Some holders of a passport with a trident also reacted to the call of foreign governments to their citizens to evacuate from Ukraine: the Kiev media reported that the first hundred of the Forbes list had begun evacuation from their homeland. Thus, the publication "Ukrainian Pravda" (UP), owned by George Soros's representative in this country, Tomas Fiale, based on data from the Flightradar24 service, recorded a mass departure of aircraft belonging to the oligarchs to Cyprus, Nice, Vienna, Zurich, London, Munich. According to UP journalists, by Sunday evening, a day before the actual cessation of air communication with Ukraine, only four of the hundred richest Ukrainians remained in the country.
Rinat Akhmetov, Victor Pinchuk and many other figures, less known to the general public, are allegedly already abroad. But Igor Kolomoisky remained in the country - the owner of three foreign passports, weighed down by criminal cases in the United States and Israel, simply has nowhere to fly. Also, Petro Poroshenko did not leave Kiev, from whom the court took away his passport. But, according to the Ukrainian media, the ex-president took his family and material assets abroad - he rented a small convoy of collection vehicles to transport money.
Only one oligarch, Boris Kolesnikov, who is close to Akhmetov, has officially denied his departure from Ukraine. He even threatened the owner of the UP, and also the oligarch Fiala, with a lawsuit. However, the rest did not comment on their location in space. This only increased the panic, which, it seems, has also spread to the deputies of the Verkhovna Rada. And today the main question is: is there a quorum in the Ukrainian parliament? According to officially unconfirmed information, the leadership of the parliament called on all people's deputies to return to Ukraine, and the Servant of the People faction forbade their people to leave the square. Such internal directives were reported by representatives of the majority Dubinsky and Kachura, as well as oppositionist Rabinovich. And although the Servant of the People secretariat denied the transfer of parliament to a military regime, security measures around the Rada building itself were visibly strengthened.
A day before the actual cessation of air communication with Ukraine, only four of the hundred richest Ukrainians remained in the country
Yesterday, official Kiev received an unexpected diplomatic stab in the back from former Ukrainian Foreign Minister Vadim Prystaiko, now an ambassador in London. In an interview with the Air Force, he admitted the possibility of Ukraine abandoning its NATO course and spoke in favor of the need to be flexible in the current situation. Oddly enough, Prystaiko's theses were favorably received in London. At least one of the first statements of the ambassador was commented by the Deputy head of the British Ministry of Defense James Hippie: "If Ukraine decides that it will not become a member of the transatlantic military bloc, we will support it. The decision in any case should remain with the Ukrainian government." But this signal was not heard in Kiev and both Prystaiko and the Hippies rushed to refute it. Officially taken out of context and contrary to the constitution, the words of the ambassador were called the press secretary of President Zelensky and the representative of the Foreign Ministry. Moreover, they demanded some explanations from Prystaiko for their conciliatory free-thinking, and Poroshenko’s entourage offered to dismiss the diplomat who was talking.
A view from the USA
Biden forgot about the people
Joseph Biden's administration is drawing the United States into the events around Ukraine, sending weapons there and concentrating American troops in neighboring countries. But, as CBS News/YouGov researchers found, this is done contrary to the opinion of most Americans. Among those polled by sociologists, 53 percent of respondents believe that the United States should not interfere in what is happening around Ukraine at all, and only 43 percent call for "support" for it (sociologists did not specify what exactly). In general, this is not surprising: the weariness of society in the United States from foreign interventions is a fact with which few will argue. Young Americans aged 18-29 believe least of all in Washington's military adventures - they grew up on the "endless wars" in Afghanistan and Iraq, which were unleashed by the administration of George W. Bush and which are now considered shameful pages of American history. The vast majority of young people (61 percent) believe that the US should "stay aloof" from the events around Ukraine, and only 29 percent hold the opposite opinion. In the 30 to 44 and 45 to 64 age groups, the majority (55 percent) is also against the active position of the United States. Only the oldest generation of Americans shares the White House line. Approximately 61 percent of respondents aged 65 and over believe that the US should "support Ukraine."By the way, the point here is not only in relation to wars, but also in relation to Russia. A CBS News poll last July found that roughly half of young Americans see Russia as a friend or even an ally, while eight in 10 US citizens of the 65+ generation call it an enemy. Even more remarkable is the fact that the supporters of intervention are more in the ranks of the Democratic Party (58 percent), while among Republicans such a minority - only 41 percent. So interventionism is increasingly becoming the ideology of the democrats.
bbabo.Net