Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
The Prime Minister spoke to the Prime Minister of Norway Jonas Gahr Støre this morning.
The Prime Minister spoke to the Prime Minister of Norway Jonas Gahr Støre this morning.
The Prime Minister began by setting out his aims for the informal meeting of European leaders taking place later today in Paris to discuss the situation in Ukraine.
Ensuring Ukraine is in the strongest possible position is paramount, and they both agreed that all international leaders must come together to ensure Euro-Atlantic security.
The Prime Minister reiterated that this is a once in a generation moment for our national security and there could be no talks about Ukraine, without Ukraine.
Source: United Kingdom – Prime Minister’s Office 10 Downing Street
The Prime Minister spoke to the Prime Minister of Norway Jonas Gahr Støre this morning.
The Prime Minister spoke to the Prime Minister of Norway Jonas Gahr Støre this morning.
The Prime Minister began by setting out his aims for the informal meeting of European leaders taking place later today in Paris to discuss the situation in Ukraine.
Ensuring Ukraine is in the strongest possible position is paramount, and they both agreed that all international leaders must come together to ensure Euro-Atlantic security.
The Prime Minister reiterated that this is a once in a generation moment for our national security and there could be no talks about Ukraine, without Ukraine.
Source: United Kingdom – Prime Minister’s Office 10 Downing Street
Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s article in the Telegraph on Ukraine.
We are facing a once-in-a-generation moment for the collective security of our continent. This is not only a question about the future of Ukraine – it is existential for Europe as a whole.
Securing a lasting peace in Ukraine that safeguards its sovereignty for the long term is essential if we are to deter Putin from further aggression in the future.
To achieve it, Europe and the United States must continue to work closely together – and I believe the UK can play a unique role in helping to make this happen, just as we did this past week in stepping in to convene and chair the Ukraine Defence Contact Group.
First, Europe must step up further to meet the demands of its own security. So I am heading to Paris with a very clear message for our European friends. We have got to show we are truly serious about our own defence and bearing our own burden. We have talked about it for too long – and president Trump is right to demand that we get on with it.
As European nations, we must increase our defence spending and take on a greater role in Nato. Non-US Nato nations have already increased defence spending by 20 per cent in the past year, but we must go further.
Russia is still waging war and Ukraine is still fighting for its freedom, which is why we must not relent in our efforts to get the kit Ukrainians need for their fighters on the front line. While the fighting continues, we must put Ukraine in the strongest possible position ahead of any talks.
The UK is ready to play a leading role in accelerating work on security guarantees for Ukraine. This includes further support for Ukraine’s military, where the UK has already committed £3 billion a year until at least 2030. But it also means being ready and willing to contribute to security guarantees to Ukraine by putting our own troops on the ground if necessary.
I do not say that lightly. I feel very deeply the responsibility that comes with potentially putting British servicemen and women in harm’s way. But any role in helping to guarantee Ukraine’s security is helping to guarantee the security of our continent, and the security of this country.
The end of this war, when it comes, cannot merely become a temporary pause before Putin attacks again.
But second, while European nations must step up in this moment – and we will – US support will remain critical and a US security guarantee is essential for a lasting peace, because only the US can deter Putin from attacking again. So I will be meeting president Trump in the coming days and working with him and all our G7 partners to help secure the strong deal we need.
We must be clear that peace cannot come at any cost. Ukraine must be at the table in these negotiations, because anything less would accept Putin’s position that Ukraine is not a real nation.
President Zelensky and the Ukrainian people have shown the most extraordinary resilience and made such great sacrifices in the defence of their nation. We cannot have another situation like Afghanistan, where the US negotiated directly with the Taliban and cut out the Afghan government. I feel sure that president Trump will want to avoid this too.
While Nato membership may take time, we should continue to support Ukraine’s irreversible path to joining the alliance.
We should also show greater strength in applying economic pressure. Putin’s economy is feeling the strain – he is worried about his energy revenues and his financial sector.
Working together, the US, Europe and all our G7 allies should seek to go further on the oil price cap, the Shadow Fleet, the sanctioning of oil giants, and going after those banks that are enabling the evasion of sanctions.
These crucial days ahead will determine the future security of our continent. As I will say in Paris, peace comes through strength. But the reverse is also true. Weakness leads to war.
This is the moment for us all to step up, and the UK will do so because it is the right thing to do for the values and freedoms we hold dear, and because it is fundamental to our own national security.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s article in the Telegraph on Ukraine.
We are facing a once-in-a-generation moment for the collective security of our continent. This is not only a question about the future of Ukraine – it is existential for Europe as a whole.
Securing a lasting peace in Ukraine that safeguards its sovereignty for the long term is essential if we are to deter Putin from further aggression in the future.
To achieve it, Europe and the United States must continue to work closely together – and I believe the UK can play a unique role in helping to make this happen, just as we did this past week in stepping in to convene and chair the Ukraine Defence Contact Group.
First, Europe must step up further to meet the demands of its own security. So I am heading to Paris with a very clear message for our European friends. We have got to show we are truly serious about our own defence and bearing our own burden. We have talked about it for too long – and president Trump is right to demand that we get on with it.
As European nations, we must increase our defence spending and take on a greater role in Nato. Non-US Nato nations have already increased defence spending by 20 per cent in the past year, but we must go further.
Russia is still waging war and Ukraine is still fighting for its freedom, which is why we must not relent in our efforts to get the kit Ukrainians need for their fighters on the front line. While the fighting continues, we must put Ukraine in the strongest possible position ahead of any talks.
The UK is ready to play a leading role in accelerating work on security guarantees for Ukraine. This includes further support for Ukraine’s military, where the UK has already committed £3 billion a year until at least 2030. But it also means being ready and willing to contribute to security guarantees to Ukraine by putting our own troops on the ground if necessary.
I do not say that lightly. I feel very deeply the responsibility that comes with potentially putting British servicemen and women in harm’s way. But any role in helping to guarantee Ukraine’s security is helping to guarantee the security of our continent, and the security of this country.
The end of this war, when it comes, cannot merely become a temporary pause before Putin attacks again.
But second, while European nations must step up in this moment – and we will – US support will remain critical and a US security guarantee is essential for a lasting peace, because only the US can deter Putin from attacking again. So I will be meeting president Trump in the coming days and working with him and all our G7 partners to help secure the strong deal we need.
We must be clear that peace cannot come at any cost. Ukraine must be at the table in these negotiations, because anything less would accept Putin’s position that Ukraine is not a real nation.
President Zelensky and the Ukrainian people have shown the most extraordinary resilience and made such great sacrifices in the defence of their nation. We cannot have another situation like Afghanistan, where the US negotiated directly with the Taliban and cut out the Afghan government. I feel sure that president Trump will want to avoid this too.
While Nato membership may take time, we should continue to support Ukraine’s irreversible path to joining the alliance.
We should also show greater strength in applying economic pressure. Putin’s economy is feeling the strain – he is worried about his energy revenues and his financial sector.
Working together, the US, Europe and all our G7 allies should seek to go further on the oil price cap, the Shadow Fleet, the sanctioning of oil giants, and going after those banks that are enabling the evasion of sanctions.
These crucial days ahead will determine the future security of our continent. As I will say in Paris, peace comes through strength. But the reverse is also true. Weakness leads to war.
This is the moment for us all to step up, and the UK will do so because it is the right thing to do for the values and freedoms we hold dear, and because it is fundamental to our own national security.
The rights of persons belonging to minorities are fundamental values of the EU and are part of the Copenhagen criteria for accession to the EU.
In June 2024, the Commission confirmed that Ukraine had fulfilled the requirement to enact a law addressing the remaining Venice Commission recommendations from June and October 2023 linked by amending in December 2023 the law on national minorities as well as the laws on state language, media and education[1].
Subsequently, the EU invited Ukraine, in the Negotiating Framework, to prepare an Action Plan on national minorities[2]. As part of the accession process, the Commission conducts a screening of Ukraine’s alignment with the EU acquis in the field of fundamental rights, including the rights of persons belonging to national minorities.
The Commission consistently conveys the message, in bilateral contacts with Ukrainian counterparts, that it is expected that Ukraine will continue to implement the adopted legislation adequately and effectively, in line with European standards and as part of a constructive mutual dialogue with the representatives of the national minorities.
The Commission will continue to follow closely the Ukraine government’s ongoing dialogues with representatives of persons belonging to national minorities, including the representatives of Ukraine’s Romanian national minority.
The Commission is also assisting Ukraine in its reform efforts, by supporting the project ‘Support for implementing European standards relating to anti-discrimination and rights of national minorities in Ukraine’ implemented by the Council of Europe[3].
18 February, ENVI Members will consider the draft opinion on the implementation of the environmental aspects of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF).
The RRF is a key instrument of the EU’s response to the economic and social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, with additional RePowerEU chapters introduced following Russia’s war on Ukraine and the energy crisis. Around €275 billion were committed to be spent on climate action. However, recent findings from the European Court of Auditors highlight potential overestimations of funds allocated to climate action and discrepancies between planned measures and actual implementation. The ENVI draft opinion raises questions on the contribution of RRF to the green transition and calls for further investigations. ENVI Members will discuss the role of the RRF in achieving the EU’s environmental and climate goals.
The highlight of the February 2025 plenary session was the presentation of the European Commission’s long-awaited 2025 work programme and the subsequent debate. The session also saw a debate on Council and Commission statements on continued EU support for Ukraine, followed by an address by Ruslan Stefanchuk, Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada. Members took part in several debates linked to preparing the EU for a new trade era: on multilateral cooperation on tariffs, the EU-Mercosur Trade Agreement, and protecting the system of international justice and its institutions. A debate and vote on the 2024 European Central Bank annual report took place in the presence of Christine Lagarde, President of the Bank. Parliament held a debate on media freedom, in honour of the memory of journalists Ján Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová; another debate marked the anniversary of the murder of Alexei Navalny. Members also debated the political crisis in Serbia, the escalating violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and resolving humanitarian crises following war and conflict. Finally, Parliament debated the escalation of violence in Sweden, the mental health crisis among Europe’s youth, and cross-border recognition of same-sex couples and their children’s civil status documents.
Details 2025-02-11 President Lai meets Deputy Prime Minister Thulisile Dladla of the Kingdom of Eswatini On the afternoon of February 11, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation led by Deputy Prime Minister Thulisile Dladla of the Kingdom of Eswatini. In remarks, President Lai thanked Eswatini for continuing to support Taiwan’s international participation at international venues. The president stated that Taiwan and Eswatini work closely in such areas as agriculture, the economy and trade, education, and healthcare, and expressed hope that the two countries will continue to support each other on the international stage and strive together for the well-being of both peoples. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I warmly welcome our distinguished guests to the Presidential Office. Deputy Prime Minister Dladla previously visited Taiwan while serving as minister of foreign affairs. This is her first time leading a delegation here as deputy prime minister. I want to extend my sincerest welcome. Deputy Prime Minister Dladla has earned a high degree of recognition and trust from His Majesty King Mswati III. She was not only Eswatini’s first woman foreign minister, but is also the second woman to have held her current key position. She shows an active interest in people’s welfare, and has a reputation for being deeply devoted to her compatriots. I have great admiration for this. I am truly delighted to meet with Deputy Prime Minister Dladla today. I would like to take this opportunity to once again express my gratitude to His Majesty the King for leading a delegation to attend the inauguration ceremony for myself and Vice President Bi-khim Hsiao last year. This demonstrated the close diplomatic ties between our countries. I also want to thank Eswatini for continuing to support Taiwan’s international participation at international venues. I would ask that when Deputy Prime Minister Dladla returns to Eswatini, she conveys Taiwan’s greetings and gratitude to His Majesty the King and Her Majesty the Queen Mother Ntombi Tfwala. Diplomatic ties between Taiwan and Eswatini have endured for over half a century. Our two nations have continued to work closely in such areas as agriculture, the economy and trade, education, and healthcare. Our largest collaboration to date has been assisting Eswatini in the construction of a strategic oil reserve facility. We will continue to push forward with this project, and look forward to achieving even greater results in all areas. I understand that Deputy Prime Minister Dladla is very concerned about issues regarding gender equality and women’s empowerment. During her term as foreign minister, she facilitated bilateral cooperation in those areas. Now, as deputy prime minister, she is actively attending to the disadvantaged and advancing social welfare. These policies are very much in line with the priorities of my administration. I look forward to strengthening cooperation with Deputy Prime Minister Dladla for the benefit of both our societies. Taiwan and Eswatini are peace-loving nations. Faced with a constantly changing international landscape and the growing threat posed by authoritarianism, we hope that our two countries will continue to support each other on the international stage and strive together for the well-being of both our peoples. In closing, I wish Deputy Prime Minister Dladla and our distinguished guests a pleasant and successful visit. Deputy Prime Minister Dladla then delivered remarks, first greeting President Lai on behalf of the King, the Queen Mother, and the people of Eswatini, and extending gratitude for the warm reception afforded to her and her delegation, which underscores the strong bonds of friendship between our two nations. The deputy prime minister stated that, in reflecting on the fruits of our partnership, the evidence of Taiwan’s commitment to Eswatini is all around us. The strategic oil reserve project launching in April, she indicated, will redefine Eswatini’s energy security, and the Central Bank complex and electrification project stand as monuments of Taiwan’s vision for Eswatini’s progress and indicate that our partnerships are very strong. Deputy Prime Minister Dladla pointed out that education is the foundation of any nation’s progress, and that Taiwan’s contribution to Eswatini’s education sector cannot be overstated. Through Ministry of Foreign Affairs scholarship programs, she said, Eswatini has sent numerous students to Taiwan, where they’ve received world-class education in various disciplines, including engineering, business, and medicine. In turn, she said, these graduates are now contributing to the development of Eswatini. The deputy prime minister stated that Taiwan has also strengthened Eswatini’s industrial and technological sectors, with collaborations and partnerships that create new opportunities for employment and innovation, and that Taiwan’s technical and medical assistance has strengthened Eswatini’s healthcare systems and uplifted the expertise of its professionals. Deputy Prime Minister Dladla also congratulated President Lai once again on his presidency, which she stated will lead Taiwan to new heights, adding that His Majesty coming to Taiwan personally for the inauguration was a resounding declaration of Eswatini’s enduring support for Taiwan’s sovereignty, stability, and rightful place on the world stage. She emphasized that Eswatini stands with Taiwan always and unwaveringly. In conclusion, the deputy prime minister stated that Eswatini fully agrees with Taiwan that we must all safeguard our national sovereignty and protect the lives and property of our people. She said that our common enemy will always be poverty and natural disasters, but against all odds, we will stand united, and we shall remain united and be one. The delegation was accompanied to the Presidential Office by Eswatini Ambassador Promise Sithembiso Msibi.
Details 2025-02-11 Presidential Office thanks US and Japan for joint leaders’ statement On February 7 (US EST), President Donald Trump of the United States and Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru of Japan issued a joint leaders’ statement reiterating “the importance of maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait as an indispensable element of security and prosperity for the international community.” In the statement, the two leaders also “encouraged the peaceful resolution of cross-strait issues, and opposed any attempts to unilaterally change the status quo by force or coercion” and “expressed support for Taiwan’s meaningful participation in international organizations.” Presidential Office Spokesperson Karen Kuo (郭雅慧) on February 8 expressed sincere gratitude on behalf of the Presidential Office to the leaders of both countries for taking concrete action to demonstrate their firm support for peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait and for Taiwan’s international participation. Spokesperson Kuo pointed out that there is already a strong international consensus on the importance of peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. The spokesperson emphasized that Taiwan, as a responsible member of the international community, is capable and willing to work together with the international community and will continue strengthening its self-defense capabilities as it deepens its trilateral security partnership with the US and Japan and works alongside like-minded countries to uphold the rules-based international order. The spokesperson said that Taiwan will work toward ensuring a free and open Taiwan Strait and Indo-Pacific region, as well as global peace, stability, and prosperity, as it continues to act as a force for good in the world.
Details 2025-02-11 President Lai’s response to Pope Francis’s 2025 World Day of Peace message President Lai Ching-te recently sent a letter to Pope Francis of the Catholic Church in response to his message marking the 58th World Day of Peace. The following is the full text of the president’s letter to the pope: Your Holiness, In your message for the 2025 World Day of Peace entitled Forgive us our trespasses: grant us your peace, you called for a cultural change that would bring an end to the governance of interpersonal and international relations by a logic of exploitation and oppression and herald true and lasting peace. I wholeheartedly admire and identify with your point of view. Since transitioning from a medical career to politics, I have remained true to my original intentions in the sense that, while a doctor can help only one person at a time, a public servant can simultaneously assist many people in resolving the difficulties affecting their lives. In my inaugural address in May 2024, I pledged that every day of my term, I would strive to act justly, show mercy, and be humble, which accord with the teachings of the Bible. I promised to treat the Taiwanese people as family and prove myself worthy of their trust and expectations. With an unwavering heart, I have accepted the people’s trust and taken on the solemn responsibility of leading the nation forward and building a democratic, peaceful, and prosperous new Taiwan. In this new year, the changing international landscape continues to present many grave challenges to democratic nations around the world. As the Russia-Ukraine war persists, the steady convergence of authoritarian regimes, including China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, threatens the rules-based international order and severely impacts peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific and the world at large. Your Holiness has stated that war is a defeat for everyone. I, too, firmly believe that peace is priceless and that war has no winners. A high level of consensus has formed in the international community on upholding peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. The Taiwanese people also maintain an unyielding commitment to safeguarding a way of life that encompasses freedom, equality, democracy, and human rights. Taiwan will continue to spare no effort in preserving regional peace and stability and serving as a pilot for global peace. In your World Day of Peace message, you urged prosperous countries to assist poorer ones. This compassion is truly touching. Taiwan is proactively implementing values-based diplomacy and, under the Diplomatic Allies Prosperity Project, enhancing allies’ development through a range of initiatives. Over many years, Taiwan has accumulated abundant and unique experience of providing foreign assistance. Seeking to foster self-reliance among disadvantaged countries, we have extended genuine support to help alleviate poverty through such avenues as strengthening basic infrastructure, transferring technology, and cultivating talent. In your message, you reminded countries worldwide that assistance should not be merely an isolated act of charity and pointed to the need to devise a new global financial framework so that food crises, climate change, and other challenges could be jointly addressed. I hold this view in high regard. I therefore earnestly hope that international organizations will stop excluding Taiwan for political reasons. Taiwan is willing to shoulder its international responsibilities so that it can contribute and share its valuable experience through many global platforms. On behalf of the government and people of the Republic of China (Taiwan), I again express our interest in collaborating with the Holy See to advance world peace through concrete action. We also aspire to demonstrate Taiwanese values and the Taiwanese spirit and work together with the Holy See to uphold the core values of justice, democracy, freedom, and peace. Please accept, Your Holiness, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration, as well as my best wishes for your good health and the continued growth of the Catholic Church.
