Celebrated Italian war reporter Francesca Mannocchi has condemned the double standard over Israel’s war mongering.

“What Israel is doing in southern Lebanon is, quite simply, no different from what Russian troops have been doing in Ukraine,” she said in an interview.

“It’s the same thing…

• READ MORE: At least 22 killed in Israeli attacks on Lebanon in 24 hour – ceasefire death toll tops 3000

“Since 2022, have we ever read a headline saying, ‘Putin is building a security buffer zone in Mariupol’? No.

“We’ve always called it what it is: a military occupation.

“Yet when Israeli troops do the exact same thing in southern Lebanon, we call it a ‘security buffer zone’.

That framing clearly shaped perception, Mannochi said.

‘Same dynamics, same methods’
“We are talking about the same dynamics, the same methods, the same displacement of civilians, the same destruction. And yet, on one side it is widely seen as a war crime; on the other, as a legitimate security operation.”

Mannochi asked why the difference?

“Because in recent years there has been a gradual erosion in how international law is perceived and applied. And it has its convenient enemies.

“Putin is an easy one: no one would seriously argue that the Russian Federation is a democracy.

Israel, on the other hand, continues to be described, and accepted, as a ‘democracy’, even when that label is increasingly contested.

“Why? Because this implicates us. While we no longer feel allied, morally or politically, with Russia, many in the West still see themselves as morally and militarily aligned with Israel.”

Italian war reporter Francesca Mannocchi:

“What Israel is doing in southern Lebanon is, quite simply, no different from what Russian troops have been doing in Ukraine. It’s the same thing…

Since 2022, have we ever read a headline saying “Putin is building a security buffer… pic.twitter.com/yRM0p7BBDp

— Paolo Mossetti (@paolomossetti) May 18, 2026

While appreciating certain points in Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s speech “Securing NZ’s Future in a more Volatile World” on current challenges to international law, enshrined “rules” and “order”, we must take a hard look at the solutions he offers to enhance security.

Security now clearly is shaped in a global context. The world’s geopolitical issues affect us all, not just those near sites of military engagement, as wars on Ukraine and Iran show.

So it’s misleading to consider security as simply a national or even regional issue, though people within range of military missiles and drones suffer the most horrendously.

• READ MORE: New Zealand in ‘big trouble’ amid growing global uncertainty, US-China relations, expert says
• Securing NZ’s Future in a more Volatile World — Luxon speech

We would agree, as Luxon claims in closing remarks, that we have values worth defending.

What kind of a world and what network of values do we most want to defend? And how can we do this without compromising those same values?

Does anyone really believe that cultural and political values such as democracy are best defended by doubling military spending as he proposes? Or that 20th century national security perspectives and “bomb them to hell” strategies are fit for purpose today, while nuclear arsenals grow month by month, no longer restrained by arms control agreements?

We don’t exist in a defence structure siloed off from a former ally who flouts any semblance of a “rules-based order”. Australia, now our only officially acknowledged defence partner, is closely linked militarily with the US.

Exercises against ‘enemy’
Last year. NZ’s navy joined US and Israel in regular RIMPAC military exercises, to prepare for war against those labelled “enemy”. Judith Collins justified this on the basis that the US sent the invitations; NZ didn’t create the guest list. (Jack Tame interview, The Nation).

Clearly it’s time to weigh up our bedfellows more judiciously, and what values their actions, rather than their words, show they are defending.

It’s hard to see how one defends values like democracy by preparing for war alongside nations whose “Ministries of War” commit and enable genocide in Gaza, threaten to add Canada and Greenland to the US real estate portfolio, and bomb weaker nations back to the Stone Age, while kidnapping presidents of other nations if US corporate interests could benefit.

Luxon is right in stating that this is a historical inflection point, and the way in which we react, along with other nations, will determine “what kind of world comes next”.

How are our values best defended? With weapons and threats? Or by joining like-minded nations to call out all who undermine the values, rules and institutions that endeavoured since the end of World War Two and the United Nations Charter to enhance genuine human security worldwide?

Only ethically grounded values, policy and strategies, supported by inspired multilateral diplomacy and conflict resolution skills, can promote such values and the multilateral order which supported them.

War is a barbaric, blunt tool from a past age which cannot deal with worsening 21st century existential threats which need global collaboration to solve, if most of humanity is to survive the future.

We owe it to our descendants to defend ethical values appropriately to build the foundations of a world that is fit for them.

Frances Palmer is a peace and conflict studies advocate and commentator. She was a SCF nurse in Vietnam and Khmer refugee camps 1975, 1980. Palmer wrote history resources for schools on “Cambodia, Faces of Violence, Hegemony & Holocaust” and “Aotearoa NZ 1980s-1990s, Participation & Resistance to International War”. This article was first published at Scoop.

It was perhaps inevitable that the shock Hamas attack on Israel would become a minor election sideshow in New Zealand. Less than a week from the Aotearoa New Zealand polls, a crisis in the Middle East offered opposition parties a brief chance to criticise the foreign minister’s initial reaction.

But if it was a fleeting and fairly trivial moment in the heat of a campaign, the crisis itself is far from it — and it will test the foreign policy positions of whichever parties manage to form a government after Saturday.

It can be tempting to see the latest eruption of violence in Gaza and Israel as somehow “normal”, given the history of the region. But this is far from normal.

• READ MORE: The Gaza Strip − why the history of the densely populated enclave is key to understanding the current conflict
• Israel has no good options for dealing with Hamas’ hostage-taking in Gaza
• Israel-Gaza conflict: how could it change the Middle East’s political landscape? Expert Q&A
• Other Israel-Gaza conflict reports

What appear to be intentional war crimes and crimes against humanity, involving the use of terror against citizens and guests of Israel, will provoke what will probably be an unprecedented response.

Israel’s declaration of war and formation of an emergency war cabinet — backed by threats to “wipe this thing called Hamas off the face of the Earth” — were the start.

The bombardment and “complete siege” of Gaza, and preparation for a possible ground invasion, have catastrophic potential.

Hundreds of thousands may be forced towards Egypt or into the Mediterranean, with the fate of the hostages held by Hamas looking dire. Israel has now said there will be no humanitarian aid until the hostages are free.

There is a risk the war will spread over Israel’s northern border with Lebanon, with Hezbollah (backed by Iran) now involved.

US President Joe Biden’s warning to Iran to “be careful”, and the deployment of a US carrier fleet to the Eastern Mediterranean, only ups the ante.

“The number of bombs that Israel has dropped on the Gaza Strip in the last six days is equal to the number of bombs that America has dropped in Afghanistan in a year.”

– The Washington Post pic.twitter.com/0CiXPZKL1u

— PALESTINE ONLINE (@OnlinePalEng) October 13, 2023

Rules of war
Given the suspension of some commercial flights to and from Israel, New Zealand’s most meaningful first response has been practical: arranging a special flight from Tel Aviv for citizens and Pacific Islanders, and their families, currently in Israel or the Palestinian territories who wish to leave.

Beyond these immediate concerns, however, the world is divided. Outrage in the West is matched by support in Arab countries for Palestinian “resistance”. Despite US efforts to get a global consensus condemning the attack, the United Nations Security Council could not agree on a unified statement.

With no global consensus, New Zealand can do little more than assert and defend the established rules-based international order. This includes stating clearly that international humanitarian law and the rules of war are universal and must be applied impartially.

That’s akin to New Zealand’s position on the Russian invasion of Ukraine: the rules of war apply to all, both state and non-state forces (irrespective of whether those parties agree to them). War crimes are to be investigated, with accountability and consequences applied through the relevant international bodies.

This applies to crimes of terror, murder, hostage-taking and indiscriminate rocket attacks carried out by Hamas. But the government needs also to emphasise that war crimes do not justify further retaliatory war crimes.

Specifically, unless civilians take a direct part in the conflict, the distinction between them and combatants must be observed. Military action should be proportionate, with all feasible precautions taken to minimise incidental loss of civilian life.

International law prohibits collective punishments, and access for humanitarian relief should be permitted. To hold an entire population captive – as a siege of Gaza involves – for the crimes of a military organisation is not acceptable.

UNICEF: 447 Palestinian children have been killed in Gaza, there are reports that this number has already risen. #GazaUnderAttack pic.twitter.com/a2SNVqgOJg

— PALESTINE ONLINE (@OnlinePalEng) October 13, 2023

The two-state solution
It is also important that New Zealand carefully considers definitions of terrorism and legitimate force. Terrorists do not enjoy the political and legal legitimacy afforded by international law.

Unlike other members of the Five Eyes security network, New Zealand designates only the military wing of Hamas, not its political wing, as a prohibited “terrorist entity” under the Terrorism Suppression Act.

Whether this distinction is anything more than a fiction needs to be reviewed. If this were to change, it would mean the financing, participation in or recruitment to any branch of Hamas would be illegal. This might have implications for any future peace process, should Hamas be involved.

At some point, most people surely hope, the cycle of violence will end. The likeliest route to that will be the so-called “two-state solution”, requiring security guarantees for Israel, negotiated land swaps and careful management of Jerusalem’s holy sites.

New Zealand has long supported this initiative, despite its apparent diplomatic near-death status. An emergency meeting of the Arab League in Cairo this week urged Israel to resume talks to establish a viable Palestinian state, and China has also reiterated support such a solution.

New Zealand cannot stay silent when extreme, indiscriminate violence is committed by any group or nation. But joining any movement of like-minded nations to continue pushing for the two-state solution is still its best long-term strategy.

Dr Alexander Gillespie is professor of law, University of Waikato. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

On Thursday, the whole world celebrated the International Day of Peace. Although the UN day is not as famous as others, like World Press Freedom Day, International Women’s Day or World Teacher’s Day, it is important nevertheless.

The UN General Assembly has set aside the special day to help strengthen the ideals of peace, by observing 24 hours of nonviolence and ceasefire. Why? Because never has our world needed peace more.

Just look around us. The Ukraine-Russia war seems like a never-ending fight. Despite efforts made globally to end it, the armed conflict continues to rage on in Europe.

• READ MORE: Other UN and peace reports

In the continent of Africa, clashes continue in the war-torn Sudan.

According to the UN reports, Sudan is now home to the highest number of internally displaced anywhere in the world, with at least 7.1 million uprooted.

More than six million Sudanese are one step away from famine and experts are warning that inaction could cause a spill over effect in the volatile region. In the Middle East, strife can be heard and seen in the mainstream media every second day.

The scourge of hunger, HIV/AIDS, strange diseases, famine, climate change and natural disasters continues, without any end in sight. On the other hand, for many people living in stable, well-educated and prosperous communities, every day is an invaluable gift to wake up to.

Peace seems invisible
Peace in these places seems invisible because people’s hearts are filled with contents and happiness. People enjoy living in good homes, going to good schools, walking on safe streets and lawbreaking is unusual.

However, this environment and type of living is absent or different in some parts of the world around us.

In some countries, every year wars kill hundreds of lives, including women and children, poverty puts millions more through a life of struggle and low levels of education makes people unemployed and in need of the many offerings of life.

With military conflicts, humanity takes a significant step backwards, as many things have to be recovered instead of going forward. Just look at the past two world wars to understand this.

Both wars caused the loss of human lives, property loss, economic collapse, poverty, hunger and infrastructural destruction. But among the trail of destruction the wars left behind emerged humans’ insatiable desire for peace.

The absence of comfort and the overriding feeling of anxiety and fear brought about by conflicts, created spaces in the human heart that allowed humans to, once again, yearn for goodwill, friendship and unity.

That is why the celebration of the International Day of Peace, which is aimed at conveying the danger of war, is very important.

Actions for Peace
This year’s IDP theme was Actions for Peace: Our Ambition for the #GlobalGoals, a call to action that recognises individual and collective responsibility to foster peace.

On the day, UN Secretary-General António Guterres said, “Peace is needed today more than ever.”

“War and conflict are unleashing devastation, poverty, hunger, and driving tens of millions of people from their homes. Climate chaos is all around. And even peaceful countries are gripped by gaping inequalities and political polarisation.”

Defined loosely, peace simply means being in a place, where no hatred and no conflict exists and where hatred and conflict are replaced by love, care and respect. We are now in the year 2023.

We find that fostering peace is becoming impossible without justice and fairness, without the values of respect and understanding, without love and unity, and without equality and equity.

Crime continues to escalate, our women and children continue to get raped, there is a lot of hatred and rancour, our streets are not safe at night and our homes are not secure.

People don’t respect people’s space, people’s human rights and people’s property. The internet and social media have revolutionised the world, the way we do things and the way we live our lives.

But some of these are extinguishing peace instead of disharmony. Despite efforts to use the internet to prevent conflict, social media is fueling hatred, radicalisation, suspicion, rallying people to disturb the peace, spreading untruths and creating disunity.

Defences of peace
The Preamble to the Constitution of UNESCO declares that “since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed”.

Therefore, for us in Fiji, every day and every opportunity must be exploited to support people to understand each other, work together to build lasting peace and make a safer world for diversity and unity.

Because we are all anticipating Fiji’s upcoming games in the Rugby World Cup 2023, we should think seriously about how we can use sports as instruments of peace.

Our Flying Fijians are doing this superbly every time they erupt in singing, give a handshake or a smile, and lift their hands and eyes to the skies in prayerful meditation. There are no wars in Fiji yet we are still struggling to instill peace in our hearts, mind and lives.

We still need peace in our families and communities. Peace is more than the absence of war.

It is about living together with our imperfections and differences — of sex, race, language, religion or culture. At the same time, it is about striving to advance universal respect for justice and human rights on which peaceful co-existence is grounded.

Peace is more than just ending strife and violence, in the home, community, nation and the world.

It is about living it everyday. UNESCO says peace is a way of life “deep-rooted commitment to the principles of liberty, justice, equality and solidarity among all human beings”.

Have a peaceful week with a quote from the Bible (Matthew 5:9) “Blessed Are the Peacemakers, for They Will Be Called Children of God”.

John Mitchell is a Fiji Times journalist and writes the weekly “Behind The News” column. Republished from The Sunday Times with permission.

In a keynote speech at the annual Pacific Update conference the region’s major university, Fiji deputy Prime Minister Professor Biman Prasad has warned delegates from the Pacific, Australia and New Zealand that Oceania is not in good shape because of problems not of their own making.

Professor Prasad was speaking at the three-day conference at the University of the South Pacific where he was the former dean of the Business and Economic Faculty,

He listed these problems as climate change, geopolitics, superpower conflict, a declining resource base in fisheries and forests, environmental degradation and debilitating health problems leading to significant social and economic challenges.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific Update reports

He asked the delegates to consider whether the situation of the South Pacific nations is improving when they take stock of where the region is today.

“What is clear, or should be clear to all of us, is that as a region, we are not in entirely good shape,” said Professor Prasad.

Pacific Update, held annually at USP, is the premier forum for discussing economic, social, political, and environmental issues in the region.

Held on June 13-15 this year, it was co-hosted by the Development Policy Centre of the Australian National University (ANU) and USP’s School of Accounting, Finance and Economics.

Distant wars
In his keynote, Professor Prasad pinpointed an issue adversely affecting the region’s economic wellbeing.

“Our region has suffered disproportionally from distant wars in Ukraine,” he said. “Price rises arising from Russia’s war on Ukraine is ravaging communities in our islands by way of price hikes that are making the basics unaffordable.

“Even though not a single grain of wheat is imported from this region, the price increase for a loaf of bread across the Pacific is probably among the highest in the world.

“This is not unbelievable, not to mention unjust,” he noted, adding that this is due to supply chain failures in these remote corners of the world where the cost of shipping goods and services have spiralled.

Though he did not specifically mention the collateral damage from economic sanctions imposed by the West, he did point out that shipping costs have increased several hundred percent since the conflict started.

