ЦЕНЗОРА.NET

Серед звільнених з полону є правозахисник, журналіст та військовослужбовець Максим Буткевич
…

A Canadian surveillance plane over the East China Sea — Over the blue waters of the East China Sea, a Canadian air force patrol crew scans the horizon, searching for vessels suspected of making illicit transfers of oil to North Korea.

The 20-member crew aboard the Aurora CP-140 is on the front line of a U.S.-led multinational effort to enforce United Nations sanctions that cap North Korea’s oil imports.

On this clear day in mid-October, the Canadian plane is patrolling international waters off the coast of China — a hotspot, the crew says, for ships attempting to dodge sanctions.

When they locate a suspicious vessel, the crew swoops low, circling to snap pictures from multiple angles. The idea is to “make our presence known,” said Major Doug Publicover, the commander of the Canadian mission.

The Canadians pass the information to the Enforcement Coordination Cell, or ECC, a loose configuration of 11 nations that conduct surveillance and share intelligence on North Korea’s sanctions violations.

“It’s a small piece of the pie,” Publicover said of Canada’s contribution, “but each country does their bit, and hopefully that deterrence can be larger.”

Sanctions under strain

Since 2006, U.N. Security Council sanctions have restricted much of North Korea’s economic activity as punishment for its nuclear and missile programs. The sanctions limit North Korea’s annual imports to 4 million barrels of crude oil and 500,000 barrels of refined products.

U.S. officials, however, say North Korea regularly exceeds these limits, mainly because of a lack of enforcement by China and Russia — North Korea’s key allies. Both countries deny those claims but have taken steps to blunt the impact of the sanctions, which they say are no longer necessary.

Earlier this year, Russia vetoed the renewal of a U.N. panel that monitored sanctions violations. China abstained from the vote. As an alternative, the U.S. and its allies this week created the Multilateral Sanctions Monitoring Team, or MSMT, which aims to fill the intelligence gap left by the disbanded panel.

“We just collect information, we tabulate it, and we push it off,” says Royal Canadian Air Force Commander Larry Moraal, the ECC’s deputy director. “[But] they’ll have greater access to the international community than we do.”

China pushback

As the U.S. and its allies move ahead with sanctions enforcement, China has voiced growing frustration, particularly with patrols near its borders. Chinese military jets have frequently intercepted Canadian and Australian planes on these missions, at times creating tense encounters.

During this week’s flight, with VOA aboard, Chinese fighter jets shadowed the Canadian plane for hours as it patrolled the East China Sea. Unlike past incidents, though, the interactions were not dangerous, said Publicover.

“We’re in their backyard — we expect to have some company,” Publicover said.

China’s biggest concern is that some flights “have been seriously approaching or even entered China’s airspace,” said Hu Bo, director of the Beijing-based South China Sea Strategic Situation Probing Initiative.

In 2023, China accused a Canadian CP-140 of entering its airspace near the disputed Diaoyu Islands, known as the Senkaku Islands in Japan. The islands are administered by Japan but also claimed by China and Taiwan.

When asked by VOA, Canadian officials declined to comment on the incident, underscoring that all its operations occur in international waters.

Philip Shetler-Jones, a senior research fellow at the London-based Royal United Services Institute, said it’s easy to understand why China doesn’t like patrols so close to its borders.

“I don’t think many countries would like it. But that’s different from having an acceptable legal basis to say it’s not OK — or an acceptable legal basis on which to justify the kind of dangerous maneuvers and actions they’ve carried out,” he said.

Going it alone

With China and Russia increasingly disengaged from enforcing sanctions, U.S.-led mechanisms like the ECC and MSMT are among the few remaining options. Some experts, however, question how effective this approach can be.

“There’s no way the U.S. and its allies on their own could enforce U.N. sanctions” without help from China and Russia, says Peter Ward, a research fellow at the Seoul-based Sejong Institute.

Still, Ward said the newly created MSMT can serve as a useful tool for naming and shaming violators, applying pressure, and helping countries struggling to implement sanctions.

Maya Ungar, a U.N. analyst at the International Crisis Group, added that the body could boost its credibility by involving a wider range of countries. But, she said, its accusations will likely carry less weight than those from the now-dismantled U.N. panel of experts.