Details 2025-02-11 President Lai meets former US Vice President Mike Pence On the afternoon of January 17, President Lai Ching-te met with former Vice President of the United States Mike Pence. In remarks, President Lai thanked former Vice President Pence for his contributions to the deepening of Taiwan-US relations, noting that he actively helped to strengthen Taiwan-US cooperation and facilitate the normalization of military sales to Taiwan, and did his utmost to deepen the Taiwan-US economic partnership. The president indicated that former Vice President Pence also spoke up for Taiwan on numerous occasions at international venues, backing Taiwan’s international participation. President Lai expressed hope for a stronger Taiwan-US partnership to maintain peace and stability throughout the world, and that the two sides can advance bilateral exchanges in such areas as the economy, trade, and industry. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I am delighted to welcome former Vice President Pence and Mrs. Karen Pence to the Presidential Office. Former Vice President Pence is not only an outstanding political leader in the US, but also a staunch supporter of Taiwan on the international stage. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I would like to take this opportunity to extend our deepest gratitude to former Vice President Pence for his contributions to the deepening of Taiwan-US relations. Thanks to former Vice President Pence’s strong backing, ties between Taiwan and the US rose to unprecedented heights during President Donald Trump’s first administration. Former Vice President Pence actively helped to strengthen Taiwan-US security cooperation and facilitate the normalization of military sales to Taiwan, helping Taiwan reinforce its self-defense capabilities. He also did his utmost to deepen the Taiwan-US economic partnership. Former Vice President Pence also paid close attention to the military threats and diplomatic isolation faced by Taiwan. He spoke up for Taiwan on numerous occasions at international venues, taking concrete action to back Taiwan’s international participation. We were truly grateful for this. As we speak, China’s political and military intimidation against Taiwan persist. China and other authoritarian regimes, such as Russia, North Korea, and Iran, are continuing to converge and present serious challenges to democracies around the globe. At this moment, free and democratic nations must come together to bolster cooperation. I believe that a stronger Taiwan-US partnership can be an even more powerful force in maintaining peace and stability throughout the world. Former Vice President Pence has previously supported the signing of a trade agreement between Taiwan and the US. Taiwan looks forward to continuing to work with the new US administration and Congress to advance bilateral exchanges in such areas as the economy, trade, and industry. This is the first time that former Vice President Pence and Mrs. Pence are visiting Taiwan, and their visit is significantly meaningful for Taiwan-US exchanges. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I want to extend a warm welcome. Moving forward, I hope we will jointly realize even more fruitful achievements through Taiwan-US cooperation. Former Vice President Pence then delivered remarks, thanking President Lai for his hospitality on his and his wife’s first visit to Taiwan, saying that it is an honor to be here to reaffirm the bonds of friendship between the people of America and the people of Taiwan, which are strong and longstanding. The former vice president indicated that the American people admire the people of Taiwan and all that has been accomplished in a few short decades for Taiwan to rise to one of the world’s preeminent economic powers and free societies. He said that he is grateful for President Lai’s courageous and bold leadership of Taiwan, and grateful to be able to express the support of the overwhelming majority of the American people for this alliance. Former Vice President Pence indicated that the values shared by Taiwan and the US, including freedom, the rule of law, and respect for human rights, bind us together in a partnership that transcends geographic boundaries and cultures. He then assured President Lai that China’s increasingly aggressive posture in the Taiwan Strait and across the Indo-Pacific, for the values and interests that both sides share, is deeply concerning to the American people. Former Vice President Pence stated that America is a Pacific nation, and is committed to the status quo, adding that they recognize it is China that wants to change the status quo that America, Taiwan, and other allies in the region want to preserve, which has created an environment of extraordinary growth and prosperity. The former vice president concluded by once again thanking President Lai and his team for their gracious hospitality and conveying best wishes to him and the people of Taiwan. Former Vice President Pence then assured President Lai that just as Taiwan will never surrender its freedom, he will continue to be a voice for a strong US-Taiwan relationship in the defense and the benefit of Taiwan, the US, and the free world. Later that day, Vice President Bi-khim Hsiao hosted a banquet for former Vice President Pence and his delegation at Taipei Guest House to thank him for his longstanding friendship and staunch support for Taiwan-US ties.
Details 2025-02-11 President Lai meets delegation to 60th Inaugural Ceremonies of US president and vice president On the morning of January 16, President Lai Ching-te met with Taiwan’s delegation to the 60th Inaugural Ceremonies of the President and Vice President of the United States. In remarks, President Lai stated that democratic Taiwan stands united, working hard to deepen Taiwan-US ties together. He then entrusted the delegation with three missions: to convey best wishes from the people of Taiwan, convey our firm commitment to democracy, and help Taiwan-US relations reach a new milestone. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: The 60th Inaugural Ceremonies of the President and Vice President of the US will be held on January 20. I want to thank Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜), president of the Legislative Yuan, for accepting my invitation to lead our nation’s representative delegation to the event. I also thank Legislative Yuan Members Ko Chih-en (柯志恩), Wang Ting-yu (王定宇), Ko Ju-chun (葛如鈞), Lee Yen-hsiu (李彥秀), Chen Kuan-ting (陳冠廷), Kuo Yu-ching (郭昱晴), and Chen Gau-tzu (陳昭姿) for joining this visit to the US to attend the inauguration of President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance. We have gathered together today despite differences in party affiliation because in democratic Taiwan, while parties may compete domestically, when it comes to engagement externally, they stand united and share responsibility, working hard to deepen Taiwan-US ties and strive for the best interests of the nation. We share the value of defending freedom and democracy, and we share the goal of advancing peace and prosperity. Today, we engage with the world together as those from the same country – the Republic of China (Taiwan). In this complex and volatile new international landscape, and as the nation faces difficulties and challenges, I want to stress that in Formosa, there is no hostility that cannot be let go, and no hardship that cannot be overcome. Unity is the most important, and I hope that Taiwan can stand united, because there is true strength in unity. Democratic Taiwan must stand united in engaging with the world and initiate exchanges with confidence. On that ground, I am entrusting this delegation with three key missions. First, convey best wishes from the people of Taiwan. Just last year, Taiwan and the US celebrated the 45th anniversary of the passage of the Taiwan Relations Act. And on May 20, the US sent a senior bipartisan delegation to congratulate me and Vice President Bi-khim Hsiao on our inauguration. As the leader of this cross-party delegation, Speaker Han must clearly convey the well-wishes of the people of Taiwan, congratulate President Trump and Vice President Vance on their inauguration, and wish success to the new administration and prosperity to the US. Second, clearly convey the firm commitment of the people of Taiwan to democracy. The theme of these inaugural ceremonies is “Our Enduring Democracy: A Constitutional Promise.” Taiwan and the US share the universal value of democracy and are staunch allies. I hope that the delegation can faithfully convey the firm commitment to democracy that the people of Taiwan have, which will not change even in the face of authoritarian threats. Taiwan is willing to stand side by side with the US and other members of the democratic community to defend the sustainable development of global democracy and prevent the expansion of authoritarianism. Third, help Taiwan-US relations reach a new milestone. In recent years, Taiwan-US relations have continued to grow, with the first agreement under the Taiwan-US Initiative on 21st Century Trade having formally taken effect last month. This morning, the House of Representatives also passed the US-Taiwan Expedited Double-Tax Relief Act. I hope that the delegation can help Taiwan-US relations reach a new milestone through these exchanges so that our relations continue to grow, our cooperation expands even more, and so that we can achieve even greater success after the new administration takes office. Four years ago, Taiwan’s representative to the US inaugural ceremonies was Vice President Hsiao, who was then our representative to the US. Everyone has a lot to learn from her. I have specially invited everyone here to converse so that you can draw from Vice President Hsiao’s experience and ensure an even smoother visit. Washington, DC was also hit by a rare blizzard recently, and the weather has been very cold, so make sure to stay warm. I am sending everyone off with hand warmers and thermoses so that you can bring some warmth from Taiwan with you on your journey. And I ask that Speaker Han exercise his wisdom to help generate some warmth between the ruling and opposition parties through cooperation, which they can then bring back to Taiwan. Let us unite to give our all for diplomacy so that we can unite to give our all for Taiwan. I wish the delegation a smooth and safe trip, and hope your missions can be carried out successfully. Speaker Han then delivered remarks, stating that it was an honor to be invited by President Lai to organize a delegation to represent our nation at the 60th Inaugural Ceremonies of the President and Vice President of the US in Washington, DC, and express the Republic of China’s sincere and cordial best wishes. The Legislative Yuan’s president has assumed this important task numerous times in the past, he said, not only to represent the government of the Republic of China, but also to take on the mission of conveying the voices of 23 million people. He went on to say that he is honored to take up the baton, lead eight legislators to the US to attend this celebration that will attract global attention, and express sincere best wishes to newly elected President Trump, Vice President Vance, and the new administration’s team. As enjoined by President Lai, he hopes the delegation’s trip will help open a new chapter in Taiwan-US exchanges. Speaker Han stated that the US is the most free and democratic country in the world. He noted that in 1776 in the US Declaration of Independence, founding father Thomas Jefferson propounded the concept of “unalienable rights,” and emphasized that the people have a right to freedom and the pursuit of happiness, democratic ideas that have long been rooted in the people’s hearts. Today, he said, democracy is also embedded in the DNA of Taiwan’s 23 million people, and this hard-won democratic achievement is a result of the concerted efforts of our pioneering predecessors, thinkers, and activists over the past 100 years. Speaker Han stated that during this visit, the Legislative Yuan delegation hopes to convey the voice of Taiwan as a democratic country. Taiwan’s security, he said, is like the four legs of a table: The first leg is defending the Republic of China, the second is defending freedom and democracy, the third is maintaining Taiwan-US relations, and the fourth is maintaining cross-strait peace. The delegation will travel to the US amidst severe cold weather to show that we value our relationship with the US, and our citizens have great hopes and expectations. Speaker Han stated that this will be a cross-party delegation of eight legislators, all of whom have a strong sense of mission. He hopes that all democratic nations will acknowledge Taiwan’s importance, and pay attention to Taiwan’s 23 million people. The delegation, he said, will do its utmost to convey the goodwill and warmth that the people of Taiwan give to each and every one of our good friends.
Details 2025-02-14 President Lai holds press conference following high-level national security meeting On the morning of February 14, President Lai Ching-te convened the first high-level national security meeting of the year, following which he held a press conference. In remarks, President Lai announced that in this new year, the government will prioritize special budget allocations to ensure that Taiwan’s defense budget exceeds 3 percent of GDP. He stated that the government will also continue to reform national defense, reform our legal framework for national security, and advance our economic and trade strategy of being rooted in Taiwan while expanding globally. The president also proposed clear-cut national strategies for Taiwan-US relations, semiconductor industry development, and cross-strait relations. President Lai indicated that he instructed the national security and administrative teams to take swift action and deliver results, working within a stable strategic framework and according to the various policies and approaches outlined. He also instructed them to keep a close watch on changes in the international situation, seize opportunities whenever they arise, and address the concerns and hope of the citizens with concrete actions. He expressed hope that as long as citizens remain steadfast in their convictions, are willing to work hand in hand, stand firm amidst uncertainty, and look for ways to win within changing circumstances, Taiwan is certain to prevail in the test of time yet again. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: First, I would like to convey my condolences for the tragic incident which occurred at the Shin Kong Mitsukoshi department store in Taichung, which resulted in numerous casualties. I have instructed Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) to lead the relevant central government agencies in assisting Taichung’s municipal government with actively resolving various issues regarding the incident. It is my hope that these issues can be resolved efficiently. Earlier today, I convened this year’s first high-level national security meeting. I will now report on the discussions from the meeting to all citizens. 2025 is a year full of challenges, but also a year full of hope. In today’s global landscape, the democratic world faces common threats posed by the convergence of authoritarian regimes, while dumping and unfair competition from China undermine the global economic order. A new United States administration was formed at the beginning of the year, adopting all-new strategies and policies to address challenges both domestic and from overseas. Every nation worldwide, including ours, is facing a new phase of changes and challenges. In face of such changes, ensuring national security, ensuring Taiwan’s indispensability in global supply chains, and ensuring that our nation continues to make progress amidst challenges are our top priorities this year. They are also why we convened a high-level national security meeting today. At the meeting, the national security team, the administrative team led by Premier Cho, and I held an in-depth discussion based on the overall state of affairs at home and abroad and the strategies the teams had prepared in response. We summed up the following points as an overall strategy for the next stage of advancing national security and development. First, for overall national security, so that we can ensure the freedom, democracy, and human rights of the Taiwanese people, as well as the progress and development of the nation as we face various threats from authoritarian regimes, Taiwan must resolutely safeguard national sovereignty, strengthen self-sufficiency in national defense, and consolidate national defense. Taiwan must enhance economic resilience, maintain economic autonomy, and stand firm with other democracies as we deepen our strategic partnerships with like-minded countries. As I have said, “As authoritarianism consolidates, democratic nations must come closer in solidarity!” And so, in this new year, we will focus on the following three priorities: First, to demonstrate our resolve for national defense, we will continue to reform national defense, implement whole-of-society defense resilience, and prioritize special budget allocations to ensure that our defense budget exceeds 3 percent of GDP. Second, to counter the threats to our national security from China’s united front tactics, attempts at infiltration, and cognitive warfare, we will continue with the reform of our legal framework for national security and expand the national security framework to boost societal resilience and foster unity within. Third, to seize opportunities in the restructuring of global supply chains and realignment of the economic order, we will continue advancing our economic and trade strategy of being rooted in Taiwan while expanding globally, strengthening protections for high-tech, and collaborating with our friends and allies to build supply chains for global democracies. Everyone shares concern regarding Taiwan-US relations, semiconductor industry development, and cross-strait relations. For these issues, I am proposing clear-cut national strategies. First, I will touch on Taiwan-US relations. Taiwan and the US have shared ideals and values, and are staunch partners within the democratic, free community. We are very grateful to President Donald Trump’s administration for their continued support for Taiwan after taking office. We are especially grateful for the US and Japan’s joint leaders’ statement reiterating “the importance of maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait as an indispensable element of security and prosperity for the international community,” as well as their high level of concern regarding China’s threat to regional security. In fact, the Democratic Progressive Party government has worked very closely with President Trump ever since his first term in office, and has remained an international partner. The procurement of numerous key advanced arms, freedom of navigation critical for security and stability in the Taiwan Strait, and many assisted breakthroughs in international diplomacy were made possible during this time. Positioned in the first island chain and on the democratic world’s frontline countering authoritarianism, Taiwan is willing and will continue to work with the US at all levels as we pursue regional stability and prosperity, helping realize our vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific. Although changes in policy may occur these next few years, the mutual trust and close cooperation between Taiwan and Washington will steadfastly endure. On that, our citizens can rest assured. In accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act and the Six Assurances, the US announced a total of 48 military sales to Taiwan over the past eight years amounting to US$26.265 billion. During President Trump’s first term, 22 sales were announced totaling US$18.763 billion. This greatly supported Taiwan’s defensive capabilities. On the foundation of our close cooperation with the past eight years’ two US administrations, Taiwan will continue to demonstrate our determination for self-defense, accelerate the bolstering of our national defense, and keep enhancing the depth and breadth of Taiwan-US security cooperation, along with all manner of institutional cooperation. In terms of bilateral economic cooperation, Taiwan has always been one of the US’s most reliable trade partners, as well as one of the most important cooperative partners of US companies in the global semiconductor industry. In the past few years, Taiwan has greatly increased both direct and indirect investment in the US. By 2024, investment surpassed US$100 billion, creating nearly 400,000 job opportunities. In 2023 and 2024, investment in the US accounted for over 40 percent of Taiwan’s overall foreign investment, far surpassing our investment in China. In fact, in 2023 and 2024, Taiwanese investment in China fell to 11 percent and 8 percent, respectively. The US is now Taiwan’s biggest investment target. Our government is now launching relevant plans in accordance with national development needs and the need to establish secure supply systems, and the Executive Yuan is taking comprehensive inventory of opportunities for Taiwan-US economic and trade cooperation. Moving forward, close bilateral cooperation will allow us to expand US investment and procurement, facilitating balanced trade. Our government will also strengthen guidance and support for Taiwanese enterprises on increasing US investment, and promote the global expansion and growth of Taiwan’s industries. We will also boost Taiwan-US cooperation in tech development and manufacturing for AI and advanced semiconductors, and work together to maintain order in the semiconductor market, shaping a new era for our strategic economic partnership. Second, the development of our semiconductor industry. I want to emphasize that Taiwan, as one of the world’s most capable semiconductor manufacturing nations, is both willing and able to address new situations. With respect to President Trump’s concerns about our semiconductor industry, the government will act prudently, strengthen communications between Taiwan and the US, and promote greater mutual understanding. We will pay attention to the challenges arising from the situation and assist businesses in navigating them. In addition, we will introduce an initiative on semiconductor supply chain partnerships for global democracies. We are willing to collaborate with the US and our other democratic partners to develop more resilient and diversified semiconductor supply chains. Leveraging our strengths in cutting-edge semiconductors, we will form a global alliance for the AI chip industry and establish democratic supply chains for industries connected to high-end chips. Through international cooperation, we will open up an entirely new era of growth in the semiconductor industry. As we face the various new policies of the Trump administration, we will continue to uphold a spirit of mutual benefit, and we will continue to communicate and negotiate closely with the US government. This will help the new administration’s team to better understand how Taiwan is an indispensable partner in the process of rebuilding American manufacturing and consolidating its leadership in high-tech, and that Taiwan-US cooperation will benefit us both. Third, cross-strait relations. Regarding the regional and cross-strait situation, Taiwan-US relations, US-China relations, and interactions among Taiwan, the US, and China are a focus of global attention. As a member of the international democratic community and a responsible member of the region, Taiwan hopes to see Taiwan-US relations continue to strengthen and, alongside US-China relations, form a virtuous cycle rather than a zero-sum game where one side’s gain is another side’s loss. In facing China, Taiwan will always be a responsible actor. We will neither yield nor provoke. We will remain resilient and composed, maintaining our consistent position on cross-strait relations: Our determination to safeguard our national sovereignty and protect our free and democratic way of life remains unchanged. Our efforts to maintain peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, as well as our willingness to work alongside China in the pursuit of peace and mutual prosperity across the strait, remain unchanged. Our commitment to promoting healthy and orderly exchanges across the strait, choosing dialogue over confrontation, and advancing well-being for the peoples on both sides of the strait, under the principles of parity and dignity, remains unchanged. Regarding the matters I reported to the public today, I have instructed our national security and administrative teams to take swift action and deliver results, working within a stable strategic framework and according to the various policies and approaches I just outlined. I have also instructed them to keep a close watch on changes in the international situation, seize opportunities whenever they arise, and address the concerns and hope of the citizens with concrete actions. My fellow citizens, over the past several years, Taiwan has weathered a global pandemic and faced global challenges, both political and economic, arising from the US-China trade war and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Through it all, Taiwan has persevered; we have continued to develop our economy, bolster our national strength, and raise our international profile while garnering more support – all unprecedented achievements. This is all because Taiwan’s fate has never been decided by the external environment, but by the unity of the Taiwanese people and the resolve to never give up. A one-of-a-kind global situation is creating new strategic opportunities for our one-of-a-kind Taiwanese people, bringing new hope. Taiwan’s foundation is solid; its strength is great. So as long as everyone remains steadfast in their convictions, is willing to work hand in hand, stands firm amidst uncertainty, and looks for ways to win within changing circumstances, Taiwan is certain to prevail in the test of our time yet again, for I am confident that there are no difficulties that Taiwan cannot overcome. Thank you.
