WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

Ukraine, US teams hold talks in Saudi Arabia, US envoy hopeful on ending war

Ukrainian and U.S. delegations discussed on Sunday proposals to protect energy facilities and critical infrastructure, Ukraine's defence minister said, part of a diplomatic push by U.S. President Donald Trump to end three years of war.

The meeting in Saudi Arabia, which precedes talks on Monday between the U.S. and Russian delegations, came as U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoffexpressed optimism about the chances for ending Europe's deadliest conflict since World War Two.

"I feel that (Russian President Vladimir Putin) wants peace," Witkoff told Fox News on Sunday.

"I think that you're going to see in Saudi Arabia on Monday some real progress, particularly as it affects a Black Sea ceasefire on ships between both countries. And from that, you'll naturally gravitate into a full-on shooting ceasefire."

Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said his country's delegation to Sunday's talks was working in "a completely constructive manner", adding: "The conversation is quite useful, the work of the delegations is continuing.

"But no matter what we say to our partners today, we need to get Putin to give a real order to stop the strikes," Zelenskiy said in a televised statement.

Ukraine's delegation was headed by Defence Minister Rustem Umerov, who said the aim of such contacts was helping to "bring a just peace closer and to strengthen security", though Zelenskiy also said Sunday's talks were essentially "technical".

Putin agreed last week to Trump's proposal for Russia and Ukraine to stop attacks on each other's energy infrastructure for 30 days, but that narrowly defined ceasefire was soon cast into doubt, with both sides reporting continued strikes.

A large-scale Russian drone attack on Kyiv overnight killed at least three people, causing fires in high-rise apartment buildings and damage throughout the capital, Ukrainian officials said on Sunday.

Meanwhile Russian authorities said on Sunday that their air defences had destroyed 59 Ukrainian drones targeting the country's southwestern regions, adding that the strikes had killed one person in Rostov.

Zelenskiy, facing continued advances by Russian troops in eastern Ukraine, has backed Trump's call for a blanket 30-day ceasefire.

'SOMEWHAT UNDER CONTROL'

Trump said on Saturday that efforts to stop further escalation in the Ukraine-Russia war were "somewhat under control". The U.S. hopes to reach a broad ceasefire within weeks, targeting a truce agreement by April 20, Bloomberg News reported on Sunday, citing people familiar with the planning.

White House National Security Adviser Mike Waltz said on Sunday the United States was talking through a range of confidence-building measures aimed at ending the war, including on the future of Ukrainian children taken into Russia.

Asked about the goals for the broader negotiations, Waltz said that after a Black Sea ceasefire was agreed, "we'll talk the line of control, which is the actual front lines".

"And that gets into the details of verification mechanisms, peacekeeping, freezing the lines where they are," Waltz said. "And then of course, the broader and permanent peace."

Trump's contacts with Putin - two publicly announced phone calls but possibly other exchanges too - have spooked European leaders who fear Washington could be turning its back on Europe in the hope of striking a peace deal with Russia as part of some broader grand bargain encompassing oil prices, the Middle East and competition with China.

Britain and France are leading European efforts to beef up military and logistical support for Ukraine, and a number of countries have announced plans to increase defence spending as they try to reduce their reliance on the United States.

However, Witkoff on Sunday played down concerns among Washington's European NATO allies that Putin might be emboldened by any peace deal in Ukraine to invade other neighbours.

"I just don't see that he wants to take all of Europe. This is a much different situation than it was in World War Two," Witkoff said.

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Ukrainian armed forces lost over 190 soldiers in Kursk direction in 24 hours

Over the past 24 hours, the Ukrainian armed forces have lost over 190 soldiers, three combat armored vehicles, and a multiple launch rocket system launcher in the Kursk area, the Russian Defense Ministry reported.

"Over the past 24 hours, the Ukrainian armed forces have lost over 190 soldiers, three combat armored vehicles, 16 vehicles, five artillery pieces, six mortars, a multiple launch rocket system launcher, and two ammunition depots were destroyed," the ministry reported.

The Russian Defense Ministry added that units of the Battlegroup North inflicted losses on formations of a mechanized, airborne assault brigade, a marine brigade and three territorial defense brigades of the Ukrainian armed forces in the areas of the settlements of Gogolevka, Gornal, Guevo and Oleshnya during offensive operations. Four enemy counterattacks were repelled.

