor, and its likely impact Lebanon’s financial and monetary stability. Observers said that the delegation’s visit is proof that the US will refuse to tolerate any reluctance by political, financial and banking authorities in Lebanon to apply US sanctions, especially when it comes to corruption and terrorism financing.
US officials also discussed Hezbollah’s financial arm, the Al-Qard Al-Hassan Association, which is subject to US sanctions.
Meanwhile, an IMF delegation headed by Ernesto Ramirez continued talks with Lebanese officials, including Mikati and Berri, on the country’s financial and economic recovery strategy. The IMF is waiting for Lebanese authorities to begin acting on promises of reforms required by the international community, including an electricity plan since this issue alone is responsible for about half of the deficit in the state’s general budget. Despite high-level talks during the past two weeks, the government has been unable to reach a final formula on the plan. A Saudi-French agreement was announced on Monday following talks between French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian and his Saudi counterpart Prince Faisal bin Farhan to finance several humanitarian projects and provide direct assistance to several hospitals and primary healthcare centers.Saudi Arabia will also donate $36 million to Lebanon through the King Salman Humanitarian Aid and Relief Center.

An open letter about the Lebanon crises to the UN’s António Guterres
Makram Rabah/Al Arabiya English/March 01/2022
Dear Mr. António Guterres,
I am writing to you as a citizen of the occupied Republic of Lebanon, which you visited a few months ago to show solidarity with its people. Your visit, unfortunately, had the opposite effect, as it further empowered the ruling elite and Iran's hold over this once flourishing oasis of diversity.
“I am coming to Lebanon with one simple message: the United Nations stands with the people of Lebanon,” these words which you so kindly declared in Beirut have not been channeled by your various UN agencies, which have continued to provide the corrupt ruling establishment with photo opportunities, ones which they have devilishly used to disenfranchise further and suppress the many voices of dissent.
Consequently, your busy schedule did not allow you to notice that the outgoing Head of Mission and Force Commander Major General Stefano Del Col on UNIFIL visited former Prime Minister Hassan Diab in a farewell visit. The two discussed the mission of UNIFIL. Strangely enough, news reports about this meeting were limited. A few local Lebanese media outlets offered coverage, perhaps highlighting its lack of news worthiness.
In reality, this somewhat trivial visit by the head of the UNIFIL speaks to the heart of the unconstructive role of the international community which you, Secretary-General, embody. Former PM Diab is not part of the ruling establishment, which has embezzled the Lebanese taxpayers' money either by shady dealings or unsound decisions. Still, he is also a fugitive from the law. The Special investigator issued an arrest warrant into the August 4 Beirut port explosion, a subpoena that the Lebanese security forces have yet to enforce.
The terrible port explosion, which devastation you witnessed on your last trip to Beirut, killed over 200 people and injured many more. Traumatizing thousands the blast not only destroyed my home city of Beirut, but cemented Hezbollah and Iran's hegemony and occupation.
Earlier this month, the UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon and your representative Joanna Wronecka, stood in the garden of my slain friend and champion of free speech Lokman Slim. She said: “ his voice is missed – but the call for freedom, truth, and reform cannot be silenced.” She added that the UN would continue pushing for justice and accountability. When will this happen?
Lokman was killed by Hezbollah deep in the south of the country a few miles away from the most extensive UNIFIL base, whose troops are tasked with the full implementation of UNSCR 1701 and 1559.
Dear Secretary-General, in Lebanon, we have 18 different dictators, each representing a sect or a party, who have used corruption, violence, and poverty to subdue and condition in unison with Iran's militia Hezbollah the Lebanese into a life of degradation.
The people of Lebanon have listened to your predecessors who said the right things but never accompanied the words with actions. You have recently condemned the Russian invasion of Ukraine and have implored Russian President Vladimir Putin to give peace a chance.
Your promotion of what the UN stands for is noble. You have carried this during your time as a high commissioner for refugees and continue this as a Secretary-General. But, overall, the UN continues to fail in its moral duty to address issues in Lebanon.
Just recently, Ukraine's UN ambassador Sergiy Kyslytsya addressed his Russian counterpart Vassily Nebenzia that there is no purgatory for war criminals. They go straight to hell. As people of Lebanon and Syria, Mr. Secretary-General, we are ruled by war criminals who your visit and that of your senior staff normalize, empower, and portray as heads of state. They are war criminals who wear expensive designer suits and strive for impunity.
Much of what I express to you is what the people of Lebanon and the region yearns. These are ideals that I bestow on my students at the American University of Beirut. This beacon of education is where young men and women use their training and reading endeavors to build better futures and put war criminals in jail instead of in the public office.
I genuinely hope my letter to you did not interrupt your duties of condemning and feeling sad for actions you and members of the international community would have prevented by merely taking action.

Will the international community bolster electoral fraud in Lebanon?
Elie Abouaoun/The Arab Weekly/March 01/2022
As Lebanon prepares for the upcoming legislative elections in May, the international community continues to consider Lebanon’s “deliberate depression” as inconsequential.
Since 2019, Lebanon has been a topic of interest to many experts and institutions. Amongst diverse, often redundant, analyses of the situation, the most astute description of the country’s predicament came in the World Bank’s Economic Monitors published respectively in the autumn of 2020 and 2021. The first, “The Deliberate Depression” argued that Lebanon’s economic recession was imposed on the general public by the elite that has long ruled the country and captured the state and its associated economic rents”. The second, “The Great Denial” states that “the elite’s preference has been to hold onto power and its rents and this entails preventing a recovery by eluding fundamental reforms to the unsustainable and now failed post-civil war development model”.
There are not too many interpretations of the World Bank’s compelling classification of Lebanon’s crisis as being “potentially one of the top ten, possibly top three most severe economic collapses worldwide since the 1850s” and a direct threat to “the country’s long-term stability and social peace”.
The most prominent conclusion is that the usual technical solutions offered by international financial institutions will not work by themselves and that only a change in both executive and legislative powers will extricate the country from the elite’s criminal capture.
Amongst the common vehicles of political change are elections. So far, the ruling elite’s constant assurances that the legislative elections due in May 2022 will take place on time are not corroborated by sustained and transparent preparations from the government. For example, less than one hundred days from D-Day, many candidates are still unable to officially submit their application because of multiple administrative and banking hurdles. This alone poses a significant threat to an already narrow space for electoral competition.
As with any other conundrum which design theorist Horst Rittel described as a “wicked problem”, Lebanon cannot be fixed by one party; nor can it be fixed through one round of elections. However, having a number of reform-minded new members of parliament can help putting the country on the overdue recovery path. Obviously, addressing all the issues of the electoral process needs time, resources and a political will that is hard to find. Insisting that all reforms are prerequisites to holding elections is not an option because this will give a golden pretext for the ruling elite to postpone them quasi-indefinitely.
Nonetheless, there are a few reforms that are technically feasible in the short timeframe, with the potential for a significant impact on the outcome of the 2022 election.
Establishing an independent Electoral Management Body (EMB) to replace the ministry of interior in overseeing the vote is one of them.
Under the current law, the electoral process is managed by the ministry of interior, with a supervisory role through a Supervisory Electoral Commission” (SEC). Its function is limited to monitoring campaign spending and media coverage of the candidates. The SEC’s president warned recently that the committee will not be able to fulfil its mandate, not only because of financial and human resources but also because of legal constraints limiting its mandate to monitoring. Moreover, given the general distrust in government and the ruling parties, the continued control by the ministry of interior over elections will likely lead to a low voter turnout, a widespread boycott among non-affiliated voters and hence the re-election of the same political class.
As long as a government-appointed authority is in charge of overseeing elections, the credibility of the whole process will be undermined and it will remain subject to corruption, thus keeping many voters away from the ballot boxes. Entirely independent from the executive, the new EMB would enhance the integrity of elections in Lebanon, traditionally marred by massive corruption. In addition, an EMB will increase public trust in the vote and so lead to a higher turnout.
Counterarguments claiming there is not enough time to establish an independent EMB fall short, as past examples prove that in the presence of political will and international consensus, EMBs in South Africa and Tunisia were established in a few months.
The second proposed reform is to adopt Mega Voting Centres. Lebanese do not vote where they live. Instead, they must return to their birthplace, a requirement which has previously disenfranchised many citizens. The ongoing economic and fuel crises will discourage many Lebanese from voting. It is simply too expensive for citizens to exercise their right to vote by returning to where they were born. Mega centres would allow them to vote in their place of residence for MPs representing their place of origin. This will increase participation. It will also be a vital reform to enable citizens who face intimidation to vote freely, particularly in areas dominated by armed groups. Further, it reduces the ability of the ruling parties to influence voters, buy votes or coerce and intimidate candidates.
These two simple reforms do not require a major legislative overhaul as they can be carried through with expedited one-article laws. Yet they can significantly influence the outcome of the election by encouraging higher turnout and allowing voters’ free and fair exercise of their rights. They would mitigate, albeit partially, partisan pressure on voters and meddling in the management of the election process.
While many Lebanese political and civic groups, experts and specialised agencies have already highlighted the importance of these reforms, it is obvious that the ruling elite will never willingly adopt changes that will allow independent non-affiliated candidates to make their way into parliament. Only sustained international pressure, including conditionality on external funding, will persuade the Lebanese decision-makers to proceed with these reforms.
When approached by Lebanese opposition groups, some western diplomats based in Lebanon were reluctant to accept this. For them, such reforms remain a domestic issue. This position would have made sense in a country where the public space allows for change through citizen mobilisation. In Lebanon, this avenue is not available and as in 2005, mass mobilisation produces results only when it is boosted by international pressure. What is more, the donor countries are ignoring, or being misled by how much the SEC, which can only monitor media and electoral spending, can actually do to ensure free and fair elections.
As the government of Lebanon is looking desperately for external funding for both the elections and an overdue bailout package, there is no better timing to introduce this conditionality.
Another counterargument usually invoked is that the IMF is not entitled to impose political reforms while negotiating an assistance package. As much as this is accurate, this specific case is different because it is about fighting corruption not imposing political conditions. Moreover, the IMF limitation does not apply to donor countries, some of which have often had unconventional demands, way more controversial than a couple of electoral reforms. Therefore, the UN coordinated “Friends of Lebanon” group can and should make sure that the Lebanese government does not receive any assistance if the above-mentioned two electoral reforms are not adopted.
By simply supporting, politically or financially, the SEC and by reassuring local public opinion that its own monitoring will deter Lebanon’s ruling elite from manipulating the 2022 elections, the international community will be failing the Lebanese. Electoral Observation Missions (EOM), whether from EU or elsewhere will not have been formed before the electoral corruption begins. Knowingly or not, the outside world and its EOMs will be complicit in failing to provide assistance to a population in danger.

