casino game quest 2
NoneTeachers, parents have differing reactions to Santa Fe school phone policy
The first reactions to Sonic the Hedgehog 3 are in, and it sounds like the third entry in the series ups the ante for the blue blur in a major way. Sonic the Hedgehog 3 is directed by Jeff Fowler and stars Ben Schwartz as the titular hedgehog. The cast also features Colleen O'Shaughnessey as Tails, Idris Elba as Knuckles, and Keanu Reeves as Shadow. Actors appearing in live action roles include James Marsden as Tom Wachowski, Tika Sumpter as Maddie Wachowski, and Jim Carrey in a dual role as both Dr. Robotnik and his grandfather Gerald. "sonic 3 rules. it’s the closest Hollywood has made to a dragon ball movie. there was plenty for a longtime fan to clap and cheer for, which i did in a mostly empty theater, and outside of a few expected cringe jokes, this was a hilarious story," Washington Post's Gene Park writes on Twitter. "#SonicMovie3 begs the question: What if Ben Schwartz made me cry as a blue guy who has to go fast? Just as action-packed and as fun as the first two films, Sonic the Hedgehog 3 really ups the anti and reminds us why we love these movies. Go TEAM SONIC!" says Rachel Leishman of The Mary Sue. "It’s not often that each movie gets better in a trilogy, but #SonicMovie3 is the best of the bunch. There’s action-packed goofiness a plenty thanks to Jim Carrey pulling double duty, but what I didn’t expect was a surprisingly moving performance from Keanu Reeves and a third act that might make Sonic fans a little weepy-eyed. Also - there are two big post credits scenes so AVOID SPOILERS. It’s clear [Fowler] and crew have a great affinity for the Blue Blur and he’s not going anywhere anytime soon," according to Chris Killian of ComicBook.com. "I’ve seen Sonic 3 and I was surprised that my favorite emotional arc was actually with Dr. Robotnik (!!) The cast is as wonderful and goofy as ever and I teared up when I heard [SPOILER]. Also, you are NOT prepared for the mid-credits scene," Jeffrey Vega of IGN says. "Surprising no one... #SonicMovie3 is the best Sonic yet! It's also the best video game adaptation to date. With electrifying action, truly touching moments, and Jim Carrey doing what he does best, Sonic 3 marks a wonderfully chaotic end to the year. What an utter blast!" says James Lister of Get Your Comic On. Sonic the Hedgehog 3 hits theaters on December 20 in the US and December 21 in the UK. For now, check out our guides to all the movie release dates and upcoming video game movies you need to know about.Stock market today: Wall Street slips to a rare back-to-back lossDanaher Announces Quarterly Dividend
NoneWhile Cincinnati Bengals quarterback Joe Burrow was playing the "Monday Night Football" game against the Dallas Cowboys in Texas, his Anderson Township, Ohio, home was broken into, officials said Tuesday. The Hamilton County Sheriff's Office confirmed to ABC News that Burrow's house was burglarized shortly after 8 p.m. local time. One of Burrow's employees told deputies on the scene that when she arrived at his home she found a bedroom window broken and the room ransacked. Deputies cleared the house and the employee was able to give a general list of what was missing, according to officials. An investigation into the incident is ongoing and deputies have been in contact with Burrow's neighbors to see if any security footage was obtained of the burglary. The break-in at Burrow's Cincinnati residence follows a spate of incidents at fellow prominent NFL players' homes. However, a sheriff's department spokesperson said, at this time, there is no indication that this attempted robbery was part of the larger string of athlete robberies. Last month, the NFL issued a security alert to teams' security directors and the players' union warning of "organized and skilled criminals" that are increasingly targeting the homes of professional athletes. The NFL and other professional sports leagues received a briefing from the FBI, a source told ABC News at the time. The homes of Chiefs stars Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce were burglarized on consecutive days in October in the Kansas City area, according to the NFL memo. Additionally, the Minnesota home of former Vikings defensive tackle Linval Joseph, who now plays for the Dallas Cowboys, was targeted in a burglary in November, the NFL said. Law enforcement officials noted these groups target the homes on days the athletes have games. Players were told to take precautions and implement home security measures to reduce the risk of being targeted. Some of the burglary groups have conducted extensive surveillance on targets, including attempted home deliveries and posing as grounds maintenance or joggers in the neighborhood. Burglars have entered through side doors, via balconies or through second-floor windows. They've targeted homes in secluded areas and focused on master bedrooms and closet areas. Players were warned to avoid updating any social media with check-ins or daily activities until the end of the day and discouraged from posting expensive items on social media. ABC News' Jack Date and Darren Reynolds contributed to this report.
