Transparently Disingenuous Russia

"Under the auspices of the United Nations, with the United States, even with European countries, and, of course, with our partners and friends, we could discuss the possibility of introduction of temporary governance in Ukraine."

"[It would allow the country to] hold democratic elections, to bring to power a viable government that enjoys the trust of the people, and then begin negotiations with them on a peace treaty." 

Russian President Vladimir Putin

Putin said Russian troops had the "strategic initiative" in Ukraine   Reuters

"He is afraid of negotiating with Ukraine."

"He is afraid of negotiating with me personally, and by excluding Ukraine's [government] he is suggesting that Ukraine is not an independent actor for him."

"Europe definitely knows how to defend itself, and we are working together to ensure greater security for our country and all European nations." 

"Russia continues looking for excuses to drag this war out even further."

"Putin is playing the same game he has since 2014 [unilateral annexation of the Crimean peninsula]."

"This is dangerous for everyone -- and there should be an appropriate response from the United States, Europe, and all our global partners who seek peace."

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy

 

"You could say that I was very angry, pissed off, when... Putin started getting into Zelensky's credibility, because that's not going in the right location."

"New leadership means you're not gonna have a deal for a long time." 

"If Russia and I are unable to make a deal on stopping the bloodshed in Ukraine, and if I think it was Russia's fault - which it might not be... I am going to put secondary tariffs... on all oil coming out of Russia."

"There will be a 25% tariff on oil and other products sold in the United States, secondary tariffs."

U.S. President Donald J. Trump

(Volodymyr Zelenskyy / X)

 

As a brilliant solution to vexing problems, Russian President Putin's Friday proposal for Ukraine to be placed  temporarily under external governance throughout the efforts to reach a peaceful settlement in the conflict that Russia imposed upon Ukraine through its military invasion and subsequent claims of legitimacy in annexing Ukrainian provinces as Russian territory, this one registered as just another form of naked aggression on the part of Russia in its territorial grabs. 

 

Further, calling into dispute Ukrainian democracy and President Zelenskyy's legitimacy reminds one of Vladimir Putin's musical chairs performance when he brought in Dmitry Medvedev as president while he took on Medvedev's prime ministerial role, to enable them to once again reverse the situation ensuring that Russia's two-term presidency limit would not interfere with Putin's designs to remain Russian president in perpetuity to which end he changed the constitution and now sits secure as Russia's legal long-term president. Any challengers have been summarily either murdered or imprisoned.

 

Yet this is the man who insists that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has no legitimacy to sign a peace agreement since his term expired. A pathetic piece of demagoguery since he would be very well aware that it is illegal in Ukraine for national elections to be held during times of conflict and the nation is under martial law. Still, Putin pressed ahead with the claim that any such agreement to a permanent ceasefire signed by the sitting Ukrainian government could be challenged by a successor government so that new elections should be called for, through external vigilance under temporary guardianship. 

A summit hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron considered plans for troop deployment to Ukraine in view of an eventual peace deal where Macron announced that 'several' other nations would volunteer to participate in the force along with France and Britain. Mr. Putin, however, made it clear that he would not accept troop involvement from NATO members in a prospective peacekeepng force. So, for Mr. Putin it would be far more appropriate if Belarus, Iran and North Korean troops comprised such a peacekeeping force in Ukraine.

 

"They are playing games and they're playing for time", stated U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, while Macron and other Paris summit participants accused Russia of insincerity in its offering to participate in negotiations that could lead to a peace agreement to end the bloodshed. 

Both Russia and Ukraine agreed in principle to a tentative US.-brokered agreement to pause strikes on energy infrastructure even as both sides hold varying views on when the deal to halt strikes should become effective, accusing one another of violations, making it more than obvious just how fraught any semblance of an agreement would be in the challenge to negotiate a broad peace. 

 

Germany has voted to hugely boost investment in its military   BBC

 

Russia's claims of wanting peace and an end to the conflict -- as long as it is able to hold on to the one-fifth of eastern Ukraine that the Kremlin now considers part of Greater Russia, are viewed with skepticism by its neighbours. Leading Norway, as an example to refurbish its old Cold War Military Bunkers, and leaving Germany convinced it must now begin to rebuild a viable military, the better to confront any future expansionary moves by Moscow.

