MAGA would like Putin’s wannabe running America: Russia’s New Threats to Exiles: Seized Assets and Forced Returns

The New York Times

Russia’s New Threats to Exiles: Seized Assets and Forced Returns

Anton Troianovski – February 1, 2024

Fans watch as Bi-2, one of Russia’s most popular rock bands, performs at Chalet Berezka, a Russian restaurant and nightclub in Dubai, United Arab Emirates on March 1, 2023. (Andrea DiCenzo/The New York Times)
Fans watch as Bi-2, one of Russia’s most popular rock bands, performs at Chalet Berezka, a Russian restaurant and nightclub in Dubai, United Arab Emirates on March 1, 2023. (Andrea DiCenzo/The New York Times)

In Bangkok this week, members of an anti-war Russian-language rock group were fighting deportation to Russia, detained in what supporters described as a cramped, hot, 80-person immigration holding cell.

On Wednesday in Moscow, the lower house of Parliament passed a law that will allow the Russian government to seize the property of Russians living abroad who, in the words of the legislature’s chair, “besmirch our country.”

The two developments, though thousands of miles apart, reflected the same grim calculus by the Kremlin: Using new legislation and apparent diplomatic pressure on other countries, it is turning the screws on Russia’s sprawling anti-war diaspora.

“Historic Russia has risen up,” President Vladimir Putin said at a meeting with backers of his presidential campaign on Wednesday, reprising his contention that the time has come to cleanse Russian society of pro-Western elements. “All this scum that’s always present in any society is being slowly, slowly washed away.”

Under the law, any Russian, even those in exile, found to be engaged in “crimes against national security” — including criticizing the invasion of Ukraine — could have their assets confiscated. Putin is expected to sign the law, though it is not yet clear how widely or aggressively the Kremlin plans to use it.

But the law’s quick passage — it sailed through the rubber-stamp State Duma unanimously — is another signal that the Kremlin, having stamped out dissent at home, is increasingly turning its attention to criticism from abroad. Hundreds of thousands of Russians fled after the war began, including many celebrities who can still reach their fans through platforms like YouTube, which remains accessible inside Russia.

Among the first to feel this increasing pressure are popular performers who have drawn large audiences in places popular with Russian émigrés like Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and Southeast Asia. In recent weeks, Russian anti-war celebrities have accused Thailand and Indonesia of bending to Russian pressure to cancel their shows, while an anti-war rapper found himself banned from reentering the United Arab Emirates, his adopted home.

The most dramatic case unfolded after members of the rock group Bi-2, originally from Belarus and one of Russia’s most popular bands, were arrested in Thailand last week for an immigration violation. Their supporters said Russian officials spent days pushing Thailand to deport some of them to Russia, where the musicians could have faced prosecution for criticizing the war.

By Wednesday, the rockers had escaped that fate thanks to the intervention of Israeli and Australian diplomats, who arranged for all seven band members to be deported to Israel, according to the group’s lawyer, who requested anonymity for security reasons. (Four are citizens of Israel, and one of Australia.)

The extent of the Kremlin’s efforts to get the rockers sent to Russia was not clear, but on Tuesday, the group said in a statement that Thai authorities had canceled an earlier plan to deport some of them to Israel after Russian diplomats visited the immigration center where they were being held.

Analysts and human rights advocates consider the case a stark demonstration of the Kremlin’s increasingly aggressive efforts to punish Russians speaking out against Putin abroad — especially when they do so in non-Western countries that are interested in maintaining good relations with Moscow.

“This is a special operation,” said Dmitry Gudkov, an exiled Russian opposition politician who is close to Bi-2, referring to what he described as Russia’s efforts to get the band members sent to Russia. “Their task is to grab someone big outside the country to show that they can grab anyone, anywhere.”

The rock group’s brooding hits are part of the soundtrack of the early Putin era, and in later years the group was rubbing shoulders with the Russian elite at marquee events — performing, for example, at Putin’s annual economic conference in St. Petersburg in 2019. But by last year, Bi-2’s lead singer, Igor Bortnik, was writing that Putin’s Russia evoked “only disgust and squeamishness.”

Russia’s Foreign Ministry denied interfering in the Bi-2 case in Thailand, but it referred to the band members soon after their detention as “sponsors of terrorism.” A Russian lawmaker, Andrei Lugovoi, said the country was awaiting Bi-2’s deportation “with open arms” and predicted: “Soon they’ll be playing and singing on spoons and metal plates, tap dancing in front of their cellmates.”

(Lugovoi is no stranger to Russian intervention abroad, having been charged by Britain in 2007 with poisoning a Putin critic in London.)

Thailand, which has stuck to a largely neutral stance on the war in Ukraine and is a prime destination for Russian tourists, said it was following established procedure. Asked by a reporter on Wednesday about the potential deportation to Russia of Bi-2 band members, the country’s foreign minister, Parnpree Bahiddha-Nukara, said that if they are found to have “committed illegal acts,” then Thailand “has to follow the process.”

The band released a statement from its concert organizer, VPI Event, acknowledging that it had failed to obtain the right visas for the band’s Jan. 24 show on the Thai island of Phuket. But VPI asserted that Thai authorities’ decision to arrest the performers — rather than sanction the concert organizers — was unusually harsh.

“We are making every effort to free the performers, but we are facing unprecedented pressure at every stage,” the company’s statement said while the musicians were still behind bars, adding that shows in Thailand by two other Russian anti-war performers had been canceled in recent weeks. “The campaign to cancel concerts under pressure from the Russian Consulate began in December.”

Some pro-Kremlin figures have started praising Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs for getting more aggressive in putting pressure on anti-war Russians abroad.

