Ukrainian President Moves to Withdraw From Ottawa Convention: What to Know
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Sunday signed a decree to withdraw the country from the Ottawa Convention, an international treaty that bans the use and stockpiling of antipersonnel landmines, the country's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) confirmed on Sunday.
The decree comes after more than three years since Russia's 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
When asked for additional comment on Sunday morning, Ukraine's Ministry of Foreign Affairs referred Newsweek to its website post.
Why It Matters
Antipersonnel mines are designed to use against humans rather than tanks or military vehicles and cannot distinguish between civilians and combatants. As they are hidden and often scattered, the mines often maim or kill civilians long after fighting has ended.
The announcement comes the same day as North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries scrambled fighter jets, according to the Polish military, after a Ukrainian official said Moscow had launched its largest-scale air attack on the country in more than three years.
In February 2022, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of its Eastern European neighbor, with the conflict resulting in significant loss of life, international sanctions on Moscow, and a protracted humanitarian crisis. Russia previously annexed Crimea in 2014.
What To Know
Ukraine's Ministry of Foreign Affairs posted a statement on its official website that said "Ukraine has made the difficult but necessary political decision to stop the implementation of irrelevant obligations under the Ottawa Convention."
The ministry's post continued stating that Russia's "armed aggression" has made Ukraine, and other nearby countries "reassess their positions and adopt a joint political decision to withdraw from the Ottawa Convention."
In March, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Poland announced their intention to withdraw from the treaty, while Finland's parliament voted to do so in June. On Friday, Lithuania's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Kęstutis Budrys, confirmed in an X, formerly Twitter, post that the country has "formally notified the UN Secretary-General of its withdrawal from the Mine Ban Treaty."
Ukraine's statement and move to withdraw came just hours after Ukrainian authorities said Russia had launched 477 drones and decoys, as well as 60 missiles of various types, at Kyiv overnight. The country's air force said it had shot down 211 drones with another 225 straying before hitting their targets. Air defenses intercepted one of the short-range ballistic missiles, four of the Kalibr cruise missiles and 33 Kh-101 missiles, according to the military.
The attacks into Sunday were the largest airstrikes on Ukraine of more than three years of full-scale war in the country in terms of number of incoming threats, Colonel Yuriy Ignat, an official with Ukraine's Air Force, confirmed to Newsweek.
A residential building after a Russian drone attack in Odesa on June 28 amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
A residential building after a Russian drone attack in Odesa on June 28 amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
OLEKSANDR GIMANOV/AFP via Getty Images
What Is the Ottawa Convention?
The Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction, better known as the Ottawa Convention or Mine Ban Treaty, went into effect in 1999.
More than 160 countries had signed onto the treaty over the years, with Ukraine having ratified it in 2005. Neither Russia nor the United States is a party to the treaty.
What People Are Saying
Russia's Defense Ministry said in a June 29 statement on Telegram: "At night, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation delivered a mass strike by air-, ground-, and sea-based long-range precision weaponry, the Kindzhal hypersonic aero-ballistic missile system as well as unmanned aerial vehicles at Ukrainian defense industry and oi-refining enterprises."
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky wrote in an X, formerly Twitter, post on June 29: "Almost all night long, air raid alerts sounded across Ukraine — 477 drones were in our skies, most of them Russian-Iranian Shaheds, along with 60 missiles of various types. The Russians were targeting everything that sustains life. A residential building in Smila was also hit, and a child was injured. Emergency services are responding wherever they're needed."
Roman Kostenko, the People's Deputy of Ukraine, wrote in a Sunday Facebook post, "This is a step that the reality of war has long demanded. Russia is not a side of this convention and massively applies mines against our military and civilian. We cannot stay bound when the enemy has no limitations."