G7 foreign ministers and the EU gave a joint statement on the margins of the Munich Security Conference on 15 February 2025.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy with G7 foreign ministers and Vice-President of the European Commission Kaja Kallas at the Munich Security Conference.
Joint statement:
The G7 Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America and the High Representative of the European Union, met on the margins of the Munich Security Conference for the first time under Canada’s 2025 Presidency.
The G7 members discussed Russia’s devastating war in Ukraine. They underscored their commitment to work together to help to achieve a durable peace and a strong and prosperous Ukraine and reaffirmed the need to develop robust security guarantees to ensure the war will not begin again.
The G7 members welcomed their discussion today with Andrii Sybiha, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine. They recalled the G7’s important contribution towards ending the war in Ukraine, including through measures pursuant to the G7 Joint Declaration of Support for Ukraine, by supporting Ukraine financially through the use of extraordinary revenues stemming from Russian Sovereign Assets, by imposing further cost on Russia, if they do not negotiate in good faith, through caps on oil and gas prices, and by making sanctions against Russia more effective. Any new, additional sanctions after February should be linked to whether the Russian Federation enters into real, good-faith efforts to bring an enduring end to the war against Ukraine that provides Ukraine with long-term security and stability as a sovereign, independent country. The G7 members reaffirmed their unwavering support for Ukraine in defending its freedom, sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity.
The G7 members discussed the provision to Russia of dual-use assistance by China and of military assistance by DPRK and Iran. They condemned all such support.
The G7 members discussed political, security and humanitarian issues in the Middle East, including in Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Iran, and their commitment to advancing regional peace and stability. They underscored the importance of a durable, Israeli-Palestinian peace. They reaffirmed their support for the full implementation of the ceasefire reached between Israel and Hamas, including for the release of all hostages and the expansion of humanitarian aid in Gaza. The G7 members stand behind the ongoing efforts of Egypt, Qatar and the United States in continuing to work towards a permanent ceasefire. They reiterated their unequivocal condemnation of Hamas and the need to ensure that Hamas neither reconstitutes militarily nor participates in governance. They recognized Israel’s inherent right to self-defence, consistent with international law.
The G7 members welcomed the outcomes of the International Conference on Syria, hosted by France on February 13, 2025. They reiterated their shared commitment to the people of Syria and their support for an inclusive political transition process, in the spirit of UN Security Council Resolution 2254. They welcomed, as well, positive developments in Lebanon, including the recent election of President Joseph Aoun, the designation of Nawaf Salam as Prime Minister, and the formation of a new government. The G7 members reaffirmed their commitment to both countries’ stability, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.
The G7 members unequivocally condemned Iran’s destabilizing actions, including its rapid advancement of uranium enrichment without credible civil justification, its facilitation of terrorism organizations and armed groups across the Middle East and Red Sea, its proliferation of ballistic missiles and drones, and its transnational repression and violation of fundamental human rights.
The G7 members reiterated their commitment to a free, open and secure Indo-Pacific region, grounded in respect for the rule of law and sovereignty. They strongly opposed any attempts to change unilaterally the status quo using force and underscored the importance of resolving disputes peacefully. They strongly opposed China’s attempts to restrict freedom of navigation through militarization and coercive activities in the East and South China Sea.
The G7 members expressed serious concern over the DPRK’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs and reaffirmed their commitment to the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. They demanded that the DPRK abandon all its nuclear weapons, existing nuclear programs, and any other weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ballistic missile programs in a complete, verifiable, and irreversible manner in accordance with all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions (UNSCRs). They underscored that direct DPRK support for Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine marks a dangerous expansion of the conflict, with serious consequences for European and Indo-Pacific security. They urged the DPRK to cease immediately all assistance for Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, including by withdrawing its troops. The called upon DPRK to resolve the abductions issue immediately.
The G7 members also discussed urgent situations of conflict and instability elsewhere in the world, including in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Sudan, and in Haiti and Venezuela.
The G7 Foreign Ministers looked forward to their meeting in Canada in Charlevoix, Quebec on March 12-14.
A spontaneous memorial of flowers in St Petersburg, Russia, on the day of Alexei Navalny’s death, February 16 2024.Aleksey Dushutin/Shutterstock
This is the best day of the past five months for me … This is my home … I am not afraid of anything and I urge you not to be afraid of anything either.
These were Alexei Navalny’s words after landing at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo Airport on January 17 2021. Russia’s leading opposition figure had spent the past months recovering in Germany from an attempt on his life by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB). Minutes after making his comments, Navalny was detained at border control. And he would remain behind bars until his death on February 16 2024, in the remote “Polar Wolf” penal colony within the Arctic Circle.
“Why did he return to Russia?” That’s the question I’m asked about Navalny most frequently. Wasn’t it a mistake to return to certain imprisonment, when he could have maintained his opposition to Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, from abroad?
But Navalny’s decision to return didn’t surprise me. I’ve researched and written about him extensively, including co-authoring Navalny: Putin’s Nemesis, Russia’s Future?, the first English-language, book-length account of his life and political activities. Defying the Kremlin by returning was a signature move, reflecting both his obstinacy and bravery. He wanted to make sure his supporters and activists in Russia did not feel abandoned, risking their lives while he lived a cushy life in exile.
The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.
Besides, Navalny wasn’t returning to certain imprisonment. A close ally of his, Vladimir Ashurkov, told me in May 2022 that his “incarceration in Russia was not a certainty. It was a probability, a scenario – but it wasn’t like he was walking into a certain long-term prison term.”
Also, Navalny hadn’t chosen to leave Russia in the first place. He was unconscious when taken by plane from Omsk to Berlin for treatment following his poisoning with the nerve agent Novichok in August 2020. Navalny had been consistent in saying he was a Russian politician who needed to remain in Russia to be effective.
In a subsequent interview, conducted in a forest on the outskirts of the German capital as he slowly recovered, Navalny said: “In people’s minds, if you leave the country, that means you’ve surrendered.”
Video: ACF.
Outrage, detention and death
Two days after Navalny’s final return to Russia, the Anti-Corruption Foundation (ACF) – the organisation he established in 2011 – published its biggest ever investigation. The YouTube video exploring “Putin’s palace” on the Black Sea coast achieved an extraordinary 100 million views within ten days. By the start of February 2021, polling suggested it had been watched by more than a quarter of all adults in Russia.
Outrage at Navalny’s detention, combined with this Putin investigation, got people on to the streets. On January 23 2021, 160,000 people turned out across Russia in events that did not have prior approval from the authorities. More than 40% of the participants said they were taking part in a protest for the first time.
But the Russian authorities were determined to also make it their last time. Law enforcement mounted an awesome display of strength, detaining protesters and sometimes beating them. The number of participants at protests on January 31 and February 2 declined sharply as a result.
Between Navalny’s return to Russia in January 2021 and his death in February 2024, aged 47, he faced criminal case after criminal case, adding years and years to his time in prison and increasing the severity of his detention. By the time of his death, he was in the harshest type of prison in the Russian penitentiary system – a “special regime” colony – and was frequently sent to a punishment cell.
The obvious intent was to demoralise Navalny, his team and supporters – making an example of him to spread fear among anyone else who might consider mounting a challenge to the Kremlin. But Navalny fought back, as described in his posthumously published memoir, Patriot. He made legal challenges against his jailers. He went on hunger strike. And he formed a union for his fellow prisoners.
He also used his court appearances to make clear his political views, including following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, declaring: “I am against this war. I consider it immoral, fratricidal, and criminal.”
Navalny’s final public appearance was via video link. He was in good spirits, with his trademark optimism and humour still on display. Tongue firmly in cheek, he asked the judge for financial help:
Your Honour, I will send you my personal account number so that you can use your huge salary as a federal judge to ‘warm up’ my personal account, because I am running out of money.
Navalny died the following day. According to the prison authorities, he collapsed after a short walk and lost consciousness. Although the Russian authorities claimed he had died of natural causes, documents published in September 2024 by The Insider – a Russia-focused, Latvia-based independent investigative website – suggest Navalny may have been poisoned.
A mourner adds her tribute to Alexei Navalny’s grave in Moscow after his burial on March 1 2024. Aleksey Dushutin/Shutterstock
Whether or not Putin directly ordered his death, Russia’s president bears responsibility – for leading a system that tried to assassinate Navalny in August 2020, and for allowing his imprisonment following Navalny’s return to Russia in conditions designed to crush him.
Commenting in March 2024, Putin stated that, just days before Navalny’s death, he had agreed for his most vocal opponent to be included in a prisoner swap – on condition the opposition figure never returned to Russia. “But, unfortunately,” Putin added, “what happened, happened.”
‘No one will forget’
Putin is afraid of Alexei, even after he killed him.
Yulia Navalnaya, Navalny’s wife, wrote these words on January 10 2025 after reading a curious letter. His mother, Lyudmila Navalnaya, had written to Rosfinmonitoring – a Russian state body – with a request for her son’s name to be removed from their list of “extremists and terrorists” now he was no longer alive.
The official response was straight from Kafka. Navalny’s name could not be removed as it had been added following the initiation of a criminal case against him. Even though he was dead, Rosfinmonitoring had not been informed about a termination of the case “in accordance with the procedure established by law”, so his name would have to remain.
This appears to be yet another instance of the Russian state exercising cruelty behind the veil of bureaucratic legality – such as when the prison authorities initially refused to release Navalny’s body to his mother after his death.
“Putin is doing this to scare you,” Yulia continued. “He wants you to be afraid to even mention Alexei, and gradually to forget his name. But no one will forget.”
Alexei Navalny and his wife, Yulia Navalnaya, at a protest rally in Moscow, May 2012. Dmitry Laudin/Shutterstock
Today, Navalny’s family and team continue his work outside of Russia – and are fighting to keep his name alive back home. But the odds are against them. Polling suggests the share of Russians who say they know nothing about Navalny or his activities roughly doubled to 30% between his return in January 2021 and his death three years later.
Navalny fought against an autocratic system – and paid the price with his life. Given the very real fears Russians may have of voicing support for a man still labelled an extremist by the Putin regime, it’s not easy to assess what people there really think of him and his legacy. But we will also never know how popular Navalny would have been in the “normal” political system he fought for.
What made Navalny the force he was?
Navalny didn’t mean for the humble yellow rubber duck to become such a potent symbol of resistance.
In March 2017, the ACF published its latest investigation into elite corruption, this time focusing on then-prime minister (and former president), Dmitry Medvedev. Navalny’s team members had become masters of producing slick videos that enabled their message to reach a broad audience. A week after posting, the film had racked up over 7 million views on YouTube – an extraordinary number at that time.
The film included shocking details of Medvedev’s alleged avarice, including yachts and luxury properties. In the centre of a large pond in one of these properties was a duck house, footage of which was captured by the ACF using a drone.
Video: ACF.
Such luxuries jarred with many people’s view of Medvedev as being a bit different to Putin and his cronies. As Navalny wrote in his memoir, Medvedev had previously seemed “harmless and incongruous”. (At the time, Medvedev’s spokeswoman said it was “pointless” to comment on the ACF investigation, suggesting the report was a “propaganda attack from an opposition figure and a convict”.)
But people were angry, and the report triggered mass street protests across Russia. They carried yellow ducks and trainers, a second unintended symbol from the film given Medvedev’s penchant for them.
Another reason why so many people came out to protest on March 26 2017 was the organising work carried out by Navalny’s movement.
The previous December, Navalny had announced his intention to run in the 2018 presidential election. As part of the campaign, he and his team created a network of regional headquarters to bring together supporters and train activists across Russia. Although the authorities had rejected Navalny’s efforts to register an official political party, this regional network functioned in much the same way, gathering like-minded people in support of an electoral candidate. And this infrastructure helped get people out on the streets.
The Kremlin saw this as a clear threat. According to a December 2020 investigation by Bellingcat, CNN, Der Spiegel and The Insider, the FSB assassination squad implicated in the Novichok poisoning of Navalny had started trailing him in January 2017 – one month after he announced his run for the presidency.
At the protests against Medvedev, the authorities’ growing intolerance of Navalny was also on display – he was detained, fined and sentenced to 15 days’ imprisonment.
The Medvedev investigation was far from the beginning of Navalny’s story as a thorn in the Kremlin’s side. But this episode brings together all of the elements that made Navalny the force he was: anti-corruption activism, protest mobilisation, attempts to run as a “normal” politician in a system rigged against him, and savvy use of social media to raise his profile in all of these domains.
Courting controversy
In Patriot, Navalny writes that he always “felt sure a broad coalition was needed to fight Putin”. Yet over the years, his attempts to form that coalition led to some of the most controversial points of his political career.
In a 2007 video, Navalny referred to himself as a “certified nationalist”, advocating for the deportation of illegal immigrants, albeit without using violence and distancing himself from neo-Nazism. In the video, he says: “We have the right to be Russians in Russia, and we’ll defend that right.”
Although alienating some, Navalny was attempting to present a more acceptable face of nationalism, and he hoped to build a bridge between nationalists and liberals in taking on the Kremlin’s burgeoning authoritarianism.
But the prominence of nationalism in Navalny’s political identity varied markedly over time, probably reflecting his shifting estimations of which platform could attract the largest support within Russia. By the time of his thwarted run in the 2018 presidential election, nationalist talking points were all but absent from his rhetoric.
However, some of these former comments and positions continue to influence how people view him. For example, following Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, Navalny tried to take a pragmatic stance. While acknowledging Russia’s flouting of international law, he said that Crimea was “now part of the Russian Federation” and would “never become part of Ukraine in the foreseeable future”.
Many Ukrainians take this as clear evidence that Navalny was a Russian imperialist. Though he later revised his position, saying Crimea should be returned to Ukraine, some saw this as too little, too late. But others were willing to look past the more controversial parts of his biography, recognising that Navalny represented the most effective domestic challenge to Putin.
Another key attempt to build a broad political coalition was Navalny’s Smart Voting initiative. This was a tactical voting project in which Navalny’s team encouraged voters to back the individual thought best-placed to defeat the ruling United Russia candidate, regardless of the challenger’s ideological position.
The project wasn’t met with universal approval. Some opposition figures and voters baulked at, or flatly refused to consider, the idea of voting for people whose ideological positions they found repugnant – or whom they viewed as being “fake” opposition figures, entirely in bed with the authorities. (This makes clear that Navalny was never the leader of the political opposition in Russia; he was, rather, the leading figure of a fractious constellation of individuals and groups.)
But others relished the opportunity to make rigged elections work in their favour. And there is evidence that Smart Voting did sometimes work, including in the September 2020 regional and local elections, for which Navalny had been campaigning when he was poisoned with Novichok.
In an astonishing moment captured on film during his recovery in Germany, Navalny speaks to an alleged member of the FSB squad sent to kill him. Pretending to be the aide to a senior FSB official, Navalny finds out that the nerve agent had been placed in his underpants.
How do Russians feel about Navalny now?
It’s like a member of the family has died.
This is what one Russian friend told me after hearing of Navalny’s death a year ago. Soon afterwards, the Levada Center – an independent Russian polling organisation – conducted a nationally representative survey to gauge the public’s reaction to the news.
The poll found that Navalny’s death was the second-most mentioned event by Russian people that month, after the capture of the Ukrainian city of Avdiivka by Russian troops. But when asked how they felt about his death, 69% of respondents said they had “no particular feelings” either way – while only 17% said they felt “sympathy” or “pity”.
And that broadly fits with Navalny’s approval ratings in Russia. After his poisoning in 2020, 20% of Russians said they approved of his activities – but this was down to 11% by February 2024.
Video: BBC.
