A Polish political scientist and journalist, Prof. Adam Wielomski, has taken to social media to claim Western European leaders do not seek a ceasefire in Ukraine at all, while the U.S. and Russia have their terms set and ready to go.
According to Wielomski, Trump and Putin have already made an agreement and will simply use their Aug. 15 meeting in Alaska to announce it “with great pomp and circumstance.”
Meanwhile, talk of Zelensky being present at the meeting is in no way related to Zelensky having any say on the negotiated terms, he continues, but to show that Zelensky is on board and to have him sign the pre-arranged agreement.
The issue, however, is that “Zelensky does not want to sign because he is afraid of being held responsible for losing the war.”
And Western Europe stands behind him “because it wants the war to continue despite the withdrawal of the Americans, as this will give it fuel and an excuse to eliminate American control over it in the form of NATO and give it a reason to create either a European Defense Union or to federalize the EU with a common foreign and defense policy.”
Wielomski then asks the “intelligentsia” who will benefit the most, Kyiv or Moscow, from the Americans withdrawing, leaving Zelensky only with the U.K. and the EU to support it.
News portal Do Rzeczy reported on a document signed over the weekend by European leaders, committing to continued support of Ukraine and financing its ongoing needs. President Macron, Prime Minister Meloni, Chancellor Merz, Prime Minister Tusk, Prime Minister Starmer, President von der Leyen, and President Stubb all signed the statement regarding “peace for Ukraine in connection with the planned meeting between President Trump and President Putin.”
Included in the document was their concern that serious negotiations can only take place under conditions of a ceasefire or a reduction in military operations and that Ukraine’s participation in any talks was critical to any peace being achieved.
Both the White House and the Kremlin accepted President Zelensky’s request to join the talks, although no formal invitation was issued. Meanwhile, a senior member of Putin’s inner circle, Investment Envoy Kirill Dmitriev, has said that many countries are making “titanic efforts” to hinder an agreement between Russia and Trump.
Dmitriev did not name specific countries but indicated that critics of the upcoming talks may attempt to sabotage the summit through diplomatic maneuvers and disinformation via the media.
The U.S. consumer spending engine and tariffs as leverage
Mainstream economists were surprised last week after Donald Trump closed two massive trade and tariff deals, the first with Japan and the second with the EU. And this happened without triggering an economic crash.
The deal with Europe in particular has made a number of critics look rather foolish; there's an army of mainstream economists who might reasonably acknowledge they misjudged the situation. But we all know that economists never admit their mistakes.
As I have been telling people for months, the American consumer is the economic engine of the world. There was no chance that any nation, or group of nations, was going to effectively challenge the U.S. on tariffs.
Doing so would mean catastrophic loss of the U.S. export market.
The U.S. makes up 30%-35% of all global consumer spending and is the largest consumer market in the world. There are no clear numbers for the whole of Europe, but Germany, Europe’s largest economy makes up only 3% of global consumer spending. Germany is also the third largest economy in the world next to China. In other words, Europe has NO capacity whatsoever to fill the void in trade left behind by the U.S. If the U.S. economy detaches from Europe, or if the U.S. economy crashes, Europe would crash also. This is a fact...
It’s safe to expect the EU to fold. They cannot afford not to.
Why the EU folded on trade
I'm not saying that it's a good thing that the U.S. is the consumption engine of the global economy! Rather, I’m explaining the reality we live in.
Tariff deals help to balance a long running pattern established post-WWII which positions America as the primary consumer market for the planet, while limiting the retention of a robust domestic industrial base. Tariffs also balance the highly uneven relationship the American public experiences with global corporations. As I argued in my article Tariff Freak Out: Why So Many People Cling To The Cancer Of Globalism earlier this year:
I’m getting a little tired of people constantly defending international conglomerates as if they are victims. On the libertarian side of things there are number of well meaning skeptics that suggest tariffs are “unconstitutional” because they symbolize taxation without representation. This is incorrect. Tariffs are not a tax on the public. They are not a tax on foreign economies. They are a tax on global corporations and the foreign goods they import...
