Russian foreign minister heavily criticised by EU foreign policy chief, and plans for the traditional ‘family photo’ abandoned. What we know on day 1,711

The EU’s foreign policy chief has accused Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov of presenting “lies” in G20 meetings in Atlanta about the Ukrainian conflict and suggested Moscow was not ready for peace negotiations. “We were talking about the big geopolitical crisis, including Ukraine, and we were able to address Sergei Lavrov head-on with this,” Kaja Kallas told Agence France-Presse on the sidelines of a meeting on Friday. “Of course, he put forward a lot of lies, a lot of false narratives that we were also able to then rebuke.” Kallas said Russia did not appear ready to move ahead in peace talks. “Even if they would have said this in words, their deeds tell something else,” she said. “July, August, and September have been the deadliest months for civilians in Ukraine.” She added: “They should show with their deeds that they are ready to negotiate, but they are clearly, clearly not.”

At the talks, which are focusing on global economic growth, energy security and trade, European officials pushed Russia to secure a ceasefire in the Black Sea, an important agriculture export corridor. However, Lavrov conceded no ground on Ukraine and at a press conference, he criticised Europeans for their “arrogant boycott” while praising the willingness of US President Donald Trump’s administration to engage with Moscow.

Plans for a traditional family photo of G20 ministers were called off after some European officials objected to appearing alongside Lavrov. Moscow has been shunned by most of the West since it invaded Ukraine, and Lavrov himself remains under international sanctions. The UK foreign secretary, Ed Miliband, said: “We do not engage in that way with the Russians and have not for a number of years.” German foreign minister Johann Wadephul said there would be no photo because “there is no normality with Russia”.

US secretary of state Marco Rubio spoke briefly with Lavrov on the sidelines of the G20 meeting, with the Russian minister saying both sides had a “decent talk”. Trump has invited Russian President Vladimir Putin to Florida in December and has eased some sanctions on Moscow while touting a deal for Russia to sell diesel as prices soared. The Russian foreign minister’s G20 appearance comes also ahead of fresh negotiations expected between Moscow, Kyiv and Washington in November.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration on Friday approved the sale of 500 Patriot missiles to Ukraine for an estimated $2.1bn, the state department said, but Ukraine’s president has warned deliveries could take years. The approval, which goes to Congress for review, comes after weeks of complaints by Ukrainian authorities that its supplies of the interceptor missiles were dwindling. A state department statement did not provide an estimate for when the weapons could be delivered but Volodymyr Zelenskyy said late Friday in a post on X that “deliveries may begin ONLY IN A FEW YEARS”. Weapons sales typically take years to fulfil, and two people briefed on the US decision said the missiles – which are yet to be manufactured – are not expected to be delivered until a couple of years into the 2030s.

Patriot missiles are among the most important weapons Ukraine has to intercept Russian drones and missiles. The Ukrainian president on Friday suggested the US and European allies could give his country missiles they have stockpiled now, which would later be replenished by the new purchase. “We are asking our American partners to find a solution for the time when there is a real danger and a real need to use PAC-3 interceptors,” Zelenskyy said.

People living in the besieged Russian-held city of Oleshky in southern Ukraine were evacuated on Friday as part of a joint relief operation, the first of its kind in four years and eight months of war. The city, which lies on the Russian-occupied side of the Dnipro River has suffered months of food and medical shortages, leading to warnings of starvation for the few thousand people remaining there, including children. A humanitarian convoy arrived in the city with food and medicine and to evacuate those wishing to leave for Russia or Ukraine. It’s not clear how many people chose to evacuate but US first lady Melania Trump posted on social media on Friday that the convoy could safely evacuate more than 750 people.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Peter Zay/Anadolu/Getty Images

© Photograph: Peter Zay/Anadolu/Getty Images

© Photograph: Peter Zay/Anadolu/Getty Images

Russia exercised its veto at the UN Security Council on Friday to block a U.S. resolution that would have made autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty the only basis for negotiations over Western Sahara.

---

The draft text drew 11 votes in favor, one against and three abstentions. China, Pakistan and Somalia withheld their votes. Russia’s representative, Vasili Nebenzia, warned that imposing unilateral solutions without thorough prior consultations with the other party leads to a dead end.

The U.S. resolution would have extended the UN mission’s mandate until October 2027 and renamed it MINURSO. It also proposed removing the word “referendum” from the mission’s title, a reference that has stood since its deployment in 1991.

RELATED: US Reiterates Its Interest in Strategic Sectors in Morocco and Western Sahara

That referendum formed part of a settlement plan adopted in 1991 that would have allowed the Sahrawi people to decide the territory’s future. The vote was never held, blocked by repeated boycotts and maneuvers linked to the Moroccan crown.

