EU country moves to sanction Ukrainian military officials
Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, Budapest has consistently criticized EU efforts to arm Kiev. Relations between Hungary and Ukraine have been further strained in recent weeks amid mutual espionage recriminations. Moreover, Budapest has repeatedly accused Kiev of trampling on the rights of the Hungarian ethnic minority in the country's Western Transcarpathia region.
In a post on X on Wednesday, Szijjarto wrote that 'today we initiated that the EU place on its sanctions list those responsible for the death of a Hungarian man during forced conscription.'
In a separate post, the minister stated that a 'brutal manhunt is unfolding on Ukraine's streets, with systemic beatings and torture targeting those unwilling to join the military.'
The following day, Szijjarto claimed that 'for 10 years, the Hungarian community in Ukraine has faced systematic attacks' by the government in Kiev, and accused the EU of turning a blind eye to alleged cases of discrimination.
Last Thursday, the Hungarian Foreign Ministry summoned the Ukrainian ambassador over the incident.
According to Hungarian media, 45-year-old Jozsef Sebestyen died on July 6 as a result of injuries sustained when he was beaten with iron bars by draft officers.
The Ukrainian Ground Forces claimed Sebestyen had been 'legally mobilized,' but deserted and admitted himself to a hospital, where he died from a 'pulmonary embolism' with no signs of violence.
Ukraine's mobilization drive has increasingly been marred by widespread violence and abuse at the hands of recruitment officials, as attested by multiple social media videos.
Earlier this month, the Council of Europe's commissioner for human rights, Michael O'Flaherty, expressed concern over 'allegations of torture and death during military recruitment' in Ukraine.
Russian officials have claimed that Kiev is dead set on waging war against Moscow 'until the last Ukrainian,' using its own citizens as cannon fodder.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
4 hours ago
- Russia Today
State Department accuses EU of ‘Orwellian censorship'
The EU's online content regulations are an affront to free speech, the US State Department has said in response to France's praise for the Digital Services Act (DSA). The State Department echoed earlier criticism from US Vice President J.D. Vance, who accused EU member states of attempting to quash dissenting voices and stigmatize popular right-wing parties such as Alternative for Germany (AfD). 'In Europe, thousands are being convicted for the crime of criticizing their own governments. This Orwellian message won't fool the United States. Censorship is not freedom,' the State Department wrote on X on Tuesday. 'All the DSA protects is European leaders from their own people.' Earlier this month, France's mission to the UN promoted the DSA on X, stating, 'In Europe, one is free to speak, not free to spread illegal content.'Passed in 2022, the DSA mandates that online platforms remove 'illegal and harmful' content and combat 'the spread of disinformation,' according to the European Commission. Critics in both the US and Europe have likened the regulations to the creation of a bloc-wide 'ministry of truth.' Earlier this year, prosecutors in Paris launched an investigation into Elon Musk's platform X, on suspicion that it was being used to meddle in French politics and spread hateful messages. The company dismissed the probe as 'politically motivated.' In 2024, French authorities detained Russian-born tech entrepreneur Pavel Durov on charges that he had allowed his Telegram messaging app to be used for criminal activities. Durov, who was later released on bail, denied any wrongdoing and accused France of waging 'a crusade' against free speech. He also claimed that French intelligence officials attempted to pressure him into censoring content during Romania's 2024 presidential election. France's foreign intelligence agency, the DGSE, confirmed that it had 'reminded' Durov of his responsibility to police content, but denied allegations of election interference.
Russia Today
11 hours ago
- Russia Today
Kremlin responds to Azerbaijan's position on Ukraine conflict
Russia disagrees with Azerbaijan's stance on the Ukraine conflict but hopes that this divergence in views will not hinder efforts to restore bilateral ties in light of a recent rift, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday. He added that Moscow wants to resolve the tensions in its relationship with Baku. Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev recently urged Ukraine to 'never agree to occupation.' Speaking at the Shusha Global Media Forum last week, Aliyev encouraged Kiev to consider Azerbaijan's approach to resolving its territorial dispute with Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh. The longstanding conflict between Baku and Yerevan over the breakaway region ended in 2023 after Azerbaijan retook it by force, prompting the departure of its remaining ethnic Armenian population. Peskov acknowledged the differences in the positions of Russia and Azerbaijan on the Ukraine conflict, but insisted that this has not been an obstacle in relations. He added that Moscow seeks 'to move past what we hope is a brief period of cooling in bilateral relations and avoid sacrificing mutually beneficial interests for the sake of a short-term situation.' Tensions between Moscow and Baku have been rising following the deaths of two Azerbaijani nationals suspected of being gang members during a Russian law enforcement operation in Ekaterinburg last month. The Azerbaijani authorities rejected the conclusions of the Russian investigation and accused the police of unlawful killings. In response, Azerbaijani police raided the local office of the Russian news network Sputnik, detaining two journalists along with several other Russian nationals. The government also suspended all Russia-related cultural events. Despite the strain, Moscow has emphasized the historically cooperative nature of its relationship with Baku and voiced hope for a de-escalation of tensions.
