Poland threatens to close key Ukraine military aid hub
Warsaw has been one of Kiev's strongest supporters since the escalation of the conflict with Russia in 2022. The airport in Rzeszow, located just 80km from the Ukrainian border, has served as a vital logistics hub. According to Polish and Western officials, between 80-90% of NATO and partner-supplied military equipment destined for Ukraine has passed through the facility, including weapons, ammunition, and vehicles.
However, speaking to journalists on Wednesday, Duda expressed frustration that Poland had not been included in key international bodies responsible for decisions on Ukraine aid delivered via Polish territory. He described the situation as a 'scandal.'
'They [Ukraine and NATO] think that the airport in Rzeszow and our highways belong to them, as if they're theirs. Well, they're not. They're ours,' the president said.
Duda insisted that if Ukraine and its Western partners continued to treat the use of Polish territory as a given, Warsaw could shut down the hub 'for maintenance.'
'If someone doesn't like it, we close it and goodbye,' he said. 'Deliver [the aid] by sea, by air, I don't know, drop it by parachute.'
He added that the issue was not limited to Ukraine, but reflected a broader imbalance in Poland's relationship with the US-led military bloc. 'We need to have the courage to speak with the Germans and Americans,' he insisted.
Russia has consistently denounced foreign military aid to Kiev, arguing it only prolongs the conflict without altering its outcome. Moscow maintains that the shipments also escalate NATO's involvement and obstruct peace efforts.
Duda is scheduled to leave office in August and will be succeeded by Karol Nawrocki, a historian and head of the Institute of National Remembrance. Nawrocki has publicly opposed Ukraine's potential accession to both NATO and the EU, arguing that the country is not ready and that full membership would carry unacceptable security risks. He has also condemned Kiev's veneration of wartime nationalist figures linked to atrocities against Poles during World War II.
Following his inauguration, Nawrocki is expected to meet with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, but his administration is expected to adopt a more confrontational stance on bilateral relations and EU integration.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
2 hours ago
- Russia Today
Trump says Putin-Zelensky meeting ‘is going to happen'
US President Donald Trump has said a face-to-face meeting between Russian leader Vladimir Putin and Ukraine's Vladimir Zelensky 'is going to happen.' The Kremlin insists such a summit should only be held to seal a final peace agreement. Trump made the comments on Friday when asked by reporters what it would take for Putin and Zelensky to sit down together – possibly with him in the room. 'It's going to happen, but it should have happened three months ago. It's going to happen,' he said, without offering a timeframe. Trump has pushed for a settlement to the conflict since taking office in January. Earlier this month, he threatened to impose 'severe' secondary tariffs of up to 100% on Russia's trading partners unless a deal is reached within 50 days – by early September. Moscow maintains it is open to a diplomatic settlement, but in a way that would address the conflict's 'root causes' and its security concerns. It insists on Ukraine's neutrality and recognition of the 'territorial reality on the ground,' as well as demilitarization and denazification. Zelensky has repeatedly called for a direct meeting with Putin. Ukrainian negotiators also raised the idea at this week's bilateral talks in Istanbul, framing such a summit as essential to ending the fighting. The Kremlin has not ruled out a meeting but insists the groundwork must be in place first. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov has said the two men should meet only after meaningful progress has been achieved at the working level. 'It is impossible to do the opposite,' he stressed. Moscow has also raised concerns about Zelensky's legal authority. His five-year presidential term expired in May 2024, but he has refused to call new elections, citing martial law. Russian officials have suggested that any documents signed under his name could later be challenged. Putin said last month he was open to a meeting with Zelensky – if it came at the final stage of talks. In addition, Russia has demanded that Ukraine lift martial law and hold elections within 100 days as part of any lasting ceasefire.