The Latest English LCCC Miscellaneous Reports And News published on March 01-02/2022
Russian Forces Step up Attacks on Ukraine’s Civilian Areas
Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
Russian forces stepped up their attacks on crowded urban areas Tuesday, bombarding the central square in Ukraine’s second-biggest city and Kyiv's main TV tower in what the country's president called a blatant campaign of terror. “Nobody will forgive. Nobody will forget,” President Volodymyr Zelenskyy vowed after the bloodshed on the square in Kharkiv. Ukrainian authorities said five people were killed in the attack on the TV tower, which is a couple of miles from central Kyiv and a short walk from numerous apartment buildings. A TV control room and power substation were hit, and at least some Ukrainian channels briefly stopped broadcasting, officials said. Zelenskyy’s office also reported a powerful missile attack on the site of the Babyn Yar Holocaust memorial, near the tower. At the same time, a 40-mile (64-kilometer) convoy of hundreds of Russian tanks and other vehicles advanced slowly on Kyiv in what the West feared was a bid by Russian President Vladimir Putin to topple Ukraine's government and install a Kremlin-friendly regime. Russian forces pressed their assault on other towns and cities across the country, including the strategic ports of Odesa and Mariupol in the south.
Day 6 of the biggest ground war in Europe since World War II found Russia increasingly isolated, beset by tough sanctions that have thrown its economy into turmoil and left the country practically friendless, apart from a few countries like China, Belarus and North Korea. Many military experts worry that Russia may be shifting tactics. Moscow’s strategy in Chechnya and Syria was to use artillery and air bombardments to pulverize cities and crush fighters’ resolve. The bombing on the TV tower came after Russia’s Defense Ministry announced it would target transmission facilities in the capital used by Ukraine’s intelligence agency. It urged people living near such places to leave their homes.
Overall death tolls from the fighting remained unclear, but a senior Western intelligence official estimated Tuesday that more than 5,000 Russian soldiers had been captured or killed. Britain’s Defense Ministry said it had seen an increase in Russian air and artillery strikes on populated urban areas over the past two days. The ministry also said three cities — Kharkiv, Kherson and Mariupol —were encircled by Russian forces. In Kharkiv, with a population of about 1.5 million, at least six people were killed when the region's Soviet-era administrative building on Freedom Square was hit with what was believed to be a missile. The attack on Freedom Square — Ukraine’s largest plaza, and the nucleus of public life in the city — was seen by many Ukrainians as brazen evidence that the Russian invasion wasn’t just about hitting military targets but also about breaking their spirits. The bombardment blew out windows and walls of buildings that ring the massive square, which was piled high with debris and dust. Inside one building, chunks of plaster were scattered, and doors, ripped from their hinges, lay across hallways.
“People are under the ruins. We have pulled out bodies,” said Yevhen Vasylenko, an emergency official.
Zelenskyy pronounced the attack on the square “frank, undisguised terror” and a war crime. “This is state terrorism of the Russian Federation,” he said. In an emotional appeal to the European Parliament later, Zelenskyy said: “We are fighting also to be equal members of Europe. I believe that today we are showing everybody that is what we are.”He said 16 children had been killed around Ukraine on Monday, and he mocked Russia's claim that it is going after only military targets. “Where are the children? What kind of military factories do they work at? What tanks are they going at?” Zelenskyy said. Human Rights Watch said it documented a cluster bomb attack outside a hospital in Ukraine’s east in recent days. Local residents also reported the use of the weapons in Kharkiv and the village of Kiyanka, The Kremlin denied using cluster bombs. If the allegations are confirmed, that would represent a new level of brutality in the war and could lead to even further isolation of Russia. Unbowed by Western condemnation, Russian officials upped their threats of escalation, days after raising the specter of nuclear war. A top Kremlin official warned that the West's “economic war” against Russia could turn into a “real one.”More than a half-million people have fled the country, and countless others have taken shelter underground. Bomb damage to water pipes and other basic services have left hundreds of thousands of families without drinking water, UN humanitarian coordinator Martin Griffiths said.
“It is a nightmare, and it seizes you from the inside very strongly. This cannot be explained with words,” said Kharkiv resident Ekaterina Babenko, taking shelter in a basement with neighbors for a fifth straight day. “We have small children, elderly people, and frankly speaking it is very frightening.”The UN human rights office said it has recorded 136 civilian deaths. The real toll is believed to be far higher.
A Ukrainian military official said Belarusian troops joined the war Tuesday in the Chernihiv region in the north, without providing details. But just before that, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko said his country had no plans to join the fight. In Kharkiv, explosions burst one after another through a residential area in a video verified by The Associated Press. In the background, a man pleaded with a woman to leave, and a woman cried. Hospital workers moved a Kharkiv maternity ward to a bomb shelter. Amid mattresses piled up against the walls, pregnant women paced the crowded space, accompanied by the cries of dozens of newborns.Russia’s goals in hitting central Kharkiv were not immediately clear. Western officials speculated that it is trying to pull in Ukrainian forces to defend the city while a larger Russian force encircles Kyiv. Russian troops continued to press toward the capital, a city of nearly 3 million. The leading edge of the convoy was 17 miles (25 kilometers) from the center of the city, according to satellite imagery from Maxar Technologies. A senior US defense official described the long convoy as “bogged down,” saying Russia appeared to be pausing and regrouping to re-evaluate how to retake the momentum in the fighting. Overall, the Russian military has been been stalled by fierce resistance on the ground and a surprising inability to completely dominate Ukraine’s airspace. The immense convoy, packed together along narrow roads, would seemingly be “a big fat target” for Ukrainian forces, the senior Western intelligence official said on condition of anonymity. “But it also shows you that the Russians feel pretty comfortable being out in the open in these concentrations because they feel that they’re not going to come under air attack or rocket or missile attack,” the official said. Ukrainians used whatever they had to try to stop the Russian advance. On a highway between Odesa and Mykolaiv in southern Ukraine, residents piled tractor tires filled with sand and topped with sandbags to block convoys.

Ukraine Appeals for More Help from Israel, Which Eyes Ties to Moscow
Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
The Ukrainian envoy to Israel tearfully implored it to provide more war aid on Tuesday even as Prime Minister Naftali Bennett defended his government's open channels to both Kyiv and Moscow as a means of offering "quiet" help. While the Israeli foreign minister has condemned the Russian invasion, Bennett's rhetoric has been circumspect. At Kyiv's behest, he proposed Israel mediate peace talks. He has also voiced solidarity with Ukraine and sent it humanitarian relief. Ambassador Yevgen Korniychuk said Israel had not met Ukraine's request for helmets and "defensive weapons" like those given by Western powers. Israel should yank Russian broadcasters popular with its big former Soviet immigrant community, he said. "We want Israel to support us by all means in these difficult days," he told reporters, tears in his eyes. "We are asking for (its) humanity, to understand our people's needs."Israel is keen to keep rank with its US ally on the crisis. But it is also mindful of Moscow's military sway in next-door Syria, where it regularly strikes Iranian targets. Israeli-Russian contacts prevent them trading fire by accident. "Israel effectively has a security border with Russia," Foreign Minister Yair Lapid said in a televised statement. "Our cooperation mechanism assists in our determined battle against Iranian entrenchment on our northern border." Bennett said Israel's "measured and responsible approach" to the crisis "allows us not only to guard our interests, but also to be useful -- to be a credible player, one of the few that can communicate directly with both parties, and assist as required." "And we are indeed helping -- quietly," he said in a speech at Mossad intelligence headquarters, according to his office. The Russian embassy declined to comment. Korniychuk called on Israel to expand its asylum criteria for Ukrainian refugees. Israel -- population 9.2 million -- says it is focusing on the 40,000 Ukrainian Jews and 180,000 Ukrainians with Jewish family ties who might want to immigrate.

Britain Rejects Calls for Ukraine No-Fly Zone
Associated Press/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
Britain's deputy prime minister again rejected calls for NATO to enforce a no-fly zone over Ukraine, saying it would risk widening the war by putting the alliance in direct conflict with Russian forces. Dominic Raab told Sky News on Tuesday that Britain instead is pressuring Russian President Vladimir Putin to change course by working with other countries to ratchet up sanctions and investigate war crimes during the conflict. "We're not going to (impose a no-fly zone) because it would put us in a position where we would have to enforce it by, in effect, shooting down Russian planes," Raab said in an interview with Sky. The comments came after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy asked NATO to impose a complete no-fly zone for Russian airplanes, helicopters and missiles. The U.K. Ministry of Defense on Tuesday said Russia had failed to gain control of the skies over Ukraine, forcing it to shift to night operations to reduce its losses. Russian forces have "made little progress" in their advance on the capital, Kyiv, over the past 24 hours probably because of logistical difficulties, the ministry said.

Russia's Kharkiv Strike Chills Ukraine
Associated Press/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
In the dust and debris — and the dead — in Kharkiv's central square, Ukrainians on Tuesday saw what might become of other cities if Russia's invasion isn't countered in time. Not long after sunrise, a Russian military strike hit the center of Ukraine's second-largest city, badly damaging the symbolic Soviet-era regional administration building. Closed-circuit television footage showed a fireball engulfing the street in front of the building, with a few cars continuing to roll out of the billowing smoke. "You cannot watch this without crying," a witness said in a video of the aftermath, verified by The Associated Press. An emergency official said the bodies of at least six people had been pulled from the ruins, and at least 20 other people were injured. It wasn't immediately clear what type of weapon was used or how many people were killed, but Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said there were dozens of casualties. Zelenskyy called the attack on the square "frank, undisguised terror. Nobody will forgive. Nobody will forget. This attack on Kharkiv is a war crime." It was the first time the Russian military had hit the center of the city of about 1.5 million people whose residential neighborhoods have been under fire for days. The Ukrainian emergency service said it had put out 24 fires in and around Kharkiv caused by shelling, and it had disabled 69 explosive devices. Also struck on Tuesday was a tent site on the central square that had been set up to collect aid for the volunteer Ukrainian fighters who have rushed to Kharkiv's defense. In recent days, volunteer guards had occupied the regional administration building as part of those efforts. It was feared that some of the volunteers were now among the dead. Windows of the administration building were blown out. Ceilings had collapsed. Concrete dust added another layer of grim, gray desperation. A nearby car was crushed.
As emergency responders picked through the debris, there was fresh anger. "This is for those who were waiting for a Russian peace, this is what you wanted, yes? Many injured," one said. The Russian military has denied targeting civilians, despite abundant evidence of shelling of residential buildings, schools and hospitals. The military "takes all measures to preserve the lives and safety of civilians," Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said Tuesday. "I would like to stress that strikes are carried out only on military targets and uses exclusively precision weapons."Unconvinced, one Kharkiv hospital has moved its maternity ward to a bomb shelter, with pregnant women pacing in the gloom. The cries of dozens of newborns echoed off the thick concrete walls. Electrical cables dangled. Rolled-up mattresses were placed against windows. As the shelling in Kharkiv intensified, one family spent a fifth day in another shelter beneath the city. Water bottles and backpacks were stocked in the basement. A military-style helmet hung on a shelf, and underneath it a boy looked at a phone. Boredom mixed with fear. "It is a nightmare, and it seizes you from the inside very strongly. This cannot be explained with words," mother Ekaterina Babenko said. She could hardly believe the Russian attack was occurring in Kharkiv and tearing its neighborhoods apart. "My friend who lives in the suburb Gorizont, a few hours ago, the house next to hers was hit and several floors were destroyed," Babenko said. "And for some time, there was no connection with her. Those were scary minutes, very scary." For her family and others still sheltering in the city, the world above was changing too quickly to comprehend. Warehouses, homes, garages, cars, all burned. "Sveta, let's go," one man urged in a video showing the shelling of a residential area in Kharkiv on Monday. "Go, I'll catch up with you," the woman. "Leave, for God's sake," the man pleaded. Other residents were already flowing west, hoping to leave Ukraine altogether.

NATO Says No Need to Change Nuclear Alert Level
Associated Press/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
NATO's chief says the alliance sees no need to change its nuclear weapons alert level, despite Russia's threats. NATO's secretary-general, Jens Stoltenberg, spoke to The Associated Press following talks on European security with Polish President Andrzej Duda an air base in Poland where NATO's Polish and U.S. fighter jets are based. "We will always do what is needed to protect and defend our allies, but we don't think there is any need now to change the alert levels of NATO's nuclear forces," Stoltenberg said. The Kremlin has raised the specter of nuclear war, reporting on Monday that its land, air and sea nuclear forces were on high alert following President Vladimir Putin's weekend order. NATO itself has no nuclear weapons, but three of its members, the United States, Britain and France, do.

Ukraine’s Kharkiv Struck by Cluster Bombs, Experts Say
Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
Multiple cluster bombs were fired on Ukraine's second largest city Kharkiv on Monday, two munitions experts said after reviewing footage posted on social media. Reuters geo-located two separate videos that show thuds and flashes over a wide residential area in the city of 1.4 million in northeast Ukraine. Reuters was unable to obtain the original footage to confirm the time and date of the recordings, which were posted online on Monday. Kharkiv has been the target of some of the worst aerial attacks since Ukraine was invaded by Russian forces on Feb. 24.
"Kharkiv appears to have been the target of multiple cluster munition attacks yesterday," said Sam Dubberley, head of the Digital Investigations Lab at New York-based Human Rights Watch. "We have geo-located one showing what appears to be several civilian victims a short way away."
Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former British Army officer and biological and chemical weapons specialist, agreed that cluster munitions were most likely used in Kharkiv. "This does look very much like cluster bombs, and similar to those I've seen going off in Iraq and Syria," he said in an email to Reuters. "The multiple explosions on impact of each warhead would suggest a cluster munition."Ukraine's ambassador to the United States accused Russia on Monday of attacking Ukrainians with cluster bombs and vacuum bombs, weapons that have been condemned by a variety of international organizations.
When asked about allegations that Russia was using cluster munitions and vacuum bombs, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said: "It's undoubtedly fake news." Russian operations are focused on military targets, not civilian ones, he said. Russia and Ukraine have not joined the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions, which has been signed by 108 states. The treaty prohibits the use and stockpiling of this type of explosive, which scatters submunitions, or "bomblets". Kharkiv Mayor Ihor Terekhov and Kharkiv region chief Oleg Synegubov said aerial attacks had killed or wounded dozens of civilians, including three children, in residential districts. "Four people left a bomb shelter to get water and were killed," Terekhov said. "A family, two adults and three children, burned alive in a car."Reuters could not independently verify the casualty numbers.

Turkey closes Bosphorus, Dardanelles straits, blocks Russian warships
Reuters/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
Turkey is calling on all sides in the Ukraine crisis to respect an international pact on the passage of warships through the Turkish straits to the Black Sea, Defence Minister Hulusi Akar was cited as saying on Tuesday after Ankara closed access. NATO ally Turkey borders Ukraine and Russia in the Black Sea and has good ties with both. Under the 1936 Montreux Convention, Ankara has the right to limit transit of naval vessels through its straits during wartime. This allows it to curb Russian warships going to the Black Sea. The pact grants exemption to warships returning to their home bases.
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu was cited by state media as saying that Turkey had demanded all Black Sea and non-Black Sea states to halt passage through its straits. "Eroding Montreux or disrupting the status quo in any way is to nobody's benefit. We see a benefit in preserving Montreux. We tell all sides that it would be beneficial to abide by Montreux," Akar told reporters after Monday's cabinet meeting, his ministry said. In a call on Monday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken "expressed his appreciation" to Cavusoglu for Turkey's implementation of the accord, State Department spokesperson Ned Price said. Yoruk Isik, an Istanbul-based geopolitical analyst and head of the Bosphorus Observer consultancy, told Reuters that Turkey had closed the Bosphorus and Dardanelles straits to all states. "So it's really happened, it's closed... It's closed to all maritime traffic, not only to Russian ships," Isik said, adding the closure should be seen as Ankara giving Moscow "breathing room" to determine its position. At least four Russian ships are waiting to cross from the Mediterranean. While calling Russia's invasion an unacceptable violation of international law, Turkey has carefully formulated its rhetoric not to offend Moscow, with which Ankara has close ties in energy, defence and tourism. It has called for dialogue and offered to host peace talks. Late on Monday, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan spoke to Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko about ceasefire talks between Russia and Ukraine on Belarus' border, his office said.
"We are determined to use the powers the Montreux Convention grants our country to ease the crisis," Erdogan said after the cabinet meeting. "We will surely not compromise on our national interests, but we will also not disregard regional and global balances. This is why we cannot abandon ties with Russia or Ukraine."While forging close ties with Russia, Turkey has also sold drones to Ukraine and signed a deal to co-produce more, angering Moscow. It also opposes Russian policies in Syria and Libya, as well as its 2014 annexation of Crimea. "Turkey is really doing its best, or you can see it bends over backwards not to offend Russia," Isik said.