“The MFA has really gotten to work in this regard,” Sergei Markov, a pro-Kremlin political analyst who appears frequently on Russian state television, said in a phone interview. Russian diplomats, he added, have been “actively informing” foreign governments in recent months about Russians who have “gone over to the enemy’s side.”

Alisher Morgenshtern, a rapper who had criticized the war and moved to Dubai, said last Friday that the United Arab Emirates had banned him from reentering the country. Ruslan Bely, an anti-war comedian, had two shows in Thailand canceled in January.

Another Russian comedian who opposes the war, Maksim Galkin, last week announced a show in Bali, Indonesia, days after Russian state media reported that his two planned shows in Thailand had been canceled.

But last weekend, Galkin told his 9 million Instagram followers that the Bali show, too, was canceled. Indonesian authorities, he wrote, had turned him away at the border and told him they were doing so at the request of the Russian government.

“It’s funny,” Galkin wrote, that the Russian state was expending so much effort on “the maniacal persecution of dissenting artists abroad.”

The head of the Bali regional office of Indonesia’s Ministry of Law and Human Rights, Romi Yudianto, said he was not familiar with Galkin’s case but that Indonesia “has its own sovereignty” and the right to reject unwanted visitors.

But Markov described the pressure on anti-war performers, as well as the new law allowing the confiscation of the property of Russians criticizing the war, as part and parcel of the same government effort.

“This is a message to those who are against Putin,” but aren’t sure how loudly to voice their disapproval, Markov said. It is a reminder to them, he said, that if they do speak up, even outside Russia, “don’t think that you’ll be fine.”

Putin’s official financial disclosure claims he earns just $175K a year and owns a couple of apartments and a parking spot

Business Insider

Putin’s official financial disclosure claims he earns just $175K a year and owns a couple of apartments and a parking spot

Mia Jankowicz – January 31, 2024

Why the Putin-Kim meeting has world leaders worried

  • Putin’s official financial disclosure is out, and it’s almost comically modest.
  • It says his assets include a couple of apartments, some old cars, a camping trailer, and a parking spot.
  • It makes no mention of the vast palaces and superyachts widely reported to be under his control.

President Vladimir Putin’s latest financial disclosure has been released, declaring a modest set of assets that almost certainly does not reflect his true financial position.

The disclosure is one of the formalities associated with registering as a presidential candidate, which Putin did on Monday, ahead of Russia’s March 17 elections.

According to the document, detailed by The Moscow Times, Putin’s assets are largely unchanged compared to his last disclosure in 2018, and include:

  • $753,000, representing six years of his official salary, pension, and other earnings;
  • $607,000 in savings across several bank accounts;
  • A 1,650-square-foot government-leased apartment in Moscow;
  • An 828-square-foot apartment in St Petersburg, with a 193-square-foot garage attached;
  • A St Petersburg parking space;
  • Two classic cars from the 1960s;
  • A 1987 camping trailer;
  • And a 2009 Lada Niva.

That’s far from the riches Putin is widely believed to command.

Putting a true figure on those is close to impossibleeven for wealth experts like those at Forbes.

Investigative reporting by groups such as the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, independent Russian outlet Proekt, and opposition campaigner Alexei Navalny have over the years pointed to vast sums and property portfolios whose likely ultimate controller is the Russian president.

Footage shows the main building of the Lake Valdai palace.
A photo shows the main building of the Lake Valdai palace.Navalny.com

The most widely-cited estimate is credited to financier and Kremlin critic Bill Browder, who suggested that Putin was worth about $200 billion — which in 2024 would place him as the third-richest person in the world, a few billion ahead of Jeff Bezos.

The latest financial disclosure makes no reference to the multiple palaces and superyachts said to be owned or controlled by Putin.

Secret Putin palace
Drone footage by the Dossier Center showing what is allegedly a luxurious home belonging to Russian President Vladimir Putin in Karelia, northern Russia.Dossier Center

There’s no mention of the secret bunker at his Black Sea palace, nor the highly-protected woodland palace on Lake Valdai, where his rumored girlfriend Alina Kabayeva is said to live.

As recently as this month, investigative outlet the Dossier Center also reported on a complex on Lake Karelia, near Finland’s border, said to belong to Putin.

It described the property as comprising “three modern-style houses, two helicopter pads, several yacht piers, a trout farm, and a farm with cows for the production of marble beef, as well as a personal waterfall.”

CIA chief says Russia’s failures in the Ukraine war have sealed its fate as ‘China’s economic vassal’

Business Insider

CIA chief says Russia’s failures in the Ukraine war have sealed its fate as ‘China’s economic vassal’

Kwan Wei Kevin Tan – January 31, 2024

CIA chief says Russia’s failures in the Ukraine war have sealed its fate as ‘China’s economic vassal’
  • The Russia-Ukraine war has dealt multiple setbacks to Vladimir Putin, the director of the CIA says.
  • William J. Burns said in an op-ed that the war had “proved foolish and illusory” for Putin.
  • The invasion, Burns said, had weakened Russia’s military and economy.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has crippled its economy and left it beholden to China, says William J. Burns, the director of the CIA.

“Russia’s economy is suffering long-term setbacks, and the country is sealing its fate as China’s economic vassal,” Burns wrote in an opinion article for Foreign Affairs on Tuesday.

Russia has been struggling under the West’s crippling economic sanctions ever since it invaded Ukraine in February 2022. But the ties between Russia and China have only deepened, with bilateral trade reaching a record $240 billion in 2023, Chinese customs data showed.