What Happens Next
Zelensky's signature to withdraw now advances the measure to the Ukrainian parliament, which will vote on the matter. If approved, then the country must notify the United Nations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
43 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Supreme Court to Hear JD Vance Case
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a Republican-led challenge to a federal campaign finance law provision that limits how much political parties can spend in coordination with candidates. The case, which centers on free speech claims, involves Vice President JD Vance, who was a U.S. Senate candidate in Ohio when the lawsuit was initiated. The justices took up an appeal from Vance and two Republican committees, contesting a lower court's decision that upheld the spending limits. The challengers argue the restrictions violate constitutional protections by capping party spending influenced by input from supported candidates. Vice President JD Vance speaks during the Ohio Republican Party dinner, Tuesday, June 24, 2025, in Lima, Ohio. Vice President JD Vance speaks during the Ohio Republican Party dinner, Tuesday, June 24, 2025, in Lima, Ohio. Associated Press The Supreme Court is set to hear the case during its next term, which begins in October. The Trump administration, under then-Republican President Donald Trump, filed a brief in support of JD Vance and the Republican committees. Vance, now serving as Trump's vice president, is a central figure in the case. The Justice Department also urged the Court to take up the matter and requested the appointment of an outside party to defend the lower court's ruling, given that the department no longer supports it. At the heart of the case is a constitutional question: Do federal limits on coordinated campaign spending between political parties and candidates violate the First Amendment's protection of free speech? The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, along with subsequent amendments, governs fundraising and spending in U.S. elections by imposing limits on how much individuals, organizations, and political parties can contribute to or spend on behalf of candidates. The law aims to curb corruption and undue influence in federal campaigns. Under this framework, political party spending that is made without coordination with a candidate's campaign—classified as an "independent expenditure"—is not subject to spending caps. In contrast, "coordinated expenditures", in which a party works in tandem with a candidate, are strictly limited. These limits vary by the population size of the state in which a candidate is running: lower in less populous states, and higher in more populous ones. According to court filings, the 2024 limits ranged from about $123,000 to $3.7 million for Senate races and approximately $62,000 to $123,000 for House contests. In a 2022 lawsuit, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, National Republican Congressional Committee, JD Vance, and former Ohio congressman Steve Chabot asked a court to block the Federal Election Commission (FEC) from enforcing these coordinated spending limits. The plaintiffs argued that the restrictions "severely restrict political party committees from doing what the First Amendment entitles them to do: fully associate with and advocate for their own candidates for federal office." In a 2024 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, based in Cincinnati, upheld the legality of the coordinated expenditure caps, finding them consistent with constitutional protections. The court cited precedent from a 2001 Supreme Court ruling in a similar case from Colorado, which had upheld the same kind of limitations. The 6th Circuit emphasized that it was bound to follow that Supreme Court precedent. When the plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court, they urged the justices to reconsider the older precedent. They argued that "developments in campaign finance" and shifts in the Court's broader First Amendment jurisprudence had undermined the logic of the 2001 decision. At the time of the appeal's filing in December 2024, JD Vance was already serving as vice president-elect. On Monday, the Supreme Court granted the plaintiffs' request to review the case and also approved a motion from three Democratic groups—the Democratic National Committee, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee—to intervene in defense of the lower court's ruling. Marc Elias, attorney for the Democratic groups, told Reuters that the Republican Party has "spent decades trying to eliminate statutory limits on political party expenditures that are coordinated with candidates' campaigns." He added that the Democratic intervenors would offer "a vigorous and informed defense of the coordinated expenditure limits now under attack." This legal battle unfolds against the backdrop of the Supreme Court's influential 2010 Citizens United v. FEC decision, which struck down limits on independent expenditures by corporations and outside groups, ruling such restrictions violated the First Amendment's free speech clause. While Citizens United opened the door to unlimited outside spending, the legality of coordinated expenditures between candidates and parties remains at the heart of this newly revived constitutional debate.