Of course, these numbers must be taken for what they are: polling in an authoritarian state regarding a figure vilified and imprisoned by the regime, during a time of war and amid draconian restrictions on free speech. To what extent the drop in support for Navalny was real, rather than reflecting the increased fear people had in voicing their approval for an anti-regime figure, is hard to say with certainty.
When asked why they liked Navalny, 31% of those who approved of his activities said he spoke “the truth”, “honestly” or “directly”. For those who did not approve of his activities, 22% said he was “paid by the west”, “represented” the west’s interests, that he was a “foreign agent”, a “traitor” or a “puppet”.
The Kremlin had long tried to discredit Navalny as a western-backed traitor. After Navalny’s 2020 poisoning, Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said that “experts from the United States’ Central Intelligence Agency are working with him”. The Russian state claimed that, rather than a patriot exposing official malfeasance with a view to strengthening his country, Navalny was a CIA stooge intent on destroying Russia.
Peskov provided no evidence to back up this claim – and the official propaganda wasn’t believed by all. Thousands of Russians defied the authorities by coming out to pay their respects at Navalny’s funeral on March 1 2024. Many, if not all, knew this was a significant risk. Police employed video footage to track down members of the funeral crowd, including by using facial recognition technology.
The first person to be detained was a Muscovite the police claimed they heard shouting “Glory to the heroes!” – a traditional Ukrainian response to the declaration “Glory to Ukraine!”, but this time referencing Navalny. She spent a night in a police station before being fined for “displaying a banned symbol”.
Putin always avoided mentioning Navalny’s name in public while he was alive – instead referring to him as “this gentleman”, “the character you mentioned”, or the “Berlin patient”. (The only recorded instance of Putin using Navalny’s name in public when he was alive was in 2013.)
However, having been re-elected president in 2024 and with Navalny dead, Putin finally broke his long-held practice, saying: “As for Navalny, yes he passed away – this is always a sad event.” It was as if the death of his nemesis diminished the potency of his name – and the challenge that Navalny had long presented to Putin.
Nobody can become another Navalny
Someone else will rise up and take my place. I haven’t done anything unique or difficult. Anyone could do what I’ve done.
So wrote Navalny in the memoir published after his death. But that hasn’t happened: no Navalny 2.0 has yet emerged. And it’s no real surprise. The Kremlin has taken clear steps to ensure nobody can become another Navalny within Russia.
In 2021, the authorities made a clear decision to destroy Navalny’s organisations within Russia, including the ACF and his regional network. Without the organisational infrastructure and legal ability to function in Russia, no figure has been able to take his place directly.
More broadly, the fate of Navalny and his movement has had a chilling effect on the opposition landscape. So too have other steps taken by the authorities.
Russia has become markedly more repressive since the start of its war on Ukraine. The human rights NGO First Department looked into the number of cases relating to “treason”, “espionage” and “confidential cooperation with a foreign state” since Russia introduced the current version of its criminal code in 1997. Of the more than 1,000 cases, 792 – the vast majority – were initiated following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Russian law enforcement has also used nebulous anti-extremism and anti-terrorism legislation to crack down on dissenting voices. Three of Navalny’s lawyers were sentenced in January 2025 for participating in an “extremist organisation”, as the ACF was designated by a Moscow court in June 2021. The Russian legislature has also passed a barrage of legislation relating to so-called “foreign agents”, to tarnish the work of those the regime regards as foreign-backed “fifth columnists”.
Mass street protests are largely a thing of the past in Russia. Restrictions were placed on public gatherings during the COVID pandemic – but these rules were applied selectively, with opposition individuals and groups being targeted. And opportunities for collective action were further reduced following the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Freedom of speech has also come under assault. Article 29, point five of the Russian constitution states: “Censorship shall be prohibited.” But in September 2024, Kremlin spokesperson Peskov said: “In the state of war that we are in, restrictions are justified, and censorship is justified.”
Legislation passed very soon after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine made it illegal to comment on the Russian military’s activities truthfully – and even to call the war a war.
YouTube – the platform so central to Navalny’s ability to spread his message – has been targeted. Without banning it outright – perhaps afraid of the public backlash this might cause – the Russian state media regulator, Roskomnadzor, has slowed down internet traffic to the site within Russia. The result has been a move of users to other websites supporting video content, including VKontakte – a Russian social media platform.
In short, conditions in Russia are very different now compared to when Navalny first emerged. The relative freedom of the 2000s and 2010s gave him the space to challenge the corruption and authoritarianism of an evolving system headed by Putin. But this space has shrunk over time, to the point where no room remains for a figure like him within Russia.
In 2019, Navalny told Ivan Zhdanov, who is now director of the ACF: “We changed the regime, but not in the way we wanted.” So, did Navalny and his team push the Kremlin to become more authoritarian – making it not only intolerant of him but also any possible successor?
There may be some truth in this. And yet, the drastic steps taken by the regime following the start of the war on Ukraine suggest there were other, even more significant factors that have laid bare the violent nature of Putin’s personal autocracy – and the president’s disdain for dissenters.
Plenty for Russians to be angry about
How can we win the war when dedushka [grandpa] is a moron?
In June 2023, Evgeny Prigozhin – a long-time associate of Putin and head of the private military Wagner Group – staged an armed rebellion, marching his forces on the Russian capital. This was not a full-blown political movement against Putin. But the target of Prigozhin’s invective against Russia’s military leadership had become increasingly blurry, testing the taboo of direct criticism of the president – who is sometimes referred to, disparagingly, as “grandpa” in Russia.
And Prigozhin paid the price. In August 2023, he was killed when the private jet he was flying in crashed after an explosion on board. Afterwards, Putin referred to Prigozhin as a “talented person” who “made serious mistakes in life”.
In the west, opposition to the Kremlin is often associated with more liberal figures like Navalny. Yet the most consequential domestic challenge to Putin’s rule came from a very different part of the ideological spectrum – a figure in Prigozhin leading a segment of Russian society that wanted the Kremlin to prosecute its war on Ukraine even more aggressively.
Video: BBC.
Today, there is plenty for Russians to be angry about, and Putin knows it. He recently acknowledged an “overheating of the economy”. This has resulted in high inflation, in part due to all the resources being channelled into supporting the war effort. Such cost-of-living concerns weigh more heavily than the war on the minds of most Russians.
A favourite talking point of the Kremlin is how Putin imposed order in Russia following the “wild 1990s” – characterised by economic turbulence and symbolised by then-president Boris Yeltsin’s public drunkenness. Many Russians attribute the stability and rise in living standards they experienced in the 2000s with Putin’s rule – and thank him for it by providing support for his continued leadership.
The current economic problems are an acute worry for the Kremlin because they jeopardise this basic social contract struck with the Russian people. In fact, one way the Kremlin tried to discredit Navalny was by comparing him with Yeltsin, suggesting he posed the same threats as a failed reformer. In his memoir, Navalny concedes that “few things get under my skin more”.
Although originally a fan of Yeltsin, Navalny became an ardent critic. His argument was that Yeltsin and those around him squandered the opportunity to make Russia a “normal” European country.
Navalny also wanted Russians to feel entitled to more. Rather than be content with their relative living standards compared with the early post-Soviet period, he encouraged them to imagine the level of wealth citizens could enjoy based on Russia’s extraordinary resources – but with the rule of law, less corruption, and real democratic processes.
‘Think of other possible Russias’
When looking at forms of criticism and dissent in Russia today, we need to distinguish between anti-war, anti-government, and anti-Putin activities.
Despite the risk of harsh consequences, there are daily forms of anti-war resistance, including arson attacks on military enlistment offices. Some are orchestrated from Ukraine, with Russians blackmailed into acting. But other cases are likely to be forms of domestic resistance.
Criticism of the government is still sometimes possible, largely because Russia has a “dual executive” system, consisting of a prime minister and presidency. This allows the much more powerful presidency to deflect blame to the government when things go wrong.
There are nominal opposition parties in Russia – sometimes referred to as the “systemic opposition”, because they are loyal to the Kremlin and therefore tolerated by the system. Within the State Duma, these parties often criticise particular government ministries for apparent failings. But they rarely, if ever, now dare criticise Putin directly.
Nothing anywhere close to the challenge presented by Navalny appears on the horizon in Russia – at either end of the political spectrum. But the presence of clear popular grievances, and the existence of organisations (albeit not Navalny’s) that could channel this anger should the Kremlin’s grip loosen, mean we cannot write off all opposition in Russia.
Navalny’s wife, Yulia, has vowed to continue her husband’s work. And his team in exile maintain focus on elite corruption in Russia, now from their base in Vilnius, Lithuania. The ACF’s most recent investigation is on Igor Sechin, CEO of the oil company Rosneft.
But some have argued this work is no longer as relevant as it was. Sam Greene, professor in Russian politics at King’s College London, captured this doubt in a recent Substack post:
[T]here is a palpable sense that these sorts of investigations may not be relevant to as many people as they used to be, given everything that has transpired since the mid-2010s, when they were the bread and butter of the Anti-Corruption Foundation. Some … have gone as far as to suggest that they have become effectively meaningless … and thus that Team Navalny should move on.
Navalny’s team are understandably irritated by suggestions they’re no longer as effective as they once were. But it’s important to note that this criticism has often been sharpest within Russia’s liberal opposition. The ACF has been rocked, for example, by recent accusations from Maxim Katz, one such liberal opposition figure, that the organisation helped “launder the reputations” of two former bank owners. In their response, posted on YouTube, the ACF referred to Katz’s accusations as “lies” – but this continued squabbling has left some Russians feeling “disillusioned and unrepresented”.
So, what will Navalny’s long-term legacy be? Patriot includes a revealing section on Mikhail Gorbachev – the last leader of the Soviet Union, whom Navalny describes as “unpopular in Russia, and also in our family”. He continues:
Usually, when you tell foreigners this, they are very surprised, because Gorbachev is thought of as the person who gave Eastern Europe back its freedom and thanks to whom Germany was reunited. Of course, that is true … but within Russia and the USSR he was not particularly liked.
At the moment, there is a similar split in perceptions of Navalny. Internationally, he was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, awarded the Sakharov Prize by the European Parliament, and a documentary about him won an Oscar.
But there are also those outside of Russia who remain critical: “Navalny’s life has brought no benefit to the Ukrainian victory; instead, he has caused considerable harm,” wrote one Ukrainian academic. “He fuelled the illusion in the west that democracy in Russia is possible.”
Trailer for the Oscar-winning documentary Navalny.
Inside Russia, according to Levada Center polling shortly after his death, 53% of Russians thought Navalny played “no special role” in the history of the country, while 19% said he played a “rather negative” role. Revealingly, when commenting on Navalny’s death, one man in Moscow told RFE/RL’s Russian Service: “I think that everyone who is against Russia is guilty, even if they are right.”
But, for a small minority in Russia, Navalny will go down as a messiah-like figure who miraculously cheated death in 2020, then made the ultimate sacrifice in his battle of good and evil with the Kremlin. This view may have been reinforced by Navalny’s increasing openness about his Christian faith.
Ultimately, Navalny’s long-term status in Russia will depend on the nature of the political system after Putin has gone. Since it seems likely that authoritarianism will outlast Putin, a more favourable official story about Navalny is unlikely to emerge any time soon. However, how any post-Putin regime tries to make sense of Navalny’s legacy will tell us a lot about that regime.
While he was alive, Navalny stood for the freer Russia in which he had emerged as a leading opposition figure – and also what he called the “Beautiful Russia of the Future”. Perhaps, after his death, his lasting legacy in Russia remains the ability for some to think – if only in private – of other possible Russias.
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
Ben Noble has previously received funding from the British Academy and the Leverhulme Trust. He is an Associate Fellow of Chatham House.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi shakes hands with his Ukrainian counterpart Andrii Sybiha in Munich, Germany, February 15, 2025. [Photo/Chinese Foreign Ministry]
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi reaffirmed China’s commitment to peace and dialogue during a meeting with his Ukrainian counterpart Andrii Sybiha in Munich, Germany on Saturday, held on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference.
Wang, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China’s Central Committee, emphasized the long-standing friendship and strategic partnership between China and Ukraine, established in 2011. He noted that, despite challenging global circumstances, China remains Ukraine’s largest trading partner, a testament to the enduring potential for cooperation between the two nations.
Highlighting China’s view of Ukraine as both a friend and a partner, Wang expressed China’s willingness to work with Ukraine to overcome challenges and further develop bilateral ties. He also expressed hope that Ukraine would continue to ensure the safety of Chinese institutions and citizens within its borders.
On the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, Wang reiterated China’s firm stance on promoting peace and dialogue. He emphasized the principles laid out by President Xi Jinping, which he said have proven to be objective, impartial, and pragmatic in guiding the resolution process.
China will remain committed to these principles, continuing to play a constructive role in the political settlement of the crisis and the pursuit of peace, Wang affirmed. He added that China supports all efforts focused on peace and advocates for a fair, lasting, and binding peace agreement accepted by all parties involved. Wang also noted that the “Friends of Peace” platform, led by China and other Global South countries, will continue its work to foster international consensus on peace and dialogue.
Sybiha, for his part, acknowledged the strong bilateral ties and friendly relations between the peoples of Ukraine and China. He stressed Ukraine’s adherence to the one-China principle and its readiness to strengthen exchanges and deepen its strategic partnership with China. Sybiha also assured that Ukraine would continue to protect Chinese institutions and citizens.
Furthermore, Sybiha expressed Ukraine’s respect for China’s global influence and its appreciation for China’s balanced approach to international issues. He called on China to play a key role in achieving comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the region.
