Latest news with #Lithuania
Russia Today
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Russia Today
EU state won't recognize Russian winners of marathon
Organizers of the Vilnius Marathon in Lithuania have barred Russian and Belarusian nationals from representing their countries in the standings and receiving awards, according to the event's press service. The race organizers have introduced special conditions for Russian and Belarusian participants: they must present a Lithuanian residence permit and submit a written declaration denouncing Russia's 'military actions." In addition, they are excluded from prize eligibility and cannot appear in the official standings under their nationalities. 'All athletes from Russia and Belarus agree that by participating in the event they are competing without competition and are not eligible for prizes or awards,' according to the Rules page of the marathon's official website. Russian and Belarussian athletes must also provide 'a freely signed document in English or Lithuanian expressing opposition to Russian hostilities,' reads another point. When asked by Russian media outlet Volna if targeting only Russian and Belarusian athletes constituted discrimination, the organizers dodged the question, saying that 'only Lithuanian citizens' are eligible for prizes because the race is part of the 'closed championship of Lithuania.' When asked whether the nationalities of athletes from other countries will be listed in the standings, the organizers confirmed that they will. The Vilnius Marathon is scheduled for September 14 and will feature multiple events, including a full marathon, half marathon, 10km, 5km, and a 200m children's race. Entry fees range from €15 to €65. Top prizes are worth up to €1,500 ($1,700). Since the Ukraine conflict escalated in February of 2022, Russian and Belarusian athletes have been banned from many international sporting events, with Western-led organizers citing 'solidarity with Ukraine.' Moscow has condemned the bans, accusing Western sports bodies of politicizing athletics. Lithuania and its Baltic neighbors, Estonia and Latvia, have long worked to sever cultural ties with Russia. Since the outbreak of the Ukraine conflict, these former Soviet republics have intensified this drive, which has been fueled by claims that Russia could attack the region coming from Western officials. In a recent security report, Lithuanian authorities named Russia, Belarus, and China as the country's main threats. Moscow, which denies any intention of attacking the Baltics, has accused the nations of harboring 'extreme Russophobia' and downgraded diplomatic ties with them in 2023.
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Poland refuses entry to 24 people from Germany in new border checks
Polish border guards have refused entry to 24 people in the first week of checks at the border with Germany, according to Polish news agency PAP. Konrad Szwed, a spokesman for the Polish Border Guard, said on Monday that 67,000 people and more than 28,500 vehicles were checked at the German-Polish border between July 7-13. The Polish centre-left government ordered random checks at the borders with Germany and Lithuania a week ago as a way to crack down on irregular migration. The move was also seen as a response to similar German measures that have been in place since October 2023. On the Lithuanian side, some 40,000 people and 19,500 vehicles were checked in the first week, the spokesman said. There, 15 people were denied entry and 19 migrants were turned back to Lithuania in accordance with a repatriation agreement. Eight suspected people smugglers were detained. Out of 65 border crossings to Germany and Lithuania in total, 16 now have permanent border checks, while other border posts are subject to partial controls. The new Polish border checks have not yet had any major impact in Lithuania, according to the authorities there. "There have been no problems for travellers due to the Polish checks," said a spokesman for the Lithuanian border guard. German authorities reported long tailbacks on the German side of the border on Thursday, and fear heavy traffic later this month as summer holidays start.
Russia Today
16 hours ago
- Business
- Russia Today
German defense minister says troops ready to kill Russians
German troops are prepared to kill Russian soldiers if Moscow attacks a NATO member, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has suggested. In an interview with the Financial Times published on Sunday, Pistorius stressed that German forces – some of whom have recently been redeployed to Lithuania – would not hesitate to take lethal action if necessary. 'If deterrence doesn't work and Russia attacks, is it going to happen? Yes,' Pistorius said. 'But I would recommend that you simply go to Vilnius and talk to the representatives of the German brigade there. They know exactly what their job is.' According to Pistorius, any talk about peace and détente could only be possible 'on equal terms' and 'from a position of strength.' 'Not to intimidate anyone, but to make it clear that we know what we can do — we want to live in peace with you, but don't think that we're weak or that we won't defend ourselves,' he added. Moscow has repeatedly dismissed speculation that Russia plans to attack NATO as 'nonsense,' arguing it has no interest in doing so. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has also criticized what he described as Western leaders' attempts at fearmongering, saying: 'They have made a monster out of Russia in order to justify the decision to increase NATO defense spending to 5% of GDP.' Peskov also singled out German Chancellor Friedrich Merz as 'a fierce apologist for confrontation with Russia,' accusing him of 'aggressively mobilizing Europe.' German officials have also been debating a potential return to some form of military conscription to reinforce the military in case there are not enough volunteers to fill the ranks.
