In Ukraine, civilians train with wooden guns to prepare against possible Russian invasion

Satellite photos show Russian troops deployed near Ukraine border

In 2015, cheers broke across China when the International Olympics announced that China will host the 2022 Winter Olympics, making Beijing the first city to host both Summer and Winter Games.

It was truly a milestone in China’s efforts to be seen as a world power, and another validation of its growing influence as it continued to challenge the West.

China’s President Xi Jinping, made a vow to deliver on a series of extraordinary promises he made to woo the Olympic delegates. "The Chinese people will deliver a wonderful, extraordinary, and remarkable Winter Olympics for the world," said Mr. Xi at the Olympics committee meeting in Malaysia.

Then came the coronavirus. And the boycotts.

Over the last year, the lead up to the games has been clouded by a string of controversies. With the diplomatic boycotts over human rights, particularly towards its Uyghur Muslim community in the country’s Xinjiang region, and the #MeToo case of the Tennis Star Peng Shuai against the former Chinese Premier Zhang Gaoli. Its crackdown on dissent by jailing or restricting social media access of human rights activists, and the imposition of the draconian "zero-COVID policy".

As the games are all set to begin next week, China has managed to maneuverer its way through obstacles. It has called the US-led diplomatic boycotts a "self-directed political farce", and condemned the ‘politicization’ of the games, calling it a "grave distortion of the spirit of the Olympic Charter."

In a recent phone call with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi has demanded the US to end its "interference". Wang has also accused the US of continuously putting "forward wrong words and actions toward China, causing new conflicts in relations between the two countries."&nbsp;

While these controversies were not enough, it seems like Chinese President Xi Jinping’s moment of glory may be stolen by not one, but two global security crisis.&nbsp;

And both of them happen to involve China’s allies.

While Mr. Xi had hoped to be the talking point with less than a week to go for the 2022 Winter Olympics. Russia and North Korea have managed to capture the world’s attention. While one is gathering thousands of troops on the border of its neighbouring country, the other is fuelling up tensions with one missile test after another.

Let’s rewind to a week ago, when Beijing and Moscow, placed a "hold" on United States' effort at the United Nations to impose sanctions on five North Koreans in the backdrop of missile launches, even though Pyongyang had already done four missile tests by then.

While the nations have often had each other’s back on a global stage, the same cannot be said for the present situation.

China’s generosity from North Korea, in return, has not only been met with the continuation of missile tests but also its decision to skip the Winter Olympics, following a series of diplomatic boycotts from the West. In a hand delivered-letter, North Korea said that it could not take part in the Olympics due to the hostile forces’ moves and the worldwide pandemic," but it "would fully support the Chinese comrades in all their work to hold a splendid and wonderful Olympic festival," as quoted by The New York Times.

However, this does not seem to be the case. With its sixth missile test on Jan. 27, and with recent pictures of North Korea's supreme leader Kim Jong-Un visiting a munitions factory, it shows that Pyongyang is not going to stop&nbsp;with showcasing its arsenal anytime soon. Seems that N.Korea probably does not attach the same importance as China to the "UN Olympic Truce resolution." The resolution which calls upon&nbsp;countries to observe a truce, that is,&nbsp;to&nbsp;build 'a peaceful and better world through sport and the Olympic ideal',&nbsp;"from seven days before the start of the Olympic Games until seven days after the end of the Paralympic Games."

On the other hand, it seems neither does Russia.

While Xi is preparing to have a smooth start to the Olympic Games, his "old friend" Russian President Vladimir Putin has been busy ramping up his efforts to possibly invade Ukraine, even though they have repeatedly dismissed the claim. As we approach closer to the opening ceremony of the Games, the situation on the Ukrainian border is only intensifying, with Russia launching military drills near the border.&nbsp;

While, the recent so called&nbsp;"Normandy talks",&nbsp;a meeting between the German, French, Russian, and Ukrainian officials,&nbsp;may have been&nbsp;a step towards defusing the situation brewing between Russia and Ukraine, with the former agreeing&nbsp;to meet again in Berlin in two weeks. One can never be too sure with Russia.

And this is not the first time that Moscow has tried to steal Beijing’s limelight. Back in 2008, Russia’s war with Georgia erupted on the same day as the opening ceremony of the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics prompting Putin to fly home.

Putin has said he will join Xi at the opening ceremony of the Beijing Winter Olympics on Feb 4. Will it be a Deja Vu moment? Well, that needs to be seen.

The coming few days is not only critical for China as it is marred by a string of controversies regarding the 2022 Winter Olympics but will also show if Mr. Xi’s clout among its allies is dimming.

In 2015, cheers broke across China when the International Olympics announced that China will host the 2022 Winter Olympics, making Beijing the first city to host both Summer and Winter Games.