“In the backdrop of all these, or should I say forefront, is a runaway climate crisis whose most profound and acutest impacts are felt by small island states,” said Professor Prasad. “The impacts of climate change on our economies and societies are systematic; they are widespread, and they are growing”.

Rather than focusing on the problems listed by Professor Prasad, this year’s Pacific Update devoted a significant part of the event to the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) scheme, where Australia has opened its borders to thousands of workers from the Pacific island countries with new provisions provided for them to acquire permanent residency in the country.

Development aid scheme
Australia is presenting this as a development assistance scheme where many academics presenting research papers showed that the remittances they send back help local economies by increasing consumption(and economic growth).

Hiroshi Maeda, a researcher from ANU, said that remittances play a crucial role in the economy of the Kingdom of Tonga in the Pacific, a country of just over 106,000 people.

According to recent census data from Australia, New Zealand and the United States of America quoted in a UN report, 126.540 Tongans live overseas. According to a survey by Maeda, temporary migration has helped to increase household savings by 38.1 percent from remittances sent home.

It also increases the expenditure on services such as health, education and recreation while also helping the housing sector.

There was a whole session devoted to the PALM scheme where Australian researchers presented survey findings done among Pacific unskilled workers, mainly working in the farm sector in Australia, about their satisfaction rates with the Australian work experience.

Dung Doan and Ryan Edwards presented data from a joint World Bank-ANU survey. They said there had been allegations of exploited Pacific workers and concerns about worker welfare and social impacts, but this is the first study addressing these issues.

They have interviewed thousands of workers, and the researchers say “a majority of the workers are very satisfied” and “social outcomes on balance are net positive”.

Better planning needed
When IDN asked a panellist about PALM and other migrant labour recruitment schemes of Australia such as hiring of nurses from the Pacific and the impact it is creating — especially in Fiji where there are labour shortages as a result — his response was that it needs better planning by governments to train its workers.

But, one Pacific academic from USP (who did not want to be named) told IDN later, “Yes, we can spend to train them, and Australia will come and steal them after six months”. She lamented that there needed to be more Pacific academics who made their voices heard.

One such voice, however, was Denton Rarawa, Senior Advisor in Economics of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) from the Solomon Islands. He pointed out that a major issue the Pacific region needed to address to reach the sustainable development goals (SDGs) was to consider reforms and policies that strike a balance between supporting livelihoods and reducing future debt risks.

“Labour Mobility is resulting in increasing remittances to our region,” but Rarawa warned, “It is having an unintended consequence of brain drain with over 54,000 Pacific workers in Australia and New Zealand at the end of last year.”

All Pacific island nations beyond Papua New Guinea and Fiji have small populations — many have just about 100,000 people, and some, like Nauru, Tuvalu and Kiribati, have just a few thousand.

Rarawa argues that even though “we may be small in land mass, our combined exclusive economic zone covers nearly 20 percent of the world’s surface as a collective, we control nearly 10 percent of the votes at the United Nations.

“We are home to over 60 percent of the world’s tuna supply — therefore, we are a region of strategic value”.

Rarawa believes that good Pacific leadership is needed to exploit this strategic value for the benefit of the people in the Pacific.

“The current strategic environment we find ourselves in just reinforces and re-emphasize the notion for us to seize the opportunity to strengthen our regional solidarity and leverage our current strategic context to address our collective challenges,” argues Rarawa.

“We need deeper regionalism (driven by) political leadership and regionalism (with) people-centred development (that) brings improved socio-economic wellbeing by ensuring access to employment, entrepreneurship, trade, finance and investment in the region.”

Dr Kalinga Seneviratne is a Sri Lanka-born journalist, broadcaster and international communications specialist. He is currently a consultant to the journalism programme at the University of the South Pacific. He is also the former head of research at the Asian Media Information and Communication Center (AMIC) in Singapore. In-Depth News (IDN) is the flagship agency of the non-profit International Press Syndicate.

RNZ has appointed a group of experts to carry out an investigation over how pro-Russian edits were inserted into international stories online.

An RNZ digital journalist has been placed on leave after it came to light he had changed news agency stories on the war in Ukraine.

RNZ has since been auditing hundreds of stories the journalist edited for its website over a five-year period.

Twenty-one stories from news agency Reuters and one BBC item have so far been found to be inappropriately edited, and have been corrected. Most relate to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but others relate to Israel, Syria and Taiwan.

Media law expert Willy Akel, will chair a three-person panel. The other members are public law expert and former journalist Linda Clark, and former director of editorial standards at the ABC, Alan Sunderland.

RNZ board chairman Dr Jim Mather told RNZ’s Morning Report the board had also agreed on the review’s terms of reference.

“The terms of reference are specific about reviewing the circumstances around the inappropriate editing of wire stories discovered in June 2023 identifying what went wrong and recommending areas for improvement.

Specific handling of Ukraine complaint
“We’re also going to look at the specific handling of the complaint to the broadcasting minister from the Ukrainian community in October 2022 and then it’s going to broaden out to review the overall editorial controls, systems and processes for the editing of online content at RNZ.”

The review would also look at total editorial policy and “most importantly” practice as well, Mather said.

No stone would be left unturned, he said.

“Policy is one thing but ensuring it’s put into practice is another.

“We have specifically and purposefully decided not to limit it in any way shape or form but to allow it to broaden as may be required to ensure we restore public confidence in RNZ.

“We’re prepared as a board to support the panel going where they need to, to give us all confidence that we are ensuring that robust editorial process are being followed.

“I’m making no pre-determinations whatsoever, I’m waiting for the review to be conducted.”

The investigation was expected to take about four weeks to complete.

Dr Mather said he retained confidence in RNZ chief executive and editor-in-chief Paul Thompson.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

RNZ chief executive Paul Thompson says the New Zealand public has been let down after pro-Russian sentiment was added to a number of its online stories without senior management realising.

It comes after readers noticed the text of a Reuters story about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine published on RNZ was changed.

It has since come to light that a staff member altered the text, and Russian propaganda has been found on more than a dozen other stories.

• LISTEN TO RNZ NINE TO NOON: ‘I am gutted. It’s painful,’ says RNZ chief executive
• Prime Minister responds to questions on RNZ investigation into pro-Russian editing
• LISTEN TO RNZ MORNING REPORT:  The Michael Lidski interview
• LISTEN TO RNZ MEDIAWATCH: Probe into RNZ’s Russian invasion of Ukraine edits
• RNZ investigation into editorial editing

So far, 250 stories published by RNZ have been audited, with chief executive Paul Thompson saying thousands more would be checked “with a fine-tooth comb”.

Fifteen of the 16 altered articles were from the Reuters wire service, and one was from BBC.

An independent review of the editing of online stories has been commissioned by RNZ.

On Monday, Thompson told RNZ’s Nine to Noon it was a “serious breach” of the organisation’s editorial standards and “really, really disappointing”.

One area of operation
It was one area of the company’s operation and one staff member was under an employment investigation for alleged breaches to RNZ’s policy, he said.

Thompson apologised to RNZ’s audience, the New Zealand public and the Ukrainian community.

“It’s so disappointing that this pro-Kremlin garbage has ended up in our stories,” Thompson said, labelling the act inexcusable.

Thompson said it raised issues with RNZ’s editing process of online news, and showed they were not as robust as they needed to be.

When asked how it happened and no one noticed, Thompson simply said: “I don’t know.”

Most wire copy was only edited by one person, Thompson said, and most of the stories found to have issues only had one or two words changed, making it “very hard” to detect.

However, all added material was “really, really serious”.

‘We have to get to the bottom of what happened’
“I am gutted. It’s painful, it’s shocking and we have to get to the bottom of how it happened,” he said.

Since the weekend, Thompson said a new policy had been put in place where all wire copy needed to be checked twice before publishing, as RNZ required for any other stories being published on its website.

Thompson said he expected to be able to give further information about the external review in the coming days.

He confirmed it would be entirely independent to the organisation and the finding of the review would go straight to RNZ’s board – not him.

Findings would then be released to the public to keep everything fully transparent – as RNZ was doing with its current audit.

Thompson said the situation was a “blow” to RNZ’s reputation.

“We are responding as well as we can and as openly as we can. The really sad thing is how much great work that we do.

‘Fierceness’ of RNZ editorial standards
“The best part of working in RNZ is the fierceness with which we defend our editorial standards and it’s galling that the activity in a very small area of the organisation can affect us all.”

Thompson confirmed RNZ received the complaint from Michael Lidski in October last year, but the email was directed at Broadcasting Minister Willie Jackson. The company was cced in, as well as other media organisations.

He confirmed RNZ does not typically respond to complaints directed at the minister.

In hindsight, Thompson said the organisation could have done something about it at the time.

Thompson said he had contacted both Reuters and BBC and was keeping the organisations updated as to its audit.

Neither had asked anything of him at this time.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

RNZ is investigating how online stories about the war in Ukraine, supplied by an international news agency, were edited to align with the Russian view of events.

A staff member has been stood down while other stories are audited. It has also prompted an external review of RNZ’s online news publishing.

The alarm was raised after a story was published by RNZ on Friday about the escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict which contained significant amendments to the original copy by the international wire service Reuters.

• LISTEN TO RNZ MEDIAWATCH: Probe into RNZ’s Russian invasion of Ukraine edits
• RNZ investigation into editorial editing

The alarm was raised after a story was published by RNZ on Friday about the escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict which contained significant amendments to the original copy by the international wire service Reuters.

The original story by its Moscow bureau chief Guy Faulconbridge said:

“The conflict in eastern Ukraine began in 2014 after a pro-Russian president was toppled in Ukraine’s Maidan Revolution and Russia annexed Crimea, with Russian-backed separatist forces fighting Ukraine’s armed forces.”

But when republished on RNZ.co.nz, that passage adopted a more “Kremlin-friendly” framing.

“The conflict in Ukraine began in 2014 after a pro-Russian elected government was toppled during Ukraine’s violent Maidan colour revolution. Russia annexed Crimea after a referendum, as the new pro-Western government suppressed ethnic Russians in eastern and southern Ukraine, sending in its armed forces to the Donbas.”

‘False account of events’
RNZ’s 4pm news bulletin on Friday said the version published by RNZ “included a false account of events” and RNZ was investigating how the story was “changed to reflect a pro-Russian view”.

RNZ corrected the story online, adding a footnote which said it was “taking the issue extremely seriously.”

Late on Friday, RNZ said an investigation was under way into “the alleged conduct of one employee” who had been “placed on leave while we look into these matters”.

“We are auditing other articles to check whether there are further problems,” the statement said.

RNZ chief executive Paul Thompson said the inappropriate editing of the stories to reflect a pro-Moscow perspective was deeply concerning and would be addressed accordingly.

Other stories in the spotlight
Another RNZ.co.nz story on the destruction of the Nova Kakhovka dam described the 2014 Maidan Revolution as a “coup” — pro-Russian language which did not appear in the original Reuters text.

These stories repeat false claims that Russia’s annexation of Crimea happened after a referendum on the move. The invasion was underway before the vote was held.

“Colour revolution” is sometimes used to describe protest movements backed by foreign powers with the intention of regime change.

Describing the 2014 revolution in those terms or as a “coup” aligns with the official Russian perspectives, but contradicts the Ukrainian view.

The assertion that ethnic Russian citizens were suppressed by the Ukrainian government has also been used by Russia to justify the invasion of Ukraine, but there is scant evidence for his claim. The BBC’s Kyiv correspondent called it “demonstrably false” in 2014.

An RNZ News footnote now says the story was “edited inappropriately and has been corrected” and “we are investigating.”

Other Reuters stories on rnz.co.nz with similar editorial alterations came to light on Friday. RNZ added footnotes explaining they had been “edited inappropriately and had been corrected.”

One about the first large-scale air strikes in nearly two months had said “Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine claiming that a US-backed coup in 2014 with the help of neo-Nazis had created a threat to its borders — and had ignited a civil war that saw Russian-speaking minorities persecuted.”

That example was from late-April — and it is surprising no-one noticed the inflammatory additions to it until Friday’s revelations prompted a look-back.

RNZ confirmed late on Friday night “the alleged conduct of one employee” was under investigation. Mediawatch understands this is a member of RNZ’s digital team.

The statement said the staffer had been “placed on leave while we look into these matters – and audit other articles to check for further problems”.

In a further statement in Saturday evening, RNZ said 15 inappropriately edited stories had been identified and corrected so far.

Chief executive Paul Thompson said an external review of RNZ’s online news publishing processes would now be carried out by experts “to ensure these are robust”. The results of the review would be made public, he said.

Outside sources
Reuters is aware of the issue but has not responded to a request for comment.

An online user in the US who noted “Russian propaganda . . . on the Reuters wire today under the byline of its Moscow bureau chief” said a Reuters representative told them language appearing on RNZ’s site “was not written by Reuters or Guy Faulconbridge.”

Reuters’ website terms and conditions warns: “You may not remove, alter, forward, scrape, frame, in-line link, copy, sell, distribute, retransmit, create derivative works . . . without our prior written consent.”

Mediawatch also asked RNZ if it was permitted to alter copy supplied by Reuters.

“There will be no comment until that investigation is completed and any appropriate action taken,” RNZ replied.

International news agencies such as Reuters supply news on a commercial basis to clients.

The terms of agreements with media organisations vary, but commonly allow media customers to edit text for length and to permit the addition of relevant details specific to the territory in question.

Significant changes not permitted
Passages of text can usually be included in or added to stories published by client media companies, but significant editorial changes are generally not permitted where the published story is attributed to the agency.

RNZ’s editorial policy contains a section on material from “external sources” but doesn’t specify news agency suppliers.

“Staff may not ‘lift’ material from other news organisations with which we have no supply contract without independently authenticating the information before use,” it says.

“We should be aware of the dangers involved, particularly if the material is controversial.”

RNZ’s editorial policies also say audiences “should not be able to detect a presenter or journalist’s personal views”

“Staff will have opinions of their own, but they must not yield to bias or prejudice. To be professional is not to be without opinions, but to be aware of those opinions and make allowances for them, so that reporting is judicious and fair.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

One year to the day since Russian tanks ran over the Ukraine border — and over the UN Charter and international law in the process — the world is less certain and more dangerous than ever.

For New Zealand, the war has also presented a unique foreign policy challenge.

The current generation of political leaders initially responded to the invasion in much the same way previous generations responded to the First and Second World Wars: if a sustainable peace was to be achieved, international treaties and law were the mechanism of choice.

• READ MORE: A year on, Russia’s war on Ukraine threatens to redraw the map of world politics – and 2023 will be crucial
• Ukraine war 12 months on: the role of the Russian media in reporting – and justifying – the conflict
• Ukraine: 12 months at war – Biden visit to Kyiv sets the seal on a year of growing Western unity and Russian isolation

But when it was apparent these higher levels of maintaining international order had gridlocked because of the Russian veto at the UN Security Council, New Zealand moved back towards its traditional security relationships.

Like other Western alliance countries, New Zealand didn’t put boots on the ground, which would have meant becoming active participants in the conflict. But nor did New Zealand plead neutrality.

It has not remained indifferent to the aggression and atrocities, or their implications for a rule-based world.

The issue one year on is whether this original position is still viable. And if not, what are the military, humanitarian, diplomatic and legal challenges now?

President Biden makes a surprise visit to Kyiv in dramatic show of U.S. support for Ukraine days before anniversary of invasion https://t.co/iqUrTrRqvq

— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) February 20, 2023

Military spending
While New Zealand has no troops or personnel in Ukraine, it has given direct support.

Defence force personnel assist with training, intelligence, logistics, liaison, and command and administration support. There has also been funding and supplied equipment worth more than NZ$22 million.

This has been welcomed, although it is considerably less on a proportional basis than the assistance offered by other like-minded countries. However, the deeper questions involve how the war has affected defence policies and spending overall internationally.

