Republican’s hold on nominations leaves Marines without confirmed leader for 1st time in 100 years
Lolita C. Baldor – July 10, 2023
Acting Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps Gen. Eric Smith speaks during a relinquishment of office ceremony for U.S. Marine Corps Gen. David Berger on Monday, July 10, 2023, at the Marine Barracks in Washington. Smith has been nominated to be the next leader, but will serve in an acting capacity because he hasn’t been confirmed by the Senate. Berger’s term as Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps expired Monday. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta) ASSOCIATED PRESSU.S. Marine Corps Gen. David Berger, left, whose term as Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps expires Monday, holds the battle colors during a relinquishment of office ceremony, Monday, July 10, 2023, at the Marine Barracks in Washington. Assistant Commandant Gen. Eric Smith, right, has been nominated to be the next leader, but will serve in an acting capacity because he hasn’t been confirmed by the Senate. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta) ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Marine Corps is without a confirmed leader for the first time in a century as Gen. David Berger stepped down as commandant on Monday and a Republican senator is blocking approval of his successor.
Berger took over as the 38th commandant in July 2019, and is required to leave the job after four years. Gen. Eric Smith, currently the assistant commandant, has been nominated to be the next leader, but will serve in an acting capacity because he hasn’t been confirmed by the Senate.
Under the law, Smith can serve as the acting commandant, but he can do nothing that would presume confirmation. As a result, he can’t move into the main residence or the commandant’s office, or issue any new formal commandant’s planning guidance, which is traditional for a new leader. He has the authority to implement new policies such as budget, training and other personnel decisions.
Smith’s promotion delay is the first of what could be many top level military officers held up by Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala. Tuberville has stalled all nominations for senior military jobs because he disagrees with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s decision to have the Defense Department pay for travel when a service member has to go out of state to get an abortion or other reproductive care. Abortion is now illegal in Alabama.
Speaking at a ceremony at the Marine Barracks Washington, just down the street from Capitol Hill, Austin and Berger called on the Senate to take action.
“We need the Senate to do their job so that we can have a sitting commandant that’s appointed and confirmed. We need that house to be occupied,” said Berger, with a nod to the commandant’s quarters at the edge of the parade field.
Austin and other Pentagon officials have pressed the Senate to move forward, saying that delays are already impacting more than 200 military officers, and many key leaders.
“You know, it’s been more than a century since the U.S. Marine Corps has operated without a Senate confirmed commandant,” Austin said during the ceremony.
Because of Berger’s requirement to step down in July, the Marine job is the first of the military chiefs to be affected by Tuberville. The Army, Navy and Air Force are all expected to face the same delay later this year, as could the nomination of the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The current chairman, Army Gen. Mark Milley, leaves his job at the end of September. Gen. CQ Brown, the current chief of the Air Force, has been nominated to replace Milley, and is scheduled to go before the Senate Armed Services Committee for his hearing on Tuesday.
The hold, however, is also impacting scores of one, two and three-star officers who are assigned to new commands but can’t move on. It also affects their families, who usually relocate over the summer to their new military communities so school-age children can settle in before fall.
“Smooth and timely transitions of confirmed leadership are central to the defense of the United States and to the full strength of the most powerful fighting force in history,” said Austin. “Stable and orderly leadership transitions are also vital to maintaining our unmatched network of allies and partners. And they’re crucial for our military readiness.”
Smith hit the thorny issue head on during his remarks at the ceremony Monday — saying he wanted to get one thing out fast.
“If you’re saying, ‘what am I supposed to call you?’ ACMC. That is my title, and one that I’m proud of,” said Smith, using the shorthand for his assistant commandant role. But he quickly added, “to make sure that there is no confusion — all orders, directives and guidance, which were in effect this morning remain in effect, unless I direct otherwise. Further guidance to the force will follow.”
Sabrina Singh, a Pentagon spokeswoman, said Monday that as of last Friday, there were 265 senior officers whose promotions have been held up by Tuberville, and that number could leap to 650 by the end of the year if the issue isn’t corrected. She noted that in more than 100 cases, officers — like Smith — would be forced to do two jobs at the same time because no one can move up.
She said the Pentagon is asking officers to delay planned retirements and stay on, while in other cases officers are doing more senior ranking jobs without getting the pay for that new rank.
Later in the day, Jack Reed, D-R.I., chairman of the Senate committee, spoke on the Senate floor, asking that Smith be confirmed and criticizing Tuberville for what he called an unprecedented hold that is driving the U.S. military “to a potential breaking point.
“In General Smith we have a Purple Heart recipient — this man has literally shed his blood for his country,” said Reed, who attended the Marine ceremony. “He stands ready to continue his service to our nation and the Marines he will lead for four more years. He simply awaits our action.”
Tuberville, however, blocked a vote and in a Senate floor speech said the holds would have “minimal effect” on Smith’s ability to lead.
“There may be a delay in his planning guidance, and yet he cannot move into the commandant’s residence, but there is little doubt about General Smith’s ability to lead effectively,” said Tuberville.
The last time the Corps was led by an acting commandant was in 1910. Then-Maj. Gen. George Elliott, who was the commandant, reached the required retirement age in November 1910 and left the office. Col. William Biddle served as the acting commandant until he was promoted to major general and became commandant in February 1911.
Berger, a native of Woodbine, Maryland, graduated from Tulane University and was commissioned in 1981. He commanded at every level including tours in Iraq and Afghanistan.
During his tenure, he spearheaded a broad campaign to transform the Marine Corps to better be able to fight amphibious wars in the Pacific after years of battling terrorist groups in the Middle East. The plan was lauded by many in the Pentagon and Congress as a critical way for the Marines to prepare for a potential conflict with China.
Smith, a career infantry officer, is a highly decorated Marine who served multiple tours in Afghanistan and Iraq, including time in Fallujah and Ramadi during heavy combat in 2004 and 2005 in Operation Iraq Freedom. He later was the senior military adviser to Defense Secretary Ash Carter.
Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.