Iran’s Supreme Leader Criticizes US over Ukraine Crisis
Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said on Tuesday the war in Ukraine should be stopped and accused the United States, which he called a "mafia-like regime," of creating the conflict. Iran's top political authority also said the roots of the conflict must be acknowledged.
"Basically, the US regime creates crises, lives off of crises and feeds on various crises in the world. Ukraine is another victim of this policy," Khamenei said in a televised speech. "In my view, Ukraine is a victim of the crises concocted by the United States," Khamenei said. "There are two lessons to be learnt here. States which depend on the support of the US and Western powers need to know they cannot trust such countries," he added. While Iran and the United States have been foes for decades, Tehran and Moscow are strategic partners. Tehran and Moscow are military allies in the conflict in Syria. Russia is also an important trade partner because of Western sanctions against Iran. Khamenei criticized Washington and other Western nations as talks reached a critical stage in Vienna between Iran and world powers about reviving a 2015 nuclear deal. Iran said on Monday efforts to revive the pact could succeed if the United States took a political decision to meet Tehran's remaining demands, as months of negotiations enter what one Iranian diplomat called a "now or never" stage. The stakes are high, because the failure of 10 months of talks could carry the risk of a fresh regional war, more harsh sanctions on Iran by the West and continued upward pressure on world oil prices already strained by the Ukraine conflict. Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman said the remaining issues were the extent to which sanctions would be rolled back, providing guarantees that the United States would not quit the pact again and resolving questions over uranium traces found at several old but undeclared sites in Iran. All parties involved in the talks say progress has been made toward the restoration of the pact to curb Tehran´s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief, which the United States abandoned in 2018. But both Tehran and Washington have said there are still some significant differences to overcome.

Russia's Syria Intervention Provided Hints for Ukraine War
Associated Press/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
From a tent in the rebel-held pocket of Syria, Ahmad Rakan has closely followed news of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. More than two years ago, a Russian airstrike destroyed his house in a nearby village during a months-long Syrian government offensive backed by Moscow's firepower that drove him and tens of thousands of others from their homes."We more than anyone else feel their pain," he said of Ukrainian civilians currently under Russian bombardment. For the past seven years, Syrians like Rakan have experienced first-hand Russia's military might as it struck opposition strongholds, brokered mass surrender deals and deployed military police across their country, practically rendering it a Russian protectorate on the Mediterranean. Observers say Russia's brazen military intervention in Syria and the impunity with which it was met emboldened Vladimir Putin. They say it gave him a renewed Middle East foothold from where he could assert Russian power globally, and paved the way for his attack on Ukraine. "There is no doubt that the Russian intervention in Ukraine is an accumulation of a series of Russian military interventions in Georgia in 2008, Crimea in 2014 and Syria in 2015," said Ibrahim Hamidi, a Syrian journalist and senior diplomatic editor for Syrian affairs at the London-based Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper. Putin "believes that America is regressing and China's role is increasing and Europe is divided and preoccupied with its internal concerns … so he decided to intervene," he said.
Moscow's 2015 decision to join the war in Syria was its first military action outside the former Soviet Union since the federation's collapse. It saved President Bashar Assad's government and turned the tide of the war in his favor, enabling the Syrian leader to brutally reassert control over much of Syria. Russian airstrikes often indiscriminately hit hospitals, schools and markets. The war-ravaged country became a testing ground for Russian weapons and tactics that it can now bring to bear in Ukraine. Anna Borshchevskaya, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute focusing on Russia's policy toward the Middle East, said Russia deployed a "multi-domain" approach in Syria, including long-range precision weapons and large-scale bombing campaigns, along with cyber warfare, disinformation and use of paramilitary forces. Deploying its air power "has come to define Russia's evolving way of war and Syria was an especially important illustration of this development," she said. Moscow also showed a canny diplomatic touch in Syria, creating arrangements with the West that forced an implicit acceptance of its intervention. It created joint patrols with NATO member Turkey which backed Syrian rebels, to enforce truces in some areas. It established understandings with Israel that allowed the latter to carry out airstrikes against Iran-linked targets in Syria. It set up a so-called deconfliction line with the U.S. to prevent mishaps between American and Russian planes flying in Syria's skies. At the same time, it sought to defend Assad on the international scene, dismissing as fabrications Assad's use of chemical weapons and barrel bombs against civilians. Within Syria, Russia added a soft power campaign. In some areas, festivals were put on to popularize Russian culture, Russian national songs were played on Syrian television, self-serving propaganda was churned out and hot meals were served to civilians. Max, a dual Syrian-Ukrainian national who hails from Syria's coastal province of Latakia, recalled working for a week as a social media troll disseminating the "truth" about Russia's positive actions in Syria. He and other Russian-speaking Syrians worked from an office set up in a local university.
A member of Assad's Alawite ruling sect, he said he and others in his hometown were grateful when Russia intervened militarily in 2015, particularly as Islamic extremists had been approaching the area. "Then Russians came and the front line was pushed way back," he told The Associated Press in a phone call from Ukraine, where he is now stuck in an Airbnb in a residential area of Kyiv. Max, who is now working for an international organization in Lebanon, had flown to Ukraine to update his personal documents when he became trapped there by Russia's invasion. He spoke on condition his full name would not be used for his safety. Today, Max no longer buys into the Russian narrative. Many in his hometown in Syria, though, support Russia's war in Ukraine, as Moscow continues to mount a sophisticated disinformation effort about its invasion. Images coming out of Ukraine, including the harrowing mass flight of civilians, are stirring intense and conflicting emotions among Syrians at home and refugees across the globe. Resentment runs deepest in the northwest province of Idlib, Syria's last opposition-held bastion, where Russian airstrikes continue to this day. In a statement issued Monday, the opposition's civil defense group known as the White Helmets group, deplored Russia's aggression against Ukraine. "It pains us immensely to know that the weapons tested on Syrians will now be used against Ukrainian civilians," it said, lamenting what it said has been a lack of support from the international community in holding Russia to account in Syria and elsewhere. "Instead of standing up for international norms, such as those against the use of chemical weapons, the international community has tried to find ways to cooperate with Russia and to this day considers Russia a willing and essential partner in diplomacy," it said. Borshchevskaya said the lesson Putin took from Syria was that "the West will not oppose his military interventions" and it gave him a success to build on. "Appetite comes with eating, and with each intervention he has grown increasingly more brazen, culminating in the tragedy we now see unfolding in Ukraine," she said. "Just as what happened in Syria did not end in Syria, what is happening in Ukraine will not end in Ukraine." Rakan now lives in a tent with his wife and three kids near the Turkish border, where he runs a car spare parts shop. He said he hopes a Russian defeat in Ukraine could have positive repercussions for Syria's opposition.
"We pray for God for victory for the people of Ukraine, and we hope that this war will mark the end of Russia," he said. "Maybe they (Ukrainians) can achieve the victory that was not achieved in Syria."

Tehran, Damascus Hold Security Coordination Meeting to Confront US Moves
Damascus - Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
Security talks between Iran and Syria were conducted in Tehran at a time when Syria’s Special Adviser at the Republic Presidency Luna al-Shebel announced Damascus having information about extremist fighters leaving the Middle East region and heading to Ukraine and Kazakhstan.
Speaking to Sputnik on Monday, al-Shebel revealed that the Syrian government had communicated with representatives from the rebel republics of Donetsk and Luhansk to inform them that Damascus is ready for cooperation as soon as the turbulence in the region settles.
Al-Shebel’s statements coincide with Tehran holding an Iranian-Syrian security meeting on Sunday. The top Iranian security official Ali Shamkhani held a meeting with the Head of the Syrian National Security Bureau Major-General Ali Mamlouk to discuss bilateral ties, as well as regional and international developments. According to Iranian media, Mamlouk presented Shamkhani with a security briefing od the situation in Syria. For his part, Shamkhani asserted that Tehran will continue to back Damascus. “Iran, which has supported the Syrian government and people in the most difficult circumstances and the height of terrorist group movements, is determined to continue its support for the Syrian government and people,” Shamkhani told Mamlouk according to IRNA. Mamlouk said that cooperation between Tehran and Damascus in counterterrorism helps in bolstering regional security. The state-owned SANA reported that Mamlouk and Shamkhani reviewed means for confronting alleged US efforts for reviving terror groups in Syria. Mamlouk urged all states to unite to end extremism worldwide and praised Iran’s role in fighting terrorism. Shamkhani pointed to field mobilization to train, arm, and direct terror groups in Syria, and accused the US of playing a “dangerous” part in creating regional and global crises. “The US occupation of parts of Syria is the biggest obstacle to the full return of security and stability to it,” SANA quoted Shamkhani as saying.

Eleven Killed as Fire Rips through Syria Shopping Mall
Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
A fire in a shopping center in the Syrian capital Damascus killed at least 11 people early Tuesday, the interior ministry said, in one of the deadliest blazes of recent years. Many of those killed were security guards or other staff on duty overnight in the six-storey building, civil defense director Ahmad Abbas said. The cause of the blaze was not immediately clear. "Eleven people have died as a result of the fire in the La Mirada mall, and two people have been rescued," the interior ministry said. The fire caused "extensive material damage", it added, ripping through stores that sold clothes, leather goods and cosmetics -- many of which were highly flammable. "Investigations are underway to determine the cause of the blaze," the ministry statement said. Fires in the Syrian capital are relatively frequent, some caused by electrical short-circuits, others by unsafe heating. A 52-year-old witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name Hani, said the fire broke out at around 3:00 am (0100 GMT). "The fire started on the top floor and started to spread quickly to other levels," he said. Damascus police chief Hussein Jumaa said the cause of the blaze was likely "internal.""The fire spread so fast that the people in the building couldn't save themselves," Jumaa told state television.
'My livelihood is gone'
Twenty fire engines helped douse the blaze, civil defense chief Abbas said. "It took around four hours for us to bring the fire under control," he said, adding that the victims died either of suffocation or of severe burns. "They were all guards working at the mall, or workers on duty," Abbas added. Ten of the 11 corpses recovered from the building were charred beyond recognition, the state SANA news agency reported. It said seven people were wounded, including those who suffered smoke inhalation. An AFP correspondent saw fire trucks stationed outside the charred facade of the shopping mall, where dozens of businesses had been destroyed. "We have asked everyone to stay away from the area to facilitate civil defense operations," a fire department official told AFP on condition of anonymity, because he was not authorized to speak to the media. Despite the security cordon, dozens flocked to the scene, including business owners eager to check on their shops. One store owner collapsed when he saw the scale of the damage. "My livelihood is gone... my money is gone," he wailed. The fire comes a week after a blaze in a hospital in Syria's second city of Aleppo killed three people, sparked by an electrical short-circuit, according to SANA. In September last year, a firefighter died and two civilians were injured in a blaze that destroyed a fabric warehouse in the Old City of Damascus.


Israel Freezes Palestinian Evictions in East Jerusalem
Asharq Al-Awsat/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
Israel's Supreme Court on Tuesday froze the eviction of four Palestinian families from the flashpoint east Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah, where Jewish settler groups have sought to seize control. Justice Isaac Amit, in a ruling by a three-judge panel, wrote the families would be recognized as protected tenants, and would pay a Jewish settler group a symbolic annual rent of 2,400 shekels (about $740) "until a determination of ... land rights".The four families in annexed east Jerusalem were at the heart of clashes that helped spark the 11-day war last May between Israel and armed groups in the Gaza Strip. Israel annexed east Jerusalem -- which Palestinians claim as their future capital -- following the 1967 Six-Day War, a move not recognized by most of the international community. Sheikh Jarrah has become a symbol of Palestinian resistance against Israeli control of Jerusalem. The Palestinian families had been seeking a right to appeal a lower court decision that Jewish settlers owned the land. In Tuesday's ruling, two of the three judges granted that right to appeal. "The decision to allow them to appeal is just a preliminary decision," said advocacy coordinator Gaal Yanovski at Ir Amim, a Jerusalem group opposed to settlements. "Two of the three judges decided they are freezing the eviction until there will be a land settlement of title."
Tuesday's decision was part of a years-long legal battle waged by Palestinian families, resisting efforts by Jewish Israeli organizations to reclaim property owned by Jews in east Jerusalem prior to Israel's founding in 1948. The court recounted that Jordanian authorities controlling the area in 1954 built homes for Palestinian families, in exchange for those residents agreeing to relinquish their United Nations refugee status. However, the land rights of the residents were not recorded by Jordanian authorities before the 1967 conflict. Jewish groups claimed the property shortly after, using an Israeli law that allows Jews, but not Palestinians, to recover Jerusalem property lost in the 1948 war to create Israel. In August, the families refused a "compromise" proposed by Israel's top court, in which they would be recognized as protected tenants in exchange for recognizing Israeli ownership of their homes.
The new ruling leaves the final status of the property open to a decision by an office within Israel's Ministry of Justice, Yanovski said. Sami Irshid, a lawyer representing the Palestinian families, told AFP the decision was "significant". "The decision of the Supreme Court today cancels the eviction while the issue of ownership is decided," he said. Pro-settler lawmaker Itamar Ben-Gvir, who has opened a "parliamentary office" beside disputed homes, blasted the ruling as "a dark, illegal decision" and pledged to protest it. More than 200,000 settlers now live in east Jerusalem, alongside about 300,000 Palestinians. The Jewish settlements there are considered illegal under international law.