While New Zealand’s current Defence Policy Review is important at the policy level, the implications affect all citizens and political parties. Specifically, most countries — allies or not — are increasing military spending and collaborating to develop new generations of weapons.

For New Zealand, this calls into question the longer-term feasibility of its relatively low spending of 1.5 percent of GDP on defence. And Wellington is increasingly being left out of collaborative arrangements (AUKUS being just one example), which in turn reinforce alliances and provide pathways to technology.

This is tied to the largest question of all: whether New Zealand wishes to relegate itself to becoming a regional “police officer” or wants to carry its fair share of being part of an interlinked modern military deterrent.

Amid U.S. claims that Beijing may be poised to send weapons to help Russia’s war in Ukraine, China accused the Biden administration of spreading lies and defended Beijing’s close partnership with Russia. https://t.co/52tRnRRAFh

— The New York Times (@nytimes) February 20, 2023

Diplomacy and domestic law
New Zealand also needs to reconsider its commitment to humanitarian assistance. So far, almost $13 million has been spent and a special visa created allowing New Zealand-Ukrainians to bring family members in for two years. With the war showing no sign of ending, this will likely need to extend.

But New Zealand’s non-neutral status also means it has other responsibilities, and should consider greater assistance with the Ukrainian refugee emergency. This would require going beyond the current visa scheme, and opening and expanding the refugee quota programme’s current cap of 1500.

Diplomatically, New Zealand also has to start considering what peace would look like. This raises hard questions about territorial integrity, accountability for war crimes, reparations and what might happen to populations that do not want to be part of Ukraine.

New Zealand has enacted a stand-alone law to apply sanctions on Russia. But because this now sits outside the broken multilateral UN system, a degree of caution is called for, given the door is now open to sanction other countries, UN mandate or not.

Preparing for the worst
Finally, New Zealand needs to prepare for the worst. The war is showing no sign of calming down. Weapons and combatant numbers are escalating unsustainably.

Nuclear arms control is in freefall, with Russian President Vladimir Putin suspending participation in the New START Treaty, the last remaining agreement between Russia and the United States.

At the same time, the US has ramped up the rhetoric, suggesting China might supply arms to Russia, and declaring unequivocally that Russia has committed crimes against humanity in Ukraine.

Were China to go against Western demands and provide weapons, countries like New Zealand will be in a very difficult position: its leading security ally, the US, may expect penalties to be imposed against its leading trade partner, China.

While Putin may be able to live with the rising death toll of his own soldiers (already over 100,000), at some point the Russian population won’t be. As the US discovered in Vietnam, it was not the external enemy that ultimately prevailed, it was domestic unrest, as more people turned against an unpopular war.

How Putin will respond to a war he cannot win conventionally, while risking losing popularity and position at home, is impossible to predict.

Everyone might hope his nuclear threats are a bluff, but New Zealand’s leaders would be wise to plan for the worst.

Whether a small, distant, non-neutral South Pacific nation might be a direct target or not is conjecture. What is not speculation, however, is that if the Ukraine war spins out of control, New Zealand would be in an emergency unlike anything it’s witnessed before.

Dr Alexander Gillespie, professor of law, University of Waikato. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Pacific Media Watch

As Russia’s propaganda and crackdown on journalism continue to wreak havoc, the Paris-based global media freedom watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has released its new campaign video.

Devised and produced by the Paris-based advertising agency BETC, this powerful video takes just a few seconds to demonstrate the importance of journalism in combatting propaganda.

In the new video, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s mendacious speeches to the Russian people about the invasion of Ukraine are contrasted with images of reporters covering the war.

Only the facts reported by journalists can thwart the Kremlin’s propaganda. Like the #FightForFacts campaign video that RSF released at the end of 2020, this new video aims to get viewers to appreciate the importance of journalism in raising awareness and in motivating the public about issues that are decisive for their future.

RSF secretary-general Christophe Deloire said:

“Without journalists to cover the war in Ukraine, we would be powerless against disinformation and propaganda, we wouldn’t know whether the bombing of civilians in Ukraine was true or false, or whether the Bucha massacres really took place.

“After the world was stunned by the war in Ukraine, RSF wants to raise awareness about the other war being waged by the Kremlin, the information war.

Eight journalists have been killed in Ukraine since the start of the war.

In the occupied territories, journalists are hunted down, arrested and given an impossible choice: collaboration, prison or death.

From day one, RSF teams mobilised. In Lviv and Kyiv, press freedom centres set up by RSF provide protective equipment, first aid kits, digital safety training and psychological support to both Ukrainian and foreign journalists covering the war.

This campaign video is intended to help RSF raise part of the funds it needs to continue its work in Ukraine and the rest of the world.

Targeted at the general public, it is being carried by TV channels, shared on social media and available to all websites that want it.

And it is available in 13 languages (French, English, Spanish, Portuguese, German, Swedish, Romanian, Azeri, traditional Chinese, simplified Chinese, Korean, Japanese and Mongolian).

The video was produced by and with the support of the BETC agency.

About BETC
An ad agency created in 1994, BETC was named Adweek’s International Agency of the Year in 2019 as well as the Effie Agency of the Year for the second year running.

BETC looks to renew the relationship between brands and creation.

Out of desire, curiosity and commitment, BETC creates new synergies and produces its own content in the fields of music, film, publishing, design… BETC is at the heart of the Magasins Généraux project in Pantin, where it moved in July 2016.

It is a new space for creation, innovation, production and sharing that is located at the heart of Greater Paris.

The BBC celebrated its 100th birthday last Tuesday. It came as the institution faces increasing competition for audiences from global entertainment providers, anxieties about the sustainability of its funding and a highly competitive global news market.

Its international broadcasting operation, the BBC World Service, is only a little younger, established 90 years ago.

Delivering news and programmes in 40 languages across the continents, it faces similar, significant questions about financing, purpose and its ability to deliver in a world of increased social media and online news consumption.

• READ MORE: US and Russia engage in a digital battle for hearts and minds
• 100 years of the BBC: the rebels who reshaped broadcasting – and paid the price

Currently the BBC’s international services are mostly funded by British people who pay a television licence fee, with a third of the total cost covered by the UK government.

The BBC claimed that, as of November 2021, the World Service reached a global audience of 364 million people each week.

The role of radio
Radio is still clearly a key means to extend the reach of the World Service and a core part of the BBC’s global news package. It is highly adaptable and reasonably affordable.

It also gives people in parts of the world where access to media can be difficult relatively easy access to news. Short-wave radio, the traditional means of broadcasting over very long distances, is also difficult for hostile regimes to block.

Recently, fears that Russia would target Ukraine’s internet infrastructure and erect firewalls to prevent its own citizens’ accessing western media sources, led the BBC to reactivate shortwave radio news services for listeners in both countries. UK government funding of £4.1 million supported this.

Current thinking about the World Service has been shaped by a 2010 decision of UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s government to withdraw Foreign and Commonwealth Office funding for BBC international operations from 2014. This seemed to end a 60 years-long era when the BBC was the key subcontractor for British global “soft power” (using cultural resources and information to promote British interests overseas).

The plan was that British TV licence-fee payers would fund the World Service, seemingly as an act of international benevolence, free of government ties. However, this seemed unlikely to be sustainable at a time when BBC income was being progressively squeezed.

In 2015, World Service revenues were boosted by a major grant from the UK’s Official Development Assistance fund, covering around a third of the World Service’s running costs.

One anonymous BBC insider was quoted by The Guardian saying that this would sustain the corporation’s “strong commitment to uphold global democracy through accurate, impartial and independent news”.

Even before the Second World War, the BBC claimed it only broadcast truthful and objective news. Policy makers recognised this as a crucial asset for promoting British interests overseas, and seldom sought to challenge (openly at least) the “editorial independence” of the BBC.

The BBC’s 2016 royal charter further entrenched this thinking, stating that news for overseas audiences should be “firmly based on British values of accuracy, impartiality and fairness”. The idea that a truthful approach to news was a core “British value” that could help promote democracy around the world became part of the BBC’s basic mission statement.

In 2017, the BBC established 17 new foreign-language radio and online services. To maximise possibilities for listening it purchased FM transmitter time in major cities around the world, and deployed internet radio, increasingly accessible to many users via mobile devices.

The focus was on Africa and Asia. However, the World Service also strengthened its Arabic and Russian provision to serve those who “sorely need reliable information”.

The British Broadcasting Company has placed an advertisement in today’s edition of The Times for its first permanent members of staff.

(14 October 1922) pic.twitter.com/iRSDfvHsAz

— The BBC, 100 years ago today (@BBC100yearsago) October 14, 2022

Fake news factor
The World Service’s rationale has been strengthened by growing concerns about “fake news”: distorted and untrue reports designed to serve the commercial or geopolitical interests of those who manufacture it.

The BBC has, in response, further emphasised its historic role as a truthful broadcaster. In its trusted news initiative it has worked with other global media outlets to tackle disinformation, hosting debate and discussion, and sharing intelligence about the most misleading campaigns.

Claims for continued relevance also rest on a drive to bring news to an ever larger audience. The BBC’s stated aim is to reach 500 million people this year, and a billion within another decade.

In 2021 the BBC claimed to be on course to realise this goal, reaching a global audience of 489 million. The audience for the World Service accounted for the single largest component of this global figure.

What then should we make of the BBC’s announcement in September 2022 that 400 jobs would have to go at the World Service due to the freezing of the licence fee and rapidly rising costs?

Radio services in languages including Arabic, Persian, Hindi and Chinese will disappear, and programme production for the English-language radio service will be pared down. Certainly, these cuts will reduce the BBC’s impact overseas.

But they should also be understood as part of a longstanding and ongoing transition from shortwave radio to web radio.

Similarly, cutting back on World Service non-news programming might not be a major cause for concern. In an age of global streaming services and social media, audiences can receive programmes from providers from across the globe.

The World Service would find it hard to compete with many of these services. However, the BBC remains in a pre-eminent position to offer trusted news.

By focusing on providing news online, the World Service is putting its resources where it can best promote British soft power and international influence, thereby improving prospects for its own continued existence.

However, abandoning radio entirely would be a mistake. As the Russian invasion of Ukraine has demonstrated, radio remains a crucial way to reach audiences who might find their access to trusted news via the internet suddenly cut off.

Dr Simon Potter, Professor of Modern History, University of Bristol. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Dominic Bryce Abelen has been described as a “warrior until the end”. He is also New Zealand’s first serving soldier to be killed fighting in Ukraine.

His death puts renewed focus on the status of foreign fighters in that war.

Abelen was off duty from the Royal NZ Infantry Regiment’s 2/1 Battalion and one of many former or current New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) soldiers in Ukraine.

• READ MORE: Few NZ personnel fighting in Ukraine, says former defence minister
• Ukraine’s foreign legion may be new, but the idea isn’t
• There is little to stop New Zealanders leaving to fight in Ukraine – but few legal protections if they do

Like other volunteers, he will have felt a strong ethical duty to be there and believed he was defending a country against an indiscriminate and inhumane aggressor.

The call by Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy for individuals to help has seen thousands of foreign fighters respond since Russia invaded six months ago. Russia is playing the same game, actively recruiting mercenaries and foreign volunteers.

The upshot is that hundreds of New Zealand volunteers may be in Ukraine right now, despite the very limited assistance their government can give them.

Walking a tightrope
Two problems arise when volunteers from other countries join the fight on another nation’s soil.

First, the lines between what constitutes a lawful or unlawful fighter blurs, and warfare can often become particularly unrestrained.

Second, what starts out as a bilateral conflict turns into an international quagmire.

That is why the United States, NATO and allied countries like New Zealand have actively tried to walk a difficult tightrope — giving military support, but only up to Ukraine’s sovereign border.

So, New Zealand may provide military equipment but cannot physically use it within the country’s borders. Military personal from the NZDF may also train Ukrainian soldiers, but this must be done outside Ukrainian territory.

While these efforts mean New Zealand is not technically neutral, neither is it an active participant. It is a very fine line.

And if NATO or its supporters became active participants, Ukraine could easily turn into a third world war.

If New Zealanders were to fight in Ukraine with official authorisation, it would effectively make New Zealand an active participant. New Zealand’s relationship with Russia would become very difficult.

To avoid a global conflict, then, there can be no officially sanctioned NATO (or Kiwi) boots on the ground.

Dominic Abelen, who was killed in contact with the enemy in a night operation to retake trenches from Russian forces, has been hailed as a brave man by a fellow soldier on the front. https://t.co/89seJQ7nJh

— Stuff (@NZStuff) August 24, 2022

The status of unofficial soldiers
Assuming that critical boundary is not crossed, the question then becomes what to do about volunteers who go to fight without official permission or recognition. Two basic principles apply when considering the status of New Zealanders fighting in Ukraine:

• NZDF members who join to fight for another country without permission are on dangerous legal ground — a soldier cannot have two masters
• a general principle applies that such fighters must not become mercenaries, a status prohibited by both international and domestic law.

The key definition of a mercenary is they make money “substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar rank and functions in the armed forces” of the foreign country they are fighting for.

If they are caught, mercenaries do not have the rights of genuine prisoners of war and can be executed. If the volunteer is a citizen or resident of the country at war, or they are a member of the armed forces of that country, they are not mercenaries.

For such reasons, countries such as Britain, Australia and the US have tried to steer would-be volunteers away from joining.

So the status of New Zealanders fighting in Ukraine without official permission is difficult. Although a general travel warning to avoid Ukraine has been issued, this does not actually prohibit New Zealanders going. Nor does it prohibit them volunteering to fight.

There is something of an anomaly here, considering the lengths taken to prevent volunteers joining terrorist groups and to deal with those returning.

ICYMI | Special Report “Foreign Fighters, Volunteers, and Mercenaries: Non-State Actors and Narratives in Ukraine”

This TSC report sets out how states should prepare themselves as non-state actors complicate the battlefield in #Ukraine.

Read: https://t.co/sp9yOTHYQI

— The Soufan Center (@TheSoufanCenter) August 24, 2022

Can NZ volunteers be stopped?
In reality, whether the rules around foreign fighters in Ukraine are being followed is up for debate.

Russia is already taking a hard line against foreign volunteers, conducting trials and promising executions. Captured New Zealand volunteers will likely face the same consequences — irrespective of whether they are wearing the uniform of the Ukrainian army.

This is difficult for any government. Offering more equipment, training and humanitarian relief to Ukraine can be justified. But this can also encourage some that joining a “just” war themselves is the right thing to do.

There is no question the government must keep an exceptionally tight leash on any NZDF personnel who try to join the conflict. That cannot be tolerated.

The harder question is whether to take a firmer position against those outside the military who would voluntarily put themselves at risk — and in doing so, make this war even more complicated and dangerous.

Dr Alexander Gillespie is professor of law at the University of Waikato. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Former Defence Minister Ron Mark of Aotearoa New Zealand says there is only a small number of citizens fighting in Ukraine.

The NZ Defence Force today confirmed Corporal Dominic Abelen as the New Zealander killed in Ukraine as the war-ravaged nation marked its 31st anniversary of independence from Russia.

The 30-year-old had served with the 2nd/1st Battalion, Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment based in Burnham, but had been on a period of leave without pay and was not on active duty.

• READ MORE: Moscow to be held accountable for killing 25 civilians at Chaplyne rail town, EU warns
• Ukraine’s Independence Day darkened by deadly missile strike
• Other Ukraine war reports
• LISTEN: Ron Mark interview on Checkpoint

Former Defence Minister Ron Mark told RNZ Checkpoint he did not meet NZ Corporal Dominic Abelen when he recently visited Ukraine.

Mark said there was not a big number of New Zealand personnel participating in Ukraine’s war.

“There’s a small number of New Zealanders there, it’s not the big number that some people have been saying — that’s a bit of an exaggeration,” Mark said.