 

Bunkers like the ones at Bardufoss can keep expensive fighter planes safe from attacks by drones (Credit: Norwegian Armed Forces)

 

 

101: Making Friends and Influencing People

"As you all know, it's a big issue and it's only going to get bigger over the coming decades."

"It's cold as s--- here. Nobody told me."

"[Danish leaders have] spent decades mistreating the Greenlandic people, treating them like second-class citizens and allowing infrastructure on the island to fall into disrepair."

"Denmark has not kept pace and devoted the resources necessary to keep this base, to keep our troops, and in my view, to keep the people of Greenland safe from a lot of very aggressive incursions from Russia, from China and other nations."

"I think that they [Greenlanders] ultimately will partner with the United States. We can make them much more secure. We could do a lot more protection. And I think they'd fare a lot better economically as well."

U.S. Vice-President JD Vance

JD Vance in Greenland BBC

"[The United States] needs Greenland for international security."

"Greenland's very important for the peace of the world. And I think Denmark understands, and I think the European Union understands it. And if they don't we're going to have to explain it to them."

"We’ll get Greenland. Yeah, 100%." 

U.S. President Donald J. Trump 

"It is a time when we as a population are under pressure."

"We must stick together. Together we are stronger."

"[The U.S. visit signaled a] lack of respect."

Greenland's PM-designate Jens-Frederik Nielson

 

"[Donald Trump Jr's visit in January first sparked concerns] that’s when we realized that his words are no longer just words, he actually means what he says."

"We’re afraid of being colonized again. We’ve been a colony for the past 300 years under Denmark, it still feels like it. Now another colonizer is interested in us."

"[Greenland needs to be] open-minded [and consider strengthening relations with the US to secure a sustainable independence strategy]."

"Trump is only going to be president for the next four years so we also need to think about what’s going to happen in 10 years, 15 years."

Qupanuk Olsen, Greenland politician, pro-independence party Naleraq

U.S. Vice-President J.D. Vance was in Greenland on Friday, slamming Denmark for not doing a good job in keeping its semi-autonomous territory safe. But as Greenland content creator Qupanuk Olsen explains, many Greenlanders did not roll out the red carpet for Vance.   CBC

 

It's hard to say whether President Trump's representatives in his White House Cabinet really expected to be welcomed with huge enthusiasm by Greenlanders in their shared trip to Greenland on Friday. Originally the trip was to have lasted longer, and be more expansive, but in the face of obvious push-back by offended Greenlanders who consider their semi-autonomous government under Denmark's protection the arbiter of who should embark on a state visit to their island, and that by special invitation, an invitation that hadn't been extended. 

 

As far as Greenlanders were concerned, the visit by US. Vice-President Vance, his wife and other senior American officials took it upon themselves as an act of hubris to visit unannounced and uninvited; their home, as it were, invaded by strangers. Strangers, no less, with designs on their homeland that are extraordinarily offensive; offering to buy a home that is definitely not for sale. In the end, the visitors confined their trip to visiting the American military outpost at Pituffik on the northwest coast of Greenland. In the process, evading the risk of violating diplomacy through an uninvited delegation.

 

With U.S. President Donald Trump threatening to take over Greenland, the country’s prime minister has called a visit by a U.S. delegation a provocation and highly aggressive. The Americans on the trip include national security adviser Mike Waltz and Usha Vance, the vice-president’s wife.  CBC

Nonetheless both Greenlanders and Danes were offended that the trip took place at all, but even more so that the original itinerary had been planned without customary diplomatic consultation beforehand. Addressing American troops at the U.S. Space Force Pituffik outpost informing them that the Trump administration is very interested in "Arctic security", Vice-President Vance advanced the Trump agenda. His entourage that included national security adviser Mike Waltz, Energy Secretary Chris Wright, and Senator Mike Lee of Utah then received briefings from military officials present at the base.

 

"As you all know, it's a big issue and it's only going to get bigger over the coming decades", Mr. Vance advised  his listeners, as the first U.S. vice-president to ever visit Greenland. In the process of President Trump expressing his intention to 'buy' Greenland from Denmark, relations between the two nations have become extremely strained, with the U.S. President repeatedly suggesting the U.S. should control the mineral-rich territory of Denmark. It is highly unlikely that any two such allies, both NATO members, have ever collided over an issue where one coveted the territory of the other. 