– having regard to its previous resolutions on Georgia, in particular that of 28 November 2024 on Georgia’s worsening democratic crisis following the recent parliamentary elections and alleged electoral fraud(1),
– having regard to Georgia’s status as an EU candidate country, granted by the European Council at its summit of 14 and 15 December 2023,
– having regard to Article 78 of the Georgian Constitution, which demands the implementation of all possible measures to guarantee Georgia’s complete integration into the EU and NATO,
– having regard to the final report of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) on the parliamentary elections held in Georgia on 26 October 2024,
– having regard to Rules 136(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,
A. whereas the democratic backsliding in Georgia has dramatically accelerated since the parliamentary elections of 26 October 2024, which were deeply flawed and marked by grave irregularities, and failed to meet international democratic standards and Georgia’s OSCE commitments; whereas these elections violated the democratic norms and standards set for free and fair elections, failing to reflect the will of the people and rendering the resulting ‘parliament’, and subsequently the ‘president’, devoid of any democratic legitimacy; whereas from the very beginning of its activity, the current Georgian parliament has operated as a one-party (Georgian Dream) organ, which is incompatible with the essence of pluralistic parliamentary democracy;
B. whereas Article 2 of the EU-Georgia Association Agreement(2) concerns the general principles of the agreement, which include democratic principles, human rights and fundamental freedoms;
C. whereas Article 78 of the Georgian Constitution states that the constitutional bodies must take all measures within the scope of their competences to ensure the full integration of Georgia into the European Union;
D. whereas the President of Georgia, Salome Zourabichvili, publicly condemned the parliamentary elections as rigged, declared that she would not recognise them and called for an international investigation; whereas the current Georgian regime, led by the Georgian Dream party and its founder, Bidzina Ivanishvili, has orchestrated an unconstitutional usurpation of power, systematically dismantling democratic institutions, undermining judicial independence and eroding fundamental freedoms and the rule of law, thereby deepening Georgia’s political and constitutional crisis;
E. whereas Georgia has officially held the status of EU candidate country since December 2023; whereas on 28 November 2024, Irakli Kobakhidze announced that Georgia would delay initiating accession talks with the EU and reject its financial assistance until the end of 2028, disregarding the country’s constitutional commitment to European integration and effectively undermining Georgia’s sovereign Euro-Atlantic aspirations;
F. whereas on 28 November 2024, peaceful mass anti-government protests began across the country, demanding new, free and fair elections, an end to political violence and repression, and the return of the country to its European path; whereas the protests have been taking place without interruption for over 75 days;
G. whereas on 14 December 2024, the de facto parliament held a ‘presidential election’ with a single candidate from the Georgian Dream party, former footballer Mikheil Kavelashvili, elected with 224 out of 225 votes cast;
H. whereas Georgia’s self-appointed authorities have plunged the country into a fully fledged constitutional and political crisis, as well as a human rights and democracy crisis; whereas this has been marked by the brutal repression of peaceful protesters, political opponents and media representatives, with judges, prosecutors and police officers actively fabricating politically motivated administrative and criminal charges against protesters, journalists and opposition figures detained during peaceful anti-government demonstrations; whereas, as of December 2024, more than 460 people have been arrested or punished since the protests began, with this number growing by the day;
I. whereas riot police deliberately lacking force identification numbers have forcefully dispersed protesters with tear gas and water cannons; whereas numerous journalists have reported being targeted and beaten, and having their equipment destroyed and personal items stolen; whereas dozens of protesters have been brutally assaulted, and several hundred people have been arrested; whereas Georgia’s Public Defender has revealed that 80 % of those detained reported experiencing violence and inhumane treatment at the hands of law enforcement officers; whereas despite international condemnation, the illegitimate Georgian Government has awarded medals to officials involved in the crackdown;
J. whereas independent media outlets, including TV Formula, TV Mtavari and TV Pirveli, face severe operational and financial constraints due to the regime’s interference, while dozens of media representatives are being subjected to various forms of intense physical and psychological pressure; whereas numerous violent attacks on journalists have been documented, including the severe beatings of Aleksandre Keshelashvili, Maka Chikhladze and Giorgi Shetsiruli, and the harassment of detained journalist Saba Kevkhishvili; whereas on 12 January 2025, the Georgian authorities arrested journalist Mzia Amaghlobeli, who has been in pre-trial detention since then and is on hunger strike in solidarity with all political prisoners in Georgia; whereas she faces between four and seven years in prison;
K. whereas, on the night of 14 January 2025, Giorgi Gakharia, opposition leader of the For Georgia party and former Prime Minister, and Zviad Koridze, journalist and Transparency International activist, were physically assaulted by Georgian Dream officials in separate incidents at the same venue in Batumi;
L. whereas on 2 February 2025, Nika Melia, a leader of the pro-European Akhali party, and Gigi Ugulava, the former mayor of Tbilisi, were arrested during the anti-government protests and subjected to physical violence in detention; whereas on 12 January 2025, Elene Khoshtaria, leader of the Droa political movement, was detained in Batumi;
M. whereas the de facto Georgian authorities have used disproportionate force and excessive violence against peaceful protesters and resorted to arbitrary mass arrests to thwart dissent; whereas independent human rights organisations have reported the systemic mistreatment of detainees, including torture; whereas to date, not a single law enforcement official involved in the brutal crackdowns, arbitrary arrests and mistreatment has been brought to justice;
N. whereas the self-appointed authorities introduced new draconian legislation that came into force on 30 December 2024 and amended the Criminal Code, the Code of Administrative Offences and the Law on Assemblies and Manifestations, imposing further arbitrary restrictions on the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, introducing, among other things, hefty fines for putting up protest slogans and posters, and granting police the power to detain individuals ‘preventively’ for 48 hours on suspicion of planning to violate the rules governing public assembly; whereas on 3 February 2025, the Georgian Dream party unveiled further draft legislation designed to tighten control, ramping up penalties for a variety of offences directly targeting protestors, critics and political dissent, such as harsher punishments for ‘insulting officials’, the criminalisation of road blocks and an increase in the duration of administrative detention from 15 to 60 days;
O. whereas on 27 January 2025, the Council decided to suspend parts of the EU-Georgia visa facilitation agreement for Georgian diplomats and officials, but failed to impose individual sanctions in response to the continued crackdown; whereas the Hungarian and Slovak Governments have been consistently blocking impactful EU-wide sanctions, preventing the remaining 25 Member States (EU-25) from effectively introducing sanctions against the self-appointed Georgian authorities;
P. whereas several Member States, including Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia and Czechia, have imposed bilateral sanctions on some Georgian politicians, judges and other officials responsible for the brutal crackdown on protesters, violations of human rights and abuse of the rule of law; whereas in December 2024, the United States sanctioned Bidzina Ivanishvili, alongside Georgia’s ‘Minister of Internal Affairs’ Vakhtang Gomelauri and Deputy Head of the Special Tasks Department Mirza Kezevadze, for their involvement in brutal crackdowns on media representatives, opposition figures and protesters; whereas the UK and Ukraine have imposed similar sanctions on high-level Georgian officials; whereas Ivanishvili, through hastily adopted laws tailored to his personal situation, is moving his offshore assets to Georgia in anticipation of further sanctions;
Q. whereas on 29 January 2025, Georgian Dream announced that it would withdraw its delegation from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) after it demanded new, genuinely democratic parliamentary elections, the release of political prisoners and accountability for perpetrators of violence; whereas UN experts have condemned the pattern of repression and human rights violations in Georgia, while the OSCE has called this suppression a serious breach of the right to freedom of assembly;
R. whereas the ruling Georgian Dream party convened the new parliament in violation of the country’s constitution, resulting in a boycott of parliament by the opposition; whereas on 5 February 2025, the self-appointed ‘parliament’ voted to approve the early termination of the mandates of 49 out of 61 members of parliament, representing the Coalition for Change, Strong Georgia and the United National Movement, in order to strip them of their immunity and facilitate their arrest and prosecution; whereas the same ‘parliament’ established a commission to punish former ruling party United National Movement;
S. whereas a growing number of civil servants have been dismissed after speaking out against the halting of Georgia’s EU accession process; whereas Georgian Dream has amended laws on public service, simplifying procedures to dismiss public servants, several of whom have been dismissed for participating in protests, in a clear attempt to silence critical voices;
1. Condemns the Georgian Dream ‘authorities’ and urges them to immediately cease the violent repression of peaceful protesters, political opponents and media representatives; underlines that Georgia’s self-appointed authorities are currently violating fundamental freedoms, basic human rights and the core international obligations of the country, thereby undermining decades of democratic reforms driven by the country’s political class and civil society; considers Georgia as a state captured by the illegitimate Georgian Dream regime; expresses deep regret over the fact that the ruling Georgian Dream party has abandoned its path towards European integration and NATO membership; recalls that the ongoing democratic backsliding and adoption of anti-democratic laws has effectively suspended Georgia’s EU integration process; reiterates its unwavering support for the Georgian people’s legitimate European aspirations and their wish to live in a prosperous and democratic country;
2. Does not recognise the self-proclaimed authorities of the Georgian Dream party established following the rigged election of 26 October 2024, which was neither free nor fair, was held in violation of democratic norms and standards, and did not reflect the will of the people of Georgia; underlines that the extensive electoral fraud has undermined the integrity of the election process, cast doubt on the legitimacy of the result and eroded public trust, both domestically and internationally, in any new government;
3. Calls for the EU and its Member States, as well as national parliaments and interparliamentary institutions, not to recognise the legitimacy of the Georgian Dream one-party parliament and their appointed president; calls, therefore, on the international community to join the boycott of the self-proclaimed Georgian authorities;
4. Continues to recognise Salome Zourabichvili as the legitimate President of Georgia and representative of the Georgian people; praises her efforts to peacefully steer the country back towards a democratic and European path of development; calls on the President of the European Council to invite President Zourabichvili to represent Georgia at an upcoming European Council meeting and at the next European Political Community summit;
5. Underlines that the settlement of the current political and constitutional crisis in Georgia can only be achieved by way of new parliamentary elections; demands that new elections take place in Georgia within the next few months in an improved electoral environment, overseen by an independent and impartial election administration and monitored through diligent international observation to guarantee a genuinely fair, free and transparent process; encourages the Member States and EU officials to firmly demand new elections and to make any future engagement explicitly conditional on setting a new date for parliamentary elections and establishing a mechanism to ensure they are free and fair;
6. Calls on the Council and the Member States, particularly the EU-25 on a bilateral and coordinated basis, to impose immediate and targeted personal sanctions on Bidzina Ivanishvili, his family and his companies, and to freeze all his assets within the EU for his role in the deterioration of the political process in Georgia, enabling democratic backsliding and acting against the country’s constitutionally declared interests of Euro-Atlantic integration; calls on the French Government to strip Bidzina Ivanishvili of the Legion of Honour and impose individual sanctions on him; welcomes, in this regard, the sanctions imposed bilaterally by Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Czechia, as well as those already imposed by the US and the UK;
7. Calls for the EU and its Member States, in particular the EU-25 on a bilateral and coordinated basis, to impose personal sanctions on the officials and political leaders in Georgia responsible for democratic backsliding, electoral fraud, human rights violations and the persecution of political opponents and activists, including Irakli Kobakhidze, Shalva Papuashvili, Vakhtang Gomelauri, Mayor of Tbilisi and Secretary General of the ruling Georgian Dream party Kakha Kaladze, and Chair of the Georgian Dream party Irakli Garibashvili; calls for them to extend these sanctions to judges, including those of the Constitutional Court of Georgia who are passing politically motivated sentences, and representatives of the law enforcement services, as well as to financial enablers tacitly or openly supporting the regime and the owners of regime-aligned media outlets, including TV Imedi, Pos TV and Rustavi 2 TV, for their role in spreading disinformation and seeking to manipulate public discourse in order to sustain the current ruling party’s authoritarian rule;
8. Calls on the Council and the Member States to impose sanctions on Bidzina Ivanishvili’s network of enablers, elite entourage, corrupt financial operatives, propagandists and those facilitating the repressive state apparatus, including, among others, Ekaterine Khvedelidze, Uta Ivanishvili, Tsotne Ivanishvili, Bera Ivanishvili, Gvantsa Ivanishvili, Alexander Ivanishvili, Shmagi Kobakhidze, Ucha Mamatsashvili, Natia Turnava, Ivane Chkhartishvili, Sulkhan Papashvili, Giorgi Kapanadze, Tornike Rizhvadze, Ilia Tsulaia, Kakha Bekauri, Lasha Natsvlishvili, Vasil Maglaperidze, Grigol Liluashvili, Mikheil Chinchaladze, Levan Murusidze, Irakli Rukhadze, Tinatin Berdzenishvili, Tamaz Gaiashvili, Anton Obolashvili and Gocha Enukidze;
9. Maintains the view that the measures taken so far by the EU in response to the flagrant democratic backsliding and reneging on previous commitments does not yet fully reflect the severity of the situation in Georgia and the latest developments; welcomes the Council’s decision to suspend visa-free travel for Georgian diplomats and officials, but considers it as only a first step, which must be followed by tougher measures; deplores the obstruction by the Hungarian and Slovak Governments of the Council decisions on introducing sanctions against individuals responsible for democratic backsliding in Georgia;
10. Emphasises that respect for fundamental rights is vital to the EU’s visa liberalisation benchmarks; reiterates its call on the Commission and the Council to review Georgia’s visa-free status, with the possibility of suspension if it is considered that EU standards on democratic governance and freedoms are not being upheld;
11. Strongly condemns the brutal violence and repression used by Georgia’s ruling regime against peaceful protesters since 28 November 2024; calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners and those detained during the anti-government protests; demands the release of journalist Mzia Amaghlobeli, who has been on hunger strike for over four weeks now because of her unjust detention and risks facing critical, irreversible and life-threatening consequences; denounces the assault and beating of former Prime Minister Giorgi Gakharia, resulting in his hospitalisation, followed by the arrest on 2 February 2025 of political leaders including Nika Melia and Gigi Ugulava, as a shocking escalation of state-orchestrated violence by Georgian Dream and its allies against peaceful demonstrators and political opponents; reminds of the detention of Elene Khoshtaria on 12 January 2025 in Batumi;
12. Reiterates its solidarity with the people of Georgia and its vibrant civil society in fighting for their legitimate democratic rights and for a European future for their country; urges the Georgian Government to reverse its current political course and return to implementing the will of the Georgian people for continued democratic reforms that would reopen the prospect of future EU membership;
13. Strongly condemns the enactment of draconian legislation that imposes unjustified restrictions on freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly, and demands the annulment of such recently adopted repressive legislation; urges the Georgian authorities to immediately and unconditionally release all individuals detained for peacefully exercising their fundamental rights to freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly, and to ensure prompt, thorough and impartial investigations into all allegations of unlawful and disproportionate use of force by the law enforcement agencies; considers that the Georgian justice system has been weaponised to stifle dissent, instil fear and silence free speech;
14. Calls for the ‘Georgian authorities’ to take immediate action to ensure the safety and freedom of journalists and to investigate all instances of violence and misconduct by law enforcement agencies; emphasises the importance of fostering a democratic environment where media, civil society and the opposition can operate freely without fear of retaliation or censorship;
15. Demands an independent, transparent and impartial investigation into police brutality and the excessive use of force against peaceful demonstrators; calls for those responsible for human rights violations, including law enforcement and government officials ordering acts of repression, to be held fully accountable before the law;
16. Denounces the launch of an investigation by the Prosecutor’s Office on 8 February 2025 into non-governmental organisations accused of aggravated sabotage, attempted sabotage and assisting foreign and foreign-controlled organisations in hostile activities aimed at undermining the state interests of Georgia, for which they could receive multiple-year sentences; views this action as further escalation of repression by the regime, misuse of the judicial system and accelerated democratic backsliding;
17. Condemns the broader campaign of attacks by the Georgian authorities vilifying civil society organisations and reputable international donors that support democracy, the rule of law and the protection of human rights in Georgia;
18. Denounces the termination by Georgian Dream of the mandates of 49 opposition members of parliament as a sign of further democratic backsliding, and considers this the latest move in Georgian Dream’s attack on political pluralism in the country;
19. Welcomes PACE’s decision to challenge the credentials of Georgia’s parliamentary delegation due to democratic backsliding and human rights abuses; supports PACE’s call for Georgia to immediately initiate an inclusive process involving all political and social actors, including the ruling party, the opposition and civil society, to urgently address the deficiencies and shortcomings noted during the recent parliamentary elections and to create an electoral environment conducive to new, genuinely democratic elections to be announced in the coming months;
20. Notes that Georgia, once a front runner for Euro-Atlantic integration, is undergoing an accelerated process of democratic backsliding, in a seemingly deliberate attempt to demonstrate that the will of the Georgian people no longer determines the country’s future, which could result in the country taking the Belarussian path of political development, transitioning from the current authoritarian state to a dictatorial regime;
21. Deplores the decision of Irakli Kobakhidze to suspend accession talks and reject EU funding until the end of 2028; recalls that all polls consistently show the overwhelming support of the Georgian population for a Euro-Atlantic future; expresses strong support for the Euro-Atlantic aspirations of the Georgian people;
22. Calls for an immediate and comprehensive audit of EU policy towards Georgia due to the democratic backsliding; calls on the Commission to review the EU-Georgia Association Agreement in the light of the self-declared Georgian authorities’ breach of the general principles, as laid down in Article 2, namely respect for democratic principles, the rule of law and fundamental freedoms; points out that non-fulfilment of obligations may result in the conditional suspension of economic cooperation and privileges afforded by the Agreement;
23. Welcomes the Commission’s decision to cease all budgetary support to the Georgian authorities and to suspend the initiation of any future investment projects; encourages the Commission to terminate all financial support for ongoing projects; calls for a moratorium on all investment projects in the field of connectivity; calls on the Commission to start identifying economic sectors of relevance to the oligarchic interests that support and sustain the current authoritarian rule, with a view to a potential future decision about restrictive measures or economic sanctions; calls on the Commission to start identifying connectivity projects that support and sustain the current authoritarian rule and to consider their suspension until a rerun of the parliamentary elections;
24. Condemns the climate of intimidation and polarisation fuelled by statements by Georgian Government representatives and political leaders, as well as by attacks against political pluralism, including through disturbing cases of intimidation and violence against the Georgian democratic political forces and repeated threats to ban opposition parties, to arrest their leaders and even ordinary supporters, and to silence dissent; underlines that anything but the full restoration of Georgia’s democratic standards will entail a further deterioration of EU-Georgia relations, make any move towards EU accession impossible and result in additional sanctions;
25. Calls on the Commission to swiftly redirect the frozen EUR 120 million originally intended as support for the Georgian authorities to enhance the EU’s support for Georgia’s civil society, in particular the non-governmental sector and independent media, which are increasingly coming under undue pressure from the ruling political party and the authorities, as well as to support programmes supporting democratic resilience and electoral integrity; calls for the EU’s funding mechanisms to be adjusted to take into account the needs that arise in a more hostile and anti-democratic environment; highlights the urgency of the need to support civil society in the light of growing repression and the suspension of activities of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), and therefore urges the Commission to ramp up support without delay;
26. Expresses deep concern about the increasing Russian influence in the country and about the Georgian Dream government’s actions in pursuing a policy of rapprochement and collaboration with Russia, in spite of its creeping occupation of Georgian territory; deplores, in this regard, the growing anti-Western and hostile rhetoric of the Georgian Dream party’s representatives towards Georgia’s strategic Western partners, including the EU, and its MEPs and officials, and Georgian Dream’s promotion of Russian disinformation and manipulation;
27. Strongly reiterates its urgent demand for the immediate release of former President Mikheil Saakashvili on humanitarian grounds, specifically for the purpose of seeking medical treatment abroad; emphasises that the self-appointed authorities bear full and undeniable responsibility for the life, health, safety and well-being of former President Mikheil Saakashvili and must be held fully accountable for any harm that befalls him; calls, furthermore, on the Georgian Dream authorities to ensure that Members of the European Parliament are granted unhindered access to Mikheil Saakashvili;
28. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the self-appointed authorities of Georgia.
Journalists work at the media center of the 61st Munich Security Conference in Munich, Germany, Feb. 16, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]
The 61st Munich Security Conference (MSC) concluded on Sunday amid strained transatlantic relations.
“We have to fear that our common value base is not that common anymore,” Christoph Heusgen, chairman of the MSC, remarked on Sunday, pointing to the growing divide between Europe and the U.S., as he closed the three-day annual event.
In the wake of U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance’s controversial speech at the MSC, Heusgen expressed his gratitude that European politicians had “spoken out and reaffirmed the values and principles they are defending.”
During this year’s meeting, participants, including around 60 heads of state and government and 150 ministers, discussed key global security challenges such as climate change, European security and regional conflicts.
Yet, divisions persisted on issues like the Ukraine conflict and European defense, amid an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape.
What set this year’s MSC apart was Vance’s comment regarding Europe’s democracy and free speech, which sparked widespread backlash and openly exposed the rift between the U.S. and its transatlantic allies, Xiao Qian, deputy head of the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University, told Xinhua.
Heusgen emphasized the urgent need for shared norms and principles in a multipolar world. “This order is easy to disrupt, to destroy, but much harder to rebuild,” he noted.
Highlighting the rising importance of the Global South, Heusgen concluded that over 30 percent of speakers at this year’s conference were from Africa, Asia, Latin America, ensuring their voices were heard in discussions on the evolving multipolar order.
The 61st Munich Security Conference (MSC) concluded on Sunday. In interviews with Xinhua, Chinese experts attending the MSC said the event addressed numerous emerging global uncertainties, while China reaffirmed its commitment to being a constructive force in a changing world.
A security report was released ahead of the conference with a focus on multipolarization and its U.S. section noted that the U.S. administration of President Donald Trump “promises more selective, often unilateral, international engagement, only when narrowly construed US interests are at stake.”
And it also stated that the administration’s “toying with the idea of coercively absorbing Greenland, Panama, and Canada” suggests it will not feel bound by key international norms.
Wang Junsheng, a researcher at the Institute of Asia-Pacific and Global Strategy of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said the key focus of the conference was the uncertainties stemming from the Trump administration. He said the administration’s past statements and acts have indicated a disrespect for international order and a disruption of the existing international system.
The report stated that the Trump administration’s indifference toward United Nations’ agencies and climate change will negatively impact the Global South countries.
Wang Yiwei, director of the Institute of International Affairs at Renmin University of China, said the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and the World Health Organization not only undermined the authority and effectiveness of the global governance system but also dampened the momentum for multilateral cooperation. This, he argued, has deepened the fragmentation of the international order and hastened the world’s shift toward a more disordered state.