In 2015, cheers broke across China when the International Olympics announced that China will host the 2022 Winter Olympics, making Beijing the first city to host both Summer and Winter Games. It was truly a milestone in China’s efforts to be seen as a world power, and another validation of its growing influence as it continued to challenge the West. China’s President Xi Jinping, made a vow to deliver on a series of extraordinary promises he made to woo the Olympic delegates. "The Chinese people will deliver a wonderful, extraordinary, and remarkable Winter Olympics for the world," said Mr. Xi at the Olympics committee meeting in Malaysia. Then came the coronavirus. And the boycotts. Over the last year, the lead up to the games has been clouded by a string of controversies. With the diplomatic boycotts over human rights, particularly towards its Uyghur Muslim community in the country’s Xinjiang region, and the #MeToo case of the Tennis Star Peng Shuai against the former Chinese Premier Zhang Gaoli. Its crackdown on dissent by jailing or restricting social media access of human rights activists, and the imposition of the draconian "zero-COVID policy". As the games are all set to begin next week, China has managed to maneuverer its way through obstacles. It has called the US-led diplomatic boycotts a "self-directed political farce", and condemned the ‘politicization’ of the games, calling it a "grave distortion of the spirit of the Olympic Charter." In a recent phone call with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi has demanded the US to end its "interference". Wang has also accused the US of continuously putting "forward wrong words and actions toward China, causing new conflicts in relations between the two countries." While these controversies were not enough, it seems like Chinese President Xi Jinping’s moment of glory may be stolen by not one, but two global security crisis. And both of them happen to involve China’s allies. While Mr. Xi had hoped to be the talking point with less than a week to go for the 2022 Winter Olympics. Russia and North Korea have managed to capture the world’s attention. While one is gathering thousands of troops on the border of its neighbouring country, the other is fuelling up tensions with one missile test after another. Let’s rewind to a week ago, when Beijing and Moscow, placed a "hold" on United States' effort at the United Nations to impose sanctions on five North Koreans in the backdrop of missile launches, even though Pyongyang had already done four missile tests by then. While the nations have often had each other’s back on a global stage, the same cannot be said for the present situation. China’s generosity from North Korea, in return, has not only been met with the continuation of missile tests but also its decision to skip the Winter Olympics, following a series of diplomatic boycotts from the West. In a hand delivered-letter, North Korea said that it could not take part in the Olympics due to the hostile forces’ moves and the worldwide pandemic," but it "would fully support the Chinese comrades in all their work to hold a splendid and wonderful Olympic festival," as quoted by The New York Times. However, this does not seem to be the case. With its sixth missile test on Jan. 27, and with recent pictures of North Korea's supreme leader Kim Jong-Un visiting a munitions factory, it shows that Pyongyang is not going to stop with showcasing its arsenal anytime soon. Seems that N.Korea probably does not attach the same importance as China to the "UN Olympic Truce resolution." The resolution which calls upon countries to observe a truce, that is, to build 'a peaceful and better world through sport and the Olympic ideal', "from seven days before the start of the Olympic Games until seven days after the end of the Paralympic Games." On the other hand, it seems neither does Russia. While Xi is preparing to have a smooth start to the Olympic Games, his "old friend" Russian President Vladimir Putin has been busy ramping up his efforts to possibly invade Ukraine, even though they have repeatedly dismissed the claim. As we approach closer to the opening ceremony of the Games, the situation on the Ukrainian border is only intensifying, with Russia launching military drills near the border. While, the recent so called "Normandy talks", a meeting between the German, French, Russian, and Ukrainian officials, may have been a step towards defusing the situation brewing between Russia and Ukraine, with the former agreeing to meet again in Berlin in two weeks. One can never be too sure with Russia. And this is not the first time that Moscow has tried to steal Beijing’s limelight. Back in 2008, Russia’s war with Georgia erupted on the same day as the opening ceremony of the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics prompting Putin to fly home. Putin has said he will join Xi at the opening ceremony of the Beijing Winter Olympics on Feb 4. Will it be a Deja Vu moment? Well, that needs to be seen. The coming few days is not only critical for China as it is marred by a string of controversies regarding the 2022 Winter Olympics but will also show if Mr. Xi’s clout among its allies is dimming.

Is China’s clout among its allies dimming?

The Biden administration and its allies are assembling a punishing set of financial, technology and military sanctions against Russia that they say would go into effect within hours of an invasion of Ukraine, hoping to make clear to President Vladimir Putin the high cost he would pay if he sends troops across the border.

In interviews, officials described details of those plans for the first time, just before a series of diplomatic negotiations to defuse the crisis with Moscow, one of the most perilous moments in Europe since the end of the Cold War. The talks begin Monday in Geneva and then move across Europe.

