Immortal Regiment honors Soviet WWII veterans under tight police watch in Berlin (VIDEOS)
The Immortal Regiment, which is held on May 9 in cities across Russia and other countries, is a procession in which people carry portraits of relatives who fought against Nazi Germany in World War II. The idea was first conceived in the Russian city of Tomsk in 2012 and has since spread across the world.
The procession in Berlin, which drew members of the Russian community and local residents, moved through the center of the German capital and concluded at the Soviet War Memorial in Tiergarten, where thousands of Red Army soldiers are buried.
Marchers wishing to lay flowers at the memorial to mark the 80th anniversary of Nazi Germany's defeat were allowed to approach the site in groups of only ten, each escorted by law enforcement.At the memorial, a group of pro-Ukraine activists attempted to interfere with the flower-laying ceremony and had to be restrained by police.
Marchers were chanting 'Russia, Russia,' while the opposing demonstrators waved Ukrainian and NATO flags and held signs reading 'Arm Ukraine.'Earlier this week, Berlin city officials banned the display of Soviet flags and symbols at World War II memorials during the May 8–9 events in the capital. The restrictions also extended to singing Soviet songs in public.
Moscow decried the ban as 'degrading' and 'discriminatory.' The Russian embassy in Berlin strongly criticized the measure, arguing that it violated the rights of the descendants of Soviet soldiers. Up to 27 million Soviet citizens died in the fight to defeat Nazism.
In 2023, the city authorities outlawed both Russian and Soviet flags during Victory Day commemorations. In 2024, additional symbols, including the letters 'Z' and 'V', were banned for being associated with the Ukraine conflict.
Despite the ban, participants of the Immortal Regiment sang 'Katyusha', a popular wartime folk song symbolizing hope, sacrifice, and the longing of those left behind on the home front.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
7 hours ago
- Russia Today
EU is complicit in Israeli crimes through inaction
The EU can be seen as complicit in the Israeli war crimes in Gaza since it fails to act 'in the face of a clear case of massive human rights violations,' the bloc's former top diplomat, Josep Borrell, has said. Brussels is extremely reluctant to punish West Jerusalem for its transgressions, even though they 'surpass' other crimes the bloc had condemned, he admitted. Israel has been repeatedly accused of war crimes amid its ongoing conflict with Hamas in Gaza. West Jerusalem launched its military campaign in the enclave in response to the October 7, 2023, attack in which the Palestinian militants killed 1,200 people and took over 200 hostages. Since then, more than 60,000 people, mostly civilians, have been killed in Gaza, according to the enclave's health ministry. West Jerusalem also faced accusations of obstructing humanitarian aid in the area. According to Borrell, a third of Israeli bombs falling on Gaza 'are made in Europe.' 'Many member states simply don't want to impose sanctions on Israel,' Borrell told the EU Observer in an interview published on Monday. He also believes that the EU Commission head, Ursula von der Leyen, also plays a major role in stalling the process as she simply does not put the issue of sanctions against Israel on the agenda and prevents an open debate on its within the commission. According to the former top diplomat, Brussels only imposed restrictions against 'maybe 20 people' over the Israeli settlement activities in the West Bank, despite such policies being considered illegal by the international community. 'We sanctioned thousands in Russia for less,' he said, adding that restrictions considered by Brussels against West Jerusalem are nothing but 'a bad joke.' 'What [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu has done in Gaza surpasses many war crimes we've condemned,' Borrell stated, calling the situation in Gaza an example of 'horrors' that are 'greater than others.' According to Borrell, further inaction in the face of Israel's violations could cost the EU its international image and reputation. 'There's a growing sense that inaction is starting to make us responsible for what's happening.'
Russia Today
9 hours ago
- Russia Today
Cutting Russia ties has cost EU €1 trillion
The EU's decision to reduce energy and trade cooperation with Moscow over the Ukraine conflict has cost the bloc more than €1 trillion ($1.15 trillion), Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Grushko has said. In an interview with Izvestia on Monday, Grushko said the figure is based on various expert estimates of the economic consequences of the EU's decision to impose unprecedented sanctions on Russia, adding that it accounts for lost profits from energy and trade cooperation. According to Grushko, trade between the EU and Russia dropped from €417 billion ($482 billion) in 2013 to €60 billion ($69 billion) in 2023 and is now 'approaching zero.' He added that Europe's economy has subsequently taken a hit and is losing competitiveness. 'Natural gas in Europe is four to five times more expensive than in the US, and electricity is two to three times higher,' he said. 'That is the price Europe has to pay for ending all economic contacts with Russia.' In June, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that refusing Russian gas supplies had cost EU countries around €200 billion ($231 billion). In late 2024, Russian officials also estimated that total EU losses tied to sanctions against Russia had reached $1.5 trillion. Meanwhile, Moscow has said it has acquired a 'certain immunity' to Western sanctions. Grushko's comments come after the EU agreed a trade deal with the US, which commits the bloc to purchasing large volumes of American energy – which Moscow says will come at a much steeper cost than that provided by Russia – and imposes 15% tariffs on key EU exports. Numerous EU politicians have described the agreement as lopsided and damaging to the bloc's interests. Commenting on the US-EU deal, Putin claimed that the EU had essentially lost its political sovereignty, and that this directly leads to losing economic independence. The EU began imposing sanctions on Russia in 2014, following the start of the Ukraine crisis, and expanded them drastically in 2022. Measures have targeted banking, energy exports, and other industries. Moscow considers the sanctions illegal, saying they violate international trade rules and harm global economic stability.