Want to give the worst gift ever? These right-wingers are now on CameoMagic travel to Charlotte after learning more about their gritty groupThe Ministry of Foreign Affairs has recalled Dickson Ogwang Okul, the Foreign Service Officer Grade II from his posting at the Ugandan Mission in South Sudan. He has been recalled back to the Ministry’s Headquarters with immediate effect. “You should therefore hand over office by Section F-d of the Uganda Public Service Standing Orders (2021) and report to the undersigned for further guidance.” the recall letter reads in part. The letter dated November 20th was written by Bagire Vincent Waiswa, the Permanent Secretary Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The recall of Okul follows an incident on Sunday where he drew his pistol at Lango clan leaders during a cultural meeting at Lango Cultural Centre in Lira during preparations for the upcoming Ateker Festival in Soroti, scheduled for this month. Ogwang Okul’s presence at the meeting was met with disapproval by other clan heads due to his involvement in the ongoing leadership dispute over the Won-Nyaci (Paramount Chief) position. Despite being asked to leave, Ogwang Okul maintained that he had received a formal invitation to attend and saw no reason to exit. Earlier, Bagire had written to Ogwang requesting him to show cause as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him for breaching the provisions of the Uganda Public Service Standing Orders. He also raised concerns as to why Ogwang Okul was in the country at the time when he was not permitted to. “Whereas permission was granted to you to travel to Uganda from 23rd February 2024 and to South Africa from 4th to 9th March 2024, it has been established that no permission has been granted to you to leave your duty station in Port Sudan for the date in question.” He then requested the Head of Mission in Port Sudan to provide him with details relating to the dates of Ogwang ‘s absence from the station to enable the Ministry to take further appropriate decisions. Adding that payment of his allowance should be halted. But Ogwang Okul blamed political interference on cultural matters as a reason for his recall. “Please understand that navigating these intricate political and cultural landscapes is never easy. Who told you it would be easy? This is a testament to the challenges we face in our pursuit of a better future for Lango.” he wrote on his WhatsApp forum arguing the people of Lango to remain calm. “Let us remain firm, focused, and determined in our shared vision. I urge you to refrain from speculation and divisive actions because the truth will eventually prevail, and I am confident that transparency will shed light on this matter. Let the truth set us free.” This is the second time Ogwang is being recalled from foreign duty. In 2020, the State Department of the United States asked him to return home after he allegedly beat up his wife at the time when he served as the Deputy Ambassador to the United States. He was asked to leave Washington DC after he reportedly invoked diplomatic immunity to avoid prosecution. **** URN
A bankruptcy judge on Monday ordered a new hearing in conspiracy theorist Alex Jones' effort to stop the satirical news outlet The Onion from buying Infowars and turning it into a parody. Jones alleges fraud and collusion marred the bankruptcy auction in which The Onion was named the winning bidder on Nov. 14 over a company affiliated with him. U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez had been scheduled to hear an emergency motion to disqualify The Onion's bid, but decided to put it off until either Dec. 9 or Dec. 17. That's also when the judge will hear arguments on a request to approve the sale of Infowars to The Onion. Lopez said similar arguments are being made in both requests. Lopez could ultimately allow The Onion to move forward with its purchase, order a new auction or name the other bidder as the winner. At stake is whether Jones gets to stay at Infowars’ studio in Austin, Texas, under a new owner friendly to him, or whether he gets kicked out by The Onion. The other bidder, First United American Companies, runs a website in Jones’ name that sells nutritional supplements. Regardless, Jones has set up a new studio, websites and social media accounts that would allow him to keep airing his show. And his personal account with 3.3 million followers on the social platform X was not part of the sale, although Lopez will be deciding whether it should be included in the liquidation and sold off later. In a new court filing Monday, lawyers for X objected to any sale of the accounts of both Jones and Infowars, saying X is the owner of the accounts and that it has not given consent for them to be sold or transferred. Jones has praised X owner Elon Musk on his show and suggested that Musk