During his speech at the MSC, U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance criticized European countries, including Germany, on issues concerning democracy and immigration. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Saturday criticized Vance for interfering in German politics. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot on Saturday emphasized that Europe would not accept external imposition.
Wang Junsheng said Vance’s speech was condescending, undermining the principle of equal exchanges between nations. He added that Vance’s blatant interference in Germany’s internal affairs violates other’s sovereignty and reflects unilateralism, which could provoke diplomatic tensions.
Xiao Qian, deputy head of the Center for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University, said Vance’s speech failed to address issues such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict and tariffs, disregarding the concerns of countries in Europe and beyond. European officials and scholars have expressed deep disappointment.
Wang Junsheng said the Russia-Ukraine conflict remained a key issue at this year’s MSC. While the Trump administration has been pursuing a negotiated resolution, widespread concerns persist in Europe regarding the fairness and justice of the U.S. proposal, its potential to achieve lasting peace, and whether it primarily serves American interests.
With regard to U.S. wielding the big stick of tariffs, Wang Yiwei said this move has undermined the global free trade regime and World Trade Organization rules, fueled trade protectionism and economic nationalism, disrupted global supply chains, and heightened uncertainties in the development of world economy.
Addressing the “China in the World” session of the MSC, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi pledged that China will remain a global stabilizing factor and a constructive force in the transformation of the world. Wang, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, elaborated on China’s four key views regarding multipolarity, including advocating equality among nations, respecting the rule of international law, practicing multilateralism, and upholding openness and win-win cooperation.
The Chinese experts said Wang’s speech addressed concerns of all parties and provided the greatest certainty in this uncertain world. China’s proposal to promote an equal and orderly multipolar world was widely discussed and received high praise from attendees.
Vatican City (Agenzia Fides) – “Thank you for the affection, prayer… I invite everyone to continue to pray for peace in tormented Ukraine, Palestine, Israel and all the Middle East, Myanmar, Kivu and Sudan”. These are the words that Pope Francis sent from Gemelli Hospital in Rome, where he has been hospitalized since Friday 14, February for a respiratory infection. Words addressed in particular to the artists gathered in St. Peter’s Basilica for the celebration of their Jubilee.All the Pontiff’s commitments scheduled for these days have been canceled with the exception of the Mass that he himself was supposed to preside over in St. Peter’s for the Jubilee event dedicated to the world of art and culture. On behalf of the Bishop of Rome, who sends his greetings, Cardinal José Tolentino de Mendonça, Prefect of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, presides over the Eucharistic celebration at the Altar of Confession and read the homily prepared by the Pope for the occasion, commenting on today’s Gospel passage, that of the Beatitudes, a text that Pope Francis has repeatedly defined as the “Magna Carta” of the Christian.In “a time when new walls are being erected”, artists, the Pontiff emphasizes in the homily read by the Portuguese cardinal – are “guardians of the Beatitudes. As artists and representatives of the world of culture, you are called to be witnesses to the revolutionary vision of the Beatitudes. Your mission is not only to create beauty, but to reveal the truth, goodness and beauty hidden within the folds of history. Let the Gospel of the Beatitudes guide you, and may your art be a herald of a new world. Never cease searching, questioning and taking risks. True art is never easy; it offers the peace of restlessness. And do not forget that hope is not an illusion; beauty is not a utopia. Yours is not a random gift but a calling. Respond, then, with generosity, passion and love”.A reference to the homily is also present in the text that had been prepared to accompany the Angelus prayer, a text released at midday by the Press Office: today’s event, it reads, “reminds us of the importance of art as a universal language that spreads beauty and unites peoples, contributing to bringing harmony into the world and silencing every cry of war. I would have liked to be among you but, as you know, I am here at the Gemelli Hospital because I still need some treatment for my bronchitis”. In this regard, the Pope expresses his “thank you” for the spiritual support and also asks to pray for all healthcare workers: “Thank you for the affection, prayer and closeness with which you are accompanying me in these days, and I would like to thank the doctors and healthcare workers in this hospital for their care: they do such a valuable and tiring job, let us support them with prayer!” (F.B.) (Agenzia Fides, 16/2/2025)
Share:
New Zealand’s smokefree law was hailed around the world for creating a smokefree generation that would have lifelong protection from smoking’s harms.
The smokefree generation would have ended sales of tobacco products to anyone born on or after a specific date, thus gradually phasing out smoking. This new approach goes beyond age restriction policies (such as R18 or R21), which may imply smoking is “safe” once people reach the designated age.
However, the coalition government moved swiftly to repeal the smokefree generation measure. That decision did not reflect attitudes towards the policy from young people and the general public.
In an earlier in-depth study, we found young people strongly supported measures restricting their access to tobacco because they understood this policy would protect them from becoming addicted to smoking. Surveys also showed strong support for the smokefree generation policy from young people, the general public and people who smoke.
NZ falls further behind international best practice
As New Zealand went backwards, other jurisdictions, including the UK and several US towns, have proposed or taken more progressive approaches. Recent policies include vapes and other nicotine products, alongside smoked tobacco, and aim to create a nicotine-free generation.
Because many more young people in New Zealand vape than smoke, we were interested in how they viewed a nicotine-free generation policy.
On the one hand, they might support an approach that reduces the shame, stress and stigma nicotine addiction causes. On the other, they might accept arguments tobacco companies have made, claiming birth-year measures remove young people’s freedoms.
We talked in-depth with 20 young people who assessed themselves as addicted to vaping. We asked them to imagine a nicotine-free generation policy was in place and applied to them, before probing how they interpreted and rationalised this approach.
Our participants thought a nicotine-free generation policy would bring several wide-ranging benefits. They outlined personal benefits, such as increased fitness, better overall health and fewer financial concerns.
Participants also envisaged societal benefits, including reduced pollution (from littered disposable vapes), fewer disputes among young people (less fighting over vapes) and a less pressured health system.
Nearly all participants wanted to quit vaping. Several had tried to stop but relapsed. Easy access to vaping products and vaping’s ubiquity made many feel that quitting was impossible.
Some felt targeted by marketers and unable to resist the pro-vaping environment that surrounded them. One person said vape shops were designed to attract younger people.
There’s vape stores everywhere. It’s insane […] they’re always bright[ly] colour[ed] so you can see them.
These feelings of powerlessness led several to view government regulation as the only way to protect young people from vaping. Rather than wanting to assert “choices” and “freedoms”, many of the people who talked with us felt they would be better off if this option simply did not exist.
One participant explained:
Although it is a choice […] it’s never going to be a positive choice. I wouldn’t mind it being taken away because I know it would be for my benefit […] it wouldn’t be a negative thing.
Participants wanted a better future where younger generations did not face the challenges they had found overwhelming.
The generation below me […] I don’t want them to go through [negative] health effects [and] experience that kind of thing.
Nonetheless, a very small minority argued that young people should find out about risks themselves. One person argued:
It’s people’s lives and they should be able to pick what they do […] Let them find out for themselves.
Participants noted concerns about how a nicotine-free generation policy would be implemented and questioned whether retailers would respect this measure. Some thought parents or older siblings would supply vapes, as some already did. Others expected an illicit market could evolve.
However, participants suggested several solutions they thought could address these challenges, including not normalising vaping, reducing retail outlet numbers and vape product marketing, increasing compliance monitoring and providing better support to help people quit vaping.
Time for political leadership
Our findings suggest it is time to discuss whether Aotearoa New Zealand should return to more progressive smokefree policies that recognise how the rapidly evolving nicotine market has undermined young people’s wellbeing.
The current political emphasis on individual responsibility ignores young people’s calls for policies that remove harmful “choices”. It does not address earlier evidence that suggests governments have a responsibility to protect young people from harms.
Reducing the ubiquity and appeal of vaping products should be an urgent policy priority for 2025.
We acknowledge the excellent work undertaken by Renee Hosking, a summer scholarship student with the ASPIRE Aotearoa Centre.
Janet Hoek receives funding from the Health Research Council of New Zealand, Royal Society Marsden Fund, NZ Cancer Society and NZ Heart Foundation. She is a member of the Health Coalition Aotearoa’s smokefree expert advisory group, a senior editor at Tobacco Control (honorarium paid) and she serves or has served on several government, NGO and community advisory groups.
Lani Teddy receives funding from the Health Research Council of New Zealand. She is affiliated with ASPIRE Aotearoa whose members undertake research to inform tobacco policy.
Anna DeMello does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amin Saikal, Emeritus Professor of Middle Eastern and Central Asian Studies, Australian National University
The dismantling of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) is a serious blow to the soft power of the United States and disastrous for many poor countries where it helps provide humanitarian, health and educational services.
One country whose citizens will bear the brunt of it is Afghanistan, under the misogynistic and draconian rule of the Taliban.
According to United Nations reports, more than half of Afghanistan’s estimated 40 million population is dependent on international handouts for their survival. Most of the remaining barely earn enough to exist.
USAID has played a critical part in alleviating the suffering of Afhghans since the hasty retreat of the US and its allies from the country and the return of the Taliban to power in mid-2021.
Since then, the United States has been the largest donor of humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan, amounting to US$3.71 billion (A$5.8 billion), channelled through UN agencies and other international organisations. USAID has been responsible for delivering a large proportion of it.
The effects are already being felt. A major midwifery program has closed, while “secret schools” for girls and the American University of Afghanistan has suspended classes.
US aid, along with help from other donors, has also been critical in keeping mass starvation at bay.
Aid propping up the Taliban
Indeed, not all the aid has directly been delivered to the needy. The Taliban have creamed off a portion of it in the process of permitting and supervising its delivery.
As widely reported, the group has indirectly received some US$40 million (A$63 million) a week of donor funds. The United Nations says it’s unavoidable that some money makes its way to Afghanistan’s central bank, which is under the control of the Taliban.
This aid money, together with US$7 billion (A$11 billion) worth of light and heavy arms left behind by the US and its allies, has been crucial in enabling the Taliban to enforce its extremist rule, despite lacking domestic and international legitimacy.
US President Donald Trump’s objection to the flow of any American aid to the Taliban is well placed. He has criticised the Biden administration for its chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan and failure to curtail the indirect benefits of American aid to the group.
Further, National Security Advisor Michael Waltz and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, who both served in Afghanistan, have vowed to continue to fight terrorism around the world. Waltz believes terrorist groups are regrouping in Afghanistan under the Taliban and the Pentagon may need to send US troops back there.
A halt to any aid that can advantage the Taliban is absolutely imperative. Countering the group is vital to combating violent extremism and terrorism.
Afghans still desperately need aid
However, this effort needs to be managed in ways that do not deprive the needy people of Afghanistan.
Afghanistan’s economy, industries, reconstruction projects and work opportunities have virtually collapsed, while many schools have been closed or transformed into religious institutions.
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) estimates that in the last three years, Afghanistan’s economy has contracted by 27%, with staggeringly high unemployment and inflation.
Living conditions are so bad that some families are selling their children in order to feed the rest of the family.
No section of the society is in more desperate need than girls and women, who have been stripped of all their basic rights to education, work and public life. They are not even allowed to speak in public or pray outside the four walls of their homes. As put by actor Meryl Streep, a cat has more freedom than women in Afghanistan.
The disembowelling of USAID will have far-reaching consequences for the people of Afghanistan.
If the Trump administration wants to achieve its anti-Taliban objectives, it needs a two-pronged policy approach:
identify new ways to continue humanitarian assistance to the people of Afghanistan in ways that don’t benefit the Taliban
increase pressure on the Taliban by strictly enforcing international sanctions and maintaining its isolation on the international stage.
The suspension of American aid has already resulted in a devaluation of the Afghani currency. This has prompted the Taliban to impose severe restrictions on the transfer of dollars out of the country.
Some analysts predict that if the economy continues to worsen, it will impact the Taliban’s ability to govern.
In turn, this could strengthen civil and armed opposition groups – including the women’s Purple Saturday movement, which stands for a free and legitimately governed Afghanistan. These groups have increasingly become active in different parts of the country.
Amin Saikal does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
On the anniversary of Alexei Navalny’s death, which followed years of persecution by the Kremlin, we again extend our condolences to his family. We reiterate that the ultimate responsibility for his death lies with the Russian authorities. One year on, Russia’s dire human rights record continues to deteriorate. The Kremlin crushes peaceful dissent, maintains a climate of fear and undermines the rule of law. All to serve its own interests. As we reflect on Navalny’s enduring legacy, we continue to stand with civil society and human rights defenders working tirelessly to build a better future for Russia in the face of immense personal risk.
There are over 800 political prisoners in Russia, including many imprisoned for speaking out against the Kremlin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine and the brutality shown towards the Ukrainian people. The UN Special Rapporteur’s reports illustrate how many political prisoners are tortured, denied adequate medical treatment and placed in forced psychiatric detention. We are clear: the Russian authorities must uphold their international obligations and release all political prisoners.
Australia, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Romania, Sweden, Iceland, Bulgaria and the United Kingdom.
Here is a scenario, but first a broad brush-painted historical parallel.
Hitler and the Nazis could well have accomplished everything that they wanted to do within German borders, including exterminating Jews, so long as they confined their ambitious to Germany itself. After all, the world pretty much sat and watched as the Nazi pogroms unfolded in the late 1930s.
But Hitler never intended to confine himself to Germany and decided to attack his neighbours simultaneously, on multiple fronts East, West, North and South.
This came against the advice of his generals, who believed that his imperialistic war-mongering should happen sequentially and that Germany should not fight the USSR until it had conquered Europe first, replenished with pillaged resources, and then reorganised its forces for the move East. They also advised that Germany should also avoid tangling with the US, which had pro-Nazi sympathisers in high places (like Charles Lindbergh) and was leaning towards neutrality in spite of FDR’s support for the UK.
Hitler ignored the advice and attacked in every direction, got bogged down in the Soviet winter, drew in the US in by attacking US shipping ferrying supplies to the UK, and wound up stretching his forces in North Africa, the entire Eastern front into Ukraine and the North Mediterranean states, the Scandinavian Peninsula and the UK itself.
In other words, he bit off too much in one chew and wound up paying the price for his over-reach.
Hitler did what he did because he could, thanks in part to the 1933 Enabling Law that superseded all other German laws and allowed him carte blanche to pursue his delusions. That proved to be his undoing because his ambition was not matched by his strategic acumen and resources when confronted by an armed alliance of adversaries.
A version of this in US? A version of this may be what is unfolding in the US. Using the cover of broad Executive Powers, Musk, Trump and their minions are throwing everything at the kitchen wall in order to see what sticks.
They are breaking domestic and international norms and conventions pursuant to the neo-reactionary “disruptor” and “chaos” theories propelling the US techno-authoritarian Right. They want to dismantle the US federal State, including the systems of checks and balances embodied in the three branches of government, subordinating all policy to the dictates of an uber-powerful Executive Branch.
In this view the Legislature and Judiciary serve as rubber stamp legitimating devices for Executive rule. Many of those in the Musk-lead DOGE teams are subscribers to this ideology.
At the same time the new oligarchs want to re-make the International order as well as interfere in the domestic politics of other liberal democracies. Musk openly campaigns for the German far-Right AfD in this year’s elections, he and Trump both celebrate neo-fascists like Viktor Urban in Hungry and Javier Milei in Argentina.
Trump utters delusional desires to “make” Canada the 51st State, forcibly regain control of the Panama Canal, annex Greenland, turn Gaza into a breach resort complex and eliminate international institutions like the World Trade Organisation and even NATO if it does not do what he says.
He imposes sanctions on the International Criminal Court, slaps sanctions on South Africa for land take-overs and because it took a case of genocide against Israel in the ICC, doubles down on his support for Netanyahu’s ethnic cleansing campaign against Palestinians and is poised to sell-out Ukraine by using the threat of an aid cut-off to force the Ukrainians to cede sovereignty to Russia over all of their territory east of the Donbas River (and Crimea).
He even unilaterally renames the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America in a teenaged display of symbolic posturing that ignores the fact that renaming the Gulf has no standing in international law and “America” is a term that refers to the North, Central and South land masses of the Western Hemisphere — i.e., it is not exclusive to or propriety of the United States.
Dismantling the globalised trade system Trump wants to dismantle the globalised system of trade by using tariffs as a weapon as well as leverage, “punishing” nations for non-trade as well as trade issues because of their perceived dependence on the US market. This is evident in the tariffs (briefly) imposed on Canada, Mexico and Colombia over issues of immigration and re-patriation of US deportees.
In other words, Trump 2.0 is about redoing the World Order in his preferred image, doing everything more or less at once. It is as if Trump, Musk and their Project 2025 foot soldiers believe in a reinterpreted version of “shock and awe:” the audacity and speed of the multipronged attack on everything will cause opponents to be paralysed by the move and therefore will be unable to resist it.
That includes extending cultural wars by taking over the Kennedy Center for the Arts (a global institution) because he does not like the type of “culture” (read: African American) that is presented there and he wants to replace the Center’s repertoire with more “appropriate” (read: Anglo-Saxon) offerings. The assault on the liberal institutional order (at home and abroad), in other words, is holistic and universal in nature.
Trump’s advisers are even talking about ignoring court orders barring some of their actions, setting up a constitutional crisis scenario that they believe they will win in the current Supreme Court.
I am sure that Musk/Trump can get away with a fair few of these disruptions, but I am not certain that they can get away with all of them. They may have more success on the domestic rather than the international front given the power dynamics in each arena. In any event they do not seem to have thought much about the ripple effect responses to their moves, specifically the blowback that might ensue.
This is where the Nazi analogy applies. It could be that Musk and Trump have also bitten more than they can chew. They may have Project 2025 as their road map, but even maps do not always get the weather right, or accurately predict the mood of locals encountered along the way to wherever one proposes to go. That could well be–and it is my hope that it is–the cause of their undoing.
Overreach, egos, hubris and the unexpected detours around and obstacles presented by foreign and domestic actors just might upset their best laid plans.
