Listen on SoundCloud or via Patreon.

Book discussed:

Tolstoy’s Search for the Kingdom of God: Gender and Queer Anarchism by Javier Sethness Castro, Routledge 2025

Production by Chris Rywalt

We ask listeners to support us with a small monthly donation via Patreon or PayPal.

Composite image by CounterVortex from Ilya Efimovich Repin via Wikimedia Commons and Sasha Braulov via Instagram

Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, the international community imposed sanctions, and used international legal tools to counter the Russian aggression and support Ukraine. A year after the invasion, the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant against Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has yet to be taken into court custody.

Recently, rights groups have noted diminishing pressure on Russia from the international community, raising concerns about human rights protections and prospects for peace in Ukraine. Notably, US President Donald Trump briefly halted military aid to Ukraine in 2025, followed by a sharp reduction in funds provided for Ukraine in the 2026 budget compared to previous years. This comes amid an escalation of the conflict despite US-brokered peace talks, as 2025 was the deadliest year for civilians in Ukraine since 2022.

Amnesty International’s senior director for research and advocacy Erika Guevara-Rosas commented: “Despite the ongoing aggression, international resolve to oppose Russia’s crimes under international law and support its victims has come under increasing strain in recent months, particularly since the beginning of Donald Trump’s presidency. Commitments to justice and human rights are weakening as powerful actors grow emboldened to disregard international law and further erode the rules-based order.”

World leaders have warned that an erosion of the rules-based order continues to shift the international order into unchartered territory.

Despite drastic shifts in international attitude, many countries continue to support Ukraine. Canada recently unveiled a new set of sanctions against Russia, aimed at increasing economic costs to Russia and degrading its military capabilities. Additionally, EU members states have agreed to extend protection for Ukrainian refugees into 2027.

From JURIST, Feb. 24. Used with permission.

See our last reports on Russian war crimes, and the (still limited) sanctions.

Photo of Russian embassy in London: Kwh1050 via Wikimedia Commons

From The New Humanitarian, Feb. 13

Image: INPACT

After a trial held in absentia, the Moscow City Court on Dec. 12 sentenced Prosecutor Karim Khan and eight ICC judges under the Russian Criminal Code for “unlawfully prosecuting Russian citizens in The Hague,” and subsequently placed them on an international wanted list. Prosecutor Khan received a 15‑year prison term, with the others receiving sentences of between three and 15 years.

The experts stated that the ICC’s prosecution of Russian citizens, including President Vladimir Putin, concerns charges of war crimes “committed in the context of Russia’s war against Ukraine.” They emphasized that Article 48 of the Rome Statute grants functional immunity to prosecutors and judges “acting in exercise of their official functions,” and asserted that Russia’s move is an attempt to intimidate ICC officials:

The latest attack on ICC officials is part of a deliberate and calculated strategy which exposes the profound insecurity of a Government that fears accountability… Threats against the ICC promote a culture of impunity and send a dangerous signal, implying that States can use domestic jurisdictions to intimidate those tasked with investigating and prosecuting the most serious crimes under international law.

Noting that the trial was held in absentia, the experts called this a violation of due process and the right to a fair trial. They charged that the decision to try the officials in absentia was exemplary of Russia’s broader pattern of using in absentia criminal proceedings against dissenters.

The UN experts called on the Russian government to withdraw the warrants, annul the convictions, comply with international law and human rights obligations, and “end the abuse of criminal law against international judicial officials.”

From JURIST, Feb. 5. Used with permission.

See our last reports on Russian war crimes, the ICC case against Russia, and Great Power moves against the ICC.

Photo: Wikipedia

Listen on SoundCloud or via Patreon.

Production by Chris Rywalt

We ask listeners to support us at one of our three tiers via Patreon: Become a Basic Supporter for just $1.25 per weekly podcast ($5 per month), or a Special Supporter for $2.50 per podcast ($10 per month), or a Major Rant Enabler for $6.25 per podcast ($25 per month). We now have 61 paid subscribers. If you appreciate our work, please become Number 62!

