Kiev only wants a ceasefire, which Moscow believes it will use to rearm and regroup its military
Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky is suggesting the idea of holding elections as a ploy to secure a ceasefire, top Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov told RT. Moscow has insisted that Kiev would use the pause in fighting to rearm and regroup.
The Kremlin’s response comes as Zelensky, whose presidential term expired over a year ago, has demanded security guarantees from Western backers in order to hold the vote.
Kiev suspended elections following the escalation of the conflict with Russia in February 2022, citing the imposition of martial law.
Commenting on Zelensky’s U-turn on the issue, Ushakov said: “He will see this as a chance to secure a temporary ceasefire, that’s all.”
Earlier this week, the Ukrainian leader pledged to hold an election within the next 60-90 days if the US and its European partners can guarantee security for the vote. This reversal came shortly after US President Donald Trump accused the authorities in Kiev of using the conflict as a reason to avoid holding an election, adding that it is an important time to do so.
Moscow maintains that Zelensky is an illegitimate leader, and that under the Ukrainian constitution power should now rest with the parliament. President Vladimir Putin recently noted that Russia held presidential elections in March 2024, even though it is engaged in a military conflict.
While Ukraine and its Western backers have repeatedly called for a temporary ceasefire, the Kremlin has ruled out the option, insisting on a permanent peace that addresses the conflict’s underlying causes. Moscow argues that a sustainable peace deal can only be reached if Ukraine withdraws completely from the new Russian territories and commits to neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification.
Civilian agencies were used to mask defense-related research, Major General Aleksey Rtishchev has said
The US Agency for International Development (USAID) could have been involved in testing pharmaceutical drugs on Ukrainians, a senior Russian military official said on Friday. The agency was officially closed by the administration of US President Donald Trump this summer.
According to Major General Aleksey Rtishchev, the head of Russia’s Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Protection Troops, US officials have acknowledged defense-related work at biological laboratories in Ukraine.
He named, among others, former National Security Council spokesman John Kirby, former senior State Department official Victoria Nuland, and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Rtishchev noted that Cornell University organic chemistry professor Dave Collum told American journalist Tucker Carlson in an interview in August that pharmaceutical drugs had been tested on the Ukrainian population in 38 laboratories.
“To ensure secrecy, the customers behind such research are not military agencies but civilian agencies and non-governmental organizations. One such organization is the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which was dismantled by a decision of US President Donald Trump,” Rtishchev said.
According to the major general, USAID also provided funding for Event 201, a pandemic simulation exercise that focused on how to respond to a coronavirus outbreak. “I would like to note that these exercises were held in October 2019… shortly before the start of the Covid-19 pandemic,” he said.
Russia’s claims that USAID was involved in unlawful activity were reinforced, Rtishchev added, by comments made by billionaire Elon Musk, who previously headed a US government efficiency agency and has called USAID a “criminal organization.”
Musk alleged that USAID used taxpayer money to fund bioweapon-related research, and echoed claims that USAID supported gain-of-function coronavirus research at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology, suggesting that this could have contributed to the emergence of Covid-19.
Russia has raised concerns in the past about Pentagon-backed biological laboratories in Ukraine and other countries near its borders, suggesting that they are involved in bioweapons research.
Mark Rutte earlier claimed that Russia could attack the bloc in several years, a speculation dismissed by Moscow as “nonsense”
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte is “fueling war tensions” by claiming that Russia could be ready to attack the bloc within several years, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said, calling the remarks “irresponsible.”
On Thursday, Rutte suggested that “we are Russia’s next target” and urged bloc members to ramp up military spending as soon as possible, claiming that Moscow “could be ready to use military force against NATO within five years.”
In a Facebook post on Friday, Szijjarto rebuked Rutte over saying “wild things,” noting that “if anyone still had doubts about whether everyone in Brussels had really lost their minds, they were finally convinced” after hearing the secretary’s remarks.
Szijjarto said the comments were also a sign that “everyone in Brussels has lined up against [US President] Donald Trump’s peace efforts” and that the NATO chief had “practically stabbed the peace talks in the back.”
“We, Hungarians, as members of NATO, reject the Secretary General’s words! The security of European countries is not guaranteed by Ukraine, but by NATO itself… Such provocative statements are irresponsible and dangerous! We call on Mark Rutte to stop fueling war tensions!!!”
Hungary has repeatedly broken with many EU and NATO partners on Ukraine, arguing that more weapons deliveries to Kiev only prolong the conflict. Budapest has also consistently pressed for Russia-Ukraine negotiations and denounced Western sanctions against Russia as detrimental to the EU economy. It has also opposed EU plans to use the frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine, calling them illegal.