U.N. Slaps Expanded Arms Embargo on Yemen's Houthi Rebels
Associated Press/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
The U.N. Security Council has voted to impose an expanded arms embargo on Yemen's Houthi rebels, saying they have threatened the peace, security and stability of the war-torn country. Council members said the rebels are responsible for attacking civilians, commercial shipping in the Red Sea, and Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. The Security Council had already imposed an asset freeze, travel ban and arms embargo against Houthi leaders and top officials, but this resolution dramatically expands the arms embargo to include all Houthis. The British-drafted resolution said the Iran-backed Houthis "implemented a policy of sexual violence and repression against politically active and professional women, engaged in the recruitment and use of children," indiscriminately used land mines and improvised explosive devices and obstructed humanitarian aid to Yemenis.
Yemen has been convulsed by civil war since 2014, when the Houthis took control of the capital of Sanaa and much of the northern part of the country, forcing the government to flee to the south, then to Saudi Arabia. A Saudi-led coalition entered the war in March 2015, backed by the U.S., to try to restore President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi to power. Despite a relentless air campaign and ground fighting, the war has deteriorated largely into a stalemate and spawned one of the world's worst humanitarian crises. The U.S. has since suspended its direct involvement in the conflict.
Monday's vote was 11-0, with Ireland, Norway, Brazil and Mexico abstaining amid concerns about the negative impact on the humanitarian situation in the Arab world's poorest nation and the risk of undermining a fragile political process. Peter Salisbury, the International Crisis Group's senior analyst for Yemen, tweeted that Yemen has been "the site of some of the first post-Russia/Ukraine horse trading at the Security Council" since Russia's invasion of its neighbor last week.
Russia voted in favor of the resolution after the UAE abstained on Friday's vote in the Security Council on a resolution that would have condemned the Russian invasion of Ukraine, "in what was perceived at council as a quid pro quo," Salisbury said. UAE Ambassador Lana Nusseibeh welcomed the arms embargo on the Houthis, calling it a "terrorist group" responsible for "flagrant violations and heinous attacks." "This resolution will curtail the military capabilities of the Houthis and push toward stopping their escalation in Yemen and the region," she said. "It will also prevent their hostile activities against civilian vessels and threats to shipping lines and international trade ... (and) stop the suffering of Yemeni civilians and those affected in neighboring countries by their terrorist acts." Nusseibeh called on the Houthis to stop their cross-border attacks and return to serious political negotiations, stressing that there is no military solution to the war in Yemen. Ireland's deputy U.N. ambassador ,Jim Kelly, said his government abstained because it remains concerned that designating all Houthis "may result in unintended negative humanitarian and political consequences." It is also concerned the resolution's description of "terrorist attacks" by the Houthis "may have unintended negative consequences for the millions of Yemeni people living under Houthi control," he said.
Since 2014, nine Yemenis have been added to the U.N. sanctions blacklist and the resolution extends the arms embargo, travel ban and asset freeze against them until Feb. 28, 2023. The list includes Abdel-Malek al-Houthi, leader of the Houthi movement, and Yemen's former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, who reportedly died in December 2017. Last year's additions included three senior Houthi rebels linked to cross-border attacks from Yemen into Saudi Arabia and the Houthi offensive in the central desert city of Marib. The resolution calls on all countries "to increase efforts to combat the smuggling of weapons and components via land and sea routes, to ensure implementation of the targeted arms embargo."It "strongly condemns the cross-border attacks by the Houthi terrorist group, including attacks on Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates striking civilians and civilian infrastructure, and demanding the immediate cessation of such attacks." U.N. envoys have been trying for several years to get the Houthis and the government to commit to a nationwide cease-fire and to reopen Sanaa airport to commercial traffic. They've also pushed them to ensure an uninterrupted flow of fuel and commodities through the main port of Hodeida and to resume a political process aimed at reaching a political settlement. The resolution says there is no military solution to the current conflict and that the only viable path forward is "dialogue and reconciliation among the multiple and varied parties."It extends the mandate of the U.N. panel of experts monitoring implementation of the sanctions until March 28, 2023. In their last report circulated on Jan. 29, the experts said nearly 2,000 children recruited by the Houthis died on the battlefield between January 2020 and May 2021, and the Iranian-backed rebels continue to hold camps and courses encouraging youngsters to fight.

Canada to refer the situation in Ukraine to International Criminal Court
March 1, 2022 - Geneva, Switzerland - Global Affairs Canada
The Honourable Mélanie Joly, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the following statement:
“Canada has decided to refer the situation in Ukraine to the International Criminal Court (ICC). We are working with other ICC member states to take this significant action as a result of numerous allegations of the commission of serious international crimes in Ukraine by Russian forces, including war crimes and crimes against humanity.”
“We do not take this decision lightly. We have repeatedly called on Russia to cease its unprovoked and completely unjustifiable attacks on Ukraine and engage in meaningful dialogue. However, as the horrific events in Ukraine unfold before our eyes, it is now clear that more must be done.
“The ICC has our full support and confidence. We call on Russia to cooperate with the court.
“We firmly stand with Ukraine and the brave men and women fighting to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. The perpetrators of these serious international crimes must face justice.”

Canada condemns fraudulent constitutional referendum in Belarus
February 28, 2022 - Ottawa, Ontario - Global Affairs Canada
The Honourable Mélanie Joly, Minister of Foreign Affairs, today issued the following statement:
“Canada condemns Belarus’s recent constitutional referendum, which is an attack on democracy and a threat to security and stability in the entire region. Canada will therefore not recognize the results of this referendum.
“The Lukashenko regime has used a campaign of fear and repression to influence the vote and supress democratic opposition. Independent voices and media are being silenced, political prisoners remain behind bars, and tens of thousands of Belarusians have been exiled.
“Moreover, the referendum lacks the democratic legitimacy as independent observers, including those from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), have been barred from evaluating the voting process to ensure its integrity.
“In these constitutional amendments, Lukashenko has strengthened his authoritarian grip on the Republic of Belarus. He has increased the power of unelected loyalists, opened the door to nuclear weapons, introduced presidential impunity, and taken Belarus backwards in terms of democracy and human rights. The Lukashenko regime will be held accountable for these deeply troubling acts.
“On Friday, February 25, 2022, Canada announced sanctions on Belarus due to its support to Russia in the latter’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Canada will monitor the situation in Belarus and will not hesitate to look at appropriate measures to respond to this deeply flawed referendum, which only serves to harm global stability.
“We stand in steadfast support of the Belarusian people and remain ready to take action with international partners whenever and wherever democracy is threatened.”

Canada/Message from Cardinal Collins re: Reduced COVID-19 Restrictions
February 28, 2022
To all parishioners, clergy and staff of the Archdiocese of Toronto,
I wish to extend my deep gratitude for your ministry during these almost two years of pandemic. These have been difficult and challenging days, but I am heartened by the witness and outreach exhibited by all of you in accompanying and caring for the Catholic community as we journeyed through this valley of tears. Please know that your work is deeply appreciated.
I have been clear throughout the pandemic that Covid-19 restrictions would only remain in place for as long as necessary. These restrictions have stayed with us for longer than we had hoped when we created the WorshipSafe protocols in the summer of 2020. While these measures have been challenging at times, it is clear that they have been effective in protecting the health and well-being of our parishioners, volunteers, staff and clergy. In particular, I thank the thousands of volunteers who helped to clean churches and assist with the many WorshipSafe guidelines while welcoming parishioners and maintaining a safe environment for all.
Thankfully, the vaccination rate in our province is high and the number of Covid cases with severe outcomes is declining. As a result, restrictions are gradually being lifted. Beginning on Tuesday, March 1, 2022, capacity limits at our churches, including physical distancing requirements, will be removed.
Masks will continue to be worn in our churches until directed otherwise by medical and health officials (as throughout the pandemic some limited medical exemptions may apply).
In consultation with medical officials, most other restrictions will also be lifted as of March 1, 2022.
In all of our efforts, let us remember to serve those who need us. The pandemic has been a long, stressful time for many and we should expect that the faithful will have different responses to the removal of Covid restrictions, ranging from joy to fear. Concerns, and even conflict, may arise as these restrictions are removed. I also acknowledge that clergy or staff will experience these same feelings.
Some parishes may wish to gradually increase capacity while others may return to full capacity right away. I encourage pastors to exercise prudential judgement to meet the needs of their community while also providing access to the sacraments to as many as possible. Similarly, pastors will need to discern how best to return their office operations to normal. Kindness and charity should prevail in the way we encounter and dialogue with one another.
It is providential that we have reached this point where these restrictions can be removed at the beginning of Lent. This time of preparation for Easter is an ideal moment for parishes to undertake special efforts to welcome the faithful home once again.
The Eucharist remains the source and summit of our life in Christ. For Christians, participation in the Sunday Eucharist is the central experience of the week, and that is the foundation for the obligation of every Catholic to be personally present at Mass every Sunday. Of course, if there is a legitimate reason (such as being sick) this obligation does not apply. Similarly, when pandemic restrictions for the common good and love of neighbour have prevented attendance, then the obligation does not apply, and it is understandable as well that some may feel hesitant at first about returning to personal participation. But as the restrictions are lifted, now is the time to encourage Catholics to return to physical presence at Sunday Mass, if not impeded for a legitimate reason, in keeping with our basic Sunday obligation as Catholics.
Thank you again for your patience and dedication to fostering a safe environment over the past two years. Please know of my ongoing support and profound gratitude for all that you continue to do.
Sincerely in Christ,
Thomas Cardinal Collins
Archbishop of Toronto