The plans the United States has discussed with allies in recent days include cutting off Russia’s largest financial institutions from global transactions, imposing an embargo on American-made or American-designed technology needed for defense-related and consumer industries, and arming insurgents in Ukraine who would conduct what would amount to a guerrilla war against a Russian military occupation, if it comes to that.

Such moves are rarely telegraphed in advance. But with the negotiations looming — and the fate of Europe’s post-Cold War borders and NATO’s military presence on the continent at stake — President Joe Biden’s advisers say they are trying to signal to Putin exactly what he would face, at home and abroad, in hopes of influencing his decisions in coming weeks.

The talks Monday will be led by the deputy secretary of state, Wendy Sherman, an experienced diplomat who negotiated the 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran. Russian officials are expected to press their demands for “security guarantees,” including prohibiting the deployment of any missiles in Europe that could strike Russia and the placement of weaponry or troops in former Soviet states that joined NATO after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Putin is also demanding an end to NATO expansion, including a promise that Ukraine could never join the nuclear alliance. While the Biden administration has said it is willing to discuss all Russian security concerns — and has a long list of its own — the demands amount to a dismantling of the security architecture of Europe built after the Soviet Union’s collapse.

On Wednesday, members of the NATO alliance will meet with Russia in Brussels. The next day in Vienna, Ukrainian officials will also be at the table, for the first time, for talks at the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. But with 57 members, that group is so large that few expect serious negotiations.

U.S. diplomats worry that after the whirlwind week, the Russians could declare that their security concerns are not being met — and use the failure of talks as a justification for military action. “No one should be surprised if Russia instigates a provocation or incident,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Friday, and “then tries to use it to justify military intervention, hoping that by the time the world realizes the ruse, it’ll be too late.”

This time, he said, “we’ve been clear with Russia about what it will face if it continues on this path, including economic measures that we haven’t used before — massive consequences.”

That warning, however, is an unspoken acknowledgment that the Obama administration’s response in 2014, when Putin last invaded parts of Ukraine, was too tentative and mild. At that time, Putin surprised the world by annexing Crimea and fueling a grinding proxy war in eastern Ukraine. Now, U.S. officials say they are trying to learn from their past mistakes.

An internal review of those actions, conducted by the White House in recent weeks, concluded that while Obama-era sanctions damaged Russia’s economy and led to a sell-off of its currency, they failed at their central strategic objective: to cause so much pain that Putin would be forced to withdraw. Nearly eight years later, Russia still holds Crimea and has ignored most of the diplomatic commitments it made in the negotiations that followed, known as the Minsk accords.

Those sanctions started with actions against some smaller Russian banks and individuals directly involved in the invasion. Virtually all of the sanctions — and additional measures imposed after Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and after the SolarWinds cyberattack in 2020 that sabotaged computer programs used by the federal government and American companies — remain in place. But there is scant evidence that they have deterred Putin, who began building up forces near the Ukrainian border just as Biden announced his response to SolarWinds this past spring.

When asked recently whether he could point to any evidence that the Russians were deterred by recent sanctions, a senior aide to Biden paused a moment and then said, “No, none.”

Rather than start with moves against small banks and on-the-ground military commanders, officials said, the new sanctions would be directed at cutting off the largest Russian financial institutions that depend on global financial transfers. The plan was described by one official as a “high-impact, quick-action response that we did not pursue in 2014.”

The officials declined to say whether the United States was prepared to cut Russia off from the SWIFT system, which executes global financial transactions among more than 1,100 banks in 200 countries. But European officials say they have discussed that possibility — something most major European powers had declined to consider until recently, for fear that Russia might retaliate by attempting to cut off gas and oil flows in the winter, even briefly.

The SWIFT cutoff has been used against Iran with some success. But Cynthia Roberts, a professor of political science at Hunter College in New York, noted that Russia had learned a lot about “global sanctions-proofing,” and she expressed doubt that the country would suffer as much as U.S. officials contend if it were disconnected from SWIFT.

“They would definitely take a big hit,” she said at a seminar held this past week by the Center for the National Interest. But she noted that Russia had stockpiled hundreds of billions in gold and dollar reserves and that the Bank of China had joined Russia’s own domestic version of SWIFT. That raises the possibility that Russia and China, as part of their expanding partnership, might join forces to help Moscow evade the West’s action.

The bottom line, she said, is that “sanctions have a very poor coercive track record.”

The technology sanctions would target some of Putin’s favored industries — particularly aerospace and arms, which are major producers of revenue for the Russian government. The focus would be on Russian-built fighter aircraft, anti-aircraft systems, anti-satellite systems, space systems and emerging technologies where Russia is hoping to make gains, like artificial intelligence and quantum computing.