U.S. “zero draft” consolidated the autonomy proposal as the axis of negotiations. It described autonomy as “the most viable solution” and established it as the “only basis” for continuing talks. Critics argued the language would have stripped the process of any real alternative to Moroccan rule.

Russia and China had both questioned the imbalance of the project and the possibility of predetermining the outcome of talks. Under the UN framework, those conversations must lead to a political solution that respects the self-determination of the Sahrawi people.

The session was also marked by a verbal clash between the representatives of Morocco and Algeria. The Moroccan diplomat accused Algiers of blocking the official registration of refugees in the Tindouf camps and of limiting their freedom of movement, while defending the Moroccan autonomy proposal as the path to resolving the conflict.

Morocco and its backers see the autonomy plan as a pragmatic exit. Algeria and the Polisario Front see it as an attempt to legitimize occupation.

Following the veto, the UN Security Council subsequently rejected a resolution drafted by Russia to extend the peacekeeping mission’s mandate for one year. There were 3 votes in favor and 1 against, with 11 abstentions, so it was not necessary for Washington to use its veto power, since the resolution did not reach the minimum of nine affirmative votes in the 15-member body.

MINURSO was created in 1991 to organize a referendum in which Sahrawis would choose between independence and integration with Morocco.

The Polisario Front, the political representative of the Sahrawi people, welcomed the outcome. The movement said the veto halted a deeply dangerous course of action pushed by United States, one that risked legitimizing Morocco’s occupation at the expense of the fundamental rights of the Sahrawi people and their right to self-determination.

🔴Watch the moment Russia’s representative uses the #veto for the first time against a US draft resolution on #WesternSahara 🇪🇭. pic.twitter.com/iJjAvJkR6A

— Algeria Gate -English (@algatedzEng) October 30, 2026

Polisario’s Warning

Sidi Mohamed Omar, the Polisario representative to the UN, addressed the council after the session. He said the U.S. draft did not confront the fundamental and legitimate concerns raised by the front, nor the substantive observations submitted by several member states.

Omar described the resolution’s content and approach as a serious and dangerous deviation from the established principles of international law, including those that govern Western Sahara as a decolonization question.

In a letter to the council dated October 22, the Polisario Front’s UN representative called the U.S. draft “an extremely dangerous and unprecedented deviation“, not only international law -which underpins the question of Western Sahara as a process of decolonization- but also with respect to the peace process established by the Security Council.

Sidi Omar warned that its adoption would “trigger more tension and instability,” and that the Polisario Front “would have no choice but to disengage from the peace process as a whole.“

He stressed that the International Court of Justice confirmed that sovereignty over Western Sahara “belongs exclusively to the Sahrawi people, who have an inalienable, non-negotiable and imprescriptible right to self-determination and independence”.

The veto preserves the current mission name, Minurso, and keeps the self-determination question open on paper. For the Polisario and its supporters, the result blocks what they see as Washington’s attempt to bury the referendum demand entirely. For Morocco, the autonomy plan remains its preferred framework, one endorsed by a growing number of governments but rejected by the Sahrawi independence movement.

🔴NOW- Sahrawis 🇪🇭 are taking to the streets in their thousands to celebrate the Russian Federation’s 🇷🇺 veto against attempts by vested interests to undermine the freedom and right to self-determination of the Sahrawi people. #WesternSahara #MINURSO #SaharaLibre pic.twitter.com/p6fDYD3PtY

— Frente POLISARIO (@Polisario_) October 30, 2026

After the veto, hundreds of people marched through the refugee camps of TindoThe standoff caps decades of diplomatic wrangling over the former Spanish colony. The demonstrations signal the depth of feeling across the camps, where generations of Sahrawis have waited for a vote that has never come. The veto, for now, keeps that possibility alive.

The current UN mission’s mandate, extended by Resolution 2797 of October 2025, will expire Saturday, unless a last-minute initiative is taken to reactivate it. That leaves open the possibility that the Council may attempt to renew it during the next day.

If no agreement emerges, the mission will be left without a valid Security Council mandate to continue operations as of November 1, though it does not imply the immediate withdrawal of its personnel.

The Ukrainian president called the US decision strong, but added that delivery of 500 Patriot PAC-3 missiles ⁠could take years

The US has approved the sale ⁠of 500 Patriot PAC-3 missiles ⁠to Ukraine for an estimated $2.1bn, but Volodymyr Zelenskyy has warned deliveries could take years and stockpiles were needed now to counter Russian ballistic missile attacks.

