By Tom Arms

America this week crossed its Ukrainian Rubicon.

It took a while. And with good reason. US foreign policy was badly burned by operations in Afghanistan and the Middle East. It could not afford another expensive failure.

That’s not to say that the Biden Administration failed to support Ukraine’s fight against the Russian invasion. It froze the oligarchs’ assets, imposed sanctions, dispatched 100,000 US troops to Europe and provided $14 billion in military and humanitarian aid.

But at the same time, President Biden, was ultra-careful not to prod the Russian bear into a World War Three. There were to be no NATO boots on Ukrainian soil and a close watch was kept on any weapons provided to the Ukrainian military.

NATO forces will still keep out of Ukraine, but the flow and type of weapons is being substantially upgraded. On Thursday the president announced that he wants Congressional approval for a further $33 billion for Ukraine. $20 billion in the form of military aid; $8.5 billion in economic aid and $3 billion in humanitarian aid. A pro-Ukraine Congress will almost certainly approve the package.

The president also wants to liquidate the $1 billion-plus in oligarchs’ frozen assets to help offset the cost of the Ukraine war. This may not be much in comparison to the global total, but if Europe follows suit they will add an estimated $30 billion to the pot.

Biden’s announcement followed a trip to Kyiv by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin, which in turn was followed by a meeting at America’s Ramstein Air Base in Germany of more than 40 countries who pledged to support Ukraine. The usually soft-spoken low profile Lloyd Austin was loud in his condemnation of Vladimir Putin and his support for Volodomyr Zelensky.

“We will not allow Putin to win,” said Austin, and it was clear from his comments and those of Antony Blinken that in supporting Ukraine the US believed it was backing good against evil and was on the right side of history. “Russia,” said the American Defence Secretary, “is waging a war of choice to indulge the ambitions of one man. Ukraine is fighting a war of necessity to defend its democracy, its sovereignty and its citizens.”

Blinken added: “Russia has already failed. Ukraine has already succeeded.”

America’s shift to a full-throated and committed support can be directly attributed to two causes: The united EU and NATO response to the Russian invasion and Ukraine’s staunch defence of its territory, especially the latter.

It is important to America to be not only on the side of the angels but to be on the side that wins. And it looks as if Ukraine is winning and will continue to do so. So far the UN estimates that 21,900 Russian troops have died in Putin’s war.  One year’s production of aircraft—150—has been shot down and two years’ production of tanks—500—has been destroyed. It is estimated that the Russian artillery have used 70 percent of their entire inventory of short, medium and long-range missiles.

The Russian shift to the south and east has resulted in some gains for Moscow, but not as much as Putin hoped and the Ukrainians are ensuring that each gain is a costly one in lives and equipment.

Moscow’s ability to replace losses has also been seriously hampered by sanctions. The IMF has predicted that the Russian economy will shrink by at least 12.5 percent this year. On top of that, a large part of Russian defence systems include Western parts which manufacturers are now banned from exporting.

The danger now is that Putin will conclude that he cannot afford to lose and will resort to nuclear weapons to prevent that outcome. After Biden’s announcement of increased support, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov called a press conference to condemn US and NATO “aggression” and added: “There is now a considerable risk of nuclear war.”