And:
Frankly, I do not care that they’re getting taxed for importing foreign goods and exporting American jobs. That’s a good thing. If they want to void the tax, all they have to do is bring manufacturing and jobs back to the U.S. It’s not as if they don’t have options.
Americans can also buy from smaller locally sourced producers to avoid price hikes. Suddenly, the playing field in which international companies get an unfair advantage is a little more level and competition returns. That’s a free market, as opposed to what we have today...
Look: The EU made a deal because they need international conglomerates to continue investing dollars into their industries.
Every other nation (including China and even Canada) is likely to follow suit for similar reasons.
An extra $100 billion is already in the federal government’s coffers as of July. It's just as important to give Trump props for his successes as it is important to call him out for his mistakes.
Because I think he made one…
The hidden economic threat ahead
That said, Trump has stumbled into one blaring economic blunder that he should have seen coming a hundred miles away. It could undermine his entire term, as well as putting future conservative efforts in the U.S. at risk.
You might have heard of Trump's abrupt firing of Erika McEntarfer, the head of the Bureau for Labor Statistics (BLS).
You probably didn't care. Honestly, the incident is barely a blip on the White House’s very busy radar. DOGE pushed over 200,000 bureaucrats out of their jobs – what’s one more?
It's the reason for the firing that needs to be addressed.
The media is painting the incident as a temper tantrum by Trump. As if he fired McEtarfer because she dared to publish negative numbers about the U.S. economy.
Major countries and regional blocs in Africa are throwing their weight behind an ambitious plan to establish a “non-circulating” currency backed by critical minerals, which are crucial to technological development, defense, and economic growth.
Analysts say a denomination based on commodities could reduce Africa’s reliance on foreign currencies—especially the U.S. dollar—and decrease its dependence on loans from China, Europe, the United States, and global financial institutions like the World Bank.
The proposed monetary unit is provisionally called the African Units of Account (AUA), according to a plan formulated by the African Development Bank (AfDB) and KPMG South Africa.
The new currency is supported by the African Union and South Africa, the continent’s biggest economic power, and could soon be piloted in a test market.
The proposal says the AUA would be traded on the international foreign exchange market, and would be less susceptible to fluctuations in individual African currencies or the U.S. dollar, making it more attractive to investors.
Economists say the backing of the currency with mineral reserves could reduce the risk perceived by lenders, potentially leading to lower interest rates on loans for development projects, especially in Africa’s energy sector.
While some in Africa’s mining industry are optimistic about the potential of such a currency, others warn that China could “weaponize” it, given Beijing’s dominance in global critical minerals supply chains.
The International Energy Agency and other organizations project that demand for critical minerals like cobalt, copper, platinum, and lithium will spike fourfold shortly, with global powers in a race to secure supplies.
Africa is at the center of the competition.
It’s the world’s poorest and least developed region, but it holds almost a third of global reserves of critical minerals, according to the International Monetary Fund.
The minerals are essential for modern technologies like smartphones and computers, in electricity grids, and in weapons such as missile systems, fighter jets, and warships.
U.S. President Donald Trump regards critical minerals as vital to the future of the United States, and he wants to secure supply chains as soon as possible.
The United States Geological Survey (USGS) lists 50 minerals essential to America’s economy and national security, including cobalt, lithium, manganese, platinum, tantalum, tungsten, and vanadium.
Most are found in Africa.
South Africa, for example, is the world’s largest producer of manganese and platinum; Zimbabwe is one of the world’s top lithium producers, and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) mines approximately 70 percent of the world’s cobalt.
“A well-managed and structured critical minerals currency could strengthen Africa’s hand in global resources markets and free it to leverage its abundant natural resources,” said Moeletsi Mbeki, a South African economist.
This, he told The Epoch Times, is especially important at a time when the continent seeks to mitigate economic damage from global uncertainty caused by conflicts and “market turmoil.”
“If we consider the tariffs that Trump’s slapping around, and global trade wars happening now and in the future, maybe this new currency could prevent Africa from being collateral damage,” said Mbeki.