44 minutes ago
Women can be drafted into the Danish military as Russian aggression and military investment grows
HOVELTE, Denmark -- Peering across a dense stretch of woodland outside of Denmark's capital with camouflage paint smeared across her face, 20-year-old Katrine scans the horizon for approaching threats. After nearly four months of military training, the young soldier and the rest of her unit spent early June completing their final exercises near the Danish army's barracks in Hovelte, 25 kilometers (15 miles) north of Copenhagen. Katrine and other female soldiers, all of whom spoke to The Associated Press on June 11 on the condition that only their first names be used because of operational security, volunteered for military service earlier this year. Until now, that was the only way women were allowed to partake in military service, although women have been able to enlist as full-time members of the armed forces since the early 1970s The Scandinavian country is seeking to increase the number of young people in the military by extending compulsory enlistment to women for the first time. Men and women can both still volunteer, and the remaining places will be filled by a gender-neutral draft lottery. 'In the situation the world is in now, it's needed,' Katrine said. 'I think it's only fair and right that women participate equally with men.' Under new rules passed by Denmark's parliament earlier in June, Danish women who turn 18 after Tuesday will be entered into the lottery system, on an equal footing with their male compatriots. The change comes against a backdrop of Russian aggression and growing military investment across NATO countries. Even from the relative safety of Denmark, Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine casts its shadow. Lessons from the Ukrainian battlefields have even filtered down into their training. 'That makes it very real,' Katrine said. Denmark's gender-parity reforms were originally outlined in 2024 as part of a major defense agreement. The program was originally expected to be implemented by early 2027, but has been brought forward to summer 2025. Col. Kenneth Strøm, head of the conscription program, told AP the move is based on 'the current security situation.' 'They could take part in NATO collective deterrence,' Strøm added. 'Raising the number of conscripts, that would simply lead to more combat power.' Denmark, a nation of 6 million people, has about 9,000 professional troops. The new arrangement is expected to bring the figure up to 6,500 people doing military service annually by 2033, up from 4,700 last year. Under Danish law, all physically fit men over age 18 are called up for military service. Some people — both men and women — volunteer, and the rest of the places are filled by a lottery system that until now has only involved men. Women volunteers make up roughly a quarter of 2024's cohort. 'Some will probably be very disappointed being chosen to go into the military,' Anne Sofie, part of Katrine's cohort of volunteers, said of the new female conscripts. 'Some will probably be surprised and like it a lot more than they think they would.' The duration of service is also being extended, from four to 11 months. Conscripts will first spend five months in basic training, followed by six months of operational service, plus additional lessons. The move is part of a broader military buildup by the Nordic nation. In February, Denmark's government announced plans to bolster its military by setting up a $7 billion fund that it said would raise the country's defense spending to more than 3% of gross domestic product this year. Parts of the conscript program are being financed by the so-called Acceleration Fund. 'We see a sharpened security situation in Europe. We have the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. We have focus on the Baltic countries, where Denmark is contributing a lot of soldiers. So, I think it's a general effort to strengthen the Danish defense,' said researcher Rikke Haugegaard from the Royal Danish Defense College. But Haugegaard notes there are many challenges, from ill-fitting equipment and a lack of additional barracks, to potential cases of sexual harassment. 'For the next year or two, we will be building a lot of new buildings to accommodate all these people. So, it will be a gradual process,' she added. In 2017, neighboring Sweden instituted a military draft for both men and women after its government spoke of a deteriorating security environment in Europe. Norway introduced its own law applying military conscription to both sexes in 2013.