This was the first instance of a current NZDF soldier travelling to Ukraine while on leave from the army, he said.

Humanitarian relief
Most of the military people over there were involved in humanitarian relief and had some form of military background, he said.

Mark said he was aware of New Zealanders assisting with combat medicine, residential evacuations and training Ukrainians soldiers in basic weapons and combat skills.

The New Zealanders who were in Ukraine often attempted to connect with their compatriots, joining them in the warzone, Mark said.

“It’s a small world and people are connecting up frequently with other Kiwis, there’s not a lot of them there but they tend to try and find each other,” he said.

However, when these New Zealanders developed relationships and friendships with their comrades they would often look to make an “understandable” transition, Mark said.

“Eventually when they make friends with Ukrainians, when they meet others some specifically look to go to the Ukrainian Foreign Legion and others join up with Ukrainian forces and you know it’s an understandable transition from my perspective because what they’re seeing is untenable in their eyes.”

A Russian attack killed 25 civilians when missiles struck a railway station and a residential area in eastern Ukraine, officials in the capital Kyiv said, as the nation marked its Independence Day under heavy shelling https://t.co/t66KNnJf3y

— Reuters (@Reuters) August 25, 2022

‘Be realistic’ plea
He urged New Zealanders considering joining the fight in Ukraine to be “realistic”.

The war in Ukraine was unlike anything New Zealand had been involved with for a long time, he said.

“On one side it looks like the first World War. It’s a slogging match, a war of attrition, artillery-versus-artillery, missile-versus-missile and people dug in trenches in fixed positions… on the other hand it’s extremely high-tech and it’s extremely challenging with the level of drone usage and the amount of precision guided munitions that are available.”

Some of the weaponry being used in Ukraine was so advanced the NZDF had never seen or had even had the chance to purchase such equipment, he said.

The best way New Zealanders could make an impact in the war in Ukraine was to support humanitarian organisations, Mark said.

“I encourage people if you really want to make a difference, getting involved with humanitarian organisations…  We can alleviate a lot of suffering and pain for ordinary civilians who are wearing the brunt of this…

“This is a disgusting war and it’s a war that needs to come to an end, and it could come to an end if Mr Putin would just withdraw. Simple as that.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Russia’s foreign ministry has slapped New Zealand journalists, officials and an academic with sanctions for supporting what it called the country’s “Russophobic agenda”.

The political move was announced Saturday.

The list includes New Zealand’s Military Secretary to the Minister of Defence, Shane Arndell, and other leading figures in the country’s defence force as well as the mayors of Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Nelson.

• READ MORE: Russia bans Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern from entering country

Journalists named include Whena Owen, Matthew Hooton and James Hollings.

The sole academic named was Stephen Hoadley, an associate professor in the Faculty of Politics and International Relations at the University of Auckland.

The sanctions bar the targeted individuals from entering Russia indefinitely, the Russian ministry said.

“Taking into account that Wellington does not intend to abandon its anti-Russian course and continues to produce new restrictions (against Moscow), work on updating the ‘black list’ will continue,” the ministry added.

In April, Russia announced an earlier blacklist of politicians from New Zealand, including Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.

I regret to inform you that I appear to have been banned from Russia

There goes that Trans Siberian Railway fantasy.https://t.co/2bgNYYTjeE

— Aaron Hawkins For Mayor (@A_G_Hawkins) July 30, 2022

Nelson mayoral candidate ‘proud’
Nelson councillor and mayoral hopeful Matt Lawrey was among those named, and said he was flattered to be banned from Russia, and had been getting congratulated for it all day.

He understood that he was included for organising two public rallies in Nelson that were held in support of Ukraine in the wake of Russia’s invasion.

He said he was pleased the Russian embassy had been taking note of the positive things being done in Nelson to support the people of Ukraine.

“I have to say it all makes the Russian government look a little bit desperate … it does kind of reek of desperation,” Lawrey said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. This incorporates news agency reporting.

Frontline investigative articles on Aotearoa New Zealand’s 23-day Parliament protester siege, social media disinformation and Asia-Pacific media changes and adaptations are featured in the latest Pacific Journalism Review.

The assault on “truth telling” reportage is led by The Disinformation Project, which warns that “conspiratorial thought continues to impact on the lives and actions of our communities”, and alt-right video researcher Byron C Clark.

Several articles focus on the Philippines general election with the return of the Marcos dynasty following the elevation of the late dictator’s son Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr and the crackdown on independent media, including Nobel Peace Prize co-laureate Maria Ressa’s Rappler.

• READ MORE: Pacific Journalism Review archives

Columbia Journalism School’s Centre for Investigative Journalism director Sheila Coronel writes of her experiences under the Marcos dictatorship: “Marcos is a hungry ghost. He torments our dreams, lays claim to our memories, and feeds our hopes.”

But with Marcos Jr’s landslide victory in May, she warns: “You will be in La-La Land, a country without memory, without justice, without accountability. Only the endless loop of one family, the soundtrack provided by Imelda.”

The themed section draws on research papers from a recent Asian Congress for Media and Communication conference (ACMC) hosted by Auckland University of Technology (AUT) introduced by convenor Khairiah A Rahman with keynotes by Asia Pacific Report editor David Robie and Rappler executive editor Glenda Gloria.

In the editorial titled “Fighting self-delusion and lies”, Philip Cass writes of the surreal crises in the Ukraine War and the United States and the challenges for journalists in the Asia-Pacific region:

“Similarly, there are national leaders in the Pacific who seem to truly want to believe that China really is their friend instead of being an aggressive imperialist power acting the same way the European powers did in the 19th century.”

With the Photoessay in this edition, visual storyteller and researcher Todd Henry explores how kava consumption has spread through the Pacific and into the diasporic community in Aotearoa New Zealand.

His “Visual peregrinations in the realm of kava” article and images also examine the way Pasifika women are carving their own space in kava ceremonies.

Unthemed topics include Afghanistan, the Taliban and the “liberation narrative” in New Zealand, industrial inertia among Queensland journalists, and Chinese media consumption and political engagement in Aotearoa.

Pacific Journalism Review, founded at the University of Papua New Guinea, is now in its 28th year and is New Zealand’s oldest journalism research publication and the highest ranked communication journal in the country.

The latest edition is published this weekend.

• Pacific Journalism Review fulltext articles at the Informit database

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern is expected to participate in the upcoming NATO Leaders Summit, becoming the first New Zealand leader to do so.

NATO’s Secretary-General, Jens Stoltenberg, has invited the leaders of Australia, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand to attend the military alliance’s meeting in Spain held on June 28-30.

Anthony Albanese, Fumio Kishida and Yoon Suk-yeol have already accepted the invitation.

• READ MORE: Other reports on Jacinda Ardern

Ardern is expected to participate in a session focused on the Asia-Pacific region and meet with a range of foreign leaders.

While ministers, including Foreign Affairs Minister Nanaia Mahuta, have attended previous NATO meetings, this is the first time New Zealand has been invited to the Leaders Summit.

Stoltenberg said the invitation is a “strong demonstration” of NATO’s “close partnership” with like-minded countries in the Asia Pacific.

NATO will set its strategy for the next decade at the summit and define the security challenges the alliance is facing and what it will do to address them.

‘Strengthened’ defence talks
Leaders will also discuss “strengthened” defence, further support for Ukraine, and Finland and Sweden’s applications for membership.

Otago University professor of politics and international studies Robert Patman said the invitation is significant and “reflects the gravity of the international situation at the moment.”

The invitation has come at a “critical” time in Europe, he said.

“We live in such an interconnected world. We’ve seen in New Zealand how events far away from us, such as transnational terrorism, can impact on our own society…

“We live in a world in which increasingly all states, big and small, are confronted by problems which don’t respect borders.

“There’s a recognition among NATO that although New Zealand and Australia and South Korea and Japan are geographically a long way from NATO, they share a lot in common in terms of values and in their approach to international order.

“So I think that’s probably why, given the dramatic backdrop of the war in Ukraine, that we’ve been invited to NATO.”

At the summit, Ardern will likely want NATO leaders to “reaffirm the importance of a rules-based international order, on which this country critically depends,” Patman said.

Ardern also recently returned from a trip to the United States where she met with US President Joe Biden, and a trip to Singapore and Japan.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

A Russian-owned superyacht docked in Fiji has left for the United States after a Fiji court ordered its removal, saying it was a waste of money to maintain amid legal wrangling over its seizure.

Fiji’s Supreme Court lifted a stay order which had prevented the US from seizing the superyacht Amadea.

A US Justice Department’s Taskforce has focused on seizing yachts and other luxury assets of Russian oligarchs in a bid to pressure Russian President Vladimir Putin over the war in Ukraine.

• READ MORE: Graham Davis: Behind the saga of the ‘seized’ Russian super yacht Amadea
• Other Amadea reports

The 106m Amadea arrived in Fiji on April 13 after an 18-day voyage from Mexico.

It was seized by Fiji authorities after the country’s High Court granted a US warrant last month that linked the yacht to sanctioned Russian oligarch Suleiman Kerimov.

The FBI has said the US$300 million luxury vessel had running costs of $25 million to $30 million per year, and the United States would pay to maintain the vessel after it was seized.

However, Fiji’s government has been footing the bill while an appeal by the vessel’s registered owner, Millemarin Investments, worked its way through the country’s courts.

Ordered to ‘sail out of Fiji’
The Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that public interest demanded the yacht “sail out of Fiji waters”, because having it berthed in Fiji was “costing the Fijian government dearly,” according to the judgment.

The vessel “sailed into Fiji waters without any permit and most probably to evade prosecution by the United States,” it added.

Anthony Coley, a spokesperson for the US Justice Department, posted on Twitter that the Amadea set sail for the United States on Tuesday “after having been seized as the proceeds of criminal evasion of US sanctions against Russian oligarch Suleyman Kerimov.”

The United States alleged Kerimov beneficially owned the Amadea, although lawyers for the vessel had denied this and told the court it was owned by another Russian oligarch, Eduard Khudainatov, the former chief of Russian energy giant Rosneft, who had not been sanctioned.

Last month, another luxury yacht reportedly owned by Khudainatov worth some $700 million was impounded by police in Italy.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Today, with authorization from the Fijian High Court and under a new flag, the Amadea set sail for the United States after having been seized as the proceeds of criminal evasion of US sanctions against Russian oligarch Suleyman Kerimov. (1/2) pic.twitter.com/JHiYUDKcmQ

— Anthony Coley (@AnthonyColeyDOJ) June 7, 2022

Appalled by French reporter Frédéric Leclerc-Imhoff’s death in Ukraine on Monday, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has called for a transparent investigation into the circumstances of his death.

At the same time, RSF is stepping up its efforts to provide the best possible protection for journalists in the field.

It says that with the Kremlin “working tirelessly to spread its propaganda” about the war, journalists are needed for verified and independent information.

• READ MORE: Other reports on media covering Ukraine war

A video reporter for the French TV news channel BFMTV, Leclerc-Imhoff is the eighth journalist to be killed in the field in Ukraine since the start of the invasion. His body was reportedly still in Bakhmut, in the Donetsk region, but was to be transported to Dnipro for a forensic autopsy, according to a Ukrainian interior ministry adviser.

Leclerc-Imhoff’s BFMTV colleague, Maxime Brandstaetter, and their Ukrainian fixer, Oksana Leuta, who were both slightly injured in the shelling that killed Leclerc-Imhoff, are in the process of being evacuated to Dnipro.

Leclerc-Imhoff, 32, was sitting at the front of a humanitarian truck in Lysychansk when shrapnel from an exploding shell pierced the truck’s armoured windshield and struck him in the neck.

At the time of his death, he was filming the evacuation of around 10 civilians from the eastern front line to a safer location.

Reliable, honest and independent reporting
“Aged 32, Frédéric Leclerc-Imhoff paid with his life in the quest for the reliable, honest and independent reporting that is vital for our democracies,” RSF secretary-general Christophe Deloire said.

“We are saddened and appalled by this tragedy. RSF asks the Ukrainian authorities to display exemplary transparency and independence with the regard to the investigation by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) into this violation of the rules of war.”

The Kremlin, which has imposed total censorship on freely reported news and information in Russia and the territories its army occupies in Ukraine, used the state news agency TASS to attack Leclerc-Imhoff’s memory.

TASS called him a “mercenary” in the service of “Ukrainian far-right radical forces” in defiance of the facts.

Since the start of the invasion, RSF had already registered 50 events affecting around 120 journalists that qualify as war crimes.

It has just filed its fifth complaint with the International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor and with Ukraine’s prosecutor-general, and is continuing to analyse attacks targeting reporters.

Present in Ukraine via its press freedom centres in Kyiv and Lviv, RSF also supplies security gear to news reporters in the field and provides them with safety training and psychological assistance.

The goal is to ensure reliable coverage of the Russian government’s war of aggression and war on information.

Pacific Media Watch collaborates with Reporters Without Borders.

OPEN LETTER to the Foreign Minister of Aotearoa New Zealand, Nanaia Mahuta:

Kia ora Nanaia,

We have been informed that the Wellington City Council has been advised by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs not to light up the Michael Fowler Centre in the colours of the Palestinian flag tomorrow — which has been arranged through councillor Tamatha Paul and approved by council — because Aotearoa New Zealand does not recognise a Palestinian state and this will cause offence to the Israeli Embassy in Wellington.

This is outrageous advice. We want you to intervene and immediately override this advice from your ministry officials so the Fowler Centre can be lit up tomorrow.

• READ MORE:  RSF calls for independent probe into Al Jazeera reporter’s West Bank killing
• Gallery: Nakba Day in Auckland – protesting against Israel’s ‘ethnic cleansing’
• John Minto: NZ government and media must own up to their silence over Shireen Abu Akleh
• Behind the tears for Shireen, more evidence of Israel’s daily crimes with impunity
• Photos: Israeli forces attack Shireen Abu Akleh’s funeral
• Other Shireen Abu Akleh reports

Firstly New Zealand’s official policy is to support a “two-state” solution in historic Palestine and this policy in effect recognises a Palestinian state. You cannot have a “two-state solution” with just one state.

Secondly it is deeply insulting to Palestinians to have official recognition of their national day — Nakba Day — effectively vetoed by ministry officials and the “sensitivities” of the Israeli embassy. It is Israel which is refusing to allow a Palestinian state to be formed.

The current Israeli Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, has said he refuses to meet with Palestinian leaders, refuses to negotiate a peace deal and will refuse to recognise a Palestinian state while he is Prime Minister.

Why should Israel’s veto over a Palestinian state dictate Aotearoa New Zealand’s support for Palestinians?

Why would we take any notice of the “sensitivities” of an embassy which is supporting and promoting what every international human rights organisation has declared to be an apartheid state?

Parliament has flown the Ukrainian flag in recent weeks over Russia’s invasion and occupation of Ukraine so why shouldn’t New Zealand fly the Palestinian flag in recognition of Israel’s ongoing brutal military occupation of the entire area of historic Palestine?

Within the last 10 days an Israeli court has approved the eviction of 1000 more Palestinians from their land and homes in the occupied West Bank of Palestine and the Israeli regime has announced it is ready to approve the building of 4000 more Jewish-only homes in illegal settlements on Palestinian land.

And just this last week we have seen the brutal “cold-blooded murder” of Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh and the shocking sight of pall bearers and mourners at her funeral being brutally attacked by Israeli state forces.

Aotearoa New Zealand is bigger than the venal, self-serving advice of cowardly MFAT officials.

Please direct your ministry officials to approve Wellington City Council lighting up the Fowler Centre tomorrow in the colours of the Palestinian flag.

Asia Pacific Report editors join the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) in solidarity with this open letter protest over the Nakba Day censorship and in memory of the Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh assassinated by Israeli troops last Wednesday.