How many Russians have died in Ukraine? Data shows what Moscow hides
Erika Kinetz – July 10, 2023
A Russian soldier killed during combats against Ukrainian army lies on a corn field in Sytnyaky, on the outskirts of Kyiv, Ukraine, Sunday, March 27, 2022. Nearly 50,000 Russian soldiers have died in the war in Ukraine, according to a new statistical analysis. (AP Photo/Rodrigo Abd, File)Ukrainian servicemen load bodies of Russian soldiers in to a railway refrigerator carriage in Kyiv, Ukraine, Friday, May 13, 2022. Nearly 50,000 Russian soldiers have died in the war in Ukraine, according to a new statistical analysis. (AP Photo/Efrem Lukatsky, File) Relatives of servicemen who died during the Russian Special military operation in Donbas pose for a photo holding portraits of Russian soldiers killed during a fighting in Ukraine, after attending the Immortal Regiment march through a street marking the 77th anniversary of the end of World War II, in Sevastopol, Crimea, May 9, 2022. Nearly 50,000 Russian soldiers have died in the war in Ukraine, according to a new statistical analysis. (AP Photo, File)A woman at a cemetery in Volzhsky, outside Volgograd, Russia, on May 26, 2022, looks at the graves of Russian soldiers killed in the war in Ukraine. Some experts say that Europe’s largest conflict since World War II could drag on for years. Nearly 50,000 Russian soldiers have died in the war in Ukraine, according to a new statistical analysis. (AP Photo, File)The father and son of Russian army Sgt. Daniil Dumenko, 35, who was killed in Ukraine, mourn his death at a ceremony in Volzhsky, outside Volgograd, Russia, on May 26, 2022. Nearly 50,000 Russian soldiers have died in the war in Ukraine, according to a new statistical analysis. (AP Photo, File)Ukraine’s military official workers move bodies of killed Russian soldiers into a refrigerator in Kharkiv, Ukraine, Saturday, June 18, 2022. Nearly 50,000 Russian soldiers have died in the war in Ukraine, according to a new statistical analysis. (AP Photo/Andrii Marienko, File)The remains of one of the Russian soldiers killed in battles and abandoned by the Russian troops in Sviatohirsk, Donetsk region, Ukraine, Wednesday, Dec. 21, 2022. Volunteers of a Ukrainian search group look for the remains of Ukrainian and Russian servicemen to identify them. Nearly 50,000 Russian soldiers have died in the war in Ukraine, according to the first independent statistical analysis of Russia’s war dead. (AP Photo/Andriy Andriyenko, FileUkrainian servicemen pack the dead body of a Russian soldier, killed in a recent battle in the Kharkiv region, Ukraine, Saturday, April 8, 2023. Nearly 50,000 Russian soldiers have died in the war in Ukraine, according to the first independent statistical analysis of Russia’s war dead. (AP Photo/Andrii Marienko, File)A grave of a Russian serviceman who died during the Russian-Ukrainian war at the cemetery in the village of Dinskaya, Krasnodar region, southern Russia, on Saturday, April 1, 2023. Nearly 50,000 Russian soldiers have died in the war in Ukraine, according to the first independent statistical analysis of Russia’s war dead. (AP Photo, File)
BRUSSELS (AP) — Nearly 50,000 Russian men have died in the war in Ukraine, according to the first independent statistical analysis of Russia’s war dead.
Two independent Russian media outlets, Mediazona and Meduza, working with a data scientist from Germany’s Tübingen University, used Russian government data to shed light on one of Moscow’s closest-held secrets — the true human cost of its invasion of Ukraine.
To do so, they relied on a statistical concept popularized during the COVID-19 pandemic called excess mortality. Drawing on inheritance records and official mortality data, they estimated how many more men under age 50 died between February 2022 and May 2023 than normal.
Neither Moscow nor Kyiv gives timely data on military losses, and each is at pains to amplify the other side’s casualties. Russia has publicly acknowledged the deaths of just over 6,000 soldiers. Reports about military losses have been repressed in Russian media, activists and independent journalists say. Documenting the dead has become an act of defiance; those who do so face harassment and potential criminal charges.
Despite such challenges, Mediazona and the BBC’s Russian Service, working with a network of volunteers, have used social media postings and photographs of cemeteries across Russia to build a database of confirmed war deaths. As of July 7, they had identified 27,423 dead Russian soldiers.
“These are only soldiers who we know by name, and their deaths in each case are verified by multiple sources,” said Dmitry Treshchanin, an editor at Mediazona who helped oversee the investigation. “The estimate we did with Meduza allows us to see the ‘hidden’ deaths, deaths the Russian government is so obsessively and unsuccessfully trying to hide.”
To come up with a more comprehensive tally, journalists from Mediazona and Meduza obtained records of inheritance cases filed with the Russian authorities. Their data from the National Probate Registry contained information about more than 11 million people who died between 2014 and May 2023.
According to their analysis, 25,000 more inheritance cases were opened in 2022 for males aged 15 to 49 than expected. By May 27, 2023, the number of excess cases had shot up to 47,000.
That surge is roughly in line with a May assessment by the White House that more than 20,000 Russians had been killed in Ukraine since December, though lower than U.S. and U.K. intelligence assessments of overall Russian deaths.
In February, the U.K. Ministry of Defense said approximately 40,000 to 60,000 Russians had likely been killed in the war. A leaked assessment from the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency put the number of Russians killed in action in the first year of the war at 35,000 to 43,000.
“Their figures might be accurate, or they might not be,” Treshchanin, the Mediazona editor, said in an email. “Even if they have sources in the Russian Ministry of Defense, its own data could be incomplete. It’s extremely difficult to pull together all of the casualties from the army, Rosgvardia, Akhmat battalion, various private military companies, of which Wagner is the largest, but not the only one. Casualties among inmates, first recruited by Wagner and now by the MoD, are also a very hazy subject, with a lot of potential for manipulation. Statistics could actually give better results.”
