Zelenskyy announces new anti-graft bill in Ukraine after public outcry and EU criticism
Opponents of the contentious law passed by lawmakers and approved by Zelenskyy earlier this week said that it stripped Ukraine's anti-corruption watchdogs of their independence by granting the government more oversight of their work.
Zelenskyy said that it was needed to speed up investigations, ensure more convictions and remove 'Russian influence' from the fight against corruption, though he didn't provide examples of Russian meddling.
In an abrupt change of course on Thursday, Zelenskyy unexpectedly said that he had drawn up a new draft bill on corruption that 'guarantees the real strengthening of the law and order system in Ukraine.'
'The most important thing is real tools, no Russian connections, and the independence of the (watchdogs),' he said in a Telegram post.
The declaration appeared to bow to recent pressure that threatened to undermine public trust in Ukraine's leaders after more than three years of fighting Russia's full-scale invasion. The protests haven't called for Zelenskyy's ouster, but they are the first major anti-government demonstrations since the war began.
'It is important that we maintain unity,' Zelenskyy said in his post.
The announcement also left some questions unanswered. Zelenskyy had said Wednesday that he met with the heads of Ukraine's key anti-corruption and security agencies and gave them two weeks to make recommendations on how the graft law could be improved before he presented another bill to Parliament.
Despite that assurance, further street protests were scheduled for Thursday evening.
The new pronouncement also left unclear whether Zelenskyy intended to revoke the law that he approved earlier in the week after Parliament had passed it. He didn't publicize details about the proposed new law.
The unrest has come at a difficult time in the all-out war, which began on Feb. 24, 2022. Russia's bigger army is accelerating its efforts to pierce Ukraine's front-line defenses and is escalating its bombardment of Ukrainian cities.
Ukraine is also facing a question mark over whether the United States will provide more military aid and whether European commitments can take up the slack, with no end in sight to the war.
Delegations from Russia and Ukraine met in Istanbul for a third round of talks in as many months Wednesday. But once again, the talks were brief and delivered no major breakthrough.
Fighting entrenched corruption is crucial for Ukraine's aspirations to join the EU and maintain access to billions of dollars in Western aid in the war. It's also an effort that enjoys broad public support.
EU Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos expressed concern Wednesday over the new law, calling it 'a serious step back.' The Ukrainian branch of Transparency International criticized parliament's decision, saying it undermines one of the most significant reforms since what Ukraine calls its Revolution of Dignity in 2014 and damages trust with international partners.
Meanwhile, Russian planes dropped two powerful glide bombs on the center of Kharkiv, Ukraine's second-largest city, on Thursday morning, regional Gov. Oleh Syniehubov said. At least 37 people were wounded, including a 28-day-old baby, a 10-year-old girl and two 17 year olds, authorities said.
The southern city of Odesa, and Cherkasy in central Ukraine, were also hit overnight, authorities said. The drone and missile strikes on the cities wounded 11 people, including a 9-year-old, and damaged historic landmarks and residential buildings, officials said.
Ukraine has sought to step up its own long-range drone attacks on Russia, using domestic technology and manufacturing.
An overnight Ukrainian drone attack on the Russian Black Sea resort of Sochi killed two women and wounded 11 other people, local authorities said Thursday.
An oil depot was hit, officials said, without offering details.