“The proposed sale will improve Ukraine’s capability to meet current and future threats by improving its integrated air and missile defense capabilities,” the US state department said in a statement on Friday.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Getty Images

© Photograph: Getty Images

© Photograph: Getty Images

The Ukrainian president called the US decision strong, but added that delivery of 500 Patriot PAC-3 missiles ⁠could take years

The US has approved the sale ⁠of 500 Patriot PAC-3 missiles ⁠to Ukraine for an estimated $2.1bn, but Volodymyr Zelenskyy has warned deliveries could take years and stockpiles were needed now to counter Russian ballistic missile attacks.

“The proposed sale will improve Ukraine’s capability to meet current and future threats by improving its integrated air and missile defense capabilities,” the US state department said in a statement on Friday.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Getty Images

© Photograph: Getty Images

© Photograph: Getty Images

Marco Rubio pulls plug on traditional photo op at meeting of foreign ministers after about one-third of countries threaten boycott

The traditional “family photo” to open the G20 foreign ministers’ meeting has been abruptly cancelled in the US after a host of nations – including Australia and the UK – refused to appear beside the Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov.

The US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, pulled the plug after several European officials, the UK and Australia made it known they would boycott or walk out of the snapshot that often kicks off such international gatherings.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Megan Varner/Pool Reuters/AP

© Photograph: Megan Varner/Pool Reuters/AP

© Photograph: Megan Varner/Pool Reuters/AP

The Canadian contribution follows similar announcements made by other allies. Norway pledged $9 billion for 2027 on Oct. 7, and on Oct. 28, the U.K. announced a $13 billion pledge to Ukraine, its largest ever.

Stephen Hubbard said that only when he was being taken from Moscow to St Petersburg did he believe he was ‘going somewhere’

In his first comments since recently being released from a Russian prison, a retired Michigan teacher said he only believed he would be freed when he got new clothes.

Stephen Hubbard, 74, remarked on Friday that he had heard many times previously that he would be released – but never really trusted what he was told, adopting a philosophy of “seeing is believing” and “actions speak louder than words”.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images

© Photograph: Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images

© Photograph: Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images

Em pleno Dia das Bruxas de 1961, uma operação na Praça Vermelha de Moscou reabriu o mausoléu de Vladimir Lenin e retirou de lá o cadáver de Josef Stalin.

Não se tratava de um ritual de Halloween, mas de uma das diversas ações promovidas pela União Soviética para enfraquecer o stalinismo e o “culto à personalidade” percebido em torno da figura do antigo líder.

Por ordem do então primeiro-ministro Nikita Khrushchov, o corpo foi enterrado em uma cova simples na Necrópole da Muralha do Kremlin, sinalizado apenas por uma placa de mármore gravada com as iniciais, sobrenome e data de morte do governante.

Dois líderes dividindo um túmulo

Por sete anos, o mausoléu de pedra no centro da Praça Vermelha teve como ponto central os caixões transparentes de Vladimir Lenin, para quem o local foi construído, e de Josef Stalin.

A ideia de preservar o corpo de Lenin foi do Partido Comunista e ganhou apoio do próprio Stalin. Para os revolucionários, o povo não poderia despedir-se de uma figura tão amada; conservar a oportunidade de visitá-lo e manter seu cadáver em condições honrosas, ou seja, com decomposição mínima, era prolongar o respeito e o culto ao pai da União Soviética.

Leia Mais:

Para isso, o governo da época optou por embalsamar Lenin utilizando uma série de processos físicos e químicos que, até hoje, precisam ser “retocados” periodicamente para evitar a degradação do corpo.

Seu sucessor, Stalin, governou por três décadas e morreu ainda com grande apoio político, em 1953. Apesar de seus conflitos pessoais, a dupla de comunistas era vista como dois lados da mesma moeda, ambos reverenciados pela população e creditados pela derrubada do capitalismo e a unificação do território.

Portanto, foi natural que o partido decidisse dar a Stalin o mesmo tratamento honroso reservado ao corpo de Lênin. Ele foi enterrado ao lado do antecessor em seu próprio caixão de vidro, onde permaneceu por sete anos.

Desconstruindo o mito

A reverência por Stalin, no entanto, não perdurou. Os líderes seguintes da União Soviética iniciaram um processo de reeducação política conhecido como “desestalinização”: uma tentativa de erradicar a violência e o autoritarismo do governo por meio da desconstrução do mito stalinista.

O principal promotor deste movimento foi Nikita Khrushchov, cuja liderança também foi marcada pelo avanço tecnológico, pela Guerra Fria travada com os Estados Unidos e pelo início da fragmentação dos territórios soviéticos.