Similar export controls have been surprisingly effective against China’s leading producer of cellphones, Huawei, which for a while was among the top providers of smartphones to the world. That part of its business has all but collapsed in the past year because it cannot obtain advanced chips. But the Russian economy bears little resemblance to China’s, and it is not clear that it is equally vulnerable to an embargo of semiconductors and other microelectronics that are critical to Chinese manufacturing.

There are other options under consideration that go well beyond merely banning the sale of computer chips. In one additional step, according to U.S. officials, the Commerce Department could issue a ruling that would essentially ban the export of any consumer goods to Russia — from cellphones and laptop computers to refrigerators and washing machines — that contain American-made or American-designed electronics. That would apply not only to American makers, but also to European, South Korean and other foreign manufacturers that use American chips or software.

Unlike China, Russia does not make many of these products — and the effects on consumers could be broad.

But a senior European official said there was still a debate about whether the Russian people would blame Putin, or the United States and its allies, for their inability to buy the goods.

While the Commerce and Treasury departments work on sanctions that would maximize America’s advantages over Russia, the Pentagon is developing plans that have echoes of the proxy wars of the 1960s and ’70s.

To underscore the potential pain for Russia, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, spoke with his Russian counterpart two weeks ago and delivered a stark message: Yes, he said, you could invade Ukraine and probably roll over the Ukrainian military, which stands little chance of repelling a far larger, better armed Russian force.

But the swift victory would be followed, Milley told Gen. Valery Gerasimov, by a bloody insurgency, similar to the one that led to the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan more than three decades ago, according to officials familiar with the discussion.

Milley did not detail to Gerasimov the planning underway in Washington to support an insurgency, a so-called porcupine strategy to make invading Ukraine hard for the Russians to swallow. That includes the advance positioning of arms for Ukrainian insurgents, probably including Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, that could be used against Russian forces.

More than a month ago, Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, created a new interagency planning cell to examine a range of contingencies if Putin goes ahead with an invasion. The cell, which reports directly to Sullivan, includes representatives from the National Security Council, the intelligence agencies and the departments of Defense, State, Treasury, Energy and Homeland Security.

The cell is attempting to tailor responses to the many types of attacks that could unfold in the next few weeks, from cyberattacks aimed at crippling Ukraine’s electric grid and pipelines to the seizure of small or large amounts of territory.

Intelligence officials said recently that they thought the least likely possibility was a full-scale invasion in which the Russians try to take the capital, Kyiv. Many of the assessments, however, have explored more incremental moves by Putin, which could include seizing a bit more land in the Donbas region, where war has ground into a stalemate, or a land bridge to Crimea.

Several officials familiar with the planning say the administration is looking at European nations that could provide more aid to support Ukrainian forces before any conflict, as well as in the initial stages of a Russian invasion.

Lt. Col. Anton Semelroth, a Defense Department spokesperson, noted in December that the United States had already committed more than $2.5 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since 2014, including $450 million in 2021 alone. Over the past three months, it has delivered 180 Javelin missiles, two patrol boats, ammunition for grenade launchers, machine guns, secure radios, medical equipment and other items that U.S. officials describe as defensive in nature.

But the planning cell is considering more lethal weaponry, such as anti-aircraft weapons.

After visiting Ukraine last month, Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass., a former Marine officer, said that in his view, “We need to make any incursion by Russia more painful — Day 1 painful, not six months from now painful.

“We have a short window to take decisive action to deter Putin from a serious invasion,” Moulton said. “I worry our current deterrent tactics are responding to an invasion rather than preventing it.”

One option likely to be discussed at NATO this coming week is a plan to increase, possibly by several thousand, the number of troops stationed in the Baltics and in southeast Europe.

On Friday, Blinken again warned that if the Russians invade, NATO would deploy more forces along the borders between NATO nations and Russian-controlled territory.

The Biden administration and its allies are assembling a punishing set of financial, technology and military sanctions against Russia that they say would go into effect within hours of an invasion of Ukraine, hoping to make clear to President Vladimir Putin the high cost he would pay if he sends troops across the border.