Many Russian fatalities – as well as amputations – could have been prevented with better front-line first aid, the U.K. Ministry of Defense said in an intelligence assessment published Monday. Russia has suffered an average of around 400 casualties a day for 17 months, creating a “crisis” in combat medical care that is likely undermining medical services for civilians in border regions near Ukraine, the ministry said.
Independently, Dmitry Kobak, a data scientist from Germany’s Tübingen University who has published work on excess COVID-19 deaths in Russia, obtained mortality data broken down by age and sex for 2022 from Rosstat, Russia’s official statistics agency.
He found that 24,000 more men under age 50 died in 2022 than expected, a figure that aligns with the analysis of inheritance data.
The COVID-19 pandemic made it harder to figure out how many men would have died in Russia since February 2022 if there hadn’t been a war. Both analyses corrected for the lingering effects of COVID on mortality by indexing male death rates against female deaths.
Sergei Scherbov, a scholar at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Austria, cautioned that “differences in the number of deaths between males and females can vary significantly due to randomness alone.”
“I am not saying that there couldn’t be an excess number of male deaths, but rather that statistically speaking, this difference in deaths could be a mere outcome of chance,” he said.
Russians who are missing but not officially recognized as dead, as well as citizens of Ukraine fighting in units of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk republics, are not included in these counts.
Kobak acknowledged that some uncertainties remain, especially for deaths of older men. Moreover, it’s hard to know how many missing Russian soldiers are actually dead. But he said neither factor is likely to have a huge impact.
“That uncertainty is in the thousands,” he said. “The results are plausible overall.”
Asked by the Associated Press on Monday about the Meduza and Mediazona study, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said during a conference call with reporters he wasn’t aware of it as the Kremlin had “stopped monitoring” Meduza. Peskov also refused to comment on the number of deaths mentioned in the study, saying only that “the Defense Ministry gives the numbers, and they’re the only ones who have that prerogative.”
Meduza is an independent Russian media outlet that has been operating in exile for eight years, with headquarters in Riga, Latvia. In April 2021, Russian authorities designated Meduza a “foreign agent,” making it harder to generate advertising income, and in January 2023, the Kremlin banned Meduza as an illegal “undesirable organization.”
Moscow has also labeled independent outlet Mediazona as a “foreign agent” and blocked its website after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Dasha Litvinova contributed to this report from Tallinn, Estonia.
Exclusive-Wagner fighters neared Russian nuclear base during revolt
July 10, 2023
Exclusive-Wagner fighters neared Russian nuclear base during revolt
(Reuters) – As rebellious Wagner forces drove north toward Moscow on June 24, a contingent of military vehicles diverted east on a highway in the direction of a fortified Russian army base that holds nuclear weapons, according to videos posted online and interviews with local residents.
Once the Wagner fighters reach more rural regions, the surveillance trail goes cold – about 100 km from the nuclear base, Voronezh-45. Reuters could not confirm what happened next, and Western officials have repeatedly said that Russia’s nuclear stockpile was never in danger during the uprising, which ended quickly and mysteriously later that day.
But in an exclusive interview, Ukraine’s head of military intelligence, Kyrylo Budanov, said that the Wagner fighters went far further. He said that they reached the nuclear base and that their intention was to acquire small Soviet-era nuclear devices in order to “raise the stakes” in their mutiny. “Because if you are prepared to fight until the last man standing, this is one of the facilities that significantly raises the stakes,” Budanov said.
The only barrier between the Wagner fighters and nuclear weapons, Budanov said, were the doors to the nuclear storage facility. “The doors of the storage were closed and they didn’t get into the technical section,” he said.
Reuters was not able to independently determine if Wagner fighters made it to Voronezh-45. Budanov did not provide evidence for his assertion and he declined to say what discussions, if any, had taken place with the United States and other allies about the incident. He also didn’t say why the fighters subsequently withdrew.
A source close to the Kremlin with military ties corroborated parts of Budanov’s account. A Wagner contingent “managed to get into a zone of special interest, as a result of which the Americans got agitated because nuclear munitions are stored there,” this person said, without elaborating further.
A source in Russian occupied east Ukraine, with knowledge of the matter, said this caused concern in the Kremlin and provided impetus for a hastily negotiated end to the rebellion on the evening of June 24, brokered by Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko.
U.S. officials expressed doubts about this account. In response to a query about whether Wagner forces reached the base and sought to acquire nuclear weapons, White House National Security Council spokesman Adam Hodge said, “We are not able to corroborate this report. We had no indication at any point that nuclear weapons or materials were at risk.”
The Kremlin and Wagner commander Yevgeny Prigozhin did not respond to questions for this article.
Matt Korda, a Senior Research Associate and Project Manager for the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, said it would be “virtually impossible for a non-state actor” to breach Russian nuclear security. Wagner may have had thousands of troops at its disposal, he said, but it’s unlikely any of them knew how to detonate a bomb.
“If you had a malicious actor who was able to get their hands on a nuclear weapon, they would find the weapons stored in a state of incomplete assembly,” he said. “They would need to be completed by installing specialised equipment and then unlocking permissive action links, and in order to do that they would need the cooperation of someone from the 12th Directorate” responsible for protecting Russia’s nuclear arsenal.
Budanov is the first official to suggest Wagner fighters came close to acquiring nuclear weapons and further escalating an armed mutiny that has been widely interpreted as the biggest challenge to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s power. U.S. officials have long feared the nightmare possibility that strife in Russia might lead to nuclear devices falling into rogue hands.
Wagner fighters drove in the direction of Voronezh-45 after peeling away from a larger convoy of heavy weaponry that was advancing along the M4 highway that runs north from Rostov, where the rebellion began. This smaller group headed east, and engaged Russian forces in a firefight at the first village it reached, according to residents and social media posts. But then it appears to have passed without hindrance for 90 km, including driving unchallenged through the centre of a town that houses a military base.
Reuters followed the group’s progress to the town of Talovaya, about 100 km from the base, which dates back to the Soviet era. It is one of Russia’s 12 “national-level storage facilities” for nuclear weapons, according to a report by U.N. scientists. At Talovaya, Russian forces attacked the column, according to local people who spoke to Reuters. A Russian helicopter was shot down, killing the two crew.