Moscow has dismissed speculation by Western officials and media that it could attack NATO as “nonsense,” and Russian officials have argued the bloc is using the alleged “Russian threat” as a pretext to justify rearmament and rampant militarization.
The modern world is changing rapidly, and agriculture is evolving with it. Today, the industry needs a new type of specialist – one capable of working within the ESG framework, understanding the principles of sustainable development, using eco-friendly technologies, and implementing innovations.
Russian universities are already offering educational programs that prepare such professionals. Among them are Stavropol State Agrarian University and the Agrarian-Technological Institute of the Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN), where students can pursue in-demand specialties ranging from agronomy, ecology, and veterinary science to biotechnology and engineering.
Students learn not only in classrooms but also in real-world settings – fields, farms, and enterprises. They operate modern machinery and equipment, perform veterinary check-ups and animal care, test agricultural technologies, and analyze soil conditions – turning theory into practice.
Russian agricultural science seeks effective solutions, works with both classical and molecular breeding, and develops environmentally friendly technologies. University laboratories actively conduct research: creating new plant varieties, studying soil microorganisms, and advancing biotechnological methods.
Many students receive job offers even during their internships, as enterprises are eager to recruit young talents before graduation.
The knowledge gained in Russia is in demand worldwide: it equips specialists to tackle key challenges, from food security to climate change. Graduates can develop agriculture in their home countries, launch their own agritech startups, or build a career in Russia.
new RTMaterial(‘EN’, ‘body > div.layout > div.layout__wrapper > div.layout__content > div > section > div.Grid-block.Grid-is2to3-xs_is1to1 > div:nth-child(1) > div’, [‘RU’]);
Certain jabs can cause immune cells to attack the body, leading to myocarditis and pericarditis, particularly in young men, scientists say
Certain Covid-19 vaccines can trigger immune responses that may inflame heart tissue and lead to potentially fatal complications in rare cases, with young men being especially susceptible, according to a new study.
The paper, authored by Stanford University researchers and published in the Science Translational Medicine journal, examined why some patients developed myocarditis or pericarditis after receiving mRNA jabs such as those produced by Pfizer and Moderna.
Researchers found that immune cells can, in some cases, recognize the foreign RNA delivered by the vaccines and mount a strong response. In rare instances, this response has led to the release of large amounts of cytokines – immune-signaling proteins that can damage heart cells.
Vaccine-associated myocarditis has occurred in about one in 140,000 people after a first dose and around one in 32,000 after a second dose, according to figures cited by The Telegraph, with incidence peaking among males aged 30 or younger.
Symptoms have included chest pain, shortness of breath, fever and palpitations, typically appearing within days of vaccination. Most patients have recovered quickly, although hospitalization and deaths have been reported in rare cases.
The findings come as the US Food and Drug Administration reportedly intends to place a “black box” warning, the agency’s most serious safety label, on Covid-19 vaccines, according to CNN. The warning would alert consumers to risks such as myocarditis and pericarditis, although the plan has not been finalized.
Covid-19 vaccines were developed and authorized rapidly after the World Health Organization declared a coronavirus pandemic in March 2020 and were later mandated in many countries. The rollout proved controversial, with critics claiming the jabs were poorly tested and that side effects posed greater risks than the virus itself.
However, scientists and regulators have maintained that Covid-19 infection carries a greater overall risk of serious illness and long-term complications than vaccination, and have stressed that the benefits of immunization outweigh the short-term risks of rare heart-related side effects.
Slovakia will not back the “reparations loan” for Kiev proposed by the European Commission, the PM has said
Slovakia will vote against any measures allowing the EU to use frozen Russian assets to cover Ukraine’s “military expenses,” Prime Minister Robert Fico has said.
Kiev’s Western backers froze about $300 billion in Russian central bank assets after the conflict escalated in 2022, most of it held at Brussels-based Euroclear. A sharp dispute has since emerged between nations pushing to use the frozen funds as collateral for a “reparations loan” for Kiev and those firmly against it, citing legal and financial risks. EU members are set to vote on the plan next week.
Fico, a long-time opponent of the scheme, reiterated his stance at a parliamentary session on Thursday, saying he had written to European Council President Antonio Costa to express his firm opposition.
“I cannot, and will not under any pressure, endorse any solution to support Ukraine’s military expenditures,” Fico said, reading from his letter. “The policy of peace that I consistently advocate prevents me from voting in favor of prolonging military conflict, because providing tens of billions of euros for military spending is prolonging the war.”