Reuters/Tass

In Nigeria, history tends to repeat itself with unerring accuracy and in tiresome syntax. When he wrote his Report on the Amalgamation of Northern and Southern Nigeria and Administration in 1919, Frederick Lugard described Nigeria as an “anomaly…. of a country with aggregate revenue practically equal to its needs, but divided into two by an arbitrary line of latitude.” While one portion was fiscally viable, he suggested, the other “was dependent on a grant paid by the British taxpayer.” Through the Amalgamation in 1914, Lugard created a Customs Union in which extraction could be sustained by administering mechanisms of fiscal compensation to smooth over these disparities.

From the get-go, the invention of Nigeria was about the exploitation of resources and property. Rivers State is at the centre of these resources. Towards this goal, the powers of government have historically been mobilised. More than 111 years after the Amalgamation, this raison d’êtreof the Nigerian estate remains resilient. It is both evident and explicit in the machinations that have now eventuated in the declaration of a state of emergency over Rivers State.

When he addressed the country on 18 March to proclaim a state of emergency in Rivers State, Bola Tinubu, Nigeria’s president, claimed that he acted on “security reports made available to [him]” showing “disturbing incidents of vandalisation of pipelines by some militant without the governor taking any action to curtail them.” Importantly, he had not bothered to speak to the State governor to hear his own side of the story, nor did he indicate that any humans had been injured or killed.

Security reports in such situations are provided by the State Security Service, (SSS). It is currently headed as Director-General by Oluwatosin Ajayi, whose stint as State Director of Security (SDS) in Rivers State coincided with the tenure as governor of Nyesom Wike, a principal belligerent in the political conflict in the state.

As a result, the president continued, “no good and responsible president will standby and allow the grave situation to continue without taking remedial steps prescribed by the Constitution to address the situation in the state, which no doubt requires extraordinary measures to restore good governance, peace, order and security.”

These words were not new. When he moved the motion in the federal parliament on 29 May 1962 for the declaration of a state of emergency in the old Western Region, Prime Minister, Abubakar Tafawa-Balewa uttered the original version of the same sentence. After rendering his version of the events in the regional parliament in Ibadan the previous week, the prime minister declared: “No responsible Government of the Federation could allow an explosive situation such as that which now exists in Western Nigeria to continue without taking adequate measures to ensure that there is an early return to the Region of peace, order and good Government.”

Then in the Western Region, as today in Rivers State, there was a political dispute between a predecessor and his successor, both of them of the same party. The predecessor was Obafemi Awolowo, leader of the Action Group, who had transitioned from the office of regional premier to being leader of the Opposition in the federal parliament. His successor as premier was Ladoke Akintola. Although both lawyers, these men had fundamental differences of both provenance and ideology. Awolowo was Ijebu from the south of Yorubaland. Akintola, who grew up in Northern Nigeria, was from Ogbomosho in the north of Yorubaland. Ideologically, Akintola’s politics tended towards conservative populism; Awolowo was more towards democratic socialism.

In May 1962, the National Executive Committee of the Action group resolved to request Akintola to resign as both deputy leader to Awolowo in the party and as premier of the Western Region. Rival factions emerged in the party claiming a majority in the regional parliament. Akintola sought to have the parliament convened for the purpose of procuring a vote of confidence on his government. Both the regional governor and the speaker of the parliament rebuffed his overtures. Instead, outside the parliament, some party officials led by Bola Ige secured the signatures of a majority of elected members withdrawing support from Akintola’s administration.

The party presented these signatures to the governor, Oba Adesoji Aderemi, then the Ooni of Ife, who thereafter invited Dauda Adegbenro to form a new government as regional premier. Attempts to re-convene the regional parliament ended in fracas. As recalled by Awolowo, “one Mr. Oke, a supporter of Akintola, a Member from Ogbomoso, jumped on the desk and was running about on the desk and then lifted a chair and struck somebody on the head. That is how it started, and then thereafter one Mr. Ebubedike, the Member for Badagry, who lives in Ajeromi, took the Mace and then in an attempt to strike the Speaker with the Mace, the Mace struck the table and broke into two.”

On receiving notification of the governor’s decision removing him and designating Adegbenro as regional premier on 21 May 1962, Akintola began proceedings at the High Court of the Western Region. The Chief Justice of the Region – they were called Chief Justice then –Samuel Okai Quashie-Idun, had acted as Chief Justice of Ghana under the government of Kwame Nkrumah. He headed to Nigeria after resigning from Ghana’s judiciary in 1958 over disagreements with the Nkrumah government in the first flush of post-colonial authoritarianism. In 1960, Quashie-Idun became chief justice of the Western Region in succession to Robert Yorke Hedges. As chief justice, he was said to enjoy the support and patronage of Premier Akintola.