• Elon Musk is a brilliant entrepreneur and the world’s richest man. He also has a gargantuan ego, mercurial personality and thinks big. Tesla was developed to create a carbon-free planet. Space X is designed to give humanity a Martian bolthole in case we fail on Earth. His takeover of Twitter is, in his words, the result of a “strong intuitive sense that having a public platform that is maximally trusted and broadly inclusive is extremely important for the future of civilization.” Musk is a free speech absolutist. He is opposed to Twitter’s banning of Donald Trump but would be likely to countenance suspension. This brings the mercurial Musk into conflict with most of the EU governments, Britain and India. They have either introduced or are planning legislation to force social media to police their sites to prevent hate speech, conspiracy theories and outright lies such as Trump’s claim that he won the 2020 presidential election. How this will resolve itself will be watched very carefully by all the other social media players because, based on past performance, Musk is not the sort of person to quietly accept government interference.
• With the French presidential elections and the war of Ukraine grabbing the headlines you might have missed an important election result in the Balkan state of Slovenia. It was billed as a “referendum on democracy” and democracy won. On one side of the political ring was incumbent Prime Minister Janez Jansa. He is a Trump-loving ally of Hungary’s right-wing populist leader Viktor Orban. According to Freedom House his latest two-year tenure (he had been elected PM twice before), has been marked by Slovenia suffering the sharpest decline in Democratic institutions and values of any country in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Jansa repeatedly attacked the judiciary and the media whom he called “liars” and “presstitutes”. Facing Jansa was 55-year-old former Fulbright scholar Robert Golob. He is businessman who created the state-owned energy company GEN-1 and has limited political experience as a city councilor and former State Secretary at the Ministry of Economics. In January he created the Freedom Party to contest the April elections. The result was a resounding victory. The Freedom Party won 34.5 percent of the vote compared to 23.6 percent for Jansa’s Slovenian Democratic Party. The turnout was also encouraging. 71 percent of Slovenia’s 1.7m voters cast their ballots compared to 51 percent in elections two years ago. The increase in voter turnout has been attributed to Golob persuading young people to vote—a possible lesson for other politicians seeking to remove far right populists from elected office.
• The voters of Northern Ireland are facing one of their most important elections in the history of the troubled province on 5 May. It is expected that the Irish Nationalist Party Sinn Fein, which for years was the political wing of the IRA, is expected to win control of Stormont, Northern Ireland’s National Assembly. In the last elections in the Republic of Ireland, Sinn Fein won the largest share of the popular vote. Thus, both the British province and the Republic seem to be moving inexorably towards a referendum and political union. Or are they? Sinn Fein are pointedly refusing to talk about Irish unity. They need votes from disgruntled Protestants who normally vote en masse for the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP). So they avoid frightening them with talk of union by concentrating on the bread and butter issues of health, education and the cost of living crisis. Any reporters’ questions about taking up the First Minister’s job or Irish unity are politely brushed aside. “Political union,” said Deputy Sinn Fein leader Michelle O’Neill,”is an issue for the future. I want to deliver on the things that matter for the here and now.” The strategy is expected to work. If it does the future may very quickly become the here and now.
• Guns have overtaken cars as the number one cause of traumatic deaths among American children. According to a 10-year survey led by New York’s Dr Joshua Klein, firearms overtook the automobile in 2017 and have been speeding ahead ever since. In 2018, for instance, there 83,000 more American children killed by guns then car crashes. And, according to Dr Klein’s study, the number of child deaths from guns is increasing at a steady rate of about 0.72 percent a year. Of course, children are not the only ones to die as a result of an almost total absence of gun control in America. According to the latest figures from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, 111 people a day are shot in the US. 42 are murder victims and 65 commit suicide. A total of 210 survive gunshot wounds. Last year 117, 345 Americans died as a result of being shot—or shooting themselves—with a gun. The latest survey is published as the Supreme Court is pondering its latest judgment on gun control. This one involves a New York regulation restricting the carrying of concealed handguns. With conservatives holding a two-seat majority, it is possible that the court will rule against New York and in favor of the pro-gun lobby led by the National Rifle Association. The ruling will have a major impact on gun control cases now in the lower courts who tend to side with those in favor of gun control.

_______________

Tom Arms is foreign editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and author of the recently published “America Made in Britain.”

The post Observations of an Expat: Crossing the Ukrainian Rubicon first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Monitoring Desk

Seoul

Following the reports that several journalists and media professionals have been killed as they were covering the war in Ukraine since February 24, the Asia Journalists Association is alarmed and saddened by such negative developments.

1. AJA calls on all parties involved to guarantee the safety of all journalists and media workers covering the events in accordance with international conventions.
2. AJA stands by all media workers who are dealing with formidable challenges to report on the events and inform the world about what is happening. They may also have to deal with intolerable acts of intimidation or attempts to have their reports controlled. Such heroes deserve to have their safety and security guaranteed and they must not be made to pay the price for their work. Therefore, AJA calls on all parties to respect all international conventions and ensure journalists do their work without threats to their lives or safety.
3. AJA also calls on all journalists and media workers to abide by their professional and ethical standards and make sure they verify all claims in order to confront misinformation and disinformation sowing confusion and compounding the situations and ensure they do not spread.