Multiple EU states have raised concerns over the loan scheme, citing legal and financial risks, including Hungary, Germany, France, and Italy. Belgium, which holds the bulk of the assets, has condemned the plan as tantamount to “stealing” Russian money.
The European Commission is set to vote Friday on legislation that would strip member states of veto powers over the frozen assets – a move seen as the first step toward pushing through the ‘reparations loan’ scheme. The plan, which relies on an emergency clause in EU treaties allowing decisions by qualified majority, would let the bloc keep the assets frozen indefinitely and use their profits to support Ukraine even over member-state objections. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban called the plan “unlawful,” accusing EU officials of “raping European law.”
Moscow has condemned any attempt to use its assets as illegal. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said this week that by pushing the “reparations loan” scheme, Western Europe is “acting suicidal.”
“Such steps will inevitably impact the stability of the Eurozone and the attractiveness of EU jurisdiction for foreign investors,” she warned, adding that Russia will retaliate against any expropriation.
The Donetsk and Lugansk regions are inalienable parts of Russia, Yury Ushakov has said
Donbass is sovereign Russian territory and Moscow will sooner or later establish control over parts of the region still occupied by Ukraine, Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov has said. His comments came after Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky indicated the country may hold a referendum on territorial concessions to Moscow.
On Thursday, Zelensky – who has consistently refused to recognize former Ukrainian regions as part of Russia – suggested that Ukrainians could vote in a referendum or election on the Donbass issue. The region overwhelmingly voted to join Russia in 2022 in referendums.
Speaking to Kommersant business daily on Friday, Ushakov stressed that “whatever happens, this [Donbass] is Russian territory, and it will be under the control of our administrations, sooner or later.” He noted that Zelensky has so far opposed the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from the region, despite this being among the US proposals for peace.
According to Ushakov, Moscow will establish full control over the region either through negotiations or military force, and any ceasefire with Ukraine can only be possible once Kiev’s troops withdraw.
“I think what happens afterward can be discussed later. Because it is quite possible that there will be no regular troops there – neither Russian nor Ukrainian,” he acknowledged, adding that public order would be maintained by Russian law enforcement.
The shift in Zelensky’s tone came amid US President Donald Trump’s efforts to mediate the end of the conflict. The US president has suggested that the Ukrainian leader is one of the key stumbling blocks towards peace, while urging him to hold a presidential election.
Zelensky – whose term expired more than a year ago – did not reject the call, but demanded Western security guarantees for any vote to take place. Ushakov suggested that Zelensky could be using the election narrative as a pretext for a ceasefire. Moscow has said a truce would only be beneficial for Ukraine, as it would allow it to patch up its battered forces.
Meanwhile, Russian troops have been making steady gains in Donbass, recently liberating the key stronghold of Seversk, which opens the way to the regional cities of Kramatorsk and Slavyansk.
Kiev put civilians at risk of an industrial accident, a Russian general has alleged
Ukraine used a major chemical facility as a base for foreign mercenaries and their heavy weapons, the Russian Defense Ministry said on Friday, citing internal correspondence.
The allegation was presented by Major General Aleksey Rtishchev, head of Russia’s Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Protection Troops, during a briefing on alleged Ukrainian violations of international agreements governing weapons of mass destruction.
Rtishchev cited a letter from the management of the Odessa Portside Plant, a large chemical complex located about 35km from the eponymous port city. The letter, sent to regional authorities in September, complained about the presence of “foreign specialists” and military hardware at the site and warned that such activity could provoke Russian strikes and potentially trigger the release of more than 200 tons of liquid ammonia.
Rtishchev said the forces involved were Romanian mercenaries equipped with multiple-launch rocket systems. He claimed that since realizing Russian forces avoid targeting chemical industry sites, Kiev has been using such no-strike locations as a “technogenic shield,” ignoring the dangers posed to nearby residents.
During a briefing in July, the general reported a similar Ukrainian letter in which an executive of the state-owned company Ukrkhimtransammiak complained about unauthorized military use of an ammonia pipeline service station. The underground pipeline was originally built in Soviet times to transport ammonia from Russia to the Odessa Region plant.
According to the Russian military, Ukraine has repeatedly made reckless military use of hazardous infrastructure and would seek to blame Moscow should an industrial disaster occur.