“Putin’s war has already been a failure for Russia on many levels,” Burns wrote in his article. “His original goal of seizing Kyiv and subjugating Ukraine proved foolish and illusory.”

The Ukraine war, he said, had dealt “immense damage” to Russia’s military.

“At least 315,000 Russian soldiers have been killed or wounded, two-thirds of Russia’s prewar tank inventory has been destroyed, and Putin’s vaunted decadeslong military modernization program has been hollowed out,” Burns wrote.

Russia’s military and economic setbacks have also seen it turn to countries such as North Korea and Iran for munitions.

“Putin’s overblown ambitions have backfired in another way, too: they have prompted NATO to grow larger and stronger,” Burns wrote.

The military alliance has seen its ranks grow in the past year, with Finland joining in April. Sweden’s application for NATO membership has received the endorsement of all members except Hungary.

Burns’ withering assessment of Putin and Russia was echoed by the UK defense secretary, Grant Shapps, earlier this month.

“The world has turned its back on Russia, forcing Putin into the humiliation of going cap in hand to North Korea to keep his illegal invasion going,” Grant Shapps wrote in an X post on January 5.

Representatives for Burns didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider sent outside regular business hours.

Abandoning Ukraine would be an ‘own goal’ for the US as the war hollows out the army Putin spent decades building, CIA chief says

Business Insider

Abandoning Ukraine would be an ‘own goal’ for the US as the war hollows out the army Putin spent decades building, CIA chief says

Chris Panella – January 31, 2024

Abandoning Ukraine would be an ‘own goal’ for the US as the war hollows out the army Putin spent decades building, CIA chief says. Ukrainian servicemen driving a T-72 tank on the frontline in eastern Ukraine in July 2022.MIGUEL MEDINA/AFP via Getty Images
  • If the US abandoned Ukraine and cut off crucial aid, it’d be an “own goal,” the CIA director said.
  • William J. Burns said the US supporting Ukraine was a modest investment with significant returns.
  • With aid tied up in Congress, the US and Ukraine’s next steps have critical implications.

Should the US walk away from the war in Ukraine and abandon it as it attempts to fend off the Russians, it would be an “own goal of historic proportions,” the CIA director said.

The warning comes as new, crucial aid is held up by Republicans in Congress. It’s a critical time for the US, which has contributed a significant amount of aid to Ukraine, to question its vested interests in seeing a stronger Ukraine and a weaker Russia.

In an opinion article published Tuesday in Foreign Affairs, William J. Burns, the director of the CIA, wrote that Putin‘s war had already severely impacted Russia in a variety of ways, such as isolating it globally and damaging its military and economy. He added that Putin’s efforts to modernize the Russian military had suffered as a result of this devastating, high-casualty conflict.

“At least 315,000 Russian soldiers have been killed or wounded, two-thirds of Russia’s prewar tank inventory has been destroyed, and Putin’s vaunted decades-long military modernization program has been hollowed out,” Burns wrote. “All this is a direct result of Ukrainian soldiers’ valor and skill, backed up by Western support.”

The war isn’t over, though. Russia is launching offensives on multiple fronts, and despite losses, the operations continue. Russia’s defense industry is on a war footing, and support from pariah states such as North Korea and Iran is fueling its war efforts. Ukraine is holding the line, but its defense is strained by shortages in ammunition and other supplies. Putin appears to be gearing up for a longer war that will require Ukraine to receive committed and stable support from the West if it’s going to survive the fight.

Burns said there were many benefits for the US to continue supporting Ukraine, a “relatively modest investment with significant geopolitical returns.”

Among other benefits, he said that with more ammunition and weapons aid, which translates to a greater ability to resist, Ukraine would be in a stronger position should it opt to negotiate a deal with Russia.

“It offers a chance to ensure a long-term win for Ukraine and a strategic loss for Russia; Ukraine could safeguard its sovereignty and rebuild, while Russia would be left to deal with the enduring costs of Putin’s folly,” Burns wrote.

A handout image shows President Vladimir Putin, sitting and gesturing with one hand and sitting in front of a blue stylised world map as he takies part in an annual televised phone-in with the country's citizens dubbed "Direct Line with Vladimir Putin"  on June 30, 2021.
Russian President Vladimir Putin.Anadolu/handout via Getty Images

A weakened Russia licking its wounds for years to come may offer some sense of peace to NATO members and other nations concerned about an increasingly aggressive Putin invading them. And the US would be able to shift its focus to tensions elsewhere, such as the Taiwan Strait.

There’s no guarantee, but Burns presented a bleaker alternative.

“For the United States to walk away from the conflict at this crucial moment and cut off support to Ukraine would be an own goal of historic proportions,” Burns wrote; effectively, it would allow Russia to achieve its goal of conquering Ukraine or forcing it into an unfavorable peace deal, leaving Putin emboldened and more aggressive.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has warned about that exact scenario previously, including to US lawmakers back in December. During a visit to Washington, DC, the Ukrainian leader pleaded for more US aid and explained that if Russia took Ukraine, Putin wouldn’t stop there.

Such aggression would draw the US into a much larger, costlier war than the one it’s supporting in Ukraine right now, experts and analysts have argued. But aid is still held up in Congress.

The latest aid package to Ukraine has been on hold since October, when Republicans blocked it, along with assistance to Israel.

Since December, Republicans and Democrats have been working on a bipartisan bill that includes the $111 billion aid package for both nations, as well as stricter border security and immigration measures. But it remains unclear whether such a deal will have enough support, particularly from former President Donald Trump’s allies, to pass.

Ukraine Needs American Weapons, Not More GOP Drama

The Atlantic Daily

Ukraine Needs American Weapons, Not More GOP Drama

The GOP’s moral collapse threatens global security.