The Latest LCCC English analysis & editorials from miscellaneous sources published on February 28/March 01/2022
Vladimir Putin, Tyrant
Waller R. Newell/
The Tablet/March 01/2022
The Russian leader’s actions express essential and unalterable truths about human nature, which we ignore at our peril
When Vladimir Putin sent Russian forces into Crimea in 2014, then-Secretary of State John Kerry professed bewilderment that such imperial aggression could happen in the modern age. It was like something out of “the 19th century.” Kerry’s reaction to Putin’s recent invasion of Ukraine was equally baffled, as the patrician American diplomat lamented that the war would distract Putin from working with him on climate change. Common to both reactions was the astonishment that the material calculations and preoccupations of Western democracies might be blown away by a resurgence of old-fashioned tyrannical ambition.
As I show in Tyrants: Power, Injustice, and Terror, the writing had been on the wall for years regarding Putin’s grand geopolitical ambition to reestablish Russia’s control over at least some part of its former Warsaw Pact possessions, without much regard for the desires of the people who live there. Just as Putin’s previous conquest of Ossetia and Crimea shocked people into realizing that tyrannical ambition has not been outmoded by the progress of history, but is a recurring and permanent feature of human psychology and the political landscape, his current aggression again leaves people shocked that such terrible atavistic seeming actions are part of the world we are living in. It is precisely the comparative peacefulness and prosperity of the democracies that lulls us into an unawareness that wolves like Putin and Xi Jinping are always prowling just beyond the perimeter of free self-government. Putin’s latest aggression—this time aimed at the very heart of Europe—may have the salutary effect of shocking us into looking the threat of tyranny straight in the face.
Thinking that tyranny is somehow outmoded comes from the “rational actor” school of international relations, rooted in Thomas Hobbes’ materialistic interpretation of political life as motivated exclusively by economic self-interest. Those who aspire to tyranny and conquest are in the grip of “vainglorious” delusions and must be brought to realize that what they really want is safety, wealth, and the chance to enjoy it as they see fit.
Following Hobbes, we naively suppose that tyrants like Putin need only be persuaded that, like all states, they want a bigger piece of the economic pie. Once they realize that the risks of going to war—the material destruction and loss of lives—far outweigh the opportunity for profit, even the scariest seeming tyrants will see that they are better off peacefully negotiating for greater economic advantage and then taking their front-row seats at Davos to bask in the approbation of their peers. Surely, Putin must realize that the strains that war with Ukraine will place upon Russia’s frail economy will greatly undermine his popularity and retard his country’s modernization, and leave him an “international pariah,” as President Joe Biden recently warned. Better to give the Russian leader a morsel of what he wants—say, the breakaway regions of eastern Ukraine—until it sinks in that further aggression is neither in his nor Russia’s economic interest.
The rational actor theory isn’t always wrong. But it has been contradicted repeatedly by leaders who are willing to risk everything for the prospect of honor and victory, not regarding these ambitions as “vainglorious” delusions but rather as the stuff of historical greatness. The last century witnessed the rise of history’s most tyrannical aggressors, including Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and Khomeini. In every case, rationalist-oriented Western policymakers thought that the economic self-interest of tyrants would deter them from all-out war. When Britain and France offered to give Hitler the Sudetenland, they believed this offer would slake his hunger for all of Czechoslovakia and give the Czechs a reprieve. Instead, it encouraged him to further aggression. Similarly, hopes for peaceful coexistence and detente with the Soviet Union were shattered by Brezhnev’s invasion of Afghanistan. As it turned out, the Soviet Union being an economic basket case was not as important to its leadership as restoring revolutionary elan through foreign conquest, as had been done when the Red Army rolled over Eastern Europe after World War II.
The same is true of Putin today. It’s not that he doesn’t want prosperity for Russia. His early popularity was based on stabilizing the ruble. But the economy must rightfully take a distant second place to restoring Russia’s national pride and dignity after what he views as the “catastrophe” of the Soviet empire’s humiliating defeat in the Cold War. Our foreign policy experts too often forget that dictators like Putin don’t have to worry about public opinion and economic performance the same way that democratically elected leaders do. Rulers for life, they can put these to one side for prolonged periods of time in service of the greater goal of national honor.
Although Putin’s ambition is to restore Russian control over its former Warsaw Pact captive states, he in no way wishes to restore the Soviet regime itself. Russian history has long been riven by a cultural conflict between those who look to Europe, the West, and the Enlightenment as the path that Russia should follow and those who are loyal to Slavic nationalism, which is deeply religious and not interested in economic prosperity. In literature, this divide was typified by the different outlooks of Turgenev and Dostoyevsky, which Tolstoy crystallized as the difference between St. Petersburg and Moscow. During the era of anti-Soviet dissidence, this split was typified by Sakharov and Solzhenitsyn. Putin is in the Slavophile camp. A devotee of Berdyaev, a Slavophile critic of Marxism-Leninism, Putin believes that Soviet communism was an import of European rationalism that poisoned the authentic Russian soul, which has nourished the country’s national and artistic greatness.
Does the Russian soul really matter to Putin? As I wrote in Tyrants, modern tyrants and conquerors since Robespierre have been bolstered by an ideology. Slavophile thought is crucial to Putin’s worldview, including both Berdyaev and also the modern writer Aleksandr Dugin’s ideology of “Eurasianist National Bolshevism.” Dugin, an academic and popular pundit, tried to rescue what he saw as the authentically Russian agrarian populist impulse behind the original Bolshevik Revolution from its betrayal by Lenin’s “scientific” socialism imported from European thought, calling instead for a “revolution of archaic values” based on the blood and soil traditions of family, rural life, and religious faith. Putin commissioned Dugin to overhaul the Russian education system to remove all traces of Gorbachev-era glasnost and perestroika, which both believed were signs of creeping Enlightenment rationalism and materialism corrupting the Motherland.
While the Soviet communist regime will never be restored, the Slavophilic populism that was its true lifeblood can be—a national tribalism extending to all Slavic peoples including Ukraine, Poland, and the Balkans.
Dugin gave Putin the ideology he needed to reject the tainted European strain of Soviet communism while rehabilitating it as a great patriotic people’s movement, including the rehabilitation of Stalin in his role as wartime champion against Hitler. This ideology also enabled Putin to make what is to him a coherent argument that, while the Soviet communist regime will never be restored, the Slavophilic populism that was its true lifeblood can be—a national tribalism extending to all Slavic peoples including Ukraine, Poland, and the Balkans, who must be gathered back into the Russian fold.
Noteworthy also here is Dugin’s fascination with Martin Heidegger, who lent his prestige as Germany’s leading thinker in the 1930s to enthusiastic support for National Socialism. Heidegger viewed the German Volk as placed between the “pincers” of the two global technological superpowers, America and Russia. Out of this struggle, the German people must reclaim its pre-modern destiny and lead all “the peoples” out of the grip of the rationalist global order back to their tribal roots. Dugin transferred this role of the salvational people from Heidegger’s Germany to Russia, whose spiritual values will liberate people everywhere from capitalist materialism.
Here is where Putin’s grand geopolitical map for Russia becomes more clear. Dugin argues that Russia’s salvational role in the world must begin with its gradual recovery of its lost Slavic brethren in Ukraine and Moldova. But that is only the beginning. The long-range goal is world war between Russia and the United States, the leader of the “bourgeois” West. Preparing for that war involves Eurasianism making an alliance with radical Islam. For Dugin, the hostility of Islamists to Christianity is outweighed by their loathing for Western materialism and individualism. In Dugin’s view, Russia’s eventual victory over the United States and the capitalist system will also liberate ordinary Americans from their greedy Wall Street overlords. He addressed an open letter to “the American people” stressing Russia’s solidarity with them.
How much of Dugin’s agenda for eventual world conquest does Putin actually embrace or believe he can realize? It is impossible to tell. That said, his thrust into Ukraine, a sovereign state whose territorial integrity was guaranteed by the United States and United Kingdom, displays a riverboat gambler’s recklessness that seems to be a departure from his earlier preference for biting off a chunk of another country and then pausing to digest it while assuring the West that his demands had been satisfied for now.
Putin is therefore a rational actor only to a point, and in a very different way from how that is understood in the West. His aims are for Russia to be honored, feared and powerful. He is no Hitler or Ahmadinejad, willing to pursue his imperial ambitions to the point where he and Russia risk going down in flames in a final Götterdämmerung, like Hitler in his bunker. But Putin is ready to go a very great deal further in pursuing his ambitions than elected democratic leaders are—a fact that he knows, and which he believes gives him a key advantage in his confrontation with the West. He is willing to march up to the very edge of a general war in Europe, or perhaps even cross that line, and he is willing to put the Russian people through extreme material deprivation rather than settle for a slice of the pie as measured out by foreign powers. Honor and national pride come first. That is why we need to remind ourselves over and over again that the ambition to tyrannize and a lust for honor at the expense of material self-interest are unalterable features of human nature.