The AfDB and KPMG proposal said the currency would be backed by a basket of some of Africa’s most important critical minerals, and would be part of an initiative to create “a more unified and stable financial system.”
The framework document suggested that key producers of critical minerals pledge a pre-agreed proportion of proven commodity reserves to “promote regional financial integration, co-operation and cross-border trade.”
Moono Mupotola, AfDB director in Southern Africa, told The Epoch Times the bank is deciding on the minerals to be included in a “test” and is set to select a “pilot country” where a study of the feasibility of the new currency will happen.
Mbeki said the currency could help Africa take ownership of its critical minerals and their processing.
“We have all these minerals, but we don’t benefit much from them, because Africa’s value chain is so weak,” he explained.
“We process less than five percent of minerals domestically, which means the real profits are earned by foreigners, especially China.
“If we can use a common currency to unite Africa’s mining industries and their governments, it’s a real step towards more independence and greater local beneficiation and profits going into African pockets.”
Professor Hambaba Jimaima, international relations researcher at the University of Zambia, said Africa’s steps toward the currency are an indication that it wants as much economic independence as possible from both China and the West, as it prepares to be a prominent player in world affairs.
“Africa’s tired of being beholden to the West for aid and trade and to China for investment and loans,” he told The Epoch Times. “It wants to use critical minerals and a currency connected to them as a basis for industrialization and greater political clout.
“Africa has given away control of critical minerals to China. Africa wants this control back. It wants to mine and refine its own resources. Critical minerals are Africa’s trump card. The currency must be seen in this light.”
But other experts, like Ugandan economist and the East African country’s former finance minister, Ezra Suruma, are skeptical.
“Critical minerals are not yet the safe investment that gold is,” he told The Epoch Times. “Prices are volatile. If there’s more stability, then certainly the idea of a critical minerals currency is worth investigating.”
Frank Blackmore, KPMG South Africa lead economist, told The Epoch Times several factors hamper the creation of a resource-based currency.
“It’s going to take a long time for most African producers to reap full reward from their critical minerals,” he said.
“A lot of places don’t have adequate electricity; transport nodes are rundown. All of this counts against production. There are also shortages of skilled labor.”
Mbeki suggested, though, that the initial pool of minerals be used as collateral to fund development and industrialization.
“That fund could be used to encourage locally-controlled exploration and mining,” he said.
Mbeki also warns that China, as much as it often declares itself dedicated to African progress, could yet be “a fly in the ointment” in the establishment of a critical minerals-backed currency.
“China doesn’t usually support plans that could erode its power,” said the economist. “I can foresee the Chinese not being very cooperative in this regard, and they could even weaponize the currency to try to make sure that African countries toe their lines.
“As long as the Chinese have so much power in critical minerals supply chains, this new currency is on shaky ground.”
Social Security Insolvency Projected 6 Months Sooner, Chief Actuary Says
The Social Security trust funds are projected to run out about six months earlier than previously estimated, according to a new analysis from the program’s chief actuary.
Letters sent on Aug. 5 to Sen. Ron Wyden (D‑Ore.) and Rep. Steven Horsford (D‑Nev.) saythe combined Old‑Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) and Disability Insurance (DI) funds are now expected to be depleted in the first quarter of 2034, rather than the third quarter of that year as in the most recent trustees’ report.
The 2025 trustees’ report, released in June, had already moved up the combined depletion date by one year—from 2035 in the prior report to 2034—reflecting worsening demographics and legislative changes.
Under the new analysis carried out in response to requests from Wyden and Horsford, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act accelerates that timeline further by about six months.
As Tom Ozimek reports for The Epoch Times, the actuary’s letter attributes the earlier depletion to income‑tax provisions in the law, which make lower tax rates enacted in 2017 permanent and temporarily expand deductions for older Americans.
It estimates the changes will reduce revenue from taxing Social Security benefits and increase program costs by about $168.6 billion through 2034, worsening the program’s 75‑year actuarial deficit from 3.82 percent to 3.98 percent of taxable payroll.
