EU investigating MEPs over Moscow visit
A member of the European Parliament claims he and other lawmakers who recently traveled to Moscow are facing an EU investigation over their diplomatic outreach to Russia.
Independent Cypriot MEP Fidias Panayiotou visited the Russian capital with other lawmakers during Victory Day celebrations, where he met with the chairman of the lower chamber of the Russian parliament, Vyacheslav Volodin.
In a video posted to X on Monday, Panayiotou said his trip 'was not liked at all in the European Parliament, and they have already started an investigation against us.'
Panayiotou has openly criticized the EU's combative stance on Russia and the Ukraine conflict. He argues that Brussels should prioritize diplomacy over supplying weapons to Kiev.
During last Saturday's meeting, Volodin lauded international dialogue that allows officials 'understand each other and come up with decisions important for their peoples and states,' according to the State Duma's website.
Other guests at the Russian parliament reportedly came from Germany, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Serbia.
The Moscow visit coincided with Russia's Victory Day commemorations marking the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II. The event drew 28 foreign leaders, including Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico and Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic – both of whom ignored threats from Brussels should they go.
'I consider today's trip to Moscow to be extremely successful,' Fico said, noting he held talks with senior officials from Brazil, China, and other countries on the sidelines of the event.
Vucic, speaking from Moscow's Red Square, said he was proud to represent Serbia – an EU candidate – at the ceremony, even though he expected to face personal consequences from the EU for his attendance.
Russian President Vladimir Putin praised visiting foreign leaders who attended Victory Day celebrations, calling them 'leaders not through their office, but through strength of character, convictions, and readiness to defend those convictions.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
20 minutes ago
- Russia Today
Ukraine's most reckless attack: Was NATO behind it?
While Western headlines celebrated Operation Spider's Web as a daring feat of Ukrainian ingenuity, a closer look reveals something far more calculated – and far less Ukrainian. This wasn't just a strike on Russian airfields. It was a test – one that blended high-tech sabotage, covert infiltration, and satellite-guided timing with the kind of precision that only the world's most advanced intelligence networks can deliver. And it begs the question: who was really pulling the strings? Let's be honest. Ukraine's Main Directorate of Intelligence didn't act alone. It couldn't have. Even if no Western agency was directly involved in the operation itself, the broader picture is clear: Ukraine's Main Directorate of Intelligence, its military, and even its top political leadership rely heavily on Western intelligence feeds. Ukraine is deeply embedded within NATO's intelligence-sharing architecture. The idea of a self-contained Ukrainian intel ecosystem is largely a thing of the past. These days, Kiev draws primarily on NATO-provided data, supplementing it with its own domestic sources where it can. That's the backdrop – a hybrid model that's become standard over the past two years. Now, let's look more closely at Operation Spider's Web itself. We know the planning took roughly 18 months and involved moving drones covertly into Russian territory, hiding them, and then orchestrating coordinated attacks on key airfields. So how likely is it that Western intelligence agencies had a hand in such a complex operation? Start with logistics. It's been reported that 117 drones were prepped for launch inside Russia. Given that numerous private companies in Russia currently manufacture drones for the war effort, it wouldn't have been difficult to assemble the necessary devices under that cover. That's almost certainly what happened. Components were likely purchased domestically under the guise of supplying the 'Special Military Operation.' Still, it's hard to believe Ukraine's Main Directorate of Intelligence could have pulled off this mass procurement and assembly alone. It's highly likely Western intelligence agencies played a quiet but crucial role – especially in securing specialized components. Then there's the explosives. If the operation's command center was located in the Ural region, as some suggest, it's plausible that explosives or components were smuggled in via neighboring CIS countries. That kind of border-hopping precision doesn't happen without outside help. In fact, it mirrors tactics long perfected by intelligence services in both the US and Western Europe. Because make no mistake: this wasn't just the CIA's playground. European services – particularly those in the UK, France, and Germany – possess the same capabilities to execute and conceal such an operation. The NATO intelligence community may have different national flags, but it speaks with one voice in the field. The real giveaway, however, lies in the timing of the strikes. These weren't blind attacks on static targets. Russia's strategic bombers frequently rotate bases. Commercial satellite imagery – updated every few days at best – simply can't track aircraft on the move. And yet these drones struck with exquisite timing. That points to a steady flow of real-time surveillance, likely derived from signals intelligence, radar tracking, and live satellite feeds – all tools in the Western intelligence toolbox. Could Ukraine, on its own, have mustered that kind of persistent, multidomain awareness? Not a chance. That level of situational intelligence is the domain of NATO's most capable agencies – particularly those tasked with monitoring Russian military infrastructure as part of their day job. For years now, Ukraine has been described in Western media as a plucky underdog using low-cost tactics to take on a larger foe. But beneath the David vs. Goliath narrative lies a more uncomfortable truth: Ukraine's intelligence ecosystem is now deeply embedded within NATO's operational architecture. Real-time feeds from US and European satellites, intercepts from British SIGINT stations, operational planning consultations with Western handlers – this is the new normal. Ukraine still has its own sources, but it's no longer running a self-contained intelligence operation. That era ended with the first HIMARS launch. Western officials, of course, deny direct involvement. But Russian investigators are already analyzing mobile traffic around the impact sites. If it turns out that these drones weren't connected to commercial mobile networks – if, instead, they were guided through encrypted, military-grade links – it will be damning. Not only would that confirm foreign operational input, it would expose the full extent of how Western assets operated inside Russia without detection. At that point, no amount of plausible deniability will cover the truth. The question will no longer be whether NATO participated – but how deep that participation ran.