Reuters interviewed Budanov in his Kyiv office, which Russia targeted with strikes as recently as May. Dressed in military fatigues with a black pistol tucked into his waistband, Budanov spoke in front of a painting that depicts an owl, a symbol of Ukraine’s spy bureau, clutching a bat, symbol of Russia’s military intelligence agency. He said Voronezh-45 houses small nuclear devices that can be carried in a backpack. “This was one of the key storage facilities for these backpacks,” he said, without providing evidence for this assertion. Reuters was unable to establish if the backpack-sized nuclear charges, referred to by Budanov, are kept at Voronezh-45.
Such small nuclear bombs – light enough to be carried by a single person – are Cold War relics. American troops trained to parachute from planes with nuclear weapons strapped to their bodies and Soviet troops trained to deploy them behind enemy lines on foot. But by the early 1990s, both nations agreed to remove them from their arsenals as tensions eased, and did so, though Russia kept some to mine harbours, said Hans Kristensen, who leads the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, based in Washington.
Several former U.S. nuclear nonproliferation officials cautioned that it’s difficult to know for sure whether the Russians kept their promise to destroy their backpack-style nuclear weapons. “I don’t believe the Russians still have them, but I wouldn’t bet my life on it,” said David Jonas, former general counsel to the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration, which tracks atomic weapons and radioactive material worldwide.
Amy Woolf, a nuclear weapons specialist for U.S. lawmakers at the Library of Congress from 1988 to 2022, raised doubts about the potency of such weapons if they do still exist. “It’s possible there’s still some old crap stuck in storage somewhere,” she said. “But is it operational? Almost certainly not.”
Jonas, who advised top Pentagon officials on nonproliferation, agreed, noting that such portable weapons need to be maintained and updated, and degrade over time. He said Russia has struggled to maintain its conventional forces, let alone its atomic stockpile.
A FALLING OUT
Wagner was founded by Prigozhin and Dmitry Utkin, a former special forces officer in Russia’s GRU military intelligence. Cast as a private army, Wagner enabled Russia to dabble in wars in countries including Syria, Libya and Mali with full deniability. U.S. officials also say Prigozhin’s business operated a social media troll factory that interfered with the 2016 American presidential election. In recent days, Putin confirmed the Russian state financed Wagner. State television reported that Prigozhin’s operations had received more than 1.7 trillion roubles ($19 billion) from the Russian budget.
Prigozhin fired the opening salvo of his mutiny on June 23 when he accused the Russian military of launching a missile strike on a Wagner camp in Russian-occupied east Ukraine. Russia denied any such operation.
At least half a dozen sources inside and outside Russia say the conflict had been brewing for some time and that money and tensions between rival clans lay at its heart. For months, Prigozhin had been openly insulting Putin’s most senior military men, casting Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu and Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov as corrupt and incompetent and blaming them for reversals in Russia’s war in Ukraine.
The insults went unanswered in public for a long time. Then Shoigu hit back. On June 10, he ordered Wagner fighters to sign contracts with his ministry agreeing to become part of the regular army by month’s end. Prigozhin refused. On June 13, Putin publicly sided with Shoigu. The state was moving to cut Wagner’s funding and this, the sources inside and outside Russia told Reuters, was the trigger for the mutiny.
In the early hours of June 24, Wagner forces arrived in the southern city of Rostov, an important command centre for Russia’s operations in Ukraine. Wagner took charge of the base there and within hours video emerged of Prigozhin chatting with Russian commanders. Around the same time, other contingents of Wagner forces struck out north, heading in the direction of Moscow along the M-4 highway.
Wagner fighters encountered little resistance.
Some Russian units that stood in their path or were instructed to intercept them did nothing, according to five sources: a Russian security source, three people close to the Kremlin, and a person close to the Russian-installed leadership in eastern Ukraine. The security source said two Russian military formations around the south-west of the country received orders to resist Wagner but they did not act on the command.
Some Russian units did nothing because they were taken by surprise and were outgunned, the sources said, while others stood by because they assumed, until Putin went on television at 10:00 a.m. Moscow time to denounce Prigozhin, that Wagner was acting on the Kremlin’s orders. The sources said some officers were reluctant to move against Wagner because they felt solidarity with the private army and shared Prigozhin’s disillusionment with the way the Defence Ministry top brass was running the war.
At the Bugayevka crossing between Ukraine and Russia, images posted by a Wagner-affiliated Telegram channel on the morning of June 24 showed dozens of Russian troops standing in line, unarmed. The caption said they had laid down their weapons.
Oleksiy Danilov, Secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defence Council, told Reuters that many in the Russian military sided with Prigozhin. “There are so many commanders who sympathise with Wagner and don’t want to follow Putin,” he said, adding that he knew of 14 Russian generals who supported Prigozhin. Reuters was not able to independently verify his account about the generals.
One branch of the Wagner force headed north along the M-4 highway, in the direction of Moscow. Their route took them right past Boguchar, a garrison town where a Russian unit is stationed. Three local residents who spoke to Reuters said that the military there did nothing to resist, and that a significant number of people in the town, including people serving in the military, felt sympathy with the Wagner force.
One woman said of Prigozhin: “Who else should we support? At least there’s one dignified person who was not frightened.” Another female resident also said Wagner had widespread support in the town, and that many Wagner fighters are from Boguchar. “They’re all friends,” she said.
A NUCLEAR DETOUR
As the main Wagner column advanced northwards towards Moscow, a group of military vehicles, and some civilian pickups and vans, turned eastwards. The moment is captured on a video posted on a Voronezh region news site. Reuters geo-located the video to a junction near the town of Pavlovsk. The breakaway contingent rumbled through villages and along a road that cut through patches of forest and flat farmland, skirting gulleys carved out by tributaries of the Don River.
A video posted on a local online bulletin board shows a field in the dawn light near the village of Elizavetovka on June 24. In the distance there is an explosion and gunfire, and panicked cries from a male voice: “Has a war started?”