By Tom Nichols – January 31, 2024 

A Ukrainian soldier stands in a doorway
Anadolu / Getty

Republicans need to recover their senses about the dire moral and strategic tests Ukraine and the West face in Europe.


A Test of Will and Commitment

Wars test people and weapons on a battlefield, but eventual victory rests on much more than combat. Wars also stress-test political institutions, ideas, and the courage of entire societies. At this moment, the United States is on the verge of failing a challenge of will and commitment, much to the delight of the neo-fascist Russian regime that has turned Ukraine’s fields and homes into an immense abattoir. President Joe Biden, most of NATO, and many other nations recognize the crisis, but the world could face a Russian victory—and an eventual escalation of Russian aggression against Europe—solely because of the ongoing drama and inane bickering within the Republican Party.

The GOP, the party of Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan, once supported the bipartisan American understanding that U.S. leadership in the world was both a strategic and a moral imperative, especially in the great struggle with the Soviet Union. Reagan, however, supercharged the idea of the Cold War as a moral crusade. When he talked about the need for the West to oppose an “evil empire,” he meant it—and as we found out years later, his words stung Soviet leaders. As one adviser to Mikhail Gorbachev later admitted, Reagan’s rhetorical attack did not change much at the very top in the Kremlin, but for many of the people who worked in Soviet foreign-policy circles, “this term and this propaganda was perceived as punishment for what we did in Afghanistan. In other words, we felt that we deserved it.”

Soviet leaders deserved it then and Russian leaders deserve it now. Reagan’s detractors will point to his policies in Central America and elsewhere as examples of what can happen when righteous fixation on noble ends leads to the justification of bloody and repulsive means. But Reagan—like Jimmy Carter before him—was right to view opposition to the Kremlin as both strategically necessary and morally justas it is again today. Biden’s policy of steadfast support for Ukraine wisely continues that tradition.

(One of Carter’s speechwriters told me years ago that, as you might expect, Carter never liked being compared to Reagan. But Carter’s national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, was as much a Cold War hawk as almost anyone in the Reagan administration, and Carter infuriated the Soviets so badly that by 1980 the Kremlin, according to the former Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin, was rooting for Reagan to win because it thought Carter and Brzezinski were so dangerously bellicose.)

Reagan understood the Cold War as a moral issue, but today’s GOP is incapable of understanding anything as a moral issue. Indeed, the Republican Party is defined now almost entirely by its dedication to a cult of personality, the relentless quest for raw power, and the ongoing effort to institutionalize minority rule. It functions not as a political party but as an amoral claque whose members are dedicated only to their mutual protection.

Ukraine, of course, is an object of special hostility for Republicans because that besieged nation is inextricably bound up in Trump’s first impeachment. Some in the GOP also admire Russian President Vladimir Putin; Trump speaks of the Kremlin dictator in terms that would have made Reagan furious and disgusted. But nothing, it seems, can get through the Republican deflector shields powered by two of the strongest forces in the world: resentment and self-interest.

Money to help Ukraine is, for now, still tied to legislation regarding the situation on the U.S. southern border, but Biden has already surrendered on that issue: He said on Saturday that, if Congress sent him the bill that Republicans have been working on, “I’d shut down the border right now and fix it quickly.” (He is also cleverly using his legal authority to send surplus American weapons to allies—in this case, Greece—who can use these surplus U.S. arms to replenish their stocks while they send their older weapons to Ukraine.) But Republicans aren’t interested in fixing the border or helping Ukraine—not if any of it helps Joe Biden, a detestable position that abandons millions of people to slaughter under Russian guns simply for the sake of good press from the GOP’s infotainment system.

To their credit, some Republicans are trying to do the right thing. I was critical of Oklahoma Senator James Lankford on Monday for answering a question about Trump’s fitness to be president with a mouthful of mush that was, if I may paraphrase a Bible verse I’m sure the senator knows well, neither hot nor cold but lukewarm. But when it comes to the border and Ukraine, Lankford (along with some of his Senate GOP colleagues) is on the right side of both policy and history.

What, however, does a GOP senator gain by being on the right side of anything? In Lankford’s case, it earned him censure from his own state’s Republican Party. For others, it means facing an electorate that is now being flooded with news about Deep State Agent Taylor Swift instead of whether America and Europe can hold back a savage—and nuclear-armed—enemy.

The Republicans now wallowing in conspiracy weirdness and jumping at Trump’s commands are risking a mistake, in the words of CIA Director William Burns, “of historic proportions.” As the GOP plays games, the Russians continue blowing apart homes and shredding human beings, including their own hapless conscripts. The killing goes on every day, driven by a cruel and petty paranoid in Moscow and supported by a coterie of cowards who issue unhinged threats from behind the safety of the Kremlin’s walls.

Changes are afoot in the Ukrainian high command; The Washington Post reported today that the top Ukrainian commander, General Valery Zaluzhny, is about to be replaced because of his ongoing disagreements with President Volodymyr Zelensky about strategy, mobilization, and other issues. Such moments, as retired Australian Major General Mick Ryan explained in a cogent thread on X yesterday, are a normal part of the civil-military tensions that inevitably arise in wartime.

Some Republicans, driven by their hatred of Zelensky, will no doubt seize on any news from Kyiv as an excuse to hold back aid, but the Ukrainians don’t need more drama from the self-absorbed GOP. They need brave and clear-eyed friends in the West who understand what is at stake, both for the security of the world and the defense of freedom. They need more than our good wishes: They need ammunition, and they need it now.