The expectation of Akintola was reportedly that the chief justice would afford him expedited hearing and a favourable verdict, handing him under colour of law the boost he needed in this battle of his political life. Instead, Chief Justice Quashie-Idun decided to distil the legal issues and, rather than rule on them, transmitted those to the then Federal Supreme Court for decision. The case eventually traveled up to the Privy Council, where Akintola lost the legal dispute. It is said that a disappointed Akintola withdrew patronage from Quashie-Idun and their relationship never recovered. The following year, Quashie-Idun left the judiciary of the Western Region to East Africa, becoming the president of the East African Court of Appeal, where he died in 1966.

It is thought that Quashie-Idun tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to recover the relationship. In June 1963, he dismissed the action by Adegbenro of the Action Group, seeking to invalidate the appointment of Odeleye Fadahunsi as regional governor, and denied Adegbenro leave to appeal to the Federal Supreme Court. 

The disagreement between Quashie-Idun and Akintola was in reality unbridgeable. As chief justice, he saw a legal dispute which deserved judicial dispassion. For Akintola, it was a political dispute in which the role of the judiciary was to serve as his instrument. In 1962, Quashie-Idun chose to stick with his judicial brief. Today in Nigeria, judges at the highest levels have chosen to discard judicial robes and purchase sides in the political dispute in Rivers State, becoming shamefully complicit in instrumentalising the highest courts for a proverbial mess of political pottage.

When he addressed the country this past week, therefore, the president was not content with merely plagiarising Tafawa-Balewa; he found comfort in the partisanship of a wilful judiciary.

On 28 February, the Supreme Court restrained the Central Bank from releasing the federal allocations of Rivers State until the State House of Assembly had passed a lawful budget. In his address declaring the state of emergency, the president said his newly appointed military administrator in Rivers State would not be able to make any laws. In effect, he could not pass a budget to implement the Supreme Court judgment.

Yet, the day after he was installed, the Central Bank released the withheld allocation to the military administrator. On the same day, the National Assembly approved the emergency proclamation on an unlikely voice vote, after what was reported to be a splurge of money to sweeten that outcome. If the statutory allocation of Rivers State was used to purchase an emergency proclamation over the state, it is entirely in keeping with the project originated by Frederick Lugard to preserve Nigeria as a proposition in extractive anomaly.

Chidi Anselm Odinkalu, a professor of law, teaches at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and can be reached through This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Scott Hutcheson

The best leaders don’t leave influence to chance. They structure their communication, decision-making, and presence in ways that align with how people naturally process information. One of the most powerful tools? The Rule of Three—a pattern so deeply wired into human cognition that it shapes everything from great speeches to effective leadership signals. There is much to learn from the shamrock about the rule of three.

On this St. Patrick’s Day, let’s consider the shamrock. Legend suggests that St. Patrick used its three leaves to illustrate a concept that is difficult for many to grasp—the Holy Trinity, one God expressed in three distinct entities. Whether or not this story is historically accurate, the idea itself is a masterclass in communication.

Explaining something as abstract and paradoxical as the Trinity to a largely illiterate population required an approach that was both intuitive and memorable. The shamrock—something familiar, natural, and visually simple—was a brilliant choice. It distilled a complex theological idea into a tangible, everyday object, making it easier to understand and recall.

The power of this teaching method extends far beyond religious instruction. The most effective leaders know that clarity is not about dumbing things down—it’s about making the complex accessible. The shamrock endures as a powerful symbol of simplicity and clarity—qualities that are just as essential in leadership.

Why Three? The Shamrock Principle Illustrates Cognitive Efficiency

The Rule of Three isn’t just a storytelling trick—it’s a cognitive advantage. Research in cognitive science shows that our brains favor patterns of three because they optimize memory, engagement, and decision-making. This principle is widely used in communication, marketing, and leadership because information presented in triads is easier to process and recall.

From political speeches to corporate messaging, the most memorable and persuasive ideas often follow this structure. The reason is simple: our brains seek patterns, and three is the smallest number needed to establish one. Leaders who leverage this principle in their communication create clarity, drive action, and enhance their influence.

The Three Biodynamic Channels of Leadership

Great leadership isn’t just about what you say—it’s about how others experience you. Recent research suggests that leaders are judged on three primary dimensions. Think of these as three biodynamic channels:

1. Warmth – The ability to connect and build trust.
2. Competence – The demonstration of skill and credibility.
3. Gravitas – The capacity to bring people together to create shared value.

These three signals work together like the leaves of a shamrock. Remove one, and the whole system weakens. A leader high in competence but low in warmth can come across as unapproachable. One with warmth but no gravitas may struggle to rally others toward a shared goal. The key is knowing when to dial up or down each element based on the situation.