should buy Infowars. Musk has not responded publicly to that suggestion and was not among the bidders. Jones' bankruptcy and the liquidation of his assets came about after he was ordered to pay nearly $1.5 billion to relatives of victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. Jones was found liable for defamation and emotional distress damages in lawsuits in Connecticut and Texas for repeatedly calling the 2012 shooting that killed 20 first graders and six educators a hoax staged by actors to increase gun control. Proceeds from the liquidation are to go to Jones' creditors, including the Sandy Hook families who sued him. Jones alleges The Onion’s bid was the result of fraud and collusion involving many of those families, the humor site and a court-appointed trustee who is overseeing the liquidation. First United American Companies submitted a $3.5 million sealed bid, while The Onion offered $1.75 million in cash. But The Onion's bid also included a pledge by Sandy Hook families to forgo some or all of the auction proceeds due to them to give other creditors a total of $100,000 more than they would receive under other bids. The trustee, Christopher Murray, said that made The Onion's proposal better for creditors and he named it the winning bid. He has denied any wrongdoing. Jones and First United American Companies claimed that the bid violated Lopez’s rules for the auction by including multiple entities and lacking a valid dollar amount. Jones also alleged Murray improperly canceled an expected round of live bidding and only selected from among the sealed bids that were submitted. Jones called the auction “rigged” and a “fraud” on his show, which airs on the Infowars website, radio stations and Jones' X account. He filed a counter lawsuit last week against Murray, The Onion's parent company and the Sandy Hook families in the bankruptcy court. In a court filing on Sunday, Murray called the allegations a “desperate attempt” to delay the sale of Infowars to The Onion and accused Jones, his lawyers and attorneys for First United American Companies of a “vicious smear campaign lobbing patently false accusations.” He also alleges Jones collaborated with First United American Companies to try to buy Infowars. Lopez’s September order on the auction procedures made a live bidding round optional. And it gave broad authority to Murray to conduct the sale, including the power to reject any bid, no matter how high, that was “contrary to the best interests” of Jones, his company and their creditors. But at a Nov. 14 hearing Lopez said he was concerned about the process and transparency. “We’re all going to an evidentiary hearing and I’m going to figure out exactly what happened,” he said. “No one should feel comfortable with the results of this auction.” The assets of Infowars' parent company, Free Speech Systems, that were up for sale included the Austin studio, Infowars' video archive, video production equipment, product trademarks, and Infowars' websites and social media accounts. Jones is appealing the $1.5 billion in judgments citing free speech rights, but has acknowledged that the school shooting happened . Jones has brought in millions of dollars a year in revenue by hawking nutritional supplements, clothing, survival gear and other merchandise, including more than $22 million this year through Sept. 30 from his Infowars Store website, according to court documents. Many of Jones’ personal assets, including real estate, guns and other personal belongings, also are being sold as part of the bankruptcy. Documents filed in court this year say Jones has about $9 million in personal assets, while Free Speech Systems has about $6 million in cash and more than $1 million worth of inventory. Dave Collins, The Associated Press
Chandigarh: Punjab water supply and sanitation minister Hardip Singh Mundian on Tuesday urged Union minister for jal shakti C R Patil to release its pending first instalment of Rs 161 crore for 2024-25 financial year under the Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM). He was assured of the amount being released on priority. Participating in a meeting to review Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) scheme by Patil, Mundian said it was imperative to ensure regular supply of drinking water. He said Punjab made progress in attaining ODF status in rural areas and also formulated a faecal sludge management (FSM) policy. tnn We also published the following articles recently Haveri district achieves 3rd place for Jal Jeevan Mission scheme implementation Haveri district has secured third place in Karnataka for implementing the Jal Jeevan Mission, providing piped water to households. Dharwad and Gadag lead the state, while Kolar lags significantly. Haveri has certified 303 of its 685 villages, achieving 44.2% coverage under the revised