Then a fresh round of automatic gunfire, closer this time.
Reuters spoke to the man’s neighbour, who said the Russian military had attacked the Wagner force. At 08:24 am, a user on the same online bulletin board, Anna Sandrakova, wrote: “Shells are flying, low-flying helicopters, we could hear explosions, automatic gunfire.” Maxim Yantsov, the local government chief for Pavlovsk district, wrote on his Telegram channel that 19 households were damaged as a result of shooting around Elizavetovka.
A few hours later, the convoy passed through another village, Vorontsovka, still moving in the direction of the nuclear facility. Two videos posted to Telegram show more than a dozen vehicles, including armoured personnel carriers, tanks and trucks mounted with machine guns or carrying artillery.
Next on the route, the convoy reached Buturlinovka, according to posts on the town’s online bulletin board and a video that Reuters identified as being recorded in the town. Buturlinovka, closer still to the nuclear facility, is the location of a military air base.
By Saturday evening, users on a VKontakte online forum started reporting the presence of a military column at the town of Talovaya, 110 km from the military base. A video shared by a local resident with Reuters shows a column of military vehicles moving through the outskirts of the town. A second video, provided by another resident, showed at least 75 vehicles in a convoy on the edge of the town, including 5 armoured personnel carriers, two ambulances, and an artillery gun towed behind a truck. A third resident said local people offered food and water to the Wagner troops. The situation was calm, he said, until a Russian helicopter fired at the column. It fired back and the helicopter fell to the ground, followed by explosions and a cloud of smoke.
Russian state media later broadcast video of a wooden cross erected at the site in Talovaya district where the helicopter, a Ka-52 attack aircraft, crashed. Pskov region governor Mikhail Vedernikov said the two crewmen who were killed were stationed at a military base in his region, in north-west Russia. “True to their oath, they did everything to protect our country,” he said in a video address posted on his Telegram channel.
Reuters couldn’t determine what the column did next. A resident of Talovaya said that as far as he was aware, it did not move any further and the following day – after the truce was announced – the column turned around and went back the way it came.
Budanov said in his interview that an unspecified number of fighters did in fact press on to Voronezh-45 with the intention of seizing portable, Soviet-era nuclear weapons stored at the facility.
The nuclear facility at Voronezh-45 is operated and guarded by military unit no. 14254, part of the defence ministry’s 12th Main Directorate responsible for protecting Russia’s arsenal of nuclear weapons, according to the Russian Defence Ministry’s website and publicly available records. What is stored there is a closely guarded secret. Russia does not publicly acknowledge even keeping nuclear weapons there; that information has emerged from the reports of foreign scientists.
Reuters was unable to establish if the backpack-sized nuclear charges referred to by Budanov are kept at the facility. But there is evidence that such devices were developed by the Soviet Union. In testimony to the U.S. Congress, in 1997 Alexei Yablokov, a former Russian presidential science advisor, said Soviet scientists in the 1970s created suitcase-sized nuclear munitions for use by secret agents.
Kristensen, the Federation of American Scientists researcher who said that Russia and the United States discarded thousands of suitcase-sized nukes in the 1990s, said that he doubts any remain stored Voronezh-45. He said he believes – but cannot be certain – that other nuclear weapons are stored at Voronezh-45, which satellite images show to be well-maintained.
Given the 12th Main Directorate’s control over the facility, the movement of weapons would take time and likely be detected by U.S. satellites, he added.
Further north, there is evidence that the Russian military undertook drastic measures to block off another potential access route to Voronezh-45. The E-38 road branches off the M-4 highway at a settlement called Rogachevka. This road also leads to Voronezh-45. On the evening of June 24, local residents reported hearing explosions. A video posted on a Telegram channel captured the sound of an aircraft followed by an explosion. A motorist driving along the E-38 posted a video that shows the road covered in debris near a bridge over the river Bityug. In one lane is a deep crater.
A DEAL IS STRUCK
On the evening of June 24 there was an unexpected announcement by Belarusian state media. The country’s president, Alexsandr Lukashenko, had negotiated Prigozhin’s agreement to halt his forces’ advances. Prigozhin said in an audio message that his forces had come within 125 miles of Moscow and were “turning around” to head back to their training camps. Under the deal, Russia would not prosecute the rebels and Wagner fighters would either withdraw to Belarus or join Russia’s regular army.
A European intelligence source said Prigozhin was persuaded to abandon his revolt after realising he didn’t have sufficient support amongst the military.
Prigozhin’s whereabouts and future plans are unclear.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Monday that Putin held talks with the Wagner leader on June 29 and “gave his assessment of the events” of June 24.
One of Prigozhin’s private jets has made multiple trips between Belarus and Russia in the days since the rebellion, according to flight tracking data.
When Belarusian president Lukashenko hosted a group of journalists in Minsk on July 6, he said Wagner’s fighters had yet to arrive at their new Belarusian base. “As for Yevgeny Prigozhin, he’s in St Petersburg. Or perhaps this morning he flew to Moscow. Or perhaps he’s somewhere else. But he’s not in Belarus,” Lukashenko said.
(Reporting by Mari Saito, Tom Balmforth, Sergiy Karazy and Anna Dabrowska in Kyiv, John Shiffman and Phil Stewart in Washington, Polina Nikolskaya in London, Maria Tsvetkova in New York, Anton Zverev, Christian Lowe in Paris, David Gauthier-Villars in Istanbul, Stephen Grey, Reade Levinson and Eleanor Whalley in London, Milan Pavicic and Daria Shamonova in Gdansk; edited by Janet McBride)
The worst thing for Russia’s economy isn’t Western sanctions. It’s Putin.
Phil Rosen – July 10, 2023
Vladimir Putin has steered the Russian economy to the brink of catastrophe.Anadolu Agency / Getty Images
Vladimir Putin has crippled Russia’s economy to fund the war in Ukraine, experts tell Insider.
Experts say the official data from Moscow suggests it’s faring far better than it actually is.
