Connect with us

Featured

Ukraine War: Understanding the Roots and Cause of the Russia-Ukraine Crisis

Published

on

Protest in support of Ukraine.

The long-feared Russian invasion of Ukraine continues to rage ever since president Vladimir Putin’s announced “special military operation” against Ukraine on February 24. However, leading by example from the streets of Kyiv, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky has been tirelessly rallying the international community for support.

But what lead to one of the biggest military invasions of the decade?

History of the Russia-Ukraine Crisis

The current predicament can be better understood when walking back eight years. After Ukraine’s pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych was forced out of office by major demonstrations in 2014, Russia seized Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula.

Weeks later, Russia backed two separatist insurgencies in Ukraine’s east, culminating in pro-Russian insurgents with Donetsk and Luhansk declaring the DPR and LPR independent nations, despite the international community’s complete lack of recognition.

The insurgencies cost 14,000 lives and ravaged Ukraine’s easter industrial heartland, the Donbas.

However, both the West and Ukraine have accused Russia of arming and escalating the separatist movement in the country, but Russia has sided against the accusation.

Also Read: Ukraine War: Arms Suppliers Profiting From the Russia-Ukraine Crisis

France and Germany arranged a 2015 peace pact known as the Minsk II Accord. The 13-point accord required Ukraine to provide separatist areas autonomy and grant insurgents amnesty in exchange for complete control of its Russian border in rebel-held territory.

Fears of a new conflict erupted last year amid a surge in ceasefire violations in the east and a Russian army concentration near Ukraine. Still, tensions eased when Moscow withdrew the bulk of its units after rehearsals in April.

What has led to the Current Crisis?

The worst-case situation has already been realized with Mr. Putin’s declaration of his “special military operation.”

The Kremlin had previously rejected any preparations to invade, a claim that few accepted — and for a good reason.

Even after Russian President Vladimir Putin’s latest announcement, a Russian UN envoy denied that Moscow had any grievances with the Ukrainian people, insisting that only those in power would be targeted.

That has turned out to be completely incorrect.

Western leaders have united in their condemnation of Russia, effectively making it a pariah state on the international stage. Sanctions are expected to cripple the Russian economy, putting renewed pressure on Mr. Putin in the country despite the attempts to censor critical media and nascent protest movements.

Meanwhile, Mr. Biden has attempted to reassure the international community that Russia will face the consequences of its conduct.

What is Putin’s Problem with NATO?

Putin believes the goal of NATO, the Western military alliance of 30 nations, is to fracture and destroy Russian society.

He instructed that NATO go back to 1997 and halt its eastward expansion, remove its soldiers and military facilities from member nations that joined the alliance after 1997, and avoid placing “strike weapons near Russia’s borders” before the conflict.

Mr. Putin is known to hate because he sees Nato’s creeping eastward march since the demise of the Soviet Union in 1989, and he is keen to prevent Ukraine from joining the alliance.

How are the Peace Talks Going on?

President Putin has not abandoned peace talks that have been going on for weeks. Austrian leader Karl Nehammer, the sole Western leader to have visited Putin since the war began, noted the war had plunged into a “logic of war.

However, despite Russian forces’ crimes on Ukrainian land, Ukraine’s leader has stated that he will continue pursuing dialogue.

“Because Ukraine requires peace. We are in the twenty-first century in Europe “.

And he’s already admitted that his nation won’t be allowed to Nato. So while Mr. Zelensky stated that they don’t want to waste prospects for a diplomatic settlement if we have them, he also cautioned that if Russia kills the last Ukrainian troops fighting in the conflict in Mariupol, then it will mean the end of peace talks.

Turkish president presiding over peace talks between Russia and Ukraine.
Source: The Gaurdian

Kyiv proposed the following proposals during negotiations on March 29:

  • In the case of an assault, strict, legally enforceable assurances would oblige nations like the United Kingdom, China, the United States, Turkey, France, Canada, Italy, Poland, and Israel to safeguard a neutral Ukraine.
  • Ukraine would be able to join the European Union if guarantor states had discussions and came to Ukraine’s defense within three days.
  • Ukraine would become a “non-bloc” and “non-nuclear” condition, with no international military facilities or contingents on its soil.
  • Ukraine would not join military-political coalitions, and any foreign exercises would be subject to the approval of guarantor countries.