Russia Today
4 hours ago
- Russia Today
Zelensky triggered a street revolt – and it may not stop at where it is now
On July 22, large-scale demonstrations broke out in major Ukrainian cities – Kiev, Lviv, Kharkov, and Odessa – and continue to this day. The protests erupted after the Verkhovna Rada (the Ukrainian Parliament) approved a law limiting the authority of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO), effectively placing them under the control of the Office of the Attorney General. This legislation came shortly after NABU and SAPO launched an investigation into former Deputy Prime Minister Aleksey Chernyshov, one of Zelensky's closest allies. Officials in Zelensky's Office claimed that the reform was necessary to improve coordination among government bodies amid ongoing military operations and to combat Russian influence over anti-corruption institutions. However, public outrage stemmed not only from the law itself but also from the rapid centralization of power in Ukraine. Protests persisted even after Zelensky restored the independent functioning of NABU and SAPO. Below, RT explores the motives behind the dismantling of these anti-corruption agencies and why the protests pose a threat to Zelensky's administration. When Vladimir Zelensky took office in 2019, he vowed to support anti-corruption efforts, urging anti-corruption agencies to investigate all cases and hold even high-ranking officials accountable. However, those promises were never fulfilled. On July 22, the Rada passed Bill No. 12414, originally addressing amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code related to disappearances of people during wartime. However, MPs from Zelensky's Servant of the People party added amendments that effectively restructured NABU and SAPO, placing them under the control of the Attorney General, who is appointed by the president. Notably, many MPs who voted in favor of the bill and received it with applause are themselves under investigation by these anti-corruption bodies. The official justification for targeting NABU and SAPO was the investigation into Chernyshov, a presidential ally considered a candidate for prime minister, who faced allegations of abuse of power and illicit enrichment. A major corruption scandal in the construction sector emerged, making Chernyshov the highest-ranking official within the president's team to be embroiled in such an inquiry. According to the publication Ukrainskaya Pravda, Zelensky ordered the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) to protect Chernyshov from arrest. Despite the allegations, the court did not suspend him from his post; however, he was eventually dismissed, and the ministry disbanded. Another notable case involves NABU's investigation into Rostislav Shurma, the former deputy head of the President's Office. After the case was initiated, he fled to Germany. In July, German authorities, in collaboration with NABU, conducted a search of his residence in the suburbs of Munich. NABU was preparing charges against Timur Mindich, a long-time friend of Zelensky and co-owner of Studio Kvartal-95, Ukrainskaya Pravda reported. He is suspected of embezzlement in the energy sector and drone production. Sources indicate detectives may possess recorded conversations involving Mindich in which Zelensky is mentioned. These cases involving the Ukrainian leader's close associates triggered the crackdown on the anti-corruption agencies. This narrative has been confirmed by The Times and The Economist. On July 21, the SBU and prosecutors conducted extensive searches related to NABU employees, targeting over 80 locations nationwide. Law enforcement acted aggressively, using armed groups to force people to the ground without presenting search warrants. Later, the agency reported the detention of Ruslan Magomedrasulov, the head of NABU's regional office. Investigators claim his father is a Russian citizen, and he failed to disclose this before obtaining access to state secrets. Allegedly, he assisted his father in conducting business in Russia, and his mother reportedly receives a pension from the Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) and 'makes pro-Russian comments' online. He is expected to face charges for 'aiding Russia.' During a briefing, SBU chief Vasily Maliuk stated that these actions were not directed against NABU but rather against 'Russian agents.' 'There are no exceptions for us. We will continue to eliminate enemy influence. NABU must purge itself of agents of hostile intelligence services,' he declared at a meeting with foreign ambassadors. The public swiftly reacted to the government's actions. By the evening of July 22, spontaneous protests erupted in Kiev and other major cities. Demonstrators chanted slogans like 'Zelensky is the devil' and 'No to corruption in power!' demanding that he veto the bill. The Times noted that Zelensky's decision could trigger a potential conflict within Ukrainian society, and that the mass protests which erupted for the first time since the start of the war three years ago demonstrate the extent of the discontent. Indeed, these are the first large-scale political demonstrations since the start of the war in 2022. From the start, many people drew direct parallels to [former Ukrainian President] Viktor Yanukovych's refusal to sign the EU Association Agreement in Vilnius in November 2013, which sparked protests