O enterro de Stalin

Em 30 de outubro de 1961, o Congresso do Partido Comunista Soviético aprovou com unanimidade a remoção do corpo de Josef Stalin do Mausoléu da Praça Vermelha, deixando exposto apenas Vladimir Lênin.

Na reportagem publicada pelo jornal The New York Times no mesmo dia, a decisão era descrita como “símbolo da derrota dos elementos da União Soviética que se opõem às reformas pós-Stalin”.

A matéria também cita um depoimento de uma militante bolchevique, Dora Lazurkina, que afirmou na sessão do Congresso que “venerava” Vladimir mesmo depois de ser presa pela polícia do governante. No entanto, ela teria mudado de ideia por “ter conversado com Lenin, que vive em seu coração”.

“Ontem, eu falei com ele novamente, como se ele estivesse diante de mim e vivo. E ele disse que era desconfortável deitar ao lado de Stalin, que prejudicou tanto o partido”, diz a citação do discurso de Dora segundo o jornal americano. A fala teria sido recebida pelos congressistas com “aplausos contínuos e estrondosos”.

A operação de retirada do corpo começou na manhã seguinte, em 31 de outubro, Dia das Bruxas na cultura ocidental. Stalin foi enterrado junto a outros ícones do Partido Comunista junto à Muralha Vermelha que circunda a praça em Moscou.

Não houve cerimônia: apenas uma pequena equipe de coveiros estava presente. Ao longo dos anos, seu túmulo ganhou uma decoração robusta e virou outro ponto turístico na cidade. Inicialmente, foi marcado apenas com uma lápide simples e plana.

In Ukraine, President Zelenskyy made the clearest indication yet that a disruption of Starlink technology contributed to civilian deaths. Elon Musk admitted last week to ordering the slowdown of the service. The intentional hindrance of Ukrainian defenses led to bipartisan anger in Washington. Special correspondent Simon Ostrovsky and producer Katia Patin report on the fallout from the disruption.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruled on Friday that Russian teams can compete in next year's men's and women's world championships, overturning the International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF)'s decisions to exclude them from its competitions.

The IIHF has excluded Russia, which has won ​five IIHF world titles as an independent nation, from most international ice hockey competitions since 2022 following the country's invasion of Ukraine.

Russia did not compete in Olympic hockey earlier this year, the first since 2014 which had NHL players, nor was it included in the NHL's 4 Nations Face-Off. Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, four days after Olympic competition ended that year.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE OUTKICK SPORTS COVERAGE

The decision was not met with a warm reception from the IIHF and several other countries, including Canada, which will host the World Junior Championships later this year.

"Canada maintains, as it has since 2022, that Russia should not be represented in international sport competitions while Russia's illegal and unjustifiable full-scale invasion against Ukraine continues," Canada's Secretary of State for sport, Adam van Koeverden, said, via The Athletic. "Canada will maintain restrictions on the participation of Russian athletes at events hosted in Canada that receive funding from the Government of Canada and explore further options to ensure that the Russian government is held accountable."

"The IIHF disagrees with this aspect of the ruling ​and maintains that its decisions were necessary to protect the safety and security of all participants and safeguard the integrity of its competitions," ‌the ⁠federation said.

REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN PRESSES NHL OVER ALEX OVECHKIN’S APPEARANCE IN PUTIN PARTY CAMPAIGN AD

In a brief statement, CAS cited a lack of sufficient evidence to support the IIHF’s security concerns. Russia's sports minister, Mikhail Degtyarev, told state television channel Vesti that "discrimination in hockey has been brought to an end," and "this place rightfully belongs to us."

Ukraine's ice hockey federation denounced the ruling while respecting the authority of the CAS.

"We wish to express deep outrage at this decision, taken amid a full-scale war. The threats that were the reason for suspending Russian teams in 2022 have not disappeared. On the contrary, they have only intensified," the federation said on its website.

"We believe that the safety of participants and ​the integrity of international sport ​cannot be considered separately ⁠from the realities of the war that Russia continues to wage against Ukraine."

Other countries to oppose the decision include Germany, Finland, Czechia, Sweden and Austria.

The first tournament to be affected by the change will be the World Juniors, and Germany will host the World Championships next year.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Notable NHL players include Alex Ovechkin, Nikita Kucherov, Kirill Kaprizov, Andrei Svechnikov and Artemi Panarin, among others.

Reuters and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Kyiv Independent staff in the capital reported explosions and widespread fluctuations in power, with some buildings and streetlights temporarily losing electricity.

It is time to pull the plug on the corrupt Kiev regime and make peace.

Join us on Telegram, X, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The breakthrough localized ceasefire on the Kherson front line has so far held in place, allowing critical humanitarian supplies into the besieged town of Alyoshki, where thousands of residents were facing starvation.