Related:

Rock band critical of Putin is detained in Thailand, fearful of deportation to Russia

Associated Press

Rock band critical of Putin is detained in Thailand, fearful of deportation to Russia

Grant Pecku – January 30, 2024

FILE – Aleksandr “Shura” Uman, left, and Yegor “Lyova” Bortnik perform during the Bi-2 rock band concert in Moscow, Russia, Thursday, Dec. 1, 2011. Members of a rock band that has been critical of Moscow’s war in Ukraine remain locked up in a Thai immigration jail, fearful that they could be deported to Russia as a reported plan to let them fly to safety in Israel was apparently suspended. (AP Photo/Pavel Golovkin, File) (ASSOCIATED PRESS)More

BANGKOK (AP) — Members of a rock band that has been critical of Moscow’s war in Ukraine remained locked up Tuesday in a Thai immigration jail, fearful that they could be deported to Russia as a reported plan to let them fly to safety in Israel was apparently suspended.

The progressive rock band Bi-2 said on Facebook that it had information that intervention from Russian diplomats caused the plan to be scuttled, even though tickets had already been purchased for their flight.

“The group participants remain detained at the immigration center in a shared cell with 80 people,” the post said. It said they declined to meet with the Russian consul. The Russian press agency RIA Novosti said the refusal was confirmed by Ilya Ilyin, head of the Russian Embassy’s consular section.

The group later said on the Telegram messaging app that its singer Yegor Bortnik, whose stage name is Lyova, was at the airport awaiting a flight to Israel but the other members remained in the jail.

The seven band members were arrested last Thursday after playing a concert on the southern resort island of Phuket, reportedly for not having proper working papers. On Facebook, they said all their concerts “are held in accordance with local laws and practices.” Phuket is a popular destination for Russian expats and tourists. After paying a fine, the band members were sent to the Immigration Detention Center in Bangkok.

The detained musicians “include Russian citizens as well as dual nationals of Russia and other countries, including Israel and Australia,” the group Human Rights Watch said in a statement Tuesday. Those holding only Russian citizenship are thought to be most at risk.

“The Thai authorities should immediately release the detained members of Bi-2 and allow them to go on their way,” said Elaine Pearson, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Under no circumstances should they be deported to Russia, where they could face arrest or worse for their outspoken criticisms of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russia’s war in Ukraine.”

“It is not known if the Russian authorities have sought the band members’ forcible return to Russia,” Human Rights Watch said. “However, amid repression in Russia reaching new heights, Russian authorities have used transnational repression — abuses committed against nationals beyond a government’s jurisdiction — to target activists and government critics abroad with violence and other unlawful actions.”

Self-exiled Russian opposition politician and a friend of Bi-2, Dmitry Gudkov, told the AP that he had been in touch with lawyers and diplomats in an attempt to secure the band’s release and suggested that pressure to detain and deport them came directly from the Kremlin and the Russian Foreign Ministry.

Russia, Gudkov said, needs an “evocative story to show that they will catch any critic abroad. This is all happening in the run-up to (Russia’s presidential election), and it’s clear that they want to shut everyone up, and that’s why there’s intense pressure going on.”

Russia’s ambassador to Thailand Yevgeny Tomikhin said Russian diplomats were not responsible for the group’s detention.

“It’s not our practice to dictate to anyone. Americans can do this. We don’t behave like that and don’t make such requests,” Tomikhin was quoted as telling the newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda.

There have been no public statements from Thai officials on the situation.

Bi-2 has 1.01 million subscribers to its YouTube channel and 376,000 monthly listeners on Spotify.

Andrei Lugovoi, a member of the lower house of Russia’s parliament, called the band members “scum” for their criticism of Russia’s military operations in Ukraine.

“Let the guys get ready: soon they will be playing and singing on spoons and on metal plates, tap dancing in front of their cellmates,” Lugovoi said on Telegram. “Personally, I would be very happy to see this.”

Britain has accused Lugovoi of involvement in the death of former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko, who died in London in 2006 after being poisoned with tea laced with radioactive polonium-210.

Associated Press writers Emma Burrows and Jim Heintz in Tallinn, Estonia, contributed.

CIA director: Not passing Ukraine aid would be a mistake ‘of historic proportions’

Politico

CIA director: Not passing Ukraine aid would be a mistake ‘of historic proportions’

Matt Berg – January 30, 2024

Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/AP

Western allies must continue providing assistance to Ukraine in its war with Russia this year, or risk a mistake “of historic proportions,” CIA Director William Burns wrote in a column published Tuesday.

Burns laid out his case in a Foreign Affairs column, noting that less than 5 percent of the U.S. defense budget — “a relatively modest investment with significant geopolitical returns” — is all that Washington sends to Kyiv.

If an opportunity for serious negotiations to end the war emerges, he wrote, providing arms to Ukraine will put it in a stronger bargaining position. Ukraine’s military would also be able to continue fending off Russian troops while rebuilding its infrastructure, while Moscow spends massive amounts of money to keep the war going, Burns added.

“For the United States to walk away from the conflict at this crucial moment and cut off support to Ukraine would be an own goal of historic proportions,” Burns wrote, referencing a soccer term for scoring a goal for the rival team by putting the ball into a player’s own net.

Burns is the latest top U.S. official to publicly make the case for greenlighting assistance to Ukraine, as lawmakers battle over a southern border deal that’s holding up $60 billion in aid to Ukraine. The Biden administration has been urging lawmakers to push a deal through, but there’s no clear indication when lawmakers might strike a deal.

The director’s column also comes after he secretly visited Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv earlier this month, briefing him on his expectations for what Russia is planning in the near future, The Washington Post reported.