How to measure success

Despite enforcement efforts, North Korea continues to secure energy imports, often exceeding U.N.-imposed limits. Commander Moraal acknowledges this but said the ECC is raising the cost of sanctions evasion.

As an example, Moraal cites two North Korean-linked coal ships seized by South Korea earlier this year after ECC provided intelligence.

But if the ultimate goal is to curb North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, the results appear less encouraging. Recent estimates suggest North Korea now has enough fissile material to build up to 90 nuclear warheads, and it regularly unveils new advanced missile systems.

Ward believes a shift in strategy may eventually be necessary. “At some point, we may need to reckon with the fact that North Korea does have nuclear weapons and figure out how to deal with that,” he said.

Still, even if full enforcement is impossible, Ward argues there’s a case for maintaining sanctions. “The alternative could reward bad behavior,” he said.

“So long as North Korea sanctions remain relatively comprehensive, if very leaky, there are many countries that will see the case of North Korea as a cautionary lesson,” he said.
…

Внаслідок влучання FPV-дрона в автівку було поранено місцевого жителя
…

Правозахисник, який вступив до лав ЗСУ після повномасштабного російського вторгнення в Україну, потрапив у полон і був засуджений до 13 років колонії
…

HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS — The Texas Supreme Court halted Thursday night’s scheduled execution of a man who would have become the first person in the United States put to death for a murder conviction tied to a diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome.

The late-night ruling to spare for now the life of Robert Roberson, who was convicted of killing his 2-year-old daughter in 2002, capped a flurry of last-ditch legal challenges and weeks of public pressure from Republican and Democratic lawmakers who say he is innocent and was sent to death row based on flawed science.

In the hours leading up to the ruling, Roberson had been confined to a prison holding cell a few feet from America’s busiest death chamber at the Walls Unit in Huntsville, waiting for certainty over whether he would be taken to die by lethal injection.

“He was shocked, to say the least,” said Texas Department of Criminal Justice spokesperson Amanda Hernandez, who spoke with Roberson after the court stayed his execution. “He praised God, and he thanked his supporters. And that’s pretty much what he had to say.”

She said Roberson would be returned to the Polunsky Unit, about 72 kilometers (45 miles) to the east, where the state’s male death row is located.

Roberson, 57, was convicted of killing of his daughter, Nikki Curtis, in the East Texas city of Palestine. His lawyers and some medical experts say his daughter died not from abuse but from complications related to pneumonia.

A night of last-minute maneuvers

It is rare for the Texas Supreme Court — the state’s highest civil court — to get involved in a criminal matter.

But how the all-Republican court wound up stopping Roberson’s execution in the final hours underlined the extraordinary maneuvers used by a bipartisan coalition of state House of Representatives lawmakers who have come to his defense.

Rejected by courts and Texas’ parole board in their efforts to spare Roberson’s life, legislators on Wednesday tried a different route: issuing a subpoena for Roberson to testify before a House committee next week, which would be days after he was scheduled to die. The unusual plan to buy time, some of them conceded, had never been tried before.

They argued that executing Roberson before he could offer subpoenaed testimony would violate the Legislature’s constitutional authority. Less than two hours before Roberson’s execution, a judge in Austin sided with lawmakers and paused the execution, but that was then reversed by an appeals panel. The Texas Supreme Court then weighed in with its order, ending a night of uncertainty.

Roberson is scheduled to testify before the committee Monday.

“This is an innocent man. And there’s too much shadow of a doubt in this case,” said Democratic state Representative John Bucy. “I agree this is a unique decision today. We know this is not a done deal. He has a unique experience to tell, and we need to hear that testimony in committee on Monday.”

Governor, US Supreme Court did not act

Texas Governor Greg Abbott had the authority to delay Roberson’s punishment for 30 days. Abbott has halted only one imminent execution in nearly a decade as governor and has not spoken publicly about the case.

Earlier Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to halt the execution, although Justice Sonia Sotomayor — in a 10-page statement about the case — urged Abbott to grant a 30-day delay.

Roberson’s lawyers had waited to see if Abbott would grant Roberson the one-time reprieve. It would have been the only action Abbott could take in the case, as the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles on Wednesday denied Roberson’s clemency petition.