certification process requiring comprehensive video documentation from villagers confirming water supply. Jal board plans to provide over 95k new drinking water connections Guwahati Jal Board is opening applications for nearly 96,000 new domestic water connections in south-central Guwahati this December. This initiative, part of the JICA-assisted Guwahati Water Supply Project, aims to connect over 100,000 homes, adding to the 14,000+ connections already serving the area. Over 90 pc villages in Punjab, MP, UP, Bihar achieved ODF Plus status: Centre Several Indian states are making significant strides in rural sanitation. Punjab, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, and Bihar have achieved over 90% Open Defecation Free (ODF) Plus status, signifying improved waste management and sanitation practices. Madhya Pradesh leads with 99% ODF Plus villages. Union Minister C.R. Stay updated with the latest news on Times of India . Don't miss daily games like Crossword , Sudoku , and Mini Crossword .CP NewsAlert: Trump calls Florida meeting with Trudeau productive
David Muir shares rugged selfie from upstate home — and fans can't get enough
The discussions in the West about authorizing long-range missile strikes on Russia are profoundly dishonest and misleading. The political-media elites present deeply flawed arguments to support the conclusion that attacking Russia with these weapons doesn’t cross the line between proxy war and direct war. NATO may be successful in deluding itself, yet for Moscow there is no doubt that this is an act of war. The argument that Ukraine has the right to defend itself as a justification for NATO to authorize long-range strikes into Russia is very manipulative. The public is pulled in with a very reasonable premise, based on the universal acceptance of the right to self-defense. Once people have accepted this, then it’s presented as a foregone conclusion that Ukraine should be supplied with long-range missiles to attack Russia. The extent of NATO’s involvement in the war, as the main issue, is subsequently eliminated entirely from the argument. The point of departure in an honest discussion should start with the right question: When is the line between proxy war and direct war crossed? These are US long-range missiles, their use is entirely dependent on American intelligence and targeting. They will be operated by US soldiers and guided by US satellites. Launching them from Ukraine does not make it any less of a direct American attack on Russia. Washington didn’t use these weapons against Russia for three years as it knew it would amount to a direct attack, yet now the media is attempting to sell the narrative of this merely being uncontroversial military aid to enable Ukraine to defend itself. The US and some of its NATO allies have decided to attack Russia directly, and they should be honest about this intention. Attempts to present it as merely giving military aid to Ukraine to defend itself constitute an irresponsible effort to shame any dissent and avoid a serious discussion about attacking the world’s largest nuclear power. It is imperative to place oneself in the shoes of opponents and ask how we would interpret a situation and what we would do if the situation were reversed. The US and NATO have invaded many countries over the years, so we do not need to delve too deep into our imagination to set up a hypothetical scenario. How would we have reacted if Moscow had sent long-range missiles, dependent on Russian intelligence and targeting, operated by Russian soldiers and guided by Russian satellites, to attack NATO countries under the guise of merely helping Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen of another country to defend itself? We are deluding ourselves if we pretend that this would not have been interpreted as a direct attack, and despite the great risks involved, we would be compelled to retaliate to restore our deterrent. President Putin warned in September 2024 that Russia would interpret this as a direct attack and the beginning of a NATO-Russia War, and Putin argued that Russia would respond accordingly. The clarity in his language makes it nearly impossible to walk back the commitment to strike back at NATO, which is a deliberate tactic in the game of chicken, as Russia cannot swirl away. Stories about thousands of North Korean soldiers fighting in Ukraine or Kursk are used to legitimize the attack on Russia. This is most likely NATO war propaganda as there would be some evidence if thousands of North Korean soldiers were fighting. The North Koreans allegedly training in Russia are likely intended as a deterrent in case NATO would go to war against Russia. However, even if North Koreans involve themselves in the fighting, it does not make NATO any less of a participant in the war by attacking Russia. The reluctance