Is Neutrality Enough for Putin?

According to Russia, this “neutral, demilitarised” Ukraine would have its army and navy, similar to Austria or Sweden, both EU members.

There is no clear indication as to whether or not it would suffice or what it would imply. However, despite Austria’s neutrality, Sweden is rumoured to be considering joining NATO.

Ukrainians have pledged neutrality in exchange for security guarantees from allies. Putin has nonetheless stated that peace talks have ceased. As a result, Putin may still harbour ambitions to reintegrate Ukraine into Russia’s area of influence, away from its Western orientation.

Since Ukraine gained independence in 1991, it has increasingly turned to the West, both the EU and Nato.

The collapse of the Soviet Union was viewed as the “disintegration of historical Russia” by Russia’s Putin, who wants to change that. He has argued that Russians and Ukrainians are one people, ignoring Ukraine’s ancient history and dismissing the country’s independence as an “anti-Russia endeavour.” In addition, he said that “Ukraine never had durable traditions of actual statehood.”

His pressure on Viktor Yanukovych, Ukraine’s pro-Russian president, to not sign a deal with the European Union in 2013 sparked riots that culminated in the president’s ouster in February 2014.

After seizing Crimea in Ukraine’s south, Russia sparked a separatist revolt in the east and a conflict that killed 14,000 lives.

He tore up an unfulfilled 2015 Minsk peace pact as he prepared to invade in February, accusing Nato of jeopardizing “our historic future as a nation,” asserting without evidence that Nato members sought to bring the war to Crimea.

What is the Current Situation of the Russia-Ukraine Crisis?

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has progressed to a new stage. After facing stiff opposition from the Ukrainian military, Russian forces have shifted their focus to the south and east of the nation, where they will launch a new onslaught, hitting civilian targets and residential neighbourhoods.

Meanwhile, Ukraine claims to have discovered evidence of war crimes committed under Russian control in Bucha and other towns near Kyiv. Four million people have fled Ukraine due to Russian strikes on population centres.

Also Read: Russia-Ukraine Crisis: Russia Committing War Crimes in Ukraine War?

The United States and its NATO allies supply military weaponry to Ukraine and have imposed sanctions and other punitive measures on Russian President Vladimir Putin. President Biden has accused Putin of war crimes and called the invasion a “genocide,” adding Putin is “trying to wipe out the notion of being Ukrainian.” However, his comments were deemed unacceptable by the Kremlin.

While Mr. Putin has recognized Russia’s economic effect, he has shown no sign of bending to pressure to cease the conflict. As a result, the two sides have been unable to reach an agreement.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Deportation

Deportation as a Weapon: New Frontline of Palestinian Rights in the US

Published

on

Deportation-as-a-Weapon

The first time Mahmoud Khalil’s name began circulating beyond activist circles, it was not because of a speech or a protest, but due to a legal notice – a deportation order.

In the 21st century, it is appalling to see people’s right to life and other basic human rights being ridiculed. In the larger picture, the deportation drive is a hidden assault on whoever talks about the rights of the Palestinians in the United States.

A Case That Refused to Stay Quiet

Mahmoud Khalil is a Palestinian activist based in the United States. His work has focused on raising awareness about Gaza and advocating for Palestinian rights through public events and campus-linked activism.

Since Israel is being largely supported in the West, anyone who talks about the fundamental rights of the people of Gaza is dealt with extreme brutality. In this context, the Federal agencies of the United States moved forward with his deportation proceedings even though he is a permanent American citizen and married to a US citizen too.

It is not about Mahmoud Khalil or any individual but about a greater cause that is to allow the freedom of speech, expression, and association.

Palestinian Rights and the Mayor of New York

Zohran Mamdani, a prominent elected official, publicly defended Khalil, arguing that deportation should not be used as a tool against political expression. In doing so, Mamdani shifted the conversation from immigration procedure to constitutional principle.

His message remains clear: “advocacy for Palestinian rights is not a crime, and deportation should not become a backdoor method of punishing dissent.”