The board voted unanimously, 6-0, to not recommend that Roberson’s death sentence be commuted to life in prison or that his execution be delayed. All board members are appointed by the governor. The parole board has recommended clemency in a death row case only six times since the state resumed executions in 1982.

The one time Abbott halted an imminent execution was when he spared the life of Thomas Whitaker in 2018.

Texas law on scientific evidence

The House committee on Wednesday held an all-day meeting on Roberson’s case. In a surprise move at the end of the hearing, the committee issued the subpoena for Roberson to testify next week.

During its meeting in Austin, the committee heard testimony about Roberson’s case and whether a 2013 law created to allow people in prison to challenge their convictions based on new scientific evidence was ignored in Roberson’s case.

Anderson County District Attorney Allyson Mitchell, whose office prosecuted Roberson, told the committee a court hearing was held in 2022 in which Roberson’s attorneys presented their new evidence to a judge, who rejected their claims.

“Based on the totality of the evidence, a murder took place here. Mr. Roberson took the life of his almost 3-year-old daughter,” Mitchell said.

Most of the members of the House committee are part of a bipartisan group of more than 80 state lawmakers, including at least 30 Republicans, who asked the parole board and Abbott to stop the execution.

Spotlight on shaken baby syndrome

Roberson’s case has renewed debate over shaken baby syndrome, known in the medical community as abusive head trauma.

His lawyers, as well as the Texas lawmakers, medical experts, bestselling author John Grisham and others, say his conviction was based on faulty and now outdated scientific evidence. The diagnosis refers to a serious brain injury caused when a child’s head is hurt through shaking or some other violent impact, like being slammed against a wall or thrown on the floor.

Roberson’s supporters don’t deny head and other injuries from child abuse are real. But they say doctors misdiagnosed Curtis’ injuries as being related to shaken baby syndrome and that new evidence shows the girl died from complications related to severe pneumonia.

Roberson’s attorneys say his daughter fell out of bed in Roberson’s home after being seriously ill for a week.

Roberson’s lawyers also suggested his autism, then undiagnosed at the time of his daughter’s death, was used against him as authorities became suspicious of him because of his lack of emotion over her death. Autism affects how people communicate and interact with others.
…

A day after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy presented a “victory plan” to European Union leaders and NATO defense ministers, the nation’s allies are giving it qualified support, with one leader saying it will be reconsidered after the U.S. election next month.

Zelenskyy’s plan, which he unveiled to Ukraine’s parliament Wednesday, calls first for an unconditional invitation to join NATO, along with the deployment of a nonnuclear deterrent to Russian aggression, among other points. He maintains the plan could end the war no later than next year.

While NATO allies and leadership insist Ukraine’s future is with NATO, a formal invitation to join the alliance has not been made. NATO allies have said the nation cannot become a member while it is at war, and the focus has been on providing Ukraine with the support it needs to win.

The NATO-Ukraine Council met late Thursday, following Zelenskyy’s presentation to the defense ministerial meeting. At a Friday news conference in Brussels, new NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said the focus of that meeting was “to get massive military aid into Ukraine” from Western allies.

“Obviously, we all know that Ukraine will become a member of NATO, so the question is exactly when and when the invitation will take place,” Rutte said. “But that was not the main issue of the debate last night.”

U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was asked about Zelenskyy’s plan during a briefing in Brussels Friday. “The victory plan is President Zelenskyy’s plan, and we’re going to do everything that we can and provide security assistance to support the president as he tries to accomplish his objectives,” Austin said.

Austin added, “It is not my position to evaluate publicly his plan. We have been supporting him by providing security assistance in a major way for over two and a half years. We are going to continue to do that.”

U.S. President Joe Biden was in Berlin Friday for meetings with the leaders of Britain, Germany and France. Support for Ukraine was a focus of their talks.

On the sidelines of that meeting, U.S. national security spokesperson John Kirby told reporters the White House is still reviewing Zelenskyy’s plan.

He said while he did not want to go through every detail, the United States supports “President Zelenskyy’s plan for a just peace. It’s critical that whatever that peace looks like, it has to be acceptable to him and to the Ukrainian people.”

Ukrainian media reported that Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk spoke to reporters Friday following European Union talks in Brussels and said there was “no consensus” on the plan among EU leaders. He said it was difficult to tell how realistic it is because “much depends on the outcome of the U.S. presidential election.”