The Biden administration and its allies are assembling a punishing set of financial, technology and military sanctions against Russia that they say would go into effect within hours of an invasion of Ukraine, hoping to make clear to President Vladimir Putin the high cost he would pay if he sends troops across the border. In interviews, officials described details of those plans for the first time, just before a series of diplomatic negotiations to defuse the crisis with Moscow, one of the most perilous moments in Europe since the end of the Cold War. The talks begin Monday in Geneva and then move across Europe. The plans the United States has discussed with allies in recent days include cutting off Russia’s largest financial institutions from global transactions, imposing an embargo on American-made or American-designed technology needed for defense-related and consumer industries, and arming insurgents in Ukraine who would conduct what would amount to a guerrilla war against a Russian military occupation, if it comes to that. Such moves are rarely telegraphed in advance. But with the negotiations looming — and the fate of Europe’s post-Cold War borders and NATO’s military presence on the continent at stake — President Joe Biden’s advisers say they are trying to signal to Putin exactly what he would face, at home and abroad, in hopes of influencing his decisions in coming weeks. The talks Monday will be led by the deputy secretary of state, Wendy Sherman, an experienced diplomat who negotiated the 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran. Russian officials are expected to press their demands for “security guarantees,” including prohibiting the deployment of any missiles in Europe that could strike Russia and the placement of weaponry or troops in former Soviet states that joined NATO after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Putin is also demanding an end to NATO expansion, including a promise that Ukraine could never join the nuclear alliance. While the Biden administration has said it is willing to discuss all Russian security concerns — and has a long list of its own — the demands amount to a dismantling of the security architecture of Europe built after the Soviet Union’s collapse. On Wednesday, members of the NATO alliance will meet with Russia in Brussels. The next day in Vienna, Ukrainian officials will also be at the table, for the first time, for talks at the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. But with 57 members, that group is so large that few expect serious negotiations. U.S. diplomats worry that after the whirlwind week, the Russians could declare that their security concerns are not being met — and use the failure of talks as a justification for military action. “No one should be surprised if Russia instigates a provocation or incident,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Friday, and “then tries to use it to justify military intervention, hoping that by the time the world realizes the ruse, it’ll be too late.” This time, he said, “we’ve been clear with Russia about what it will face if it continues on this path, including economic measures that we haven’t used before — massive consequences.” That warning, however, is an unspoken acknowledgment that the Obama administration’s response in 2014, when Putin last invaded parts of Ukraine, was too tentative and mild. At that time, Putin surprised the world by annexing Crimea and fueling a grinding proxy war in eastern Ukraine. Now, U.S. officials say they are trying to learn from their past mistakes. An internal review of those actions, conducted by the White House in recent weeks, concluded that while Obama-era sanctions damaged Russia’s economy and led to a sell-off of its currency, they failed at their central strategic objective: to cause so much pain that Putin would be forced to withdraw. Nearly eight years later, Russia still holds Crimea and has ignored most of the diplomatic commitments it made in the negotiations that followed, known as the Minsk accords. Those sanctions started with actions against some smaller Russian banks and individuals directly involved in the invasion. Virtually all of the sanctions — and additional measures imposed after Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and after the SolarWinds cyberattack in 2020 that sabotaged computer programs used by the federal government and American companies — remain in place. But there is scant evidence that they have deterred Putin, who began building up forces near the Ukrainian border just as Biden announced his response to SolarWinds this past spring. When asked recently whether he could point to any evidence that the Russians were deterred by recent sanctions, a senior aide to Biden paused a moment and then said, “No, none.” Rather than start with moves against small banks and on-the-ground military commanders, officials said, the new sanctions would be directed at cutting off the largest Russian financial institutions that depend on global financial transfers. The plan was described by one official as a “high-impact, quick-action response that we did not pursue in 2014.” The officials declined to say whether the United States was prepared to cut Russia off from the SWIFT system, which executes global financial transactions among more than 1,100 banks in 200 countries. But European officials say they have discussed that possibility — something most major European powers had declined to consider until recently, for fear that Russia might retaliate by attempting to cut off gas and oil flows in the winter, even briefly. The SWIFT cutoff has been used against Iran with some success. But Cynthia Roberts, a professor of political science at Hunter College in New York, noted that Russia had learned a lot about “global sanctions-proofing,” and she expressed doubt that the country would suffer as much as U.S. officials contend if it were disconnected from SWIFT. “They would definitely take a big hit,” she said at a seminar held this past week by the Center for the National Interest. But she noted that Russia had stockpiled hundreds of billions in gold and dollar reserves and that the Bank of China had joined Russia’s own domestic version of SWIFT. That raises the possibility that Russia and China, as part of their expanding partnership, might join forces to help Moscow evade the West’s action. The bottom line, she said, is that “sanctions have a very poor coercive track record.” The technology sanctions would target some of Putin’s favored industries — particularly aerospace and arms, which are major producers of revenue for the Russian government. The focus would be on Russian-built fighter aircraft, anti-aircraft systems, anti-satellite systems, space systems and emerging technologies where Russia is hoping to make gains, like artificial intelligence and quantum computing. Similar export controls have been surprisingly effective against China’s leading producer of cellphones, Huawei, which for a while was among the top providers of smartphones to the world. That part of its business has all but collapsed in the past year because it cannot obtain advanced chips. But the Russian economy bears little resemblance to China’s, and it is not clear that it is equally vulnerable to an embargo of semiconductors and other microelectronics that are critical to Chinese manufacturing. There are other options under consideration that go well beyond merely banning the sale of computer chips. In one additional step, according to U.S. officials, the Commerce Department could issue a ruling that would essentially ban the export of any consumer goods to Russia — from cellphones and laptop computers to refrigerators and washing machines — that contain American-made or American-designed electronics. That would apply not only to American makers, but also to European, South Korean and other foreign manufacturers that use American chips or software. Unlike China, Russia does not make many of these products — and the effects on consumers could be broad. But a senior European official said there was still a debate about whether the Russian people would blame Putin, or the United States and its allies, for their inability to buy the goods. While the Commerce and Treasury departments work on sanctions that would maximize America’s advantages over Russia, the Pentagon is developing plans that have echoes of the proxy wars of the 1960s and ’70s. To underscore the potential pain for Russia, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, spoke with his Russian counterpart two weeks ago and delivered a stark message: Yes, he said, you could invade Ukraine and probably roll over the Ukrainian military, which stands little chance of repelling a far larger, better armed Russian force. But the swift victory would be followed, Milley told Gen. Valery Gerasimov, by a bloody insurgency, similar to the one that led to the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan more than three decades ago, according to officials familiar with the discussion. Milley did not detail to Gerasimov the planning underway in Washington to support an insurgency, a so-called porcupine strategy to make invading Ukraine hard for the Russians to swallow. That includes the advance positioning of arms for Ukrainian insurgents, probably including Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, that could be used against Russian forces. More than a month ago, Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, created a new interagency planning cell to examine a range of contingencies if Putin goes ahead with an invasion. The cell, which reports directly to Sullivan, includes representatives from the National Security Council, the intelligence agencies and the departments of Defense, State, Treasury, Energy and Homeland Security. The cell is attempting to tailor responses to the many types of attacks that could unfold in the next few weeks, from cyberattacks aimed at crippling Ukraine’s electric grid and pipelines to the seizure of small or large amounts of territory. Intelligence officials said recently that they thought the least likely possibility was a full-scale invasion in which the Russians try to take the capital, Kyiv. Many of the assessments, however, have explored more incremental moves by Putin, which could include seizing a bit more land in the Donbas region, where war has ground into a stalemate, or a land bridge to Crimea. Several officials familiar with the planning say the administration is looking at European nations that could provide more aid to support Ukrainian forces before any conflict, as well as in the initial stages of a Russian invasion. Lt. Col. Anton Semelroth, a Defense Department spokesperson, noted in December that the United States had already committed more than $2.5 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since 2014, including $450 million in 2021 alone. Over the past three months, it has delivered 180 Javelin missiles, two patrol boats, ammunition for grenade launchers, machine guns, secure radios, medical equipment and other items that U.S. officials describe as defensive in nature. But the planning cell is considering more lethal weaponry, such as anti-aircraft weapons. After visiting Ukraine last month, Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass., a former Marine officer, said that in his view, “We need to make any incursion by Russia more painful — Day 1 painful, not six months from now painful. “We have a short window to take decisive action to deter Putin from a serious invasion,” Moulton said. “I worry our current deterrent tactics are responding to an invasion rather than preventing it.” One option likely to be discussed at NATO this coming week is a plan to increase, possibly by several thousand, the number of troops stationed in the Baltics and in southeast Europe. On Friday, Blinken again warned that if the Russians invade, NATO would deploy more forces along the borders between NATO nations and Russian-controlled territory.