Pituffik Space Base is pictured as Vance visits, on Friday in Greenland. (Jim Watson/The Associated Press)

President Trump alluded to rising Chinese and Russian interest in the Arctic, where sea lanes have begun to open in the North West Passage as a result of climate change melting sea ice. Access to the Passage -- part of Canadian territory -- will be yet another issue of aggravated presumption between the U.S. and Canada where at present, diplomacy argues that before embarking through the Passage, permission must be sought from Canada. Which feeds once again into President Trump's argument about U.S. 'security' in his wish to control Canada through annexing it into the U.S.

 

Canada, its government and its population are no more anxious to accommodate the American President's desires of territorial expansion than is Denmark/Greenland. The Pituffik Space Base owned and operated by the United States with Denmark's permission, is situated remotely, 1,100 kilometres north of the Arctic Circle. Residents of Nuuk, Greenland's capital, about 1,500 kilometres south of Pituffik, voiced their concern with the U.S. delegation's visit underscoring their misgivings about the most powerful nation on earth coveting their Arctic island.

 

Denmark's Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen expressed his exasperation following the Vance trip to Greenland, stating that although Denmark can deal with criticism, there is a collegial, diplomatic way of speaking to a friendly democratic ally. Through a video he posted on social media, he declared he had a message "for our American friends." 

"Much is being said these days. Many accusations and many allegations have been made."

"And of course, we are open to criticism. But let me be completely honest, we do not appreciate the tone in which it's being delivered."

"This is not how you speak to your close allies."

Larrs Lokke Rasmussen

 

Canada/U.S. Relations Out of Kilter

Then: "Reliance on a US defence umbrella, a critical factor since the end of WW2 for so many countries is no longer guaranteed."

"No affected country can afford to close its eyes and hope that 2026 or 2028 elections in the US will bring everything back to 'normal' ... and not happen again."

"The toothpaste cannot go back in the tube." March 25 LinkedIn post 

Now: "The reality is that, without U.S. consent, no country can hope to operate the F-35 for long. [Building Canada's future fighter force solely on the F-35 would be] irresponsible."

"We may find for example that 36 F-35 and 150 other fighter aircraft such as Rafale or Gripen could be a better strategic, economic, and military posture while investing heavily in 6th gen developments." 

Retired Lt.-Gen. Yvan Blondin

The F-35 program has had a controversial history in Canada. Photo by Errol McGihon /Postmedia

Once the man who was chief of the Royal Canadian Air Force from 2012 to 2015, retired Lt.-Gen. Blondin had insisted the U.S.-built F-35 represented the best fighter jet for Canadian operations given that its allies in democracy gravitated around American leadership, technology and military operations. That is, until the election and ascension of Donald Trump to the American presidency. Much has since then changed.

 

Canada's economy is now under threat by the Trump administration amidst aggressive statements on annexing the country under American hegemony as the 51st U.S. state. And nor is Canada the only nation that finds itself under threat, since seizing Greenland and the Panama Canal have also come under discussion in the U.S. ostensibly to secure American concerns over security issues. 

 

Yet, confoundingly, one of the countries that stands to pose the greatest risk to American security has somehow secured President Trump's confidence.

 

A former fighter pilot, the retired general had years back recommended that Canada take on the F-35 from Lockheed Martin, persuading then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper it would be in Canada's best military operational interests. Which resulted in then-PM Harper's Conservative government locking into the acquisition in 2010, despite delays when increasing costs and technical problems associated with the F-35 began to surface. 

In 2023 the Liberal government under Justin Trudeau, after having for years denied that the F-35 would answer to Canada's needs and skirting the issue of acquisition, changed tack to announce it was prepared to buy 88 F-35s at a cost of $19 billion, although Canada was financially committed only to the purchase of the first 15 jets hearking back to the Conservative government decision.

 

Lt.-Gen. Blondin elaborated, explaining that the problem with the F-35 is the issue of complete control that the United States maintains over all aspects of the plane, not merely the aircraft itself. Time remains before a decision must be made for the purchase of the remaining 72 F-35s, said Lt.-Gen. Blondin after Liberal Leader Mark Carney ordered a F-35 purchase review, taking into account an increasingly hostile America under President Trump. 

