In Russia-Ukraine War, More Disastrous Path Could Lie Ahead

File Photo: Servicemen from the Donetsk People's Republic walk past damaged apartment buildings near the Illich Iron & Steel Works Metallurgical Plant, the second-largest metallurgical enterprise in Ukraine, in an area controlled by Russian-backed separatist forces in Mariupol, Ukraine, Saturday, April 16, 2022. (AP)
File Photo: Servicemen from the Donetsk People's Republic walk past damaged apartment buildings near the Illich Iron & Steel Works Metallurgical Plant, the second-largest metallurgical enterprise in Ukraine, in an area controlled by Russian-backed separatist forces in Mariupol, Ukraine, Saturday, April 16, 2022. (AP)
TT

In Russia-Ukraine War, More Disastrous Path Could Lie Ahead

File Photo: Servicemen from the Donetsk People's Republic walk past damaged apartment buildings near the Illich Iron & Steel Works Metallurgical Plant, the second-largest metallurgical enterprise in Ukraine, in an area controlled by Russian-backed separatist forces in Mariupol, Ukraine, Saturday, April 16, 2022. (AP)
File Photo: Servicemen from the Donetsk People's Republic walk past damaged apartment buildings near the Illich Iron & Steel Works Metallurgical Plant, the second-largest metallurgical enterprise in Ukraine, in an area controlled by Russian-backed separatist forces in Mariupol, Ukraine, Saturday, April 16, 2022. (AP)

For Russia, it's been a year of bold charges and bombardments, humiliating retreats and grinding sieges. Ukraine has countered with fierce resistance, surprising counteroffensives and unexpected hit-and-run strikes.

Now, on the anniversary of Russia's invasion that has killed tens of thousands and reduced cities to ruins, both sides are preparing for a potentially even more disastrous phase that lies ahead, The Associated Press said.

Russia recently intensified its push to capture all of Ukraine’s eastern industrial heartland of the Donbas. Kyiv and its Western allies also say Moscow could try to launch a wider, more ambitious attack elsewhere along the more than 1,000-kilometer (600-mile) front line.

Ukraine is waiting for battle tanks and other new weapons pledged by the West for it to reclaim occupied areas.

What's nowhere in sight is a settlement.

The Kremlin insists it must include the recognition of the Crimean Peninsula, which it annexed illegally in 2014, along with the acceptance of its other territorial gains. Ukraine categorically rejects those demands and rules out any talks until Russia withdraws all forces.

While Putin is determined to achieve his goals, Ukraine and its allies are standing firm on preventing Russia from ending up with any of its land.

Experts warn that Europe’s largest conflict since World War II could drag on for years, and some fear it could lead to a direct confrontation between Russia and NATO.

NEW OFFENSIVES, NEW OBJECTIVES
In recent months, Russian forces have tried to encircle the Ukrainian stronghold of Bakhmut and push deeper into the Donetsk region. Along with fulfilling its goal of capturing the entire Donbas, Moscow aims to wear down Ukrainian forces and prevent them from starting offensives elsewhere.

Bakhmut has become an important symbol of tenacity for Ukraine, as well as a way to tie up and destroy the most capable Russian forces. Both sides have used up ammunition at a rate unseen in decades.

Ukrainian military analyst Oleh Zhdanov said Russia has poured more troops and weapons into the Donbas and attacked other areas in an apparent bid to distract Ukrainian forces.

“Russia currently has the initiative and the advantage on the battlefield,” he said, noting Kyiv's acute shortage of ammunition.

Russia has relied on its massive arsenal, and boosted production of weapons and munitions, giving it a significant edge. While Ukrainian and Western intelligence agencies observed that Moscow is running out of precision missiles, it has plenty of old-style weapons.

But even though Ukraine and its allies expect a wider Russian offensive beyond the Donbas, it could be a gamble for Moscow, which mobilized 300,000 reservists last fall to bolster its forces.

Igor Strelkov, a former Russian security officer who led separatist forces in the Donbas when fighting erupted there in 2014, warned that any big offensive could be disastrous for Russia because its preparation would be impossible to conceal and attackers would face a devastating response. He said an offensive would also raise logistical challenges like those that thwarted Russia's attempt to capture Kyiv at the war's start.

