Ukrainian attacks to Russian ports in Black Sea

 

Two Ukrainian officials say Kyiv was behind the Novorossiysk attack.

By Marc Santora and Victoria Kim

• The New York Times, Aug. 4, 2023Updated 6:25 a.m. ET

Ukraine used air and sea drones to mount assaults early Friday on two Russian-controlled ports in the Black Sea, including a key naval and shipping hub, Russian officials said, in an apparent expansion of Ukraine’s campaign to strike targets of strategic and symbolic importance to Moscow far from the front lines of the war.

The attacks came as Russia has bombarded Ukrainian ports along the Black Sea and Danube River, imperiling Kyiv’s grain exports and threatening global food security, and were another sign of Ukraine’s ability to deploy its growing drone arsenal to pierce even well defended Russian targets.

Russian officials said that the port of Novorossiysk, in southwestern Russia, and a port on the occupied Crimean Peninsula were targeted in the latest strikes.

The extent of any damage in Novorossiysk, a base for the Russian Navy’s prized Black Sea Fleet that also houses an oil terminal and other infrastructure, was not immediately clear. Russian military bloggers posted unverified video on social media that they said showed a large Russian ship listing and being towed to port there. After the video began circulating, the Russian-appointed head of Crimea, Oleg Kryuchkov, criticized bloggers for allowing Ukraine to see “the results of their attack.”

Two Ukrainian officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military matters, said the attack on Novorossiysk was a joint operation of the Security Service of Ukraine and the Ukrainian Navy. One Ukrainian official said the Russian ship Olenegorsky Gornyak, a large amphibious landing vessel that can carry heavy cargo and military vehicles, was damaged in the strike.

The Russian Ministry of Defense said the attack caused no damage and that all the drones were neutralized, claiming that two uncrewed surface vessels were shot out of the water before reaching the base.

Movement of ships at the port in Novorossiysk was temporarily halted, the Russian state media said, citing the Caspian Pipeline Consortium, a group that manages oil exports through the port. The regional governor, Veniamin Kondratiev, also claimed there were no injuries or damage.

In a separate assault before dawn, the Russian naval port in Feodosia, in occupied Crimea, was attacked by long-range aerial drones, the Russian Defense Ministry said. It claimed to have shot down 10 Ukrainian drones and disabled three more, and said there was no damage. 

Publicly, Ukraine did not claim responsibility for the attack in Novorossiysk, with a spokesman for the Ukrainian Navy saying it had “nothing to do” with it. Kyiv has maintained a policy of deliberate ambiguity about attacks inside Russia, but President Volodymyr Zelensky has signaled that more attacks within Russia’s borders would come.

Ukraine was less circumspect about the assault in Crimea on Friday. Natalia Humeniuk, a spokeswoman for the Ukrainian military’s southern command, told Radio Liberty that the Russian Black Sea Fleet uses a large oil storage facility at the port in Feodosia, and “therefore, we should continue to expect explosions there.”

The strikes come amid escalating tensions around the Black Sea. Since pulling out of an internationally brokered agreement that allowed Kyiv to export millions of tons of grain, Russian drones and missiles have bombarded the Ukrainian ports of Odesa, Mykolaiv, Reni and Izmail, destroying more than 200,000 tons of grain, according to Ukrainian officials.

The port in Novorossiysk is a key shipping hub for Russia’s own agricultural products. When Russia agreed to the deal that allowed Ukraine to export grain last summer, Moscow insisted that the European Union clarify that sanctions imposed on Russia would not affect Novorossiysk, allowing banks, insurers and other companies to participate in the export of Russian grains and fertilizers without violating the restrictions.

Marc Santora has been reporting from Ukraine since the beginning of the war with Russia. He was previously based in London as an international news editor focused on breaking news events and earlier the bureau chief for East and Central Europe, based in Warsaw. He has also reported extensively from Iraq and Africa. More about Marc Santora

Victoria Kim is a correspondent based in Seoul, focused on international breaking news coverage.More about Victoria Kim

Nota do Itamaraty sobre a morte de Ignacy Sachs

 O Itamaraty emite dezenas de notas em um único mês. Até aqui não emitiu NENHUMA nota sobre o morticinio russo na Ucrânia, o que é INCOMPREENSÍVEL, dado o fato de que emite notas sobre uma inundação qualquer em cantos remotos do planeta. Mas acaba de emitir uma nota altamente recomendável, sobre um homem digno, uma vitima dos totalitarismos nazifascista e soviético (russo) na sua Polônia natal, que encontrou refugio no Brasil e que construiu sua reputação na economia do ecodesenvolvimento na França, onde acolheu dezenas de pesquisadores brasileiros no seu Centre de Recherches sur le Brésil Contemporaim, que eu frequentei assiduamete enquanto morei em Paris (duas vezes):

Nota 324 – Falecimento Do Economista Ignacy Sachs

Ministério das Relações Exteriores

Assessoria Especial de Comunicação Social

  

Nota nº 324

3 de agosto de 2023

 

Falecimento do economista Ignacy Sachs 

Ministério das Relações Exteriores manifesta pesar pelo falecimento do economista Ignacy Sachs ocorrido ontem, 2 de agosto, em Paris.