When viewed separately, the OASI fund—which pays retirement and survivor benefits—is now forecast to run dry in the fourth quarter of 2032, roughly three months earlier than the previous estimate of the first quarter of 2033.
The DI fund, by contrast, remains solvent through the end of the 75-year forecast window. However, because the two funds are often assessed together to reflect total benefit obligations, the combined reserves are still expected to be exhausted by early 2034.
The actuary’s office said the analysis covers only the tax‑related provisions and will serve as a baseline for the 2026 trustees’ report, which will incorporate updated data and assumptions. In particular, the forthcoming trustees’ report will also include proposals intended to extend the solvency of Social Security.
Wyden, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said the actuary’s findings confirm earlier warnings that recent Republican tax and spending policies are straining the program.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment.
The Trump administration has said its tax policy will stimulate economic growth and expand the tax base, mitigating the fiscal effects of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act without raising tax rates.
A White House Council of Economic Advisers paper from May stated that the permanent extension of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and business incentives in the bill would boost capital investment, wages, and job growth, strengthening government revenue streams over time.
Proposals to Shore Up the Program
Democrats have largely focused on raising payroll taxes for higher earners to close the funding gap. The Social Security tax currently applies to 6.2 percent of wages up to $176,100 in 2025, and income above that level is exempt. The wage base is adjusted annually for inflation by the Social Security Administration.
A proposal introduced in 2023 by Sens. Bernie Sanders (I‑Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D‑Mass.)—known as the Social Security Expansion Act—would apply the tax to earnings above $250,000 and boost benefits for some groups. Proponents say the measure would keep the program solvent through 2096, though conservative groups such as the Heritage Foundation say that it would amount to one of the largest tax increases in U.S. history and risk broader economic harm.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Wednesday that he hosted a delegation of House Republicans who were in Israel on a trip organized by the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC, as members of Congress are flocking to the country amid their August recess.
"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, yesterday evening, met with an AIPAC-organized delegation of Republican members of the US Congress," Netanyahu’s office said in a statement. "The Prime Minister briefed the members of Congress on the war in the Gaza Strip and commented on the issue of the humanitarian assistance and the mendacious campaign being waged by Hamas against the State of Israel."
AIPAC Tracker, a group that tracks donations to US lawmakers from pro-Israel lobby groups, identified 20 House GOP members from a picture posted online by Netanyahu’s office. US House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) is also in Israel this week and visited illegal Jewish settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, including one where he dined with Netanyahu.
According to Punchbowl News, about 20 House Democrats are also headed to Israel during the recess on an AIPAC-sponsored trip. The strong show of support for Israel from so many US lawmakers comes as Israel is regularly massacring over 100 Palestinians a day in Gaza, including many desperate people seeking aid, and Palestinians are starving to death in Gaza every day due to the US-backed Israeli blockade.
A weeklong educational seminar in Israel...
The 20 House GOP members identified in the photo with Netanyahu include—
House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (MN), Harriet Hageman (WY), Michael Baumgartner (WA), Julie Fedorchak (ND), Jeff Hurd (CO), Craig Goldman (R-TX), Josh Brecheen (OK), Randy Fine (FL), Marlin Stutzman (IN), Brandon Gill (TX), Abe Hamadeh (AZ), Derek Schmidt (KS), John McGuire (VA), Mark Harris (NC), Brian Jack (GA), Guy Reschenthaler (PA), Troy Downing (MT), Tony Wied (WI), Bob Onder (MO), and Jefferson Shreve (IN).
Johnson is leading a smaller delegation that includes Reps. Michael McCaul (R-TX), Nathaniel Moran (R-TX), Michael Cloud (R-TX), and Claudia Tenney (R-NY).
Members of the US Congress travel to Israel more than any other country by a huge distance. In fact, they take "more trips to Israel than to the entire Western Hemisphere and the continent of Africa combined." —journalist Glenn Greenwald
Zelensky Says 'It's Time To End The War' - But Won't Identify Any Concessions
Given the rapid movement on a Trump-Putin face to face meeting, to be held within the 'coming days' - according to both sides, Volodymyr Zelensky is speaking up, and seeking to ensure Ukraine's position isn't sidelined.