“Any large-scale offensive will quickly and inevitably entail very big losses, exhausting the resources accumulated during mobilization,” Strelkov warned.

Justin Bronk, a senior research fellow at RUSI in London, predicted any Russian offensive would fail, but said it could drain Ukraine’s resources and keep it from preparing its own large-scale counteroffensive.

“The big question is how much damage does the Russian offensive do before it runs out of steam, because that will dictate the Ukrainian position,” he said, noting that its aim could be to disrupt Kyiv's ability to stage a counteroffensive.

Bronk said Ukraine spent the winter building up its mechanized brigades that had spearheaded autumn counteroffensives in the Kharkiv and Kherson regions and suffered losses.

He said Ukraine has a window of opportunity of six to eight months to reclaim more land, noting that Russia could launch another mobilization to recruit up to 500,000 more troops who could be readied for combat after at least six months of training.

Zhdanov said Ukraine could launch a new counteroffensive in late April or early May after receiving new Western weapons, including battle tanks. He predicted Ukrainian forces will likely attack from the Zaporizhzhia region to try to reclaim the ports of Mariupol and Berdyansk and cut the Russian corridor to Crimea.

“If Ukraine reaches the Sea of Azov coast, it will nullify all the Russian gains,” Zhdanov said, turning Putin's victories "to dust.”

STALEMATE IN UKRAINE OR UPHEAVAL IN RUSSIA?
Observers see little prospect for talks. Both sides are "irreconcilable on their current positions,” said Bronk.

Major Ukrainian battlefield successes this summer could fuel "significant political turmoil in Russia, because at that point, Putin’s own position within the leadership becomes very, very difficult to see as tenable,” he said.

At the same time, if Ukraine fails to reclaim more territory before Russia builds up its troops, it could lead to a “long-term stalemate and sort of a grinding attritional war that just kind of goes on and on,” Bronk added, playing into Moscow’s plan “to prolong the war and just wait for the West to get exhausted.”

Fiona Hill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who served in the past three US administrations, also saw little prospect for a settlement.

“The Russians are digging in for the long haul. They have no intention of losing,” she said. “Putin has made it very clear that he’s prepared to sacrifice whatever it takes. His message there is basically saying you can’t possibly counteract me, because I’m willing to do whatever and I’ve got so much more manpower.”

Hill said Putin is hoping for Western support for Kyiv to dissolve — "that it goes away and that Ukraine is left exposed, and then that Russia can force Ukraine to capitulate and give up on its territory.”

Tatiana Stanovaya of the Carnegie Endowment said Putin continues to believe he can achieve his goals by pressing the campaign.

“For him, the only way he admits it can end is capitulation of Kyiv,” she said.

THE NUCLEAR OPTION
Putin has repeatedly said Russia could use “all available means” to protect its territory, a clear reference to its nuclear arsenal.

Moscow’s nuclear doctrine states that it could use those weapons in response to a nuclear strike or an attack with conventional forces threatening “the very existence of the Russian state,” a formulation that offers broad room for interpretation and abrupt escalation.

Some Russian hawks urged nuclear strikes on Ukrainian bridges and other key infrastructure to force Kyiv and its allies to accept Moscow’s terms.

Bronk said he doesn’t expect Russia to resort to that, arguing it would backfire.

“Actually using them generates almost no practical benefits at all and certainly nothing to compensate for all of the costs, both in terms of immediate escalation risk — irradiating things they want to hold on to and be part of — and also pushing away the rest of the world,” he said.

It would be certain to anger China, which doesn’t want the nuclear taboo broken, he added.

Hill also noted that Russia got some pushback from China and India, who were worried about Putin’s nuclear saber-rattling. She added that Putin sees nuclear threats as a powerful political tool and will keep issuing them in the hope of forcing the West to withdraw support for Ukraine.

“Putin’s just hoping that everybody’s going to blink,” she said. “He’s not going to give up the idea that he could use a battlefield tactical nuclear weapon.”

