Ukraine's Zelenskiy dismisses commander of joint forces after appointment to another job
Feb 26 (Reuters) - Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on Wednesday dismissed the commander of the Joint Forces of Ukraine's Armed Forces, Andriy Hnatov, following his appointment to another position.
Hnatov, named to his current post last June, was dismissed by virtue of a presidential decree.
A decree issued last month said Hnatov had been appointed Deputy Chief of the General Staff.
Hnatov's appointment to his current post last June was made to replace Lieutenant-General Yuri Sodol, after reports surfaced that he had performed badly in the war against Russia.
Hnatov had previously served as deputy commander of the southern theatre of operations and played a leading role in recapturing much of southern Kherson region from Russian invaders.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
What will Iran do next?
'They are scared. You can hear it in their voices,' someone wrote to me on Friday from Tehran. And in this case the 'they' is what's left of the Iranian military and intelligence commanders. And perhaps Khamenei, too (strikingly absent from the air waves since a speech on Friday morning). Israel's strikes, yet another show of tactical brilliance from the ever-resourceful Mossad, stunned the Islamic Republic in a brutal display of military and intelligence superiority. Iran is quite simply reeling, and the only question now is how far will Israel go, and to what end? Who, if anyone, will pick up the pieces of a broken Islamic Republic? For now, more than ever, the Islamic Republic faces internal splits, a crisis of confidence and a relentless Israeli military and intelligence machine with all the cards, to use a Trumpism. But as has been the case since October 2023, as Israel struts its hardware over the region, the most important question is, 'How does this all end?' Tactical geniuses are not always strategic masters, as Israel has shown us repeatedly. Whether the US knew about the attack in advance or not (they did) will, I feel, be a footnote in the history of this story, which begun many years ago with Netanyahu banging a large drum on the international stage, and telling everyone one day he would do something about Iran's nuclear ambitions. And now he has done something. Perhaps not as conclusive as he'd have liked, for Iran may still stun the world and announce they have a nuclear weapon. Yet given everything we've seen and heard from Tel Aviv and Washington, it's clear that these strikes are about so much more than yellow cake and centrifuges. This is about crippling the Islamic Republic, bringing it to its knees and destroying its capability to strike back and threaten Israel ever again. This is about regime change, or rather regime destruction. But what can Tehran do? The (relatively) fictional nature of the Islamic Republic's deterrent was exposed throughout 2024, with Tehran's responses to Israeli attacks being calibrated to save face, and avoid war all at the same time, a conjuring trick that Israel quickly rumbled. Iran knows it must do the same here; it needed to strike back to show the world it can't be bullied, but it also knows that its missile defence systems are comparatively weak, that its military senior leadership is in disarray and that its intelligence services are at war internally, playing the ultimate blame game. It could strike at global shipping through the Houthis, sending energy prices through the roof (and saving the Russian economy), and in an act of total desperation, it could also hit Saudi oilfields. But would any of this help its cause? Would any of this save the Islamic Republic? Unlikely. Its best, and riskiest, option would be to speed towards a nuclear weapon. Smart guesses suggest this could take many weeks. And from what we've seen so far, Israel can inflict a lot of damage to Iranian buildings, installation and psyches in a matter of hours. A number of weeks might just be too late. Of course, Trump is saying publicly that he wants Iran to come to the table to talk, but it seems as if the time for talking might well be at an end. But the wildcard in all of this will be Persian nationalism, a force so potent and with such a selective memory that it's entirely possible for large sections of the Iranian population to rally behind a hated regime as they all gather together to resist Israeli bombs. This is why Israel's attacks have been carefully calibrated to keep civilian casualties to a minimum. Having to rely on your enemies to save you from your own people, however, is a damning indictment of an exhausted revolution.