Aotearoa New Zealand is deeply saddened by the death of Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh in Jenin and the violence at her funeral. We call for an independent, transparent and thorough investigation into the circumstances of her death.

— Nanaia Mahuta (@NanaiaMahuta) May 15, 2022

A tweet after this open letter – but still no condemnation of Israel for the killing of Abu Akleh by the New Zealand government.

The absolute impunity which the Aotearoa New Zealand government has given to Israel’s racist apartheid regime over many decades and the cowering of the Aotearoa New Zealand media in the face of threats of false smears of anti-semitism from the racist pro-Israel lobby are key factors in the daily murder and mayhem conducted by Israeli troops in Palestine.

The latest killing is of Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh which was described by Al Jazeera and eyewitnesses as an “assassination in cold-blood”.

This veteran journalist has been the “voice of the voiceless” as she has fearlessly reported for Al Jazeera on Israel’s military occupation of Palestine over many decades.

• READ MORE: Shireen Abu Akleh: Al Jazeera reporter killed by Israeli forces
• Western media slammed for coverage of Shireen Abu Akleh’s killing
• Behind the tears for Shireen, more evidence of Israel’s daily crimes with impunity
• A tribute on Al Jazeera’s The Stream
• Other reports on the assassination of Shireen Abu Akleh

Her fearlessness is in sharp contrast to local media reporting on Israel/Palestine which includes multiple, repeated inaccuracies which reinforce Israel’s “justifications” for its brutality.

Most New Zealanders do not even know that Israel runs a military occupation over the entire area of historic Palestine.

With rare exceptions, our media simply provide a safe portal for Israeli propaganda.

Israel’s unbridled brutality
Meanwhile, our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, if they say anything at all about Israel’s occupation or unbridled brutality are much more likely to criticise Palestinians than they are to criticise Israel.

If they spoke out about the Russian invasion of Ukraine like they do with the situation in the Middle East, they would be blaming Ukrainians for “provocations against Russian troops” and asking Ukrainians to exercise “maximum restraint” in the face of Russian brutality.

It’s hypocrisy on a grand scale.

We call out human rights abuses to a US agenda. We condemn Russia and China but look the other way with Israeli or Indonesian brutality (as in West Papua).

None of this has changed under the current minister Nanaia Mahuta who has been silent for more than 18 months on the Palestinian struggle.

Silence is never an option when it comes to human rights. It is the position of cowards.

Until Israel is called out for its racist apartheid policies and the consequences which flow from that, it will continue to murder with impunity.

We have yet again asked the minister to speak out and demand an independent investigation and accountability for Shireen Abu Akleh’s assassination.

John Minto is a political activist and commentator, and spokesperson for Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa. This article was first published by The Daily Blog and is republished with the author’s permission.

Fiji’s Court of Appeal has ruled that the Russian luxury yacht Amadea, seized by the US government but docked in western Fiji, will stay in the country for at least another month.

Defence lawyers acting for the vessel’s registered owners, Millemarin Investment Limited, sought a stay order in the Fiji Court of Appeal after High Court judge Justice Deepthi Amaratunga refused their application.

Haniff and Tuitoga had sought a stay order on his Tuesday ruling to grant Fijian authorities the power to enforce a US Justice Department (DOJ) warrant to seize the Amadea.

• READ MORE: Graham Davis: Behind the saga of the ‘seized’ Russian super yacht Amadea
• Other Amadea super yacht reports

The Amadea, which arrived in Fiji on April 12 after an 18-day crossing from Mexico, is according to the US government owned by Russian oligarch Suleiman Kerimov.

Kerimov faces money laundering charges in the US and is also part of a wider network of oligarchs, close associates of the Russian President Vladimir Putin who are sanctioned by the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union.

“The US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control designated Kerimov as part of a group of Russian oligarchs who profit from the Russian government through corruption and its malign activity around the globe, including the occupation of Crimea,” the Department of Justice said in a statement issued Thursday morning in Washington DC.

“According to court documents, Kerimov owned the Amadea after his designation. Additionally, Kerimov and those acting on his behalf and for his benefit caused US dollar transactions to be routed through US financial institutions for the support and maintenance of the Amadea.”

US police boarded boat
On Thursday, Fijian police with US law enforcement who have been in the country since the Amadea arrived in Fiji from Mexico, boarded the yacht.

Justice Amaratunga told the court on Friday afternoon the Fiji Mutual Assistance Act, which facilitated the enforcement of US seizure action, limited his ability to stay his earlier order.

Haniff and Tuitoga lawyers received their stay on Friday evening, keeping the Amadea in Lautoka while they take the 30 days allowed to appeal the ruling to execute US seizure orders.

Meanwhile, the boat has a team of US marshals, the US Coast Guard, the Federal Bureau of Investigations, and Fiji police.

The skipper and some crew are believed to still be on the vessel.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

The United States government can now remove the US$325 million luxury yacht Amadea, owned by Russian oligarch Suleiman Kerimov, currently docked in Fiji.

A Fiji High Court judge refused an application to stay his earlier ruling to allow the enforcement of a US Justice Department warrant to seize the luxury vessel which has been docked in the western port of Lautoka for almost a month.

Justice Deepthi Amaratunga told the court the Mutual Assistance Act which facilitated the enforcement of US seizure action limited his ability to stay the earlier order.

• LATEST: Fiji’s Court of Appeal restrains Amadea from leaving
• READ MORE: US govt seizes oligarch’s superyacht anchored in Fiji
• Fiji seizes Russian oligarch’s $300m yacht at US request
• Other Amadea super yacht reports

US officials based at the embassy in Fiji were expected to make an announcement with the Fiji police force later today explaining action taken overnight on Thursday and plans to sail the Amadea out of Fiji.

Fiji police boarded and seized the vessel yesterday and handed the property to US marshals and representatives from the Coast Guard, FBI and maritime authorities.

The Department of Justice announced today the vessel had been placed in the possession of the US Marshals’ Service.

Suleiman Kerimov, a close ally of Vladimir Putin, is not believed to be on board the vessel.

RNZ Pacific correspondent Lice Movono reported from Suva earlier today that Fijian police with US law enforcement, who had been in the country since the Amadea arrived in Fiji from Mexico, boarded the yacht yesterday.

“The US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control designated Kerimov as part of a group of Russian oligarchs who profit from the Russian government through corruption and its malign activity around the globe, including the occupation of Crimea,” a US Department of Justice statement said.

“According to court documents, Kerimov owned the Amadea after his designation. Additionally, Kerimov and those acting on his behalf and for his benefit caused US dollar transactions to be routed through US financial institutions for the support and maintenance of the Amadea.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

The war in Ukraine would test even the most hardened political operator: millions forced to flee their homes, thousands (including many civilians) killed or injured, evidence of Russian war crimes mounting.

Yet Volodomyr Zelenskyy, a relative novice head of state, has not just risen to the challenge, he has been widely praised and admired for his exemplary crisis leadership. So, what explains this prowess?

Zelenskyy’s acting experience has been credited with his ability to connect powerfully with different audiences, using facts and emotions to build support for the Ukrainian cause.

• READ MORE: How Zelenskyy emerged as the antithesis of Putin and proved you don’t need to be a strongman to be a great leader
• Why Zelenskyy’s ‘selfie videos’ are helping Ukraine win the PR war against Russia
• Vladimir Putin, the czar of macho politics, is threatened by gender and sexuality rights
• Other reports on NZ and the Ukraine invasion

His commitment to serve his people has been called pivotal. He has been described as charismatic — although this alone is no guarantee of success, given charismatic leaders can still lead their nations to destruction.

And it’s Zelenskyy’s repeated displays of courage that seem to really strike a chord with many. This leads us into the territory of character virtues, which we argue hold the key to Zelenskyy’s abilities as a crisis leader.

Ancient wisdom for today’s world
Aristotle is credited with first proposing that virtues play a central role in forging a strength of character that can navigate and weather life’s challenges with moral fortitude and integrity.

Over the past few decades, scholars concerned with preventing unethical leadership have developed Aristotle’s insights further, using modern social scientific methods.

Recently, we drew on this knowledge to examine crisis leadership and how character virtues guided 12 heads of state through that first, tumultuous wave of covid-19. We’ve used the same approach to analyse Zelenskyy’s leadership.

We closely examined an extended filmed interview with Zelenksyy by The Economist. Being unscripted and more spontaneous than his pre-prepared speeches, it offered a clearer insight into his character.

We found all seven of the key character virtues — humanity, temperance, justice, courage, transcendence, wisdom and prudence — evident in Zelenskyy’s responses to the interviewers’ questions.

The Economist interview with President Zelenskyy.

Character virtues in action
The virtue of humanity relates to care, compassion, empathy and respect for others. Zelenskyy demonstrates this primarily through his focus on protecting Ukrainians from Russian aggression, but it even extends to his enemy’s suffering.

Zelenskyy expresses concern that Putin is “throwing Russian soldiers like logs into a train’s furnace”, and laments that the Russian dead are neither mourned nor buried by their own side.

This refusal to simply give way to hate and anger when speaking of his enemies also reflects a second virtue, temperance — the ability to exercise emotional control.

Zelenskyy’s modesty also reflects this virtue — in the interview he shrugs off praise for being an inspirational hero, preferring to keep to the main issues. Temperance serves to maintain emotional equilibrium, thus enabling Zelenskyy to make difficult decisions in a level-headed manner.

The virtue of justice means acting responsibly and ensuring people are treated fairly. It involves citizenship, teamwork, loyalty and accountability. Zelenskyy speaks of his “duty to protect” Ukrainians and to “signal” with his own conduct how others should act. By remaining in Ukraine, he becomes a role model of this virtue while simultaneously demonstrating the virtue of courage.

Zelenskyy’s own courage has been widely noted, but we observed that he also repeatedly acknowledges that of his fellow citizens, thereby encouraging them to act with virtue.

A formidable opponent
By expressing the seemingly unshakeable hope that Ukrainians will secure victory because of their courage, Zelenskyy demonstrates the virtue of transcendence — the optimism and faith that a cause is meaningful, noble and will prevail.

Zelenskyy’s views about what motivates other countries display his wisdom. In the interview he demonstrates a broad strategic perspective and insight into the varying interests that shape other nations’ responses to the war. This helps him craft his appeals to allies, and to Russia, which then have a greater chance of resonating.

The final virtue, prudence, complements that wisdom. It involves an ability to gauge what is the right thing to do and is something of a meta-virtue, guiding the choice of which other virtues are needed from moment to moment. We found repeated instances of Zelenskyy demonstrating just that, weaving together multiple virtues in his responses to questions.

Our analysis of his leadership indicates Zelenskyy possesses strength of character and emotional, intellectual and moral clarity about what is at stake. This explains his effective crisis leadership to date. Despite the clear military mismatch between Russia and Ukraine, Putin has taken on a formidable opponent.

Dr Suze Wilson is senior lecturer, Executive Development/School of Management, Massey University and Dr Toby Newstead is lecturer in management, University of Tasmania. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

If you’re as confused as most people by the exact circumstances surrounding the continuing presence in Fiji of the Russian super yacht Amadea, join the club. Here’s our modest attempt to cut through the fog.

Twelve days ago — on April 14 — the CJ Patel Fiji Sun newspaper trumpeted an exclusive with Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qilihio, reporting that the Amadea had been seized. It had not. In fact, it still hasn’t been formally seized.

What happened last week is that the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) obtained a restraining order from the High Court to prevent the Amadea from leaving Fiji. Until that order was granted, there was every possibility in the intervening period of the vessel leaving.

• READ MORE: Other Amadea reports on Asia Pacific Report

In fact, lawyers for the owners were arguing that there was no legal justification to detain the Amadea any longer after they had reportedly paid an amount in fines for customs infringements.

It was only when the High Court granted the restraining order that leaving was no longer a legal option.

Indeed, all along there has been a suspicion that the vessel might try to make a run for it. It has a significant armoury and the security forces would have already factored in their ability to prevent a determined attempt to leave.

This application was lodged by the Office of the DPP on a warrant issued by the United States government. The papers are from Washington DC and passed through the Attorney-General’s Office before carriage of the matter was given to the DPP under the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act.

A second case
Now there is a second case that has been brought before the High Court for the Amadea to be seized. Yes, taken from the owners altogether in line with the American-led sanctions that have been imposed on the nautical playthings and other toys of Russian oligarchs and Vladimir Putin’s cronies the world over.

The High Court will hand down its judgment next Tuesday (May 3), which is expected to be in Washington’s favour.

And sometime after that, the Amadea will presumably become the property of the US government and sail off into the sunset under the command of Uncle Sam in the direction of the US.

It has been an astonishing saga. The original, mostly European crew, had orders to sail from the Mexican port of Mazanillo across the entire Pacific to the Russian port of Vladivosok via Lautoka, where the Amadea has been refuelled and resupplied.

Their services have evidently been terminated and an entirely Russian crew has been on standby to take over when it finally gets permission to sail. Alas for them, their journey to Fiji will have been in vain.

Incredibly, there is still doubt about the vessel’s true ownership. The whole world has been told that it belongs to the Russian oligarch, Suleiman Kerimov, but there is still evidently no conclusive proof — the vessel’s ownership evidently buried in a labyrinth of multiple shelf companies in places like the British Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands.

For the purposes of the High Court case in Suva, the owner is officially stated as being Millemarin Investment Limited. Is it Suleiman Kerimov?

No evidence about Kerimov
Millemarin Investment’s local lawyer, Feizal Hannif, told the court there was no evidence that it is. He said the vessel’s beneficial owner was in fact one Eduard Khudaynatov. But counsel for the DPP, Jayneeta Prasad, argued that the ownership of the vessel was not an issue. It was subject to a US warrant and the ownership issue was for the American courts to decide.

So fortunately unravelling all of this is not Fiji’s problem. But what was Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho doing 12 days ago telling the Fiji Sun that the Amadea had been seized when we won’t know that for certain until next Tuesday, nearly three weeks after the Sun “scoop”?

And is there going to be any attempt to set the official record straight?

Australian-Fijian journalist Graham Davis publishes the blog Grubsheet Feejee on Fiji affairs. Republished with permission.

Independence leader and Nobel laureate José Ramos-Horta has declared victory in Timor-Leste’s presidential election, saying he had secured “overwhelming” support and would now work to foster dialogue and unity.

Data from the country’s election administration body (STAE) with all votes counted showed Ramos-Horta secured a decisive 62 percent win in Tuesday’s ballot, well ahead of his opponent, incumbent President Francisco “Lu Olo” Guterres with 37 percent.

“I have received this mandate from our people, from the nation in an overwhelming demonstration of our people’s commitment to democracy,” Ramos-Horta told reporters in Dili.

• READ MORE: Ramos-Horta declares victory in East Timor presidential election
• Other Timorese elections reports

The 72-year-old statesman is one of Timor-Leste’s best known political figures and was previously president from 2007-12, and prime minister and foreign minister before that.

Addressing concerns over political instability in the country, Ramos-Horta said he would work to heal divisions in Timor-Leste.

“I will do what I have always done throughout my life… I will always pursue dialogue, patiently, relentlessly, to find common ground to find solutions to the challenges this country faces,” he said.

Ramos-Horta said he had not spoken to his election rival Lu Olo, but had received an invitation from the President’s Office to discuss a handover of power.

Political instability, oil dependency
Home to 1.3 million people, the half-island and predominately Roman Catholic nation of Timor-Leste has for years grappled with bouts of political instability and the challenge of diversifying its economy, which is largely dependent on oil and gas.

Ramos-Horta said he expected Timor-Leste to become the 11th member of the regional bloc the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) “within this year or next year at the latest”.

Timor-Leste currently holds observer status in ASEAN.