US details costs of a Russian invasion of Ukraine

After the UK accused the Kremlin of seeking to install a pro-Russian leader in Ukraine, a senior British minister said on Sunday that Russia would face severe economic sanctions if it installs a puppet regime in Ukraine.

"There'll be very serious consequences if Russia takes this move to try and invade, but also install a puppet regime," British Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab told Sky News.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/russia-looks-to-replace-ukraine-govt-with-pro-moscow-administration-claims-uk-446814">Russia looks to replace Ukraine govt with pro-Moscow administration, claims&nbsp;UK</a>

On Saturday, the United Kingdom made the accusation, saying Russian intelligence officers were in contact with a number of former Ukrainian politicians as part of an invasion plan.

In response, the Russian Foreign Ministry dismissed the British claim as "disinformation," accusing NATO of "escalating tensions" over Ukraine.&nbsp;

The British claims come after top American and Russian diplomats failed to reach an agreement on Friday on resolving the Ukraine crisis, which was sparked when Russia began massing troops near its border with the country.

Moscow has insisted that it has no plans to invade, and it and its American counterparts have agreed to keep talking. However, tensions remain high.

Due to the threat of Russian military action, the State Department of the US has also ordered eligible family members to leave the Embassy in Kyiv.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/threat-of-war-forces-us-to-order-departure-of-ukrainian-embassy-staffs-kin-447011">Threat of war forces US to order departure of Ukrainian embassy staff’s kin</a>

Senior administration officials said Saturday that US President Joe Biden has begun considering options for increasing America's military assets in the region after meeting with top national security advisers at his Camp David retreat.