__________________

Courtesy: The AsiaN

The post AJA calls to ensure safety of journalists covering war in Ukraine first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Monitoring Desk

Rabbi Avraham Wolf, Chief Rabbi of the Jewish Community of Odessa and Southern Ukraine, in a letter published by Times of Israel, says ‘for over 20 days, we have been under siege under fire, non-stop shelling, and victims of indiscriminate firing upon hospitals and innocent children.’

“There are tens of thousands of dead and wounded victims. The situation here is painful and indescribable,” he says.

Rabbi writes, “I was left here in Odessa with a few heroes who aren’t ready to give up on any Jew that didn’t manage to escape. We will not abandon them. We will stay here and not leave until the last Jew is rescued with God’s help!”

“Nearly 2 million people in Ukraine have already lost their homes. The lives of millions more have changed beyond recognition following the Russian invasion. We, the Jewish community of Odessa and the surrounding areas, have never imagined in our wildest dreams that such a war would occur and that we would fall into it, unable to live and unable to leave.”

“We feel and see death before our eyes every day. We live frozen in fear, with sirens and explosions erupting night and day, surrounded by destruction and devastation,” Rabbi says.

“Our Jewish community in Odessa boasts about 35,000 people. Anyone who could have escaped has already done so. More than half of our community are now refugees. Only those who are unable to leave remain. This includes the sick, the elderly, people who cannot travel, and devoted relatives unwilling to abandon their loved ones. Even people who want and can leave cannot always escape. Roads are blocked. Men who reach the border are not allowed to cross with their families.”

“The city of Odessa is under total siege. Yet, we continue to transport hundreds of families from our community across the Moldovan border close to us. This includes refugee families who managed to escape from Kyiv and other cities, thanks to the heroic efforts of our volunteers and dedicated staff.”

“Because of the ban on 18-60-year-old men from leaving Ukraine, we are forced to use all sorts of covert means to evacuate them as well and not cut them off from their families and small children! It costs us a lot of money,” he writes adding, “We have so far managed to evacuate 120 children from our orphanage. But there are still 80 orphans left who we have not yet been able to rescue and are in danger of death at any moment.”

The lucky ones who managed to escape war-torn Ukraine are now refugees. Homeless children and parents whose only home and security have been taken from them. Thousands of people have lost their property and possessions and suddenly became homeless!

They were left only with the clothes on their backs which barely withstand the freezing temperatures on the streets of Ukraine. They sleep in refugee camps inside tents with no heating and no money to their name!

___________________

Courtesy: Times of Israel

The post ‘We feel and see death before our eyes every day’ first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Ukraine is fighting on behalf of a Western Alliance of which it is not officially a member.  It is fighting a war which is the clearest cut case of good against evil since 1939. It is a war which has been 70 years in the waiting.

By Tom Arms

Putin has to go. But when and how? What will be the result of his Ukrainian failure in Russia and the rest of the world? How much damage will be inflicted on Ukraine and almost every other country before he is thrown out of the Kremlin?

Working on the assumption that the West will win (any other scenario is unthinkable), what will be the short, medium and long-term repercussions for the world?

The immediate consequence is Hell for Ukraine, pariah status and economic disaster for Russia and economic pain for everyone else.

Vladimir Putin expected Ukraine to fall into his lap like an over-ripe Slavic apple. It didn’t happen. They are fighting back with a fierce patriotism which has shocked the Russian president and won global admiration.

Most of the world has rallied around with the toughest sanctions since World War Two and tons of military hardware—but no troops and no planes for a no fly zone. Ukraine is not a member of NATO and the alliance is terrified of Ukraine escalating into World War III if NATO and Russian troops directly face each other.

So Ukraine is fighting on behalf of a Western Alliance of which it is not officially a member.  It is fighting a war which is the clearest cut case of good against evil since 1939. It is a war which has been 70 years in the waiting.

In the short term Volodomyr Zelensky’s brave army will probably lose militarily. The Russian army is too big. As I write this blog the tank column that has been inching its way towards Kyiv is fanning out through the surrounding forests for a major bombardment of the Ukrainian capital and Russian planes are increasing their attacks.

But a conventional Russian military victory would be a political disaster for Putin. His invasion has created a sense of Ukrainian nationalism which would lead to an insurgency war which would more than equal Moscow’s ten-year Afghan calamity, which in turn led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. The economic war would continue and Russia would be forced to retreat behind an unsustainable Soviet-style Iron Curtain.