Russia Today
9 hours ago
- Russia Today
Fyodor Lukyanov: Europe's last security project is quietly collapsing
This week marks the 50th anniversary of a landmark event in European diplomacy. In 1975, the leaders of 35 countries, including the United States, Canada, and almost all of Europe, gathered in the Finnish capital Helsinki to sign the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). The agreement capped years of negotiation over peaceful coexistence between two rival systems that had dominated world affairs since the end of the Second World War. At the time, many believed the Final Act would solidify the postwar status quo. It formally recognized existing borders – including those of Poland, the two Germanys, and the Soviet Union – and acknowledged the spheres of influence that had shaped Europe since 1945. More than just a diplomatic document, it was seen as a framework for managing ideological confrontation. Fifty years later, the legacy of Helsinki is deeply paradoxical. On the one hand, the Final Act laid out a set of high-minded principles: mutual respect, non-intervention, peaceful dispute resolution, inviolable borders, and cooperation for mutual benefit. In many ways, it offered a vision of ideal interstate relations. Who could object to such goals? Yet these principles were not born in a vacuum. They were underpinned by a stable balance of power between the NATO and the Warsaw Pact. The Cold War, for all its dangers, provided a kind of structure. It was a continuation of the Second World War by other means – and its rules, however harsh, were understood and largely respected. That system no longer exists. The global order that emerged after 1945 has disintegrated, with no clear replacement. The post-Cold War attempts to graft a Western-led system onto the rest of Europe succeeded only briefly. The OSCE, which evolved from the CSCE, became a vehicle for imposing Western norms on others – a role it can no longer credibly perform. Despite the growing need for cooperation in an unstable world, the OSCE today exists mostly in theory. The notion of 'pan-European security' that underpinned the Helsinki Process has become obsolete. Processes are now fragmented and asymmetric; rivals are unequal and numerous. There is no longer a shared framework to manage disagreements. That hasn't stopped calls to revive the OSCE as a political mediator, particularly amid recent European crises. But can an institution forged in a bipolar world adapt to the multipolar disorder of today? History suggests otherwise. Most institutions created in the mid-20th century have lost relevance in periods of upheaval. Even NATO and the EU, long considered pillars of the West, face mounting internal and external pressures. Whether they endure or give way to new, more flexible groupings remains to be seen. The fundamental problem is that the idea of European security itself has changed – or perhaps disappeared. Europe is no longer the center of the world it once was. It has become a theater, not a director, of global affairs. For Washington, Europe is increasingly a secondary concern, viewed through the lens of its rivalry with China. American strategic planning now sees Europe mainly as a market and an auxiliary partner, not a driver of global policy. The Trump administration's economic policies highlight this shift. Measures targeting Russia, for example, are often less about Moscow and more about Beijing or other major powers. Even the conflict in Ukraine, while grave, is treated by many in Washington as a pawn in broader geopolitical chess. Consider, too, the OSCE's diminished role in managing real-world conflicts. One recent case illustrates the point: proposals to establish an extraterritorial corridor through Armenia, protected by an American private military company. This idea may never materialize, but it reflects the mindset now prevalent in the West – one in which legitimacy can be manufactured as needed, with or without traditional institutions like the OSCE. The Final Act of 1975 was, in retrospect, the zenith of Europe's geopolitical stature. Much of Europe were no longer the main actors, but it remained the primary arena. Even that is no longer true. The continent's fate is increasingly shaped by external powers and shifting alliances. New agreements are needed, ones that reflect today's realities and involve new players. But whether such agreements can be reached is far from certain. The 'spirit of Helsinki' has not disappeared – but it no longer animates the institutions it once created. The principles remain appealing, but the context that made them meaningful is gone. If collective Europe wants a new era of security and cooperation, it will have to begin not by reviving the past, but by accepting its article was first published in the newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta and was translated and edited by the RT team