But Hill added: “If he thought he would get the results that he wanted from it, he would use it.”

Stanovaya, who has long followed Kremlin decision-making, also said Putin’s nuclear threat is no bluff.

If he sees that Ukraine can attack in a way that threatens Russian territory and lead to Moscow's defeat, "I think he would be ready to use nuclear weapons in a way that he can show that it’s a question of survival for Russia,” she said.



‘We Choose Denmark,’ Says Greenland Ahead of W. House Talks

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen attend a press conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, January 13, 2026. (Reuters)
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen attend a press conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, January 13, 2026. (Reuters)
TT

‘We Choose Denmark,’ Says Greenland Ahead of W. House Talks

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen attend a press conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, January 13, 2026. (Reuters)
Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen attend a press conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, January 13, 2026. (Reuters)

Greenland would choose to remain Danish over a US takeover, its leader said Tuesday, ahead of crunch White House talks on the future of the Arctic island which President Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened.

Trump has been talking up the idea of buying or annexing the autonomous territory for years, and further stoked tensions this week by saying the United States would take it "one way or the other".

"We are now facing a geopolitical crisis, and if we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark," Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said at a press conference.

"One thing must be clear to everyone: Greenland does not want to be owned by the United States. Greenland does not want to be governed by the United States. Greenland does not want to be part of the United States."

He was speaking alongside Danish leader Mette Frederiksen, who said it had not been easy to stand up to what she slammed as "completely unacceptable pressure from our closest ally".

"However, there are many indications that the most challenging part is ahead of us," Frederiksen said.

Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen and his Greenlandic counterpart Vivian Motzfeldt are to meet US Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday to discuss Greenland's future.

Lokke said they had requested a meeting with Rubio, and Vance had asked to take part and host it at the White House.

Vance made an uninvited visit to the island in March where he criticized Denmark for what he said was a lack of commitment to Greenland and security in the Arctic, and called it a "bad ally".

The comments enraged Copenhagen, which has been an ardent trans-Atlantic supporter and which has sent troops to fight US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

- 'Misunderstandings' -

For Nuuk and Copenhagen, Wednesday's meeting at the White House is aimed at ironing out "misunderstandings".

These relate to Greenland's defense, Chinese and Russian military presence in the Arctic, and the relationship between Greenland and Copenhagen, which together with the Faroe Islands make up the Kingdom of Denmark.

"To the uninformed American listener, the ongoing (independence) talks between Denmark and Greenland might have been construed as if Greenland's secession from Denmark was imminent," said Greenland specialist Mikaela Engell.

For these listeners, "I can understand that, in this situation, it would be better for the Americans to take hold of that strategic place", the former Danish representative on the island told AFP.

But this "discussion has been going on for years and years and it has never meant that Greenland was on its way out the door", she stressed.

Denmark's foreign minister said the reason Copenhagen and Nuuk had requested Wednesday's meeting was "to move the entire discussion... into a meeting room, where you can look each other in the eye and talk through these issues".

Greenland's location is highly strategic, lying on the shortest route for missiles between Russia and the United States. It is therefore a crucial part of the US anti-missile shield.

Washington has accused Copenhagen of doing little to protect Greenland from what it perceives as a growing Arctic threat from Russia and China, though analysts suggest Beijing is a small player in the region.

Denmark's government has rejected US claims, recalling that it has invested almost 90 billion kroner ($14 billion) to beef up its military presence in the Arctic.

The Danish prime minister on Tuesday called for stronger cooperation with the US and NATO to improve the region's security.

She also called for NATO to defend Greenland, and said that security guarantees would be "the best defense against Chinese or Russian threats in the Arctic".

Diplomats at NATO say some Alliance members have floated the idea of launching a new mission in the region, although no concrete proposals are yet on the table.

Rutte said on Monday that NATO was working on "the next steps" to bolster Arctic security.

Greenland's foreign minister and Danish Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen are to meet NATO's Secretary General Mark Rutte on January 19 to discuss the issue.

"We are now moving forward with the whole issue of a more permanent, larger presence in Greenland from the Danish defense forces but also with the participation of other countries," Lund Poulsen told reporters.