by Moscow in the past to sufficiently retaliate against NATO’s incremental escalations has been presented as evidence for the false conclusion that it wouldn’t dare respond. There is no doubt that Russia’s restraints have emboldened NATO. President Biden once argued that sending F-16s would result in a Third World War, such warnings now are denounced as ”Russian propaganda”. Russia’s failure to respond when the US crossed that line meant that the US could argue it did not amount to a direct attack. The rules of proxy war subsequently changed. Russia’s dilemma over the past three years has been to either respond at the risk of triggering a Third World War, or to gradually abandon its deterrent and embolden the US. With every NATO escalation, Russia is facing an ever-higher price for its restraint. Russia has been under pressure to set a final red line, and NATO attacking Russia directly is simply too dangerous to go unanswered. How will Russia respond? There are several more steps on the escalation ladder before pushing the nuclear button. Russia can intensify strikes on Ukrainian political targets and infrastructure, possibly introduce North Korean troops, strike NATO assets in the Black Sea and logistic centers in Poland or Romania, destroy satellites used for the attacks on Russia, or attack US/NATO military assets in other parts of the world under the guise of enabling other countries to defend themselves. Russia’s response will also depend on how these missiles are used. The New York Times has suggested that the use of these missiles would be limited and primarily used to assist Ukraine with the occupation of Kursk, which also makes the US an even more involved participant in the occupation of Russian territory. However, Russia must respond forcefully to any breach of its red lines to counter NATO’s incrementalism – salami tactics that aim to chop away at its deterrent. The purpose of such incrementalism is to avoid an excessive response from Russia. The US will predictably impose restrictions on how these weapons can be used as it engages in direct attacks on Russia, but gradually these restrictions will be removed. The extent of Russia’s response will depend on the extent to which these weapons are effective. The war is evidently being won by Russia, which is why Moscow is cautious about any escalations, as it only needs time. However, if these weapons would actually turn the tide of the war, then Russia would consider itself compelled to launch a powerful attack on NATO as Moscow considers this to be a war for its survival. NATO should therefore hope that these weapons are not effective, which undermines the reasoning for using them at all. The war has already been lost, and Washington previously admitted that these long-range missiles would not be a game changer. There are two reasons for escalating the war at this point, to further bleed Russia and to sabotage Trump’s objective to end the fighting. There is overwhelming evidence that the overarching objective in sabotaging all paths to peace and fighting the proxy war in Ukraine has been to weaken Russia as a strategic rival. Even Vladimir Zelensky recognized in March 2022 that some Western states wanted to use Ukraine as a proxy against Russia: ”There are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives.” Both Israeli and Turkish mediators have confirmed that the US and UK sabotaged the Istanbul peace agreement in order to pit Russia against the Ukrainians, while interviews with top American and British diplomats have revealed that the weakening of Russia and regime change in Moscow was the only acceptable outcome. The timing of Washington’s decision is also suspicious and appears to aim at sabotaging Trump’s massive mandate to end the proxy war. By comparison, Obama similarly threw a wrench into US-Russia relations in late 2016 as he was handing the White House over to Trump. The anti-Russian sanctions and expulsion of Russian diplomats were intended to sabotage Trump’s promise to get along with Russia. Biden appears to be following the same playbook by risking a Third World War to prevent peace from breaking out in Ukraine. Biden was too cognitively impaired to run for re-election, yet he is supposedly mentally fit enough to attack Russia as he prepares to leave the White House. The world today is more dangerous than at any other time in history. The US decision to attack the world’s largest nuclear power is a desperate effort to restore global primacy. What makes this situation even more dangerous is the absurd self-deception across the West that results in us sleepwalking towards nuclear war. The public should be presented with more honest arguments when making the case for risking a third world war and nuclear annihilation. This piece was first published on Glenn Diesen’s Substack and edited by the RT team.
