Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has built his reputation on talking tough on terrorism, came under international pressure on Friday for his invitation to leaders of the radical Palestinian movement Hamas for talks in Moscow.
The US called for Russia to clarify its intentions and an Israeli minister described the move by Putin, who has made the bloody anti-separatist war in Chechnya a hallmark of his presidency, as a "knife in the back."
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov responded by predicting that the international community would eventually support the olive branch held out to Hamas.
"I'm not afraid to predict that some time in the future many leading states, and I'm thinking in particular about the quartet, will start supporting Hamas contacts ... to make clear to the Hamas authorities the attitudes of one or another state toward Middle East settlement," he said during an official visit to Italy.
However, an earlier statement by the quartet -- the US, UN, EU and Russia -- made clear that relations with Hamas were possible only if the organization af-firmed Israel's right to exist and renounced violence.
The diplomatic row began on Thursday when Putin said he would invite Hamas officials to Moscow "soon" for discussions on the future of the Middle East peace process.
Hamas welcomed the proposal and said it would attend talks.
There was support on Friday from France's foreign ministry, which said that the proposal "may contribute to advancing our positions" on the Middle East peace process.
Russia's special envoy to the Middle East, Alexander Kalugin, also sought to underline that Russia was not giving Hamas a free ride.
"We will call on Hamas to change its position in the meeting with its representatives. We will uphold the positions of the international `quartet.' This will be a signal to Hamas that we expect action in response," he told Interfax news agency.
"We call on them to adhere to prior agreements, to put an end to terrorist acts. And, of course, they must move to recognize Israel's right to exist," Kalugin said.
Russian commentators were divided on Friday over whether Putin's offer to Hamas was positive.
Russia's Kommersant daily said Moscow wants to persuade Hamas to "leave all of Palestine's international contacts under the control of [Palestinian President] Mahmoud Abbas" and to enforce monitoring over how Western funds given to the Palestinian authority are spent.
The Izvestia daily put the Hamas invitation in the context of Moscow's policy on Iran's nuclear programme, saying Putin "has now assumed the role of the main dove of peace" in the Middle East.
Russia is seeking to position itself as a key broker in the international crisis over Iran's nuclear ambitions.
An important proposal for ending the standoff includes an offer from Moscow to enrich Iran's uranium on Russian territory. That, Moscow says, would allow Iran to run a civilian programme and the international community to keep tabs on potential bomb-making material.
Izvestia said, however, that Putin's role has been undermined by only partial diplomatic success over Iran.
But Viktor Kremenyuk, an independent analyst from the USA-Canada Institute in Moscow, said Russia's Iranian diplomacy could actually help links with Hamas because of ties between the Islamic republic and the Palestinian group.
"Moscow has very good relations with Tehran and Tehran could push Hamas to ensure that the Moscow visit gives results," he said.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
Gogoro Inc was once a rising star and a would-be unicorn in the years prior to its debut on the NASDAQ in 2022, as its environmentally friendly technology and stylish design attracted local young people. The electric scooter and battery swapping services provider is bracing for a major personnel shakeup following the abrupt resignation on Friday of founding chairman Horace Luke (陸學森) as chief executive officer. Luke’s departure indicates that Gogoro is sinking into the trough of unicorn disillusionment, with the company grappling with poor financial performance amid a slowdown in demand at home and setbacks in overseas expansions. About 95