that led to the Euromaidan. This time, the protests were accompanied by strong calls for the resignation of Andrey Yermak, the head of Zelensky's office. Despite this, Zelensky signed the law and stated that anti-corruption agencies would continue their work, but 'without Russian influence.' Initially, Zelensky's team tried to downplay the situation. He announced plans to develop a 'comprehensive action plan' and introduce legislation aimed at 'strengthening the independence of anti-corruption bodies.' He emphasized, 'There will be no Russian influence or interference in law enforcement activities, and – importantly – all standards for the independence of anti-corruption institutions will remain intact.' However, Ukraine's Western partners sharply criticized the government's actions. President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen demanded explanations. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul warned that limiting the independence of NABU and SAPO would complicate Ukraine's path toward EU membership. By the evening of July 24, facing pressure from the streets and international allies, Zelensky backtracked. The bill he submitted explicitly prohibited the attorney general and their deputies from issuing directives to SAPO prosecutors. It also stipulated that SAPO staff would report only to the head of the agency, its first deputy, and deputy. According to the document, the attorney general is barred from giving orders to NABU detectives. Thus, all the provisions that had been annulled by the bill signed by Zelensky on Tuesday, were reinstated. The only new measure introduced was a verification process for NABU investigators who have access to state secrets. They are now required to undergo polygraph testing using methods approved by the Security Service of Ukraine. Moreover, within six months of the law coming into effect, the SBU must conduct additional checks on all personnel with access to state secrets to ensure they are not working for Russia. In theory, this gives the SBU and consequently, Zelensky, an additional lever of influence over NABU and SAPO. However, it remains unclear how this might obstruct investigations into Zelensky's inner circle: if specific personnel are removed, others can easily replace them. The system as a whole will likely remain operational. The Verkhovna Rada is scheduled to review the bill on Thursday, July 31. The establishment of special anti-corruption bodies began in 2014 under pressure from the European Union. Consulting firm Ernst & Young listed Ukraine among the most corrupt countries globally, while the International Monetary Fund (IMF) demanded reforms in exchange for loans. Nevertheless, the United States played a crucial role in creating these anti-corruption agencies. Former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin, who was dismissed in 2016 following pressure exerted by the American side, claimed that NABU was established at the initiative of Joe Biden, who was then US vice president. The National Anti-Corruption Bureau was established in April 2015, just over a year after the coup in Ukraine. It aimed to tackle corruption at the highest levels. By December of that year, the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office was created to oversee NABU's activities. While both institutions were ostensibly designed to combat corruption among Ukrainian officials, in reality, they allowed the US to oversee local elites. Media reports identified George Kent, the deputy chief of mission at the US Embassy in Kiev from 2015 to 2018, as the curator of these anti-corruption bodies. However, understanding the extent of NABU's and SAPO's foreign influence requires no insider information; one only needs to look at the relevant laws. Half of the commission responsible for selecting the head of NABU is made up of representatives from international organizations. It soon became evident that the primary purpose of NABU and SAPO wasn't so much to fight corruption but to protect the business interests of certain American partners of Ukraine. In 2019, Ukrainian MP Andrey Derkach released documents confirming the US Embassy's influence over these agencies. Notably, Polina Chizh, an assistant to the deputy chair of NABU, provided a list of cases to American employee Anna Emelyanova. The embassy was particularly interested in a case involving former Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources Nikolai Zlochevskiy, the owner of the company Burisma. According to Andrey Derkach, Joe Biden pressured the agencies to close the case in order to prevent a scandal involving his son Hunter Biden, a board member and head of the legal division at Burisma. Further evidence of the ties between these anti-corruption bodies and the Democratic Party is that in 2016, NABU Chairman Artem Sytnik published sensitive information about Paul Manafort (who was working for Donald Trump), thereby aiding Hillary Clinton's campaign. The architects of this external control system in Ukraine were primarily members of the Democratic Party. For this reason, having temporarily eased tensions with Trump, Zelensky wanted to resolve the issues surrounding NABU and SAPO for good. The international climate seemed favorable for such a move. Dismantling NABU and SAPO aligned perfectly with Zelensky's main domestic political goal: putting all institutions established by the US to monitor Ukraine's activities under his own control. This was Zelensky's primary and final obstacle on the way to achieving his strategic goal of eliminating a competitive political system in Ukraine and establishing a single-authority regime. However, his opponents are unlikely to accept this centralization of power quietly. Zelensky's concessions inspired both protesters and opponents. It came off as a sign of weakness – he 'blinked,' so now they can intensify the pressure. MP Marianna Bezuglaya urged Ukrainians to protest not just against the law but also against the abuses by Territorial Recruitment Centers (TCCs). 