Tusk added that the plan would be reassessed after the U.S. elections next month. Former President Donald Trump, the Republican nominee for president, has indicated he does not support continuing U.S. military aid for Ukraine, at least not at current levels.

Also Friday, Ukraine’s military said Russian forces Thursday suffered their second deadliest day since the start of Russia’s invasion in February 2022.

On its account on the Facebook social media platform, the General Staff of Ukraine’s armed forces reported 1,530 Russian casualties since Thursday.

Some information for this report was provided by The Associated Press, Reuters and Agence France-Presse.
…

When it comes to military equipment being sent to Ukraine, big-ticket items like Patriot missiles and F-16 fighter jets come to mind. But for many Ukrainian soldiers, the U.S.-made 60-millimeter M224 mortars, also used by the U.S. Marine Corps, have been highly effective against Russian forces. Anna Kosstutschenko has the story. Video: Pavel Suhodolskiy
…

berlin — U.S. President Joe Biden and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz will discuss increased reports of antisemitic acts in both countries over the last year as war has raged in the Middle East when they meet Friday in Berlin, a Biden administration official told reporters on the eve of Biden’s state visit to Germany.

“This is an area where the United States and Germany have worked very closely,” said the official, who was not named as a condition of the Wednesday night briefing.

The official added that while Biden is unlikely to hold a specific event centered on antisemitism during his one-day visit, the issue is “very important to President Biden, and one that he has, that we have, discussed with the German government over the years and continue to do so.”

The official did not give any more details on engagements or plans.

Watchdogs have sounded the alarm in both countries: According to a German government report, antisemitic incidents rose by about 83% last year. In the United States, the Anti-Defamation League has said that U.S. antisemitic incidents “skyrocketed” in the months after Hamas militants attacked Israel last October.

Biden has clearly tied the recent rise in anti-Jewish acts to a growing backlash over his staunch support of Israel.

In May, he spoke at the first Holocaust Remembrance Day since the start of the war on October 7, 2023. He warned of a “ferocious” rise in antisemitic incidents and said that, at the height of university protests, “Jewish students [were] blocked, harassed, attacked, while walking to class.”

He said protesters used “antisemitic posters, slogans calling for the annihilation of Israel, the world’s only Jewish state.”

Earlier this month, he spoke of his belief that “without an Israel, every Jew in the world’s security is less stable.”

He added, “It doesn’t mean that Jewish leadership doesn’t have to be more progressive than it is, but it does mean it has to exist, and that’s what worries me most about what’s going on now.”

Germany’s World War II history makes it particularly sensitive to this type of hatred, but critics say it has taken steps that stifle legitimate criticism.

In November, weeks into the Gaza conflict, a German museum canceled a show by a South African artist after she expressed support for the Palestinian cause. Candice Breitz, the artist, who is Jewish, called the act another example of “Germany’s increasingly entrenched habit of weaponizing false charges of antisemitism against intellectuals and cultural workers of various descriptions.”

In March, police canceled a conference of pro-Palestinian activists because a planned speaker had previously made antisemitic remarks. They blocked him from entering Germany and cut power to the Berlin building where conference participants had gathered to watch him on a livestream.

On the first anniversary of the war, Scholz warned against growing anti-Jewish sentiment and affirmed his support for Israel.

“We will never accept antisemitism and blind hatred of Israel. The Jewish people here in Germany have the full solidarity of our state,” he said.

A difficult definition

Key to managing antisemitism is the question of whether criticism of Israel is, by definition, antisemitic.

The Federal Association of Research and Information Centers for Antisemitism, Germany’s antisemitism watchdog, uses a working definition from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, describing antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.” Although its definition of antisemitism does not mention Israel, many of its cited examples of antisemitism do.

The U.S. State Department also uses that definition, but when the White House produced its first strategy on antisemitism last year, before the start of the Gaza war, the strategy was not based solely on that definition.

One Jewish rights group that worked with the White House on the strategy said the decision to codify the definition of antisemitism “would only have made it harder to recognize and respond to antisemitic attacks in context” and “would have opened the door to infringement of First Amendment rights.”