In Biden’s pledge to ‘shut down’ border, a stunning political shift

CNN

In Biden’s pledge to ‘shut down’ border, a stunning political shift

Analysis by Zachary B. Wolf, CNN – January 29, 2024

President Joe Biden’s evolution on the key election issue of immigration entered a new phase when he promised to “shut down the border right now” if given new powers by Congress.

The deeper policy context of the comments, delivered at a campaign event in South Carolina Saturday and in a statement from the White House on Friday, is that Biden wants to resuscitate a bipartisan deal to pair new border powers with additional military aid for Ukraine and Israel.

But the Trump-like rhetoric from the Democratic president – and the fact that Democrats are not even talking about a pathway to legal status for undocumented immigrants currently in the country – is also an important political admission as immigration-focused Donald Trump zeroes in on the Republican presidential nomination and the border crisis reverberates through the country and into Washington, DC.

Biden is willing to offer concessions so he can make deals, and Trump wants to keep this as a campaign issue.

Trump wants to kill bipartisan deal

“As the leader of our party, there is zero chance I will support this horrible, open-borders betrayal of America,” Trump said in Nevada on Saturday, although future Republican presidents would also benefit from the new power Biden is seeking.

Trump doesn’t think the president needs new power to shut the border. He has promised that, if elected, he will act as “dictator for one day” to do it, and he’s actively working against the bipartisan effort even though parts of it are straight out of his policy playbook.

“The reality is that this includes many provisions that when Donald Trump was president, he hoped would be made into law,” said CNN’s Lauren Fox, appearing Monday on “Inside Politics.” These Trump-friendly priorities, she said, include making it much more difficult for migrants to seek asylum in the US and increasing the speed at which asylum cases can be processed in immigration courts.

Biden’s acknowledgment

CNN’s Priscilla Alvarez, a White House reporter who is also an expert on the issue of immigration, documents Biden’s shift.

“Biden took office pledging to restore asylum and manage the border in a ‘humane’ way,” Alvarez writes. “But his administration has faced the harsh realities and challenges at the US-Mexico border amid record migration across the Western Hemisphere — making it a political vulnerability seized on by Republicans.”

A man crosses the Rio Grande River from Mexico to collect clothing and other items left on the Texas banks of Shelby Park at the US-Mexico border in Eagle Pass, Texas, on January 12, 2024. - Kaylee Greenlee Beal/Reuters
A man crosses the Rio Grande River from Mexico to collect clothing and other items left on the Texas banks of Shelby Park at the US-Mexico border in Eagle Pass, Texas, on January 12, 2024. – Kaylee Greenlee Beal/Reuters
Permanent power for the president

The new permanent power pushed by Biden and Senate negotiators is in line with temporary, Covid-era restrictions originally put in place during Trump’s administration, but which lapsed last year on Biden’s watch.

Following Trump’s lead, rather than work with the president to secure the border, House Republicans have rejected even the idea of a Senate compromise and are gearing up to impeach Biden’s secretary of Homeland Security, Alejandro Mayorkas, for not applying current law to turn away more people at the border.

Still no deal in writing

The framing of this issue may end up being more important than the policy itself. The bipartisan group of senators has not released text for their compromise, but they insist it does exist.

“We do have a bipartisan deal. We’re finishing the text right now,” Sen. Chris Murphy, the Connecticut Democrat who is a key negotiator on the deal, said on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday.

“The question is whether Republicans are going to listen to Donald Trump, who wants to preserve chaos at the border because he thinks that it’s a winning political issue for him,” said Murphy, adding the proposal would give the president, Republican or Democrat, permanent new emergency powers.

What we know

While the text of the bill has not been finalized, Biden ticked off the major points during that appearance in South Carolina:

  • “It includes an additional 1,300 Border Patrols — we need more agents on the border;
  • 375 immigration judges to judge whether or not someone can come or not come and be fair about it;
  • 1,600 asylum officers;
  • and over 100 cutting-edge inspection machines to help detect and stop fentanyl coming in.”
GOP negotiator censured by his own party

Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, the top Republican negotiator, is already facing blowback even though the deal has not been publicly released.

The Oklahoma Republican Party voted over the weekend to censure Lankford and demanded that he abandon the bipartisan talks.

Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Lankford was pressed about the new authority for Biden, which would be triggered if there’s an average of 5,000 migrant crossings per day over the course of a full week. Lankford said this would not normalize 5,000 migrant crossings per day. And for context, border officials were dealing with more than 10,000 crossings per day for most of December.

“This is set up for if you have a rush of people coming at the border, the border closes down – no one gets in,” he said. “This is not someone standing at the border with a little clicker, saying, ‘I’m going to let one more in, we’re at 4,999 and then it has to stop.’ It is a shutdown of the border, and everyone actually gets turned around.”

Democrats waiting for details too

Rank-and-file Democrats would surely be frustrated with such a compromise, which does not address their long-term immigration priorities, like giving permanent legal status to the children of undocumented immigrants who were raised in the US or paving a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who have built lives and paid taxes in the US.

“We have milestones and we have a path to get there, but we were never going to get a path to citizenship in this bill,” former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told CNN’s Dana Bash on Sunday.

Frustration in US cities

Meanwhile, mayors of Democratic cities continue to raise the alarm about an untenable wave of migrants bused north from border states and draining their infrastructure.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson plans to begin evicting some asylum-seekers from shelters in his city later this week. Next week, Denver Mayor Mike Johnston plans to follow suit. In strapped New York City, CNN visited a tent city on Randall’s Island.

The public view of the current immigration situation has shifted

Nearly half – 45% of Americans in a CBS News poll released early this month – said the situation at the border is a crisis.