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Zohran Mamdani Not Fully Embraced by Top New York Democrats
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Zohran Mamdani has not yet been fully embraced by top New York Democrats after his apparent victory in the New York City mayoral primary last week. Newsweek reached out to Mamdani's campaign for comment via email. Why It Matters Mamdani appears poised to clinch the Democratic nomination, with more than 43 percent support after the first round of ranked choice voting. Although some news outlets have not yet called the race, Mamdani has declared victory, and his top rival—former Governor Andrew Cuomo—conceded the race last Tuesday. Democrats have had a wide array of reactions to the results—progressives like Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez cheered on Mamdani, and his victory is one of the most significant ones for the party's left flank in recent years. However, more centrist Democrats have not yet united behind the self-described Democratic Socialist in the days following the primary amid concerns that his views could fuel attack ads against the party in the 2026 midterms. New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani attends the New York City Price March on June 29, 2025. New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani attends the New York City Price March on June 29, 2025. MEGA/GC Images via Getty Images What To Know Mamdani is an outspoken progressive, supporting a number of policies that are to the left of most other elected New York Democrats, including free buses, a $30 minimum wage and city-run grocery stores to address food deserts. Some Democrats have also raised concerns about Mamdani's statements about the conflict between Israel and Hamas. Mamdani has been critical of the Israeli government and faced criticism for not condemning the phrase "globalize the intifada." Many view the phrase as antisemitic, but some say it is a call for Palestinian human rights. Mamdani told NBC News' Kristen Welker over the weekend it is "not language that I use," and has pledged to support the city's large Jewish community if elected in November. Many progressive Democrats have been supportive of Mamdani. On June 25, Ocasio-Cortez—who similarly upset the party's establishment in her 2018 primary against former Representative Joe Crowley—urged party unity behind Mamdani. Ocasio-Cortez is one of the most powerful New York Democrats, and has been floated as a potential 2028 White House contender or even as a challenger to fellow Democrat and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. "We can rise above our differences and unite to support working people and welcome new, promising leaders," Ocasio-Cortez, whose endorsement of Mamdani was viewed as critical in the primary, wrote to X. Other statewide Democrats like Ltietanant Governor Antonio Delgado and Attorney General Letisha James were also quick to support Mamdani after the primary. James wrote to X, "His was a campaign powered by the people, and the people made their voices heard. New Yorkers are ready for a city we can all afford. Now it is time to bring our city together and win!" Bill Neidhardt, a Democratic strategist who works on the pro-Mamdani PAC New Yorkers for Lower Costs, touted Mamdani's support from many Democrats and labor unions in a statement to Newsweek. "Zohran reshaped the electorate to nail a 7-point victory in the face of a $25 million super PAC. Since then, he's picked up endorsements from the dean of the New York Congressional delegation Jerry Nadler, some of the largest unions in the city, and multiple beloved Democrats, all in addition to his endorsements from the most popular elected officials in the city. It's foolish to care too much about anyone who is a little slower in joining the party," he said. Laura Tamman, clinical assistant professor of political science at Pace University, told Newsweek that whether or not leaders endorse Mamdani "won't do a thing to Mamdani's chances of winning in the fall." "He has shown he doesn't need institutional support," she said. "But smart elected officials will be listening to their constituents and taking notes on Assemblymember Mamdani's policy proposals. If they don't, they may end up in Andrew Cuomo's shoes on the next primary Election Day." Still, many longtime elected officials across New York declined to quickly coalesce around Mamdani. Here is a look at what these officials are saying about his victory. Governor Kathy Hochul Hochul, who could face a tight reelection bid in 2026, declined to say whether she would support Mamdani during a news conference on Thursday. "You know, the election just completed, I had a chance to call and congratulate him on the Tuesday's primary and look forward to having conversation," she said. Hochul said there are "obviously" differences in their political positions, and that they will "have those conversations." She also said the election is still months away, and that her primary focus right now is on affordability. She pushed back against a reporter who asked if she was "skeptical" about the candidate. "So as much as there's a lot of people perhaps even in this room, who are very focused on the politics, I don't have the luxury to do that. I focus on governing and delivering for New Yorkers and working with people that are in government today," she said. Senator Chuck Schumer Schumer, who has represented New York in the Senate for more than 25 years, congratulated