___
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
Trump's broad tariffs go into effect as economic pain in the U.S. surfaces
U.S. President Donald Trump was set to officially begin levying higher import taxes on dozens of countries Thursday, just as the economic fallout of his monthslong tariff threats has begun to create visible damage for the U.S. economy. The White House said that starting just after midnight that goods from more than 60 countries and the European Union would face tariff rates of 10 per cent or higher. Products from the European Union, Japan and South Korea will be taxed at 15 per cent, while imports from Taiwan, Vietnam and Bangladesh will be taxed at 20 per cent. For places such as the EU, Japan and South Korea, Trump also expects them to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in the U.S. 'I think the growth is going to be unprecedented,' Trump said Wednesday afternoon. He added that the U.S. was 'taking in hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs,' but he couldn't provide a specific figure for revenues because 'we don't even know what the final number is' regarding tariff rates. Explainer: Here are the trade deals the U.S. has announced so far Despite the uncertainty, the Trump White House is confident that the onset of his broad tariffs will provide clarity about the path of the world's largest economy. Now that companies understand the direction the U.S. is headed, the administration believes they can ramp up new investments and jump-start hiring in ways that can rebalance the U.S. economy as a manufacturing power. But so far, there are signs of self-inflicted wounds to America as companies and consumers alike brace for the impact of new taxes. What the data has shown is a U.S. economy that changed in April with Trump's initial rollout of tariffs, an event that led to market drama, a negotiating period and Trump's ultimate decision to start his universal tariffs on Thursday. After April, economic reports show that hiring began to stall, inflationary pressures crept upward and home values in key markets started to decline, said John Silvia, CEO of Dynamic Economic Strategy. 'A less productive economy requires fewer workers,' Silvia said in an analysis note. 'But there is more, the higher tariff prices lower workers' real wages. The economy has become less productive, and firms cannot pay the same real wages as before. Actions have consequences.' Even then, the ultimate transformations of the tariffs are unknown and could play out over months, if not years. Many economists say the risk is that the American economy is steadily eroded rather than collapsing instantly. 'We all want it to be made for television where it's this explosion – it's not like that,' said Brad Jensen, a professor at Georgetown University. 'It's going to be fine sand in the gears and slow things down.' Trump has promoted the tariffs as a way to reduce the persistent trade deficit. But importers sought to avoid the taxes by importing more goods before the taxes went into effect. As a result, the $582.7 billion trade imbalance for the first half of the year was 38% higher than in 2024. Total construction spending has dropped 2.9% over the past year, and the factory jobs promised by Trump have so far resulted in job losses. The lead-up to Thursday fit the slapdash nature of Trump's tariffs, which have been variously rolled out, walked back, delayed, increased, imposed by letter and frantically renegotiated. Tony Keller: What does Donald Trump want from Canada? We are about to find out The process has been so muddled that officials for key trade partners were unclear at the start of the week whether the tariffs would begin Thursday or Friday. The language of the July 31 order to delay the start of tariffs from Aug. 1 said the higher tax rates would start in seven days. On Wednesday morning, Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, was asked if the new tariffs began at midnight Thursday, and he said reporters should check with the U.S. Trade Representative's Office. Trump on Wednesday announced additional 25-per-cent tariffs to be imposed on India for its buying of Russian oil, bringing their total import taxes to 50 per cent. He has said that import taxes are still coming on pharmaceutical drugs and announced 100-per-cent tariffs on computer chips, meaning the U.S. economy could remain in a place of suspended animation as it awaits the impact. The President's use of a 1977 law to declare an economic emergency to impose the tariffs is also under challenge. The impending ruling from last week's hearing before a U.S. appeals court could cause Trump to find other legal justifications if judges say he exceeded his authority. Even people who worked with Trump during his first term are skeptical that things will go smoothly for the economy, such as Paul Ryan, the former Republican House speaker, who has emerged as a Trump critic. 'There's no sort of rationale for this other than the President wanting to raise tariffs based upon his whims, his opinions,' Ryan told CNBC on Wednesday. 'I think choppy waters are ahead because I think they're going to have some legal challenges.' Still, the stock market has been solid during the recent tariff drama, with the S&P 500 index climbing more than 25 per cent from its April low. The market's rebound and the income tax cuts in Trump's tax and spending measures signed into law on July 4 have given the White House confidence that economic growth is bound to accelerate in the coming months. As of now, Trump still foresees an economic boom while the rest of the world and American voters wait nervously. 'There's one person who can afford to be cavalier about the uncertainty that he's creating, and that's Donald Trump,' said Rachel West, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation who worked in the Biden White House on labour policy. 'The rest of Americans are already paying the price for that uncertainty.'