That group, T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights, also opposed a proposed bill in Congress using the group’s definition, with CEO Rabbi Jill Jacobs saying in a statement: “The profoundly misguided Antisemitism Awareness Act does nothing to keep Jews safe, while also threatening the civil liberties fundamental to this country.”

Second gentleman Douglas Emhoff, who led the rollout of the White House strategy, said it is more important to look at what antisemitism does than what it is.

“At its core, antisemitism divides us, erodes our trust in government, institutions and one another,” he said. “It threatens our democracy while undermining our American values of freedom, community and decency. Antisemitism delivers simplistic, false and dangerous narratives that have led to extremists perpetrating deadly violence against Jews.”

History professor Jonathan Elukin of Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, said the definition of antisemitism has shifted over the centuries. He focuses on antisemitism in the medieval and early modern periods — before Israel was founded.

This iteration of antisemitism in the U.S., he told VOA, is “more associated with a kind of larger sense of an anti-Western, anti-modern kind of feeling, both on the far right and on the far left. They both seem to be converging in some ways on resentment, hatred, suspicion, anxiety about the Jews.”

As for the sentiment on the far right, he said, “I think it’s more a kind of tribal nostalgic sense that America is supposed to be or was thought to be kind of a Christian nation.”

He said the debate over definitions obscures a problem.

“Does it even matter whether it fits some kind of arbitrary notion of antisemitism, which in itself is a very arbitrary and time-bound definition?” he asked.

But, he said, talking about the problem is a start.

“In the short term, obviously it requires education, activism, political leadership to draw the line at acceptable or what’s not acceptable expressions of anti-Jewish sentiment,” he said. “Both here and abroad.”

Kim Lewis contributed to this report.
…

An independent panel formed to investigate the performance of the Secret Service after an assassination attempt in July against former President Donald Trump has called for extensive changes to the agency, including the installation of new leadership from the outside.

In a report issued Thursday morning, the panel praised the bravery of the individual agents who work to protect political figures in the United States. However, it blasted their leaders for creating an internal culture that has become “bureaucratic, complacent and static,” with the result that “the Secret Service does not perform at the elite levels needed to discharge its critical mission.”

Without “fundamental reform,” the panel warned, other attacks on the agency’s protectees “can and will happen again.”

In a statement, Secret Service Acting Director Ronald L. Rowe Jr. said, “We respect the work of the Independent Review Panel and will carefully examine the report and recommendations released today.”

He added that the agency has started making changes as a result of the attempted assassination.

“We have already significantly improved our readiness, operational and organizational communications and implemented enhanced protective operations for the former president and other protectees,” Rowe said.

Failure in Pennsylvania

President Joe Biden established the panel after a July 13 episode in Butler, Pennsylvania, in which a young man with a rifle was able to get within a few hundred meters of Trump while he was delivering a campaign speech. The would-be assassin fired several shots; Trump’s right ear was struck, but he was not seriously wounded. One bystander was killed, and two others were seriously wounded, before a Secret Service countersniper team killed the gunman.

In the aftermath of the incident, it became clear that there had been multiple failures leading up to the assassination attempt. The gunman was identified as a potential danger in advance of the shooting but was not prevented from accessing the roof of a building with a clear line of sight to the stage where Trump was speaking.

In the minutes leading up to the shooting, law enforcement officials in the crowd were made aware of the shooter’s presence, but because of poor coordination of communications, the information was not relayed to the members of Trump’s protective detail near the stage.

Panel’s recommendations

The panel’s findings include calls for specific changes to the way the Secret Service handles large events such as the Trump rally in Butler.

While the Secret Service has primary responsibility for the security of such events, it relies on other law enforcement agencies, including state and local police, for assistance. The report calls for having a unified command post at events like the Butler rally that would allow better communication among various agencies.

The report also calls for creating specific plans for dealing with all locations within 914 meters (1,000 yards) of an event that offer line-of-sight vision of the protectee, overhead surveillance of all outdoor events, improved communication systems and other changes.

Leadership change

In the wake of the Butler shooting, Kimberly Cheatle resigned as Secret Service director and was temporarily replaced by Rowe. However, the report issued Thursday calls for a much more extensive shakeup of the agency’s higher echelons.