Germany, in Historic Reversal, Abandons Pro-Putin Russia Policy
Soeren Kern/ Gatestone Institute/March 01/2022
The measures represent a complete reversal of Germany's post-Cold War Russia policy — which focused on pursuing economic ties rather than confrontation with Moscow — and mark a definitive end to the era of former Chancellor Angela Merkel.
"We are living through a watershed era. And that means that the world afterwards will no longer the same as the world before. The core question is whether power is allowed to prevail over the law. Will we allow Putin to turn the clock back to the 19th century and the age of great powers? Or can we muster the strength to keep warmongers like Putin in check. That requires strength of our own. Yes, we fully intend to secure our freedom, our democracy and our prosperity." — German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Bundestag, February 27, 2022.
The significance of the German U-turn cannot be overstated: Germany will become the biggest spender on defense in Europe.
In a major policy reversal, the German government has also decided to suspend technical certification of the controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which would double shipments of Russian natural gas to Germany by transporting the gas under the Baltic Sea.
"Olaf Scholz is changing decades of German foreign policy in a single speech. Russia went too far and now Germany is waking up. Incredible." — Marcel Dirsus, German political scientist.
"I have to say I don't recognize Europe as it responds to Putin's gangsterism against #Ukraine... all of a sudden I see the Continent grow a spine. Way to go!" — Andrew Michta, veteran transatlantic security analyst.
"Watching Scholz in Bundestag today is watching decades of German foreign policy change in a few minutes before your eyes." — Andrew Gray, politics editor for Politico.
"Putin knew well why he invested so much in friendly relations. Germany was open to that. But the attack on Ukraine changed everything. Comes certainly as a shock to Putin." — Ulrich Speck, German foreign policy analyst.
"It is hard to overestimate how much Putin's attack on Ukraine changed Germany. Less than a week ago Nord Stream 2 was still alive, delivering lethal weapons to Ukraine taboo & cutting Russia out of Swift out of the question. Putin's invasion changed Germany. Turning point." — Michael Knigge, German journalist.
"Germany basically doing what Donald Trump demanded that they do — to widespread ridicule — for the four years of his Presidency. I know it galls people to hear it, but Trump was right about some very big things." — John McGuirk, Irish political commentator.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has announced a paradigm shift in German defense and energy policies in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. He said that Germany will substantially increase defense spending and take immediate measures to reduce its energy dependence on Russia. Pictured: Scholz addresses an extraordinary session of the German parliament, on February 27, 2022.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has announced a paradigm shift in German defense and energy policies in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. He said that Germany will substantially increase defense spending and take immediate measures to reduce its energy dependence on Russia.
Scholz has also announced several other important policy reversals: Berlin has halted the controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which would double shipments of Russian natural gas to Germany by transporting the gas under the Baltic Sea; it has agreed to authorize the transfer of weapons to Ukraine; and it has decided to ban Russian banks from the SWIFT international payment system.
The measures represent a complete reversal of Germany's post-Cold War Russia policy — which focused on pursuing economic ties rather than confronting Moscow — and mark a definitive end to the era of former Chancellor Angela Merkel.
During an extraordinary session of the Bundestag, the German parliament, on February 27, Scholz said that Russia's aggression against Ukraine marks a turning point in European history:
"We are living through a watershed era. And that means that the world afterwards will no longer be the same as the world before. The core question is whether power is allowed to prevail over the law. Will we allow Putin to turn the clock back to the 19th century and the age of great powers? Or can we muster the strength to keep warmongers like Putin in check. That requires strength of our own. Yes, we fully intend to secure our freedom, our democracy and our prosperity....
"With the attack on Ukraine, Putin is not just seeking to wipe an independent country off the map. He is demolishing the European security order that had prevailed for almost half a century since the Helsinki Final Act. He is also isolating himself from the entire international community....
"President Putin always talks about indivisible security. But what he really seeks now is to divide the continent into the familiar old spheres of influence through armed force. This has consequences for security in Europe. Yes, in the long-term security in Europe cannot be achieved in opposition to Russia. But for the foreseeable future, Putin is jeopardizing this security.
That is why I say very clearly that we accept the challenge that now faces us — with clear-headed resolve....
"Anyone who reads Putin's historicizing essays, who has watched his televised declaration of war on Ukraine, or who has recently — as I have done — held hours of direct talks with him, can no longer have any doubt that Putin wants to build a Russian empire. He wants to fundamentally redefine the status quo within Europe in line with his own vision. And he has no qualms about using military force to do so. We can see that today in Ukraine.
"We must therefore ask ourselves: What capabilities does Putin's Russia possess? And what capabilities do we need in order to counter this threat — today and in the future? It is clear that we must invest much more in the security of our country. In order to protect our freedom and our democracy. This is a major national undertaking.
"The goal is a powerful, cutting-edge, progressive Bundeswehr [German armed forces] that can be relied upon to protect us. At the Munich Security Conference a week ago I said that we need airplanes that fly, ships that can set out to sea and soldiers who are optimally equipped for their missions. That is what is important. And it is quite certainly something that a country of our size and our significance within Europe should be able to achieve.
"But we should be under no illusions. Better equipment, modern technology, more personnel — all of this costs a lot of money. We will therefore set up a special fund for the Bundeswehr [Sondervermögen Bundeswehr]. The 2022 federal budget will provide a one-off sum of 100 billion euros for the fund. We will use this money for necessary investments and armament projects. We will now — year after year — invest more than two percent of our gross domestic product in our defense....
"In the awareness that the Bundeswehr alone does not have the means to contain all future threats ... we will do more to guarantee a secure energy supply for our country. The Federal Government has already initiated one important measure to address this. And we will change course in order to eliminate our dependence on imports from individual energy suppliers. After all, the events of recent days and weeks have shown us that responsible, forward-looking energy policy is not just crucial for our economy and our climate. It is also crucial for our security....
"If we want the last thirty years to be more than a historical exception, then we must do everything we can to maintain the cohesion of the European Union, the strength of NATO, to forge even closer relations with our friends, our partners and all those who share our convictions worldwide. I am utterly confident that we can succeed in this. Because rarely have we and our partners been so resolved and so united.
"What unites us at this time is that we know the strength of free democracies. We know that when something finds a broad consensus among politicians and the public, it will endure — even in this watershed moment and beyond. And so I thank you and all parliamentary groups in this House who have unequivocally condemned the Russian invasion of Ukraine for what it is: an absolutely unjustifiable attack on an independent country, on the peaceful order in Europe and the world."
Defense Spending
Scholz's vow to raise defense spending above 2% of gross domestic product (GDP) represents a sharp reversal from previous German policy, which has been to free ride on the U.S. defense umbrella. The significance of the German U-turn cannot be overstated: Germany will become the biggest spender on defense in Europe.
For Germany, 2% of GDP amounts to approximately 76 billion euros ($85 billion). By comparison, the British defense budget currently is 40 billion pounds ($54 billion) and the French defense budget is 41 billion euros ($46 billion).
At the 2014 Wales Summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), allies agreed to spend a minimum of 2% percent of their GDP on defense, but Germany — the biggest economy in the EU and the fourth biggest in the world — has consistently refused to honor that pledge. In 2021, Germany spent only 1.5% of GDP on defense, according to NATO data, which also shows that German defense spending increased by less than 0.5% of GDP since 2015.
The German armed forces (Bundeswehr) are in an especially sad state of disrepair. On February 24, the highest-ranking officer in the German Army publicly lamented that years of financial neglect had rendered the army unable to respond to Russian aggression in Ukraine. Chief of the Army Lt. Gen. Alfons Mais wrote:
"You wake up in the morning and realize: There is war in Europe. In my 41st year of peacetime service, I would not have believed that I would have to experience another war. And the Bundeswehr, the army that I am allowed to lead, is more or less stripped bare. The policy options we can offer in support of the Alliance are extremely limited. We all saw it coming and were unable to get our arguments through to draw and implement the conclusions of the Crimean annexation. That does not feel good! I am pissed off!"
A damning report published by the German Parliament in January 2019 found that critical equipment was scarce, and that readiness and recruitment were at all-time lows. "No matter where you look, there's dysfunction," said a high-ranking German officer stationed at Bundeswehr headquarters in Berlin. Later that year, the Bundeswehr grounded all 53 of its Tiger attack helicopters due to technical faults.
A May 2018 report by the German magazine Der Spiegel revealed that only four of Germany's 128 Eurofighter jets were combat ready. Germany's obligation to NATO requires it to have at least 80 combat-ready jets for crisis situations.
At the end of 2017, not one of the German Air Force's 14 large transport planes was available for deployment due to a lack of maintenance, according to the German Parliament. In October 2017, a spokesman for the German Navy said that all six of Germany's submarines were in the dock for repairs. In February 2015, Germany's defense ministry admitted that its forces were so under-equipped that they had to use broomsticks instead of machine guns during a NATO exercise in Norway.
Much of the blame falls on former German Chancellor Angela Merkel. During her 16 years in office, she was content to free-ride on the U.S. defense umbrella. Successive American presidents unsuccessfully pressed Merkel to increase German defense spending. Former U.S. President Donald Trump was especially adamant that Germany pay its fair share:
"If you have a country that's paying only 1%, and you have some that are paying less than 1%, and they are wealthy countries, on top of everything. Now we go to a new year, and they don't pay. And now we go to yet another year, and they don't pay. Well, now, I ask you: Do they have to pay for the back years?
"Why is it they owe us for this year, but every time a new year comes up, they don't have to pay? It's wrong. It's not right. I could say that you go back 25 years.
"If Germany as an example is paying 1%, and they are supposed to be paying 2%, you are talking about billions of dollars. That means that last year, the year before, the year before, all of those years, they would owe us money. Nobody has ever brought that up. They just keep talking about the present. So if they are short one year and then you go into the new year, they never talk about the year they didn't pay. But they actually in theory owe us that money. It's not fair."
Scholz said that the 100-billion-euro fund (equivalent to $115 billion) would immediately be used to modernize the military and purchase cutting-edge weaponry. To put that into perspective, the German defense budget in 2021 was 47 billion euros ($55 billion).
Specifically, Scholz announced that Germany would buy state-of-the-art Heron drones from Israel and F-35 warplanes from the United States. He also pledged to strengthen NATO's nuclear deterrent against Russia. In addition, Scholz said that Germany, in cooperation with other European countries, would build "the next generation" of combat aircraft and tanks.
Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, Germany's former defense minister, tweeted:
"I'm so angry at ourselves for our historical failure. After Georgia, Crimea, and Donbas, we have not prepared anything that would have really deterred Putin. We have forgotten the lesson of Schmidt and Kohl that negotiation always comes first, but we have to be militarily strong enough to make non-negotiation not an option for the other side."
Energy Security
Scholz also announced a series of measures to lessen German dependence on Russian energy supplies. He said that Germany would build up strategic energy reserves and increase the storage volume of natural gas by two billion cubic meters, which amounts to a supply of approximately ten days. Scholz added that Germany will purchase additional natural gas on world markets and he vowed to "quickly build" two liquid natural gas (LNG) terminals at ports in Brunsbüttel and Wilhelmshaven near the North Sea.
In another policy reversal, the German government suspended technical certification of the controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which would double shipments of Russian natural gas to Germany by transporting the gas under the Baltic Sea.
The leaders of many Central and Eastern European countries — including Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Ukraine — are opposed to the pipeline, which they argue will effectively give Moscow a stranglehold over European gas supplies and open the continent to Russian blackmail.
Both the Obama and Trump administrations opposed the pipeline — which is fully owned by Russia's state-owned energy company Gazprom — on the grounds that, once completed, it would strengthen Putin's economic and political influence over Europe.
In July 2021, the Biden administration abruptly reversed the long-standing bipartisan policy consensus and announced that the U.S. was no longer opposed to the pipeline. The move was ostensibly aimed at extending an olive branch to then German Chancellor Angela Merkel. On February 25, a day after Russia invaded Ukraine, Biden reversed his earlier decision and reimposed sanctions on Nord Stream 2.
Scholz has faced intense political pressure to halt Nord Stream 2, but it remains to be seen if his decision will be permanent or temporary. The €9.5 billion ($10.8 billion) pipeline has already been built — construction was completed in September 2021 — and technical and regulatory certification was expected to be finished by August 2022. If or when Russia-Ukraine tensions ease, the German government will probably face economic pressure to certify the pipeline and make it operational.
Meanwhile, in an even more shocking policy reversal, German Energy Minister Robert Habeck said that he was considering extending the life-span of Germany's remaining nuclear power plants as a way to secure the country's energy supply. Habeck is a member of the Greens party, which has always been opposed to nuclear energy.
There are long-term solutions to Germany's energy dependence on Russia. The United States, for instance, could supply a large portion of Germany's demand for fossil fuels if the Biden administration would reverse current policies that restrict the exploration, development and export of American oil and gas. Those policies are economically and geopolitically harmful to both the United States and its allies in Europe.
Arms Sales
In another historic about-face, Scholz, under massive public pressure, agreed to deliver arms to Ukraine directly and through third countries. The move reverses longstanding German policy on arms transfers to conflict zones.
Scholz announced that Germany would be sending 1,000 anti-tank weapons and 500 Stinger missiles directly to Ukraine. He also removed restrictions that prohibited third countries from transferring German-made weapons to conflict zones. The move will allow the Netherlands, for instance, to transfer 400 German-made rocket-propelled grenade launchers to Ukraine.
German policy has bordered on ridiculousness. Up until just a few days ago, the German government prohibited Estonia from transferring Soviet-made D-30 howitzers to Ukraine. The cannons, which entered into service in the 1960s and were originally stationed in former East Germany, were subsequently exported to Finland and then to Estonia after German reunification. Germany has now granted Estonia permission to send those weapons to Ukraine.
Previously, German Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht announced that Germany would send 5,000 military helmets to Ukraine. Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko called the offer an "absolute joke" and asked: "What will Germany send us next, pillows?"
Economic and Financial Sanctions
In yet another policy shift, Germany agreed to cut some Russian banks out of the SWIFT — the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication — global payment system. The move — coordinated with G7 members Canada, France, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States — limits the ability of Russia's central bank to support the ruble, which has fallen to historic lows against the euro and the U.S. dollar.
The ban, which blocks sanctioned banks from transferring money in and out of the country, exempts energy transactions. The aim, apparently, is to cripple Russia's banking network without disrupting energy flows from that country. American commentator Andrew McCarthy explained the paradox:
"Europe and, to a lesser extent, the United States are now dependent on Russian energy. The Europeans get 40 percent of their gas and a quarter of their oil from Russia, and we depend on Moscow for 7 percent of our oil. If we cut Russia off from the messaging system that facilitates global financial transactions, and Russia thus could not collect its oil revenues, Putin would turn off the taps....
"Second, Russia owes us a lot of money. Despite Putin's years of rogue behavior, American and European governments have blithely continued doing business with Russia and encouraging the entanglement of our commercial and financial sectors with Moscow's....
"A SWIFT cut off would put payments on those debts at risk (as may the apparently ongoing crash of the Russian economy). The damage to American and Western economies in that case would be immense."
Reactions
Germany's decision to reverse its longstanding appeasement of Russia has been greeted with a mix of disbelief, relief and praise. It has been variously described as "a revolution," "a full paradigm shift," "a change of mentality," "a fundamental rethink," "a fundamental turn," "utterly extraordinary," "a big step," "a major shift," "a historic policy shift," "a historic announcement," "an astonishing reversal," "a game changer," "a truly historic moment," "a breath-taking turnaround," "a great relief," "a watershed moment," "a 180-degree turnaround," "a massive U-turn," "a critical turning point," "nothing short of extraordinary, and "this is huge."
German political scientist Marcel Dirsus wrote:
"Olaf Scholz is changing decades of German foreign policy in a single speech. Russia went too far and now Germany is waking up. Incredible."
Veteran transatlantic security analyst Andrew Michta tweeted:
"I have to say I don't recognize Europe as it responds to Putin's gangsterism against #Ukraine...all of a sudden I see the Continent grow a spine. Way to go!"
Andrew Gray, politics editor for Politico, noted:
"Watching Scholz in Bundestag today is watching decades of German foreign policy change in a few minutes before your eyes."
Politico's chief Europe correspondent, Matt Karnitschnig, added:
"Reminds me of something Amb. Kornblum [former U.S. Ambassador to Germany] once told me: the pace of change in Germany is glacial, until it's not. Today is the German political equivalent of an arctic shelf melting."
German foreign policy analyst Ulrich Speck tweeted:
"Germany has taken a strong position. The biggest European economy and the unofficial leader of Europe. Putin knew well why he invested so much in friendly relations. Germany was open to that. But the attack on Ukraine changed everything. Comes certainly as a shock to Putin."
German journalist Michael Knigge added:
"It is hard to overestimate how much Putin's attack on Ukraine changed Germany. Less than a week ago Nord Stream 2 was still alive, delivering lethal weapons to Ukraine taboo & cutting Russia out of Swift out of the question. Putin's invasion changed Germany. Turning point."
Europe specialist Max Bergmann predicted:
"We are witnessing the emergence of a global power in this crisis: the European Union. I was confident that a Russian invasion w/d be a shock to Europe and lead to a robust response. But never w/d I have predicted the announcements from Germany, EU, and others. Truly stunning."
German China scholar Andres Fulda wrote:
"Thank you for reversing Germany's Russia policy @Bundeskanzler Olaf Scholz! Now let us also completely rethink German China policy. Future German foreign and security policy needs to be based on deterrence and compellence vis-a-vis autocracies."
Irish political commentator John McGuirk concluded:
"Germany basically doing what Donald Trump demanded that they do — to widespread ridicule — for the four years of his Presidency. I know it galls people to hear it, but Trump was right about some very big things."
Commentary
Johannes Boie, editor-in-chief of Bild, the largest-circulation newspaper in Germany, wrote:
"Yes, the Chancellor's speech came a day or two too late. But that no longer matters.
"Because today Olaf Scholz spoke in the Bundestag. And the chancellor spoke plainly! We have not seen that from him before....
"The head of government has changed significantly in the Ukraine crisis. And now he's changing the country!
"'We are in a new era!' he said in reference to the Russian government's brutal, unjustified attack on Ukraine. Now a jolt goes through sleepy, boring Germany.
"100 billion euros for the Bundeswehr as an immediate measure! Fighter jet and drone programs will be accelerated! Finally, money for defense, as NATO has long demanded!
"Numerous measures designed to ensure that German citizens do not suffer from high energy costs. Liquid gas terminals for a more independent energy supply!
"A left-wing chancellor is implementing demands for which conservative and center-right journalists and politicians have been ridiculed for many, many years. Maybe that's the only way....
"Scholz spoke words and sentences that have not been heard from a government in Germany for a long time: 'We are on the right side of history!'
"And: 'The war is a catastrophe, but it will also prove to be a catastrophe for Russia!' The list of measures followed: Arms to Ukraine. Cut off Russia economically. Is a German chancellor threatening the Russian tyrant?
"There was confidence, strength, power! Finally!"
In an essay for the center-right newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, commentator Gerald Braunberger wrote:
"The session of the Bundestag on February 27, 2022 will probably go down in the history books. With great clarity and supported by a very large majority of MPs, Chancellor Olaf Scholz redefined the coordinates of German politics. The consequences will be significant.
"Germany's participation in the West's sanctions policy is correct, even if the sanctions are not only felt in Russia. They cannot be calculated exactly, but at least temporary uncertainties on the financial markets, increases in the price of raw materials and impairments to economic growth are very possible in Germany as well.
"Ambitions in energy and defense policy reach far into the future. It is remarkable how quickly the war in the east has increased Germany's willingness to build two LNG terminals. In general, all attempts to reduce dependence on Russian gas are to be welcomed. This will not happen quickly, it will cost a lot of money and require an unbiased examination of other energy sources....
"Scholz surprised with the announcement that he would mobilize an additional 100 billion euros for the Bundeswehr. This is also a correct and important signal, but the Bundeswehr's malaise can be explained just as much by the inefficient use of available funds as by a lack of money."
Commentator Wolfgang Münchau, in an analysis for the Eurointelligence news outlet, wrote that the policy reversals announced by Scholz are a good start, but following through on them will prove difficult:
"A lot changed in a week, but don't be complacent about the sheer scale of what is yet to happen. And look at the small print. The Swift sanctions exclude transactions for oil and gas. Of course they do. Germany can't keep importing gas, and then not pay for it. The weapons Germany is now ready to send Ukraine won't affect the outcome of the war. On Nord Stream 2, Germany had no choice. The Americans would have sanctioned every shareholder, every customer, and every SPD politician involved with it. It was a smart move to pre-empt this....
"The real issue is not now how we pay Russia, but what we pay Russia for. Germany has made itself dependent on gas from Russia, a dependency that will not be easy to reverse. Germany needs it both for electricity generation and heating. More importantly, it is dependent on Russian gas to cap energy costs for its corporate sector, a potential threat to competitiveness. Olaf Scholz has given the order to his government to examine alternatives to Russian gas. That's a good start. But I see no way for Germany to compensate fully for Russian gas imports during a supply crisis. The dependence on Russia did not go away during the last week....
"Germany will remain dependent on Russia for a long time, unless the EU builds up alternative gas supply sources and channels, such as the transport of liquefied natural gas from Spain. Until this happens, I would withhold judgement on the scale of the transformation. And the corporate sector remains powerful.
"But starting from where we were, last week was a good week because it changed the debate. The test will come when Germany has to make some really hard choices. That has not happened yet."
Commentator Thomas Sigmund, in an essay for the German financial newspaper Handelsblatt, wrote that the Merkel era is finally over:
"Nothing is anymore as it was. The strong speech by the Chancellor on Sunday in the Bundestag represents a turning point in the Berlin Republic. Olaf Scholz flipped the switch and completely reorganized foreign and security policy.
"The exclusion of Russia from the Swift payment information system, 100 billion euros for the Bundeswehr and the promise of wanting to achieve NATO's two percent target for defense spending — the turnaround is breathtaking and definitely ends the Merkel era."
Writing for the influential German blog Tichys Einblick, George Gafron noted that words must be followed-up by deeds:
"Anyone who followed the special session of the Bundestag on the overall situation after the Russian attack on Ukraine actually had to doubt whether they were really watching the right TV program. Was that really the Social Democratic Chancellor Olaf Scholz? Was it really the representatives of the Greens, who unanimously spoke out in favor of strengthening the Bundeswehr and immediately implementing the 2% target of the gross national product for defense? The tones on energy policy sounded just as if they were from another world. Almost everything suddenly seemed possible again.
"Not only is there to be a coal reserve, but also an end to dependence on Russian gas supplies through a broad diversification of energy supplies, including the export of large quantities of liquid gas. Yes, there is even talk of a completely new energy policy. The Germans experienced a situation as if a group of doctors had to tell a patient whom they had previously told about sunburn that it was skin cancer. The unity of the state-supporting parties in government and opposition was also surprising — what happened?
"Almost overnight, German politics was roused from its slumber. The freezing cold reality has descended on us all. In the last decades after the reunification of Germany, the desire for harmony and peaceful trade with the whole world increasingly became the driving force behind German politics. The truth was too uncomfortable to face. The development of aggressive and militant nationalism in nineteenth-century thought was simply ignored. What's more, there were always enough voices that showed understanding for the Kremlin's behavior and blamed the West itself for its escapades....
"Germany, in particular, did everything possible to slow down the integration of the new NATO members into the structures of the alliance. The consequences of this were decisions by the United States to conclude special agreements with Poland, Hungary and above all with the Baltic States. Only then did the Merkel government give in. And again it was Berlin that prevented Ukraine's admission to NATO at the NATO summit in Bucharest in 2008.
"The findings of their own intelligence services were simply ignored. The Federal Intelligence Service verifiably informed the Federal Chancellery again and again at certain intervals about the massive rearmament of the Russian army and the corresponding restructuring, which greatly expanded the attack possibilities of all branches of the armed forces. The same applies to the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution [Germany's domestic intelligence agency], which not only drew attention to the intensive increase in Russian espionage activities against the Federal Republic. All of these studies disappeared on the instructions of the Chancellor....
"Not to mention the state of the Bundeswehr. These days, the highest authority in the Bundeswehr had to openly admit that the country's army is currently not in a position to carry out its mandate under the Basic Law to defend the Federal Republic of Germany. In retrospect, how hollow must be the talk of more sovereignty and a say in the world from a country that is not even able to defend itself against third parties....
"The signpost for the near future has been set up. However, the path itself has yet to be actually trodden."
*Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.
© 2022 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Ukraine’s Brave Stand Against Putin Upends Germany’s Pro-Russia Policy
Jermy Stern/The Tablet/March 01/2022
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/ukraines-brave-stand-against-putin-upends-germanys-pro-russia-policy
But it will take more than a war to undo decades of emotional and economic investment in the Russian state
One of the most consequential results of the failure of Vladimir Putin’s armies to disintegrate Ukraine, as large sections of the global diplomatic class seem to have wearily expected, may be taking place right now in Germany—a country that less than 10 days ago barred transfers of weapons to Ukraine and nixed calls to kick Putin off SWIFT. Confronted by public evidence of Ukrainian heroism and Russian failure, a sense of delirious regret seems to have gripped Berlin, as Germany’s new Social Democratic government set about shredding every basic assumption that has steered German foreign policy since the fall of the Berlin Wall.
It was only two weeks ago, in fact, on Feb. 15—when a Russian invasion force of nearly 200,000 stood on three Ukrainian borders—that Scholz assured Putin that Ukraine would not accede to NATO in the foreseeable future, three current and former German government officials confirmed to Tablet. Until Berlin froze Nord Stream 2 on Feb. 22, it had spent the previous seven years inflexibly defending the Gazprom-operated pipeline—whose sole purpose was to excise Ukraine from the European gas market by doubling direct imports from Russia into Germany. Now, both of those commitments have disappeared into thin air, to be replaced by a sudden spasm of German resolve.
Indeed, the announcements by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz would have seemed like science fiction at any point since the end of the Cold War: A €100 billion investment in new weapons, including the acquisition of U.S. F-35 warplanes and Israeli drones, plus a massive ongoing increase in the country’s overall defense spending target, up to 2% of GDP. Accompanying these sudden commitments to a robust and capable German military were announcements of the creation of a strategic gas reserve, financing for liquefied natural gas terminals, and speculation about bringing nuclear reactors back online to diversify from Russian gas imports. In making these commitments, Germany was upending decades of voluntary dependence on the Kremlin even at the price of the country’s seemingly sacrosanct commitment to its less than successful, anti-nuclear “green” energy policy.
Nor are the changes in Berlin confined to the inner circles of the country’s current government. Reliably pro-Russian German media has spent the last six days running stories of betrayal by Vladimir Putin and wondering about the possible strategic blindness and failure of the otherwise untouchable Angela Merkel. Christoph Heusgen, Merkel’s foreign policy adviser of 12 years, admitted to their shared naivety, while Merkel’s last defense minister blamed herself for failing to face down the Putin sympathizers in the government.
In an about-face with more immediate consequences, the Scholz coalition has agreed to ban Russia from SWIFT, the payments system that finances international trade, as well as to send anti-aircraft missiles to Ukraine. For the first time since 1945, Russian soldiers may be killed with German arms.
There is no doubt that the recent revolution in German policy is real, and that the shock and determination behind it are sincere. Paradoxically, this kind of dizzying, overnight shift in attitude and fortunes characterizes much of Germany’s history, which has often been the product of external shocks. Yet there are reasons to wonder how deep it will run and how long German politics can allow it to hold.
The combination of deep shame, romantic fascination, and perceived familiarity that colors how many Germans feel about Russia and the Kremlin itself is not a simple problem that a war in Ukraine is likely to solve; it has been an essential part of German identity for decades, and might not be easily dislodged by the invasion of a country where many Germans, even those genuinely sickened by his means, have long believed that Putin has “understandable” claims. To this day, no major German leader has disavowed the promise of German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier that Germany will never participate in a war against Russia, implying a special German exemption from NATO’s Article 5 commitment of mutual assistance—a somewhat bizarre statement of where the country’s ultimate loyalties lie.
The central mantra of German foreign policy for the last 30 years has been that “there can be no security in Europe without Russia or against it,” a consciously vaporous cliché on behalf of which Germans have been willing to tolerate astonishing levels of Russian violence and German complicity in Russian corruption—which has involved, for example, the wholesale purchase of the former leadership of the Social Democratic Party, from Gerhard Schroeder (Germany’s chancellor from 1998-2005) on down. The open ownership of large sections of German ex-officialdom by a foreign power has been tolerated and even lauded by the rest of Germany’s political class on the basis of a conviction that its special relationship with Russia holds the peace of Europe together.
Germans have spent two decades forging a strategic partnership with Putin that aided his belief in his ability to break it apart. In the wake of Scholz’s speech to a special session of the Bundestag on Sunday, in which he spoke movingly of “a change in the history of our continent,” there is a sense that a new Europe has been born on the back of a previously unthinkable degree of German solidarity and mettle. But this welcome glint of hope in the shattered glass of Ukraine may well prove illusory.
A good bit of Germany’s unusually close relationship with Putin’s Russia for the last 22 years can be explained by simple corruption, mercantilism, and myopia. Yet these qualities are hardly unique to Germany: For every German CEO or public official who has happily traded his integrity and duties to his own country in exchange for money and access in Russia, there is at least one American who has done the same or worse in China, as German officials often correctly point out.
An element of Germany’s approach to Russia that is just as important but less well understood, however, is psychological: Even in the Putin era, Germans have continued to regard the Russian state with intense guilt and extreme gratitude, both of which seem oddly misplaced, or displaced. While Germans might have plenty of good reasons to still feel guilty about the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union, the shape that guilt takes has been more consonant with the needs of contemporary Russian nationalism than with historical reality: The Nazis inflicted their most extreme violence on ordinary Ukrainians and Belorussians—especially on Jews. Yet Soviet historians, as the scholar John Lough has pointed out, paradoxically allowed for no distinction between these nationalities and Russians, who were all “citizens” of the USSR, even though their separate “nationalities” were all duly recorded on the infamous fifth line of their Soviet passports.
According to official Soviet memory, the Nazis’ true victim, the war’s true victor, and the only deserving recipient of German apology, was the USSR—whose successor state is Russia. Other than Ukraine’s brief and troubled attempt at independence between 1917-1921, Germans never considered it or other former Soviet territories in Eastern Europe like Belarus or Moldova as anything other than “Russian” anyway. Since the end of the Cold War, the Kremlin has had an easy time convincing Germans to conflate the entire USSR with modern Russia, and to direct its guilt about the Nazi period to Moscow at the expense of Kyiv.
For many years, the Russian government has been able to translate its near-monopoly on German war guilt into a more general willingness to see everything its way, which helps explain why Germans seem to remember important periods in recent history a bit differently than some of its neighbors and allies. Ostpolitik, West Germany’s policy of détente with Soviet-bloc countries that began in the 1960s, became something of a national religion in Germany after 1990, remembered exclusively as bringing peace to Europe and the Cold War to an end—rather than as having potentially extended the life of the USSR and its grip over Central and Eastern Europe. Germans also tend to remember reunification as a historically generous and selfless decision taken by Mikhail Gorbachev—who they believe had it in his power to keep Germany divided by force—rather than as a concession by Gorbachev to a reality in which a bankrupt and decaying Moscow no longer had the ability to militarily or economically enforce its dying empire.
By the time the USSR fell apart, Germans were as convinced as Americans that history had ended, and that even Russia would be swept up by liberalism, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. Their sense that the end-game was known to all the players in advance made it easy for the Kremlin to exploit their self-understanding as the only people in NATO (and eventually the European Union) who truly understand Russia—resulting in the German neologism Russlandversteher, “Russia understander,” and its close cousin, Putinversteher, neither of which were considered terribly pejorative until very suddenly last week.
The Putinversteher, of course, were the last to actually see Putin’s Russia for what he had made it. As Putin bombed Chechnya, invaded Georgia, spoke of Russian “rights” in Eastern Europe, and reconverted Russian society into a quasi-feudal arrangement between a kleptocratic state and a citizenry with diminishing rights and legal protections, German diplomatic engagement with Moscow and exports to Russia both reached post-Cold War peaks. Germany’s conviction that its lucrative trade with Russia was also conveniently liberalizing it and facilitating its friendly integration into Europe recalled Germany’s skewed memory of Ostpolitik.
Putin’s increasingly apparent disdain for the rights of Eastern European states didn’t rattle Berlin as much as it might have in part because—like the Russian leader—Germans themselves appreciated the spaces between Russia and Germany less as a newly emancipated zone of independence than as a historically natural buffer zone in which Germany could manifest its economic supremacy. As long as Putin seemed to tolerate the conversion of former Warsaw Pact countries and Soviet territories into markets and pools of cheap labor supply for German industry—itself reinforcing Germany’s status as the dominant power in the European Union—the Putinversteher were willing to regard hints of a Russian “sphere of influence” not as menacing and eerily fascist but as “understandable.” In effect, Putin became the security contractor who would protect German factories in parts of Eastern Europe.
When Putin annexed Crimea and invaded eastern Ukraine in 2014, Merkel was genuinely shaken and revolted; any European official involved in U.S.-EU talks over how to respond to Putin’s landgrab will testify to the fact that it was Merkel who led the ensuing robust sanctions regime—not Barack Obama, who lobbied heavily to water it down before shunting the matter entirely onto Germany and France. But according to one former British diplomat who was close to those talks, Merkel was also so desperate for a ceasefire that she quietly appeared to compromise with Putin on a diminution in Ukrainian sovereignty. In any case, the sanctions regime itself was designed to give the appearance that the West had appropriately punished Putin, rather than to actually hurt the Russian dictator and thereby influence his future decision-making.
By 2015, when discussions for a second Baltic Sea pipeline that would remove the dependence of German industry and consumers on Ukrainian transit routes became serious, there were no psychological obstacles left in the German system: Trading with Germany was liberalizing Russia; even if his methods were outdated, Putin’s understanding of Ukrainian independence was reasonable; eliminating Ukraine’s strategic importance to Europe would be no great loss to Berlin, etc. Merkel could argue for years with a straight face that Nord Stream 2 was a purely “commercial project” divorced from politics—even though the majority shareholder was Gazprom, a Russian state company—because “Russia” and Putin’s regime were seen as one and the same, and as part of the larger German economic order in the East.
In the years leading up to the current crisis, Putin repeatedly poked the German system under Merkel and found nothing but goo. A massive Russian hacking attack on the Bundestag in 2017 incurred no reaction. In the summer of 2019, an assassin connected to the Russian security services executed a Georgian citizen wanted by the Kremlin in broad daylight in Berlin, with no evident repercussions. At the same time, Merkel successfully lobbied for a restoration of Russian voting rights in the Council of Europe, a human rights organization, despite no change in the developments that had led to its suspension in the first place: Putin’s occupation and destabilization of Ukraine.
Trusting American policy in Ukraine may not be any smarter or more strategic than trusting Vladimir Putin. For Germany, it may be less so.
The performance of Olaf Scholz over the weekend has been widely interpreted as a welcome and significant break from the Merkel-Schroeder consensus, and maybe it will be. But for those hoping for Germans to awake from their decadeslong geopolitical slumbers, it is important to remember that Scholz is motivated not only by the peace of Europe and the future of democracy but by German domestic politics of the most immediate and least-elevated kind.
Before Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 22, Scholz’s approval ratings had plummeted by more points in a shorter amount of time than any other postwar German chancellor. The Christian Democrats (Merkel’s party) had overtaken the Social Democrats (Scholz’s) in polls for the first time since the December elections, and elevated Friedrich Merz, an arch conservative and master of parliamentary maneuvering, to leader of the opposition. If Merz is able to break up Scholz’s coalition with the Greens and Free Democrats, there would be no new elections—only a swapping in of Merz and his party for Scholz and his.
Prior to the events of last week, Merz had cleverly dropped the Christian Democrats’ support for Nord Stream 2 and floated the possibility of expelling Russia from SWIFT, seeking to exploit Scholz’s vulnerability as the head of Germany’s most pro-Russian political party. By announcing such a dramatic U-turn in Germany’s defense, energy, and Russia policies, Scholz not only demonstrated support for an embattled Ukraine: He effectively neutralized his most significant domestic opponent in an hour of extreme political crisis.
Scholz’s decision to freeze Nord Stream 2 in particular had an element of political savvy behind it. It was no doubt an important and highly symbolic move, but Scholz knew that if he didn’t put the pipeline on hold himself, the United States would have done it for him—by sanctioning Nord Stream 2 AG, the operating company chaired by Gerhard Schroeder, Scholz’s mentor, and the personification of German corruption in Russia. By putting the pipeline to rest, at least for now, Scholz ensured that German investors and politicians involved in the project would not get caught in the crosshairs of the U.S. Senate—and that control over the potential reopening of the project would most likely remain in German hands.
It’s no great crime for a politician to hide the advancement of certain political priorities in the exclusive guise of moral obligation, but even if Berlin’s awakening is genuine, it’s unclear how quickly the revolution in its defense and energy policies can be converted into reality. The German military has been a hollow shell for generations; even with higher spending, it will take decades to turn it into a real-world fighting force, which will be as nothing compared with the multigenerational effort it will take to convince the German public to accept an active role for the Bundeswehr in European security. As for energy, the nuclear reactors taken offline by Merkel’s phaseout cannot be switched back on even in a matter of months; energy supplied by modular reactors and increases in LNG imports would not make up for a potential loss in supply of Russian gas, should Putin decide to shut off the spigot.
How would Scholz weigh the importance of German support for Ukraine against the prospect of German pensioners freezing to death in winter? How long could his coalition with the Green Party survive under a full-scale return to nuclear and coal-fired energy? What happens when German industry furiously demands action to reverse the precipitous climb of energy prices hammering its ability to compete with Chinese firms? All of these are questions for another day, clearly—now that Scholz has fended off the threat from Merz.
Furthermore, what incentives will Scholz have to lean so far out in front of his skis when the United States is clearly unwilling to do the same, and seems incapable of steady policy commitments to its allies? The Biden administration’s “historic” and “crippling” sanctions against Russia include carveouts for energy and agricultural commodities, which account for the bulk of the Russian economy, because the White House is terrified of an inflationary spiral that would sink the Democrats’ already-grim prospects in the midterm elections. Washington is only now sending Ukraine the air defense systems and other defensive weapons for which Kyiv has been pleading for months—and which the Biden administration repeatedly refused to send. Behind closed doors, what do German officials make of well-documented reports that as vice president, Biden’s family personally profited from an energy tariff corruption scheme that he personally guaranteed in concert with the then-president of Ukraine, who voters threw out of office in favor of Volodymyr Zelensky—a popular democratic decision that now looks to be of Churchillian proportions? Trusting American policy in Ukraine may not be any smarter or more strategic than trusting Vladimir Putin. For Germany, it may be less so.
The tragedy in Ukraine may have seemingly shocked Germans out of their 30-year slumber in an instant, but Germany remains a country governed by officials and supported by voters who have never in living memory had to pay any significant costs for their national interests, or incurred risks or made sacrifices for the security of their neighborhood: That was America’s job, and then, in part, Russia’s job. What made Angela Merkel one of the most popular chancellors in German history was not that she solved difficult problems, but that she had a genius for fudging them and then punting them as far into the future as possible. Despite Scholz’s historic speech over the weekend, there is no sign yet that German voters won’t expect the same from him.