Convoys from Russia carrying food supplies, medicines, sanitary materials and fuel began arriving Friday. The town had been largely cut off from outside contact since May this year. For nearly six months, the people of Alyoshki have been living in extreme deprivation under deadly assault from drones and mines fired by the NATO-backed Ukrainian regime.

Yet the gutter-level Western media have portrayed the suffering of Alyoshki as being caused by Russia.

The plight of the people came to worldwide attention earlier this month when Pope Leo XIV appealed to Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and the Ukrainian side to cooperate on breaking the siege. Then the dire situation facing the town was raised in a phone call between Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump on October 9.

To her credit, America’s First Lady Melania Trump offered assistance in mediating a ceasefire to enable a humanitarian relief mission. It was Melania who announced on October 23 that a truce had been accepted by both sides. The cessation came into effect this week on October 27 at 4 am Moscow time. It is due to end on Sunday at midnight. The window of five days has permitted critical humanitarian supplies for the residents. Buses have also entered the town to evacuate those who want to leave.

Russia’s human rights commissioner Yana Lantratova and her Ukrainian counterpart, Dmitry Lubinets, led a joint mission to deliver aid and oversee arrangements for evacuation.

The relief mission has been a logistical challenge. Alyoshki sits on the left bank of the Dnieper River, facing the city of Kherson on the other bank. Russian troops took Alyoshki (Oleshky in Ukrainian) during the first weeks of the Special Military Operation in March 2022. The Kherson Oblast (region) voted in a referendum to join the Russian Federation four years ago, along with the oblasts of Zaporozhye, Donetsk, and Lugansk. But the city of Kherson remains under the control of Ukraine. The four provinces are historically Russian territory, also known as Novorossiya.

Alyoshki residents have been living on the front line in a pitiful crossfire. The conditions worsened after the Kakhovka dam was blown up by the NATO-backed Kiev regime forces using HIMARS rockets in June 2023. The flood destroyed much of the town’s civilian infrastructure and utilities for drinking water, electricity, and heating. Its population dwindled from a pre-war 25,000 to the present estimated 2,000. Their situation deteriorated in March 2025, when the Ukrainian forces blew up a major bridge over the Dnieper. That meant all access to the town was by road from the East through Russian-held territory.

Earlier this year, the Ukrainian forces on the right bank of the river intensified the assault on Alyoshki with swarms of drones firing on inhabitants and their houses while dropping hundreds of mines on the town and its exit roads. Residents who were able to escape spoke of the hellish conditions of starvation while under constant threat of being fired on. Several people were killed or maimed by drones as they attempted to scavenge for food.

In previous months, Russian vehicles attempting to bring in food supplies were routinely targeted by the Ukrainian drones. That was how the town ended up living under siege, and its people were facing starvation. It was methodically cut off by the NATO-backed regime.

Rodion Miroshnik, Russia’s foreign ministry envoy, described the situation as a “medieval blockade using modern methods.”

The Kiev regime and the Western news media have gone into overdrive with propaganda. They have accused Russia of blockading the town and “exploiting” the humanitarian crisis. This is peddling incredible lies and doublethink. So, Russian troops who control Alyoshki are shooting at their own supply efforts? There are also other vile lies, such as Russia denying aid to residents unless they accept Russian citizenship.

Yana Lantratova, the Russian human rights commissioner, said anyone who wishes to relocate to Ukraine will be facilitated. All evacuees will have to be transported into Russia as a first step, then, if they wish, be flown to Belarus and from there to Ukraine. The circuitous route is because the Ukrainian forces blew up the bridge crossing the Dnieper. Most evacuees have been glad to be received by Russia.

The Western propaganda distortion is similar to the siege of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP). The civilian nuclear installation has been under the control of Russian forces since 2022 and has been shelled constantly by the Ukrainian side with NATO weapons. Yet the Western media make out that it is the Russian forces that are targeting the ZNPP.

Another confounding fact for the regime and the Western backers is that most of the Alyoshki residents want to remain in place now that humanitarian needs have been met. They are not fleeing to Ukraine.

Praise is due to Melania Trump for getting personally involved in this crisis and helping bring relief to the people of Alyoshki. She said that American journalists have been allowed to observe the humanitarian mission along with their Russian counterparts. The U.S. news crew was said to be from the Newsmax outlet, which tends to be favorable to President Trump in its coverage. Though, notably, before the arrival of the relief mission on Friday, Newsmax anchors were repeating the Western media narrative that the humanitarian crisis had been caused by Russia. It will be interesting to see what its reporters have to say after visiting the town and talking with residents firsthand.