Forbes
17 hours ago
- Business
- Forbes
Navigating The Risk-Revenue Tradeoffs In SaaS
Mindaugas Čaplinskas is Cofounder and Strategic Advisor of IPRoyal, a leading residential proxy provider. Potential revenue tends to increase with the amount of risk you are willing to take. Commonly known as an informal investing principle, the risk-revenue tradeoff also applies to software-as-a-service (SaaS) businesses. It lives not just in the traditionally discussed scenarios of entrepreneurship but also in the day-to-day decisions of SaaS businesses. SaaS businesses have transformed how software solutions are utilized in personal and, especially, business settings. However, rather than eliminating the risk-revenue tradeoffs, they simply shift them to another level. In my experience, navigating this shift and the possible scenarios for your business is important for success in SaaS markets. How Shifting Risk Shifts Revenue The SaaS model has created a fundamental shift in risk-revenue tradeoff calculations for small- and medium-sized businesses (SMBs). Why invest in a developer team when you can get the needed software for a reasonable monthly subscription? In some cases, consumers hardly have a choice but to go with SaaS or similar solutions because of the infrastructure costs. For example, it is difficult for many SMBs to justify acquiring a worldwide network of proxy servers for their use cases. The investment risks greatly outweigh the benefits, making the move to a proxy provider with the necessary know-how and infrastructure an obvious choice. The investment risks are then transferred from the customer to the provider, but the risk-revenue tradeoff calculation doesn't disappear—it simply shifts to another level. The provider must ensure ongoing service quality, system availability, security features and all other factors traditionally handled by in-house developer teams. The customer can then focus on its competencies, marketing or other aspects of the business while the SaaS provider looks for strategies to transform the higher risk into higher revenue. Leveraging the economies of scale is one of the most often-used strategies for achieving this. Whether it's CRMs, cloud storage, proxy servers or other SaaS services, more customers bring down the prices per unit, creating opportunities for larger profit margins. Since competitors are doing the same, this can create an intricate balance between your SaaS company's pricing and the value proposition in the context of the whole market. Failing to keep this balance favorable to business profitability can result in higher risk without translating into higher revenue. This is why I encourage SaaS businesses to make a deliberate effort to—or even build their business model around—translating risk into profit. Key Decision Factors The list of factors stakeholders should consider in practice is too large and circumstantial to cover in full. In a simplified model, I've found that most of them can be broken down into the relationship between pricing strategies and your product's delivered value: • Pricing Strategy: This directly relates to your business's risk exposure and revenue potential. A change in pricing often signals a willingness to find a different risk-revenue balance. • Delivered Value: This might be adjusted by subscription packages or similar means instead of changing pricing directly. However, it can also change due to new market conditions. Technological innovations, such as generative AI, have already reevaluated many SaaS businesses. A misalignment of value and price can result in a so-called revenue leak, where companies lose money that could be earned from their products' superior value. I've found this most often happens when SaaS companies incorrectly implement competitor-based pricing models. At the same time, cost-plus pricing models that focus on additional profit margins might overvalue the products and lead to lost market share. If you're looking to avoid such pitfalls, I recommend balancing your value and price in terms similar to risk and revenue. In my experience, this is typically easier to achieve with correct risk evaluation tools that can help model various scenarios and assess them in terms of the level of risk they carry. A Risk-Reward Matrix For SaaS The classic risk-reward matrix provides four general, strategic decision making scenarios. I've often heard criticisms that the specific risks and rewards are rarely known upfront or can be measured quantitatively. This can be especially true for businesses in the early stages or at critical development points. Yet I've also found that creating such a framework for different products or the entire organization can aid decision-making when facing unknown situations. At the very least, the risk-reward matrix can help you formulate the opportunities your company aims to create and the scenarios it should avoid. Let's take a closer look at the four types of scenarios in this matrix: 1. High-Risk, High-Reward: These scenarios are characterized by substantial uncertainty but may bring significant revenue, market share, technological edge or other rewards. Think of early movers in new markets with significant venture capital backing. 2. High-Risk, Low-Reward: These scenarios occur when the rewards cannot justify the investments. They are typically accompanied by red flags that every CEO should learn to see and avoid, such as the sunk cost fallacy. Price wars in saturated markets are also common examples, as market gains in these areas are often unsustainable in the long term. 3. Low-Risk, High-Reward: These opportunities combine great gains with almost guaranteed success. Every business should seize these opportunities when they arise, but it's also important to create them. In my experience, most such scenarios result from careful business positioning in a niche area where safe investments will pay off well. 4. Low-Risk, Low-Reward: These activities should not be overlooked, as small, routine changes and business processes can provide the stability needed to develop other ventures. They are often associated with core business products and processes that do not aim to transform your market standing. Decision matrices are well-known methods for navigating important strategic choices, used even by institutions like the U.S. Department of Defense. SaaS businesses often must take on risks to transform them into revenue, so the use of risk-reward matrices can be an effective method for guiding judgments. Depending on the use case and available information, the matrix can be further supplemented with more variations, such as gradual risk and reward, or by assigning better-defined probabilities. Pricing strategies, product features and business risk tolerance should change depending on which scenario you and your competitors are currently in. Conclusion SaaS businesses that are proactive in their choices and do not wait for opportunities to just happen stand a stronger chance of successfully navigating risk-revenue decisions. Consider how you can apply these and other analytical tools to evaluate the possibilities and make decisions that will help you transform risk into revenue. Forbes Business Council is the foremost growth and networking organization for business owners and leaders. Do I qualify?