Putin Has Already Caused a Revolution in Germany
Andreas Kluth/Bloomberg/Tuesday, 1 March, 2022
If you had any sense of history and found yourself near the German Bundestag in Berlin on Sunday, you could have heard the sound of an explosion. It wasn’t a physical one, like the blasts of the bombs Russian President Vladimir Putin is lobbing at the brave people of Ukraine. It was instead the detonation of two or more decades of naive, misguided and often hypocritical foreign and defense policy.
In a special session of parliament, Chancellor Olaf Scholz dispatched nearly every dogma Germans — notably including his own party, the Social Democrats — have stubbornly clung to for a generation to the chagrin of their allies in NATO and the European Union.
And it wasn’t just the chancellor. After him, one speaker after another rose to find similarly clear and moving words — from the center-left Greens and center-right Free Democrats in Scholz’s coalition to the Christian Democrats in opposition. Let the world take note: Owing to Putin’s naked aggression, Germany has changed almost overnight.
Here’s a partial list of the reversals announced: A week earlier, Scholz had already nixed the operation of a new gas pipeline called Nord Stream 2, which connects Russia directly to Germany and thereby circumvents Ukraine and eastern Europe. Up to that point, Scholz, his party and many other Germans had maintained the fiction that this project was a private-sector business deal with no geopolitical dimension. That delusion is buried, as is the pipeline.
Next, Scholz got fully behind the West’s decision to exclude several Russian banks from the SWIFT system for international payments — dropping any initial reluctance. The government also signed up to the whole long list of other Western sanctions against Russian institutions and individuals. The goal, several speakers made clear, was the complete economic, financial and political isolation of Putin’s Russia.
But that wasn’t the biggest surprise. That prize goes to the decision to finally send weapons to Ukraine for its self-defense. Throughout this crisis, Germany had stubbornly stuck to its position of not arming parties in war (which it has hypocritically ignored in other conflicts). Invariably, the explanations included lugubrious moral lectures about Germany’s historical responsibility as a former warmonger.
That sanctimoniousness has crumbled, as Germans keep witnessing Ukrainian heroism. Like people across much of the world, they’re agape at the valor of ordinary Ukrainians preparing to fight, and of mothers stoically seeking shelter with their children in subway shafts. And they’re inspired by the laconic courage of President Volodymyr Zelenskiy — who answered American offers to transport him to safety with the reminder: “I need ammunition, not a ride.”
Even more surprisingly, Scholz and his cabinet announced a pivot in defense policy overall. For years, the country’s allies have berated Germany for skimping on its army, to the point where it could barely defend its own territory or be of much use to allies in a pinch. Now the government wants to set up a special fund worth 100 billion euros ($112.7 billion) to re-equip the military.
It also promises to boost defense budgets going forward, at long last taking aim at the NATO-wide target of spending 2% of GDP. The often infantile German debate on whether to banish American nuclear warheads from German soil appears to be canceled.
But the speakers this Sunday in the Bundestag — too often a venue for windbags venting platitudes — were even clearer than that. In effect, they offered mea culpas for having got wrong many big things, for a long, long time. The first of these is the peculiarly German tradition — rooted in its Ostpolitik (eastern policy) during the Cold War — that dialogue and rapprochement will inevitably lead to better relations with Russia. This cliche is captured in the rhyme Wandel durch Handel — change through trade. We’ve talked and traded with Putin all these years, a cabinet minister stated frankly, and look where it got us.
A second point of naivete the speakers confessed to is the faux-pacifism that’s pervaded German thinking on world affairs for many decades, but especially since the fall of the Berlin Wall. Armed conflict, in this narrative, was banished from the continent (with unfortunate exceptions in the Balkans) and from the European zeitgeist. Dialogue and rules had allegedly replaced deterrence and national interests as means and ends of policy. Bunk, bunk and bunk, Scholz and other orators acknowledged in so many words. The way to stop a bully like Putin is with strength — only then do talks make sense. That used to be an un-German martial notion. It could now become the new mainstream.
Distilling the legacy of Scholz’s predecessor, Angela Merkel, I recently concluded that, after her, “the post-heroic age in German history will be over.” Post-heroism is a term Germans have used to describe their postwar turn away from hard power and toward commerce and idealism, whether genuine or staged.
Scholz, who took office only in December, at first seemed an unlikely leader for a return to a more muscular and traditional foreign policy that lives up to the expectations of allies. He’s usually not a man to cause explosions. But that was before the real blasts in the east — before the heroism of a Zelenskiy, and the villainy of a Putin.