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
Americans don't see Supreme Court as politically neutral, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds
WASHINGTON, June 15 (Reuters) - Americans are divided on major issues that the U.S. Supreme Court is due to rule on in the coming weeks, but most agree on one thing - neither Republicans nor Democrats see the nation's top judicial body as politically neutral, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll. Just 20% of respondents to the poll agreed that the Supreme Court is politically neutral while 58% disagreed and the rest either said they did not know or did not respond. Among people who described themselves as Democrats, only 10% agreed it was politically neutral and 74% disagreed, while among Republicans 29% agreed and 54% disagreed. The two-day poll, which closed on Thursday, was based on responses from 1,136 U.S. adults. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. The court has issued major rulings in recent years including in cases rolling back abortion rights, expanding gun rights, recognizing presidential immunity from prosecution for official acts, rejecting race-conscious collegiate admissions and curbing the power of federal agencies. Its 6-3 conservative majority includes three justices appointed by Republican President Donald Trump in his first term in office. In the Reuters/Ipsos poll, 44% of respondents expressed a favorable view of the court, including 67% of Republicans and 26% of Democrats. The Supreme Court's popularity has declined since its June 2022 decision to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that had legalized abortion nationwide. Some 57% of respondents in a Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted at the end of 2021 expressed a favorable opinion of the court. By the end of June 2022, that figure had fallen to 43%. The justices are expected to issue rulings in major cases in the coming weeks as they near the end of their current term that began in October. Among these cases are one on the legality of Tennessee's Republican-backed law banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors and one involving Trump's executive order restricting automatic birthright citizenship, part of his hardline approach to immigration. Some 53% of respondents in the Reuters/Ipsos poll said they supported "laws that prevent transgender children under the age of 18 from getting medical treatment related to gender identity and gender transitioning." Another 28% opposed such laws and the rest were unsure or did not answer the question. Among Republicans, support for such laws was at 57% and opposition at 28%, while among Democrats support was at 23% and opposition at 54%. The Tennessee law prohibits medical treatments such as puberty blockers and hormones for transgender minors. During December 4 arguments in the case, the court's conservative justices signaled their willingness to uphold the law. The eventual ruling could affect other state laws targeting transgender people. After Trump signed his birthright citizenship directive in January, 22 states as well as immigrant rights advocates and pregnant immigrants sued, arguing that it was a violation of citizenship language in the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment. In the Reuters/Ipsos poll, only 24% of all respondents supported ending birthright citizenship and 52% opposed it. Among Democrats, 5% supported ending it, with 84% opposed. Among Republicans, 43% supported ending it, with 24% opposed. The rest said they were unsure or did not respond to the question. The court also by the end of this month is expected to issue a ruling on the legality of a Texas law that requires people to verify the age online before accessing pornographic websites. The Reuters/Ipsos poll found strong support for such laws. Among all respondents, 70% were in support and 14% opposed. Among Democrats, 65% supported and 18% opposed, while among Republicans 80% supported and 7% opposed. During January 15 arguments in the case, the justices seemed to agree that states can try to keep adult material from minors but also voiced concern over burdens imposed on adults to view constitutionally protected material.
Edinburgh Live
5 hours ago
- Edinburgh Live
Man who made complaint against former Edinburgh Council leader Cammy Day speaks out
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info A man who complained about former Edinburgh council leader Cammy Day has slammed the Labour party, after he was allowed to rejoin. The man claimed that he was being sexually harassed in 2022. The Labour party allegedly told him his complaint would have to go through a formal process to progress, which he declined, reports the Daily Record. Now the man, who is being kept anonymous, had criticised the decision to allow Day back into the party. This comes after it was alleged that he bombarded Ukrainian refugees with inappropriate messages. The man said: 'If a senior leader in the Labour Party can act in a sexually inappropriate manner with impunity, what message does that send to victims of sexual harassment? Sign up for Edinburgh Live newsletters for more headlines straight to your inbox "Scottish Labour have given the green light to misconduct by re-admitting Cammy Day and have sent an unequivocal message to victims about whose side they are really on. 'I believe this will significantly undermine the whole system and processes that are meant to protect victims of sexual harassment; and decrease the likelihood of victims coming forward in future. Shame on them.' Join Edinburgh Live's Whatsapp Community here and get the latest news sent straight to your messages. A Labour Party spokesperson said: 'The Labour Party takes all complaints seriously. "They are fully investigated in line with our rules and procedures and any appropriate action is taken.'