Citing “an urgent need for fresh thinking informed by external experience and perspective,” the panel recommended that a new director, drawn from outside the Secret Service, be put in place and “be allowed to bring in the leadership team he or she thinks most fit.”

The new leadership would be charged with addressing multiple problems identified by the investigation, including “a troubling lack of critical thinking” within the agency and “corrosive cultural attitudes regarding resourcing and ‘doing more with less.’ ”

The report also urged a refocusing of the agency on its protective duties, to the point of potentially “shedding certain peripheral responsibilities,” including complex investigations into financial fraud and counterfeiting.

‘More with less’

Ronald Kessler, an author and journalist who has written two books about the Secret Service, told VOA that the panel correctly identified a number of problems with the agency. In particular, he cited the “do more with less” ethos, which he said has been present in the agency since it was folded into the Department of Homeland Security more than 20 years ago.

Kessler said it has become a point of pride in the agency that it operates on a shoestring rather than demanding more funding and resources.

“It’s a recipe for mediocrity and just the opposite of what anybody would want in any organization,” he said.

Within the agency, Kessler said, “the way to be promoted has been, ‘You don’t make waves, you don’t ask for more money, you don’t point out problems, you don’t expose the fact that the technical systems that are just basic don’t work.’ ”

Kessler praised the decision to seek outside leadership.

“In any organization, when it’s failing, you bring in outside people, whether it’s a private company or a government agency, and the people do respond,” he said.

Doubts about outside leadership

Paul Eckloff, a 23-year veteran of the agency who served as the assistant special agent in charge of the protection details of Presidents Barack Obama and Trump, said he doubted the wisdom of seeking outside leadership for an agency as unique as the Secret Service.

“The report is indicative of some fundamental misunderstandings of how the Secret Service operates, and these misunderstandings would be shared by any outside leader,” he told VOA.

“It would exacerbate problems within the rank and file, who believe that they are not well represented,” Eckloff said. “If the complaint about Secret Service leadership was that they were detached from the operators on the ground — [a job] they ostensibly have done before — imagine a leader who never held a post. How detached would they be?”

Eckloff also warned that requiring the agency to focus exclusively on its protective mission would be counterproductive. Serving on a protective detail is extremely intense work, he said, with agents often working weeks at a time without a day off.

For that reason, the agency tries to limit the time agents are assigned directly to a protective detail to periods of five to eight years, after which they rotate off and move into investigative work.

This leaves the agency with a deep pool of experienced agents who can be called upon to assist in protective details at times when the agency needs to surge its capacity, which occurs at least every four years during presidential elections.

The panel reviewed the attack from early August through early October. Members were Mark Filip, a former federal judge and former deputy attorney general; David Mitchell, a former superintendent of the Maryland State Police; Janet Napolitano, former secretary of homeland security; and Frances Townsend, a former homeland security adviser to President George W. Bush.
…

washington — The United States on Thursday announced fresh sanctions targeting Chinese and Russian entities for their role in designing, building and shipping attack drones that have resulted in mass casualties in Ukraine.

The sanctions target two Chinese entities, Xiamen Limbach Aircraft Engine Co., Ltd., and Redlepus Vector Industry Shenzhen Co Ltd (Redlepus), Russian entity TSK Vektor and TSK Vektor’s General Director Artem Mikhailovich Yamshchikov.

A senior administration official told reporters Thursday that the entities were involved in developing the Russian Garpiya series long-range attack drones, producing them in China and shipping them directly to Russia.

“The Garpiya, designed and produced in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in collaboration with Russian defense firms, has been used to destroy critical infrastructure and has resulted in mass casualties,” the U.S. State Department said in a statement.

“Today’s action is part of our continued effort to disrupt attempts by PRC-based and Russia-based entities and individuals to support Russia’s acquisition of advanced weapons technology and components. We will continue to impose costs on those who provide support to Russia’s military-industrial base.”

The senior administration official said the U.S. has warned Beijing in the past about the network, contradicting Chinese statements that they are not aware of such networks.

Two Chinese firms are directly “involved in producing and shipping things that are unmistakably part of Russia’s war against Ukraine and are going unmistakably to an actor that the West has already identified and sanctioned as being part of the Russian military industrial base,” said the official.

Since 2022, the U.S. has sanctioned close to 100 entities based in China and Hong Kong. The majority of them are part of the supply chain of dual-use items – components or goods that can be converted by Russia into military items that are then being deployed against Ukraine.