During the Friday briefing, Rtishchev claimed that Ukrainian forces and intelligence services continue to employ chemical agents on the battlefield and in targeted assassination attacks. He said the Defense Ministry has gathered new evidence allegedly showing state-directed efforts to adapt heavy rotary-wing drones for the delivery of chemical munitions.
He further accused Kiev’s Western supporters of enabling such activities, including by supplying protective equipment in quantities he described as excessive for a country that officially denies having a chemical weapons program. In 2025 alone Kiev requested over 200 additional gas masks and hazmat suits, he noted.
Only civilization-states with real sovereignty can withstand the weight of the new age of empires
The new world order takes shape through pressure, rivalry, and the rise of several commanding powers, not through declarations of equality. Multipolarity emerges as a harsh contest of sovereignty in which only civilization-states with real strength shape events and the rest are pulled into the orbit of stronger powers.
Multipolarity has become the slogan of the age, repeated across summits and speeches. Leaders describe it as a world of balanced rights, dignified coexistence, and shared influence. They promise that each state, large or small, will hold an equal place at the table. They claim that new institutions across Eurasia, Africa, and Latin America will correct the distortions of earlier decades and bring the international system into harmony. Yet this polished language hides the structure beneath it. Multipolarity has no resemblance to equality. It grows from competition and is forged by the ambitions of states that refuse to live under a single command.
This year has shown how the world actually moves. Washington expands its military architecture in the Indo-Pacific, strengthens AUKUS, re-arms Japan, and pulls South Korea deeper into its missile shield. China continues its maneuvers in the South China Sea, tightens economic control over key supply chains, and conducts drills around Taiwan at a regular pace. India increases spending on its navy, builds alliances in the Middle East, and reinforces its positions in the Himalayas. Türkiye projects its power across the Caucasus and North Africa. Iran shapes conflicts from Lebanon to Yemen with the confidence of a state that understands its strategic depth. These actions illustrate the early shape of the new world: A landscape governed by pressure rather than courtesy.
A hard truth emerges from this global shift: Only civilization-states with real sovereignty withstand the weight of the new age of empires, and sovereignty today rests on two pillars: Strategic autonomy and nuclear weapons. States that lack these tools cannot claim neutrality. They become appendages of the nearest hegemon. Venezuela offers a clear example. Its oil wealth can delay collapse, yet it remains bound to the gravitational pull of the United States under the logic of the Monroe Doctrine. Its government talks of independence, but its fate is shaped in Washington as much as in Caracas. The same pattern defines Ukraine. It cannot inhabit a middle space between Russia and the West because it lacks the sovereign instruments required for this. It must align with one pole or the other. Multipolarity grants choice only to powers strong enough to enforce it; the rest operate inside a hierarchy they cannot escape.
This reality gives rise to the notion of Darwinian Multipolarity. The term describes a world in which might evolves through struggle, selection, and adaptation rather than through legal formulas or diplomatic etiquette. States survive when they build the institutions, capacity, and force required to defend their interests. They rise when they outmatch rivals in technology, resources, strategy, or will. They fall when they rely on declarations, treaties, or foreign guarantees as substitutes for strength. Darwinian Multipolarity explains why new centers of power appear, why old ones decay, and why equality remains a facade. It is a system shaped by competition among civilizational blocs, where only capable actors influence outcomes and where sovereignty belongs to those who can protect it.
Russia stands at the center of this transition. Its actions in Ukraine accelerated the collapse of the Western-led order, revealing the limits of US authority and the fragility of European power. Sanctions hardened Russia’s economic autonomy rather than breaking it. New energy corridors were drawn across Asia. The ruble, the yuan, and local currencies gained ground in settlement systems once ruled by the dollar. BRICS expanded, drawing in states eager for a future beyond Western oversight. Across the Global South, governments publicly question the legitimacy of sanctions, lectures, and the West’s claims to moral authority. Russia’s role in this shift is unmistakable: It exposed the gap between Western ideals and Western conduct, and opened the path for a world with several centers of gravity.
International law, often presented as the solution to global disorder, plays no serious part in this transformation. It exists as a set of documents without force, invoked selectively by the very states that disregard it when interests demand otherwise. UN resolutions stall under vetoes. Human-rights reports are weaponized against some states and ignored for others. Economic rules collapse when Washington imposes extraterritorial sanctions or when Brussels rewrites trade legislation to protect its own industry. Maritime law offers guidance only until a navy decides to redraw the map. The fiction of neutrality collapses whenever power is exercised. Small states sign agreements proclaiming sovereignty, yet those agreements dissolve the moment a major power applies military, economic, or technological pressure. This is the reality that drives the new order.