Dotage is on daily public display That brings up another possibility. Trump’s remarks in recent weeks are descending into senescence and caducity. His dotage is on daily public display. Only his medications have changed. He is more subdued than during the campaign but no less mad. He leaves the ranting and raving to Musk, who only truly listens to the fairies in his ear.
But it is possible that there are ghost whisperers in Trump’s ear as well (Stephen Miller, perhaps), who deliberately plant preposterous ideas in his feeble head and egg him on to pursue them. In the measure that he does so and begins to approach the red-line of obvious derangement, then perhaps the stage is being set from within by Musk and other oligarchs for a 25th Amendment move to unseat him in favour of JD Vance, a far more dangerous member of the techbro puppet masters’ cabal.
Remember that most of Trump’s cabinet are billionaires and millionaires and only Cabinet can invoke the 25th Amendment.
Vance has incentive to support this play because Trump (foolishly, IMO) has publicly stated that he does not see Vance as his successor and may even run for a third term. That is not want the techbro overlords wanted to hear, so they may have to move against Trump sooner rather than later if they want to impose their oligarchical vision on the US and world.
An impeachment would be futile given Congress’s make-up and Trump’s two-time wins over his Congressional opponents. A third try is a non-starter and would take too long anyway. Short of death (that has been suggested) the 25th Amendment is the only way to remove him.
It is at that point that I hope that things will start to unravel for them. It is hard to say what the MAGA-dominated Congress will do if laws are flouted on a wholesale basis and constituents begin to complain about the negative impact of DOGE cost-cutting on federal programmes. But one thing is certain, chaos begets chaos (because chaos is not synonymous with techbro libertarians’ dreams of anarchy) and disruption for disruption’s sake may not result in an improved socio-economic and political order.
Those are some of the “unknown unknowns” that the neo-con Donald Rumsfeld used to talk about.
In other words, vamos a ver–we shall see.
Dr Paul G Buchanan is the director of 36th-Parallel Assessments, a geopolitical and strategic analysis consultancy. This article is republished from Kiwipolitico with the permission of the author.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
The UK and partners pay tribute to Alexei Navalny
On the anniversary of Alexei Navalny’s death, which followed years of persecution by the Kremlin, we again extend our condolences to his family. We reiterate that the ultimate responsibility for his death lies with the Russian authorities. One year on, Russia’s dire human rights record continues to deteriorate. The Kremlin crushes peaceful dissent, maintains a climate of fear and undermines the rule of law. All to serve its own interests. As we reflect on Navalny’s enduring legacy, we continue to stand with civil society and human rights defenders working tirelessly to build a better future for Russia in the face of immense personal risk.
There are over 800 political prisoners in Russia, including many imprisoned for speaking out against the Kremlin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine and the brutality shown towards the Ukrainian people. The UN Special Rapporteur’s reports illustrate how many political prisoners are tortured, denied adequate medical treatment and placed in forced psychiatric detention. We are clear: the Russian authorities must uphold their international obligations and release all political prisoners.
Australia, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Romania, Sweden and the United Kingdom
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Saturday expressed China’s willingness to promote more achievements in various fields of China-Brazil cooperation.
Wang, also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, made the remarks while meeting with Celso Amorim, special advisor to the president of Brazil, on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference.
Wang said that Chinese President Xi Jinping paid a historic visit to Brazil last year and reached a series of important consensus with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva on building the China-Brazil community with a shared future, demonstrating the contemporary significance and strategic value of China-Brazil relations.
The synergy between the Belt and Road Initiative and Brazil’s development strategies has injected strong impetus into China-Brazil cooperation, he added.
As major global powers and representative forces of the Global South, China and Brazil, facing a turbulent and intertwined world, have maintained strategic focus and worked together to make contributions to promoting world peace, stability, and development, Wang noted.
China is willing to work with Brazil to implement the consensus reached by the two heads of state, promote more achievements in various fields of cooperation, practice true multilateralism, uphold the core role of the United Nations, and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Global South countries, he said.
Amorim said that President Xi’s state visit to Brazil last year was of great significance, demonstrating the vision of the two heads of state and consolidating the deep friendship between Brazil and China.
The visit would also promote more achievements in practical cooperation between Brazil and China in various fields, said Amorim.
Brazil is willing to work with China to accelerate the implementation of the consensus reached by the two heads of state, build a fairer and more sustainable Brazil-China community with a shared future, and jointly safeguard international fairness and justice, he added.
The two sides expressed their willingness to strengthen communication and coordination, and deepen cooperation within the BRICS framework and between China and Latin American countries.
Both sides recognized the work of the “Friends of Peace” platform and pledged to continue to play a constructive role in promoting a political settlement of the Ukraine crisis.
The 61st Munich Security Conference, which kicked off on Friday, has underscored the complex challenges facing Europe and the urgent need for the continent to define its strategic role in an increasingly volatile global landscape.
From the persistent conflict in Ukraine to rising uncertainties in the transatlantic alliance, as well as mounting pressures on the EU’s vision for the international order, the conference focused on the multiple crises Europe faces. It also highlighted the need for the continent to navigate these complexities and assert its place on the world stage.
German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier addresses the opening ceremony of the 61st Munich Security Conference (MSC) in Munich, Germany, Feb. 14, 2025. [Photo by Gao Jing/Xinhua]
DEMANDING ROLE IN UKRAINE PEACE TALK
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, speaking at the conference, said that once Ukraine reaches an agreement with the United States and Europe on how to end the conflict, he will be ready to hold direct talks with Russia. “I am ready to meet only in this case,” he stressed.
The announcement came days after U.S. President Donald Trump had held separate phone calls with Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Ukrainian leader.
Following a 90-minute phone call with Putin, Trump announced that negotiations to end the conflicts would start “immediately.”
However, concerns ignited in Europe over being sidelined in peace talks.
On Wednesday, a joint statement by multiple European countries and the European Commission stated, “Ukraine and Europe must be part of any negotiations.”
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz echoed this sentiment on Thursday, stating that “a dictated peace will never find our support” and stressing that peace must last and ensure Ukraine’s sovereignty.
Addressing the opening of the conference, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier said “everyone wants this war to end,” adding that how it ends will have “a lasting impact on our security order” and the power position of Europe and the United States.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen warned that “a failed Ukraine would weaken Europe, but it would also weaken the United States.”
She expressed her concerns by saying that many in European security circles were “confused,” some even worried, by Washington’s recent comments.
TRANSATLANTIC TIES UNDER STRAIN
On Monday, the security conference released a report underscoring the challenges to the transatlantic relationship under the new U.S. administration.
The report expressed apprehension about a “more selective, often unilateral, international engagement” from the United States and warned that the United States could relinquish its historic role as Europe’s security guarantor.
Expressing his concerns about relations with the United States, Steinmeier said that the new U.S. administration has “a different worldview than we do,” one that disregards established rules, partnerships and trust.
“We cannot change that. We must accept that and deal with it,” he said.
The shift in responsibilities described in the conference report has already been reflected in actions taken by the new administration, such as imposing tariffs on steel and aluminum imports — a move the European Union deems unjustified and which “will not go unanswered.”
“We know how quickly tariffs can affect essential transatlantic supply chains,” said von der Leyen, reiterating that trade wars and punitive tariffs make no sense.
According to a survey conducted by the European Council on Foreign Relations after the U.S. presidential election, Europeans have adopted a newly pessimistic outlook on the transatlantic partnership.
The survey revealed that Europeans increasingly view the United States less as an ally sharing the same interests and values and more as a necessary partner with whom they must strategically cooperate.
Europe’s current struggles to address its security challenges highlight the risks of over-reliance on the United States and foreshadow growing difficulties in the transatlantic partnership, Wu Shicun, president of the Huayang Center for Maritime Cooperation and Ocean Governance, told Xinhua at the conference.
He said Europe’s current predicament in resolving its security issues “warrants reflection,” suggesting that dependence on the United States for protection would significantly limit Europe’s autonomy and influence on the world stage.
“I could sense at the (conference) that the future transatlantic partnership will face many challenges,” Wu said.
BRACE OR BE BLOWN AWAY
“Europe must use the potential for transatlantic tensions to get its act together and start working on necessary internal market reforms and boost European innovation and competitiveness,” Peterson Institute for International Economics commented in an opinion piece.
Home to the world’s highest concentration of developed countries, the EU, once the world’s largest economy, has seen a continuous decline in its competitiveness in recent years.
According to a flash estimate published by Eurostat, the EU’s statistical office, in the fourth quarter of 2024, seasonally adjusted GDP increased by 0.2 percent in the EU compared with the previous quarter.
The slow pace highlights the ongoing challenges facing Europe’s economy, with risks ranging from geopolitical tensions and persistent energy vulnerabilities to escalating trade disputes and political unrest.
A report titled “Multipolarization,” unveiled ahead of the Munich gathering, emphasized that Europe has been facing its most challenging geopolitical situation since the end of the Cold War, while underscoring the ongoing transformation of the international system into a more multipolar world.
“It is imperative that the EU diversifies its trade relations and forges new partnerships with countries of the so-called Global South,” said the report.
According to conference organizers, over 30 percent of speakers at this year’s conference will represent the Global South nations, ensuring their voices are heard in discussions on the evolving multipolar order.
As the global landscape is increasingly defined by crisis, Europe’s ability to determine its role and strategic path will be of paramount importance, said Wang Yiwei, director of the Institute of International Affairs at Renmin University of China.
In an interview with the Financial Times published on Friday, French President Emmanuel Macron championed the need for Europe to “muscle up” on defense and the economy.
Trump’s designs on Gaza and Greenland were examples of the “extreme strategic uncertainty” the world is experiencing now, said Macron. This uncertainty demands a radical rethinking of how the EU and its member states operate. Macron has called on Europe to “wake up” and spend more on defense to reduce its reliance on the United States for its security.
“This is Europe’s moment to accelerate and execute,” said the French president in the interview. “It has no choice. It is running out of road.”
“A complacent shrug or a knee-jerk response to any soundbite coming out of the White House or Mar-a-Lago won’t be enough. Europe needs to take back control of its own destiny,” Carsten Brzeski, the global head of Macro for ING Research, warned in an article published in January.
“2025 really is a make-it-or-break-it moment for Europe,” said Brzeski. “Europe needs to change. And change fast.”
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
MUNICH, Germany, Feb. 15 — German Chancellor Olaf Scholz pledged to enhance exchanges, dialogue and cooperation with China during his meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi here on Saturday.
Wang, who is also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, conveyed cordial greetings from the Chinese leadership to Scholz.
Wang said that high-level interactions between China and Germany have been frequent and bilateral pragmatic cooperation has maintained good momentum and yielded positive results, which served the fundamental and long-term interests of both peoples.
He stressed that as strategic partners, China and Germany, as well as China and the European Union (EU), should further strengthen unity, coordination and cooperation to uphold free trade, practice multilateralism, and safeguard the authority of the United Nations.
China is pleased to see Germany playing a significant role in a multipolar world and is willing to deepen comprehensive cooperation with Germany to advance bilateral relations in a positive direction, safeguard global peace and stability, and provide greater certainty to an increasingly turbulent world, he added.
This year marks the 50th anniversary of China-EU diplomatic ties, Wang said, adding that the two sides should enhance complementary advantages and deepen pragmatic cooperation to jointly usher in the next 50 years of even stronger China-EU relations.
Wang said that China appreciates Germany’s rational and pragmatic stance on the EU’s tariff issue concerning Chinese electric vehicles and hopes Germany to continue to play a constructive role in promptly resolving China-EU trade frictions at an early date.
Scholz asked Wang to convey his sincere greetings and best wishes to the Chinese leadership, stating that Germany highly values its relations with China. He said Germany is willing to enhance exchanges and dialogue at all levels with China and deepen bilateral and multilateral strategic cooperation with China.
Germany opposes protectionism and does not support a tariff war, he said, calling on the EU and China to take a constructive approach to promptly and properly resolve frictions as soon as possible, including those related to electric vehicles, and jointly uphold the free trade system.
The two sides also exchanged views on the Ukraine crisis.
During his visit to Germany, Wang also met with Friedrich Merz, chairman of Germany’s Christian Democratic Union, among others.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Meeting of G7 Foreign Ministers on the margins of the Munich Security Conference, 15 February 2025.
The G7 Foreign Ministers of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America and the High Representative of the European Union, met on the margins of the Munich Security Conference for the first time under Canada’s 2025 Presidency.
The G7 members discussed Russia’s devasting war in Ukraine. They underscored their commitment to work together to help to achieve a durable peace and a strong and prosperous Ukraine and reaffirmed the need to develop robust security guarantees to ensure the war will not begin again.
The G7 members welcomed their discussion today with Andrii Sybiha, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine. They recalled the G7’s important contribution towards ending the war in Ukraine, including through measures pursuant to the G7 Joint Declaration of Support for Ukraine, by supporting Ukraine financially through the use of extraordinary revenues stemming from Russian Sovereign Assets, by imposing further cost on Russia, if they do not negotiate in good faith, through caps on oil and gas prices, and by making sanctions against Russia more effective. Any new, additional sanctions after February should be linked to whether the Russian Federation enters into real, good-faith efforts to bring an enduring end to the war against Ukraine that provides Ukraine with long-term security and stability as a sovereign, independent country. The G7 members reaffirmed their unwavering support for Ukraine in defending its freedom, sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity.
The G7 members discussed the provision to Russia of dual-use assistance by China and of military assistance by DPRK and Iran. They condemned all such support.
The G7 members discussed political, security and humanitarian issues in the Middle East, including in Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Iran, and their commitment to advancing regional peace and stability. They underscored the importance of a durable, Israeli-Palestinian peace. They reaffirmed their support for the full implementation of the ceasefire reached between Israel and Hamas, including for the release of all hostages and the expansion of humanitarian aid in Gaza. The G7 members stand behind the ongoing efforts of Egypt, Qatar and the United States in continuing to work towards a permanent ceasefire. They reiterated their unequivocal condemnation of Hamas and the need to ensure that Hamas neither reconstitutes militarily nor participates in governance. They recognized Israel’s inherent right to self-defence, consistent with international law.
The G7 members welcomed the outcomes of the International Conference on Syria, hosted by France on February 13, 2025. They reiterated their shared commitment to the people of Syria and their support for an inclusive political transition process, in the spirit of UN Security Council Resolution 2254. They welcomed, as well, positive developments in Lebanon, including the recent election of President Joseph Aoun, the designation of Nawaf Salam as Prime Minister, and the formation of a new government. The G7 members reaffirmed their commitment to both countries’ stability, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.
The G7 members unequivocally condemned Iran’s destabilizing actions, including its rapid advancement of uranium enrichment without credible civil justification, its facilitation of terrorism organizations and armed groups across the Middle East and Red Sea, its proliferation of ballistic missiles and drones, and its transnational repression and violation of fundamental human rights.
The G7 members reiterated their commitment to a free, open and secure Indo-Pacific region, grounded in respect for the rule of law and sovereignty. They strongly opposed any attempts to change unilaterally the status quo using force and underscored the importance of resolving disputes peacefully. They strongly opposed China’s attempts to restrict freedom of navigation through militarization and coercive activities in the East and South China Sea.
The G7 members expressed serious concern over the DPRK’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs and reaffirmed their commitment to the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. They demanded that the DPRK abandon all its nuclear weapons, existing nuclear programs, and any other weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ballistic missile programs in a complete, verifiable, and irreversible manner in accordance with all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions (UNSCRs). They underscored that direct DPRK support for Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine marks a dangerous expansion of the conflict, with serious consequences for European and Indo-Pacific security. They urged the DPRK to cease immediately all assistance for Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, including by withdrawing its troops. The called upon DPRK to resolve the abductions issue immediately.
The G7 members also discussed urgent situations of conflict and instability elsewhere in the world, including in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Sudan, and in Haiti and Venezuela.
The G7 Foreign Ministers looked forward to their meeting in Canada in Charlevoix, Quebec on March 12-14.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 3
The Foreign and Defence Secretaries have written a joint Op-Ed in the Daily Telegraph on how to reach a strong and durable peace in Ukraine.
For 20 years, Vladimir Putin has been repeating the mistakes of Russia’s past: by seeking to recreate the Russian empire and suffocate the countries around its borders.
Too often in the past, the West has let him. We did too little in 2008, when he invaded Georgia, and in 2014, when he first went into Ukraine.
When he launched his full-scale attack almost three years ago, he thought it would be more of the same. Putin believed that he would win his war in three days. Yet the Ukrainians continue to fight with huge courage and the support of their friends.
Putin only responds to strength. Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky have both spoken of their desire to achieve “peace through strength”. And the support we give to Ukraine provides the strength to achieve that peace. Ukraine, Britain, Europe and the US all agree.
In Brussels this week, at the Ukraine Defence Contact Group – which we as the UK chaired for the first time – Pete Hegseth, the US defence secretary, confirmed that, like us, the US wants to see a sovereign, prosperous Ukraine.
Like us, the US wants a lasting peace, after almost three years of war.
Like us, the US recognises the failure of Minsk agreements, deals made from a position of division and weakness.
At the Munich Security Conference this weekend, our message to our allies is the need for us all to continue to unite and show strength.
The Prime Minister has signed a 100-year partnership with Ukraine – a testament to our long-term commitment and confidence in the country’s future. Including the new loans we are giving, which will be repaid using the windfall profits from frozen Russian assets, our support extends to £15 billion.
And we are going farther still: this week, we announced an additional £150 million military package, part of the record £4.5 billion in support we are providing this coming year.
A year on from the death of Alexei Navalny, we are also putting new sanctions on Putin’s inner circle, adding to 2,000 sanctions Britain has already put on Russia.
From opposition and in government, we have been clear that Europe and the UK must do more together to share the burden of our continent’s security.
[POLITICAL CONTENT REDACTED]
We were clear we need our friends in Europe to invest more in defence and seize the opportunities of closer UK-EU cooperation.
This has already begun. Europe is united on the need to step up. We are – and we will.
Europe has now committed almost two thirds of all aid to Ukraine, and well over half the military aid. In 2021, the UK and US were two of only six allies meeting Nato’s 2 per cent defence spending target. That number is now 23.