However, Thursday’s sanctions were the first to hit Chinese entities “directly developing and producing complete weapons systems in partnership with Russian firms.”

Also Thursday, the U.K. announced its largest package of sanctions against Russia’s “shadow fleet of oil tankers” – ships that supposedly knowingly operate in defiance of Western sanctions.

London said 18 more shadow fleet ships will be barred from U.K. ports, bringing the total number of oil tankers sanctioned to 43.

Sanctions working

In response to VOA’s question, the official said that Western sanctions are working.

“This is having a direct impact on their economy. It’s having a direct impact on their ability to get war material. It’s having a direct impact on the quality of goods that they are achieving,” the official said.

A second senior administration official said Moscow is feeling “unprecedented external pressure” on its trade and investment projects with China. Growing trade ties between the two countries, though, indicate “they are continuing to innovate and circumvent which is why we are also moving out on sanctions and other tools.”

China says it is not providing weapons for Russia. Beijing maintains it handles its export of dual-use items in accordance with laws and applies strict controls on drone exports.

The sanctioned companies’ transactions are “incompatible” with Beijing’s statements, the second official said. “If China is serious about that commitment, we are asking them to take action to shut down this network.”

Beijing has said in the past it “firmly opposes unilateral sanctions and long-arm jurisdiction that have no basis in international law or authorization of the U.N. Security Council.”

Every month, Beijing exports to Russia more than $300 million of those so-called dual-use items that have both commercial and military applications, according to an analysis of Chinese customs data by the Carnegie Endowment think tank.

Ties have grown between Moscow and Beijing. On Wednesday, Chinese Premier Li Qiang and Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin announced plans for expanded cooperation during the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, or SCO, summit in Islamabad, Pakistan. The SCO was founded by Russia and China in 2001 to counter Western alliances.

VOA’s Paris Huang and Henry Ridgwell contributed to this story.
…

WASHINGTON — An Alabama man was arrested on Thursday over criminal charges that he hacked the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s X account earlier this year, in an action that caused bitcoin’s value to spike, federal prosecutors announced. 

In January, a hacker posted false news about a widely anticipated announcement the SEC was expected to make about bitcoin, shocking the market and sending the cryptocurrency’s price spiking. The post on @SECGov said the securities regulator had approved exchange-traded funds to hold bitcoin. The SEC deleted the post shortly after it appeared. 

Eric Council Jr., 25, of Athens, Alabama, was arrested on Thursday morning in connection with the hack, the U.S. Attorney’s office for the District of Columbia said in a statement on Thursday. 

The SEC did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Thursday’s arrest.  

The agency previously said it was the victim of “SIM swapping,” a technique used by fraudsters to seize control of telephone lines, when its account on the social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, was hacked earlier in January.
…

За онлайн-вказівки від організатора через телеграм-канал вони заплатили по 3-5 тисяч доларів кожен
…

Пріоритет для евакуації лівий берег Осколу, тому що там унаслідок обстрілів відсутні комунікації, каже Синєгубов
…

The U.S. states of Florida, North Carolina and Georgia are dealing with the aftermath of two major hurricanes that killed hundreds of people and caused tens of billions of dollars in damage. With the presidential election less than a month away and the race extremely close, White House Bureau Chief Patsy Widakuswara looks at how the storms might affect voting in these states.
…

An independent panel investigating the attempted assassination of Donald Trump at a Pennsylvania campaign rally faulted the Secret Service for poor communications that day and failing to secure the building where the gunman took his shots. The review also found more systemic issues at the agency such as a failure to understand the unique risks facing Trump and a culture of doing “more with less.” 

The 52-page report issued Thursday took the Secret Service to task for specific problems leading up to the July 13 rally in Butler as a well as deeper one within the agency’s culture. It recommended bringing in new, outside leadership and refocusing on its protective mission. 

“The Secret Service as an agency requires fundamental reform to carry out its mission,” the authors wrote Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas of the Homeland Security Department, the Secret Services’ parent agency, in a letter accompanying their report. “Without that reform, the Independent Review Panel believes another Butler can and will happen again.” 