The ruble has is crashing, the labor force has seen an exodus, and civil war remains possible.
The West has imposed sweeping sanctions on Moscow since it launched its war on Ukraine last February, but much of Russia’s economic troubles can be chalked up to suspect and counterproductive leadership by Vladimir Putin.
Before the “special military operation” began, Russia was the 11th largest economy in the world, accounting for almost 40% of Europe Union’s natural gas imports and a quarter of its crude oil. A year and a half later, Putin’s turned Moscow into a pariah state, isolated from the global financial system, barred from its most lucrative trade routes, and in the midst of a worker brain drain. Experts say the damage has been largely self-inflicted.
Speaking with Insider on Monday, Yale researchers Jeffrey Sonnenfeld and Steven Tian said that Putin has lost the economic battle to a profound degree, and now he’s scrambling to maintain a status quo that’s quickly dissolving beneath his feet.
“He’s devouring core bedrock industries,” Sonnenfeld said. “The lion’s share of the economy is controlled by the state, the energy and financial sectors, and Putin is taking from the seed capital of those businesses to use as a cookie jar for his war chest.”
Trade will never be the same
Russia is barely breaking even on its energy trade, and most of its other top commodities like wheat, lumber, and metals sell cheaper today than before the invasion. The lack of trade income pushed Putin to levy draconian windfall taxes on businesses and individuals, which the Yale academics see as part of his “cannibalization” of the economy.
“Laying on onerous taxes is doing nothing for the economic health of the country, but they allow him to pay bills,” Sonnenfeld said.
Putin’s policy missteps became inevitable after he made the initial call to invade Ukraine, Tian said, adding that Russia’s trade status may never be the same. It’s become increasingly clear that other countries can get by just fine without Russia as a trading partner.
“He’s destroying the historical underpinnings of the Russian economy,” Tian said. “Its main exports have always been commodities, but now nobody needs to buy Russian commodities anymore.”
Yale data shared with Insider showed that Russia’s natural gas market in particular has been permanently lost.
The initial supply shock in February 2022 has quickly been overcome, with nearly 100 billion cubic metres of natural gas going online since then thanks to regasification projects commissioned across Europe. Germany has led nations including France, Netherlands, and Italy to develop new floating storage units that have come online in record time.
Russia’s LNG markets are permanently lost, according to Yale data. Gas production across other major exporters jumped following the invasion of Ukraine.Courtesy of Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute
While China and India have stepped in as big buyers of cheap Russian crude since last year, steep discounts and lengthy shipping routes prevent those sales from propping up the Russian economy in a meaningful way.
“If Putin were on the call with us today, he couldn’t point to a single policy or economic positive for himself, the Russian people, or the economy,” Sonnenfeld said.
Potential for Soviet-style collapse
Volodymyr Lugovskyy, an economics professor at Indiana University, told me he expects to see a dramatic economic change within the next three or four months.
“Many people still don’t realize how bad the situation in Russia might be,” he said.
Official government data point to an economy that’s been able to withstand the costs of war, but under-the-hood numbers like retail sales, flight purchases, and business activity suggest otherwise.
“Things are much worse than the reported 2% drop in GDP,” Lugovskyy said. “Sales of new cars, sales of new computers, those dropped by 40% to 60%. And if you remove military activity from the data, production looks far worse [than reported].”
The country’s currency in particular looks vulnerable. After the Wagner Group’s attempted mutiny in June, the ruble crashed to a 15-month low. On Monday, it hovered just above 90 per dollar, but that could weaken to 149 per dollar, in Lugovskyy’s view.
A change in power, civil war, or another attempt at mutiny, the professor maintained, could drag on the exchange rate and ultimately lead to the collapse of the economy.
“Russia might collapse into multiple pieces, like the Soviet Union, and that might not be a bad thing for the world,” Lugovskyy said. “It’s resembling an empire right now, with a central power. Extreme events are highly possible.”
Tensions between the West and China show no sign of easing. Interdependence and mistrust continue to mix uneasily. Triggers are many and varied including; human rights, relations with Russia vis-à-vis Ukraine, microchip manufacturing and the big one, Taiwan.
Then there is the rhetoric. US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is in Beijing for talks aimed at easing some of these tensions. It’s ironic, but not unprecedented, that at the exact same time, President Xi is telling the troops of the Eastern Theatre Command – the one that faces Taiwan – that they need to step up their combat readiness and “… persist in thinking and handling military issues from a political perspective, dare to fight, be good at fighting, and resolutely defend our national sovereignty, security, and development interests.”
This is not the first time Xi has timed an info-ops stunt like this to coincide with a diplomatic visit and neither is he the first Chinese President to do it.
Hu Jintao did something similar in 2011 telling his military to “make extended preparations for warfare”. It has happened many times since. One can make a case that this constant need to posture in this way masks a lack of confidence.
Xi’s military numbers and rate of build might be eyewatering but what experience underpins them? Russia’s efforts in Ukraine have shown repeatedly that spectacular parades do not equate to hardened fighting competence. His message is timed with Yellen’s visit to create maximum international effect but internally it is as likely to be a kick aimed at his generals than an immediate call to arms.
In the longer term, is war with China inevitable? General Mike Minihan of the US Air Force says it is; a hawkish stance that I suspect is shared by quite a few in the US military. But, as is the way, there are plenty who believe that the situation will continue to be managed by ongoing diplomatic efforts and the deterrent effect of our combined militaries.
Certainly, the ongoing importance of both conventional and nuclear deterrence cannot be underestimated right now. This, coupled with maximum diplomatic effort, soft and hard, should sit alongside military operations and exercises designed to demonstrate what it could look like if these efforts fail.
One thing we can be sure of is that US Pacific Command will be planning for all ‘fighting’ eventualities with a high degree of granularity. Having been part of a US led contingency plan myself (thankfully not one that was put into action in my time) I know that the level of detail that goes into American wargaming is exceptional and the algorithms they use to determine levels of damage and casualties are sophisticated.