Ignacy Sachs nasceu na Polônia, em 1927, e radicou-se na França. Em 1941, refugiou-se no Brasil, onde iniciou seus estudos de economia.

Sachs foi amigo de três gerações de economistas, cientistas e diplomatas brasileiros. Seus estudos sobre economia ambiental e desenvolvimento sustentável exerceram forte influência sobre as conferências de Estocolmo em 1972 e do Rio em 1992. Ele também participou ativamente dos Diálogos para o Desenvolvimento Sustentável da Conferência Rio+20, em 2012.

Ignacy Sachs deixa uma contribuição inestimável para o pensamento nas áreas de desenvolvimento e meio ambiente, que permanecerá como referência para as próximas gerações.

--

Esta mensagem foi enviada para pralmeida@me.com de imprensa@itamaraty.gov.br.

Remover pralmeida@me.com desta lista de e-mail

As coisas no BRICS andam um pouco confusas, para dizer o mínimo...

 Heads of state from Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa will make a pronouncement on the enlargement of the group when they meet 

A planned announcement on the expansion of BRICS at a forthcoming summit in South Africa will mark a significant change in the global order, the nation’s ambassador to the five-nation bloc said, even as some of its members push back against new admissions.

Heads of state from Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa will make a pronouncement on the enlargement of the group when they meet Aug. 22-24, Anil Sooklal said in a lecture at the University of KwaZulu-Natal on Wednesday. Twenty-two nations have asked formally to become full-time members of the group, and more than 20 others have submitted informal requests.

China favors a rapid expansion of the bloc, which will require consensus among its members. But it has encountered opposition from India, which wants strict rules on how and when other nations could move closer to the group without formally enlarging it, and from Brazil, which is wary of alienating the US and European Union, according to officials with knowledge of the matter. 

“BRICS has been a catalyst for a tectonic change you will see in the global geopolitical architecture starting with the summit,” Sooklal said. While he emphasized that the bloc doesn’t see itself as a counterweight to any other organization, he said its expansion was stoking anxiety and opposition among nations in “privileged positions.” 

Russian leader Vladimir Putin will participate at the gathering virtually, avoiding the risk of possible arrest on a warrant from the International Criminal Court for alleged war crimes if he travels to South Africa, which is a member of the tribunal.

A decision on whether Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi will attend has yet to be taken, although necessary security arrangements have been made and other pre-visit formalities have been completed, according to a person with knowledge of the matter. While Modi’s absence may be viewed as a snub to the host and he would miss out on bilateral meetings with other leaders, India isn’t comfortable with him holding talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping while a border dispute remains unresolved, they said. 

So far, representatives from 71 nations have been invited to attend the summit, according to Sooklal. 

“This will be the largest gathering in recent time of countries from the Global South coming together to discuss the current global challenges,” he said. 

Formed officially in 2009-2010, BRICS has struggled to have the kind of geopolitical influence that matches its collective economic reach. The bloc’s members represent more than 42% of the world’s population and account for 23% of global gross domestic product and 18% of trade.

An expanded BRICS will account for “almost 50% of the global population and over 35% of global GDP and that figure will grow,” Sooklal said. He also highlighted the role that the bloc’s leaders were playing in trying to end Russia’s war in Ukraine.

“There is no tangible evidence that any one of the BRICS countries, South Africa included, is feeding weapons into that conflict,” he said. “But there is clear evidence to the global community that the West is pumping billions of dollars into that conflict and the conflict is raging, so who is talking peace and who is talking war?”

https://www.business-standard.com/amp/world-news/brics-will-move-forward-on-expansion-at-summit-says-south-africa-123080200907_1.html

Venezuelanos fogem desesperados da narrativa lulista (OESP)

 1.100 venezuelanos na fonteira da Colômbia com o Panamá, na tentativa de chegar à fronteira dos Estados Unidos, onde vão ser parados na frinteira mexicana, e dai a um fututo incerto, talvez a morte, numa travessia aleatória, pelo rio ou por terra. Mas deve ser apenas uma narrativa, segundo Lula, ou uma simples foto, segundo seu assessor internacional, o que não deve provar nada, sobretudo que a Venezuela NÃO é uma ditadura miserável.

Lula’s Dance with Dictators - Andres Velasco (PS)

Lula’s Dance with Dictators

 ANDRÉS VELASCO

Project Syndicate, Aug 1, 2023

 

Brazil's president has enjoyed much international goodwill since returning to the presidency, but only because his predecessor, Jair Bolsonaro, was so thuggish and anti-democratic. Sadly, now Lula is consorting with tyrants who make even the awful Bolsonaro look good.