The president-elect, who will be inaugurated on May 20, the 20th anniversary of the country’s restoration of independence, said he would work with the government to respond to global economic pressures, including the impact on supply chains from the war in Ukraine and covid-19 lockdowns in China.

“Of course, we start feeling it here in Timor Leste. Oil prices went up, rice went up, that is a reality of what has happened in the world. It requires wise leadership.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

The High Court in Suva has allowed an application by the public prosecutor to stop the super yacht Amadea belonging to Russian billionaire Suleiman Kerimov from leaving its waters.

Kerimov, who was not on board, is facing sanctions from the United States, Britain and the European Union over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Fiji’s Director of Public Prosecutions Christopher Pryde filed the application on Tuesday — a week after the yacht moored at the Lautoka Wharf without customs clearance.

• READ MORE: Other Amadea reports

Pryde confirmed that the US was seeking to seize the vessel.

In his application, he requested that: “Amadea be restrained from leaving Fijian waters until the finalisation of an application to register a warrant to seize the property and that a US warrant to seize the Amadea be registered.”

The court is yet to hear the application.

FBC News reports says a second application for the US to seize the yacht will be heard today.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and her Singaporean counterpart Lee Hsien Loong have added a focus on climate and sustainability to the enhanced relationship between the two countries.

Speaking after bilateral talks in Singapore, the pair jointly announced a fifth pillar would be added to the agreement on the New Zealand-Singapore Enhanced Partnership.

They announced the initial enhanced partnership in 2019 during Ardern’s last official visit, with the four pillars of trade and economics; security and defence; science, technology and innovation; and people-to-people links.

• READ MORE: Other New Zealand and Singapore trade reports
• China and Solomon Islands sign security pact

The fifth pillar added today will be “climate change and the green economy”.

Ardern said given the existential threat posed by climate change, it was fitting.

“When it comes to climate change this is not an area where countries are seeking to be competitive, or we shouldn’t be seeking to be competitive unless the competition is who can reduce emissions the fastest.

“Globally we have entered what must be an age of action, and that includes the private sector as well. No government can do this alone.”

Call for stronger global cooperation
Lee echoed that sentiment, calling for stronger global cooperation on climate change.

“Climate change is the existential challenge of our times … we need stronger cooperation among most countries.”

He said areas that could be worked on included workshops for building joint capacity in responding to climate change, improved pricing for emissions trading, and work on sustainable aviation initiatives.

“Aviation is one of the major sources of carbon emissions … and New Zealand is at the end of the world and Singapore is not so close to Europe either.

“If we are going to call for a low-carbon world this is something we should be focused on.”

Ardern said Singapore was a trade hub which 20 percent of New Zealand’s exports funnelled through, and there were opportunities in reducing emissions for both shipping — including hydrogen fuel — and food, including research into urban farming.

Ardern’s trade delegation to Asia — including Trade Minister Damien O’Connor, officials, a dozen business people and media — landed in Singapore last night.

They travel to Japan tomorrow for a three-night stay, although three members of the roughly 50 people returned weak positive covid-19 test results today, believed to be from previous infections.

Because of Japan’s entry rules, they will not be allowed to enter.

Regional cooperation, defence and trade
Asked about the increasing influence of China in the Asia-Pacific region, Ardern said China had acknowledged the effects of Russia’s war on Ukraine, and Lee saying Singapore was unaware of the details of agreement between China and the Solomon Islands.

They expressed concern that the war in Ukraine could lead to increased protectionism in the region however, and reiterated their shared commitment to an “open, inclusive, rules-based and resilient Indo-Pacific region”, including free trade, open markets, and respect for countries’ sovereignty.

Lee also said they welcomed interest from other countries including China and Korea in joining the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement, an agreement signed in 2020 between New Zealand, Singapore and Chile.

The agreement aims to support digital economies and trade, and guarantees cooperation on digital identity, policies, emerging technologies, data protection and digital products.

They said they also welcomed the efforts of the United States in pursuing an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Atrocities and total war are not pixilated or sanitised. They bring death with unimaginable brutality and obliterate lives with indifference. It is time to stop protecting the New Zealand public from these grim realities of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

Our news media post warnings about disturbing images and then obscure them out of a long-held regard for the sensibilities of readers and viewers over portrayal of death. We see shapeless body bags while those lying in the street are given a dignified digital shroud.

Yes, we read and hear descriptions of what the innocent citizens of Ukraine have had to endure at the hands of Russian invaders. However, we are shielded from most graphic detail of what is being done in a mission to “demilitarise and de-Nazify” a democratic nation that posed no defence threat to its neighbour.

• READ MORE: Other Ukraine war reports
• More Gavin Ellis articles

How often do we see and hear the phrase “Warning: The following item includes disturbing images including dead bodies” when, in fact, we are left to imagine what the body looks like under its obscuring mantle?

I was moved to think about New Zealand media depiction of the victims of war crimes in Ukraine by an essay that appeared in The New York Times last Saturday. Written by long-time photojournalist David Hume Kennerly, it was headed “Photographing Hell”.

Kennerly was a combat photographer in Vietnam and was responsible for the iconic image of a vat of cyanide-laced Flavor Aid surrounded by corpses in the 1978 Jonestown massacre in Guyana. He is no stranger to war and death and was reminded of Jonestown when he saw images of the bodies of civilians lying in the street when Bucha, on the northern outskirts of Kyiv, was retaken by Ukrainian forces.

Those images were denounced by the Kremlin as “fakes” and “provocations”, to which Kennerly responded: “The images of these atrocities were taken by trusted photojournalists. They are the truth, and a record of the mendacity and brutality of the Russian military. As accusations of war crimes mount, these photos are the documentation the world needs to finally understand what is really happening in Ukraine.”

‘Direct line to people’
He went on to describe photographs as “a direct line to people, over the heads of officials, pundits and disinformation” and said some photographs will always have the power to make us confront horror.

One of the images accompanying his essay had that effect on me. It was a photograph of a body bag. It had been unzipped far enough to reveal the side of a face staring resolutely ahead. In death, the man was telling us he was an eye-witness to the atrocity that had taken his life.

The photograph had been taken by Carol Guzy, a four-time Pulitzer Prize winner, who covered the conflicts in Kosova and ISIS-held Mosul. Her photographs taken following the liberation of Bucha are confronting and include bodies being exhumed from mass graves, charred corpses, and open caskets. Yet somehow it is the unseeing eye peering from a body bag that is truly iconic.

Kennerly’s essay recalls similarly iconic images from his time in Vietnam, such as Eddie Adams’ picture of a Vietcong suspect being executed in a Saigon street and Nick Ut’s image of a young girl running naked down a road after being burnt by napalm. They helped to change public attitudes to that war.

He could have added Ronald Haeberle’s photograph of a pile of bodies, victims of the My Lai massacre by American soldiers, that appeared on the front page of the Cleveland Plain Dealer and forced the U.S. military to confront its own crimes. And Malcolm Browne’s photograph of a Buddhist monk in the act of self-immolation in Saigon shook the United States and elsewhere. And Larry Burrows’ Life magazine cover story showing a helicopter gunner with a dying pilot at his feet.

Or he could have gone back further. Start with Goya’s depictions of the Peninsular War between 1810 and 1820, then move to Robert Capa’s moment-of-death image of a falling soldier in the Spanish Civil War in 1936, and Margaret Bourke-White’s graphic portrayal of the liberation of Buchenwald concentration camp that appeared in Life magazine in May 1945. Our understanding of those events is rooted in what we were shown more than what we were told. As Kennerly observes in the essay: “Evocative images can affect policy, spur action, and every now and then alter the course of history”.

indelibly on the public record
Now we have Ukraine and Kennerly says many of the photographs from that war deserve to live as indelibly on the public record as the photos of Vietnam (and elsewhere).

But will they achieve that status if news media sanitise and, yes, censor them?

Kennerly ends by saying he’s getting tired of endless disclaimers (there is one at the top of his New York Timescontribution) that warn of “Graphic Material”.

“The best photographs of war might make us want to look away. It’s imperative that we do not.”

I agree, but I concede there is a strong tradition in this country (and in many other places) of shielding audiences from the visual depiction of death. I cannot recall, for example, seeing an unobscured image of the face of a dead person in our media, unless from a safe distance.

I certainly don’t recall publishing one during my editorship of The New Zealand Herald although I certainly saw many confronting images. News agencies observed the practice of sending the image and expecting editors to decide whether or not to publish it.

Jessica Fishman, in a very good US study of how the media censor and display the dead entitled Death Makes the News,notes that news organisations make a distinction between writing about death and portraying it visually. Much of her book is devoted to explaining why images are not published, including the dangers of “death pornography”.

Exceptions made by media
However, she identifies exceptions that media make. More often than not those exceptions are made for bodies somewhere else. Too often they are images of people “who don’t look like us”. Those are poor reasons for publication.

There are some good reasons for being extremely circumspect about publishing images from within your own country when there is a strong likelihood they will be seen by grieving relatives and friends. This is the principal reason New Zealand media do not publish pictures of bodies in fatal road crashes. It was one of the compelling judgements made by New Zealand media following the Christchurch mosque massacre when coverage concentrated on survivors.

Inevitably, however, there will be exceptions to this domestic reticence. For example, in 1972 the Daily Mirror in Britain ran a front page picture of a priest administering last rights to a protester, one of 13 killed by British troops in the Bloody Sunday incident. It is a picture I, too, would have published because it bore witness to demonstrably disproportionate use of state force.

Similarly, I would have published a photograph carried on the front page of The New York Times in 2013. It wasn’t local. It documented a war crime.

The image was of a row of bodies, four of them children, in white shrouds with only their faces visible. They were the victims of a Syrian chemical attack in Damascus.

The paper’s public editor Margaret Sullivan, in a column explaining the decision to publish, invoked the images from Vietnam that Kennerly is now resurrecting. She said they brought home the horror in a way that words never could, and the image from Syria was similarly “capable of changing the narrative, possibly affecting the course of history”. Tragically, that picture has not.

Now we have Ukraine and the strong likelihood that images captured by photojournalists in the war zone will contribute to mounting evidence of war crimes. There are precedents: Photographs taken by Ron Haviv in Bosnia played a material part in the conviction of Slobodan Milošević, Radovan Karadžić and a local warlord by the International War Crimes Tribunal at the Hague.

Images add to outrage
New Zealand publication and broadcast of explicit images of war crimes against Ukraine will not tip the balance of history or convict war criminals. However, as elsewhere, a New Zealand audience’s exposure to them will add to the weight of international public opinion against the perpetrators. Images will add to outrage.

Equally, or perhaps of even greater importance, verified explicit images of war crimes and victims may help to counter Russian propaganda still being freely disseminated in this country through the Daily Telegraph New Zealand website (no connection to the publications of the same name in London and Sydney). It carries, unquestioningly, both RT and Sputnik “news” services.

This is not to say that New Zealand media should declare open season on publishing pictures of the dead. Far from it. We are the better for not being exposed to recurring death pornography.

There are also limits to what the public can be expected the bear. In 1991, for example, Associated Press pulled from the wire an image of the charred corpse of an Iraqi soldier who had failed to escape from a burning truck on the Gulf War’s Highway of Death. One picture editor called it “the stuff of nightmares”. London’s Observer was one of only a handful of papers that ran it — and repeated publication in a book on the war. I vividly recall the image. Would I have inflicted it on a New Zealand audience? No.

Decisions on whether to publish defining images that capture far more than a moment are hard when the central focus is a corpse. It requires not only a determination of newsworthiness but also a self-examination of motives. Publication must serve a higher purpose than merely shocking an audience.

Sadly, pictures that serve that higher purpose will continue to emerge from Ukraine. I hope editors in this country publish them. They were paid for with the lives of innocents.

Dr Gavin Ellis holds a PhD in political studies. He is a media consultant and researcher. A former editor-in-chief of The New Zealand Herald, he has a background in journalism and communications – covering both editorial and management roles – that spans more than half a century. Dr Ellis publishes a blog called Knightly Views where this commentary was first published and it is republished by Asia Pacific Report with permission.

The Fiji Revenue and Customs Service has issued two infringement notices to the captain of the seized Russian super yacht Amadea which is berthed in Lautoka port.

These are notices under Section 14 of the Customs Act of 1986 for failure to comply with procedure on arrival and Section 17 which deals with failure to comply with people disembarking.

Section 14 deals with infringements under “procedure on arrival” where the master of every aircraft or ship arriving in the Fiji Islands shall bring the ship or aircraft to an airport or port or mooring without touching at any other place.

• READ MORE: Russian billionaires head for Turkey to flee Western sanctions
• Earlier reports on the Amadea
• US seizes Russian super yacht docked in Spain
• France seizes Russian oligarch’s yacht amid EU sanctions

A fine not exceeding F$20,000 (NZ$14,000) or imprisonment for four years applies for the infringement.

Section 17 deals with “provisions as to persons disembarking from or going onboard an aircraft, ship” and states a person who contravenes or fails to comply with any direction given by the Customs comptroller under the provisions of this section is guilty of an offence and is liable to a fine not exceeding F$10,000 (NZ$7000).

“These charges are as per the Customs Act 1986,” said Police Commissioner Brigadier-General Sitiveni Qiliho.

“Normally the Act, (FRCS) Fiji Revenue and Customs Service acts on a fine matrix. If he pays the fines, then good otherwise, we will need to go to the court.”

US officials join investigation
Repeka Nasiko reports that American government officials are working with the Fiji Police Force in investigations over the Amadea.

Police Commissioner Brigadier-General Sitiveni Qiliho said the US investigators had already boarded the super yacht.

Commissioner Qiliho said investigations were progressing well.

“We are working very closely with the US government in regard to the current seizure of the yacht at the moment while we go through that investigation process,” he said.

He said the next course of action would not take place overnight and “probably take the next couple of days”.

The crew, he said, were on board and the person of interest was the captain of the vessel.

“The crew are of other nationalities.

“Their embassies and high commissions have been in touch with the investigation team and we are working through the US government with those embassies regarding the crew members who continue to be on board the vessel.”

He added that all relevant defence and border agencies were involved in the investigations.

“We have the RFMF through the Fiji Navy, Customs, Fiji Police and our international counterparts that monitor the movement of vessels.”

Amadea is reportedly owned by Russian oligarch Suleiman Kerimov, who is currently sanctioned by foreign governments, including the US, over the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Anish Chand is the Fiji Times West Bureau chief reporter; Repeka Nasiko is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

The seizure of a super yacht — reportedly owned by a sanctioned Russian oligarch — by the US government in Spain recently could point to a similar scenario playing out in Fiji in relation to the Amadea which is berthed at Lautoka port.

The US Embassy in Suva did not answer Fiji Times queries yesterday on whether it had made an application to Fiji for the seizure of Amadea.

Fiji police are investigating the ship and the circumstances of its arrival in Fiji.

• READ MORE: Russian billionaires head for Turkey to flee Western sanctions
• Earlier reports on the Amadea
• US seizes Russian super yacht docked in Spain
• France seizes Russian oligarch’s yacht amid EU sanctions

Last week, Spain acted on a request from the US Department of Justice to seize a $180 million yacht, Tango, owned by sanctioned Russian oligarch Viktor Vekselberg.

“Together, with our international partners, we will do everything possible to hold accountable any individual whose criminal acts enable the Russian government to continue its unjust war,” said Attorney-General Merrick Garland after the seizure of Tango.

Al Jazeera reports that a yacht linked to a Russian aluminium tycoon arrived in a bay near the southwestern Turkish resort of Gocek yesterday, as more Russian billionaires head for Turkey to flee Western sanctions over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Oleg Deripaska, founder of Russian aluminium giant Rusal, has been sanctioned by the US, United Kingdom and European Union.

Super yacht arrives
A witness saw the 73-metre yacht Clio arrive off the coast of Gocek in the Aegean coastal province of Mugla.