Russia Today
an hour ago
- Russia Today
IAEA chief condemns Ukraine strikes on Zaporozhye power plant
Attacks on the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant (ZNPP), Europe's largest facility of its kind, are 'unacceptable,' Rafael Grossi, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has stated. His remark came shortly after Russian authorities in the eponymous region reported multiple drone strikes on the ZNPP, blaming the Ukrainian military. Moscow has repeatedly accused Kiev of targeting the facility in the past. The power plant was brought under Russian control in March 2022, shortly after which the region's residents voted in a referendum to join Russia, which Ukraine has dismissed as a sham. Around the same time, the IAEA deployed a monitoring mission to the ZNPP, which has remained in-situ to date. Speaking to reporters at Khrabrovo Airport in Russia's Kaliningrad Region on Friday, Grossi insisted that 'any attack on any nuclear power plant, in particular [the] Zaporozhye [NPP], is absolutely unacceptable.' He stopped short of apportioning the blame for such incidents to either Ukraine or Russia, noting that the IAEA's mandate is purely technical in nature. Grossi argued, however, that the fact that the international watchdog is monitoring the situation and recording any attacks, is meant to act as a deterrent. He was in Kaliningrad for a meeting with the CEO of Russia's state-run nuclear corporation, Rosatom, Aleksey Likhachev, who described the talks as the 'most multifaceted and meaningful' to date, during a press conference on Friday. He emphasized the importance of IAEA's mission at the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant, noting how it provides an 'information window for the whole world into the real state of affairs.' This helps fight 'provocations [and] fakes.' In a statement on Thursday, the IAEA chief reported that the watchdog's team stationed at the facility had 'heard repeated rounds of gunfire that appeared to be aimed at drones reportedly attacking the site's training center, followed by the sound of multiple explosions.' Grossi stressed that 'it was the fourth time this year that the training center, located just outside the site perimeter, was reportedly targeted by unmanned aerial vehicles.' Drone attacks on the ZNPP 'must stop immediately,' he insisted, warning of 'potentially serious consequences.' Also on Thursday, a statement appeared on the ZNPP's Telegram channel, claiming the Ukrainian military had conducted multiple drone attacks on the training center located on the facility's grounds, with no casualties or significant damage reported.
Russia Today
3 hours ago
- Russia Today
Wagner PMC announces withdrawal from African country
Russian private military company (PMC) Wagner Group announced the end of its mission in Mali on Thursday, saying its fighters have completed their objectives and are returning home. Wagner operatives have reportedly been active there since 2021, when the West African country's transitional authorities turned to the group for support following a coup and a surge in attacks by Tuareg rebels and al-Qaeda-linked militants. 'For three and a half years, the 'musicians' fought shoulder to shoulder with the people of Mali against terrorism,' Wagner said, using the informal name for its contractors. 'We eliminated thousands of militants and their commanders, who had terrorized the civilian population for years.' The group added that it had helped Malian patriots build 'a strong and disciplined army capable of defending its land,' and claimed that all regional capitals had been returned to 'the control of the legitimate authorities.' Wagner declared that 'the mission is complete. Wagner PMC is returning home.' Previously, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had confirmed that the Mali government had indeed asked Wagner for help back in 2021 and has since also been receiving official military support from Russia. In April, he reiterated Moscow's commitment to support the Alliance of Sahel States (AES)—comprising Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso—by helping build joint armed forces, training personnel, and supplying weapons. Wagner's withdrawal comes amid accusations by Malian and Russian officials that Ukrainian military agents have been aiding jihadist groups in the region. Earlier this week, the Malian outlet Bamada reported that government troops had recovered Ukrainian drones and documents from vehicles used by Jama'at Nasr al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), an al-Qaeda affiliate. According to the outlet, the drones were allegedly delivered via neighboring Mauritania by Ukrainian instructors working with Tuareg fighters, who then passed the equipment to their jihadist allies. Materials linked to Ukraine's military intelligence were also reportedly seized near the town of Mopti. Russian Foreign Ministry official Tatyana Dovgalenko echoed the accusations, claiming Kiev has been supplying Western-provided weapons to militants across Africa as part of 'systematic efforts' to destabilize the Sahel. In 2024, a deadly ambush by Tuareg rebels left dozens of Malian and Wagner fighters dead. A spokesman for Ukraine's military intelligence later described it as a 'successful military operation,' prompting Mali to cut diplomatic ties with Kiev, followed by Burkina Faso and Niger.