How to Apply the Shamrock Principle in Leadership

1. Structure Communication Around Three Key Points

Whether leading a meeting or delivering a speech, structuring your message around three main ideas makes it more persuasive. Studies show that people recall structured information up to 40% better than unstructured content.

Example: Instead of overwhelming your team with a long list of priorities, give them three key takeaways.

2. Balance Warmth, Competence, and Gravitas in Your Leadership Style

Ask yourself:

• Do I naturally project warmth (approachability, trust-building)?
• Am I demonstrating competence (expertise, reliability)?
• Am I cultivating gravitas (the ability to bring people together around a shared goal)?

A strong leader adjusts these based on context. For example, a high-stakes negotiation may require amplifying competence and gravitas, while a team-building retreat might call for more warmth.

3. Use the Rule of Three in Decision-Making

In complex environments, clarity is a competitive advantage. Leaders who frame decisions around three core factors avoid analysis paralysis and inspire confidence.

Example: When evaluating a business strategy, break it down into:

1. Impact – What is the potential upside?
2. Feasibility – Can we realistically execute this?
3. Risk – What are the possible downsides?

This approach helps teams move forward with focus and alignment.

Forbes

The Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) distributed N1.67 trillion to Nigeria's three tiers of government in February, representing a 1.49% decrease from January's allocation.

According to Bawa Mokwa, Director of Press and Public Relations at the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation, the February distribution was sourced from:

- Statutory revenue: N827.63 billion

- Value-Added Tax (VAT): N609.43 billion

- Electronic Money Transfer Levy (EMTL): N35.17 billion

- Solid minerals revenue: N28.21 billion

- Augmentation: N178 billion

From the total gross revenue of N2.34 trillion available in February, deductions included N89.092 billion for collection costs and N577.097 billion for transfers, interventions, refunds, and savings.

Revenue Decline Noted

The committee reported that February's gross statutory revenue of N1.65 trillion fell by N194.66 billion compared to January's N1.84 trillion. Similarly, VAT revenue decreased from N771.88 billion in January to N654.45 billion in February.

Allocation Breakdown

Of the N1.67 trillion distributed:

- Federal government: N569.65 billion

- State governments: N562.19 billion

- Local governments: N410.55 billion

- Derivation revenue to oil-producing states: N136.04 billion (13% of mineral revenue)

While oil and gas royalty and EMTL increased significantly, other revenue sources—including VAT, petroleum profit tax, companies income tax, excise duty, import duty, and CET levies—all decreased.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Former President Goodluck Jonathan has criticized the handling of the political crisis in Rivers State, describing the suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, Ngozi Odu, and all members of the state House of Assembly as a “clear abuse of power.” His remarks came during the annual colloquium organized by the Haske Satumari Foundation in Abuja on Saturday.

The crisis escalated on March 18 when President Bola Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers State, citing political and security instability. The suspension of the governor, his deputy, and state lawmakers was subsequently ratified by the National Assembly through a voice vote.

Jonathan expressed concern over the actions of the executive, legislative, and judicial arms of government, accusing them of misusing their authority. “As a former president and also from the Niger Delta, people called on me, President Jonathan, and ex-President Obasanjo to speak out on the suspension of the Rivers State governor,” he said. “But traditionally, former presidents globally avoid commenting on the actions of sitting presidents to prevent escalating tensions.”

He likened the situation to an Indian proverb: “If someone is truly sleeping, you can easily wake them. But if they are pretending to sleep, it becomes difficult to wake them.” Jonathan emphasized that the key actors in Nigeria’s government—executive, legislative, and judicial—know the right course of action but are deliberately avoiding it. “This is a clear abuse of office and power across all three arms of government,” he stated.

The former president warned that the decisions made by those in power would have long-term consequences and urged politicians to recognize their shared responsibility in ensuring good governance. He called for accountability and adherence to the rule of law to resolve the crisis in Rivers State.

Popular comedian and activist, Mr Macaroni, has clarified that he is not seeking financial assistance despite revealing his staggering ₦500 million debt. Speaking with Saturday Beats, the skit maker explained that his intention in sharing his financial struggles was to help others learn from his mistakes—not to solicit donations.

“I’m not accepting any help or donations. I shared the story primarily so people could learn,” he stated.

Mr Macaroni recently shocked fans when he disclosed that he had fallen into heavy debt, a situation stemming from a failed investment and a scam between 2021 and 2022. He also admitted that financial mismanagement and excessive generosity contributed to his predicament. The comedian recounted how the burden of debt left him emotionally drained, compounded by the betrayal of someone he once trusted. However, he emphasized that he has found strength in his faith and the unwavering support of loved ones.