And a strong majority of the public – 63% now compared with 55% in September – said the Biden administration should be tougher on immigrants crossing at the border. More than two-thirds, 68%, said they disapproved of Biden’s handling of the border, although that does not translate into support for Republicans. Sixty-five percent of Americans said they disapproved of congressional Republicans’ handling of the issue.

Americans are still broadly supportive of immigration, however. In a Gallup poll released last July, 68% said the overall effect of immigration was a good thing for the US, compared with just 27% who said it was a bad thing.

After publication, White House spokesperson Angelo Fernandez Hernandez provided this statement:

“The American people overwhelmingly agree with what President Biden underlined in his Day One reform plan: that our immigration system is broken and we have an imperative to secure the border and treat migrants with dignity,” Fernandez Hernandez said in an email. “After opposing the record border security funding President Biden has delivered every year of his administration, House Republicans are blocking the border security resources President Biden is fighting for in order to hire more Border Patrol officers and invest in cutting edge technology to detect fentanyl.”

Republicans tried to hammer Biden on immigration. But they turned into a circular firing squad

Independent

Republicans tried to hammer Biden on immigration. But they turned into a circular firing squad

Eric Garcia – January 29, 2024

 (Getty Images)
(Getty Images)

President Joe Biden might finally be running out of patience with Republicans when it comes to negotiations surrounding an agreement to restrict immigration in exchange for aid to Ukraine.

After weeks of negotiations, Republicans hit a snag last week as former president Donald Trump came out swinging against any agreement. That forced Senate GOP leadership to recalibrate. On top of that, House Speaker Mike Johnson — who leads a far more rabidly anti-immigrant and anti-Ukraine conference than Mitch McConnell leads in the Senate — wrote in a letter to colleagues that the agreement “would have been dead on arrival in the House anyway.”

On Friday evening, Biden released a statement saying that the proposed legislation would give him the ability to “shut down the border when it becomes overwhelmed” and that he would invoke the authority the day he signs the bill into law.

Of course, being able to “shut down the border” is an amorphous term and the definition of shutting it down lies in the eye of the beholder. Nevertheless, Biden wants to have some kind of agreement not only because he wants to free up dollars to help Ukraine defend itself against Russia: A Harvard CAPS-Harris poll from last week showed that more voters consider immigration their top policy concern than the economy.

Republicans have battered Biden on the border ever since he took office, essentially flipping the dynamic after Donald Trump faced numerous negative headlines about family separation and the infamous Mexican border wall. Texas Governor Greg Abbott has even bused migrants to cities with Democratic mayors. That particular move led New York’s mayor Eric Adams to openly criticize Biden.

But Republicans might have gotten high on their own supply when it comes to immigration. As Inside Washington explained last week, Republicans delaying passing an immigration bill to allow Trump to benefit makes it hard for them to argue that the influx of migrants is a crisis that requires immediate addressing. If passing a bill can wait 12 months, then it’s hardly urgent.

Right-wing opposition to the immigration legislation also means that Republicans are turning against each other.

On Sunday, Fox News host Shannon Bream asked Senator James Lankford, the chief Republican negotiator, why he would give Biden the “cover of this deal” which she said would allow people into the United States. Lankford responded by saying four months ago, Republicans united to say they would demand changes in policy “and now it’s interesting a few months later, when we’re finally getting to the end, they’re like, just kidding. We actually don’t want a change in law because of a presidential election year.”

Lankford, a hardline conservative from Oklahoma, has staked much of his credibility on the legislation. So he’s understandably frustrated to see opposition. And shortly after making his case, Senator Rick Scott of Florida, a Trump ally, said on the same Fox program that Lankford was on a “suicide mission.” That also gives Scott the added benefit of knifing Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, with whom he has a tenuous relationship.

Republicans likely had a chance to pass the legislation before Trump returned to his role of being the de facto nominee. But his victories in Iowa and New Hampshire — as well as the coalescing of the GOP around him — has meant that they have to defer to what he dictates.

The ultimate sign that Republicans might be overconfident is their plan to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Why? It’s not entirely clear. But what is apparent is that Johnson, who is a little more than three months into the job, has chosen to appeal to the most far-right factions of his conference.

Holding a series of sideshow hearings for a secretary most people have never heard of will do little to shed light on whether laws are being enforced at the border. But it will allow figures like committee member Marjorie Taylor Greene to pontificate and get more television air time. Indeed, Greene came out strongly against the bipartisan bill in the Senate, despite the fact no text exists.

It appears that Biden is attempting to create a foil to the feud. By saying he would willingly close the border if given the means to do so, he wants to put the pressure on Republicans to pass the bill. If not, he hopes to hammer them for not giving him the power to curb immigration into the US.

Trump and his allies are wielding immigration as a political weapon against Biden, and Ukraine is paying the price

Business Insider

Trump and his allies are wielding immigration as a political weapon against Biden, and Ukraine is paying the price

Chris Panella – January 29, 2024

  • Negotiations on a deal on the border and aid could collapse thanks to Trump.
  • He put pressure on the bipartisan deal he called “meaningless,” leaving Republicans scrambling on what’s next.
  • The chaos hurts Ukraine in particular, as its troops fight Russia without new US aid.

Republicans and Democrats have spent weeks carefully negotiating a massive, bipartisan immigration and foreign aid deal, leaving Ukraine in a wait-and-see position on critical support.

As both sides moved closer toward a possible agreement, former President Donald Trump stepped in to torpedo attempts at a compromise.

His opposition to the deal, which some have said may be in hopes of keeping the border as a key campaign issue going into the election this year, has left some Republicans wary of crossing him and others frustrated.