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump Got Her Husband Out of Prison in Belarus. Here's What She Wants Him to Know.
Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, an opposition leader in Belarus, hadn't heard from her husband Siarhei in more than two years. Not since Belarusian authorities placed him in 'incommunicado' detention, in full isolation. And then he called her. 'My dear wife,' he said. 'I'm free.' He had been released from prison after negotiations between authoritarian leader Alexander Lukashenko and Trump administration officials, and was at the border between Belarus and Lithuania. He and 13 other political prisoners were heading to the American embassy in Vilnius. Tsikhanouskaya and Siarhei have since reintroduced him to their children, traveled to a solidarity rally in Poland and done interviews with major news outlets. But both Tsikhanouskaya and her husband, a blogger and political activist who was preparing to challenge Lukashenko in Belarus' 2020 election when he was imprisoned, are grappling with the opposition's role in what comes next. In an interview with POLITICO Magazine, Tsikhanouskaya described the joy of finally reuniting her family even as she said there was far more work to be done. She also made clear that a certain peace-seeking president could help her cause. 'We ask President Trump, go further, free them all,' she said. 'Use your influence again. We believe that you can do this, and Belarusians will never forget it.' The administration's efforts in Belarus come as Trump continues to search for an end to Russia's war on Ukraine, and as Lukashenko looks for a means to end the political isolation his relationship with Vladimir Putin has wrought. Along with freeing more political prisoners, Tsikhanouskaya is desperate to make sure Belarus isn't pulled further into Russia's orbit as part of negotiations to end Putin's war. This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. When did you know that your husband Siarhei would be freed? The moment when I understood that he was free was when he called me from the border, just a direct call, and I heard his voice, and he told me, 'My dear wife, I'm free.' I could hardly believe this, because I was sure that he would be one of the last who would be released from prison, but who understands the logic of this regime? We had several lists of people to be released, humanitarian lists where people who were about to die were there and people who were incommunicado, some others. They chose Siarhei, I don't know why. A lot has been made of the term 'incommunicado.' What exactly does that mean in the context of Belarus? Incommunicado means that a person is kept in full isolation. Since March 2023, more than two years, we lost full connection with Siarhei. A lawyer wasn't able to attend to him. Letters were not received from my husband. Nothing. Just forced disappearance. And we have eight people at the moment on this list, and I wasn't sure if he was alive, what prison he's kept in, what state he's in. The regime is doing this to blackmail relatives, put a burden on the shoulders of their relatives. This knowing nothing about people is, of course, very, very painful. Can you speak to what it was like to see Siarhei for the first time post-prison sentence? It was, it is now, shocking to see him in such a state. He lost half of his weight. He says that for the last couple of months, they even gave him additional portions of butter, cottage cheese. When he got out of the minivan, I knew that he would be there, but if I had seen him somewhere else, I wouldn't have recognized him. And when he returned home, our young daughter didn't recognize him at all. I said, 'Dear, look who came?' And she just said, 'Hello, who are you?' And when he started talking, she just recognized his voice. Of course, there were oceans of tears, hugs, but prison changes people a lot. It's like gray face, like very skinny people. It's difficult to see, but the physical state, maybe it's possible to improve somehow. But all those memories from prison, the emotional trauma, psychological trauma, it will not be able to be softened. Has it set in that he's back? How has it been to have him back in the movement? The release of Siarhei, it's brought a boost of energy to the Belarusian people, first of all. It was such news for people. And he's full of energy. For five years, he was thinking about new ideas, new projects, how to change the situation in Belarus. And now we have to use this momentum to direct more attention to the topic of Belarus, to the topic of political prisoners and the country's political disaster. So, on the one hand, as a wife, I want to take care of him, I want him to relax a little bit. But on the other hand, I understand that he has to jump into the agenda. He's given so many interviews now, so many people want to meet him, to see him, and we have to use that momentum. And he's still realizing what has happened in the democratic movement. But, for sure he will join this movement as a strong speaker, as a leader, just to try to mobilize the energy of Belarusians. Five years [since an anti-Lukashenko protest movement was violently quashed and Siarhei was first jailed], and people are exhausted. You know, people continue to fight. We are working on different projects in coordination with the people on the ground, but somehow people are losing, step by step, the energy. And he's a driver who can really, really attract attention. So Siarhei will focus on building new channels of communication with the workers, rural communities, entrepreneurs, officials. His voice is powerful and he speaks the language of people. Many Belarusians watched his first press conference, it gave maybe people inside the country new hope. Many people who believed in 2020, and were silent for five years, are active