There has been some speculation that the success of the Alyoshki truce could catalyze a wider ceasefire in Ukraine. That’s unlikely. The truce on the Kherson front line is a special case of a localized emergency to alleviate an acute humanitarian crisis. Moscow has consistently said that the solution to the conflict requires a peace settlement dealing with long-term issues of security and NATO’s historic aggression. A temporary general ceasefire is not acceptable.

Nevertheless, what the Alyoshki breakthrough demonstrates is the benefit of dialogue and a basic commitment to cooperate in resolving difficulties. In principle, with that kind of attitude, any problem can be solved, and that’s “the art of the possible,” or diplomacy at work.

However, it should be noted first and foremost that the appalling situation in Alyoshki was created by the Kiev regime using NATO weapons. This NeoNazi regime callously played with civilian lives to maximize pressure on Russia. It didn’t care about the suffering of civilians, even though, sickeningly, the regime is now making out that it is “saving our people.”

The NeoNazis recreated a Leningrad-like barbaric siege. President Putin’s relatives died in the Nazi starvation of Leningrad (St Petersburg) during WWII. That memory no doubt gave him a stronger incentive to alleviate the crisis in Alyoshki.

Surprisingly, the Kiev regime cooperated this time with a ceasefire to de-mine the roads and permit relief convoys into Alyoshki. Previous ceasefires, for example, ad hoc Christmas truces, were always breached by the duplicitous regime. This time, the regime is under pressure from President Trump to comply with a diesel deal made with Russia to ease fuel prices in the U.S. The regime knew it was on watch, and so it is not going to mess around, especially when the matter concerns the US president’s wife’s endeavors. This shows an important point. With enough leverage from Washington, the regime can be brought to heel, as it should be, to get this conflict resolved once and for all.

This war is dragging on, and lives are suffering, because of U.S. and European procrastination. It is time to pull the plug on the corrupt Kiev regime and make peace.

The approval represents a step toward a possible sale rather than a completed purchase, and a timeline was not mentioned. The United States Congress generally has 30 days to review a proposed sale to Ukraine, while manufacturing and delivery of complex weapons systems can take years.

Comboio chegou à Crimeia com civis retirados da cidade ucraniana ocupada. Melania Trump, que ajudou a negociar a trégua, disse que foram evacuadas mais de 750 pessoas.

© RUSSIAN DEFENCE MINISTRY PRESS SERVICE HANDOUT/EPA

The post Russian Army Advances 19 Kilometers Into Ukrainian Defenses in Huliaipole appeared first on South Front.

O Departamento de Estado dos Estados Unidos informou nesta sexta-feira (30) que aprovou a venda de 500 mísseis Patriot PAC-3 para a Ucrânia por um valor estimado em US$ 2,1 bilhões (equivalente a cerca de R$ 11,3 bilhões).

A Ucrânia pagará pelos mísseis interceptadores defensivos com contribuições do Canadá, da Alemanha e da Noruega — canalizadas por meio do programa Jumpstart, dos EUA —, além de recursos próprios financiados pelo Empréstimo de Apoio à Ucrânia, da União Europeia, afirmou o Departamento de Estado americano em um comunicado.

Atrasos nas entregas de mísseis aumentaram a tensão entre a Ucrânia e os EUA, após o presidente Donald Trump anunciar um acordo sobre diesel com a Rússia e criticar Volodymyr Zelensky pela relutância em interromper os ataques a refinarias russas.

Zelensky declarou, no início desta semana, que o governo ucranaiano aguardava há quase um mês a autorização dos EUA para o fornecimento de mísseis cruciais, em um momento em que a Rússia intensificava os ataques contra a infraestrutura energética e civil.

O líder do país europeu tem solicitado repetidamente aos EUA que acelerem as entregas antes da chegada do inverno. A Casa Branca fornece mísseis adquiridos por aliados da Otan, a aliança militar ocidental, por meio de um programa conhecido como Purl.

A Lockheed Martin é a principal contratada para esta venda.

Os EUA têm fornecido grandes quantidades de armamentos a aliados, ao mesmo tempo em que utilizam munições em suas próprias operações militares — como no Irã —, o que gera preocupações quanto aos estoques de sistemas essenciais de defesa aérea e armas de precisão.

Em julho, o Exército americano firmou um contrato com a Lockheed, no valor de até US$ 58,6 bilhões, para a produção de mísseis interceptadores Patriot.

A empresa afirmou que esse acordo permitirá cumprir a promessa de triplicar a capacidade de produção dos mísseis PAC-3 MSE até o final de 2030, além de ampliar em 50% o número de postos de trabalho em sua fábrica em Camden, no Arkansas — passando de 1.200 para cerca de 1.850 empregos.