One rallygoer was killed and two others wounded when Thomas Michael Crooks climbed onto the roof of a nearby building and opened fire as Trump spoke. The former president was wounded in the ear before being rushed off the stage by Secret Service agents. That shooting, along with another incident in Florida when Trump was golfing — a gunman there never got a line of site on the president or fired a shot — has led to a crisis in confidence in the agency. 

The report by a panel of four former law enforcement officials from national and state government follows investigations by members of Congress, the agency’s own investigators and by Homeland Security’s oversight body. 

A look at the report’s key findings and recommendations: 

Poor communications, no plan for key buildings 

The panel echoed previous reports that have zeroed in on the failure to secure the building near the rally that had a clear line of site to where Trump was speaking and the multiple communications problems that hindered the ability of the Secret Service and local and state law enforcement to talk to each other. 

“The failure to secure a complex of buildings, portions of which were within approximately 130 yards of the protectee and containing numerous positions carrying high-angle line of sight risk, represents a critical security failure,” the report said. 

The panel faulted the planning between Secret Service and the local law enforcement, and said the Secret Service failed to ask about what was being done to secure the building: “Relying on a general understanding that ‘the locals have that area covered’ is simply not good enough and, in fact, at Butler this attitude contributed to the security failure.” 

The panel also cited the fact that there were two separated command posts at the Butler rally: one with various local law enforcement and another with the Secret Service: “This created, at the highest level, a structural divide in the flow of communications.” 

There were other communications problems. 

The Secret Service had to switch radio channels because radio traffic of agents protecting first lady Jill Biden at an event in Pittsburgh was popping up on the channels of agents covering the Butler rally. 

The panel also noted that all the law enforcement personnel on the ground were using a “chaotic mixture” of radio, cell phone, text, and e-mail throughout the day to communicate. 

Also the panel said it was unclear who had ultimate command that day. 

Cultural issues within the agency 

The report delved into the agency’s culture and painted a picture of an agency struggling to think critically about how it carries out its mission, especially when it comes to protecting Trump. 

The panel said agency personnel operated under the assumption that they effectively had to “do more with less.” The report said the additional security measures taken to protect Trump after the Butler shooting should have been taken before. 

“To be clear, the Panel did not identify any nefarious or malicious intent behind this phenomenon, but rather an overreliance on assigning personnel based on categories (former, candidate, nominee) instead of an individualized assessment of risk,” the panel wrote. 

The panel also noted the “back-and-forth” between the Trump security detail and Secret Service headquarters regarding how many people were needed to protect him. 

The panel also faulted some of the senior-level staff who were involved in the rally for what they called a “lack of ownership.” In one example, the panel said a senior agent on site who was tasked with coordinating communications didn’t walk around the rally site ahead of timen and did not brief the state police counterpart before the rally about how communications would be managed. 

It cited the relative inexperience of two specific agents who played a role in security for the July 13 rally. One was the site agent from Trump’s detail whose job it was to coordinate with the Pittsburgh field office on security planning for the rally. The panel said the agent graduated from the Secret Service academy in 2020, and had only been on the Trump detail since 2023. Before the Butler rally the agent had only done “minimal previous site advance work or site security planning.” 

Another agent assigned to operate a drone detection system had only used the technology at two prior events. 

What did the panel recommend? 

Having a unified command post at all large events where Secret Service and other law enforcement representatives are all physically in the same place; overhead surveillance for all outdoor events; security plans must include a way to mitigate line of site concerns out to 1,000 yards and who’s in charge at the event; and more training on how to get protectees out of dangerous scenarios. 

The panel said the agency also needs new, outside leadership and a renewed focus on its core protective mission while expressing skepticism that the agency should continue with the investigations it currently conducts. While the Secret Service is well known for what it does to protect presidents and other dignitaries, it also investigates financial crimes. 

“In the Panel’s opinion, it is simply unacceptable for the Service to have anything less than a paramount focus on its protective mission, particularly while that protective mission function is presently suboptimal,” the report said. 

The panel members were Mark Filip, deputy attorney general under President George W. Bush; David Mitchell, who served in numerous state and local law enforcement roles in Maryland and Delaware; Janet Napolitano, homeland security secretary under President Barack Obama; and Frances Fragos Townsend, Bush’s assistant for homeland security and counterterrorism. 
…