Industry Colleagues Show Support

Following his revelation, numerous celebrities and activists have offered words of encouragement.

Social activist Rinu Oduala dismissed the notion of recklessness, saying, “I can attest to your financial kindness. Even in the midst of this, you still give. May love always triumph.”

Political commentator Morris Monye empathized, stating, “I used to share my struggles too, but I’m learning to hold it in. We will overcome.”

Actor and filmmaker Femi Adebayo commended Mr Macaroni’s openness, saying, “Your good heart came through for you, my brother.”

Actress Kehinde Bankole praised his honesty, calling it “a high level of accountability”, while hypeman Do2dtun described vulnerability as a strength, adding, “You have just unlocked another level of growth.”

Other celebrities, including Broda Shaggi, Ejike Asiegbu, Bisola Aiyeola, Aproko Doctor, and TheOnlyChigul, also sent their support.

Public Reactions Pour In

Fans have resonated deeply with Mr Macaroni’s story, with many sharing their own experiences. One user, @Og_koded94, expressed empathy, writing, “I am in the same shoes. I pray God restores all our hope for a better life.”

Despite his challenges, Mr Macaroni remains determined to move forward, emphasizing the lessons he has learned and his resolve to rebuild.

The Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) has announced the temporary closure of Samuel Ladoke Akintola Airport in Ibadan to allow for significant upgrade works. This move is part of the Oyo State government’s initiative to transform the airport from a domestic facility into an international gateway.

The Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA) has officially shut down the airport’s runway, a decision that complies with the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) regulations. FAAN stated that the upgrades are aimed at meeting global aviation standards, ensuring enhanced safety and convenience for passengers and airport personnel in the long term.

Obiageli Orah, FAAN’s Director of Public Affairs and Consumer Protection, highlighted that the temporary closure is in line with international safety protocols. “This step is crucial to safeguarding the well-being of all stakeholders during the construction phase,” she explained.

FAAN has urged travellers and other stakeholders to remain patient and cooperative during the closure. The agency reiterated its dedication to delivering seamless travel experiences and maintaining safe, secure air travel through this essential upgrade project.

Israeli airstrike kills Hamas political leader in southern Gaza, Hamas says

An Israeli airstrike in southern Gaza's Khan Younis killed Hamas political leader Salah al-Bardaweel on Sunday, Hamas officials said, as residents reported an escalation in the Israeli military campaign that began on Tuesday.

Pro-Hamas media said the airstrike killed Bardaweel, who is a member of the group's political office, and also killed his wife. Israeli officials had no immediate comment.

Taher Al-Nono, the media advisor of the Hamas leadership, mourned Bardaweel's death in a post on his Facebook page.

After two months of relative calm, Gazans were again fleeing for their lives after Israel effectively abandoned a ceasefire, launching a new all-out air and ground campaign on Tuesday against Gaza's dominant Palestinian militant group Hamas.

Explosions echoed throughout the north, central, and southern Gaza Strip in the early hours of Sunday, as Israeli planes hit several targets in those areas in what witnesses said was an escalation of the attack that began on Tuesday.

In a statement, Hamas accused Israel of assassinating Bardaweel, whom it said was praying along with his wife, when an Israeli missile struck their tent shelter in Khan Younis.

"His blood, that of his wife and martyrs, will remain fueling the battle of liberation and independence. The criminal enemy will not break our determination and will," said the group.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly said the main aim of the war is to destroy Hamas as a military and governing entity. He has said the aim of the new campaign is to force the group to give up remaining hostages.

Hamas' de facto government head Essam Addalees and internal security chief Mahmoud Abu Watfa were among those killed by Israeli strikes on Tuesday, in addition to several other officials.

Palestinian health officials said at least 400 people were killed Tuesday.

Palestinian medics said an Israeli plane bombed a house in the city of Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip, wounding several people.

Hamas has accused Israel of breaking the terms of the January ceasefire agreement by refusing to begin negotiations for a final end to the war and a withdrawal of its troops from Gaza. But Hamas has said it is still willing to negotiate and was studying Witkoff's "bridging" proposals.

The return to the air strikes and ground operations that have devastated Gaza has drawn calls for a ceasefire from Arab and European countries. Britain, France and Germany issued a joint statement calling on Israel to restore access for humanitarian aid.

Israel has blocked the entry of goods into Gaza, and Falk accused Hamas of taking aid for its own use, a charge Hamas has previously denied.