And we all need to turn up the pressure on Russia. Putin’s economy is struggling. Last year, the Kremlin spent more on military aid than social welfare for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Sanctions on energy are a particular priority: the UK has sanctioned more than 100 ships, as well as Gazprom Neft and PJSC Surgutneftegas, two of Russia’s big four oil companies.
While Russia is weakened, it remains undeniably dangerous. Just this weekend, our Royal Navy will track Russian warships passing close to British waters. These ships are retreating from Syria after Putin abandoned his ally Bashar al-Assad, yet they remain armed and full of ammunition. We will be watching their every move.
Ultimately, we need a strong peace. A durable peace. A peace that allows Ukrainians a secure future and deters any future Russian aggression. That is why there must be no talks about Ukraine without Ukraine, and we must give Mr Zelensky the strongest possible hand in those talks.
A bad peace would not only harm our security, but our economies, too: Putin’s 2022 invasion took 1.5 per cent off global GDP and added 3 per cent to European inflation. China, Iran and North Korea are all watching.
A durable peace must be based on new security arrangements: Europe doubling down to do more on our own continent’s security; a continuing, long-term US commitment to its allies through Nato; and British support to the US and allies in the Indo-Pacific – such as through the Aukus security partnership. That is the way to make us all stronger.
On Feb 24, we will mark a grim milestone – three years since Putin’s full-scale invasion. Yet despite all the challenges, Ukrainians are showing astonishing tenacity. Now is the time to turn up the pressure on the Kremlin. With strength and unity, we will prevail.
Holy See Press Office Communiqué: Audience with the Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic, 14.02.2025
Today the Holy Father Francis received in audience His Excellency Mr. Robert Fico, Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic, who also met with His Eminence Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Secretary of State, accompanied by the Reverend Mirosław Wachowski, under-secretary for Relations with States.
During the cordial talks at the Secretariat of State, mutual appreciation for the sound bilateral relations was expressed, and commitment in favour of social cohesion was renewed. In this context, particular attention was paid to the question of anthropology and matters regarding the family and education.
The international framework was also explored, focusing on the continuing instability in Ukraine and the prospects for peace, as well as the fragile truce in Israel and Palestine and the serious humanitarian emergency in Gaza.
From the Vatican, 14 February 2025
WASHINGTON – In case you missed it, U.S. Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) is working with President Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to hold the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) accountable for stonewalling her investigations and hiding how they spent tax dollars.
She recounted her experience in a Wall Street Journal op-ed here:
“After keeping its spending records hidden from Congress and taxpayers, USAID employees are now protesting the review of the agency’s records by President Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency. It’s no surprise that Washington insiders are more upset at DOGE for trying to stop wasteful spending than at USAID for misusing tax dollars.”
This week, Senator Ernst joined Fox News to discuss her work with DOGE:
“I was privileged to meet with Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk just after the fall election and gave them an eight-page memo that outlined a number of the ‘squeal’ initiatives that I have had over the last ten years. It outlined a blueprint to save $2 trillion within our federal government, and we have seen them act on those initiatives already.”
“There are so many ways that we can save money. We’ve seen the fraud, waste, and abuse – the telework abuse that has happened in DC…We have to be able to do a deep dive and provide our taxpayers with good reasons why we are spending their money the way we do. Unfortunately, for many of these agencies, they cannot come up with a good reason why we are spending money the way we do.”
View more coverage of Ernst exposing the rogue agency:
RADIO IOWA | Iowa Senator Ernst says USAID shutdown the right move
“Last summer, Ernst accused USAID of payroll fraud. On Sunday on the X Spaces broadcast, Ernst said Musk, with President Trump’s blessing, has made the right move in shutting down USAID, so ‘every dollar’ can be scrutinized.”
DAILY CALLER | Joni Ernst Says USAID ‘Abused The System,’ Agency Threatened Her For Seeking Transparency
“‘We need to know that those dollars are doing it and not going to fund terrorist organizations, not going to support a gender ideology in certain regions. We have to know that it’s going for a specific goal that is approved by Congress and, unfortunately, USAID has abused this system,’ Ernst said.”
THE FEDERALIST | Ernst’s struggle to hold USAID accountable frustrated Musk who called the agency’s obstruction of her attempts to investigate ‘outrageous.’
“Ernst first pressed USAID on how it used its tax dollars to pay the facilities and administrative costs outlined in Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreements (NICRAs) in November 2022… Months later in November 2023, Ernst demanded that USAID Administrator Samantha Powers hand over crucial information about her agency’s spending — including sending billions of American tax dollars to fund pet projects and small businesses in Ukraine — but, as Ernst noted Sunday, was again ignored… Ernst’s struggle to hold USAID accountable frustrated Musk, who called the agency’s obstruction of her repeated attempts to investigate ‘outrageous.’”
NY POST | Sen. Joni Ernst warns of ‘willful sabotage’ at USAID, cites millions in funding for Wuhan lab, terrorists and more
“The Republican Hawkeye State senator and Senate DOGE Caucus chair, listed a slew of examples on social media this week on why ‘USAID is one of the worst offenders of waste in Washington’… In one example she highlighted, an inspector general discovered that Chemonics, a USAID contractor, overbilled the feds by ‘as much as $270 million through fiscal year 2019’ and was caught ‘possibly offering kickbacks to terrorist groups.’”
FOX NEWS | USAID has ‘demonstrated pattern of obstructionism,’ claims top DOGE Republican in letter to Rubio
“The Senate chair of the DOGE Caucus is exposing a ‘demonstrated pattern of obstructionism’ at the U.S.’ top aid agency in a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, outlined how the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has been ‘stonewalling’ her office for years as she sought documents to ensure taxpayer dollars weren’t wasted at the agency, which is now under the microscope of billionaire Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).”
RED STATE | Joni Ernst Drops Devastating USAID Thread, and You Won’t Believe Where Your Money Has Been Going
“Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) put out a thread on Tuesday and you won’t believe what your money has been going to.”
DAILY MAIL | Congresswoman reveals ‘crazy’ USAID threatened her when she tried to curb its spending last year
“The Iowa Republican tore into the agency…’They were trying to scare us away from continuing to dig into this,’ she added. Ernst wanted to know how much USAID was spending on administrative costs versus aid.”
NATIONAL REVIEW | USAID’s Long Track Record of Wasteful, Left-Wing Spending Made It an Obvious First Target for Musk
“Senator Joni Ernst (R., Iowa) pushed to suspend the flow of American taxpayer dollars to EcoHealth. ‘From funneling tax dollars for batty studies with the Wuhan Institute in China, to sending Ukrainians to Paris Fashion Week, USAID has been one of the worst offenders of waste in Washington.’”
DAILY WIRE | ‘Beyond Repair’: Musk Says Trump Has Given The Go-Ahead To ‘Get Rid Of’ USAID
“Musk made the comments during a discussion on X with Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) as they talked about the work of what Trump has called the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Ernst said that any program administered by USAID that may actually benefit America should be moved under the jurisdiction of the State Department.”
FOX DIGITAL | Senator sends message to Dems upset over Elon Musk’s DOGE team: ‘Get used to this’
“We are going to find ways to focus our American taxpayer dollars on the things that they should be spent on, which is the American people and our interests… There are important [USAID] projects, we acknowledge that, but we have to disrupt the system, ferret out the waste and get back to what we should be doing. And that’s making sure that American interests are represented and supporting our allies and partners.”
WASHINGTON EXAMINER | Joni Ernst spotlights ‘obstruction and lies’ by USAID’s wasteful spending
“But what we found was extreme expenditures on the part of USAID with very little data-driven results. We have seen money funded in the Wuhan Institute of Virology through dollars steered by USAID on dangerous Coronaviruses. We saw how that turned out. We’ve seen funding going to Morocco for pottery classes, tourism in Lebanon of all places, even when the State Department was advising against travel.”
FOX NEWS | ‘Sesame Street in Iraq’: USAID’s ‘wasteful and dangerous’ spending exposed by senator
“Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, published a list of projects and programs she says the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has helped fund across the years, highlighting it as ‘wasteful and dangerous’ spending that has gripped taxpayers until the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) stepped in… Ernst highlighted that the agency ‘authorized a whopping $20 million to create a Sesame Street in Iraq.’”
WASHINGTON EXAMINER | Joni Ernst backs Trump’s gutting of USAID
“Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) is backing President Donald Trump in his effort to dismantle the United States Agency for International Development… Ernst outlined problems with the agency that she discovered in previous investigations. In addition to waste, corruption, and inefficiency, she also alleged a ‘demonstrated pattern of obstructionism’ in its dealings with the Senate… The Iowa senator went into detail regarding some of the excesses of USAID in an X thread, including a reported $2 million for pottery classes in Morocco, an undisclosed sum for Ukrainian models to attend fashion shows abroad, $2 million for tourism in Lebanon, $20 million for a Sesame Street in Iraq, and $9 million in humanitarian assistance for Syria that ended up in the hands of terrorists.”
WASHINGTON TIMES | Sen. Joni Ernst applauds Secretary of State Rubio’s push to overhaul USAID and review its spending
“Ms. Ernst has prided herself as a taxpayer advocate and authored the ‘Make ’Em Squeal’ awards targeting wasteful government spending. She is now heading up the Senate DOGE caucus, working with the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency. In a live X session with Mr. Musk this week, Ms. Ernst said a large chunk of the USAID money is spent on overhead costs and things not associated with its humanitarian mission… In the wake of this series of significant misjudgments and oversight obstruction by the USAID, it is of the utmost importance to conduct a full and independent analysis of the recipients of USAID assistance.”
BREITBART | Sen. Joni Ernst Details USAID’s ‘Anti-American Agenda’ in Letter to Secretary of State Rubio
“Ernst said that, through her oversight efforts, she discovered that USAID has signed onto agreements with grant recipients allowing the recipients to spend more than 25 percent of the total award on indirect costs of the grant, including ‘rent for a partner’s corporate headquarters, advocacy costs, and other miscellaneous expenses.’”
KWQC | Ernst blasts USAID for obstructing investigations
“In November 2023, Ernst began investigating USAID’s assistance to small businesses in Ukraine. Ernst wrote to Powers that she was steadfast in her support for weapons and munitions on the battlefields, but wanted accountability for the billions in non-military aid. In March 2024 she led a bipartisan effort to eliminate waste at the agency. In May 2024, USAID’s obstruction of her oversight efforts led Ernst to call for a probe of the agency’s implementing partners and recipients of aid by the Inspector General.”
TV coverage of Senator Ernst’s efforts here:
Watch Fox News’s full coverage of Ernst’s work here.
“We got all kinds of threats from USAID because I was trying to exercise my oversight capacity in Congress. My staff and I had estimated was that 30 to 40% of the USAID’s awards would go to indirect costs. So their overhead, their rent, employees.”
Watch Ernst’s full Fox News interview here.
“I have been on USAID’s case for years now, going back several years where I was trying to investigate the expenditures for humanitarian aid, primarily when it came to the war in Ukraine. And what my team and I encountered was absolute obstruction and lies coming out of USAID. They did everything possible to stop me from accessing their records, to understand where our taxpayer money was going… We are going to find ways to focus our American taxpayer dollars on the things that they should be spent on, which is the American people and our interests.”
Watch Ernst’s full Fox Business interview here.
“However, we have seen such complacency with oversight and direction from USAID. Sometimes it takes a sledgehammer. And that’s exactly what Elon Musk is doing. He is going and he is dismantling it. It will be scrutinized. But I can guarantee you, if there are worthy projects that really benefit Americans and our objectives, that those programs, will be rebuilt, but they will have proper oversight within the State Department and in Congress.”
Watch KCCI’s coverage of Ernst’s efforts here.
“USAID is culpable for decades of unchecked, outlandish expenditures and that behavior must end now.”
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that Ukraine stands ready to move towards peace following his meeting with U.S. Vice President JD Vance in Munich of Germany on Friday.
“We are ready to move as quickly as possible towards a real and guaranteed peace,” he said on social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter.
Zelensky emphasized Ukraine’s appreciation for U.S. President Donald Trump’s determination, which he believes can help end the Russia-Ukraine conflict and secure justice and security guarantees for Ukraine.
Zelensky also noted that Ukraine looks forward to the visit of Keith Kellogg, the U.S. special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, for further meetings and a deeper assessment of the situation on the ground.
Following the talks with Zelensky, Vance said that the United States aims to achieve durable and lasting peace, the Interfax-Ukraine news agency reported.
Zelensky and Vance met on the sidelines of the 61st Munich Security Conference that kicked off earlier Friday.
It is too early to discuss specific details regarding potential negotiations with Ukraine, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova said on Friday.
“We are saying that supplies (to Ukraine) should be stopped, as the continuation of the conflict is tied to the ongoing supplies,” Zakharova said during her weekly briefing.
She stressed that the issue of arms supplies to Ukraine should not be linked to the start of the negotiation process, and stopping the supply of weapons should not be seen as a condition that would drive or “stimulate” potential talks.
Zakharova further said that it was simply too early to talk about a specific negotiation process.
She said that until recently, some have prohibited themselves from holding negotiations, while others insisted that everything should be resolved on the battlefield, adding that Moscow will provide necessary comments when there is an appropriate reason to do so.
The Commission for Social Development concluded its 2025 annual session today, recommending four resolutions, including a text on the New Partnership for Africa’s Development, to the Economic and Social Council for their adoption.
“The call to address systemic challenges, including poverty, hunger and social exclusion, resonates more powerfully than ever before,” said Krzysztof Maria Szczerski (Poland), Chair of the Commission, as he delivered closing remarks for the session. Discussions during this session highlighted the centrality of gender equality, human rights and the promotion of social cohesion, he noted, adding that ensuring equitable access to health, education, decent work and housing is fundamental to creating just and inclusive societies.
The second World Summit for Social Development to be held in November in Doha represents a vital opportunity to reset global priorities and renew our collective resolve. “As we prepare for this landmark event, it is essential that we remain steadfast in our pursuit of structural reforms,” he went on to say, emphasizing the need to promote quality employment, eliminate barriers to technology and create resilient social protection systems.
E/CN.5/2025/L.7
The Commission approved the draft resolution “Future organization and methods of work of the Commission for Social Development” (document E/CN.5/2025/L.7) without a vote, forwarding it to the Council.
By the text, the Council would decide that the priority theme for the sixty-fourth session of the Commission, which shall allow it to contribute to the work of the Council, will be “Advancing social development and social justice through coordinated, equitable and inclusive policies”.
E/CN.5/2025/L.5
The Commission also approved, without a vote, the draft resolution “Social dimensions of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development” (document E/CN.5/2025/L.5), recommending its adoption by the Economic and Social Council.
By the text, the Council would, recognizing that New Partnership for Africa’s Development programmes have become the cornerstone of development in the continent, urge African Governments to fast-track the implementation of the revised Africa Health Strategy for the period 2016–2030 and stress the importance of improving maternal and child health. It would encourage Member States to continue to provide capacity-building support to African countries in water- and sanitation-related activities and programmes. Further, it would encourage African countries to accelerate actions for eradicating extreme poverty, provide decent jobs and tackle the climate emergency by investing in a sustainable, inclusive and just transition.
E/CN.5/2025/L.4
Acting without a vote, the Commission approved the draft resolution “Strengthening solidarity, social inclusion and social cohesion to accelerate the delivery of the commitments of the Copenhagen Declaration on Social Development and Programme of Action of the World Summit for Social Development as well as the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” (document E/CN.5/2025/L.4) and recommended its adoption by Council.
By the text, the Council would recognize the need for strengthening international cooperation to provide necessary financial assistance, technical support and capacity-building to developing countries for attaining the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Reaffirming that eradicating poverty in all its forms is the greatest global challenge, it would encourage States to invest in programmes for poverty eradication and the promotion of equitable and universal access to basic services and resilient infrastructure, including healthcare services, education, safe drinking water and sanitation and affordable housing.
E/CN.5/2025/L.6
The Commission approved the draft resolution “Modalities for the fifth review and appraisal of the Madrid International Plan of Action on Ageing, 2002” (document E/CN.5/2025/L.6), sending it to the Council.
The text would have the Council decide that the procedure for the fifth review and appraisal of the Madrid Plan of Action will follow the set procedure of the fourth review and appraisal exercise, and the global review and appraisal will be held by the Commission on the third day of its sixty-sixth session, in 2028. It would also request the Secretary-General to submit to the Commission at its sixty-fifth session, in 2027, a report, including an analysis of the preliminary findings of the fifth review and appraisal exercise, and at its sixty-sixth session, in 2028, a report, including the conclusions of the fifth review and appraisal exercise.
E/CN.5/2025/L.3
The Commission also adopted the draft resolution “Policies and programmes involving youth” (document E/CN.5/2025/L.3) without a vote.
The text would have the Commission urge States to ensure that youth issues are adequately addressed in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and promote the full and effective participation of young people and youth-led and youth-focused organizations in decision-making processes. Relatedly, it would call on donors to actively contribute to the United Nations Youth Fund to facilitate the participation of youth representatives from developing countries in UN activities, considering the need for greater geographical and gender balance of youth representation, as well as to accelerate the implementation of the World Programme of Action for Youth. In this regard, it would request the Secretary-General to take appropriate action to encourage contributions to the Fund.
In other business, the Commission nominated Olivier de Schutter (Belgium) and Graziella Moraes Silva (Brazil) to serve as members of the Board of the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development for the additional term from the date of confirmation by the Economic and Social Council to 30 June 2027, and Jenina Joy Chavez (Philippines) for a four-year term from the date of confirmation by the Council to 30 June 2029.
The Commission also adopted the provisional agenda and documentation for its sixty-fourth session (document E/CN.5/2025/L.1) and the draft report of its sixth-third session (document E/CN.5/2025/L.2).
Following the closure of the sixty-third session, the Commission opened its sixty-fourth session, electing Khrystyna Hayovyshyn (Ukraine)as Chair, and Céline Pierre Fabre (Haiti) and Stefano Guerra (Portugal) as Vice-Chairs.