Failure to reach a deal is likely to leave multiple parties feeling aggrieved, but it would especially hurt Ukraine. Its troops are scraping the bottom of the barrel for ammunition to defend themselves and their cities against intensifying assaults, and the country is increasingly nervous about fighting off Russia with little help from its biggest single supporter in the West.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said last week in a closed-door meeting with other Republicans that Trump’s pushback against the border deal had forced them into a pickle. The comments were first reported by Punchbowl News.

“When we started this, the border united us and Ukraine divided us,” McConnell said. “The politics on this have changed.”

“We don’t want to do anything to undermine him,” McConnell added, talking about Trump as the former president moves closer to clinching the Republican presidential nomination after successes in Iowa and New Hampshire earlier this month.

The next day, at another closed-door meeting, McConnell said that his comments had been misinterpreted and that he was committed to getting the deal passed.

trump biden
President Donald Trump watches a video of President Joe Biden playing during a rally for Sen. Marco Rubio at the Miami-Dade Country Fair and Exposition on November 6, 2022, in Miami, Florida.Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Trump’s opposition to the bill comes as he campaigns on fixing the border crisis. Last week, he called the deal “meaningless” and asserted that the “ONLY HOPE” for a secure border is voting for him.

Senator Mitt Romney slammed Trump’s response, saying, “I think the border is a very important issue for Donald Trump. And the fact that he would communicate to Republican senators and congresspeople that he doesn’t want us to solve the border problem because he wants to blame Biden for it is … really appalling.”

“But the reality is that, that we have a crisis at the border, the American people are suffering as a result of what’s happening at the border, he said, noting that someone running for president should want to solve the problem as opposed to saying, ‘Hey, save that problem. Don’t solve it. Let me take credit for solving it later.'”

Other Republicans, like Senator Todd Young, have suggested Trump is purposefully disrupting negotiations for his campaign. One Republican Senator told CNN on background: “This proposal would have had almost unanimous Republican support if it weren’t for Donald Trump.”

At a Las Vegas rally on Saturday, Trump doubled-down on his message. “As leader of our party, there is zero chance I will support this horrible open borders betrayal of America,” Trump said. “I’ll fight it all the way. A lot of the senators are trying to say, respectfully, they’re blaming it on me. I say, that’s OK. Please blame it on me. Please.”

Donald Trump
Former President Donald Trump grins as he signs an autograph after a rally in New Hampshire a day before winning the state’s primary.Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Despite the border deal being notably to the right of the Biden administration’s stances on immigration, the bipartisan bill could be a win for Biden ahead of the election. Immigration is a top concern for many voters going into November, a potentially jeopardizing problem for Democrats amid spikes in migrant encounters, and a marquee issue for Trump to campaign on.

Both Republicans and Democrats have said they’ve been painstakingly negotiating this deal, which is focused on foreign aid but includes compromises on the border, for weeks, and Biden has shown clear desire to sign it.

In October 2023, Biden originally requested a roughly $111 billion aid package for both Ukraine and Israel. Republicans in Congress blocked it, hoping to force Democrats to agree to stricter immigration and border control policies.

At first, it appeared to result in a stalemate between the two sides, but Biden publicly signaled in December that he was willing to “make significant compromises on the border.” This move ultimately prompted careful discussions on a deal that would meet GOP negotiators’ demands on immigration, while still giving Biden a win.

The deal would also have been a win for Ukraine, which relies on Western security assistance to fuel its war efforts.

But now, as House Speaker Mike Johnson wrote Friday, it appears the deal may be dead before it’s even finished. According to Johnson, “the Senate appears unable to reach any agreement. If rumors about the contents of the draft proposal are true, it would have been dead on arrival in the House anyway.”

But Johnson could also be buckling under the weight of political pressure from Trump’s allies in the House. Earlier this month, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene said she wouldn’t support any deal and threatened Johnson with a motion to vacate him from the Speaker position if he brought the deal to the House floor. It’s unclear whether such a move would have enough support and what role House Democrats would play, but there’s a risk.

The looming question here is whether Republicans want to do anything to make progress on their issues with immigration and the US border with Mexico at all, or if they hope to continue to weaponize it against Biden and Democrats into the 2024 election. As Texas Governor Greg Abbott showed last week in defying the Supreme Court’s decision to remove the razor wire installed in the Rio Grande, tensions around the issue may only continue to get worse.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Warsaw, Poland, on April 5, 2023.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Warsaw, Poland, on April 5, 2023.Artur Widak/NurPhoto via Getty Images

The biggest loser in all of this though is probably Ukraine, which has been pleading for more US aid for months.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with US lawmakers back in December in Washington, DC to advocate for more aid, warning that Russian aggression would only increase should Ukraine fall, further endangering other nations, including NATO.

Further Russian aggression could demand more aid and assistance from the US, which would further strain America’s already depleted ammunition and weapons stockpiles.

Earlier this month, Zelenskyy said that some “radical voices from the Republican Party,” which have politicized aid for Ukraine, “are straining Ukrainian society” and leaving his people terrified. He appeared to be referring to a contingent of GOP lawmakers who have loudly denounced future US support for Ukraine. The US is by far the largest single contributor of security assistance to Ukraine.

The reality for Ukraine right now on the battlefield is a perilous one. Russian forces are conducting offensive operations along multiple sectors of the front, forcing Ukraine to fight on defense.

Ukraine likely doesn’t have the resources, particularly ammunition, to launch an offensive anytime soon, but with adequate support, it could hold off Russian forces and prepare for the possibility of new operational opportunities later. Without that support though, it is in for a tough defensive fight, which one expert has said it may not be able to survive.