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Trump's broad tariffs go into effect, just as economic pain is surfacing
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump was set to officially begin levying higher import taxes on dozens of countries Thursday, just as the economic fallout of his monthslong tariff threats has begun to create visible damage for the U.S. economy. The White House said that starting just after midnight that goods from more than 60 countries and the European Union would face tariff rates of 10% or higher. Products from the European Union, Japan and South Korea will be taxed at 15%, while imports from Taiwan, Vietnam and Bangladesh will be taxed at 20%. For places such as the EU, Japan and South Korea, Trump also expects them to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in the U.S. 'I think the growth is going to be unprecedented,' Trump said Wednesday afternoon. He added that the U.S. was 'taking in hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs,' but he couldn't provide a specific figure for revenues because 'we don't even know what the final number is' regarding tariff rates. Despite the uncertainty, the Trump White House is confident that the onset of his broad tariffs will provide clarity about the path of the world's largest economy. Now that companies understand the direction the U.S. is headed, the administration believes they can ramp up new investments and jump-start hiring in ways that can rebalance the U.S. economy as a manufacturing power. But so far, there are signs of self-inflicted wounds to America as companies and consumers alike brace for the impact of new taxes. What the data has shown is a U.S. economy that changed in April with Trump's initial rollout of tariffs, an event that led to market drama, a negotiating period and Trump's ultimate decision to start his universal tariffs on Thursday. After April, economic reports show that hiring began to stall, inflationary pressures crept upward and home values in key markets started to decline, said John Silvia, CEO of Dynamic Economic Strategy. 'A less productive economy requires fewer workers,' Silvia said in an analysis note. 'But there is more, the higher tariff prices lower workers' real wages. The economy has become less productive, and firms cannot pay the same real wages as before. Actions have consequences.' Even then, the ultimate transformations of the tariffs are unknown and could play out over months, if not years. Many economists say the risk is that the American economy is steadily eroded rather than collapsing instantly. 'We all want it to be made for television where it's this explosion — it's not like that,' said Brad Jensen, a professor at Georgetown University. 'It's going to be fine sand in the gears and slow things down.' Trump has promoted the tariffs as a way to reduce the persistent trade deficit. But importers sought to avoid the taxes by importing more goods before the taxes went into effect. As a result, the $582.7 billion trade imbalance for the first half of the year was 38% higher than in 2024. Total construction spending has dropped 2.9% over the past year, and the factory jobs promised by Trump have so far resulted in job losses. The lead-up to Thursday fit the slapdash nature of Trump's tariffs, which have been variously rolled out, walked back, delayed, increased, imposed by letter and frantically renegotiated. The process has been so muddled that officials for key trade partners were unclear at the start of the week whether the tariffs would begin Thursday or Friday. The language of the July 31 order to delay the start of tariffs from Aug. 1 said the higher tax rates would start in seven days. On Wednesday morning, Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, was asked if the new tariffs began at midnight Thursday, and he said reporters should check with the U.S. Trade Representative's Office. Trump on Wednesday announced additional 25% tariffs to be imposed on India for its buying of Russian oil, bringing their total import taxes to 50%. He has said that import taxes are still coming on pharmaceutical drugs and announced 100% tariffs on computer chips, meaning the U.S. economy could remain in a place of suspended animation as it awaits the impact. The president's use of a 1977 law to declare an economic emergency to impose the tariffs is also under challenge. The impending ruling from last week's hearing before a U.S. appeals court could cause Trump to find other legal justifications if judges say he exceeded his authority. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. Even people who worked with Trump during his first term are skeptical that things will go smoothly for the economy, such as Paul Ryan, the former Republican House speaker, who has emerged as a Trump critic. 'There's no sort of rationale for this other than the president wanting to raise tariffs based upon his whims, his opinions,' Ryan told CNBC on Wednesday. 'I think choppy waters are ahead because I think they're going to have some legal challenges.' Still, the stock market has been solid during the recent tariff drama, with the S&P 500 index climbing more than 25% from its April low. The market's rebound and the income tax cuts in Trump's tax and spending measures signed into law on July 4 have given the White House confidence that economic growth is bound to accelerate in the coming months. As of now, Trump still foresees an economic boom while the rest of the world and American voters wait nervously. 'There's one person who can afford to be cavalier about the uncertainty that he's creating, and that's Donald Trump,' said Rachel West, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation who worked in the Biden White House on labor policy. 'The rest of Americans are already paying the price for that uncertainty.'
