Tag Archives: Environment

Roundup: The tone of the interference debate gets worse

Posted on by

Because we are in an era of bad faith and lowest-common-denominator shitposting, Pierre Poilievre called a press conference yesterday to assert that Justin Trudeau was working in China’s interests against Canada—no doubt catnip to the conspiracy theorists whom he has been trying to attract to his banner, who carry signs about “treason” and who carry nooses to rallies. Even one-time sensible moderate Michael Chong has gone on television to be “just asking questions” about Trudeau’s loyalty to Canada, which is frankly beyond the pale. (Poilievre also said some absolute nonsense about LNG in Canada and his steadfast belief that there would have been a market for it if not for red tape—never mind that proponents could find buyers and couldn’t make a business case to proceed with projects that were fully permitted).

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1633197743131750400

Trudeau later responded that Poilievre’s was eroding faith in democracy with this kind of rhetoric, but that’s kind of the point with this brand of populists. They are trying to erode faith in institutions so that they can insert themselves as the solution to the problems of democracy, without needing to worry about things like minority rights. Not that Trudeau has helped, with his back-patting and platitudes, which doesn’t push back against this kind of threat. (Some good analysis here).

In the meantime, we wait for the announcement of the special rapporteur, but if the goal is to have opposition sign-off, that could be difficult. The NDP say they are cautiously optimistic, but the Bloc want someone who has pre-determined that there needs to be an inquiry, while the Conservatives are likely to engage in bad faith regardless of what happens, so the ability for there to be consensus on a name is not a hope I am holding out for. But seriously—everybody howling for a public inquiry doesn’t seem to realise that NSICOP is likely more independent, because a public inquiry would be appointed by Cabinet, with terms of reference set by Cabinet, and would report to Cabinet. The government is trying to create some distance from themselves with this rapporteur, but nobody wants to hear the actual process or procedure around the demands they’re making.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1633129536358346755

Ukraine Dispatch:

Kyiv is disavowing a group that has been making raids over the border in Russia, while other small groups within Russia are also conducting sabotage operations in opposition to Putin. Ukrainian officials have identified the soldier in a video that was executed by Russians, in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1633042812605280256

Continue reading →

Roundup: Planning to appoint a special rapporteur

Posted on by

After two weeks of pretty much flailing on the subject of allegations of Chinese influence on the last two elections, Justin Trudeau held a late-day press conference yesterday to declare that he was going to appoint a special rapporteur to deal with these allegations, who would take a look at the situation and determine if a public inquiry or commission was necessary to look into the matter, and if so, to determine what the terms of reference should be for it.

On top of that, Trudeau also:

  • Asked both NSICOP and NSIRA to conduct their own investigations into the allegations;
  • Launched formal public consultations on a foreign agent registry (with the caution that we have to be careful about how to go about registering people from certain nationalities given the history of this country);
  • Established a new National Counter Foreign Intelligence Coordinator within the department of Public Safety;
  • Called for a plan to address outstanding recommendations from NSICOP and the Rosenberg Report within 30 days;
  • Pledged $5.5 million for civil society groups to counter disinformation.

It was a lot, and there are a few things worth noting in there. The recognition that they have dragged their feet on past NSICOP recommendations is significant, because NSICOP had previously found the federal government slow to react in the 2019 election. That this current crisis is kicking their asses into finally acting is a good thing, all things considered.

The Conservatives are already outraged saying that this is too secretive, and the NSICOP is a “trap” for their members—which is, of course, bad-faith bullshit, because if they were being unduly silenced or felt that official redactions to the reports were unfair, then they would resign in protest, which no member of NSICOP has ever done. The NDP were saying this was a “baby step” in the right direction but still want a public inquiry (but remember, there is no problem in this country for which the NDP does not demand an independent public inquiry). They may yet get one. Trudeau said he would consult with opposition leaders on who would be the special rapporteur, so he can at least launder any accountability for the appointment through them (not always a good thing, guys!), and we’ll see how that goes in the next few weeks. Nevertheless, it’s a bit surprising that it took Trudeau two full weeks to get to this point, and it shouldn’t have, but once again, he and this government can’t communicate their way out of a wet paper bag, and this has once again left them looking weak, and incapable of dealing with the issue.