Mamdani after his victory but stopped short of an endorsement. "I have known @ZohranKMamdani since we worked together to provide debt relief for thousands of beleaguered taxi drivers & fought to stop a fracked gas plant in Astoria. He ran an impressive campaign that connected with New Yorkers about affordability, fairness, & opportunity," Schumer said. He added that he spoke with Mamdani and was "looking forward to getting together soon." Senator Kirsten Gillibrand Gillibrand has also declined to endorse Mamdani and said some constituents are "alarmed" about some of his statements during an interview with Brian Lehrer's show on WNYC last week. She said constituents are "alarmed by past positions, particularly references to global jihad." Gillibrand's office has said she misspoke. "This is a very serious issue because people that glorify the slaughter of Jews create fear in our communities," she said. "The global intifada is a statement that means destroy Israel and kill all the Jews. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries Jeffries, the top Democrat in the House, addressed Mamdani on ABC News' This Week on Sunday. He said he "congratulated him on the campaign that he ran, a campaign that clearly was relentlessly focused on the high cost of living in New York City and the economy," noting that he "outworked" his opponents. Still, he said he hasn't endorsed Mamdani because the two do not know each other well. "Our districts don't overlap. I have never had a substantive conversation with him. And so that's the next step in terms of this process, to be able to sit down, which we agreed to do in Central Brooklyn, to discuss his vision for moving the city forward and addressing the issues that are important to the communities that I represent," he said. Jeffries called on Mamdani to "clarify" his position on Israel. "Globalizing the Intifada, by way of example, is not an acceptable phrasing. He's going to have to clarify his position on that as he moves forward," he said. "With respect to the Jewish communities that I represent, I think our nominee is going to have to convince folks that he is prepared to aggressively address the rise in antisemitism in the city of New York, which has been an unacceptable development." Representative Laura Gillen Gillen represents a competitive Long Island district in the House and has been among the more critical Democratic voices on Mamdani. In a statement, she described him as the "absolute wrong choice for New York." "Socialist Zohran Mamdani is too extreme to lead New York City. His entire campaign has been built on unachievable promises and higher taxes, which is the last thing New York needs," she wrote. "Beyond that, Mr. Mamdani has called to defund the police and has demonstrated a deeply disturbing pattern of unacceptable antisemitic comments which stoke hate at a time when antisemitism is skyrocketing." Representative Tom Suozzi In a post to X, Suozzi, whose district includes parts of Queens and Long Island wrote, "I had serious concerns about Assemblyman Mamdani before yesterday, and that is one of the reasons I endorsed his opponent. Those concerns remain." Representative Dan Goldman Representative Dan Goldman, who represents Brooklyn and Manhattan in Congress, praised Mamdani's "energized campaign" and wrote that he met with Mamdani to discuss key issues. "Zohran and I share a desire to lift up vulnerable New Yorkers and make the city more affordable and safe," Goldman wrote. "To that end, I explained why Jewish New Yorkers feel unsafe in the City and that, as he continues this campaign, he must not only condemn anti-Jewish hate and calls for violence, but make clear that as Mayor he would take proactive steps to protect all New Yorkers and make us secure." He added that he looks forward to "continue the dialogue about our mutual desire to move this City in positive direction." Representative George Latimer Latimer, whose district includes parts of the Bronx, told CNN he is concerned about how this will affect Democrats in battlegrounds. "It's going to be tough for front-liners because they're in districts that have a lot of Republicans in it that would look at a Democrat and want to hear the narrative, 'Oh, this guy's radical,'" he said. What People Are Saying Senator Bernie Sanders, a progressive Vermont independent wrote on X: "Democratic Party Leaders: You have talked for six months about the need to create political excitement to get working class and young people involved in the political process. That's exactly what Zohran did. Get behind him." Representative Jerry Nadler, a New York Democrat who backed Mamdani, wrote in a statement: "New Yorkers want Democrats who will fight for a more affordable New York by bringing costs down and taking on big corporations. And they wanted elected leaders they can trust and believe in, which is why I'm proud to support Zohran Mamdani in the general election." Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wrote in a post on X: "Congratulations,@ZohranKMamdani! Your dedication to an affordable, welcoming, and safe New York City where working families can have a shot has inspired people across the city. Billionaires and lobbyists poured millions against you and our public finance system. And you won." What Happens Next Mamdani will face off against Republican Curtis Sliwa and independent Eric Adams in November. Cuomo has not confirmed whether he will be actively campaigning for mayor, but he could still appear on the ballot.