Apparently Washington during Steve Witkoff's visit to Moscow Wednesday pushed the idea of a trilateral meeting involving Trump mediating between Zelensky and Putin, but this has been firmly rejected by Moscow. Instead Russia is taking the reputational and diplomatic 'win' of a bilateral Trump-Putin meeting, which would be a huge first of the war and a first of Trump's second term in office.
Russia's Putin stipulated Thursday that "conditions" for a potential future meeting with Zelensky had not been met.
"I have nothing against it in general, it is possible, but certain conditions must be created for this. But unfortunately, we are still far from creating such conditions," Putin told reporters.
These conditions without doubt center on territorial concessions, and things like sovereignty on Crimea. Additionally, Russia's position is that Zelensky is in power illegally, long past his mandate after canceling elections.
Putin's remarks on a Zelensky meeting were in response to the Ukrainian leader saying he's open to such a sit-down.
In a Thursday Telegram post, Zelensky said he had spoken with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz to discuss ending the conflict in what he called "a dignified peace” that would "determine the security conditions for Europe for decades."
"Ukraine is not afraid of meetings and expects the same bold approach from the Russian side. It is time to end the war," he said, using words which Trump has also repeatedly proclaimed.
Putin earlier this summer made clear he's willing to meet Zelensky, but only during a "final phase" of negotiations.
This would necessitate that the terms for ending the war would already be outlined and on the table, and tentatively agreed to and drawn up in their details.
Putin has in effect indicated that he would only show up to sign on to Zelensky and Ukraine's surrender. But as it stands, Kiev is still unwilling to make territorical concessions or compromises, and won't even take to more obvious first step of at least offering to relinquish Crimea.
The last six months, and especially the devastation wrought by drone and missile fire on both sides' territory, has caused positions to harden - despite the immense and tragic manpower losses. Ukraine is also wholly reliant on continued Western support, despite a general war weariness having long ago set in among the European and American publics.
DNI Tulsi Gabbard just called out the mainstream press for going quiet on the newly declassified revelations that EXPOSE the full extent of the Russia Hoax.
According to Gabbard, this silence is no coincidence.
“I’m not surprised for a few reasons.”
“Primary of which, many of these mainstream media outlets were the ones who—John Brennan and his people, and James Clapper and his people, leaked to almost immediately after that, Obama-directed National Security Council meeting.”
“Weeks before that assessment was completed. And actually even before it had really begun being drafted.”
She said the media didn’t question a thing.
“In many cases, you know, they printed…these mainstream media outlets printed exactly what they were told to print, without any kind of vetting or like, hmmm…okay, was this always the assessment? Or can you give us any evidence that this is true?”
The next time someone sneers “conspiracy theorist,” “anti-vaxxer,” “climate denier,” “far right,” “hate speech,” “terrorist,” or the ever-popular “racist,” understand what they are really saying: stop thinking.
These words are a linguistic kill-switch—engineered to short-circuit thought by triggering a reflexive emotional spasm.
If you encounter someone using these words, you can be certain you are not dealing with someone interested in a good faith effort to find the truth.
These terms are precision-guided psychological weapons, fired by unseen hands to herd the public mind. Recall the CIA’s own 1967 memo coining “conspiracy theorist” expressly to silence anyone doubting the magic-bullet fairy tale that supposedly killed JFK.
Although they are a poor substitute for an actual argument, these propaganda terms unfortunately work on many people. Call someone one of these words and you no longer need to refute their ideas with facts, logic, or reason. The slur does the work like magic.
Take the granddaddy of all elastic scare-labels: terrorism.
One hundred years ago the word barely existed. Today it vaporizes civil liberties on contact.
Glenn Greenwald nailed it: the T-word is “simultaneously the single most meaningless and most manipulated word in the American political lexicon.”
The only difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist is who controls the narrative.