 

Saab's Gripen E fighter jet is an alternative being considered to the American-made F-35. Photo by Saab /PST

 

There are options in suggestions the Swedish built Gripen -- second in the Canadian fighter jet competition -- would be considered a solution. There had been a promise by its Swedish manufacturer that the Gripens could be built in Canada. Former defence procurement chief at the Canadian Armed Forces Alan Williams, and other defence analysts have given warning the F-35 represents a strategic vulnerability for Canada, with American total control over software upgrades and aircraft spare parts.

 

Canada, pointed out Lt.-Gen. Blondin, must now look to developing a defence strategy taking into account the new realities of changes in its relationship with the United States. Those who are in support of Canada's F-35 purchase point out the hundreds of millions worth of contracts that companies in Canada have been involved in, supplying parts for the U.S. aircraft, creating Canadian aerospace employment.

 

That too changed,  however, when in late February, President Trump informed Lockheed Martin, manufacturer of the F-35. that a change was in order; specifically that he wanted those jobs returned to the U.S. when Canadian contracts come up for renewal.

 

Yvan Blondin said building Canada’s future fighter force solely on the F-35 would be “irresponsible.” Photo by Jack Boland /Jack Boland/Toronto Sun

 

U.S. Scuttling Traditional Trade Relations

"The United States will help restore Russia’s access to the world market for agricultural and fertilizer exports, lower maritime insurance costs, and enhance access to ports and payment systems for such transactions."

"[The statement included ensuring safe navigation in the Black Se, a ban on strikes against energy infrastructure in Russia and Ukraine, and President Donald Trump’s imperative that] the killing on both sides of the Russia-Ukraine conflict must stop."

White House statement

 

WHAT DOES RUSSIA SAY IT WILL GET?

* The lifting of restrictions on state agricultural bank Rosselkhozbank "and other financial organizations involved in ensuring international trade in food (including fish products) and fertilisers, their connection to SWIFT, and the opening of necessary correspondent accounts".

* The removal of curbs on trade finance operations.

* The removal of sanctions and restrictions on companies producing and exporting food (including fish products) and fertilisers.

* The removal of sanctions and restrictions on insurance companies dealing cargoes of food (including fish products) and fertilisers. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov specifically mentioned the Lloyd’s of London insurance market.

Reuters

 

"This is the most disturbing action that I think we've seen from [U.S. President Donald Trump] since his election."

"In essence, what he is doing is funding [Russian President] Vladimir Putin's regime ... and funding the death of Ukrainians."

"We do need to become less dependent, unfortunately, on the United States of America."

"It's a sad thing for us to say."

"[Saskatchewan may change how it responds to Trump's threats]."

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe

Cargo ships are seen from a patrol boat of Ukraine’s coast guard as they sail in the Black Sea, amid Russia’s attack on Ukraine, February 7, 2024. REUTERS/Thomas Peter/

 A plan by the United States to restore the Russian agricultural sector's position is, according to Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe, a backchannel funding Ukrainian death and suffering. The White House statement carrying news of the United States plan to help Russia expand its markets following talks between American and Russian officials in Saudi Arabia is disturbing in its ramifications. The intention is to also lower maritime insurance costs and according to the Trump administration, enhance Russian access to shipping ports.

 

"This latest announcement from Donald Trump isn't just a betrayal of Ukraine, where people will continue to be killed and occupied under Putin's illegal invasion", added the province's NDP leader Carla Beck, responding to President Trump's threats as they apply to onerous tariffs to be imposed on Canada and Mexico for a full range of products entering the United States, along with extended similar threats to Europe, Japan and South Korea, even as the Trump administration is open to trade dialogue with Russian President Vladimir Putin, a stunning reversal of traditional U.S. trade policy and politics.

 

Saskatchewan, the world's largest producer of potash, a mineral in use as a crop-growing fertilizer, foresees consequences with Russian potash -- sanctioned since the 2022 invasion by Russia of Ukraine -- anticipating a scenario where Russian fertilizer will flood the market once sanction measure are lifted. This is all part and parcel of a coming global trade war inspired by the Trump administration where 25 per cent tariffs have been imposed on Canadian steel and aluminum, along with a 10 per cent levy on potash if it doesn't comply with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.