Israel launched its campaign in Gaza after a devastating Hamas attack on Israeli communities around the Gaza Strip on October 7, 2023 that killed some 1,200 people, according to an Israeli tally, and saw 251 abducted as hostages.

The Israeli campaign has killed more than 49,000 Palestinians, according to Palestinian health authorities, and devastated much of the coastal enclave, leaving hundreds of thousands of people in tents and makeshift shelters.

Reuters

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

As Russia retakes Kursk, Ukrainians ask, 'Was it worth it?'

When Mariia Pankova last exchanged messages with her close friend Pavlo in December, she had no idea that he was among the Ukrainian troops fighting in Russia's Kursk region.

She found out when a fellow soldier told her several days later that her friend, Pavlo Humeniuk, 24, a combat engineer in Ukraine's 47th Magura brigade, had gone missing near the village of Novoivanivka in Kursk on December 6.

Almost four months have passed and there has been no further information about Pavlo's fate, Pankova told Reuters, citing her conversations with his relatives. She keeps searching on Telegram and Facebook hoping to find out whether he is dead or alive.

Pankova, 25, believes the cost of Ukraine's risky incursion into Russia may have been too high. The sentiment is shared by many others in Ukraine, especially after troops retreated from most of Kursk this month following weeks of heavy fighting.

"I'm just not sure it was worth it," she said, large teardrops running down her face when talking about her missing friend, who she bonded with over their shared love of hiking in Ukraine's mountains.

"We're not invaders. We just need our territories back, we do not need the Russian one."

In response to questions for this story, Ukraine's armed forces General Staff said the offensive was meant to put pressure on Moscow, to divert Russian forces from other fronts and to prevent Russian cross-border attacks on neighbouring parts of Ukraine.

The operation "achieved most of its goals", the General Staff said.

Kyiv's assault on Kursk in August took Russia, and the world, by surprise. It was the biggest attack on sovereign Russian territory since the Nazi invasion of 1941.

As Ukrainian soldiers smashed into the Kursk region, largely unopposed, they quickly seized some 1,376 square kilometres (531 square miles) of Russian territory.

But short of troops, within weeks the area under Ukraine's control shrank to a narrow wedge.

Kyiv used some of its top marine and air assault forces but the grouping was never large enough to be able to hold on to a larger area.

"From the very beginning, logistics was seriously complicated because as we entered the Kursk region, we ensured sufficient depth but we did not ensure sufficient width," said Serhiy Rakhmanin, a Ukrainian lawmaker on the parliament's committee for security and defence.

From the start, Russia had a manpower advantage along the Kursk frontline.

But the situation became critical late last year. Russia brought in elite units and top drone forces as reinforcements, aided by North Korean forces. They tightened assaults around Ukrainian flanks and advanced to within firing range of a key supply road, according to reports from Ukrainian military bloggers close to the armed forces.

"They not only increased the number of their group opposing our military, but they also improved its quality," Rakhmanin said. Russian President Vladimir Putin has never acknowledged the role of the North Koreans on the battlefield.

'NO LOGIC'

Russia's retaking of the Kursk region removes a potential bargaining chip for Ukraine just as U.S. President Donald Trump undertakes talks to end the war with Russia, which holds around a fifth of Ukraine's national lands.

Ukraine's retreat from the Kursk city of Sudzha, confirmed by Kyiv on March 16, prompted questions and deepened the public divide in Ukraine on the benefits of the incursion.

Soldier Oleksii Deshevyi, 32, a former supermarket security guard who lost his hand while fighting in Kursk in September, said he saw no logic in the operation.

"We should not have started this operation at all," he told Reuters in a rehabilitation centre in Kyiv, where he has spent the past six months adjusting to life after injury.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has acknowledged his military is in a difficult position in Kursk and that he expects continued attacks from Russia as it attempts to push the remaining Ukrainian forces out of the region.

However, he has denied claims by Putin and Trump that his forces are surrounded. U.S. intelligence assessments also state Kyiv's troops are not encircled.

The Russian forces are now sending small assault groups to try to break through the Ukrainian border in the Sumy region, and may also be readying for a bigger attack there, Ukrainian military analysts said.

In public comments made to Putin, Russia's chief of General Staff, Valery Gerasimov last week confirmed his troops' recent incursions into Sumy. He detailed what he said were heavy Ukrainian losses in Kursk.

Even as Ukraine shifted to a defensive operation, its goals included “control over the territory of the Russian Federation, exhaustion of the enemy, destruction of its personnel and pulling back its reserves,” Ukraine's General Staff said.