The Cayman Islands-flagged vessel remains in the bay off Gocek.

The arrival of the Clio in Turkish waters came after two super yachts linked to Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich, who made a surprise appearance at Ukraine-Russia peace talks in Istanbul this month, docked in Turkish ports.

Anish Chand is the Fiji Times West Bureau chief reporter. Republished with permission.

Fiji is making a mockery of its stand in the United Nations in condemning Russia’s war against Ukraine by allowing the Russian super yacht Amadea to berth in the western port of Lautoka, says opposition People’s Alliance party leader Sitiveni Rabuka.

He called on government to send it on its way immediately.

He made the comment as police are investigating why the Amadea had entered and stopped inside Fiji’s territorial waters before a clearance from Customs was issued.

• READ MORE: Fiji investigates arrival of Russian oligarch’s vessel, questions captain
• ‘We don’t do Russians’, says Fiji health minister
• Other Ukraine war reports

Police Commissioner Brigadier General Sitiveni Qiliho said the super yacht was being investigated for alleged breach of Fiji’s Exclusive Economic Zone.

The super yacht belonging to a Russian billionaire sanctioned by the USA, United Kingdom and Europe came into port at Lautoka on Tuesday.

Public sources say the Amadea is owned by Suleiman Kerimov, a Russian oligarch who is currently sanctioned over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Marine Traffic, a marine analytics service, started showing Amadea in Fiji waters from daytime on Tuesday and by 6pm it was headed to the Lautoka Wharf.

Left Mexico last month
The Amadea left Manzanillo port in Mexico on March 24.

The 106-metre yacht risks being seized by the US, UK or any European Union country after they placed sanctions on Kerimov’s assets.

According to Fiji port requirements, any yacht arriving into Fiji must obtain approval from the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Trade and Transport and the Immigration Department.

“We have heard about it [Amadea] but nothing has come to Immigration,” said Immigration Secretary Yogesh Karan.

Questions sent to the Ministry of Health had not been answered on publication by The Fiji Times.

Anish Chand is the Fiji Times West Bureau chief reporter. Republished with permission.

“We don’t do Russians.” This was the response from Fiji’s Health Minister Dr Ifereimi Waqainabete when asked about the arrival on Tuesday of Russian super yacht Amadea.

“We’ll need clarification on that then we can comment on that,” he said. “We don’t do Russians.”

While the Prime Minister’s office did not respond to queries on the subject, the United States Embassy in Suva and the Delegation of the European Union in the Pacific said they had been in contact with the Fiji government over the presence in Fiji of the super yacht.

• READ MORE: Other Ukraine war reports

The Amadea, which arrived on Tuesday and was still in port yesterday, is owned by Russian billionaire Suleiman Kerimov.

Kerimov is on the United States, British and European Union sanctions list that came out after Russia’s invasion on Ukraine. Yachts owned by other sanctioned individuals have been seized all over the world.

“Seizing assets of Russian oligarchs supporting the invasion of Ukraine is a part of the sanction regime applied by the European Union,” said Sujiro Seam, Ambassador of the Delegation of the European Union.

“Several Russian oligarchs’ yachts have already been impounded in the European Union. The European Union is cooperating with partners around the world on the matter, including in the Pacific.

Consulting with Fiji
“The European Union is aware of reports of the presence of Amadea in Lautoka and, together with like-minded partners, is consulting with the government of Fiji.”

The US Embassy in Fiji also issued a similar statement, saying they are “cooperating with Fijian authorities on the matter”.

“The United States is committed to finding and seizing the assets of the oligarchs who have supported the Russian Federation’s brutal, unprovoked war of choice against Ukraine,” Stephanie Fitzmaurice, the regional public affairs officer said.

We are working closely with governments and private sector partners in Europe, and the entire world, including Fiji, on this issue.”

According to Fijian entry requirements, yachts must seek approval from the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Trade and Tourism and the Immigration Department before departing their last port.

Anish Chand is the Fiji Times West Bureau chief reporter. Republished with permission.

Commander of Joint Forces Jim Gilmour says he is confident New Zealand’s Hercules fleet will be up to the task as 50 Defence Force personnel deploy to Europe.

New Zealand is sending 50 defence force personnel to Europe tomorrow to help distribute donated military aid for Ukraine.

A Hercules aircraft carrying intelligence personnel, logistics is set to depart New Zealand on Wednesday.

This is being described as the country’s biggest military deployment to the region since the early 1990s.

Commander Joint Forces Rear Admiral Jim Gilmour told RNZ Morning Report the deployment presented a low level threat to New Zealand’s people.

He said an advance party which had been sent to the UK would convene with the latest deployment in Stuttgart, Germany — where the international effort is being coordinated.

Admiral Gilmour said the group would spend the week assessing the situation before hopefully travelling across Europe towards Ukraine early next week.

‘None entering Ukraine’
“None of our people will be entering Ukraine, we’ll be moving capabilities to wherever they’re required provided that it is safe for us to do so,” he said.

Admiral Gilmour expected military aid would be delivered via main supply routes into Western Ukraine.

He said although the military’s Hercules aircraft fleet is ageing, the bulk of the 50 military personnel travelling to Europe will be dedicated to supporting the aircraft.

“We’ve become used to being able to maintain them afar and we’ll just deal with problems if the aircraft gives us any … we always have our fingers crossed a little bit but I think I’m confident we’ll be able to start providing support there next week.”

He said military aircraft would remain available in New Zealand to respond to potential crises in the Pacific.

Last week, former Defence Minister Ron Marks suggested New Zealand should send military LAVs (Light Armoured Vehicles) to bolster Ukraine’s efforts in the war — a similar move to Australia’s delivery of Bushmaster vehicles.

Admiral Gilmour said LAVs and other military resources were considered among a suite of response options provided to Cabinet.

“We provide options all the way from fairly light or low options in terms of personnel, advice or remote intelligence for example, all the way through to fairly extensive capabilities including our people.

“We don’t expect that government will take those but our job is to make sure our advice is comprehensive and within that we have a suite of material options we could provide.”

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has previously suggested the military’s low stock of sought after weapons, such as Javelin surface-to-air missiles, meant any contribution would make little difference to Ukraine’s efforts.

However, Admiral Gilmour said all decisions on military spending were up to the government but admitted it made logistical sense to release funding to allow the purchase of Javelin missiles closer to the conflict in Ukraine.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says expelling the Russian ambassador remains an option, but it would not have the most impact of the actions New Zealand can take to condemn the Russian invasion.

MPs are debating whether they can summons Ambassador Georgii Zuev for questioning, after he has twice rebuffed their requests to discuss the war in Ukraine.

Ardern told RNZ Morning Report that it is a current discussion by the Foreign Affairs Select Committee and it would be “very unusual” for her to interfere in it.

Ardern said when it is deliberating, the committee is likely to keep in mind the fact that the first time they summonsed the Russian ambassador the request was rejected and the second time it was ignored.

New Zealand has not expelled the Russian ambassador and Ardern said she believes only one country has done so because there are other measures that have more impact on this conflict.

However, she did not rule out the ambassador being expelled in the future.

She said economic sanctions remain a far more powerful stance.

“When we’ve been engaging with our Ukraine counterparts, the focus for them, very much at the moment on economic sanctions, they can see it as having an impact, they want everyone to continue the pressure.”

Appearing before committee ‘minimum’ – Brownlee
However, National’s foreign affairs spokesperson Gerry Brownlee said appearing before the Foreign Affairs Select Committee was the least Russia’s ambassador could do.

Brownlee said the committee wanted to get the ambassador to appear after the Russian embassy in New Zealand put fake news about what was happening in Ukraine on social media.

“So he’s been asked to come to the committee for that to have a talk about that, that’s the minimum thing that he should do, otherwise what’s the point in having him here?”

Brownlee said there was an ongoing discussion about what happens from this point in terms of his appearing before the committee, but he saw it as a bare minimum.

“What is the point in having the guy in New Zealand if it’s not for us to at least put him on the mat over what we see his government has done, or want to be able to tell him his government is doing, is completely wrong.

“He is Vladimir Putin’s mouthpiece in New Zealand and he is able to sit here, get onto the social media, do all sorts of activities in that social media, pushing that Russian line [that] the rest of the world is making all this up and it’s not nearly as bad as it seems – no one believes that.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

A New Zealand aid worker in Kyiv says the ReliefAid group he leads was one of the first to provide food in the suburb of Bucha — northwest of Kyiv — where Russian troops are alleged to have executed 150 civilians.

New Zealand donations in the Ukraine War have so far helped the aid group deliver more than six tonnes of food to survivors, and take medical supplies to hospitals around Kyiv.

ReliefAid executive director Mike Seawright arrived in Kyiv this weekend after driving in from the western side of Ukraine — “down some roads that have seen a lot of intense fighting, burnt out buildings, warehouses completely flattened, family homes destroyed and lots of military hardware burnt out.

• LISTEN TO RNZ SUNDAY MORNING: ‘You can’t do this from a desk in New Zealand’ – ReliefAid executive director Mike Seawright
• Ukraine: Zelenskyy still seeks peace despite expected Russian attacks

“It was an interesting if not somewhat chilling drive.”

He has been in the country for a month after crossing the border on foot.

In Kyiv, “the fighting may have stopped … but the destruction of family homes is still there. People are living in the rubble of what was their normal lives with nothing to their name, faced with cold, harsh conditions, with little or no food. So humanitarian support such as we are providing … is essential.”

But while fighting there may have stopped, missiles were still “raining down” on the city, making it unsafe.

Management on the fly
Seawright said that with many trucks bringing aid into the country — and at least one plane of medical supplies — a lot of organisation was involved.

“It also takes a lot of management on the fly. So we’ve predefined plans … but of course what happens on the day is entirely dependent on checkpoints we can’t control, road conditions on roads that have been severely damaged … and a security situation that is extremely volatile. So this is our number eight wire – managing all of this.”

His team also wants to deliver aid to people in the besieged city of Mariupol.

“We are standing by to get in there as soon as conditions allow. We pride ourselves on being at the forefront of humanitarian action. ReliefAid is a warzone specialist humanitarian aid organisation but I have to say, even we can’t get access to Mariupol at the moment.”

As soon as an access corridor was established, they would be in, Seawright said.

Being on the ground was key to working effectively, he said.

A lot of hard work
“It takes a lot of hard working, a lot of networking, a lot of managing logistics, but I’m proud to say we’ve got an incredible team here in Ukraine allowing us to do that.

“The most important thing you need to do when engaging with a new environment is see what is happening on the ground. We’ve got to know who we are supporting. We have got to make sure we know what their needs are and therefore we need to make sure the support that we receive by generous kiwis in New Zealand and across the world is going to the right place.

“You can’t do this from a desk in New Zealand, you can’t do this by reading a report. You have to get on the ground and see it yourself.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

The discovery of many civilian bodies lying dead in the Ukrainian city of Bucha this week has brought out more Western rhetoric of horror, disgust, anger and fury at the Russian invasion of Ukraine and has renewed calls for more sanctions against Russia, more weapons to the Ukrainians and calls for Putin to be put on trial as a war criminal.

That’s a strong response to war and those responsible for starting a military invasion of a sovereign state.

Let’s shift the focus to Iraq in 2003 for a moment.

• READ MORE: Bucha killings: ‘The world cannot be tricked anymore’

On the marches to protest against the US-UK-Australian-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 one of the chants used was “Never forget Fallujah!”.

So, for those that were too young to know, or now too old to remember, here are a few well-referenced paragraphs from Wikipedia about what happened when the US invaders attacked that city as part of an invasion of another sovereign state, Iraq.

The United States bombardment of Fallujah began in April 2003, one month after the beginning of the invasion of Iraq. In April 2003, United States forces fired on a group of demonstrators who were protesting against the US presence. US forces alleged they were fired at first, but Human Rights Watch, who visited the site of the protests, concluded that physical evidence did not corroborate US allegations and confirmed the residents’ accusations that the US forces fired indiscriminately at the crowd with no provocation.

Seventeen people were killed and 70 were wounded.

Further killings
In a later incident, US soldiers fired on protesters again; Fallujah’s mayor, Taha Bedaiwi al-Alwani, said that two people were killed and 14 wounded. Iraqi insurgents were able to claim the city a year later, before they were ousted by a siege and two assaults by US forces.

These events caused widespread destruction and a humanitarian crisis in the city and surrounding areas. As of 2004, the city was largely ruined, with 60 percent of buildings damaged or destroyed, and the population at 30–50 percent of pre-war levels.

At least one US battalion had orders to shoot any male of military age on the streets after dark, armed or not. In violation of the Geneva Convention, the city’s main hospital was closed by Marines, negating its use, and a US sniper was placed on top of the hospital’s water tower.

On November 13, 2004, a US Marine with 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines, was videotaped killing a wounded combatant in a mosque. The incident, which came under investigation, created controversy throughout the world.

The man was shot at close range after he and several other wounded insurgents had previously been left behind overnight in the mosque by the US Marines. The Marine shooting the man had been mildly injured by insurgents in the same mosque the day before.

On November 16, 2004, a Red Cross official told Inter Press Service that “at least 800 civilians” had been killed in Fallujah and indicated that “they had received several reports from refugees that the military had dropped cluster bombs in Fallujah, and used a phosphorus weapon that caused severe burns.”

On 17 May 2011, AFP reported that 21 bodies, in black bodybags marked with letters and numbers in Roman script, had been recovered from a mass grave in al-Maadhidi cemetery in the centre of the city.

Blindfolded, legs tied
Fallujah police chief Brigadier General Mahmud al-Essawi said that they had been blindfolded, their legs had been tied and they had suffered gunshot wounds. The Mayor, Adnan Husseini said that the manner of their killing, as well as the body bags, indicated that US forces had been responsible.

Both al-Essawi and Husseini agreed that the dead had been killed in 2004. The US Military declined to comment.

There were no sanctions against the US, UK and Australia, there were no US soldiers, military leaders or politicians held to account. There were no arms sent to help the Iraqis facing overwhelming odds in their fight against the US and its allies.

There were no moves to charge George Bush (US President), Tony Blair (UK Prime Minister) or John Howard (Australian Prime Minister) for war crimes before the International Criminal Court.

Yes Vladimir Putin should be on trial at the International Criminal Court, but before he appears we should have seen George Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard face the same charges first.

We should never forget Bucha — but we must never forget Fallujah either. The people of both cities deserve justice at the ICC. Let’s do all we can to hold them to account.

Incidentally, US President Joe Biden was pushing hard for the invasion of Iraq back in 2003. His hypocrisy now in condemning Putin is the stuff of legends.

Republished from The Daily Blog with permission.

COMMENTARY: By John Minto

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has exposed so much hypocrisy in Aotearoa New Zealand and around the Western world that’s it’s hard to keep track.

Israel has racism down to a fine art.

While the world was putting their hand up for Ukrainian refugees — Israel put its hand up only for Jewish Ukrainian refugees (at least one grandparent must be Jewish).

• READ MORE: What the war in Ukraine taught us, Palestinians
• A threshold crossed: Israeli authorities and the crimes of apartheid and persecution

As early as January 2022, Israel began planning to transfer Ukrainian Jews to become colonists in the land of the Palestinians. Israel’s Ministry of Aliyah and Immigrant Absorption proclaimed: “We call on the Jews of Ukraine to immigrate to Israel – your home.”

The refugees/colonists began to arrive in early March, receiving preferential treatment, while Ukrainians who could not prove their Jewishness according to Israel’s racist criteria for refugees face myriad difficulties.

Meanwhile, the World Zionist Organisation’s Settlement Division has begun preparing 1000 housing units for Ukrainian Jews on stolen and occupied Palestinian and Syrian land in the occupied West Bank and the occupied Golan Heights.

When there was an outcry from Israeli liberals saying, quite rightly, that this was not a reflection of Jewish values, the government said they would take non-Jewish refugees as well.