Meanwhile, the Star has more reminders from the Chinese diasporic communities that they have been sounding the alarm for nearly twenty years and have been consistently ignored.

Ukraine Dispatch:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says his advisors were unanimous in their agreement to press the fight at Bakhmut and not retreat. American analysts are saying that even if Bakhmut were to fall, it wouldn’t change the tide of the war in any appreciable way. Meanwhile, photos have shown that the town of Marinka, which used to be home to 10,000 people, has been completely razed to the ground by Russian forces. A new top anti-corruption investigator was also appointed on Monday, as part of the ongoing efforts to clean up the system for future EU membership.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1632819587405295616

Continue reading →

QP: The repetitive demands for a public inquiry

Posted on by

While the prime minister was in town, he was not in QP, nor was his deputy. Most of the other leaders were absent, Pierre Poilieve was present, and he led off in French, saying that China has been trying to influence Justin Trudeau for ten years, starting with the donation to the Trudeau Foundation (which Trudeau had already stepped away from when the donation was made), and then said that Trudeau did nothing about China trying to interfere in two elections to support the Liberal Party (which is not really what the allegation was) before he demanded an independent public inquiry. Dominic LeBlanc got up and disputed that the government did nothing, when in fact Poilievre did nothing about the concerns when he was the minister in charge of democratic institutions. Poilievre switched to English to say that they didn’t do anything because the Communist Dictatorship in China wasn’t trying to help the Conservatives (that’s not an excuse for inaction), before repeating his same allegations that he made in French. LeBlanc repeated that they take any foreign interference seriously, which is why they took unprecedented steps when they formed government, including creating NSICOP, and the panel of senior public servants to monitor elections. Poilievre delivered a smear about Morris Rosenberg before insisting that the Liberals benefitted from the interference (not really) and then tried to call out the NDP for not being tougher on the government. LeBlanc said it was good news that top-level officials did already testify at committee and that he would be at committee himself on Thursday to answer questions. Poilievre noted the upcoming announcement coming later from the prime minister before suggesting that Trudeau would appoint a Liberal insider to hold a secretive process and not get to the truth, and he tried again to call out the NDP before demanding a public inquiry. LeBlanc reminded the House that Poilievre was the minister of democratic reform and he was aware of foreign interference allegations and did nothing. Poilievre went on a rant about the Liberals not being forthcoming about Chinese donations pre-2015, before demanding that the NDP force the government to allow PMO officials and Liberal Party figures appear at committee about the allegations. LeBlanc retorted that even if the leader of the opposition keeps repeating a falsehood, it doesn’t make it real, before he once again listed the measures they have taken.

Alain Therrien took over for the Bloc, and he demanded that everyone stand up for the confidence in the democratic system, and took his own turn to demand an independent public inquiry. LeBlanc agreed that it should be a non-partisan issue, and reiterated the “strong” measures that the government had taken. Therrien listed those who demanded an inquiry, and demanded it once again. LeBlanc again reiterated that they took measures, and gave more praise for NSICOP and other monitoring agencies.

Peter Julian rose for the NDP, and he too took a turn to demand a public inquiry, and LeBlanc recited the “unprecedented steps” that the government took to combat this problem. Alexandre Boulerice took over in French to repeat the demand and he got the same answer one more time from LeBlanc.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A caution around more nomination “safeguards”

Posted on by

There has been some renewed interest in party nominations after the accusations of shenanigans in Liberal MP Han Dong’s nomination, and unsurprisingly, we get a rather tepid piece asking if we need more safeguards. There are a few things that this ignores, part of which is the history. MPs actively wanted to keep Elections Canada out of policing nominations (though they now have a bigger role in policing the funding of said contests). This is one of the reasons why the decision was made to have party leaders sign off on nominations forms—to keep Elections Canada out of the process. (That later turned into a problem of leaders using this power to blackmail members into staying in line, which was not something contemplated at the time, and yes, I did study the Hansards of those debates as part of research for my book).

The other thing that the piece missed is how parties have been monkeying with nomination processes to get their favoured candidates installed. The Samara Centre for Democracy has a great report on this (though they were a little too credulous at the NDP’s claims they always run open nominations when they don’t), and my particular caution is that more “safeguards” for nominations may very well mean a greater ability for the party or the leader’s office to monkey around or put their thumbs on the scale. Already we are in a veritable crisis where open nominations are fast disappearing behind the curtain of protected nominations for incumbents and invoking “electoral urgency” rules unnecessarily that allow the leader to just directly appoint candidates. Parties used to be robust enough to fight this kind of interference, but they are losing that ability, particularly in the Liberals, who rewrote their party constitution to centralize even more power in the leader’s office and disempower the grassroots after Trudeau became prime minister.

Should there be more safeguards? Probably. But that means returning the power to the grassroots riding associations so that they can run proper, open and transparent contests, rather than what has been happening.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces say that in spite of Russian claims, Bakhmut is not surrounded, and the fighting continues. In fact, the head of the Wagner Group mercenaries has said that their position is at risk if they can’t get more ammunition. The Ukrainains are, however, trying to evacuate the remaining civilian population, who are still there for many different reasons.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1632023670087352321

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1632403808016908288

Continue reading →

Roundup: Listening to diasporic communities

Posted on by

Because we’re still talking about the allegations of foreign interference in elections, journalists are now officially in the “badger and hector” stage of demanding the government call some kind of independent inquiry, which Trudeau refuses to do (for good enough reasons), and he’s getting a bit exasperated and even snappish in his replies to the same questions, over, and over, and over, and over again. (Oh, the memories of journalists demanding he invoke the Emergencies Act every single day at the start of the pandemic). More to the point, Trudeau did make a point of saying that it’s often diasporic communities, and the parliamentarians who come from them, that are at greatest risk of this foreign interference, and there has been a fairly tremendous silence in the media from those voices. It’s not just Chinese influence we need to be on guard for, but Hindu nationalism is also becoming a worrying force within Canada. Nevertheless, Power & Politics did get one activist on the air yesterday, and actually did some critical self-reflection and media accountability along the way, which is virtually unheard of, so please do check out that interview.

Meanwhile, Morris Rosenberg is now doing interviews about his report, and he talked about the recommendation to lower the threshold for making public these attempts at interference. Also, a reminder that we can’t assume that the leaks being fed to media are from CSIS—merely someone who has access to their reports.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1631670700338446336

Meanwhile, there is a very good point being made that while NSICOP should be the venue by which these issues are being discussed, the government has not exactly acted on their recommendations in the past, and that remains a problem.

https://twitter.com/Dennismolin11/status/1631779724841066506

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian Forces claim that they have nearly encircled Bakhmut, and are blasting bridges out to the west, but Ukrainian forces have not given up their positions just yet. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy reiterated his call with American and European officials that Russia needs to face war crimes prosecutions for is actions during its invasion of Ukraine. On a related note, a village outside of Kyiv is still digging up bodies from their brief Russian occupation.

Good reads:

  • Justin Trudeau says an Indigenous Commissioner of the RCMP is an “excellent idea,” and no. It’s the same toxic structure and culture and would change nothing.
  • Mélanie Joly and her Chinese counterpart had a testy exchange at the G20 meeting in New Delhi over the allegations of Chinese interference in elections.
  • The government plans to finally—finally!—start debate on their digital privacy bill after letting it languish on the Order Paper for the past nine months.
  • An autopilot software glitch has been identified as the cause of a military helicopter crash in 2020, and a fix has not yet been implemented across the fleet.
  • The Senate Speaker and two other senators are facing criticism for meeting with the Speaker of Israel’s parliament, who is a far-right figure in that country.
  • Surprising nobody, Google’s CEO is not accepting the summons to appear at the Commons’ heritage committee, but will send his country manages instead.
  • The Northwest Territories is calling out Alberta for not notifying them of an oil sands tailings pond spill into their shared waterway.
  • That BC company is walking back some of their claims about getting a licence to produce and sell cocaine commercially.
  • Stephanie Carvin gives a primer on what we’re talking about when we talk about intelligence (and why it’s not evidence, since people have difficulty with that).
  • Jessica Davis gives an explainer on just what constitutes foreign interference, and lists three recent examples of what does and doesn’t qualify.
  • Shannon Proudfoot imagines Pierre Poilievre through the lens of the Mr. Men books, and how he went from Mr. Mouth to Mr. Nothing to See Here.
  • Chris Selley points out that as of yet, nobody has bothered to challenge Quebec’s blatantly unconstitutional law to opt out of the Oath to the King.
  • My Xtra column wonders why the government hasn’t appointed a special envoy for LGBTQ+ issues, as many of our contemporaries have.
  • My weekend column points out that we shouldn’t need a public inquiry into election interference if MPs would be grown-ups and use NSICOP like it is intended.

Odds and ends:

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

Roundup: More reminders about intelligence vs evidence

Posted on by

It was another day of testimony by senior national security officials at the Procedure and House Affairs Committee, and much of it went the same as it did on Wednesday—very little was confirmed or denied, but there is no evidence to suggest the integrity of the elections were compromised. We also got more of the same warnings—intelligence is not evidence, and some of it may not be true, so stop being so credulous about it. (Okay, that last part was just me. But seriously). The Commissioner of Elections did say that there were some ongoing investigations into complaints of foreign meddling, including new ones opened with the more recent revelations,

After the testimony, the committee voted 6-5 to call on the government to call a public inquiry, with the Liberals all voting against (but they don’t control this particular committee because it’s a minority parliament). The government is under no obligation to call one, and the same people who have been testifying have repeatedly said it won’t provide the answers they’re looking for, and NSICOP is the best venue for the answers MPs want, but that’s faced its own challenges in recent years. That said, even the former Conservative campaign director says that an inquiry isn’t the best way to get the answers they’re looking for, so maybe they’ll listen to him. Maybe? The head of CSIS is saying that a foreign agent registry would be helpful, and the government has already been consulting on how best to create and implement one.

Meanwhile, here is a really interesting thread about those allegations, and has a lot of Chinese-community-specific context that much of the reporting has been absent with.

https://twitter.com/karenwenlin/status/1630413714435330048

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Russian missile struck an apartment building in Zaporizhzhia, killing three people and wounding six others. Russia, meanwhile, is accusing Ukraine of launching an attack on their soil, which Ukraine denies (in part because there would be no strategic purpose in doing so).

https://twitter.com/gerashchenko_en/status/1631165700747165697

https://twitter.com/canadianforces/status/1631391509177049118

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1631542420776300544

Continue reading →

Roundup: Some unnamed inaccuracies

Posted on by

Because this story didn’t have enough drama attached to it, prime minister Justin Trudeau said yesterday that the Globe and Mail’s story on alleged election interference from China included “inaccuracies” in the leaked documents—but then wouldn’t say what those inaccuracies are, leaving them to sully the field and cast doubt on his assurances and are again told to just trust him. Frank communication is a good thing! When will he learn this?

Meanwhile, the report from the panel of senior public servants that monitor for election interference hasn’t been completed and released yet, even though it’s been over a year since the election. Privy Council Office says it’ll be coming “in due course,” but the delay is raising more eyebrows, especially given the CSIS leaks and what has been reported on them.

While this is going on the National Post spoke to former Clerks of the Privy Council and members of the panel about the determination of what they say about these allegations of interference, and the answer was basically that it’s complicated—there is no bright line for when you disclose, and disclosing could raise even more issues and that public alarm could sway the vote, which is why they were trying to avoid. It’s an interesting read about what factors they are trying to balance, and good on the Post for actually reaching out, which other outlets have not done.

Ukraine Dispatch:

It’s the one-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, a “special military operation” which was supposed to last three days, let them engineer regime change, and cross back over the border. Somehow things didn’t turn out that way. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy vowed that they will “defeat everyone.” Russians have stepped up their attacks in the hopes of depleting Ukrainian resources (but they seem to have no qualms about how many of their own are dying in the process). Here’s a look at how Canada successfully delivered grain sleeves to Ukrainian farmers to help protect their harvests until they could get to market rather than risk them going to waste. Back in Canada, this armoured vehicle manufacturer is hiring Ukrainians displaced in Canada to build the vehicles destined for the war.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Still not finding the right tone

Posted on by

Justin Trudeau continues to struggle to find the right tone to respond to the allegations of Chinese interference in the previous couple of elections, and still hasn’t managed to find it. Yesterday he made the point that this is serious, and that’s why it shouldn’t be made a partisan issue of, and that doing so is doing the work of these autocratic countries for them because it weakens trust in democratic institutions…but he’s not exactly doing much to engender that trust either, because the response is once again some feel-good bromides that don’t worry, they didn’t actually affect the election outcome. Okay, but you’re asking people to take your word for it, and doing so with the same pabulum that they shovel in everyone’s direction for absolutely everything, so it’s hard to take these assurances seriously. It’s time to drop the feel-good talking points and be utterly frank, as much as can be allowed given the nature of the situation, and that’s what they’re not doing.

And because they’re not being frank, the Conservatives are shrieking “collusion,” and “you turned a blind eye because you benefitted” (as though a hung parliament is the real benefit here). But part of the problem is that the Liberals never think that they’re partisan, even when they are, and while Jennifer O’Connell may not have been wrong in saying that the Conservatives sure sound like they want to build this up as a “big lie”/illegitimate election campaign, it wasn’t the right tone to strike. At all. I did find it interesting that a former Conservative candidate did talk to the Star, and said that he didn’t think that this alleged interference did much with the Chinese-Canadian population because Conservatives themselves were doing their best to alienate that community.

I would also like to note that poll analyst Éric Grenier was on Power & Politics yesterday to provide a bit of a reality check to these ongoing allegations, and how the ridings that the Chinese diplomats allegedly targeted had no bearing on the election. For the Liberals, they didn’t get a majority because of Quebec, thanks to debate moderator Shachi Kurl playing into Yves-François Blanchet’s hands and phrasing her “tough question” to sound like Quebeckers are racists, and it gave Blanchet the ammunition he was looking for. For the Conservatives, the GTA remains elusive to them, and that’s why they couldn’t win. None of the alleged Chinese interference did anything to change that, and the Globe and Mail should have included this kind of analysis in their original story, but they didn’t, because they wanted this to be as sensational as possible. This continued narrative that the Chinese government attempted to engineer a minority parliament remains frustratingly moronic because you can’t do that. It’s as dumb as when the Globe endorsed the Conservatives but not Stephen Harper in 2015. It doesn’t work like that, but hey, why should the so-called newspaper of record understand how our gods damned political system works?

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 365:

Russian shelling of Kherson in the southern part of the country has killed two civilians, with two civilians injured by missile strikes in Kharkiv. Meanwhile, the CBC talks to front-line Ukrainian soldiers about the training they got from Canadians, and the praise is coming particularly for battlefield medicine, as well as leadership for junior officers learning to take the initiative (unlike the old Soviet system).

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1628470688725053440

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1628484262994362370

Continue reading →

Roundup: Showboating at PROC over allegations of Chinese interference

Posted on by

The Procedure and House Affairs committee met yesterday to vote on a motion around expanding their study on election interference to include the recent revelations from the Globe and Mail about alleged Chinese interference in the past two elections. Despite some arguing, particularly with Conservatives demanding both the appearance of Katie Telford (once again, for those of you at the back, you do not summon staff to committee because ministers are responsible!), and they were going to demand classified documents, which is becoming just part of the show these days, but they were eventually talked out of both of those demands and have instead summoned a few ministers, plus CSIS, the RCMP, and Elections Canada to discuss these particular allegations.

But of course, there was showboating. And the Liberals, who usually try to pretend that they’re the grown-ups in the room, were all-in on it as Jennifer O’Connell responded to the allegation that the Liberals were covering up what happened because it benefitted them (allegedly), saying “This is the same Trump-type tactics to question election results moving forward,” and that created a giant stir. She’s not entirely wrong, and the Conservatives have dealt in enough bad faith that they could start going down that particular road (and still might), but she wasn’t helping.

Amidst all of this, the Star obtained documents from the Conservatives showing that they were considering going public about the alleged interference over Chinese-language social media they were seeing during the last campaign but decided not to for fear of political backlash. Instead, they sent it to the committee overseeing the integrity of the election, but didn’t get much response from them at the time, who are now complaining that their concerns weren’t taken seriously.

Throughout this, I keep going back to my misgivings about the way in which the original Globe and Mail story was framed, particularly in giving the impression that the Chinese were trying to engineer a minority parliament, which is impossible to do. The piece should have simply stated that the Chinese preferred it because of chaos, but there is no interference they could do, short of stuffing ballot boxes in certain regions, to hope to achieve it, and that’s not going to happen in our system. Likewise, with the allegations around campaign financing, which don’t make any sense as written. Of course, the Globe has a well-known tendency of producing a lot of smoke for very little fire, but all of that smoke is just fuelling the MPs’ showboating, and it’s making it difficult to demonstrate that we have a serious parliament as a result.

https://twitter.com/mrmubinshaikh/status/1628216781901905922

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 364:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that Ukrainian forces are holding positions on the front lines in the east, while Russia claims that they are advancing in the Donbas region toward Bakhmut. Here is a look at five significant battles over the past year. Meanwhile, Ukraine is asking Canada to lend rail expertise and parts to help keep its crucial system running (but seriously? We’ve not been good to rail in this country).

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1628044033321848833

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1628137356556439585

Continue reading →

Roundup: Inquiry report and influence reports

Posted on by

Justice Paul Rouleau delivered his final report from the Emergencies Act public inquiry yesterday, and in it, he concluded that the government was justified in invoking the Act, albeit somewhat reluctantly because of failures at every level, particularly with policing, but also most especially from Doug Ford and the Ontario government, whom he reserves some particularly even-toned scorn for. There was also some blame apportioned to Justin Trudeau for his “fringe minority” comments as having hardened the resolve of occupiers (erm, except it was true what he said). There was plenty of blame apportioned to the Ottawa police, as well there should be, and he did reject the occupiers’ claims that they were peaceful.

Rouleau made 56 recommendations, including better intelligence coordination and coordination among police, as well as to make changes to the Act, which Trudeau has promised to study and come up with a response to, and that he regrets the phrasing of his “fringe minority” comments (which, I repeat, were true). Pierre Poilievre, predictably, went before a microphone and insisted that Trudeau created the whole mess by “attacking his own population,” and went on a tear about inflation (which was not a pressing concern when the occupation happened), and then went on a rant about the CBC for daring to ask him a question, and around and around we go.

https://twitter.com/stephaniecarvin/status/1626702909017554945

In pundit reaction, Susan Delacourt filters the report through the weaponization of the term “freedom,” and what it represents and misrepresents. Paul Wells offers some of his initial thoughts on the report. Justin Ling has his own perspective of the report based on his own reporting of the occupations’ membership and the role of disinformation that fuelled it. And of course, the Beaverton gets the last word.

Chinese Interference

The Globe and Mail published a story where their two journalists had been shown CSIS documents (illegally!) to show how Chinese officials were trying to interfere in the last two elections, and how their Vancouver consul was claiming to have defeated two Conservative incumbents in the last election. And it sounds concerning…but details don’t add up for me. The Chinese say they wanted a Liberal minority, but targeting eleven ridings cannot give you that kind of outcome. And the section on political donations doesn’t make sense given the rules around them, so I have a lot of questions that this story doesn’t answer.

In response, Justin Trudeau says that whatever Chinese officials claim, the election result was unaffected (and given how the alleged Chinese scheme doesn’t make much sense, I am giving this a bit more weight). Pierre Poilievre says that Trudeau turned a blind eye because the interference was to his advantage (again, how?) One of the defeated Conservatives says he fears the country has become an “open market” for foreign governments trying to sway elections (again, how?)

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 360:

Ukrainian soldiers fighting near Bakhmut make the direct plea to western countries to send more weapons, while president Volodymyr Zelenskyy made similar requests of assembled allied leaders in Munich. American intelligence is estimating that Wagner Group mercenaries (most of them convicts) have suffered more than 30,000 casualties in Ukraine, with about 9,000 of them killed in action.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1626559600110469125

Continue reading →