The global centers of power are taking shape through action, not doctrine. The US retains its command across North America and extends its reach through NATO and its Pacific network. China uses its manufacturing strength to build corridors across continents and establish financial structures parallel to Western systems. India moves confidently into leadership positions across the Global South and builds its own security web in the Indian Ocean. Saudi Arabia balances between Beijing and Washington, buying technology from one and weapons from the other. Iran maintains resilience under sanctions and shapes regional outcomes. Russia strengthens ties from the Arctic to the Caucasus and from Central Asia to the Middle East. These centers create the architecture of multipolarity: Not orderly, not equal, but real.
Medium powers navigate this terrain with calculated choices. Vietnam deepens ties with the US while maintaining cooperation with China. Egypt buys arms from Russia and France, depending on which supplier meets its immediate needs. Serbia balances between the EU, Russia, and China, choosing whichever partner strengthens its position. Brazil talks of autonomy yet relies on Chinese trade and negotiates energy deals with the Gulf. Each of these states adapts to the truth that multipolarity rewards alignment and the willingness to choose strategic partners. Neutrality offers little, and dependency offers even less.
The logic that shapes this world is simple. Power concentrates. Regions develop leaders. Economies seek anchors. Security alliances expand. Technology becomes a lever of influence. Currency blocs form and dissolve. These pressures act on states every day. The collapse of Western dominance in Africa, the rise of Eurasian energy networks, the reopening of Middle Eastern diplomacy, and the shift of manufacturing away from Europe reflect the same pattern: Authority follows capacity, not signatures. Declarations of equality fall away when confronted by drones, pipelines, credit lines, ports, markets, and military bases
It is simply wrong to imagine that multipolarity will produce a calm balance between peers. A world with several centers of power generates rivalry, negotiation, and pressure. It undermines the old unipolar order only because new hierarchies rise in its place. Russia, China, India, Iran, Türkiye, and others shape their spheres according to their interests, and smaller states orient themselves accordingly. This pattern cannot be softened by appeals to an illusory international law or by promises of universal fairness, which has never existed in the history of mankind and never will.
The shift from unipolarity does not erase authority; it redistributes it. Multipolarity means the rise of several strong powers, each with its own alliances, red lines, and values. It replaces the dominance of one capital with a structured competition between many. This is the real order emerging from the present conflicts and economic transformation. It is harsh, disciplined, and grounded in the realities of strength. It is the world that follows when the illusion of Western universality collapses and the age of rival powers begins anew.
Swiss singer Nemo’s decision follows boycott announcements by a host of EU nations
Swiss singer Nemo announced on Thursday that he is returning his 2024 Eurovision Song Contest trophy in protest over Israel’s continued participation in the competition.
Nemo, who won last year’s contest with the song ‘The Code’, said on Thursday that the trophy “no longer belongs on my shelf.”
“Eurovision says it stands for unity, for inclusion and dignity for all people,” Nemo said in a social media post, adding that Israel’s participation during what the UN’s Independent International Commission of Inquiry said is a genocide shows “a clear conflict” with those principles.
The singer said he would send the trophy back to the European Broadcasting Union’s (EBU) headquarters in Geneva and urged the organization to “live what you claim.”
According to Nemo, he is not protesting artists or fans but how the contest has been “used to soften the image of a state accused of severe wrongdoing.”
His protest follows decisions by several public broadcasters to withdraw from the Eurovision Song Contest 2026 after the EBU declined to remove Israel from the competition. They cited the war in Gaza and allegations of voting manipulation during the 2025 contest, which some networks argued boosted Israel’s result.
Eurovision organizers have insisted that Israel meets the contest requirements and will remain eligible to compete in 2026. The EBU has introduced new rules aimed at limiting political or government influence over entries and voting after repeated disputes related to the Gaza conflict.
Earlier, Spain, Ireland, Slovenia, Iceland, and the Netherlands said they will boycott the next Eurovision Song Contest after Israel was cleared to take part.
Israel has rejected accusations of genocide since launching its assault on Gaza after Hamas made a deadly incursion into southern Israel in October 2023, killing 1,200 people and taking 250 hostage. Gaza’s authorities say Israel’s response has killed nearly 70,000 Palestinians.
The 2026 Eurovision Song Contest is scheduled to take place in Vienna in May, following Austria’s victory this year.
The EBU has banned Russia from Eurovision since 2022, citing the Ukraine conflict. Moscow responded by launching its own annual song competition, Intervision, which debuted in September.