Predictable reaction
The predictable reaction from racist Israelis was “We are a Jewish state — why are we taking in these gentiles?”

The government, however, says the non-Jewish refugees won’t be able to claim Israeli citizenship — they will have to leave when the fighting stops.

Important to point out here that Israel is NOT a Jewish state. Twenty percent of Israeli citizens are Palestinians. Israel is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multicultural state dominated by a racist regime which has made indigenous Palestinians second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth class inhabitants in the land of their birth and the land of their ancestors, Palestine.

This is well described in Amnesty International’s short video on Israeli apartheid.

The Amnesty International video.

Jewish Ukrainian refugees are being welcomed because it helps Israel maintain a majority Jewish population. It’s a country obsessed with demographics and determined to maintain what Israel’s largest and most respected Human Right Group, B’Tselem, calls “A regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea”.

It is proposed that most of the Jewish Ukrainian refuges will be settled in illegal Jewish-only settlements on stolen Palestinian land while Israel’s apartheid government continues its refusal to allow Palestinians to return to their homes and land after around 800,000 were ethnically cleansed from vast swathes of Historic Palestine by Israeli militias in 1948 — a process which continues to this day.

And Jewish Ukrainian refugees will qualify for automatic Israeli citizenship — something denied the big majority of Palestinians in their homeland Palestine – all of which has been occupied by the Israeli military since 1967.

Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali — “I’ve killed a lot of Arabs in my time and there’s nothing wrong with that” — Bennett has been promoting himself as an international mediator.

International condemnation
Israel didn’t join the international condemnation of Russia and has repeatedly refused Ukrainian appeals for military assistance, but Bennet flew to Moscow for a three-hour meeting with Putin and was then on the phone to Zelensky suggesting to him he should think about the cost in death and destruction in Ukraine and agree to Russian terms.

Bennett followed up by trying to get the parties together for a mediation meeting in Jerusalem.

This is the same Israeli leader who refuses to meet with Palestinian leaders, refuses to negotiate any peace deal with Palestinians and says he will never agree to a Palestinian state being established on his watch. Not the credentials for an international mediator.

And in case readers missed the recent news a further two high-profile groups have joined the international human rights condemnation of Israel as an apartheid state.

A short summary of the highest profile groups that have described Israel in this way over the past 18 months is here:

• Numerous Palestinian civil society organisations
• The late South African Archbishop and Nobel Peace prize winner Desmond Tutu — “Name Israel an apartheid state and boycott”.
• B’Tselem — Israel’s largest and most respected human right organisation, in their January 2021 report “A regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea: This is apartheid”
• Human Rights Watch, the US largest human rights organisation, in their April 2021 report “A Threshold Crossed: Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution”
• Amnesty International, in their February 2022 report “Israel’s apartheid against Palestinians”
• Addameer prisoner support group and Harvard Law School label Israel an apartheid state
• UN Special Rapporteur to the United Nations Human Right Council, Michael Lynk, Israel has imposed upon Palestine an apartheid reality in a post-apartheid world

Racism on steroids
It’s racism on steroids in Israel just as it was in apartheid South Africa. And increasingly Jews around the world are seeing it as such. From an opinion poll last year 25 percent of American Jews already regard Israel as an apartheid state and 38 percent of young American Jews say the same thing.

We need regime change in Israel and everyone living in historic Palestine enjoying equal rights.

John Minto is a political activist and commentator, and spokesperson for Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa. This article was first published by The Daily Blog and is republished with the author’s permission.

The first media freedom advocacy group has formed in the Marshall Islands. Organisers this week were in the initial phase of outreach to launch the Pacific Media Institute, which was incorporated last month as a non-profit organisation.

Despite a small but robust independent news media in the Marshall Islands, there has never been an advocacy group for media freedom in this nation.

“If ever there was a ‘right time’ to form an advocacy organisation for freedom of expression and transparency in government, now is it,” said Marshall Islands Journal editor Giff Johnson, one of the founding members of the institute.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific media freedom reports

“Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine is a prime example of a violation of a sovereign, independent democracy that undermines the rule of law.

“Moreover, we watch as Russia suppresses access to independent media at home to prevent its citizens from knowing what is happening in the Ukraine and the world’s reaction to the invasion.”

Founders of PMI said closer to home, there were indications of democracy and media freedoms eroding in island nations that banned visits by foreign independent media and attempted to restrict their own media and freedom of expression by their citizens.

“We are fortunate in the Marshall Islands to have clear free speech rights enshrined in the Constitution and to have had governments for decades that respect this essential element of democracy,” Johnson added.

Freedoms ‘cannot be taken for granted’
“But these freedoms here and in the region should not be taken for granted. We need to celebrate them where they exist, strengthen them where we can, and advocate for them where they don’t.”

A growing concern is the increasingly active presence in the islands of governments outside the region that do not support media freedom and transparency in government operations at home and bring this philosophy with them into the region, he said.

The PMI is a joint effort of three people in independent media in the Marshall Islands.

Joining Johnson as co-founders of PMI are Daniel Kramer, CEO of Six9Too Productions and Power 103.5FM, and Fred J. Pedro, a long-time broadcaster and talk show host.

They said PMI hoped to promote independent media and transparency in government in the Marshall Islands as well as neighbouring nations.

The purpose of the new non-profit organisation is to:

• Advocate for and engage in media freedom and freedom of expression;

• Promote transparency and accountability in government;

• Support expansion of independent, non-government media; and

• Promote training and other initiatives to increase the number and skills of people working in media and the quality of reporting in the Marshall Islands and regionally.

‘Watershed moment’
Veteran Pacific islands journalist Floyd K. Takeuchi said: “This is a watershed moment in the history of independent journalism in the Western Pacific.

“And what better country to see a media freedom group organized than the Marshall Islands, which for more than half a century has shown how democratic values, chiefly and cultural traditions, and a free press can comfortably coexist.”

PMI has already reached out to Takeuchi and other journalists with extensive experience in the region to collaborate on proposed training for media and outreach dialogues with top-level government authorities in the initial phase of the organisation.

“We want to see more young people take up careers in media in the future,” said Kramer.

“We hope that PMI can help interest young people in media careers through training and other opportunities that our new group plans to offer for journalists here and in the island region.”

Kramer’s Six9Too Productions has established an ongoing record of collaboration among musicians from the Marshall Islands, Solomon Islands and Polynesian countries that have produced hit songs and music videos.

He said PMI hoped to see this type of collaboration among working journalists here and in the region to bolster reporting skills and media freedom in general.

The PMI founders said they were hopeful that countries internationally that supported media freedom, democracy and transparency in government would be supportive of PMI training and other initiatives.

“We want to start tapping opportunities for synergy among working journalists in the Marshall Islands and in other Pacific islands through collaborative training programs and reporting initiatives,” said Johnson.

The Green Party says New Zealand has put its relationship with the NATO security alliance ahead of saving lives in Ukraine.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern yesterday announced $5 million would go to a NATO fund for the purchase of “non-lethal military assistance” such as fuel, rations and first aid equipment.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, or NATO, is a security alliance including the United States, Canada and 28 European nations.

• READ MORE: Other Ukraine war reports

Green Party Foreign Affairs spokesperson Golriz Ghahraman told RNZ the funding appeared to be a “diplomatic nod” and could have been put to better use.

“It looks like we’re trying to be part of the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ — so to speak — when that’s not actually our best contribution,” Ghahraman said.

“That $5m could have gone to aid where it would immediately be saving lives … versus us ticking-the-box of being in the NATO circle while giving very little by way of actually helping people in this conflict.”

Ghahraman said Ukrainian refugees were desperately in need of food, blankets, medicine and shelter.

‘Contending with covid’
“They are contending with covid at the same time they’re living through a European winter — millions upon millions, displaced in refugee camps or in need of resettlement.”

To date, New Zealand has contributed $6m in humanitarian aid, mostly through the Red Cross. The government has also created a special visa to assist Ukrainians to join their relatives in New Zealand.

Speaking at a media conference on Monday, Ardern said the “extraordinary measures” to help Ukrainian forces were in direct response to requests from Ukraine.

Asked to explain the pivot from humanitarian aid to military assistance, Ardern described Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as “a massive disruption to the international rules-based order”.

The Defence Force will also donate surplus stock of 1066 body armour plates, 571 camouflage vests and 473 helmets to Ukrainian forces.

ACT leader David Seymour said New Zealand’s contribution was “pathetic” and should include direct weapon support.

“How long do we want to be the weakest link in the West? We have to answer the call and provide what we have to help these people defend their homes.”

Send missile launchers
Seymour said New Zealand should immediately send Ukraine its supply of Javelin medium-range missile launchers.

“They’re not doing much here — I haven’t seen any Russian tanks in New Zealand lately — but they could do a lot over there,” Seymour said.

Ardern said directly providing weapons would be a “fundamental change” in the country’s approach to the conflict, but the option remained on the table.

She noted New Zealand did not have a large supply of such equipment.

National Party Foreign Affairs spokesperson Gerry Brownlee told RNZ the government’s response, so far, was appropriate.

“The circumstances here are very different than anything we’ve had to deal with before,” Brownlee said. “We should be doing our bit.”

Providing firepower
Brownlee said the option of providing firepower could potentially be considered “further down the track”.

“Our contribution would be so small compared to that from the United States or Great Britain,” Brownlee said.

“Whatever we do, clearly we’re going to have to operate through NATO and their connections into Ukraine to make sure that whatever assistance is given does get to the right place.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Several media crews have already come under fire and four reporters have sustained gunshot injuries in Ukraine since the start of the Russian invasion as it enters its fourth week.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has reaffirmed its call to the Russian and Ukrainian authorities to comply with their international obligations to guarantee the safety of reporters in the field, and urges journalists to take the utmost care.

• READ MORE: Читать на русском / Read in Russian
• RSF opens press freedom centre in Lviv, first bulletproof vests delivered
• RSF creates ‘mirror’ of leading Russian exile news site blocked by Kremlin
• RSF refers Russian strikes on four Ukrainian TV towers for ICC probe

The shots came within centimetres of Swiss photographer Guillaume Briquet’s head when presumed members of a Russian special commando fired on him shortly after he passed a Ukrainian checkpoint on a road towards the southern city of Mykolaiv on March 6, while covering the Russian advance in the region.

Despite the many “Press” markings on his car and his bulletproof vest marked “Press,” this experienced war reporter was then harassed by the soldiers, who stole 3000 euros and reporting equipment from him.

“As this incident clearly illustrates, reporters in the field are targets for belligerents despite all the rules protecting journalists,” said Jeanne Cavelier, the head of RSF’s Eastern Europe and Central Asia desk.

“They are civilians, who are keeping the world informed about the progress of the fighting. They must be able to work safely. We therefore call on all parties to the conflict to immediately commit to protecting journalists in the field in accordance with international law.

“We also recommend that journalists exercise the utmost caution in the light of the many attacks by Russian commandos sent ahead as scouts.”

Under Russian fire
“They were less than 50 metres away,” RSF was told by Briquet, who was wounded in the face and arm by glass splinters from his windshield.

“They clearly shot to kill. If I hadn’t ducked, I would have been hit. I’ve been fired on before in other war zones, but I’ve never seen this.

“Journalists traveling around the country with no war experience are in mortal danger.”

A crew working for the London-based pan-Arab TV channel Al-Araby TV — reporter Adnan Can and cameraman Habip Demirci — came under Russian fire in Irpin, a suburb of Kyiv, on March 6. Shots were aimed at their car even though they had attached a white flag and “Press” signs to it.

Trapped in a town where fighting was taking place, the two journalists had to hide with residents.

A crew with the UK’s Sky News TV channel — consisting of four Brits and a Ukrainian journalist – came under fire from a Russian reconnaissance unit while heading toward Bucha, on the outskirts of Kyiv, on the fourth day of the invasion, February 28.

The crew’s leader, reporter Stuart Ramsay, sustained a gunshot injury to the lower back while cameraman Richie Mockler’s body armour stopped two other rounds.

After shouting that they were journalists and after seeing that the shooting continued despite their press vests, the crew had to abandon their vehicle and run for cover.

Brush with death
Vojtech Bohac and Majda Slamova, two Czech journalists reporting for Voxpot, and two Ukrainian journalists with Central TV had more luck during a similar incident while travelling together in a car in Makariv, another town on the outskirts of Kyiv, on March 3.

They managed to escape uninjured in their car after coming under fire from Russian soldiers using AK-47 assault rifles, their media outlets reported.

“This shoulder wound missed costing me my life by just a few centimetres,” Danish journalist Stefan Weichert told RSF. He is now hospitalised in Denmark after being evacuated along his colleague, Emil Filtenborg Mikkelsen, who sustained four gunshot wounds in the same attack.

The two reporters for the Danish newspaper Ekstra-Bladet sustained these injuries in the northeastern town of Okhtyrka on 26 February.

“The gunman, who we weren’t able to identify, was located about 15 metres behind our car.” Weichert said. “He couldn’t have failed to see the ‘press’ sign that was clearly visible on our car.”

4 TV towers bombed
As well as firing live rounds at reporters, the Russian armed forces have also carried out strikes on telecommunications antennae to prevent Ukrainian TV and radio broadcasts. Four radio and TV towers — in Kyiv, Korosten, Lyssytchansk and Kharkiv — have been the targets of Russian attacks that abruptly terminated broadcasting by at least 32 TV channels and several dozen national radio stations.

Evgeny Sakun, a cameraman for the local Kyiv Live TV channel, was at the Kyiv tower at the time of the attack and was killed in circumstances that RSF is investigating.

Ukraine is ranked 97th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2021 World Press Freedom Index, while Russia is ranked 150th.

Pacific Media Watch collaborates with Reporters Without Borders.

In this A View From Afar podcast, political scientist Dr Paul Buchanan and Selwyn Manning deep dive into the big picture that hangs over the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

That big picture has many aspects to it, and as such any resolution to the atrocities being committed in Ukraine will likely be weighed against what is a challenge to the international law and rules-based order.

In a previous episode in this series, Dr Buchanan and Manning examined how the world was transitioning into a democracies versus authoritarian bipolarity.

• WATCH: A View From Afar on YouTube

This episode continues in that theme, but digs down into how descendent powers, or nations, tend to create or become entrenched in wars, and how Russia, in 2022, fits this pattern.

And, there are comparisons to global Western powers too.

But this episode goes further. It examines how transitional international moments, conflict as a systems regulator, can move to counter Russia.

In 2022, the United Nations Security Council, due to the P5 nations having veto powers, appears no longer fit for purpose.

A UN-led multilateral response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is unlikely.

Frustrated by Russia
The UN General Assembly appears frustrated by Russia’s refusal to acknowledge the combined insistence of the UNGA that it cease its war against Ukraine.

Against this backdrop, NATO, at this juncture, cannot directly defend Ukrainians as Ukraine was not able to become a NATO member state before Russia invaded its territory.

Sometimes rules and law provide security and stability in the world. And sometimes, as seen in 2022, it permits conflict to burn on.

As discussed, the global rules-based order is fast changing in 2022. And as such, this underscores a need to re-set the international system.

But what can be done to stop people from being killed in this unprovoked war – a war that in many ways illustrates a wider war between democracies and authoritarians, as the world transitions toward a new bipolarity?

And, if a global order reset is needed, what would that reset look like?

These are huge challenges that require sensible analysis.

You can comment on this debate by clicking on one of these social media channels and interacting in the social media’s comment area. Here are the links:

• Facebook.com/selwyn.manning
• Youtube
• Twitter.com/Selwyn_Manning

• The MIL Network’s podcast A View from Afar was nominated as a top defence security podcast by Threat.Technology – a London-based cyber security news publication.
• Follow A View from Afar via affiliate syndicators.