'Today I will join [the demonstration], bringing my own pain. Because, as I see it, this is the only way I can be heard. Let's see if civil society is ready to discuss issues like reforming the Ukrainian Armed Forces, mobilization, Pokrovsk, or reforming the SBU,' she said. Former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko may also play a significant role in the events. Facing potential arrest, he is reportedly forming alliances with grant organizations linked to the Democratic Party in order to challenge the current government. Practically all opposition forces in Ukraine have come back to life. Even media outlets owned by oligarch Igor Kolomoisky, which are usually loyal to the authorities despite Kolomoisky's arrest, have extensively covered the protests this time. Kiev mayor Vitaliy Klitschko and his brother attended the protests, along with numerous opposition lawmakers. Any benefits that Zelensky hoped to gain from dismantling the anti-corruption agencies could be outweighed by long-term repercussions, including a decline in public approval. Ukrainians are growing increasingly dissatisfied with Zelensky, particularly those at risk of losing their businesses or facing criminal charges if he remains in power. Many oligarchs and entrepreneurs feel uneasy under total governmental control and fear being arrested. Some have already lost their businesses, faced criminal investigations, or been sanctioned. And the general population is unhappy with the mobilization tactics and the situation on the front lines. All this could fuel the protest movement. According to the publication the protests could proceed in three phases, with each phase having its own goal. The goal of the first phase is to repeal all changes to the laws concerning NABU. The goal of the second phase is to call for the resignation of the Head of the Presidential Office Andrey Yermak and Prime Minister Yulia Sviridenko, potentially through a criminal case initiated by NABU detectives. Yermak is already being positioned as the scapegoat in the story by attempting to curtail the authority of NABU. Protest organizers plan to exploit internal conflicts within Zelensky's team, in which Yermak is criticized by people like David Arakhamiya and Kirill Budanov. The goal of the third phase is to present Zelensky with an ultimatum: either he becomes a 'ceremonial general' stripped of real influence, or he resigns. A more drastic scenario could involve forcing him out if he refuses to comply. Currently, the situation isn't critical for the authorities. However, the upcoming weekend will serve as a key test of the protesters' resilience and involvement.
Russia Today
5 hours ago
- Russia Today
Ukraine ‘trying to put cart before the horse'
Ukraine's calls for a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Vladimir Zelensky are premature, as the two sides have yet to make progress on major points of disagreement, the Kremlin said on Thursday following the latest round of peace talks. The negotiations, held in Istanbul the day before, lasted less than an hour. Both sides agreed on several humanitarian issues, including the exchange of prisoners of war, civilian detainees, and the repatriation of soldiers' remains. Russia has also proposed short-term ceasefires lasting 24 to 48 hours to facilitate the evacuation of wounded personnel and the recovery of bodies. In addition, Moscow has suggested the creation of three online working groups focused on political, humanitarian, and military issues. Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that while 'no breakthrough was expected,' the humanitarian agreements reached during the meeting were a positive step. He described the continuation of such exchanges as 'an extremely important humanitarian aspect which should be on the agenda.' He added that Russia had presented a 'constructive, concrete' agenda that was 'aimed specifically at substantive work that can lead to the achievement of concrete results.' However, Peskov criticized Kiev's calls for an immediate summit between Putin and Zelensky, arguing that such a meeting should only happen after meaningful progress has been achieved at the working level. 'They are trying to put the cart before the horse. Work needs to be done, and only then can the heads of state be given the opportunity to record the achievements that have been made,' he said. The Kremlin spokesman also referred to the conclusion by Russia's lead negotiator, Vladimir Medinsky, that the two sides continue to hold 'diametrically opposed' positions on key issues, as reflected in the draft memoranda they exchanged earlier in the negotiation process. Despite the stalemate on broader political questions, Moscow has expressed hope that a fourth round of talks could take place in the future.