again. Switching gears to politics — are you worried at all that the Trump White House might be legitimizing Lukashenko by negotiating with him on the release of political prisoners? So first of all, President Trump really made a difference. His team — Gen. Keith Kellogg, John Cole, Chris Smith — took real action and it worked. Trump has shown that diplomacy and pressure can bring results. He has leverage in the situation of Belarus and he used it. Now, we must maintain pressure on the regime. We have seen that the pressure works, and it is the most effective tool. I think that actually Belarus can be President Trump's foreign policy success story — a place where American leadership ends a crisis without war. It can be a victory that the world will notice. And we ask President Trump, go further, free them all. Use your influence again. We believe that you can do this, and Belarusians will never forget it. It was American diplomacy and mission that rescued this group of people. But for sure, without the strong and principled and firm position of the European Union as well, it wouldn't have brought this result. So again, President Trump can solve the crisis in Belarus, which lasts 30 years already, and it must be easier to bring changes to Belarus than to Russia. Of course, there is gossip that this visit of Gen. Kellogg might look like legitimization of the regime, but I trust that our American partners know who they're dealing with. And it was President Trump, actually in 2020, who didn't recognize the legitimacy of Lukashenko. They understand that Lukashenko is a criminal, he committed crimes against Belarusians, he is a war criminal. And he has to be brought to accountability for all the crimes. But nevertheless, for Lukashenko this meeting is more important than it is for the Americans, because he's seeking legitimacy. He's seeking to show the world that 'Look Americans themselves listen to me, I'm important.' But Americans understand that he's playing on the side of Putin in this game, that he is not an independent player. What would you like to see President Trump do in Belarus? We understand that President Trump wants to end the war in Ukraine and this is why Belarus might be a topic for negotiation as well. For us, it's very important that the peace in Ukraine that President Trump wants to achieve must be lasting and just. It must be on the conditions of Ukraine. We can't reward the aggressor. There cannot be peace without justice, and the Belarusian topic is existential here because if Lukashenko stays in power in Belarus, there will no longer be a possibility to secure peace in the whole region. So we want President Trump to continue first of all releases, but also continue this communication through the State Department with the Belarusian Democratic Forces, and bring changes in Belarus that will actually change the security architecture of the whole region. So, continue this humanitarian track and also push Lukashenko and his regime on their path of national dialogue with Belarusians. America can play this very strong mediation role between the Belarusians and the regime. Because again, I want to underline that Lukashenko wants negotiations with the USA or with the West, possibly with the European Union, but we need systematic changes. We want Belarusian people to return to Belarus, where they will not be prosecuted. We want to write our constitution so that it works for Belarusian people. The aim is much broader than the release of political prisoners, though that is our priority. Are you worried that the Trump administration may be giving Putin and Lukashenko too much credit in its bid to end the war? Is it too transactional? Of course, you know President Trump's politics, we see it is rather transactional. But maybe it's not about credit, it's about giving a chance to Putin, maybe to Lukashenko, to change the situation that will meet the demands of Ukrainians and Belarusians. We already saw that President Trump met President Zelenskyy during the NATO Summit and it was a very pleasant conversation. And I think that there was disappointment in Trump's administration that Putin doesn't want to make any concessions. What advice do you have for the Trump administration as it embarks on negotiations and attempts to improve relationships with Minsk? We must not normalize the trafficking of political prisoners, when people are released for some concessions from your side, softening of sanctions or publicity. And then new political prisoners are taken. Lukashenko has to be punished, not rewarded. What is a realistic path forward for getting Belarus' political prisoners freed with American coordination? There's a big chance to release all people from prison. But the issue is what the regime wants in return for this. We always say that sanctions are the leverage to release people, but we have to use this leverage smartly. If we don't see any signs that repressions are stopped, this instrument cannot be used. Because 14 people have been released but [in June], 28 were detained. When we see a change of policy by Lukashenko, that he's ready to stop these repressions and make steps forward toward the Belarusian people, it might be a signal that you can talk about lifting of sanctions. But again, don't, forget that we have more leverage with European sanctions. Of course, the actions have to be coordinated. And there should be no pressure, for example, from the American side to the European side. The main message is that sanctions as instruments have to be used smartly. We can't even speak about softening sanctions now, while repressions continue and with more than 1,000 behind bars. The first condition — ending repression — must be met. And I am sure President Trump, with all his power, can achieve it. Like the release of my husband — it happened without lifting any sanctions.