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Harvard scientists say research could be set back years after funding freeze
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) — Harvard University professor Alberto Ascherio's research is literally frozen. Collected from millions of U.S. soldiers over two decades using millions of dollars from taxpayers, the epidemiology and nutrition scientist has blood samples stored in liquid nitrogen freezers within the university's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The samples are key to his award-winning research, which seeks a cure to multiple sclerosis and other neurodegenerative diseases. But for months, Ascherio has been unable to work with the samples because he lost $7 million in federal research funding, a casualty of Harvard's fight with the Trump administration. 'It's like we have been creating a state-of-the-art telescope to explore the universe, and now we don't have money to launch it,' said Ascherio. 'We built everything and now we are ready to use it to make a new discovery that could impact millions of people in the world and then, 'Poof. You're being cut off.'' Researchers laid off and science shelved The loss of an estimated $2.6 billion in federal funding at Harvard has meant that some of the world's most prominent researchers are laying off young researchers. They are shelving years or even decades of research, into everything from opioid addiction to cancer. And despite Harvard's lawsuits against the administration, and settlement talks between the warring parties, researchers are confronting the fact that some of their work may never resume. The funding cuts are part of a monthslong battle that the Trump administration has waged against some the country's top universities including Columbia, Brown and Northwestern. The administration has taken a particularly aggressive stance against Harvard, freezing funding after the country's oldest university rejected a series of government demands issued by a federal antisemitism task force. The government had demanded sweeping changes at Harvard related to campus protests, academics and admissions — meant to address government accusations that the university had become a hotbed of liberalism and tolerated anti-Jewish harassment. Research jeopardized, even if court case prevails Harvard responded by filing a federal lawsuit, accusing the Trump administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university. In the lawsuit, it laid out reforms it had taken to address antisemitism but also vowed not to 'surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.' 'Make no mistake: Harvard rejects antisemitism and discrimination in all of its forms and is actively making structural reforms to eradicate antisemitism on campus,' the university said in its legal complaint. 'But rather than engage with Harvard regarding those ongoing efforts, the Government announced a sweeping freeze of funding for medical, scientific, technological, and other research that has nothing at all to do with antisemitism.' The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the demands were sent in April. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel federal contracts for policy reasons. The funding cuts have left Harvard's research community in a state of shock, feeling as if they are being unfairly targeted in a fight has nothing to do with them. Some have been forced to shutter labs or scramble to find non-government funding to replace lost money. In May, Harvard announced that it would put up at least $250 million of its own money to continue research efforts, but university President Alan Garber warned of 'difficult decisions and sacrifices' ahead. Ascherio said the university was able to pull together funding to pay his researchers' salaries until next June. But he's still been left without resources needed to fund critical research tasks, like lab work. Even a year's delay can put his research back five years, he said. Knowledge lost in funding freeze 'It's really devastating,' agreed Rita Hamad, the director of the Social Policies for Health Equity Research Center at Harvard, who had three multiyear grants totaling $10 million canceled by the Trump administration. The grants funded research into the impact of school segregation on heart health, how pandemic-era policies in over 250 counties affected mental health, and the role of neighborhood factors in dementia. At the School of Public Health, where Hamad is based, 190 grants have been terminated, affecting roughly 130 scientists. 'Just thinking about all the knowledge that's not going to be gained or that is going to be actively lost,' Hamad said. She expects significant layoffs on her team if the funding freeze continues for a few more months. 'It's all just a mixture of frustration and anger and sadness all the time, every day.' John Quackenbush, a professor of computational biology and bioinformatics at the School of Public Health, has spent the past few months enduring cuts on multiple fronts. In April, a multimillion dollar grant was not renewed, jeopardizing a study into the role sex plays in disease. In May, he lost about $1.2 million in federal funding for in the coming year due to the Harvard freeze. Four departmental grants worth $24 million that funded training of doctoral students also were cancelled as part of the fight with the Trump administration, Quackenbush said. 'I'm in a position where I have to really think about, 'Can I revive this research?'' he said. 'Can I restart these programs even if Harvard and the Trump administration reached some kind of settlement? If they do reach a settlement, how quickly can the funding be turned back on? Can it be turned back on?' The researchers all agreed that the funding cuts have little or nothing to do with the university's fight against antisemitism. Some, however, argue changes at Harvard were long overdue and pressure from the Trump administration was necessary. Bertha Madras, a Harvard psychobiologist who lost funding to create a free, parent-focused training to prevent teen opioid overdose and drug use, said she's happy to see the culling of what she called 'politically motivated social science studies.' White House pressure a good thing? Madras said pressure from the White House has catalyzed much-needed reform at the university, where several programs of study have 'really gone off the wall in terms of being shaped by orthodoxy that is not representative of the country as a whole.' But Madras, who served on the President's Commission on Opioids during Trump's first term, said holding scientists' research funding hostage as a bargaining chip doesn't make sense. 'I don't know if reform would have happened without the president of the United States pointing the bony finger at Harvard,' she said. 'But sacrificing science is problematic, and it's very worrisome because it is one of the major pillars of strength of the country.' Quackenbush and other Harvard researchers argue the cuts are part of a larger attack on science by the Trump administration that puts the country's reputation as the global research leader at risk. Support for students and post-doctoral fellows has been slashed, visas for foreign scholars threatened, and new guidelines and funding cuts at the NIH will make it much more difficult to get federal funding in the future, they said. It also will be difficult to replace federal funding with money from the private sector. 'We're all sort of moving toward this future in which this 80-year partnership between the government and the universities is going to be jeopardized,' Quackenbush said. 'We're going to face real challenges in continuing to lead the world in scientific excellence.'