Anteriormente, a empresa havia anunciado que a produção de mísseis interceptadores Patriot PAC-3 alcançaria 2.000 unidades por ano.

Negociadores do Pentágono estão pressionando as empresas contratadas a acelerar significativamente o ritmo; acordos preliminares de produção, firmados no início deste ano, estão no centro dos esforços para aumentar a fabricação desses mísseis.

O que é o sistema de defesa Patriot dos Estados Unidos?

A plataforma X suspendeu 15 contas que promoviam o que se suspeita ser desinformação russa sobre as Midterms, as Eleições de Meio de Mandato dos Estados Unidos. No entanto, algumas contas influentes permanecem ativas, segundo uma organização que monitora a desinformação.

Especialistas afirmam que, até o momento, a interferência russa nas Midterms de 2026 tem sido limitada. Contudo, observou-se um aumento recente na atividade de contas nas redes sociais — possivelmente ligadas à Rússia — que disseminam alegações falsas sobre diversos candidatos democratas ao Senado.

Especialistas em desinformação informaram que as suspensões no X ocorreram na quinta-feira (29) e incluíram perfis com mais de 100 mil seguidores. Ainda assim, muitas das contas mais influentes que propagam esse tipo de conteúdo continuavam ativas até esta sexta-feira (30).

“O X demonstrou que, até certo ponto, está atento a essa questão”, afirmou Bret Schafer, diretor sênior do Institute for Strategic Dialogue, organização que identificou as suspensões.

“Muitas das publicações russas encobertas que detectamos foram removidas rapidamente. Por outro lado, outros elementos dessa infraestrutura continuam no ar”, adicionou.

Essa atividade online assemelha-se a esforços de desinformação observados anteriormente durante o ciclo eleitoral de 2024 — ações que, segundo agências de inteligência dos EUA, estariam ligadas a agentes do governo russo.

A CNN entrou em contato com o X solicitando um posicionamento sobre as remoções e aguarda retorno.

O que está em jogo nas Eleições de Meio de Mandato dos EUA?

 

The closure of Novaya Gazeta, one of Russia’s last independent newspapers is a chilling reminder that authoritarian governments have always understood the danger posed by journalists who refuse to toe the official line.

There are few more revealing characteristics of an authoritarian regime than its determination to silence independent journalism. Governments confident in their legitimacy do not need to fear awkward questions, investigative reporting or newspapers which challenge the official narrative. Those which seek to control every aspect of public life, however, understand that an independent press represents a threat to their authority.

The announcement that Russia’s celebrated independent newspaper, Novaya Gazeta, is to cease operations is therefore about considerably more than the disappearance of another media organisation. It represents another deeply disturbing milestone in President Vladimir Putin’s systematic dismantling of what remains of independent public life in Russia.

For more than three decades, Novaya Gazeta stood as one of the most important remaining symbols of independent Russian journalism. Established in 1993, with financial support from former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, it emerged during a brief period of optimism following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Its journalists investigated corruption, exposed abuses of power, documented human rights violations and challenged the increasingly authoritarian direction of Russian politics. It was never an entirely comfortable publication for the Kremlin. That, of course, was precisely its purpose.

Now, editor-in-chief Sergei Sokolov, a beacon of independent journalism in a country where professional courage increasingly carries extraordinary personal risks, has announced that the newspaper can no longer continue.

The editorial team has attributed its demise to sustained pressure from Russian authorities and security services. Sokolov has said that on November 9 the newspaper will switch off its servers, leave its historic premises and bring its operations to an end.

The timing and manner of the closure are particularly significant. This was not simply a newspaper struggling commercially or losing its readership. According to the newspaper, its ability to function had been progressively dismantled: its media registration was revoked, its websites blocked, its printing facilities taken away, its financial support disrupted and its journalists subjected to searches, detention and criminal investigations.

In September, the entire editorial team was designated as foreign agents. In October, Sokolov’s home was searched and he was questioned by investigators. Journalist Oleg Roldugin had already been arrested and placed under house arrest. The newspaper was also ordered to vacate its historic Moscow headquarters.

One does not have to agree with every editorial position taken by Novaya Gazeta to recognise the significance of what has happened. Indeed, that is the very essence of press freedom: journalists must be free to investigate, question and criticise without first obtaining the approval of those they are investigating.

Sergei Sokolov deserves particular recognition. In an increasingly hostile environment, he continued to lead a newsroom whose journalists understood that reporting the truth was not merely a professional obligation but a responsibility to Russian society. His determination to keep the publication operating, even after the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, deserves admiration.