Greenwald elaborates:
“There is this common paradox which is that the words that are most frequently used and have the greatest impact are often the words that are the most ill-defined. And therefore subject to manipulation, deceit, and propaganda.
So the word ‘terrorist’ for example is something that pervades countless political discussions of great significance. And we are essentially at the point, literally, where if the government points to somebody and simply utters the word ‘terrorist,’ and large numbers of citizens… will cheer for whatever it is that is done… No matter how lawless, no matter how little evidence has been presented to justify it, the mere fact that they have been labeled a ‘terrorist’ is something that will basically cause a majority of people to sanction whatever is done.
And yet what is so fascinating about the word ‘terrorist’ is that it really is a term that has absolutely no fixed meaning, it’s simply a term that means whatever the person wielding it wants it to mean.”
Greenwald continues:
“Because the word terrorism is so potent and shuts down all debate, the mere application of that label by the government, anonymously and with no evidence… has made huge numbers of people stand up and cheer the most radical power a government can seize, which is the power to target one’s own citizens for death, for assassination, in total secrecy and with no due process.
And that to me really illustrates the potency of how these propagandistic terms are wielded….
If we’re really going to vest virtually unlimited power in the government to do anything it wants to people they call ‘terrorists,’ we ought at least to have a common understanding of what the term means. But there is none. It’s just become a malleable, all-justifying term to allow the US government carte blanche to do whatever it wants.
‘Terrorism’ is really more of a hypnotic mantra than an actual word.”
In short, say the magic T-word and—poof—your rights, your property, your life evaporate, all without trial, all to thunderous applause.
The Antidote
Using these words is almost like casting a spell—most people who hear them become hypnotized, immediately stop thinking, and turn into easily herded automatons.
When asked how far the US government has plunged into the red, many fiscally-conscious Americans will tell you the national debt has reached $37 trillion. As distressing as that official number is, America’s true fiscal situation is even worse — far worse. According to a barely-publicized Treasury report, the actual grand total of Uncle Sam’s obligations is more than $151 trillion.
That huge discrepancy springs from the fact that the federal government doesn’t hold itself to the same accounting standards it imposes on businesses. Rather than using accrual accounting — which recognizes expenses when they’re incurred — our Washington overlords self-servingly use simple cash accounting, only recognizing expenses when they’re paid. As a result, discourse on federal obligations solely focuses on the national debt, comprising Treasury bills, notes and bonds.
Once a year, however, an obscure report delivers a more accurate version of Uncle Sam’s balance sheet. While it receives almost no attention from journalists or public officials, the Treasury Department is required to submit an annual report to Congress detailing the government’s financial condition. Critically, the 1994 law compelling this report mandates that it reflect “unfunded liabilities” — that is, commitments made without any dedicated assets or income streams to ensure they’ll be kept.
One of the larger categories of those unfunded liabilities is future federal employee and veterans benefits. At the end of the 2024 fiscal year, this alone represented a $15 trillion obligation. However, by leaps and bounds, the largest unfunded liabilities spring from America’s social insurance obligations — primarily Social Security and Medicare. At fiscal-year end, these liabilities totaled a towering $105.8 trillion.
Stacking these and other unfunded liabilities on top of the publicly-held national debt and other obligations, you arrive at a grand total of $151.3 trillion at the end of the 2024 fiscal year. Offsetting that by an estimated $7.9 trillion in US government commercial assets — including property, plant, equipment and purported gold holdings — a Just Facts analysis puts Uncle Sam at an overall net-negative $143 trillion.
Writing at the Heartland Institute, Just Facts president James Agresti put that nearly-incomprehensible total in perspective: “$143 trillion amounts to 85% of the net wealth Americans have accumulated since the nation’s founding, estimated by the Federal Reserve to be $169 trillion. This includes all of their assets in savings, real estate, corporate stocks, private businesses, and even consumer durable goods like automobiles and furniture.”
Those numbers reflected the government’s position on Sept 30, 2024. They’ve not only grown significantly worse in the intervening months, they’re deteriorating at a blistering pace even as you read this: Not even counting the unfunded liabilities that represent the biggest part of the problem, the national debt alone is increasing at something like $156 million per hour.