It added that nearly 1,000 Russian soldiers were taken prisoner, some of whom were swapped for Ukrainian prisoners.

Because of the operation, Moscow had to create three new groupings, totalling about 90,000 soldiers, as well as 12,000 North Korean servicemen, the General Staff said.

Reuters could not independently verify those claims.

RISKY GAMBLE

Even at the start, some criticised it as a risky gamble.

Viktor Muzhenko, former head of Ukraine's General Staff, wrote in August 2024 that Ukraine should "focus on defending its key territories, avoiding unpredictable risky operations that could divert attention from main threats, and choose forms and methods of using troops that are adequate to their capabilities."

However, some in Ukraine hailed the operation as a black eye for Russia.

Speaking on March 12, Oleksander Syrskyi, Ukraine's commander-in-chief, said the operation diverted and killed some of Russia's best troops.

Lawmaker Rakhmanin said it also provided a much-needed boost to morale in Ukraine after Russia made territorial advances there in 2024 and showcased Ukraine's ability to conduct successful offensive operations.

While Trump negotiates with Putin for an end to the war, Pankova remembered her friend Pavlo and cast doubt over the possibility of a peace deal that prevented Russia from later taking more Ukrainian territory.

She was thinking of joining the armed forces, she said.

"Every time that someone tries to, let's say, sell some piece of Ukraine, they just have not to forget what we already gave. How many lives our people gave for that.

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Moscow issues warning to Kiev

Moscow reserves the right to retaliate in kind if Ukraine continues to strike Russian energy infrastructure in violation of the recently agreed partial ceasefire, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has warned.

On Tuesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin held phone talks with his US counterpart, Donald Trump, and agreed to a US-mediated partial ceasefire. As part of it, Moscow said it would halt strikes on Ukrainian energy sites if Kiev does the same. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky also agreed to the terms.

Despite this, Kiev struck an oil depot in Russia’s Krasnodar Region the day after the agreement and blew up a gas metering station in Sudzha on Friday.

The Ukrainian army also deliberately targeted “residential buildings and social institutions,”Zakharova said in a press statement on Saturday

“Kiev is once again demonstrating its complete inability to negotiate, as well as its lack of desire to achieve peace,” the spokeswoman said. “As in 2022, they have once again turned to provocations aimed at disrupting the negotiation process.”

Moscow is free to retaliate if this continues, she warned.

We clearly warn you that if the Kiev regime continues this destructive course, the Russian side reserves the right to retaliate, including symmetrically.

Kiev struck an oil facility operated by the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC) in southern Russia overnight on Tuesday, immediately after the US-brokered ceasefire was agreed on, the Russian Defense Ministry reported on Wednesday. The CPC’s international shareholders include US giants Chevron and Exxon Mobil.

Early Friday, Ukrainian forces destroyed a gas metering station in Sudzha as they were retreating from Russia’s Kursk Region.

Moscow has condemned both attacks as violations of Ukraine’s ceasefire responsibilities, and accused Kiev of attempting to derail US peace efforts.

According to the Kremlin, Putin brought up Kiev’s history of sabotaging peace processes in his phone call with Trump on Tuesday. The Russian leader stressed that Ukraine has “repeatedly sabotaged and violated the agreements reached,” the Kremlin press service said earlier this week.

Reuters/RT

If you are reading this, you probably know that I am a Bola Tinubu objector.

I object to the Nigerian leader not principally on account of his politics or even his policies, but because we do not know who he really is.  Even what we know about who he says he is, where he has been and what he has done are full of holes from Tinubu Square to Chicago, and back.

That said, I am not automatically opposed to his emergency declaration on Rivers State last week. Every leader, including fathers and husbands, overreaches or makes mistakes. Maybe this is one of President Tinubu’s.

On the surface of it, he violated the Constitution because the conditions in the state did not appear to meet the technical definition contained in the law.  But perhaps, as president, he had far more information than anyone else.

Perhaps he did what he thought he needed to do.  According to the same constitution, however, the legislature is the counterpoint to the weight of the executive branch.  The problem is that last week, both houses of the National Assembly blended into the executive as they always seem to do, supporting the emergency declaration with none of the relevant prescriptions fulfilled.

According to Peoples Gazette and SaharaReporters, the legislators were bribed by the executive with up to $25,000 to sell their souls.  “Eleven lawmakers, comprising seven senators and four representatives, confirmed separately to The Gazette that they were offered up to $25,000 to support Mr Tinubu’s invocation of Section 305 of the Nigerian Constitution to dismantle democratic institutions in Rivers, including firing elected Governor Simi Fubara and all state legislators, and impose government by military ordinance statewide,” that newspaper said on Thursday.