Russia Today
11 hours ago
- Russia Today
Why this American vassal is suddenly defying its master
The Trump administration has been having a rough few months. Domestic chaos – fuelled by the use of black clad, masked para-military squads to deport illegal immigrants – has fused with the deepening foreign policy crises resulting from Trump's support for the doomed right-wing Zelensky and Netanyahu regimes. And if this were not bad enough, last week Trump escalated his disruption of the global economic order by imposing yet more tariffs on the EU and other countries that are ostensibly American allies. Add to that the establishment of an 'Alligator Alcatraz' in Florida and Trump's recently revealed threat to 'bomb the sh*t out of Russia and China,' and it's no surprise that even Trump's core MAGA supporters are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with a president who promised them that he would swiftly end the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza and restore America's economic prosperity. They are also up in arms at the White House's refusal to release Jeffrey Epstein's client list, suspecting a self-serving cover up. Prominent Trump supporters are now openly critical, and Trump's dissatisfaction with inept cabinet members Pete Hegseth and Pam Bondi is clear for all to see. More ominous, perhaps, is the calculated silence of Vice President J.D. Vance in recent times. Even in Australia there are signs that the American hegemony is beginning to crumble. Last week Prime Minister Anthony Albanese took the extraordinary step of refusing to reassure Trump that Australia would assist America militarily if it went to war with China over Taiwan. Albanese's reluctant assertion of foreign policy independence was somewhat surprising given that, until now, he has been a keen supporter of Trump's foreign policy. Albanese remains a committed funder of the Zelensky regime, and Australia has consistently aligned itself with US policy in Gaza. The Australian leader enthusiastically embraced the AUKUS military agreement with America and the UK, when it was entered into by his predecessor, Conservative Prime Minister Morrison, and has echoed – albeit more moderately – the narrative surrounding a perceived China threat. Albanese's previous reluctance to assert its foreign policy independence is a consequence of Australia's longstanding dependence on America – together with Albanese's pragmatic decision to adopt wholesale the Conservative coalition's foreign policy framework so as to neutralise foreign policy as a domestic political issue. This foreign policy capitulation was also designed to mute criticism from the pro-Trump, pro-Israel, anti-China and anti-Russia Murdoch media empire – which incessantly promulgates various rejigged Cold War conspiracy theories demonising China, Russia, and the Palestinian cause. Albanese, of course, has has not succeeded in placating Murdoch – and it is a measure of his abject weakness as a political leader that he refuses to openly attack the owner of Fox News who peddles the same discredited dogmas in Australia that he does in America. It is Albanese's most egregious failure as prime minister to have permitted Murdoch to frame the foreign policy public debate – such as it is – in this country. Why then has Albanese belatedly decided to stand up to Trump? Primarily because the fundamental irrationality at the heart of the Trumpian agenda has now become glaringly obvious – even to political leaders as maladroit and supine as Albanese. Trump's efforts to dismantle the rules-based world order have, paradoxically, only strengthened China, Russia and BRICS. Meanwhile, the American proxy wars in Ukraine and Gaza continue to intensify. Nor has Trump's green lighting of Netanyahu's recent attacks on Iran destroyed that country's nuclear capacity. Trump has shown skepticism about NATO, and his commitment to defending allies like Australia is unclear. The recent inquiry launched by Pete Hegseth into the AUKUS compact may signal intentions to withdraw from the agreement. The AUKUS deal – which obliges Australia is to pay $360 billion for a few submarines that may or may not be delivered years down the road – is not only economically profligate, but it ties Australia to Trump's military agenda. Why would Albanese give a commitment to Trump to provide militarily assistance should America be unwise enough to commence a war with China? Australia has no strategic interest in defending Taiwan, and only the most ideologically deranged of Murdoch journalists could believe that Australia and America could defeat China militarily in a war in Southeast Asia. Despite advocating for a reduced global footprint, Trump continues to promote the concept of American global leadership. He may still pursue conflict with China, possibly to shift attention from persistent domestic and foreign challenges. China is Australia's most important trading partner and Trump sought last week's assurance from Albanese while the prime minister was in China on an important five-day visit. The trip included a meeting with the Chinese president – something, by the way, that Trump has denied Albanese to date. Trump was well aware of this, and he well knew that, if Albanese had given him the assurance he sought, China would have immediately retaliated by imposing trade sanctions on Australia. The contrast between Trump's treatment of Albanese and Xi Jinping's – at their private lunch last week Xi committed China 'unswervingly towards ongoing cooperation and common understanding with Australia' – is stark and telling. Meanwhile, as the US shifts away from traditional diplomacy, China and Russia have deepened their diplomatic engagements. Trump's domestic policy measures also warrant reconsideration by Western political leaders. The scenes of masked ICE officers clashing with protesters in California have drawn comparisons to past episodes of American civil unrest. Many observers were alarmed when Senator Alex Padilla was manhandled by officers for raising questions at a press conference. Additionally, the administration's suppression of dissent – including defunding public broadcasting and pressuring media outlets to silence critical voices – raises concerns about media freedom and civil liberties. The perceived harshness of Trump-era policies contributed to Albanese's election success. Many Western voters reject combative political behaviour, and Australian voters were similarly put off by Peter Dutton's emulation of Trump's combative style. There are two key takeaways for Western leaders from Trump's treatment of Albanese, and Albanese's decision to resist his demands. First, that the Trump administration is facing deep internal and external challenges, and its foreign policy approach may become increasingly erratic and unilateral. Second, that Trump may prioritize his administration's objectives even at the expense of partners. Albanese was placed in an extremely difficult diplomatic position this week. For many mainstream Western leaders, these insights may be more than a little uncomfortable – particularly those who continue to support US foreign policy and seek approval from the administration. There are also domestic pressures, including media outlets aligned with Trump, that make it difficult to oppose his influence. Unsurprisingly, the Murdoch press criticised Albanese for 'neglecting the US alliance' and 'putting the region in danger.' Nevertheless, as the inconsistencies within Trump's foreign policy become more apparent, political leaders in the West who value sovereignty and economic stability may feel compelled – as Albanese did – to redefine their alliances and pursue a more independent path. If they fail to do so, they may face a similar fate to Trump's most obsequious and compliant ally – Vladimir Zelensky.