The response was swift, and the supporters praised the stance as a rare act of political courage. Critics accused Mamdani of shielding extremism. Media coverage intensified, and Khalil’s case became symbolic.

People are dying in Gaza due to bombings, famine, poor health, and absolutely no sense of security. In this environment, instead of allowing the people of Gaza to breathe, it is inhumane that their voices are being silenced.

Deportation and the Chilling Effect

Immigration law experts note that deportation proceedings are uniquely powerful. Unlike criminal trials, they operate in a separate legal universe—one with fewer protections, lower evidentiary thresholds, and limited public scrutiny.

For activists who are students, workers, or asylum-seekers, this vulnerability is well understood.

Civil rights groups have documented a growing sense of fear among foreign-born activists involved in Palestine-related advocacy. Some report withdrawing from public organizing, while others avoid protests altogether, worried that visibility could trigger legal consequences unrelated to their conduct.

Since the escalation of the Gaza war, US campuses have seen a surge in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. These demonstrations came alongside suspensions, surveillance concerns, and disciplinary actions. Khalil’s case sits squarely within this context.

A Broader Pattern Takes Shape

Across the US, Palestinian and pro-Palestinian activists, especially those without citizenship, describe increased scrutiny. Immigration status has become a pressure point, a way to narrow the space for political engagement without directly confronting free speech protections.

Moreover, some legal scholars point out that while citizens may face arrest or prosecution for protest-related activity, non-citizens face an additional, existential risk: expulsion.

This asymmetry reshapes activism. Ultimately, it creates two classes of dissent—those who can speak and those who must calculate the cost of every word.

Where the World is Heading

The world conscience would definitely be questioned in the annals of history when the chapter of Palestine comes. The world is getting divided among the nations that support the Palestinian right to existence and the other ones that do not support this very basic human right.

In his book, “On Palestine”, Ilan Pappe and Noam Chomsky clearly described the atrocities by Israel and the ground-breaking support it gets from the West. Peppe even claimed that there is ethnic cleansing being done in Palestine by Israel.

In fact, the current deportation trends are about the advocacy tied to Palestine. The question is how a responsible democracy responds when uncomfortable voices refuse to appear.

As one civil liberties advocate put it: “You don’t have to win every case to change the climate. You just have to make people afraid.”

Ultimately, this is about changing the political climate and making people afraid of speaking against Israel or in favor of Palestine. The outcome of Khalil’s case remains uncertain. However, the signals it sends to activists, institutions, and the state are already unmistakable.

In today’s world, speaking about Gaza can follow you far beyond the protest!

Continue Reading

Featured

Life Inside Gaza’s Tents: Cold Nights, Illness, and Endless Waiting

Published

on

Life-Inside-Gazas-Tents

Before sunrise, the camp is already awake. A woman steps carefully between puddles that did not exist the night before. To add more to the inhumane conditions, rainwater has mixed with waste and ash, turning the ground into a thin, foul-smelling slurry. She is carrying two empty containers, hoping the water point has not run dry again today.

Nearby, a child coughs, a persistent dry cough that has become common in the tents since winter set in. This is just a glimpse of life now for hundreds of Palestinians in Gaza. This is not a story of a temporary stop, nor of an emergency night or two, but of a prolonged existence inside fabric shelters that were never meant to last months.

According to the United Nations, around 1.7 million people remain displaced across Gaza. Not only that, a large share of them is living in tents, plastic shelters, or overcrowded informal sites. These sites are often pitched on rubble, farmland, or roadsides. The ceasefire might have changed the tempo of the war but for those in the camps, it did not restore normal life at all.

From Homes to Tents

Entire neighborhoods across Gaza have been flattened or rendered uninhabitable. As per the UN satellite assessments, well over half of Gaza’s housing stock has been damaged or completely destroyed, leaving families with no realistic option to return.

Tents were supposed to be temporary, but as the atrocities continue to inflict the people of Gaza, now these are standing for months.

Moreover, most of those tents offer no insulation. At night, cold air moves freely through torn seams. During rain, water pools inside, soaking thin mattresses and blankets. When storms hit, some tents collapse entirely, forcing families to crowd into neighboring shelters or even sleep outdoors until replacements arrive — if they arrive at all.