LONDON – When a right-wing politician with authoritarian leanings (think Donald Trump) courts a genocidal dictator like Vladimir Putin, we recoil in distaste but are not surprised. But when a former human-rights advocate and working-class hero backs dictators guilty of abominable butchery, shock is followed by abhorrence. That is how I feel watching Brazil’s president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, embrace Putin and Venezuelan tyrant Nicolás Maduro. Lula’s is a moral failure of appalling proportions. 

Start with his love-in with Maduro, which is less well-known globally. At a regional summit in late May, progressive activists gasped when Lula claimed that human-rights violations and anti-democratic practices in Venezuela are just a “narrative construction.” This in a country where, according to Human Rights Watch, “police and military units have killed and tortured with impunity in low-income communities,” and “authorities harass and persecute journalists, human-rights defenders, and civil society organizations.” 

When other Latin American leaders protested, Lula moved from the political to the personal. Recall that Lula was tried and convicted for corruption, and went to jail under a 12-year sentence until his conviction was annulled by the Supreme Court in a decision that, according to the Financial Times, “remains controversial.” The accusations against Maduro, Lula blurted out, were “like the lies against me, which no one managed to prove.” 

At one time, Lula might have considered the report on Venezuela by the United Nations Human Rights Commissioner, which documented “grave rights violations,” as sufficient proof. Not anymore. 

Having honed his skills at coddling one dictator, Lula moved on to Putin. Shortly after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, then-candidate Lula told Timemagazine that Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky bore equal responsibility for the war. A year later, he is yet to change his mind. 

Before the recent European Union-Latin America summit, Lula led a group of countries that first vetoed an invitation to Zelensky and then insisted that the communiqué contain no condemnation of Russian aggression. And that was after he had invited Russian’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, to Brasília where, predictably, Lavrov thanked his Brazilian hosts for their “clear understanding” of the situation in Ukraine.

Lula behaves this way for the same reason that babies suck on their toes: because he can. In Latin America, several governments (Chile, Paraguay, and Uruguay among them) object, but none of them is big or influential enough to push Lula off course. The United States and major European countries find his position indefensible (“Brazil is parroting Russian and Chinese propaganda without at all looking at the facts,” said the US National Security Council spokesman), but they have too much going on elsewhere to pick a fight with Brazil. 

Some argue that Brazil is seeking to carve room for an “independent” foreign policy (read: independent from Washington, as evidenced not only by Lula’s coolness toward Ukraine, but also by his repeated criticism of the dollar’s role as a global reserve currency). An independent foreign policy sounds fine, but why does it have to include turning a blind eye to atrocities? France and the Scandinavian countries, among many others, would insist that they run their foreign affairs autonomously, but they do not mince words when it comes to condemning Russia for the carnage it has caused. 

Others claim that Brazil is playing peacemaker by refusing to take sides and insisting that talks between the warring parties be held. But telling the Ukrainians they have to negotiate now is like telling a man who is being attacked by a knife-wielding maniac that he should engage in frank and fruitful dialogue with his assailant. And the idea that Brazil will mediate between two countries at the other side of the world is plainly absurd. When the time comes for talks, maybe India will help. Perhaps Turkey or China will send a representative who can sit at the table. But… Brazil? Really? 

Yet another fanciful view is that Brazil is leading a Global South that will no longer tolerate Western colonialism. So far, so good. But what is Putin’s war if not an instance of colonialism, in which an imperial power is bent on subjugating a smaller neighbor and annexing its territory? Are some imperialists better than others? 

Chile’s president, Gabriel Boric, a tattooed 37-year-old former student activist and proud leftist, doesn’t think so. Boric has been outraged at Lula’s coddling of both Maduro and Putin. He publicly denied that abuses in Venezuela were just a “narrative” and denounced Russia’s “imperial aggression” at the EU-Latin America summit. “Today it is Ukraine” he warned, but “tomorrow it could be any of us.” 

In response, Lula again made it personal, telling media that Boric had misspoken because it was his first EU summit and he was probably “a little anxious.” The spectacle of the 77-year-old Lula talking down to another head of state, 40 years his junior, made even some far-left friends of mine shudder. 

Lula’s stance is rooted in vanity and domestic politics. The vanity springs from a vision of Brazil as a global player, strutting the world stage in the company of its fellow BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa). But to behave as though Brazil could wield global power comparable to China’s, or even India’s, is pure folly. The summit pageantry is pleasant, but the substance remains scanty. 

And the BRICS’ track record on defending peace and non-intervention is not exactly stellar. One of their summits took place just after Russia had illegally annexed Crimea. The world begged them to disinvite Putin. They declined. 

The politics is even more mundane. Brazil’s economy is growing more this year than pundits had anticipated, but the global scenario of high interest rates and low growth (in addition to very high domestic public debt) does not bode well. Moreover, Lula’s party does not have a parliamentary majority, so it must negotiate legislation with the opposition. Given somber prospects at home, photo opportunities abroad look particularly appealing. 

Lula has enjoyed much international goodwill since returning to the presidency, but only because his predecessor, Jair Bolsonaro, was so thuggish and anti-democratic. Sadly, now Lula is consorting with tyrants who make even the awful Bolsonaro look good.