Wrangling over the budget isn’t going to save us. Congressional debates tend to center on discretionary spending — outlays that require a vote by Congress during the appropriations process. However, America’s steady march to insolvency is driven by so-called mandatory spending, which is hardwired by previously-enacted laws.
In what may be the most ominous indication that the government is on an autopilot-course for catastrophe, the proportion of total federal outlays driven by mandatory spending has more than doubled since 1965 — from 34% to 73% in 2024. It was at 71% just two years earlier, in 2022.
Ukrainians aged 60 and older can now serve in non-combat roles thanks to new legislation. The elderly Ukrainians will need special approval and get medical clearance before enlisting.
The law was passed by the Ukrainian legislature earlier this month and signed by President Volodymyr Zelensky on Tuesday, allowing people over the age of 60 to serve in limited roles until martial law in Ukraine is lifted.
While the current martial law authorization is set to lapse next month, Zelensky has requested that lawmakers extend it for an additional 90 days. Zelensky’s presidential term has already expired, and he has used martial law to remain in office.
Zelensky signed the law increasing the age limit as Ukraine continues to struggle with manpower in the war with Russia. Last year, Ukraine lowered its draft age from 27 to 25, but has resisted calls from the US to drop it to 18.
According to the Verkhovna Radawebsite, the law was returned with the president’s signature on Tuesday, July 29. Parliament had passed the legislation on Wednesday, July 16.
The law applies exclusively to volunteers – there is no provision for compulsory service in this age group.
Under the updated Law “On Military Duty and Military Service,” citizens aged 60+ can now enlist under contract during martial law, provided they are deemed medically fit by a military commission and have written consent from a unit commander.
Ukrainian MP Anna Skorokhod explained earlier this month that her country was facing a severe manpower shortage, saying, "Our main problem is people. Nobody is giving us people."
Ukraine Adopts New Anti-Corruption Law: Zelensky Quickly Reverses After Purse Strings Threatened
The Zelensky government suffered a black- eye this month, even from the perspective of its Western backers, and the Ukrainian leader has been forced to retreat under pressure.
"Ukraine’s parliament approved legislation Thursday restoring the independence of the country’s two main government anti-corruption bodies — a move demanded by Kyiv’s international partners as well as tens of thousands of enraged Ukrainians who protested on the streets of the capital and other cities," writes The Washington Post on Thursday.
With a majority of 226 needed to pass, a total of 331 deputies voted in favor, in what WaPo further calls "a stunning about-face by the same lawmakers who just last week had supported the previous law undermining the agencies."
The Zelensky government clearly wanted to show and signal Western allies and its biggest monetary backers it is willing to snap-to and quickly conform. This is also seen in the fact that this particular vote was the first one to be live-streamed since the war's start.
Last week's ultra-rare wartime anti-Zelensky protests were sparked when the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) were brought directly under the supervision of the country's prosecutor general, who happens to be an open and close ally of Zelensky.
Now after his humiliation in the court of public opinion, Zelensky is singing a very different tune and is seeking to present himself as a champion of transparency and anti-corruption.
"I thank the lawmakers for supporting my bill, now officially law. I’ve just signed it, and it will be published immediately," Zelensky announced on Telegram. "This ensures that anti-corruption bodies and all law enforcement institutions operate independently and effectively."
This corrective bill which has just been passed was put forward a mere two days after the protests, and crucially as the European Union said it would withhold budgetary funding on graft concerns and the erosion of democratic principles.
On Friday the European Union announced it would suspend part of a €4.5 billion fund tied to good governance standards, with the NY Times reporting that the bloc had in effect frozen €1.5 billion (about $1.7 billion) in financial aid to Ukraine over concerns about corruption and delays in key reforms.
However, the decision was said to not be 'final' yet, and on Sunday President Zelensky held a crucial call with President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen. His office confirmed they discussed Ukraine's anti-corruption system (...or we should say lack thereof).
Some footage from last week's protests, which also got the West's attention...