There are reports that Putin has seen the writing on the wall. He has allegedly fired eight generals and turned on his trusted FSB to accuse them of providing him with faulty intelligence which led to his invasion order. The FSB is said to have responded by accusing their leader of creating a climate of fear so that reports were doctored to justify his political wish list rather than presenting evidential facts.

As we approach the Ides of March (the 15th), the scene would appear to be set for a palace coup. But who would replace Putin or dare to move against him. He has surrounded himself with group-thinking yes men known as siloviki (Russian for enforcer).  They owe their positions and wealth to the pleasure of the Russian President and have been appointed because they bought into his autocratic anti-western paranoia harnessed to a messianic belief in Russian greatness. On top of that their actions, conversations and meetings are carefully monitored by presidential spies.

The next possible source of revolt is the Oligarchs who are now being stripped of their vast wealth by Western sanctions. They too owe their position to Putin. Each has been chosen for their personal loyalty to profit from lucrative enterprises. Those who have strayed in their fealty have been stripped of their corporate assets and/or been assassinated. However, Putin is now weakened and a group of Oligarchs may take the view that the best chance of rescuing their baubles is to move against the president.

Next in line is Russia’s young people and intelligentsia. Thousands have taken to the streets to protest the war. An estimated 10,000 have been arrested. They face up to 15 years in prison for spreading “fake news” which is defined as any news not approved by Vladimir Putin. Most of this group never suffered the closed Soviet society. They travel. Until this week they followed Western media. They go clubbing, eat in street cafes and basically enjoy a Western lifestyle. That has disappeared overnight and they are angry.

But for the middle classes to successfully move against Putin they would need the support of Russia’s vast working class and all the signs are that they support Putin’s war—for the time being. The Russian proletariat has a long history of silent suffering under successive repressive regimes (1917 being the exception) and Putin’s stranglehold of the media insures their loyalty.

But even if Putin is removed, what then? How does the rest of the world deal with the persistent and dogmatic Russian paranoia coupled with a messianic belief in its right to greatness with a strong leader at the helm? How do we change centuries of national hubris to bring Russia into the rules-based international order? There was a brief moment after the collapse of the Soviet Union when such a world seemed possible. But it was crushed by the dark Russian soul.

As Putin’s Russia implodes, the West is rising to the occasion. It had appeared weak and divided. Both Moscow and Beijing spoke openly of the decline of democracies and the rise and inevitable victory of   autocracies. But Russia’s attack on the border of NATO and the EU has united and revitalized the Western Alliance. It now has an easily identifiable enemy and a justifiable cause.

Europe has united and backed with German resolve is marching towards a proper security and defence policy. Long-time neutralists Finland and Sweden are considering NATO membership. Even Switzerland has joined the sanctions war. The US has—after four years of wavering under Donald Trump—recommitted itself to the NATO alliance. The bulk of the Republican Party has ditched its isolationism to unite behind a bipartisan war effort, leaving far-right Trumpists floundering.

Autocracies will suffer. Putin has been regarded as a torch bearer by populist strongmen. If he goes down in flames it will embolden others to strike out against men such as Viktor Orban, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Narendra Modi, Nicolas Maduro, Mohammed bin Salman, Jair Bolsonaro, the Myanmar generals, Iran’s Mullahs and others. Syria’s President Assad will be especially vulnerable without his Russian protector.

China is likely to be exception. It is rich and the Communist Party has successfully established control at every level of society and a pseudo-capitalist economy that is delivering a rising standard of living. An attack on Taiwan remains a possibility. But China watchers are dubious—at least at the moment. Xi Jinping has too much to lose by widening the war. Europe (including the UK) has told Washington that it would be reluctant to support an Asian war, partly because it wants to stay focused on Ukraine and partly because it needs trade with China.

But the West faces severe short-term sacrifices. Inflation fuelled by soaring energy prices is affecting every aspect of life. At the moment the American and European public are almost gleefully surrendering the relative good life for the greater causes of Ukrainian freedom and democratic values. But how long will a West already exhausted by the restrictions of Covid continue to tighten its collective belt? Putin probably believes that his dour Russians can outlast the decadent West.