The new world after Russia's invasion of Ukraine
Khairallah Khairallah/The Arab Weekly/March 01/2022
The watershed event of President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine has overshadowed everything else. It is, quite simply, an attempt to change the world and impose new concepts starting from Ukraine.
There is no doubt that the world, after the invasion of Ukraine, will not be the same, especially if Putin succeeds in subjugating this neighbouring country and moving to another stage in his attempt to restore a position for Russia similar to that enjoyed by the Soviet Union after World War II. It is certain that history cannot repeat itself considering the prominent presence of China, as an economic power, in this new world.
It seems that Putin, who is haunted by Russian history and the greatness of his country, knows that he can no longer ignore China, which he was keen to visit before carrying out his decision to intervene militarily in Ukraine. He went to Beijing to gain its approval, taking advantage of the opening of the Winter Olympics. It all seems a far cry from the days when the United States could count, during the days of the Cold War, on the Sino-Soviet rivalry.
Does the Ukrainian crisis increase the confusion and disarray of the Joe Biden administration ... or does it increase its awareness of the bitter truths? What seems to have prompted Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine was his perception of the weaknesses of the Biden administration.
Many in the region fear that Iran could exploit the seemingly flagrant flaws in the Biden administration's attitude in order to clinch a new agreement regarding Tehran's nuclear programme. This deal, if reached, will make the world regret the first agreement which was concluded during the era of Barack Obama. The question now is whether the Biden administration could repeat the mistake of the Obama White House and accept an agreement which allows the “Islamic Republic to fund its sectarian militias in the region”, with Tehran buoyed up by what is happening in Ukraine?
In light of the Ukrainian war, which seems close to possibly sparking a world war, the countries of the region have the right to ask: is there an American administration that can be relied upon?
It is not only the Arab countries that are wary of the consequences that may result from US confusion. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has shifted positions based on his regional calculations. He was not only motivated by the Turkish economic crisis, but also took into account Russian aggressive behaviour matched by US weakness. Iran will try to benefit as much as possible from the world's preoccupation with Ukraine and the need demonstrated by the Biden administration to reach an agreement over Tehran's nuclear programme. The problem is that no one within the US administration dares admit that the main concern with the “Islamic Republic” is not so much its nuclear programme as with the sectarian militias, missiles and drones under its control. There are even those in the US administration who go so far as to say that European countries, led by Germany, are in need these days of Iranian gas in order to reduce their dependence on Russian gas.
Out of the womb of the Ukrainian war, a different world will be born. It is a world with still indistinct features. What is certain is that the United States has decided to abandon the leadership position it gained during the Cold War. Its victory then culminated with the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989 and the formal collapse of the Soviet Union in early 1992. Three decades have passed since then. Whoever closely examined the events in the Middle East and the Gulf during the last 30 years would have noticed the decline of US power. Successive US administrations, since the departure from the White House of George Bush and his team led by James Baker and Brent Scowcroft, have missed no opportunity to commit mistakes. Most of these were to Iran's advantage. Perhaps the most egregious was the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the country’s presentation to the “Islamic Republic” on a silver platter. This happened during the era of George W Bush who never realised the consequences of his Iraqi misadventure. The second prominent mistake was to allow the Russians to follow the footsteps of the Iranians and intervene militarily in Syria to save Bashar al-Assad and his minority regime.
It is not unlikely that the Biden administration will commit a third big mistake at a time when Putin is seeking to change European balances and draw red lines for the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). The question here is if Washington is willing to sign a deal with Iran in 2022 which is worse than the 2015 agreement and which ignores the fact that the region's problem lies, before anything else, in the Iranian expansionist project?