He inherited a formidable legacy. Former editor Dmitry Muratov, who shared the 2021 Nobel Peace Prize for his defence of freedom of expression, had helped establish the newspaper’s reputation as a fearless investigative publication. Six of its journalists and contributors were murdered, including the internationally renowned investigative reporter Anna Politkovskaya, whose reporting exposed alleged abuses committed during Russia’s wars in Chechnya.

Their deaths remain a terrible indictment of the dangers confronting journalists who challenge powerful interests in Russia. Sokolov’s decision to keep working despite intimidation and the threat of prosecution is a reminder that journalism is sometimes an act of extraordinary personal courage.

Yet the significance of this closure extends far beyond one newspaper and its employees. It illustrates a familiar pattern in authoritarian politics: first discredit independent journalists, then restrict their funding, impose increasingly punitive regulations, criminalise inconvenient reporting and ultimately remove the institutions themselves.

The terminology is often carefully chosen. Journalists become foreign agents. Investigations become threats to national security. Criticism becomes disinformation. Opposition to government policy is portrayed as disloyalty to the nation. It is an approach familiar from the darkest chapters of European history.

An authoritarian regime’s fear of the truth

Putin’s Russia is hardly alone in understanding the political usefulness of controlling information. Throughout history, authoritarian governments have sought to monopolise the means by which citizens receive information.

The Soviet Union perfected the practice through censorship, state-controlled newspapers and the persecution of journalists who refused to conform. Independent thought was treated as a political offence, while propaganda was presented as patriotism.

There is an uncomfortable historical irony in the fact that Novaya Gazeta emerged from the relative openness of the post-Soviet period, only to be extinguished under a Russian president who has increasingly embraced the methods of the political system that preceded it.

The newspaper’s closure is also part of a much wider campaign. Since the invasion of Ukraine in 2022, independent Russian journalists have faced increasingly restrictive censorship legislation, prosecutions and intimidation. Many have fled abroad. Others have been imprisoned or forced into silence.

The Kremlin has not simply sought to influence the national conversation. It has sought to determine which conversations Russians are permitted to have.

A government which controls the media can attempt to control the historical record, the public understanding of military failures, the exposure of corruption and, ultimately, the political choices available to its citizens. Without independent reporting, the public is left increasingly dependent upon information supplied by the very institutions whose actions require scrutiny.

Europe’s responsibility

There should be no complacency in European capitals about what this means.

Freedom of expression is not an optional extra in a democratic society. Nor is it a privilege which governments can withdraw when reporting becomes politically inconvenient.

The European Union has repeatedly condemned Russia’s persecution of independent journalists. In 2022, the then EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell specifically highlighted the intimidation which had forced Novaya Gazeta to suspend its activities. The European Court of Human Rights also ruled against Russia in cases involving restrictions on the newspaper and other journalists.

Those commitments must now translate into practical support for independent Russian journalism operating in exile and for those journalists who continue to take extraordinary risks inside Russia. The continued existence of Novaya Gazeta Europe, established by journalists who left Russia following the invasion, is encouraging. But it cannot replace the work of an independent newsroom reporting from Moscow itself.

Europe must also remember that defending press freedom means defending the principle universally, including when journalists publish opinions with which European governments or their supporters strongly disagree.

The newspaper may disappear. Its legacy will not.

There is something particularly tragic about the departure of Novaya Gazeta. Its journalists continued working long after many would reasonably have concluded that the personal and professional risks had become intolerable.

Sergei Sokolov deserves to be remembered among those journalists who refused to surrender their professional principles when confronted by an increasingly powerful and intolerant state. His newspaper’s closure should not be interpreted as a victory for the Kremlin. It is, rather, an admission of how profoundly threatened an authoritarian government can feel by the simple act of independent reporting.

Putin may be able to close the offices, disable the servers and remove the newspaper’s name from Russia’s media landscape. He cannot, however, erase the investigations, the testimony, the historical record or the courage of those who produced them. The six journalists who lost their lives because of their work deserve to be remembered. So do those who remain in prison, those forced into exile and those who continue to report despite intimidation.

A government that fears its journalists has something to hide. A government that silences them has something to fear. The disappearance of Novaya Gazeta is not merely a Russian tragedy. It is a warning to every democracy that takes freedom of expression for granted.

And it is a reminder that when independent journalism dies, democracy is invariably among its victims.

Bernardo Valente, o professor de relações internacionais na Universidade de Lisboa, considera que o Putin não aceita uma reunião presencial com Zelensky, porque acha vai vencer a guerra na Ucrânia.

A Rússia voltou a atacar a infraestrutura de transportes e energia de Dnipro pelo segundo dia consecutivo, causando estragos e obrigando a cortes de emergência na eletricidade.