These are not the conditions for life to even exist. Aid agencies describe these sites less as camps and more as open-air holding zones, where survival depends on irregular deliveries of water, food, and fuel.

Smoke, Plastic, and the Air People Breathe

With fuel scarce and electricity almost nonexistent, many families burn whatever they can find to keep warm or cook food. Plastic packaging, scraps of rubber, and mixed waste are common substitutes.

The smoke hangs low in the evenings. Burning plastic releases toxic fumes that aggravate respiratory problems, especially among children and older people. A few clinics, which are fortunately left, operating inside or near displacement sites report rising cases of persistent coughs, chest infections, and eye irritation, conditions that are difficult to treat in overcrowded settings with limited medicine.

For many families, the choice is brutal. Either to breathe toxic smoke or to endure freezing nights. This is like a Hobson’s choice for them to live in these conditions.

Childhood on Hold

Children make up nearly half of Gaza’s population, and many are growing up almost entirely inside tents.

There is no school routine, no playground, and no sense of safety after dark. Parents describe children waking at night from cold, fear, or hunger. It is not surprising that the aid workers are noting signs of trauma, including withdrawal, bed-wetting, sudden aggression, and silence.

Mental health professionals working with humanitarian teams have warned that prolonged displacement, especially under such harsh conditions, can leave long-term psychological scars. On the other hand, counselling services are scarce, and survival needs usually come first.

For many children, days pass without structure. Time is measured not by lessons or play, but by queues for water, food distributions, and the arrival, or absence, of aid trucks.

Rain, Sewage, and the Winter Toll

The appalling living conditions were already very severe, but in the winter, it makes them tenfold, turning shelters into hazards.

Heavy rainfall has flooded multiple displacement sites, washing sewage into living areas and soaking tents beyond repair. In some camps, families have raised bedding on bricks or broken furniture in an attempt to stay dry.

Humanitarian reports, including those from Transparency International, document tents collapsing under wind and rain, forcing repeated displacement even within camps. Each move strips families of what little stability they have managed to create.

Cold weather has compounded illness. Without proper clothing, heating, or medical care, respiratory infections have become harder to manage. Clinics, already overstretched, struggle to cope with demand.

A Ceasefire Without a Way Home

For people living in tents, the ceasefire did not bring clarity. Some families hoped it would mean a return home. Instead, many areas remain inaccessible, unsafe, or destroyed. In some cases, new evacuation orders have continued, forcing further movement even after the fighting slowed.

Aid workers say uncertainty is one of the heaviest burdens. Families do not know whether to rebuild makeshift shelters, prepare to move again, or wait for instructions that may never come.

“We Are Still Here”

In the camps, people talk less about politics and more about endurance and survival.

They talk about missing ordinary things, like doors that lock, floors that are dry, and nights without smoke. They talk about children growing up too fast, about illness that lingers, about days that blend into each other.

One displaced man summed it up simply: “We are alive, but this is not living.”

In a nutshell, survival continues, measured in blankets, liters of water, and the hope that tomorrow will bring something other than uncertainty to breathe.

Continue Reading

Featured

Board of Peace Explained: New Global Peace Architecture or Another Power Play?

Published

on

Board-of-Peace-Explained-New-Global-Peace-Architecture-or-Another-Power-Play

This is not just about a region in this world where human rights are not given, and people are being killed. It is about humanity, life, and the very foundations of values that humans are living with. When Gaza is discussed today, it is rarely in the language of rights. It is discussed as a problem to be solved, a territory to be stabilized, and a population to be administered.

The announcement of a new international “Board of Peace” fits neatly into this pattern. Presented as a bold initiative to guide Gaza out of conflict and into reconstruction, the Board of Peace has been framed by its sponsors as innovative, inclusive, and forward-looking. Yet for Palestinians, the announcement raises an older, still unresolved question: Who decides Gaza’s future, and on what authority?

What Is the Board of Peace?

The Board of Peace was announced by US President Donald Trump as part of a broader Phase Two Gaza plan, marking a shift from ceasefire management to post-genocide governance and reconstruction.