Energy will be the biggest winner and loser. Prices are being pushed up by Russia’s prominence as an international oil and gas exporter. Europe’s economy is almost totally dependent on Russian energy. That is why Moscow’s fossil fuels are currently exempt from European sanctions. That is a short term problem which has to be resolved quickly if only because Putin may turn off the taps at any moment. This week’s EU summit agreed to cut Russian imports by two thirds by the end of the year, but no more than that.

In the short and medium term, climate change policies are being sacrificed on the altar of war. The world desperately needs energy. Increasing production in the OPEC countries and in places such as Norway, the US, fracking sites, Venezuela, Azerbaijan and Libya along with coal production from Australia, India and Poland are seen as necessary wartime fixes.

But simultaneously the West—especially Europe—has awakened to the need to establish secure home-grown energy sources. This means more investment in green technology and probably a German U-turn on its decision to ban nuclear power stations.

The war has raised issues about economic national security in a wide range of other industries ranging from steel production to wheat to microchips. President Biden has spoken in almost Trump-like terms about bringing industries home to protect America.

If 1930s style isolationism is a long term consequence of the Ukraine War then that would be unfortunate. It would damage free trade which has encouraged economic interdependence and for 70 years helped to reduce the spread of conflicts and raised living standards worldwide. Globalization exports jobs and increases the dependence on other countries. But it also reduces consumer prices, lifts living standards worldwide and—conversely—reduces the chances of conflict.

As usual, it will be the poorest who will suffer most because of Putin’s war—in the developed and developing world. Government finances have already been stretched to breaking point by the pandemic. Now they have to pay for increased defence spending, restructured energy policies, a refugee crisis and, eventually, the rebuilding of Ukraine. Taxes will inevitably rise.  Money will be diverted from education, health and welfare to pay for more immediate needs. Infrastructure projects will be delayed. Borrowings will increase. Foreign aid will be cut. Growth and living standards, especially in the developing world, will falter after decades of improvement. Putin is to blame.