The traditional trading partners of the United States are reeling in shock at the warnings and threats emanating from the White House. U.S. allies suddenly find themselves estranged and confused in their relations with the new administration whose pronouncements on stiff tariffs -- while warning of  consequences with retaliatory measures their once-trusting trading partners ruminate on imposing and then reconsidering when the U.S. -- warns further that retaliatory measures will only incur the wrath of the U.S. which will then impose even higher tariffs, upending global integrated trading patterns.

International experts on trade negotiations and investments are attempting to make sense of a sudden turn-about in international relations. What they are all certain of, is the conclusion that in alienating traditional trading partners with explosive accusations and punishing tariffs, the United States and American consumers in general will not come away unscathed. The unsettled situation will penalize the U.S. too, albeit not as stringently as its hapless trading partners. As well, a global recession appears to be waiting in the wings. 

A worker at the Mosaic potash mine near Belle Plaine, Sask., holds a few examples of the white, crystalline substance during a tour on April 26, 2024. (Alexander Quon/CBC)

 

 

 

Gazans Waking to Hamas Terrorism Backlash

"Our children have been killed. Our houses have been destroyed."

"[I joined the protest in Beit Lahiya] against the war, against Hamas, and the [Palestinian political] factions, against Israel and against the world's silence."

Abed Radwan

 

"[The protest began as an antiwar protest and swelled to over 2,000 with people chanting against Hamas]."

"It's the only party we can affect."

"Protests won't stop the [Israeli] occupation, but it can affect Hamas."

Ammar Hassan

 

"Our main goal is to bring the hostages home."

"If Hamas continues to refuse a deal, it will pay an increasingly heavy price".

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz 

Hundreds of people took to the streets of Beit Lahia, with many chanting anti-Hamas slogans  AFP

 

Out of a population estimated to be a million and a half people, thousands of Palestinians in northern Gaza marched in another day of antiwar protests. Their demonstrations represent a rare display of public rage against their governing body, Hamas, that very political group whose charter calls for the elimination of the State of Israel, and of whom the vast preponderance of Gazans approved. An approval of both the terrorist group's violence against Jews, and their goal of destroying Israel. 

 

Presumably, the expectation among the population was that Hamas would go about their business of killing Jews and destroying the state expeditiously. Their shared aspiration unimaginably not drawing the civilian population of Gaza into the fray. A delusional fantasy given that in previous encounters between Hamas and the Israel Defense Forces, Hamas deliberately placed its civilian population in harm's way for the distinct public relations purpose of portraying Israel as a heartless killer of Palestinians.

 

During the horrendous savagery of the October 7, 2023 invasion of southern Israel, Palestinian civilians saw fit to join the thousands of Hamas operatives in their sadistic rape-and-murder spree. When Israeli hostages were  taken into Gaza, the civilian Palestinian population gave ample displays of Jew-hate as they celebrated the capture of an array of Jewish citizens from children to the elderly, wounded and dead, catatonic raped women, by ululating their pleasure and actively taunting and beating hostages and dead bodies.

Tuesday's protest was the largest anti-Hamas demonstration since war began following the 7 October attacks   AFP

So have Palestinians in Gaza discovered their mislaid humanity? Coming out in modest droves to rally against Hamas? The protests organized through social media platforms saw Hamas security forces responding to disperse the gatherings with forceful interventions to little avail. Had Palestinians responded by denying that Hamas terrorism reflected their values before the Israel Defense Forces invaded Gaza with the intention of destroying Hamas and rescuing the hostages, it might have seemed credible that they were intent on divorcing themselves from the violent terrorism they now are disowning.

 

It has taken 17 months of conflict between Israel and Hamas to impress upon Palestinians that violence begets violence and they could just as easily be on the receiving end as casualties as were the Jews, minus the ghoulish savagery of perpetrators intoxicated with hatred. In the town of Beit Lahiya some 3,000 people demonstrated, many chanting "the people want the fall of Hamas". What took so long?

 

Israeli hostages released by Hamas in Rafah and Nuseirat as part of ceasefire deal – video

Dozens of men in a Gaza City neighbourhood chanted "Out, out, out! Hamas get out!" In Jabaliya a similar protest took place. Speaking on condition of anonymity in fear of retribution, a protester explained the demonstration occurred because "everyone failed us". They chanted against Israel, Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and Arab mediators. Despite no Hamas security at the protest, scuffles broke out between supporters and opponents of the protesting group.