Having said that, the quirk of taking a kicking from Enemy X during a wargame but then telling the General in the final debrief that ‘we issued a beat down’ was interesting to watch from close up. Nevertheless, PACOM’s planning for a war with China will be reassuringly comprehensive.
So what for the UK? Well, we will feature in the plan. Somewhere in the chapter marked ‘assets’ will be what we could offer in a ‘fight tonight’. That’s zero right now, with apologies to HMS Tamar and HMS Spey, the almost unarmed patrol vessels which are all we have in the Indo-Pacific area at the moment. Then there’s what ‘best effort’ would look like if we sent everything we have across Defence, and a reasonable middle ground with associated deployment timelines.
We Brits will be a footnote in terms of overall combat power with two exceptions. Our aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth (with a full outfit of US/allied jets) would be a noticeable piece on the game board if she was out there.
Secondly our nuclear powered attack submarines, armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles, are a threat to worry any Chinese admiral. There will be other areas where we can contribute such as intelligence, cyber, special forces etc, but the carrier and the submarines will be front and centre of the conventional plan.
In QE and the Astute class submarines, we have cutting-edge capabilities. The carrier herself has redundancy (which has proven useful recently with HMS Prince of Wales in drydock to replace a broken shaft) but everything beneath that is wafer thin: we have very few F-35 jets to put aboard her, very few escort ships to send with her and not enough ammunition (including Tomahawks), support helicopters or supporting logistic ships.
Much of this will be ameliorated by operating in the sort of allied task group that would be assembled for a fight like this but every time you have to put a star by your asset (*needs US support) you degrade your usefulness until eventually they look at you across the room and ask ‘are you in this or not?’ This is happening.
And, of course, neither of those assets are there right now. HMS Queen Elizabeth made a significant impression during her 2021 deployment there but isn’t due back until 2025. Similarly, our attack subs are already fully assigned elsewhere. Someone will have worked out how quickly both these things could get there but it isn’t ‘soon’.
The Aukus alliance between us, the US and Australia is an outstanding political and military collaboration but is going to take an age to come online and a lot could happen in that time. There has however been talk of sending one of our submarines to the Indo-Pacific early.
If this happens, and is coordinated with US attack submarine deployments to the region, and we buy more Tomahawks, then that would be a significant UK contribution to both deterrence and the fight. There are a lot of unfunded assumptions in there though.
More broadly, the Integrated Review Refresh is complete and still suitably ambiguous as to whether Continental Europe, the North Atlantic or the Indo-Pacific should constitute ‘main effort’. All eyes are therefore on the imminent Defence Command and Balance of Investment Papers to allocate resources to these areas and thus provide some answers.
While this turn of the handle won’t have the slash-and-burn effect of the 2010 process there also won’t be any more money: probably less in real terms. We remain almost the only country in Europe steadfastly opposed to increasing Defence expenditure just now.
Meanwhile, the situation in Taiwan feels like a ‘circling press aircraft’. Let me explain.
I was in a naval exercise off the north of Scotland some time ago when a light aircraft claiming that it was neutral and full of press approached the ship. We spoke to it and then ‘warned’ it ranging from ‘hello who are you?’ to ‘turn away now or you will be fired on’.
Then at the range where the Rules of Engagement would have allowed me to start shooting, five miles, it turned 90 degrees and started circling the ship. We carried on talking to it and reading ‘warnings’ but they protested, stated their peaceful intentions and continued to circle. But now they were at four miles. My bluff had been called. We had intelligence to suggest a light aircraft threat but they weren’t closing us directly and so we were not allowed to engage. Now they were at three.
It was a brilliant scenario, because when do you pull the trigger?
This is what is happening with China and Taiwan. China continues to circle, getting ever closer but never pointing directly at the target. Aggressive exercises, encircling, drone overflights and encroachments will continue until they become ‘normal’, then they will tighten a little more.
My working theory is that they will keep closing in and wait for a natural disaster such as an earthquake or tsunami to provide cover for a final move under cover of Humanitarian and Disaster Relief. It’s hard to say ‘no’ to assistance and before you know it Chinese presence on Taiwan has also become ‘normal’. I could be wrong. I hope I’m not because many of the alternatives are far, far worse.
In the meantime, the diplomatic, information and deterrent efforts from both sides will continue apace. Xi will carry on building equipment and posturing aggressively and the West will continue to try and decide where to sit between appeasement, essential cooperation and aggression.
The UK will continue to contribute where it can, whilst hoping that no one notices the smallness of the stick with which we are walking softly.
To finish the story, I was out of ideas with the ‘press aircraft’ until I heard our American exchange officer in the Operations Room. He was a little bemused when I put my headset on him and told him to say, ‘turn away or we will fire on you’ but did as we was asked.
There was then a five-second pause before a new voice appeared on the radio, “British warship, this is the aircraft pilot. Can I just check this is still an exercise?”
Biden said he decided to send Ukraine controversial cluster bombs because Kyiv is ‘running out of ammunition’
Alia Shoaib – July 8, 2023
Biden said he decided to send Ukraine controversial cluster bombs because Kyiv is ‘running out of ammunition’
Joe Biden has agreed to send Ukraine deadly cluster munitions.
He defended his decision and said Ukraine needed them because they were “running out of ammunition.”
The controversial weapons are banned under an international treaty signed by 123 countries, but not the US.
President Joe Biden defended his decision to send Ukraine controversial and deadly cluster munitions, explaining it was because Kyiv was “running out of ammunition” after 500 days of war.
“It was a very difficult decision on my part. And by the way, I discussed this with our allies, I discussed this with our friends up on the Hill,” Biden told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria on Friday.
“The Ukrainians are running out of ammunition,” he added.
The US finally agreed to send the weapons as part of a new $800 million security assistance package on Friday, following months of requests from Kyiv.
The cluster munitions will be compatible with US-provided 155mm howitzers, which have been a key piece of artillery for Ukrainian forces, CNN reported.
Cluster bombs are particularly dangerous because they break apart into multiple little bombs when fired, some of which do not always explode upon impact. The unexploded ordinance can put civilians at risk for years to come, like landmines.