New York Times reports Biden is considering sending 1,000 to 5,000 troops to Eastern European countries, with the possibility of increasing this number should tensions increase.

While the world is closely watching Moscow's next move, the British foreign ministry claims that it has information Russia is considering former Ukrainian lawmaker Yevhen Murayev as a possible contender to head a pro-Russian government.

Watch |&nbsp;UK accuses Russia for allegedly trying to install pro-Russian leader in Kyiv

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/uk-accuses-russia-for-allegedly-trying-to-install-pro-russian-leader-in-kyiv-446971/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

However, in comments to British newspapers,&nbsp;Murayev dismissed the theory that Russia wants him to become Ukraine's leader.

"This morning I already read in all the news publications this conspiracy theory: absolutely unproven, absolutely unfounded," Murayev told Reuters over a video call, adding that he was considering taking legal action.

Under Russian sanctions since&nbsp;2018, he dismissed the idea that he was working with the Kremlin as "stupid" and denied that he had any contacts with Russian intelligence.

The British foreign ministry refused to provide any evidence to support its allegations.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

After the UK accused the Kremlin of seeking to install a pro-Russian leader in Ukraine, a senior British minister said on Sunday that Russia would face severe economic sanctions if it installs a puppet regime in Ukraine.

After the UK accused the Kremlin of seeking to install a pro-Russian leader in Ukraine, a senior British minister said on Sunday that Russia would face severe economic sanctions if it installs a puppet regime in Ukraine. "There'll be very serious consequences if Russia takes this move to try and invade, but also install a puppet regime," British Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab told Sky News. Also read | Russia looks to replace Ukraine govt with pro-Moscow administration, claims UK On Saturday, the United Kingdom made the accusation, saying Russian intelligence officers were in contact with a number of former Ukrainian politicians as part of an invasion plan. In response, the Russian Foreign Ministry dismissed the British claim as "disinformation," accusing NATO of "escalating tensions" over Ukraine. The British claims come after top American and Russian diplomats failed to reach an agreement on Friday on resolving the Ukraine crisis, which was sparked when Russia began massing troops near its border with the country. Moscow has insisted that it has no plans to invade, and it and its American counterparts have agreed to keep talking. However, tensions remain high. Due to the threat of Russian military action, the State Department of the US has also ordered eligible family members to leave the Embassy in Kyiv. Also read | Threat of war forces US to order departure of Ukrainian embassy staff’s kin Senior administration officials said Saturday that US President Joe Biden has begun considering options for increasing America's military assets in the region after meeting with top national security advisers at his Camp David retreat. New York Times reports Biden is considering sending 1,000 to 5,000 troops to Eastern European countries, with the possibility of increasing this number should tensions increase. While the world is closely watching Moscow's next move, the British foreign ministry claims that it has information Russia is considering former Ukrainian lawmaker Yevhen Murayev as a possible contender to head a pro-Russian government. Watch | UK accuses Russia for allegedly trying to install pro-Russian leader in Kyiv However, in comments to British newspapers, Murayev dismissed the theory that Russia wants him to become Ukraine's leader. "This morning I already read in all the news publications this conspiracy theory: absolutely unproven, absolutely unfounded," Murayev told Reuters over a video call, adding that he was considering taking legal action. Under Russian sanctions since 2018, he dismissed the idea that he was working with the Kremlin as "stupid" and denied that he had any contacts with Russian intelligence. The British foreign ministry refused to provide any evidence to support its allegations. (With inputs from agencies)

UK warns Russia of 'very serious consequences' if it installs 'puppet regime' in Ukraine

The United States has briefed India on Russian military "build-up" on Ukraine's border even as the situation in eastern Europe remains on the brink.

In a telephonic conversation with India's foreign secretary Harsh Shringla on Wednesday, US deputy secretary of state Wendy Sherman spoke on a number of issues "including Russia’s concerning military build-up on Ukraine’s borders and regional issues" said a state department readout.

During the talks, both sides discussed a wide range of issues such as the Indo-Pacific&nbsp;situation, UNSC cooperation and the Iran-P5+1 negotiations that have been going on.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
FS <a href="https://twitter.com/harshvshringla?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@harshvshringla</a> had a wide ranging telecon today with US <a href="https://twitter.com/DeputySecState?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@DeputySecState</a> Wendy Sherman. 
 