 

Hamas is adamant, it will release the remaining captives only in exchange for Palestinian prisoners, a lasting ceasefire and a complete and unconditional Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. It could have had all that with the exception of the Palestinian prisoners' release up until October 6, 2023. Had they only put down their arms, declared their intention to destroy Israel null and void  and begun instead to govern the Gaza Strip responsibly.

 

People hold hands at a memorial event marking the one-year anniversary of the Hamas attack in southern Israel, in Tel Aviv, Oct. 7, 2024. Jack Guez/AFP via Getty Images

 

What Geneva Convention Might That Be?

"[The proceedings are nothing but] another sham trial [held for Russia's] own amusement."

"The world must respond to such shameful sham trials of Ukrainian defenders."

"It is obvious to everyone that those who should be in the dock are not those defending themselves but those who initiated the aggression, those who invaded foreign land with weapons, and those who arrived with tanks on the territory of an independent state!"

"Ukrainian prisoners of war are combatants, not criminals! They were fulfilling their duty to the state, protecting its territorial integrity and sovereignty."

Dmytro Lubinets, Ukraine human rights envoy 

A woman with the words "Free Azov" written on her face attends a rally aiming to raise awareness on the fate of Ukrainian prisoners of war in Kyiv, Ukraine (AP Photo/Vadim Ghirda, File)

In a military court trial denounced by Kyiv as a sham and a violation of international law, Russia bizarrely convicted 23 captured Ukrainian servicemen on terrorism charges related to the war that the Russian invasion of Ukraine caused. Current or former fighters of the elite Azov brigade make up the personnel held on  trial. Russia had designated the Azov brigade as a terrorist group. Extending the charge of terrorism to any who worked within the brigade whether as cooks or support personnel.

 

The prominent Russian human rights group, Memorial, re-designated the Ukrainian defendants as political prisoners some of whom had been captured in 2022 during fighting in the Ukrainian port city of Mariupol, defending their country from the Russian invader. Others among the prisoners had been detained while attempting to leave the city once it was overrun by Russian forces, according to Memorial.

 

On Wednesday when the verdict was brought down in the Russian court in the city of Rostov-on-Don, only a dozen prisoners were in attendance. Of those charged, eleven -- including nine women -- had returned to Ukraine through prisoner exchanges and were thus convicted in absentia, while one other defendant had died last year while in custody.

 

Lawyers of Ukrainians captured by Russia during hostilities in Ukraine sit in front of the defendant's cage during a hearing at the Southern District Military Court in Rostov-on-Don, Russia, Wednesday, March 26, 2025. AP Photo

All of the  convicted had been charged with staging a violent coup d'etat and with organizing the activities of a terrorist organization. Russian 'justice' had seen fit to entirely inverse reality; in essence claiming that loyal Ukrainian servicemen in responding to the illegal, internationally criminal armed military invasion of their country were the aggressors, not the invading army engaged in what he Kremlin termed a 'limited military action'. Limited, presumably, in the Kremlin's estimation that the further annexation of Ukrainian territory would take a trifling amount of time and effort.

 

The dozen Ukrainian men remaining in Russian custody will serve their time in maximum security penal colonies, according to the court where they were given prison sentences ranging from 13 to 23 years. The Russian independent news site Mediazona reported that all twelve of the convicted held in Russia are prepared to appeal the verdict.

 

"None of the defendants in the case are accused of any war crimes: they are all being tried for the very fact of serving" in Azov at one time or another, stated Memorial, in their explanatory defence. Ukraine's presidential adviser, Mykhailo Podolyak, stated that the trial of combatants amounted to "an official war crime" which would warrant a response from the International Criminal Court. 

 

The defendants testified of abuse they had undergone while behind bars; that they were severely beaten, had suffered broken bones, were interrogated with bags covering their heads, were given food laced through with household chemicals, and were forced under duress to stand all day long while singing the Russian anthem, according to Mediazona. 

Rescuers work at the site of an apartment building hit by a Russian missile strike in Sumy, Ukraine, on Tuesday. (Reuters)