Experts say cluster bombs will be useful for Ukraine’s forces against well-dug-in Russian trenches amid a grueling counteroffensive.
However, the lethal weapons are highly controversial and are banned under an international treaty signed by 123 countries – but not the US, Russia, and Ukraine.
A casing of a cluster bomb rocket lays on the snow-covered ground in Zarichne on February 6, 2023, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine.YASUYOSHI CHIBA/AFP via Getty Images
Biden told Zakaria that the weapons were being sent to Ukraine during a “transition period” until the US is able to produce more 155mm artillery.
“This is a war relating to munitions. And they’re running out of that ammunition, and we’re low on it,” Biden said.
“And so, what I finally did, I took the recommendation of the Defense Department to – not permanently – but to allow for this transition period, while we get more 155 weapons, these shells, for the Ukrainians.”
Ukraine launched its much-anticipated counteroffensive to take back territory occupied by Russia in early June, but gains have so far been slow.
Biden said it took him a while “to be convinced” to send cluster bombs, but he ultimately decided Ukraine “needed them.”
Former chief of general staff for the British Army Lord Dannatt said that Biden’s move risks “fracturing” NATO harmony, considering so many NATO countries have banned them.
Responding to Biden’s decision, UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak noted on Saturday that the UK was a signatory of the international treaty banning and discouraging their use but said his government would continue to support Ukraine in other ways.
Ukraine told to investigate its use of banned ‘butterfly’ antipersonnel mines
18 PFM-1 in cluster dispenser. Also known as ‘butterfly’ mines.German Army Combat Training Centre Letzlingen 2019/Wikicommons
Last week, Human Rights Watch told Ukraine to investigate the use of banned land mines by the Ukrainian military after new evidence that they had caused civilian casualties was discovered.
The group called for Ukraine to investigate the use of Russian-made PFM-1 antipersonnel mines around the eastern Ukrainian city of Izium between April and September 2022. It said it had evidence of 11 civilian casualties from the mines, including one fatality.
The miniature PFM-1, also known as “butterfly” or “petal” mines, are fired from rockets and scatter indiscriminately on a wide area.
Putin is cannibalizing Russia’s economy as war in Ukraine derails financial order, Yale researchers say
Jennifer Sor – July 8, 2023
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin speaks at the victory ceremony at an Annual International Vladivostok Jigoro Kano Cadet Judo Tournament at Fetisov Arena, on Day 2 of the 2018 Eastern Economic ForumMikhail Klimentyev\TASS via Getty Images
Putin has begun a “merciless cannibalization” of Russia’s economy, two Yale academics said.
Researchers pointed to the chaos unfolding in Russia as Putin tries to cover the nation’s growing budget deficit.
Russia’s show of economic strength is a “facade,” the researchers said.
Vladimir Putin is ruining his nation’s economy, as the Russian president is derails the financial order in his quest to conquer Ukraine, according to two Yale researchers.
In a recent op-ed for TIME, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld and Steven Tian, two academics from the Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute, pointed to the economic chaos unfolding in Russia as the war in Ukraine drags on.
“Far from the prevailing narrative on how Putin funds his invasion, Putin’s financial lifeline has his merciless cannibalization of Russian economic productivity,” Sonnenfeld and Tian said. “He has been burning the living room furniture to fuel his battles in Ukraine, but that is now starting to backfire amidst a deafening silence and dearth of public support.”
Putin, for his part, has tried to shore up more money as the war effort continues, but has done so in ways that have largely ignored Russia’s fiscal responsibilities, the researchers said. That includes measures like printing record volumes of Russia’s ruble “out of thin air,” forcing institutions to buy “near-worthless” Russian debt assets, hefty windfall taxes on “basically anything that moves,” and taking billions out from Russia’s sovereign wealth fund to square the nation’s finances.
Those measures have contributed to the flight of millionaires and everyday workers, who have left the country to look for better opportunities, significantly hurting the nation’s output and productivity. And though Putin has made a show of Russia’s economic strength, his actions have only bought Russia more time, researchers warned.
“That resilience is nothing but a Potemkin façade, sustained not through genuine economic productivity but rather through shaking down the entire country for pennies to direct towards war,” Sonnenfeld and Tian said. “Putin can continue to sustain his invasion of Ukraine this way, but in doing so, continues to rip off his own people. In avoiding outright economic collapse by mortgaging Russia’s future, he grows more unloved by his people and is thus increasingly weakened.
Sonnenfeld and Tian have been critical of the state of Russia’s economy, despite Putin’s attempts to assure the public that Russia is doing just fine. Unpublished statistics from the Kremlin are likely to show a weaker picture of Russia’s economy than the government has led on, Sonnenfeld and Tian said, who previously argued that Russia’s economic figures were merely “cherry-picked” and that its economy was actually imploding.
“Amidst such undisguised plundering of the Russian economy, stripping it down for war toys, it is perhaps no surprise that Prigozhin’s failed putsch this past weekend revealed no lost love for Putin domestically from the Russian populace and elites,” the researchers said.
The uncertainty in Russia has sparked a surge in demand for other currencies, with Bloomberg estimating that $43.5 billion of retail deposits ditched the ruble in favor of other currencies since the war began in February 2022.
Sonin said that while the ruble surged in 2022 because of “weird” macroeconomic effects, including a dramatic fall in imports, those effects were over and the currency faced several headwinds that could push it to record lows.
“What remains is continuing capital flight, decreasing budget revenues, both oil/gas and domestic taxes, declining real incomes, CB reserves lost because of the war,” Sonin said, referring to central-bank reserves.
Crude-oil prices have dropped about 10% year to date, and the G7 imposed a $60-a-barrel price cap on seaborne crude, dimming Russia’s chances of getting full market value for its oil sales.
With Russia’s economy facing mounting headwinds amid its war against Ukraine, Sonin expects the ruble to continue its decline, though “not necessarily as fast as in the last couple of months,” he said.