Inter alia reviewed upcoming bilateral engagements and the COVID pandemic, including supply of vaccines, and exchanged views on Indo-Pacific, Middle East, UNSC, India’s neighborhood, etc.
— Arindam Bagchi (@MEAIndia) <a href="https://twitter.com/MEAIndia/status/1483854693575323648?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 19, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The focus was also on dealing with the ongoing pandemic&nbsp;as they agreed to remain closely coordinated on "shared goals and priorities and reiterated the importance of a strong US-India partnership to mitigate the COVID-19 Omicron variant’s rapid advance."

The call from Washington comes even as US secretary of State Blinken is in the Ukrainian capital Kyiv to reassure the country against any possible Russian action. Blinken is set to meet Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov on Friday as both Washington abd&nbsp;Moscow hope to find a "diplomatic off-ramp", state department officials have said.

Russian deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov had a meeting with the Indian envoy to Russia Pavan Kapoor on Monday.

During the meeting&nbsp;they "exchanged views and&nbsp;assessments on the events in Geneva, Brussels and&nbsp;Vienna on security guarantees for Russia" according to a Russian readout.

Last week, Geneva saw eight-hour&nbsp;long US-Russia talks led by Ryabkov and&nbsp;Sherman to diffuse the crisis and understand each other's concerns. Moscow has been strongly opposing Ukraine's membership of NATO alliance which it sees as a&nbsp;threat to its security.

For India, both US and&nbsp;Russia are close partners. Russian President Putin was in Delhi last month for the annual summit&nbsp;while PM Modi was in Washington last year for a bilateral with US President Biden and&nbsp;participation at the Quad summit.

The United States has briefed India on Russian military "build-up" on Ukraine's border even as the situation in eastern Europe remains on the brink. In a telephonic conversation with India's foreign secretary Harsh Shringla on Wednesday, US deputy secretary of state Wendy Sherman spoke on a number of issues "including Russia’s concerning military build-up on Ukraine’s borders and regional issues" said a state department readout.

The United States has briefed India on Russian military "build-up" on Ukraine's border even as the situation in eastern Europe remains on the brink. In a telephonic conversation with India's foreign secretary Harsh Shringla on Wednesday, US deputy secretary of state Wendy Sherman spoke on a number of issues "including Russia’s concerning military build-up on Ukraine’s borders and regional issues" said a state department readout. During the talks, both sides discussed a wide range of issues such as the Indo-Pacific situation, UNSC cooperation and the Iran-P5+1 negotiations that have been going on. FS @harshvshringla had a wide ranging telecon today with US @DeputySecState Wendy Sherman. Inter alia reviewed upcoming bilateral engagements and the COVID pandemic, including supply of vaccines, and exchanged views on Indo-Pacific, Middle East, UNSC, India’s neighborhood, etc. — Arindam Bagchi (@MEAIndia) January 19, 2022 × The focus was also on dealing with the ongoing pandemic as they agreed to remain closely coordinated on "shared goals and priorities and reiterated the importance of a strong US-India partnership to mitigate the COVID-19 Omicron variant’s rapid advance." The call from Washington comes even as US secretary of State Blinken is in the Ukrainian capital Kyiv to reassure the country against any possible Russian action. Blinken is set to meet Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov on Friday as both Washington abd Moscow hope to find a "diplomatic off-ramp", state department officials have said. Russian deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov had a meeting with the Indian envoy to Russia Pavan Kapoor on Monday. During the meeting they "exchanged views and assessments on the events in Geneva, Brussels and Vienna on security guarantees for Russia" according to a Russian readout. Last week, Geneva saw eight-hour long US-Russia talks led by Ryabkov and Sherman to diffuse the crisis and understand each other's concerns. Moscow has been strongly opposing Ukraine's membership of NATO alliance which it sees as a threat to its security. For India, both US and Russia are close partners. Russian President Putin was in Delhi last month for the annual summit while PM Modi was in Washington last year for a bilateral with US President Biden and participation at the Quad summit.

US briefs India on Russia's military 'build-up' on Ukraine border

People around the world is is Russia getting prepared for a war with Ukraine. Now there's been a massive true build up along Ukraine's bottom and there's also been a new missile test and the u.s Russia tensions remain at an all-time high.

Russian forces train near Ukraine border

Sphere mounts over a major military escalation in Ukraine Kiev's top security official has now claimed that Russian president Vladimir Putin is pretty much bent on destroying the country.

Kiev Security Supremo Warns Russia

Civil war that is presently underway in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian prime minister Abby Ahmed has said that the federal troops will not advance further in the war-torn region of Tigre to avoid an escalation of the conflict.

Tigray Conflict Has Displaced Millions

The Russian president Vladimir Putin's apparent obsession with Ukraine has brought in a new cold war-like situation. Russia's increasing military buildup along the Ukrainian border and also the latter's repeated warning of a possible retaliation have triggered fears of possible full-fledged conflict.

Vladimir Putin's Ukraine obsession escalates conflict