• Back in the halcyon days of the Cold War both sides accepted a nuclear strategy called Mutual Assured Destruction which was gifted with the appropriate acronym of MAD. It had a simple basis: Both sides (the West and the Soviet Union) possessed enough nuclear weapons to wipe out the other (and the rest of the world). Therefore it was in neither’s interest to use their nuclear weapons. As mad as MAD sounds, it worked. No nuclear weapons by either the US or Soviet Union, or Britain or France were used throughout the Cold War. There were some almost incidents, such as the Cuban Missile Crisis, but Armageddon was always averted as a MAD sanity prevailed. However, the problem with MAD is that it is built on the premise that the leadership in Washington and Moscow is led by rational people. Now the people in the West are seriously concerned because of doubts about Putin’s sanity. Three years ago there was concern about the mental stability of Donald Trump who famously said: “I can’t understand. If we have nuclear weapons, why don’t we use them? It appears that there is a growing need for a failsafe chain of command among the nuclear powers to avoid the problems of hubris-driven mental instability leading to a disastrous button-pressing incident.
• Russia, according to the White House, has prepared chemical weapons for use in Ukraine. Moscow claims that Ukraine has done the same. Ridiculous say both Washington and Kyiv. If the latter are to be believed than Putin is preparing a false flag operation whereby Russians claim they have been attacked by Ukrainian chemical weapons and respond with chemical guns blazing. But what chemical weapons? The Soviets at one time had the world’s largest biological and chemical weapons store. In fact, an estimated 65,000 were employed in the deadly business. Then along claim the 1973 Biological Weapons Convention and the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention which banned these instruments of mass destruction. At the time, Russia had nearly 40,000 tons of chemical weapons. In 2017 the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) reported that Moscow had destroyed its “declared” weapons stock. Then came the 2018 Novichok attack in Salisbury on former GRU agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter followed by a similar murderous attempt in 2020 on Russian dissident Alexei Navalny. In 2021, the CIA reported that Russia was back in the chemical weapons business, or, it had never really left it. This week’s White House announcement about the specter of Russian chemical weapons leaves an important unanswered question: Is Russian use of chemical weapons a red line for NATO? If not, why mention it?
• In other Russian news, Vladimir Putin has signed a decree increasing payments to retirees and pensioners in order to secure the backing of that crucial section of the population where most of his support lies. It is not coming from the young and middle classes who continue to demonstrate. There are reports that 10,000 protesters have been arrested. Duma this week has passed a law threatening 15 year prison sentences for anyone who spreads “fake news” which is basically defined as anything not approved by the Kremlin. They have also blocked all Western media. Companies such as the BBC are resorting to short wave radio broadcasts. Both Aerofloat and foreign air carriers have stopped all international flights into and out of Russia. The ruble has lost half of its value. Foreign companies are severing their links in droves and the government is on the verge of defaulting on its loans for the first time since the end of the First World War. The Iron Curtain is falling again.
• Meanwhile, there are reports that Putin is furious at the progress of the war and looking for scapegoats. He has allegedly sacked eight generals and claiming that he was fed fake intelligence by the FSB. Sources within Russia are saying that a frightened FSB fed him the intelligence he wanted. A rambling twitter feed from an alleged FSB agent named Igor Suslov, claimed that Putin has led the country to disaster; it was on the brink of collapse and predicted famine by summer.
• On Tuesday President Biden announced that the US was banning imports of Russian oil and gas. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had already said the same and Britain’s Boris Johnson said it would cease Russian imports by the end of the year. In itself this is not a big deal. The three countries are not big users of Russian energy. That honor falls to continental Europe which buys anywhere between 30-50 percent of its energy from Russia. If they banned Russian oil and gas their economies would overnight grind to a half. The Anglo-American-Canadian move is more political optics—a gesture to show that they are tightening sanctions on Russia’s big exports as a substitute for the no fly zones requested by Zolodomyr Zelensky. Biden and co are giving their publics an opportunity to make sacrifices for Ukraine, which according to Congress and opinion polls they want to do. But for how long. The pandemic and political instability energy prices were rising before Putin attacked. Since the Russian tanks crossed the border they have soared. This affects cars, air travel, rail travel, food prices—the entire worldwide economy.
• Oil and gas prices are set internationally. There are alternative sources, but they will take at least six months to come on stream and in many cases several years. Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE have spare capacity. But they are allied with Russia at the moment and angry with Biden’s withdrawal of support for their war in Yemen. The UAE ambassador in Washington appeared to break with his OPEC ministers when he announced on Thursday that the emirates would start boosting production. But there are reports that he is in conflict with his oil minister. Oil could flow from Iran but is being held up by the Iran Nuclear Accord. The West may have to reach an accord with Maduro’s Venezuela to tap into that country’ massive resources. Norway, Libya and Azerbaijan may also be persuaded to increase their production. The US can increase its production but not enough to fill the gap on its own. Britain has a few drop of oil left in the North Sea. All these alternatives will take time to negotiate new agreements, alliances, arrange shipping contracts and build infrastructure. Tighten the belt. Turn down the thermostat. Mothball the car. It is going to be tough.
• The British are being simultaneously lauded and panned for their response to the Ukraine Crisis. When Zolodomyr Zelensky—the Western world’s new icon of democratic freedom—addressed the Mother of Parliaments by cyber link this week he personally thanked Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The reason was that the UK has led the West in supplying weapons to Ukraine before and after the invasion. Something like $390 million worth of military aid has been dispatched so far to Kyiv. To date these have included small arms, body armor, anti-tank missiles, javelin missiles and personnel to train Ukrainians in their use. This week Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said Britain was also sending Starstreak laser-guided surface to air missiles designed to shoot down enemy aircraft. At the same time Home Secretary Pritti Patel is under heavy attack from the public and every political party (including her own) for what being described as a heartless bureaucratic muddle is related to allowing Ukrainian refugees into Britain. While the rest of Europe is waiving visa requirements, Britain started off by saying they would admit 200,000 refugees and then constructed so many obstacles that their refuge offer became a sad joke. Pritti Patel has been reluctantly dragged towards a more open door policy for the refugees, but it still falls far short on what is on offer from the EU.

______________________

Tom Arms has spent half a century writing about world affairs. He is the foreign editor of Liberal Democrat Voice, and the author of “The Encyclopedia of the Cold War” and the recently published “America Made in Britain.”

The post Observations of an Expat: Ukraine – Where Are We Going? first appeared on Sindh Courier.