According to SaharaReporters, the funds were distributed on Tuesday and Wednesday night at Senate President Godswill Akpabio’s Abuja guest house.  “According to the sources, 42 senators received $10,000 each on Wednesday night, while 45 senators were given $5,000 each on Tuesday night.”

As I completed this column on Friday, no rebuttal of these stories had come from either chamber or any legislator.

It seems like only yesterday in this column that I was lamenting the crisis of the National Assembly, describing the institution as being in decay.

“In everything but name and form, it has essentially collapsed,” I said.  “…Nigeria’s legislative branch is a caricature, merely mimicking the legislative idea and process.  That its members are elected makes it the most tragic arm of the government.”

That was in January 2022, a little over three years ago, but it was not my only instance of expressing concern about its ethical direction.  Twenty years earlier, while some of its current members were still in their political diapers, I had drawn attention to its emerging image.

In “How to Buy A Senator,” (November 2002), I reflected on the Upper Chamber’s impeachment threat to President Olusegun Obasanjo, an effort which was allegedly aborted for N300m.

Even as their self-determined wages began to rise faster than any other legislature on earth, in 2012, the senators collected new model Toyota Land Cruiser Prado jeeps worth at least N1.2bn, a purchase that a newspaper described as having “lifted the Senate’s renowned lavish automobile spending to a new high.”

I described a phenomenon of “Bloated Senate, Empty Senators,” saying there was no such thing as a member of that chamber “with a demonstrable commitment to Nigeria.”

“I believe that military rule is a contradiction in terms,” I wrote.  “The paradox, unfortunately, is that the current army of occupation, symbolised by the senators, is worse than the military.  If soldiers shoot to kill, these carnivores simply eat you alive.  As politicians, these are the world’s best example of why people think of the worst, from suicide to mass killing to military coups.  They hope, sadly, that the rot from which they benefit will last forever.”

Those, of course, were the PDP years, which the APC lampooned from every tree top for being wasteful, greedy and corrupt.  And yes, the PDP produced some of the worst public servants known to history, including David Mark, who presided over the Senate between 2007 and 2015.  His tenure was so bad that, at his departure, I offered this dismal testament as he prepared to say goodbye in his local church.  “Give me a servant of the people to cheer, and I will be the first in line,” I said.  “But don’t ask me to enshrine false gods before God, or our children.”

In 2016, as the eighth Senate got underway and even greater greed was unveiled, I wrote that the Upper Chamber mirrored Nigeria’s soul.  That was the era of Bukola Saraki: in his first few months, in 2015, each senator received an official “loan” to buy an expensive car.

Just months after that, in 2016, the senators were each given a new SUV Landcruiser worth over N35.1m.

These are just some of the stories of luxury car spending that leaked to the public.  Among them, in October 2023 and as hunger grew in Nigeria, members of both houses received new Toyota Land Cruisers worth over N100m each.

You may then remember that in 2019, BudgIT disclosed that in just17 years—2003 to 2019—the National Assembly allocated to itself N1.752 trillion, its budget rising astronomically from N23.5bn in 2003 to N135bn in 2018, and N125bn in 2019.

It is against this picture of Nigeria’s federal legislature that we must look at its irresponsible character and performance over time, particularly now that its members appear to be openly accepting gratification in foreign currency to avoid faithfully serving the constitution to which they are sworn.

The founding fathers clearly recognised the possibility that there will come along a president who makes a decision that may be wrongheaded or even willful.  It is the responsibility of the legislative branch to examine such decisions diligently, according to the constitution and their rules of procedure.

The problem with Nigeria is that when a party is in power, the legislature becomes a part of that party and there are few men of character.  In the first 16 years of the Fourth Republic, the legislature blended into the executive because the executive was PDP.

Now that the ruling party is APC, we have seen how the legislature has similarly become APC, driven by the very worst of that party.  This is why, last week, none of the provisions of law or practice were good enough for the Nigeria National Assembly.  That is why neither the President of the Senate nor the Speaker of the House cared for conditions and standards established by the constitution for the ratification of an emergency: a recorded two-thirds majority vote of their members.

This is also in accordance with the preference of the Assembly in the past 25 years for poor, or no record-keeping.  There are no archives. Its crayon-style website is shamelessly anemic, almost empty—no history, no depth, no substance—compared to the vibrant and comprehensive websites of 180 other legislatures around the world.

There are now one and a quarter arms of the Nigerian government: the executive and the judiciary.

Punch