None
The Trump Effect: Haitian Migrants Self-Deport from Springfield, OhioThe war in Ukraine is at a critical juncture. Kyiv has been given permission to use western-supplied Atacms and Storm Shadow missiles against targets inside Russia. It did so as soon as that permission was granted, with strikes against Russian military facilities in the Bryansk and Kursk regions. Moscow’s response to the strikes has been twofold. First, the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, approved changes to his country’s nuclear doctrine to lower the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons. It also launched an intermediate-range ballistic missile – Oreshnik , or Hazel Tree – at an arms factory in the Ukrainian city of Dnipro. This – so far carefully calibrated and choreographed – tit-for-tat indicates a further, gradual escalation of the war effort by both sides. It has been accompanied by a steady advance of Russian forces in eastern Ukraine and a continuation of the Kremlin’s efforts to cause maximum damage to Ukraine’s critical infrastructure. Both sides are acting in anticipation of Donald Trump’s inauguration in January, Trump has repeatedly committed himself to ending the war in Ukraine in 24 hours. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s European allies are struggling to maintain their unified front of support in anticipation of a US withdrawal of aid under the incoming Trump administration, as well as scepticism from the likes of Hungary’s Viktor Orbán. The war has taken a huge toll on Ukraine. Six million people fled the country and an additional four million people are internally displaced. The country is experiencing increasing levels of poverty and food insecurity and a bill for reconstruction of nearly US$500 billion (£396 billion) and counting. More than 30,000 Ukrainian servicemen were killed in the first two years of the war alone, with countless more wounded and missing. And a conservative estimate is that least 12,000 civilians have been killed and 30,000 injured. After 1,000 days , public disillusionment is becoming evident. Recent Gallup polls make for interesting reading: there is general agreement on the need for the war to end, but far less concord on how to end it . More than half of Ukrainians polled by Gallup (52%) agree that : “Ukraine should seek to negotiate an ending to the war as soon as possible”, while only 38% want the country to “continue fighting until it wins the war”. This is a remarkable shift compared to a year ago, when 63% wanted to continue fighting and 27% were in favour of negotiations. It’s an even starker shift in comparison to 2022 when support for a continuation of fighting stood at 73% and for negotiations at 22%. Importantly, more than half of those supporting negotiations are also open to “making some territorial concessions as a part of a peace deal to end the war”. This suggests that the odds for public support for a Trump-brokered deal among Ukrainians are improving. But this happens at a time when Ukrainians’ confidence in their government is declining and scepticism of its western partners is growing . In 2022, 60% of Ukrainians expressed trust in their government; one year later it was 49%, and in 2024 levels dropped to just 28%. By contrast, banks (92%) and the military (62%) still enjoy overwhelming public confidence. Looking for a way out As a sign of the shifting mood in Ukraine, the country’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, is talking more about an end to the war. He expressed confidence that Trump’s election would bring the war to an end more quickly and emphasised his determination to “do everything possible to end the war next year through talks”. Russian advances are steadily gathering in pace in eastern Ukraine. Institute for the Study of War But this doesn’t mean that Ukrainians are ready yet to settle on terms that Trump might propose and Putin would accept . On the contrary, there is little evidence that Ukraine is ready to give up on key elements of its peace and victory plans – most notably the aim of recovering all Russian-occupied territories and securing Nato membership as part of a package of credible security guarantees. Yet, realising that he needs to tread a fine line between his established vision of peace and victory and the growing pressure to search for an acceptable compromise, Zelensky has floated a third plan: the “ internal resilience plan ”. It’s a less ambitious strategy. The key points are stabilising the front lines and strengthening the country’s defence-industrial sector. If successful, this would create the foundations for keeping Ukraine in the fight against Russia and creating the domestic conditions for Ukraine to survive – at least until acceptable ceasefire terms are on the table. It sends a clear message that under Zelensky’s leadership, the maximum goals outlined above of regaining lost territory and Nato membership continue to guide his government’s policies in the long term. But it doesn’t rule out shorter-term compromises that may be necessary because of a diplomatic push by Trump, a worsening situation at the front, and weakening European resolve – or any combination of those. Playing for time It’s not clear how the two months before Trump’s inauguration will play out. But it is clear that peace negotiations with Russia with things as they stand would carry a greater risk of internal destabilisation in Ukraine. Zelensky’s potential realignment with those who favour negotiation could also create an opening for a serious political challenge from his predecessor, Petro Poroshenko. Poroshenko, who Zelensky replaced as president in 2019, has strongly supported a “no-surrender” stance as leader of the European Solidarity opposition in Ukraine’s parliament. He also runs the Poroshenko Foundation, which claims to have “provided assistance to more than 200 military units” in the form of weapons and equipment. Thus, the rational strategy for Zelensky is to buy time. Confronted by internal hawks and an uncertain and volatile external environment, the Ukrainian president is leaning into the opportunity created by the relaxation of western constraints on strikes against Russia and is preparing the country for more sacrifices. As far as it goes, this strategy makes sense in the short term, despite its inherent risks , including the prospect of savage reprisals from Putin. The challenge for Zelensky and Ukraine in the long term remains the same – how to manage a sustainable transition from war to peace in the face of US pressure, Russian demands and weakening European unity. Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU's Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London. Tetyana Malyarenko does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