ICJ Hears Gruesome Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar Genocide Case

A view of the courtroom during the first hearing in which Myanmar is accused of committing genocide against the country's Muslim minority, the Rohingya, at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, The Netherlands, 12 January 2026. (EPA)
A view of the courtroom during the first hearing in which Myanmar is accused of committing genocide against the country's Muslim minority, the Rohingya, at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, The Netherlands, 12 January 2026. (EPA)
TT

ICJ Hears Gruesome Violence Against Rohingya in Myanmar Genocide Case

A view of the courtroom during the first hearing in which Myanmar is accused of committing genocide against the country's Muslim minority, the Rohingya, at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, The Netherlands, 12 January 2026. (EPA)
A view of the courtroom during the first hearing in which Myanmar is accused of committing genocide against the country's Muslim minority, the Rohingya, at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, The Netherlands, 12 January 2026. (EPA)

Myanmar soldiers rampaged door-to-door, systematically killing, raping, and burning Rohingya men, women and children, the International Court of Justice heard on Tuesday, on day two of a genocide hearing.

ICJ judges are hearing three weeks of testimony as they weigh accusations by The Gambia that Myanmar committed genocide against the Rohingya in a 2017 crackdown.

Tafadzwa Pasipanodya, a lawyer for The Gambia, laid out harrowing evidence of an alleged attack on a village in northern Rakhine State in Myanmar.

Soldiers decapitated old men, gang raped women and girls, threw infants into rivers.

After killing everyone in the villages, they "systematically" burned the buildings following the so-called "clearance operations", alleged Pasipanodya.

"The totality of this evidence... convincingly show that Myanmar, through its state organs, acted with the intent to destroy the Rohingya," said Pasipanodya.

Myanmar has always maintained the crackdown by its armed forces, known as the Tatmadaw, was justified to root out Rohingya insurgents after a series of attacks left a dozen security personnel dead.

The violence forced hundreds of thousands of Rohingya to flee to neighboring Bangladesh.

Today, 1.17 million Rohingya live crammed into dilapidated camps spread over 8,000 acres in Cox's Bazar in Bangladesh.

Lawyers for Myanmar will begin their response on Friday.

A final decision could take months or even years, and while the ICJ has no means of enforcing its decisions, a ruling in favor of The Gambia would heap more political pressure on Myanmar.

The Gambia is taking Myanmar to the ICJ, which rules in disputes between states, alleging breaches of the 1948 UN Genocide Convention, under which any state can haul another before the ICJ if it believes genocide is being committed.

Legal experts are watching this case as it could give clues for how the ICJ will handle similar accusations against Israel over its military campaign in Gaza, in a case brought by South Africa.


US Designates Three Muslim Brotherhood Chapters as Global Terrorists

Tourists stand next to the fence of the White House in Washington, DC, US December 26, 2025. (Reuters)
Tourists stand next to the fence of the White House in Washington, DC, US December 26, 2025. (Reuters)
TT

US Designates Three Muslim Brotherhood Chapters as Global Terrorists

Tourists stand next to the fence of the White House in Washington, DC, US December 26, 2025. (Reuters)
Tourists stand next to the fence of the White House in Washington, DC, US December 26, 2025. (Reuters)

The United States on Tuesday designated the Egyptian, Lebanese and Jordanian branches of the Muslim Brotherhood as global terrorists, citing in part what it called their support for Palestinian group Hamas.

The ‌move, which ‌Washington formally ‌set ⁠in motion ‌last November, will bring sanctions against one of the Arab world's oldest and most influential Islamist movements.

The Treasury said it ⁠was labeling the three chapters ‌as specially designated global ‍terrorists. ‍It has accused the ‍trio of supporting or encouraging violent attacks against Israel and US partners.

"Chapters of the Muslim Brotherhood purport to be legitimate civic organizations while, ⁠behind the scenes, they explicitly and enthusiastically support terrorist groups like Hamas," the Treasury Department said in a statement.

Republicans and right-wing voices have long advocated for and considered terrorist designations for ‌the Muslim Brotherhood.