‘Agent from land of the rising sun': Belarus sentences Japanese man to 7 years for spying
A court in Belarus has sentenced a Japanese citizen to seven years in prison for spying, prosecutors said on Monday, in a case that officials in the Russian-allied country have not fully explained.
Advertisement
The man, identified by prosecutors as Nakanishi Masatoshi, was detained in July but Minsk announced the arrest only in September.
A Minsk court found him guilty of 'espionage activity', the office of Belarus's prosecutor general said.
It said the court convicted him of cooperating with a 'special service, security and intelligence agency of a foreign state, involving actions knowingly aimed at harming the national security' of
Belarus
Prosecutors said the man carried out the espionage between 2018 and 2024.
Advertisement
Belarus announced his arrest in a state television report in September that called him an 'agent from the land of the rising sun', with the country's KGB intelligence service accusing him of collecting military information.
The report said he took photos of military facilities as well as railway infrastructure, and that he had travelled to the Ukrainian border.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTHK
11 hours ago
- RTHK
15 killed, 75 injured in Russian strikes on Ukraine
15 killed, 75 injured in Russian strikes on Ukraine Residents react at the site of an apartment building in Kyiv damaged during a Russian strike. Photo: Reuters At least 15 people were killed and 75 others injured in Russian missile and drone strikes on Ukraine overnight on Tuesday, Ukrainian Interior Minister Ihor Klymenko said. The capital, Kyiv, was hit hardest in the attack, where a ballistic missile struck a nine-storey apartment building, killing 14 people and injuring 60 others, the Interfax-Ukraine news agency cited the minister as saying. Emergency workers were at the scene to rescue people from under the rubble. The Ukrainian Interior Ministry said 27 locations in the capital, including apartment buildings, educational institutions and critical infrastructure facilities, were under attack. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy called the attack 'one of the most terrifying strikes on Kyiv' and said Russian forces fired more than 440 drones and 32 missiles at Ukraine overnight. In the southern city of Odesa, one person was killed and 10 others injured. Casualties were also reported in the Kiev and Chernihiv regions. The attack lasted nearly nine hours and is the latest in a spate of mass drone and missile attacks on Kyiv. (Xinhua/AP)
Asia Times
19 hours ago
- Asia Times
Why is Stalin back in the Moscow metro?
A statue of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was unveiled in the Taganskaya metro station in Moscow in May, recreating a mural that was dismantled decades ago. It is the first such statue to be erected in central Moscow since Stalin's death in 1953 and marks a disturbing new stage in Russia's authoritarian path. Tens of millions of people died as a direct result of Stalin's policies between 1924 and his death. These policies included the forced collectivization of agriculture, the Gulag labor camp system and the 'great terror' – a wave of mass arrests between 1937 and 1938, including of key figures in the army. Yet ultimate victory over Nazi Germany in 1945, with the support of Britain and the US, redeems Stalin in the eyes of Russia's current rulers. For the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, this victory was one of the crowning achievements of the Soviet Union and remains a unifying force in modern Russia. De-Stalinization, which from 1956 to the late 1960s saw the dismantling of Stalin's policies and legacy, meant no statues of him were erected from his death until the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. But 110 monuments have been built since then (as of the last count, in 2023), with 95 of them erected in the Putin era. The rate of construction multiplied after Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea. These statues initially tended to be in peripheral parts of the Russian Federation, such as Yakutia, North Ossetia and Dagestan, and not in city centers. The renaming by presidential decree of the airport in Volgograd as Stalingrad in April 2025, to echo the city's wartime name, was thus a significant moment. But the statue in the Moscow metro, an architectural gem in the centre of Russia's capital that is used by millions of people each day, is an even more important symbolic statement. Stalin's reputation in Russia continues to recover. According to a poll from 2015, 45% of the Russian population thought the deaths caused by Stalin's actions were justified (up from 25% in 2012). By 2023, 63% of Russians had an overall positive view of his leadership. This reflects the view promoted in schools and amplified by the Russian media, where criticism of Stalin is rare. Even the 2017 British comedy, The Death of Stalin, was banned in Russia for fear of popping the bubble of public approval. The purpose of rehabilitating Stalin is about boosting support for Putin's regime, training Russians' conformity reflex and instilling pride in their history. But it also has external ramifications. With the partial exception of Georgia, his birthplace, Stalin is widely reviled by Russia's neighboring countries, which were often the victims of Stalin's repressive policies. This is especially true of Ukraine. A famine known to Ukrainians as the Holodomor was deliberately imposed there between 1932 and 1933 as part of collectivization and killed as many as 3.8 million people. As a result, his death unleashed de-Stalinization accompanied by the destruction of his statues all over eastern Europe. This began during the 1956 Budapest uprising and was followed by later such reactions in Prague and elsewhere. The statue of Stalin in Budapest was torn down by demonstrators in 1956. Fortepan adományozó / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-NC-SA After the uprisings were put down, Stalin's place was typically taken by the less controversial Vladimir Lenin, the revolutionary leader who founded the Soviet Union. But since the 2014 Maidan revolution in Ukraine, which culminated in the ousting of pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych, Ukrainians have also been pulling down statues of Lenin. Other Soviet-era symbols have also been torn down in a wave of demonstrations known as Leninopad or Leninfall . This is what has informed the latest intensification of Stalin-washing. The Ukrainian refutation of the symbolic heritage of the Soviet Union seems to have supercharged the Russian embrace of it, Stalin included. Russia has restored statues of Lenin in the Ukrainian territories it occupies. And it has now also started erecting statues of Stalin, notably in the southeastern city of Melitopol, where a statue was unveiled in May to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the Soviet Union's victory in the second world war. This is against the law in Ukraine, where there is a ban on pro-Communist (and pro-totalitarian) symbolism. Russian forces have meanwhile been destroying memorials to the Holodomor in a battle over the meaning of the Soviet legacy. The re-elevation of Stalin promotes a narrow interpretation of his rule, stressing Russia's military strength. Modern statues typically portray Stalin in a military uniform and evoke a sense of him as a victorious wartime leader. In fact, some of the appeal of the symbol of Stalin lies in welfare provisions of his leadership where, despite imposing an often cruelly authoritarian system, education and healthcare were free for all. The same can be said for his use of fear as a work incentive. Russians sometimes still denounce complacent or inept officials with the imprecation: 'If only Stalin was here to sort you out' ( Stalina na vas net in Russian). Nevertheless, it is the imperial version of Stalin that dominates, vindicating Russia's refusal to reckon with its colonial past as the center of the Soviet Union. Stalin's record is sometimes defended within Russia on the basis that Winston Churchill, for instance, remains a British national hero despite a bloody past (such as his role in the Bengal famine of 1943). While there is an element of truth in this, the difference is that Churchill's shortcomings and complicity in the death toll attributable to the British empire are publicly discussed. Such criticism of Stalin is not permitted in Russia. Even the new statue in Moscow was erected under cover of the night, evading public scrutiny and debate. Jeremy Hicks is a professor of post-Soviet cultural history and film at Queen Mary University of London. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Asia Times
2 days ago
- Asia Times
India breaks with China, Russia on Israel-Iran war
India's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MEA) clarified over the weekend that India 'did not participate in the discussions' on the Shanghai Cooperation Organization's (SCO) statement earlier that day condemning Israel for its latest strikes on Iran. The absence of any clause in the group's statement indicating that India disagreed with them initially suggested consensus (including with rival Pakistan), but after the MEA's clarification, it now suggests that India was kept out of the loop. This could have political ramifications if that's indeed what happened. The SCO was founded to peacefully resolve border issues between China and the former Soviet Republics after the USSR's dissolution and then united them all in their opposition to the shared threats of terrorism, separatism and extremism. The group has since taken on economic and other connectivity functions after expanding to include India and Pakistan in 2015, with these additional interests increasingly taking center stage since those two accuse each other of fomenting the aforesaid threats. Iran joined the SCO in 2023. Article 16 of the SCO Charter clearly states that 'The SCO bodies shall take decisions by agreement without vote and their decisions shall be considered adopted if no member State has raised objections during its consideration (consensus)… Any member State may state its opinion on particular aspects and/or concrete issues of the decisions taken which shall not be an obstacle to taking the decision as a whole. This opinion shall be placed on record.' Accordingly, given the absence of any clause in the SCO's statement indicating that India disagreed with what was written, it therefore compellingly appears that it was kept out of the loop. That arguably being the case, Western-friendly policy influencers and policymakers in India might now feel vindicated after claiming for a while already that the group no longer aligns with their country's interests as much as before. This could, in turn, lead to pressure upon India to more publicly distance itself from the SCO. It's premature to conclude that India will react in that way, especially since it has remained in the SCO thus far, despite the aforementioned interpretations among some, aimed at averting the scenario of China dominating that group, with the possibly attendant consequence of Russia becoming its junior partner. From India's perspective, that would pose a major national security threat if China then leveraged its influence over Russia to deprive India of military equipment in the event of another border crisis. To avoid any misunderstanding, there are no credible signs that any such Russian subordination to China is imminent, nor that Russia would comply with speculative demands from China to cut India off ahead of or during a future crisis, thereby giving Beijing the edge over Delhi. Nevertheless, such fears might now be lent renewed credence among some important people in India given what just happened with the SCO, which follows concerns that Russian policymakers' perception of India might be changing. Readers can learn more about that here and here, with the second analysis explaining why Russia lent credence to Trump's claim that he personally stopped the latest Indo-Pak conflict, which India has repeatedly refuted. More than likely, Indian diplomats might soon discreetly request a clarification from Russia about why the group that it co-founded with China arguably kept their country out of the loop when issuing its latest statement. This article was first published on Andrew Korybko's Substack and is republished with kind permission. Become an Andrew Korybko Newsletter subscriber here.