According to official descriptions, the board is meant to:

  • Oversee Gaza’s political transition
  • Coordinate reconstruction funding and investment
  • Provide international supervision during a “transitional” period

Trump declared himself chair of the board and described it as a high-level body composed of political leaders, financial figures, and diplomatic actors. Unlike the United Nations, the board has no clear treaty basis, no General Assembly mandate, and no defined accountability mechanism.

It is powerful not because it is formal, but because it is backed by money, political leverage, and security control.

Who is on the Board?

The individuals named or referenced in connection with the Board of Peace are not neutral facilitators.

The board’s executive circle includes:

  • Marco Rubio, US Senator and the Secretary of State
  • Tony Blair, former UK prime minister
  • Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and former Middle East envoy
  • Steve Witkoff, US real estate magnate and political donor
  • Ajay Banga, President of the World Bank

These are figures associated with Western political power, financial institutions, and security-centric diplomacy. None are elected Palestinian representatives. None comes from Gaza. The imbalance is structural, not incidental.

Which Countries Were Invited?

One of the board’s defining features is its attempt to project global legitimacy through invited state participation.

According to credible sources, Trump sent invitations to around 60 world leaders. Those explicitly named in reporting include:

  • Turkey (President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan)
  • Egypt (President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi)
  • Canada (Prime Minister Mark Carney)
  • Argentina (President Javier Milei)

Moreover, some diplomatic sources also indicate the list includes:

  • Britain
  • Germany
  • Italy
  • Morocco
  • Indonesia
  • Australia

The Palestinian Face of the Plan: Who Is Ali Shaath?

To provide the plan with Palestinian leadership, the US has backed Ali Shaath as head of the transitional Palestinian committee that will administer Gaza’s civil affairs under the Board of Peace.

Shaath’s profile is central to understanding how this governance model is being sold.

Here is a quick overview of Ali Shaath:

  • He was born in 1958 in Khan Younis
  • He is a civil engineer with a PhD from Queen’s University Belfast
  • He previously served as deputy minister of planning in the Palestinian Authority
  • He has worked on industrial zone projects in both Gaza and the West Bank

Shaath has spoken publicly about the scale of Gaza’s destruction, estimating around 68 million tons of rubble, much of it contaminated with unexploded ordnance. He has suggested that clearing debris could take three years, with full recovery achievable in seven years. It seems to be a far more optimistic timeline than UN estimates, which warn that rebuilding could extend beyond 2040.

Politically, Shaath has been described as acceptable to both Hamas and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, precisely because he is positioned as a technocrat rather than a political leader. However, it is yet to be observed how he would work with the other members.

Governance Without Sovereignty

The Palestinian committee, chaired by Shaath, has issued a mission statement pledging to restore services, rebuild infrastructure, and stabilize daily life in Gaza.

The committee describes its work as “rooted in peace” and focused on technocratic administration rather than politics.

Yet the committee:

  • Controls no borders
  • Commands no security forces
  • Regulates no airspace or coastline
  • Has no electoral mandate

It governs without power, while power remains in external hands.

When it comes to the reaction of the people of Gaza, they showed mixed feelings of skepticism over hope. Some Palestinians express cautious hope that any plan might bring electricity, water, and an end to constant displacement. Others see the Board of Peace as another externally designed structure that manages Gaza without addressing the occupation.

Peace Architecture or Power Management?

The Board of Peace is being presented as an innovation. However, history offers a cautionary lens.

Temporary governance structures in occupied or post-conflict territories have a habit of becoming permanent. Reconstruction becomes conditional. Aid becomes leverage. Administration replaces self-determination.

In a nutshell, the Board of Peace asks the world to believe that stability can precede justice, and that governance can substitute for freedom.

For Palestinians, the unanswered question is simpler and older:

If Gaza’s future is designed in Washington, financed in global capitals, and overseen by external boards—where does Palestinian self-determination actually begin?

Until that question is addressed, the Board of Peace risks becoming not a new architecture for peace, but another structure built on the same imbalance that has kept Gaza unfree for decades.

Peace cannot be outsourced, and a people cannot be rebuilt while being brutally ruled.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending