Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II has died at the age of 96 at her Balmoral residence in Scotland. She was Britain’s longest-serving monarch and this year celebrated 70 years on the throne.

Elizabeth was the only monarch most living Britons have ever known: a symbol of her nation, its empire and its Commonwealth.

Early life

Her teenage years were overshadowed by World War II, which she and her sister largely spent in the relative safety of Windsor Castle, west of London.

She personified British strength and character long before she even knew she would be queen.

In 1947, on her 21st birthday — then seen as the beginning of adulthood — she gave a now-famous televised address on her first official overseas tour in South Africa. “I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and to the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong,” she said.

That same year she married the Greek-born Prince Philip. He was a distant cousin, the son of Prince Andrew of Greece and the great-great-grandson of Britain’s Queen Victoria.

Coronation

In February 1952, Princess Elizabeth and her husband were in Kenya when news broke of the death of her father, King George XI. She returned to London as Queen Elizabeth II. Her coronation, at the age of 27, took place in Westminster Abbey on June 2, 1953.

She saw a thorough transformation of society and technology during her reign of more than seven decades, a time in which she warned about the dangers of throwing away ageless ideals while embracing the advantages of new inventions. She sent out her first tweet in 2014.

Record-breaking

There are few royal records she did not break: she was Britain’s most traveled, oldest, longest-reigning monarch.

“As head of the Commonwealth, the queen has links with the past. Sometimes it’s a past that’s difficult to come to terms with because you think of empire, you think of colonial exploitation for example,” royal author and broadcaster Richard Fitzwilliams told VOA. “But so far as the queen is concerned, you think of her dedication to the organization.”

As head of state, Queen Elizabeth II represented Britain in friendships with those who held in common the British values of freedom, equality and democracy — and with dignity she faced those who did not. She traveled to more than 100 countries and met countless prime ministers, presidents, kings and queens — hosting many of them in lavish state visits to London.

State visits

Among the dozens of world leaders to visit Buckingham Palace during her reign were Ethiopian Emperor Haile Salassie; French President Charles de Gaulle; Emperor Hirohito of Japan; President Nelson Mandela of South Africa; President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe; Russian President Vladimir Putin; U.S. Presidents George Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump; and Xi Jinping of China.

The queen was not immune to criticism in her own country. Some targeted her as a symbol of an institution out of step with a postmodern, neo-liberal and democratic world – and a burden on the British taxpayer.

Diana

The death of the popular Princess Diana in 1997 was an opportunity for critics who accused her of being coldly slow to react. When she did address the nation, it was heartfelt. “What I say to you now, as your queen and as a grandmother, I say from my heart. First, I want to pay tribute to Diana myself. She was an exceptional and gifted human being,” Elizabeth said.

The marriage of her grandson Prince William to Kate Middleton in 2011 brought youthful glamour to the ancient institution.

When Prince Harry married American actor Meghan Markle seven years later, Queen Elizabeth II was at the head of a family that appeared to be moving with the times: popular, diverse and global.

Family troubles

But there were painful times ahead. Her second son, Prince Andrew, was investigated for links to convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Harry and Meghan fell out with the royal family amid accusations of racism.

The passing of Elizabeth’s husband, Prince Philip, in 2021 left an enduring image: a queen mourning alone — as the coronavirus pandemic swept across her nation.

In June 2022, Britain celebrated the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee, marking her 70th year on the throne.

On Sept. 6, just two days before her death, she appointed Liz Truss the 15th prime minister of her reign. It would be her last major public duty.

Legacy

Queen Elizabeth remains a giant in the history of one of the planet’s most influential nations; a bridge between Britain’s colonial past and its future as a global player in a world vastly different from the one in which she was born.

Visiting Germany in 2015, addressing President Joachim Gauck, she spoke of the vast changes she had witnessed. “In our lives, Mr. President, we have seen the worst but also the best of our continent. We have witnessed how quickly things can change for the better, but we know that we must work hard to maintain the benefits of the post-war world,” she said.

Elizabeth will be remembered for her dedication, says royal biographer Matthew Dennison. “I think the importance of the length of her reign is simply that throughout that period she went on doggedly doing the job to the very best of her ability with total conviction — and I think with love,” Dennison told Reuters.

Britain’s royal tradition, of which Elizabeth was a steward, is now in the hands of her heirs, as her first son, King Charles III, ascends the throne. The Britain they inherit is a drastically different one in terms of demographics, culture and economics.

In a globalized, pluralistic world, their job of projecting an image of greatness is no less complicated.
…

Editor’s note: VOA’s Sonya Lawrence Green happened to be in London during a historic week: Prime Minister Boris Johnson resigned, Liz Truss became the new prime minister, and Queen Elizabeth II died after a 70-year reign. Here is her account.

I was sitting in a pub in London, on a weeklong visit to the United Kingdom, when the head barman rang a bell and shouted: “The queen is dead! Long live the king!”

Everyone stood up. All eyes turned to live coverage on the large TV screen. The mood was grave and respectful and hushed for several minutes. The whole country had been on what was being called “queen health watch,” and now Queen Elizabeth II had passed away at the age of 96. The queen’s death was not unexpected, but somehow it still came as a shock.

What a week to be in London. Boris Johnson delivered his farewell speech as outgoing prime minister, Liz Truss became the new prime minister and formed a new government, and the queen passed away after a historic reign.

There we were, a group of former foreign correspondents, once colleagues, now scattered around the globe, but reunited briefly in London for the memorial of a colleague. And now, a few days later, we were chatting in a pub when this news broke. Not on duty. But still.

At our table, we got to work. Not official work, but as journalists, if there is news happening, it’s instinctual to reach for more details: call, text, share memes, ask, “Have you seen this?” “Did you know that?” “What have you heard?”

I read aloud the accession protocols, which I found on an email from my news agency, and we marveled at the incredibly specific and arcane rituals of the British monarchy, while admiring their consistency in applying those customs for 900 years.

After getting all the facts straight, we turned to more personal reactions and talk. Nina sent video, sharing the atmosphere at the pub on her social media. Josh leaned over to ask if we had seen this tweet from @TheTweetOfGod, which said: “I can only save the Queen for so long.” Jane, who was awarded an MBE by the queen at Buckingham Palace for her services to broadcasting, sent a WhatsApp message speculating that the visits by outgoing Prime Minister Johnson and incoming Prime Minister Truss this week may have added undue stress to “Betty,” as she called the queen.

I decided to walk back to my hotel to monitor the ongoing coverage. In the rainy streets of central London, people were gathered in clusters, some sharing their thoughts about what happened. Flags were being lowered; plans were being made for ceremonies to come.

A swell of pedestrians headed toward Buckingham palace with flowers, in a heartfelt urge by some to express their condolences and convene with others to share this historic moment. A double rainbow had appeared over Buckingham Palace, drawing media attention and wishful talk of it being a sign that Prince Philip and Queen Elizabeth were bidding a final farewell.

I took a moment to breathe in the damp London air and reflect on the life of a woman who had served her country as queen during unprecedented change in Great Britain and the world — to reflect on those who loved or hated or were indifferent to her and all she stood for — and to know that whatever comes next, she was released from this world now, her legacy complete. 
…

The U.N. General Assembly on Thursday approved the appointment of Austria’s Volker Turk as the next U.N. high commissioner for human rights.

Reuters reported earlier on Thursday that U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres had proposed that Turk succeed Chile’s Michelle Bachelet, whose term ended on August 31. Turk currently works in Guterres’ office as undersecretary-general for policy.

Turk’s most immediate challenge will be grappling with the follow-up to a report on China’s Xinjiang region published by his predecessor minutes before her departure.

The report found that China’s “arbitrary and discriminatory detention” of Uyghurs and other Muslims in its Xinjiang region may constitute crimes against humanity.

China vigorously denies any abuses in Xinjiang.

“It is China’s hope that Mr. Turk will lead the office in strictly abiding by the principles of objectivity, impartiality … and non-politicization,” China’s Deputy U.N. Ambassador Dai Bing told the General Assembly.

Deputy U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Lisa Carty said Turk “must serve as an independent, impartial and unwavering voice for human rights issues around the world.”

“The high commissioner must be willing to call out human rights violations and abuses wherever they occur,” she said.

The high commissioner plays a critical role in speaking out against the backsliding of freedoms at a time when autocracies are gaining influence at the expense of democracy.

Other candidates for the job included career diplomat Federico Villegas from Argentina and Senegal’s Adama Dieng, who previously advised Guterres on genocide prevention.

Phil Lynch, executive director of the International Service for Human Rights, said Turk’s selection had lacked transparency and consultation with independent civil society.

“The secretary-general missed a key opportunity to build the legitimacy and authority of the next high commissioner,” Lynch said.
…

When Queen Elizabeth II acceded to the throne in 1952, the British Empire had recently lost the proverbial “Jewel in the Crown,” India, and the subcontinent was still reeling from the bloodshed of the partition that had led to the creation of Pakistan in 1947.

Despite the bitter history of colonialism in South Asia, Ayesha Jalal, professor of history at Tufts University, told VOA, it’s “remarkable” that the queen “was not a controversial figure in the otherwise fairly dense annals of South Asian anti-colonial nationalism.”

Jalal credits “good PR [public relations].”

Salima Hashmi, a Pakistani artist and art historian, remembers as a schoolgirl waving at the queen’s motorcade in Lahore when the British monarch visited the young country for the first time in 1961.

Hashmi recalled to VOA that years later, as the principal of the National College of Arts in Lahore, she hosted Queen Elizabeth during her second and final visit to Pakistan.

Hashmi said she was impressed by the queen’s “great ease with every kind of person, and her ability to make other people feel comfortable.”

Analyzing the queen’s legacy in South Asia, Hashmi told VOA that “as someone who had inherited the idea of the empire,” Queen Elizabeth “tried very hard to make the Commonwealth viable,” but the concept faded over time.

Queen Elizabeth ruled during a period of waning British influence in South Asia.

Jalal said that despite America emerging as the powerbroker, the royals “have been able to keep a rather balanced view of South Asia. They’ve kept their cultural presence, if not their political presence, to the same extent.”

The queen visited India three times and Pakistan twice during her 70-year reign.

While Britain could have done more to address the differences between the rival nations, Jalal said the queen was “an icon, who was seen as able to do good or to try and do good in the world.”

By the time of her death, Hashmi said, the queen was a “fading imprint” for South Asia, and people would be “intrigued to know how the Prince of Wales [now King Charles III] sees his role ahead, and whether he will have that kind of ceremonial clout.”
…

The United States mourned the death of Britain’s longest-serving monarch Thursday, as presidents and politicians acknowledged the singular life and achievements of Queen Elizabeth II.

“Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II was more than a monarch. She defined an era. In a world of constant change, she was a steadying presence and a source of comfort and pride for generations of Britons,” President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden said in a statement Thursday.

Buckingham Palace announced Thursday afternoon that the 96-year-old monarch had passed away peacefully at Balmoral Castle in Scotland. She was succeeded by her eldest son, Charles, now king.

Former President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle Obama, also remembered the queen in a statement Thursday.

“Like so many, Michelle and I are grateful to have witnessed Her Majesty’s dedicated leadership, and we are awed by her legacy of tireless, dignified public service,” they said.

During the queen’s 70-year reign, she worked with 14 U.S. presidents, starting with Harry S. Truman. She was welcomed in the United States on official visits multiple times, including a visit in 1976 to celebrate the U.S. bicentennial; in 1991. when she addressed a joint session of Congress; and in 2007, when she visited Virginia to mark the 400th anniversary of the founding of Jamestown. It was the first permanent English settlement in the Americas.

“Queen Elizabeth offered a master class in grace and strength, power and poise. Her extraordinary life and leadership will continue to inspire young women and girls in public service, now and for generations to come,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in a statement.

“Personally, it was an honor to be on the floor of the House during her historic address to the Congress in 1991 and to welcome her as speaker on her important visit to the United States in 2007, which deepened the special relationship between our nations,” Pelosi added.

Resolution planned

The House of Representatives will pass a bereavement resolution honoring the queen next Tuesday. Pelosi ordered that flags over the U.S. Capitol be flown at half-staff for the monarch’s passing.

“For 70 long years, from the aftermath of World War II well into the 21st century, across 15 different prime ministers, through great triumphs and great challenges, the queen’s steady leadership safeguarded the land she loved. Despite spending nearly three-quarters of a century as one of the most famous and admired individuals on the planet, the queen made sure her reign was never really about herself,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement.

“The queen embodied the essence of British leadership for over seven decades and leaves a proud legacy of service to her people and of steadfast friendship and respect for the United States,” Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Menendez said in a statement Thursday.

Many members of Congress had personally met the queen and remembered her fondly in statements on Thursday.

“I remember well her visit to San Francisco in 1983 when I was mayor,” said Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein. “I spent time with the queen at the Davies Symphony Hall and found her to be gracious and kind, a wonderful representative of her nation. Queen Elizabeth will be fondly remembered and missed by many, and my thoughts are with her family and the people of the U.K.”

The queen’s work on a global scale was also applauded in New York at the United Nations.

“Queen Elizabeth II was widely admired for her grace, dignity and dedication around the world. She was a reassuring presence throughout decades of sweeping change, including the decolonization of Africa and Asia and the evolution of the Commonwealth,” Antonio Guterres, secretary-general of the United Nations, said in a statement.

“Queen Elizabeth II was a good friend of the United Nations, and visited our New York Headquarters twice, more than fifty years apart. She was deeply committed to many charitable and environmental causes and spoke movingly to delegates at the COP26 climate talks in Glasgow.”
…

VOA Ukraine service reporter Oleksiy Kovalenko interviews Eli Rosenbaum and Christian Levesque, two US Justice Department investigators leading a team looking into Russian war crimes in Ukraine.
…

Ukrainians of different ages, walks of life and income levels have come together to donate money to provide the Ukrainian army with weapons and equipment that even included a satellite. For VOA, Anna Chernikova reports from Kyiv.
…

Buckingham Palace has issued a statement expressing concern for the health of 96-year-old Queen Elizabeth after a medical evaluation Thursday.

The statement said doctors for the British monarch have recommended she remain under medical supervision. It said she “remains comfortable” at her Balmoral castle in Scotland, her summer home.

The queen cancelled a meeting Wednesday with the Privy Council, a group of her closest, most trusted advisers. The BBC reported Thursday that Prince Charles and other members of the royal family are traveling to Balmoral to be with the Queen.

From her Twitter account, Prime Minister Liz Truss said the “whole country” is “deeply concerned” by the news. She added, “My thoughts – and the thoughts of people across our United Kingdom – are with Her Majesty the Queen and her family at this time.”

The Queen formally appointed Truss as prime minister at Balmoral on Tuesday, instead of traveling to London for the event. During her 70-year reign the Queen has typically met with her new prime minister at Buckingham Palace.

Some information for this report was provided by the Associated Press.
…

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken is in Ukraine on a previously unannounced trip to show Washington’s continuing support for Kyiv, six months after Russia invaded the country.

The United States plans to provide Ukraine with new security assistance of up to $675 million in value, two weeks after Washington pledged $3 billion in security aid packages to Kyiv. 

“It’s such a consequential moment for Ukraine” as the country recently marked its Independence Day and as the Ukrainians people are now “focused on the counteroffensive” against Russia’s military aggression, a senior State Department official said.

Blinken’s trip to Kyiv also comes ahead of the annual U.N. General Assembly, where world leaders are set to gather for what U.S. officials said is an occasion to reaffirm the principles in the U.N. Charter about sovereignty and territorial integrity.

“We are focused on helping ensure that Ukraine prevails in this war and we’re providing the security assistance so that when we get to the day where we move to a negotiated settlement, Ukraine is in the strongest possible position,” the senior official said. 

The additional security package will include more Howitzers; High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, or HIMARS; high-speed anti-radiation missiles; grenade launchers; medical armored vehicles; and night vision devices, among other equipment. 

That would bring the U.S. security assistance to Ukraine to a total of $13.5 billion since February 24, and $14.2 billion since the beginning of U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration. 

On Wednesday, the commander in chief of Ukraine’s armed forces, Valeriy Zaluzhny, said publicly for the first time that Ukraine had carried out missile strikes that hit Russian military bases in annexed Crimea, according to Agence France-Presse.

The United States has been providing defense items to Ukraine via Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA), by which the president can authorize the immediate transfer of excess weapons from U.S. stocks.

On August 24, Ukraine’s Independence Day, the Biden administration announced approximately $3 billion in security assistance under the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI), which is its largest-ever security aid package for Ukraine since the war began.

Later Thursday, Blinken is expected to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba. This is the top U.S. diplomat’s third trip to Ukraine since the war started in February. 

Blinken was last in Kyiv with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on April 24. During that trip, the plan for U.S. diplomats to return to Ukraine was announced. In March, Blinken met with Kuleba at the Poland-Ukraine border.

While in Kyiv, Blinken is scheduled to visit a children’s hospital. Since February 24, an average of five children have been killed or injured in Ukraine every day, according to a humanitarian aid organization “Save the Children” that cited verified United Nations data. 

Blinken will head to Brussels later this week for meetings with NATO counterparts.

As Ukraine continues to focus on what’s described as a “counteroffensive” against Russia, U.S. officials indicated diplomatic talks between the two countries do not appear to be a top priority for Ukraine.

“Right now, the Ukrainians do not have a viable map from which to negotiate. Twenty percent of their territory has gone, something like 30% of their industrial and agricultural potential is gone. That’s why they’re launching this counter offensive,” another senior State Department official said.

The Ukrainian military has started a counterattack across the Kherson region since late August seeking to regain control of the territory from Russian forces.
…

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy praised what he called “good news” from the Kharkiv region, saying Ukrainian forces had recaptured some towns from Russian troops.

Zelenskyy singled out several Ukrainian units in his latest video address, praising “their bravery and heroism displayed during the execution of combat mission.”

He also said Ukrainian artillery had carried out successful strikes against Russian forces in southern Ukraine.

U.S. Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Colin Kahl told an event hosted by Defense News on Wednesday that Ukrainian forces are “making slow but meaningful progress.”

“I certainly think things are going better on the Ukrainian side right now in the south than is true on the Russian side,” Kahl said.

Britain’s defense ministry said Thursday that in Kherson Oblast, in southern Ukraine, Ukrainian forces probably destroyed a military pontoon bridge in the town of Darivka that Russian forces had used after a nearby bridge was damaged.

The ministry said by targeting crossing points, Ukraine’s military is slowing Russia’s ability to deploy troops and carry out resupply efforts from the east.

“The Darivka crossing is one of the main routes between the northern and southern sectors of Russia’s military presence along the Dnipro River. Ukraine’s systematic precision targeting of vulnerable crossing points likely continues to impose pressure on Russian forces as they attempt to contain Ukrainian attacks,” the ministry said.

Ukraine on Wednesday urged residents living in Russian-occupied areas near the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant to flee for their own safety.

“I appeal to the residents of the districts adjacent to the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant … evacuate! Find a way to get to [Ukrainian] controlled territory,” Deputy Prime Minister Iryna Vereshchuk said on the Telegram messaging service.

In a separate post on Telegram, the exiled Ukrainian mayor of Enerhodar, the main town serving the plant, said it was under fire from Russian forces and the town had no electrical supply.

Both Moscow and Kyiv have for weeks accused each other of shelling the nuclear plant, Europe’s largest, risking a nuclear disaster akin to that at Ukraine’s Chernobyl plant in 1986.

On Tuesday, Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said the continued attacks on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant are “unacceptable,” and he urged that a demilitarized area be created in and around the facility. Grossi and a team of IAEA inspectors visited the site last week.

“We are playing with fire, and something very, very catastrophic could take place,” Grossi warned during a video briefing to the U.N. Security Council. “This is why in our report we are proposing the establishment of a nuclear safety and security protection zone limited to the perimeter and the plant itself.”

But neither Moscow nor Kyiv immediately committed to the Grossi proposal, saying they needed to know more details.

Some information for this report came from The Associated Press, Agence France-Presse and Reuters. 
…

A senior U.N. human rights official said Wednesday that her office has verified that Russian soldiers and affiliated groups subject Ukrainian civilians to an invasive process called “filtration,” and called for access to those being detained by Russia.

“In cases that our office has documented, during ‘filtration,’ Russian armed forces and affiliated armed groups have subjected persons to body searches, sometimes involving forced nudity, and detailed interrogations about the personal background, family ties, political views and allegiances of the individual concerned,” Ilze Brands Kehris, assistant secretary-general for human rights, told the U.N. Security Council.

“They examined personal belongings, including mobile devices, and gathered personal identity data, pictures and fingerprints,” she added.

Brands Kehris also said the U.N. human rights office has documented cases where Ukrainian civilians perceived as having ties with their country’s armed forces or state institutions, or having pro-Ukrainian or anti-Russian views, were arbitrarily detained, tortured or disappeared. Some were transferred to penal colonies, she said.

Ukraine and several Western states have also raised concerns about children being forcibly transferred to either Russia or territory it occupies.

“We are concerned that the Russian authorities have adopted a simplified procedure to grant Russian citizenship to children without parental care, and that these children would be eligible for adoption by Russian families,” the U.N. assistant secretary-general said.

‘Outrageous’

Ukraine’s envoy said Russia has forcibly taken nearly 2.5 million Ukrainians, including thousands of children, to Russia from the southern and eastern parts of Ukraine.

“Our people are being transferred to isolated and depressed regions of Siberia and the Far East,” Deputy Ambassador Khrystyna Hayovyshyn told council members. “The scale of this crime is outrageous.”

She said only about 16,000 deported citizens have returned to Ukraine. Most lack the money, transportation and travel documents to get home.

Russia’s envoy dismissed the accusations as part of a Ukrainian and Western disinformation campaign.

“They are living freely and voluntarily in Russia. Nobody is preventing them moving or preventing them leaving the country,” Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said. “Do you seriously think that such a large number of people could be forced to move and forced to keep silent?”

The United States and Albania requested Wednesday’s meeting. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield asked why Russia is carrying out these filtration activities.

“The reason is simple: to prepare for an attempted annexation,” the American envoy said. “The goal is to change sentiments by force. To provide a fraudulent veneer of legitimacy for the Russian occupation and eventual, purported annexation of even more Ukrainian territory.”

She said all persons subjected to Russian filtration need access to U.N. and humanitarian agencies so their well-being can be verified.
…

A report published by the U.N. Development Program finds the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, economic uncertainty and other crises have halted progress in human development and reversed gains made over the past three decades.

Data from 191 countries show 90% failed to achieve a better, healthier, more secure life for their people in 2020 and 2021. For the first time in 32 years, the UNDP’s Human Development Index, which measures a nation’s progress, finds human development has declined for two years running.

U.N. Development Program administrator Achim Steiner said that is unprecedented.

“Nine out of 10 countries in this year’s human development report index are shown to have faced a decline,” Steiner said. “This has never happened before even during the last devastating global moment of crisis, the financial crisis, only one out of 10 countries faced a decline in human development indices.”

The Human Development Index captures a picture of a nation’s health, education, and standard of living. This year’s rankings show some countries are beginning to get back on their feet, while others remain mired in deepening crises. The report finds Latin America, the Caribbean, sub-Saharan Africa, and South Asia have been particularly hard hit.

Switzerland tops this year’s rankings, followed by Norway, Iceland, Hong Kong, Australia, and other wealthy nations. Countries from sub-Saharan Africa are among the lowest ranked in human development, with South Sudan at the bottom.

The report’s lead author, Pedro Conceicao, said the unprecedented decline in human development was driven by economic recession, and by an extraordinary decline in life expectancy. That, he said, includes the 21st-ranked United States, which has seen a dramatic drop in life expectancy due to COVID-19 from 79 years to 76.1 years.

Conceicao said other new data from the report show global levels of trust are the lowest on record. He added those who are most mistrustful hold the most extreme political views.

“Uncertainty and the feeling of insecurity hardens people’s commitments to a group that shares a similar set of beliefs and increases hostility to other groups that think differently,” he said. “And digital technology often adds fuel to this flame of divisiveness. So, as a result, the report documents that democratic practices are under stress.”

The report warns insecurity and polarization are feeding off each other. And that, it says, is preventing nations from taking the collective action needed to address the multiple threats and crises the world is facing.
…

Oleksiy Danilov, the secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, voiced frustration that Russia remains in control of his nation’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station in an interview with VOA’s Ukrainian Service. He also warned of the risk of a nuclear catastrophe similar to the Chernobyl nuclear accident in April 1986 that killed dozens of people and forced more than 100,000 to evacuate their homes.

An inspection team from the International Atomic Energy Agency visited the Zaporizhzhia plant last week amid rising fears prompted by the placement of Russian military assets around the plant and weeks of shelling in the vicinity, blamed by each country on the other.

Russia captured the plant in the early days of its invasion of Ukraine, which it says is justified by the military threat posed by Kyiv’s increasing closeness to NATO and Western powers. Ukraine says the invasion constituted unprovoked aggression and accuses Russian forces of war crimes and “terrorism.”

Ukrainian engineers continue to operate the plant under Russian supervision, and two IAEA inspectors have remained at the site to monitor for threats to its safety. At a U.N. Security Council meeting called at Russia’s request, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres underlined Tuesday the need to deescalate the situation around the plant.

Here is a transcript of the interview with Danilov, which was conducted before the Security Council meeting. It has been edited for clarity.

VOA: What is your assessment of the IAEA’s mission and how did its outcomes affect the solution to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power situation? How can this issue be resolved?

Oleksiy Danilov: Look, I want us all to place the accents that need to be placed. First of all, terrorists seized a nuclear facility in the 21st century, which is extremely dangerous. [These are] people who do not know how this system is managed or how it works.

Terrorists are offering a meeting of the U.N. Security Council. Do you even understand what is happening? This is complete nonsense. These are the things that cannot happen in the modern world. The IAEA inspection arrived, which, in my opinion, should have been there the same day [the plant] was seized by terrorists. They did not let the press in, and [they] left. Their representatives stayed there; we do not understand what is happening there. This is the object of increased danger, which is being kept in terrorists’ hands today. I don’t even know how to say it.

Unfortunately, our country had a very tragic experience in April 1986. Does the Russian Federation at the heart of these terrorist groups that invaded our territory want to repeat it today?

This is a very dangerous thing. I will explain it: It is a high-risk facility, a nuclear facility, the largest nuclear plant in Europe, and if something happens there and a chain reaction follows, we cannot even imagine today the number of victims that these terrorists can cause, and that would be not only on the territory of our Ukraine.

The point is that if, God forbid, this cloud is moving in one or other direction, which only depends on the wind, then neither Europe, nor Turkey, nor other countries will want this to happen. And unfortunately, the world believes that nothing bad is happening and in my opinion are quite sluggish in responding to all these things.

The IAEA mission came [to inspect the plant], but no one is saying directly that it is terrorists who have captured the nuclear facility. And this is what the world should be talking about. [The international community] begins, let’s say, to discuss [variables] that are not related to this issue, [but the categorical criminality of this situation] is a fundamental thing [that needs to be discussed].

Do you remember when pirates captured ships? They were immediately repulsed, and here the whole world is simply watching how it will all end. Colleagues, friends, this is a very dangerous situation, I emphasize once again. This is the object of increased danger. And just close your eyes like that — arrive there, look around for 2-3 hours, turn around and leave, and then what?

We insist that there should be no terrorists there; [the plant] must be under the control of specialists of the country on [whose] territory it is located, and it is called Ukraine. Other specialists cannot be there, because it is our responsibility for this process. Therefore, remove the terrorist group from there.

VOA: The occupation of the Zaporizhzhia plant has been going on for the past several weeks. What is needed to make a decision to demilitarize it? What is Ukraine doing to achieve it and what are the prospects?

Danilov: The president of our country, the minister of foreign affairs of our country, everybody who is involved in this, is doing everything possible and impossible in order for this situation to stop. But I emphasize once again, the world must stop being sluggish in this matter, that is what we are talking about.

The U.N. should make this decision at its meeting. But what is actually happening is that if we look into the decision-making procedure, the Russian Federation has the right to veto. That is, the terrorist has the right to veto any decision. What else needs to be said about this? We do not know whether they will accept it or not. The thing is that for them, people are like, I apologize [for my language], some kind of junk. They don’t value human life.

This interview originated in VOA’s Ukrainian Service.
…

Albania has ordered Iranian officials out of the country and severed diplomatic relations with Tehran following an investigation into a cyberattack that it concluded was Iranian “state aggression” when it hit the Adriatic coast nation in July.

On Wednesday, Prime Minister Edi Rama announced the expulsion of all Iranian diplomats and embassy staff and gave them 24 hours to leave.

Rama’s official website said there was “irrefutable” evidence that Tehran had backed “the act of a serious cyberattack against the digital infrastructure of the government of the Republic of Albania.”

“The government has decided, with immediate effect, to end diplomatic relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Rama said in a video statement on his official website.

Rama said Tirana had already informed Iran of its decision in a diplomatic note to the Iranian embassy.

It also said it had shared its findings with fellow NATO members.

It said its “extreme measure” was “not at all desired but completely forced…[and] in full proportion to the seriousness and dangerousness of the cyberattack, which threatened to paralyze public services, delete systems, and steal state data, steal electronic communications within the government system, and fuel insecurity and chaos in the country.”

The U.S. condemned the cyberattack.  “The United States will take further action to hold Iran accountable for actions that threaten the security of a U.S. ally and set a troubling precedent for cyberspace,” said White House National Security spokesperson Adrienne Watson.

There was no immediate response from Iran to the accusations and cutoff.

Tirana and Tehran’s relations dramatically worsened after Albanian authorities agreed at the request of the United States in 2013 to accept around 3,000 members of an exiled group known as the People’s Mujahedeen of Iran (MEK), whom Iranian officials regard as terrorists.

A team of U.S. cyber experts from the FBI were recently sent to neighboring Montenegro over what officials of that Balkan NATO member called a massive and coordinated cyberattack on its government and services.

A source from Montenegro’s National Security Agency (ANB) initially suggested Russian security services were suspected, although a Cuban group later claimed it was behind the attack.

VOA National Security correspondent Jeff Seldin contributed to this report. Some information was provided by Reuters.
…

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping will meet next week at a summit in Uzbekistan, a Russian official said Wednesday.

The two leaders will meet at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit, held in the Uzbek city of Samarkand on Sept. 15-16, Russian Ambassador to China Andrei Denisov told reporters.

“Less than 10 days from now another meeting of our leaders will take place at the SCO summit in Samarkand. We are actively preparing for it,” Denisov was quoted by Russia’s state news agency Tass as saying.

The visit to Uzbekistan, if it goes ahead, will be Xi’s first foreign trip in 2½ years. Russian media also reported Xi’s plans to visit Kazakhstan prior to the summit in Uzbekistan, but the reports have remained unconfirmed.

When asked about the Uzbekistan trip, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told a daily briefing Wednesday: “On your question, I have nothing to offer.”

Putin and Xi last met in Beijing in February, weeks before the Kremlin sent troops into Ukraine. The two presidents oversaw the signing of an agreement pledging that relations between the sides would have “no limits.” It remains unclear whether Xi knew at the time of Russia’s plan to launch what Moscow is calling “a special military operation” in Ukraine.

While offering its tacit support for Russia’s campaign in Ukraine, China has sought to appear neutral and avoid possible repercussions from supporting the Russian economy amid international sanctions.

Moscow and Beijing have increasingly aligned their foreign policies to oppose liberal democratic forces in Asia, Europe and beyond, making a stand for authoritarian rule with tight borders and little regard for free speech, minority rights or opposition politics.

The Russian military held sweeping military drills that began last week and ended Wednesday in the country’s east that involved forces from China, another show of increasingly close ties between Moscow and Beijing amid tensions with the West over the military action in Ukraine.

Even though Moscow and Beijing in the past rejected the possibility of forging a military alliance, Putin has said that such a prospect can’t be ruled out. He also has noted that Russia has been sharing highly sensitive military technologies with China that helped significantly bolster its defense capability.

 
…

Russian President Vladimir Putin said Wednesday his country has not lost anything from its military operation in Ukraine and has strengthened Russia’s sovereignty.

Speaking at an economic forum, Putin said all of Russia’s actions “are directed at helping the people of the Donbas.”

“This will eventually lead to the strengthening of our country from the inside and in its foreign policy,” Putin said.

Russia invaded Ukraine in late February, and after abandoning a push toward the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv, has focused its military efforts in the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine where pro-Russian fighters have battled Ukrainian forces since 2014.

Putin also criticized an agreement brokered by the United Nations and Turkey that restarted Ukrainian grain shipments amid a global food crisis, saying the exports were not going to the world’s poorest countries.

The Joint Coordination Center that is overseeing the implementation of the deal said that as of Tuesday, more than 2.2 metric tons of grain and other foodstuffs had left Ukrainian ports on about 100 ships. Destinations have included Italy, Turkey, Iran, China, Romania, Djibouti, Germany and Lebanon.

Mykhailo Podolyak, an advisor to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, told Reuters that Russian comments about the deal were “unexpected” and “groundless.”

Britain’s defense ministry said early Wednesday that during the prior 24 hours there was heavy fighting in the Donbas, in northern Ukraine near Kharkiv and in southern Ukraine’s Kherson Oblast.

“Multiple concurrent threats spread across 500km will test Russia’s ability to coordinate operational design and reallocate resources across multiple groupings of forces,” the ministry said. “Earlier in the war, Russia’s failure to do this was one of the underlying reasons for the military’s poor performance.”
…

President Joe Biden has made a final decision to not designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism, the White House said Tuesday, saying that such a move could backfire and have unintended consequences for U.S. support of Ukraine amid Russia’s invasion.  

Biden’s one-word response — “no,” he said, when reporters asked him on Monday, “should Russia be designated a state sponsor of terrorism?” — ends months of serious, fervent discussions on Capitol Hill and in foreign capitals over whether to add Russia to the short, grim list that currently includes Cuba, Iran, North Korea and Syria. 

Nations earn this label when the U.S. secretary of state deems that a foreign government is “repeatedly providing support for acts of international terrorism.” The designation effectively renders the target a pariah, by imposing restrictions on U.S. assistance; a ban on defense exports and sales; controls over items that can be used for both military and non-military purposes, and a raft of other restrictions.    

On Tuesday, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre elaborated on the president’s thought process.  

“This designation could have unintended consequences to Ukraine, and the world,” she said. “For example, according to humanitarian experts and NGOs we have spoken to, it could seriously affect the ability to deliver assistance in areas of Ukraine. 

“Another one is it could drive critical humanitarian and commercial actors away from facilitating food exports to help mitigate the global food crisis and jeopardize the Black Sea ports deal that has already led to over a million tons of Ukrainian food exports reaching the world, including those in Horn of Africa. 

“It will also undercut unprecedented multilateral conditions that have been so effective in holding [Russian President Vladimir] Putin accountable and could also undermine our ability to support Ukraine at the negotiating table,” she said. “So, again, we do not think this is the most effective way to go, or the strongest path forward.”    

Team Yes  

Key among the proponents is Ukraine’s president, who renewed his appeal this week as inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency expressed alarm over fighting between Russian and Ukrainian forces at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant. 

In a report released Tuesday, agency chief Rafael Grossi warned that “any further escalation affecting the six-reactor plant could lead to a severe nuclear accident with potentially grave radiological consequences for human health and the environment in Ukraine and elsewhere.”  

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy used his nightly video address on Monday to hammer that point home.    

“Shelling the territory of the ZNPP means that the terrorist state does not care what the IAEA says, it does not care what the international community decides,” he said. “Russia is interested only in keeping the situation the worst for the longest time possible. This can be corrected only by strengthening sanctions, only by officially recognizing Russia as a terrorist state — at all levels.”  

And last month, the Baltic state of Latvia — formerly a member of the Soviet Union – levied the designation on Russia, with lawmakers voting overwhelmingly in favor of the move and urging other nations to follow suit.    

Closer to home, the strongest charge has come from Capitol Hill, where a bipartisan group of senators has been urging the administration to make the call, after passing a resolution in July.  

In the resolution, the senators argue that Russia promotes acts of international terrorism against political opponents and nation states, citing Russia’s aggression in Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine, Syria and remote corners of the world, under the aegis of the shadowy, Kremlin-backed mercenaries known as the Wagner Group.  

“To the Biden administration: You have the complete unanimous support of the United States Senate to label Russia a state sponsor of terrorism,” Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said. “Do it.”  

Such agreement, Graham added, is rare in this increasingly divided political landscape, saying, “I didn’t think there was an issue under the sun that could get 100 Senate votes, but we found it: Russia is a state sponsor of terrorism.”  

The resolution’s co-sponsor, Democrat Richard Blumenthal, defended the argument on moral grounds.  

“The designation of state sponsorship of terrorism puts Russia in a very small club — it consists of nations like Syria, Iran and Cuba that are outside the bounds of civilized countries,” he said. “They are pariahs. And that is exactly the designation that Russia deserves for what it has done in Ukraine as well as in other countries.”  

And, over the weekend, White House officials confirmed that Moscow is buying rockets and artillery shells from North Korea — a longtime member of the list — for use in Ukraine.  

“We expect Russia could try to purchase additional North Korean military equipment going forward,” an administration official told reporters.    

Team No  

The Kremlin opposes the designation, with spokesman Dmitry Peskov telling Russian television on Tuesday that “the very formulation of the issue is monstrous.”    

“And, of course, it is good that the U.S. president responded in this way,” he said. 

While Peskov said the Kremlin welcomed Biden’s firm “no,” he added that Moscow did not see that as a move to warm relations.  

“It can hardly be a reason for such assessments,” he said.  

U.S. officials point out that Russia is already sweating under the weight of massive U.S. sanctions.  

“The costs that have been imposed on Russia by us and by other countries are absolutely in line with the consequences that would follow from designation as a state sponsor of terrorism,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said.    

And some analysts argue that Russia is low in the rankings when it comes to earning this dubious distinction.  

“By the current standard, numerous countries could be placed on the state-sponsor-of- terror list, such as Myanmar/ Burma, China, Eritrea, Turkmenistan, Pakistan, Rwanda, Nigeria, and Zimbabwe, just to name a few,” wrote Doug Bandow, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.  

“Several U.S. allies deserve to be on such a list, too: United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Turkey, and Egypt. So does Saudi Arabia, headed by Crown Prince Mohammed “Slice ‘n Dice” bin Salman, notable for murdering and dismembering his critics. The kingdom is more repressive domestically and has killed more people internationally than even Russia.”  

To summarize, he said: “The Putin regime is evil, but it is not a sponsor of terrorism.”    

Team It’s Complicated  

Just as the arguments on each side are fervent, so are the reasons that analysts — and the White House — say this issue is not black-and-white.  

For one, said Delaney Simon, a researcher at the International Crisis Group, the U.S. and Russia engage across a number of platforms, including the United Nations Security Council, where both nations hold permanent seats.  

“None of the other states that are designated state sponsors of terror have the same sort of role in the international system,” she told VOA. “That would make any kind of multilateral diplomacy really, really complicated. And you’ve seen from some Russian statements that President Putin is going to think of this, definitely, as an escalation and cause for a rupture in relations.”    

She added that such a designation would end Russia’s sovereign immunity from lawsuits from Americans claiming to be affected by Russian actions. Those cases could drag on for years and — as in the case of Sudan, a former member of the list — significantly delay a nation’s removal from the list.  

She also pointed out another element: to reverse the designation, something bigger and more important has to change.    

“There’s sort of a checklist of things that have to happen legally before the designation can be rescinded,” she said. “One of the things that needs to happen is that the state has to undergo a fundamental change in leadership and policy. It’s hard to see, well, a leadership change. Which, by the way, is something that the Biden administration has resisted calling for.” 

Finally, she said, if the goal is to end the six-month invasion of Ukraine, this may not help.  

“I think once you look deeply at the policy implications of this issue, it’s pretty clear that the designation wouldn’t help Ukraine,” she said. ussr

And so, for now, it’s a no. 
…

Liz Truss officially became prime minister of Britain Tuesday, replacing Boris Johnson, who announced his resignation in July. As Henry Ridgwell reports from London, Truss is seen as a foreign policy hawk and has pledged a tough line against Russia and China — but she first faces daunting challenges at home.
…

Liz Truss officially became Britain’s prime minister Tuesday, replacing Boris Johnson, who resigned in July.

In a private meeting Tuesday in Balmoral, Scotland, with Britain’s Queen Elizabeth, Truss was asked to form a new government. The meeting, a formality, took place in Scotland as the 96-year-old monarch is not able to travel to London due to health problems.

Truss is the 15th prime minister to be appointed by Elizabeth, and the fourth Conservative party leader in just seven years – an indication of the monarch’s longevity and recent chaos in Britain’s politics. Truss’s meeting took place hours after Johnson traveled to Scotland to meet with the monarch.

Truss later flew back to London. In the evening, she outlined the government’s priorities in a televised address outside the prime minister’s residence at No. 10 Downing Street.

Energy crisis

Truss served as foreign secretary under Johnson. She is seen as a foreign policy hawk and has pledged a tough line against countries like Russia and China.

“We now face severe global headwinds caused by Russia’s appalling war in Ukraine and the aftermath of COVID. … United with our allies, we will stand up for freedom and democracy around the world,” Truss said.

Truss, however, also faces challenges at home.

She pledges to help Britons survive an energy crisis triggered by the war in Ukraine, as gas and electricity prices are predicted to rise as much as eight-fold in coming months.

“I will deal hands on with the energy crisis caused by Putin’s war,” Truss said, referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The BBC reported Tuesday that Truss plans to spend up to $150 billion on freezing energy bills for the next 18 months, by offering loans to energy companies. Further details are expected later this week.

Any political honeymoon will likely be short-lived, says analyst John Kampfner of London-based research group Chatham House.

“Ninety percent of her time is going to have to be dealing with the here and now on the domestic agenda – with an economy in crisis, strikes, health service (in crisis), huge energy bills, potential social unrest,” Kampfner told VOA.

Despite the cost of dealing with the energy crisis, Truss has promised to cut taxes.

Ukraine

Truss has also pledged to boost defense spending to 3% of GDP, which the analyst group the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) estimated will cost an additional $180 billion. Meanwhile, she has pledged to continue giving military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine. Britain has so far pledged around $3.8 billion.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who made no secret of his desire for Boris Johnson to stay in power, welcomed the appointment of Truss as Britain’s prime minister.

“In Ukraine, we know her well. She was always on the enlightened side of European politics. I believe that together, we will be able to do much more for the protection of our nations and to ensure the failure of Russia’s destructive efforts,” Zelenskyy said in a video posted online Tuesday.

Ukraine’s military has strong public support in Britain, according to analyst Kampfner.

“There’s every reason — notwithstanding the energy price rises and all the other challenges that Liz Truss faces — that she will absolutely continue the Johnson approach, and we can expect an early visit to get a photo op with Zelenskyy in the Ukrainian capital pretty soon,” Kampfner said.

China

As a government minister, Truss took a hawkish stance on China. She was closely involved in the decision to ban Chinese telecoms firm Huawei from involvement in Britain’s 5G network, over national security concerns.

“Liz Truss is a more hawkish person than Boris Johnson, the former prime minister,” Neil Melvin of the Royal United Services Institute told The Associated Press. “She has, for example, committed to increasing the threat perception of China. So, China will be recognized under her premiership, she’s indicated, as a threat to the U.K.”

Europe

Truss has also pledged to push through legislation overriding the Northern Ireland protocol, a key Brexit agreement that Johnson signed with the European Union that prevented the need for a hard border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, which many fear would have reignited sectarian violence. The European Union has started legal proceedings against the British government, notes Kampfner.

“The worst-case scenario is a full-blooded trade war between — can you imagine — between the 27 European nations and Britain. In every respect, that will be a disaster, it will add fuel to the fire of an already pretty terrible U.K. economy,” he said.

Special relationship

U.S. President Joe Biden congratulated Truss via Twitter Tuesday. “I look forward to deepening the special relationship between our countries and working in close cooperation on global challenges, including continued support for Ukraine as it defends itself against Russian aggression,” Biden wrote.

The special relationship is clouded by lingering tensions over Brexit, according to Kampfner.

“The Americans and particularly the Biden administration are incredibly wary of having to choose between the Brits and the European Union. They regard it as a false choice.”

Early election?

The next British election is due by December 2024. Truss was elected by just over 81,000 Conservative party members, a tiny fraction of the overall electorate. Truss, however, is not likely to seek a fresh mandate from the public through an early election, said Alan Wager of the U.K. in a Changing Europe program at Kings College London.

“The Conservative party is at the lowest level of polling they’ve been for over a decade. So that makes a general election extremely unlikely — because the vast majority of the public want one. The new prime minister will do anything to avoid facing the electorate right now,” Wager told VOA.
…

The International Atomic Energy Agency said Tuesday that it is “still gravely concerned” about the safety and security of Europe’s biggest nuclear power plant, the Zaporizhzhia facility situated in the midst of intense fighting between Ukrainian and Russian forces in southern Ukraine.  

“The current situation is untenable, and the best action to ensure the safety and security of Ukraine’s nuclear facilities and its people would be for this armed conflict to end now,” the United Nations nuclear agency said in a new report after IAEA chief Rafael Grossi and a team of inspectors visited the site last week even as shelling raged near the plant. 

The IAEA said it found extensive damage at the plant but did not assign blame. Russia, whose forces have controlled the facility since early in its invasion, and Ukraine, whose engineers operate the plant, have each accused the other of shelling the facility. 

The IAEA inspectors said they found Russian troops and equipment inside, including military vehicles parked near turbines.

“Ukrainian staff operating the plant under Russian military occupation are under constant high stress and pressure, especially with the limited staff available,” the IAEA report said. “This is not sustainable and could lead to increased human error with implications for nuclear safety.”

The U.N. nuclear agency said, “Pending the end of the conflict and re-establishment of stable conditions, there is an urgent need for interim measures to prevent a nuclear accident arising from physical damage caused by military means.”

The agency called for “the immediate establishment of a nuclear safety and security protection zone” around the Zaporizhzhia site, an apparent call for something approximating a demilitarized zone in the vicinity of the power plant. It’s a buffer that world leaders have previously asked for, but the warring countries have not implemented.

The IAEA said it is ready to immediately start consultations “leading to the urgent establishment of such a nuclear safety and security protection zone.”

The agency said, “Despite the unprecedented circumstances” at Zaporizhzhia, Ukraine’s three other nuclear power plants — Khmelnytskyy, Rivne and South Ukraine — “have continued operating safely and securely since the beginning of the conflict” on February 24.

The IAEA said Grossi later Tuesday planned to brief the U.N. Security Council on its inspection of the Zaporizhzhia plant. The IAEA said two of its experts remain at the plant to “observe the situation there and provide independent assessments.” 

Ukraine’s state-run nuclear company said Monday the Zaporizhzhia plant was disconnected from the electricity grid because of Russian shelling. 

“Today, as a result of a fire caused by shelling, the [last working] transmission line was disconnected,” Energoatom said in a statement on Telegram. 

Ukrainian Energy Minister German Galushchenko said on Facebook that Energoatom was not able to make repairs while fighting raged around the facility. 

The IAEA said Ukraine informed the agency the backup power line itself was not damaged and that Ukrainian experts plan to reconnect power in the coming days. 

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in his nightly video message Monday that the nuclear plant has again been put in a situation where it is “a step away from a radiation catastrophe.”  

Some information for this report came from The Associated Press, Agence France-Presse and Reuters.
…

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Tuesday doubled down on his warning that Turkey could “come all of a sudden one night” in response to perceived Greek threats, suggesting a Turkish attack on its neighbor cannot be ruled out.

Questioned about his earlier use of the phrase and the possibility of Turkish military action against its NATO ally, Erdogan reiterated the expression.

“What I’m talking about is not a dream,” he said at a news conference in the Bosnian capital Sarajevo. “If what I said was that we could come one night all of a sudden [it means] that, when the time comes, we can come suddenly one night.”

Turkey and Greece have decades-old disputes over an array of issues, including territorial claims in the Aegean Sea and disagreements over the airspace there. The friction has brought them to the brink of war three times in the last half-century.

Ankara says Greece is violating international agreements by militarizing islands close to Turkey’s Aegean coastline. It has also accused Greek air defenses of locking on to Turkish fighter jets during NATO exercises over the eastern Mediterranean.

Athens has also accused Turkey of violating its airspace.

“There are some illegitimate threats against us and if these illegitimate threats continue there’s an end to one’s patience,” Erdogan added, sitting alongside Bosnia’s three presidential representatives.

“When the time is due, necessary action will be taken because it is not a good sign to lock on radars to our planes. Such things done by Greece are not a good sign.”

Erdogan has previously said Turkish forces can “come all of a sudden one night” when threatening military action against Kurdish militants in Syria and Iraq. Turkey has conducted several military operations against the militants in recent years.

He first used the phrase in connection to Greece at an aerial technology festival on Saturday.
…