Image: TruthSocial

The Secretary-General’s office stated: “These attacks have resulted in significant civilian casualties and deprived millions of Ukrainians of essential services, including electricity, heating and water at a time of acute humanitarian need… Attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure violate international humanitarian law. No matter where they occur, they are unacceptable, unjustifiable and must stop immediately.”

The Oreshnik strike near the western city of Lviv was part of a wave of overnight Russian missile and drone attacks against Ukrainian targets on Jan. 9. Ukrainian sources say that at least four were killed in the attacks and at least 25 injured. The attack knocked out electricity for hundreds of thousands and disrupted heating in the middle of winter.

This was the second time Russia used the experimental hypersonic Oreshnik missile over the course of the Ukraine war, following a strike on Dnipro in November 2024. Putin boasted after that strike that the missile travels at speeds of Mach 10 (2.5 to 3 kilometers per second), which cannot be intercepted by air defense systems. He further stated that “when used in a concentrated, massive strike—using several Oreshnik missiles simultaneously—the resulting impact is comparable in power to that of a nuclear weapon [without] nuclear contamination.”

The Russian strikes were in response to what Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov claimed was a “terrorist attack” targeting President Vladimir Putin’s residence in Novgorod on the night of Dec. 28. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy denied that any attack occurred at the residence.

From JURIST, Jan. 12. Used with permission. Internal links added.

See our last reports on Russian war crimes and nuclear threats in Ukraine.

Map: PCL

Listen on SoundCloud or via Patreon.

Production by Chris Rywalt

We ask listeners to support us at one of our three tiers via Patreon: Become a Basic Supporter for just $1.25 per weekly podcast ($5 per month), or a Special Supporter for $2.50 per podcast ($10 per month), or a Major Rant Enabler for $6.25 per podcast ($25 per month). We now have 61 paid subscribers. If you appreciate our work, please become Number 62!

Image mash-up by Chris Rywalt, with material from Tamara Wyndham  and CBC

In Sudan, the WHO reported that over 100 people, including 63 children, were killed Dec. 4 when drone strikes attributed to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) hit a kindergarten and nearby hospital in South Kordofan. Paramedics and responders were also struck as they tried to help the wounded. In Myanmar’s Rakhine state, a military airstrike on Dec. 11 destroyed the Mrauk-U general hospital, killing at least 31 people and wounding dozens more. It was the 67th attack on a healthcare facility in Myanmar this year, according to the WHO.

Attacks on healthcare facilities killed a record 3,600 people in 2024, mainly in Gaza, Ukraine, Lebanon, Myanmar and Sudan. This year is on course to surpass that toll. In Gaza alone, at least 917 people were killed by Israeli attacks on healthcare facilities between Oct. 7. 2023 and June 11, 2025.

From The New Humanitarian, Dec. 12. Slightly edited, internal links added.

Recent years have also seen attacks on healthcare facilities in Syria, South Sudan, Yemen, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka.

Photo: Myanmar Now

Listen on SoundCloud or via Patreon.

Production by Chris Rywalt

We ask listeners to support us at one of our three tiers via Patreon: Become a Basic Supporter for just $1 per weekly podcast ($5 per month), or a Special Supporter for $2 per podcast ($10 per month), or a Major Rant Enabler for $5 per podcast ($25 per month). We now have 60 paid subscribers. If you appreciate our work, please become Number 61!

Image: White House

The document invokes the legacy of the Monroe Doctrine, but pushes it further. It states that the US will block “non-Hemispheric competitors” from owning or controlling “strategically vital assets” in the Americas, including ports, energy facilities, and telecommunications networks. It describes the Western Hemisphere as the top regional priority, above Europe, the Middle East and Indo-Pacific, and ties that status to controlling migration, drug flows, and foreign influence before they can reach US territory.

This comes as the US has sent thousands of troops, an aircraft carrier, and additional warships to the southern Caribbean, in a campaign US officials frame as a push against drug trafficking. US aircraft have carried out multiple strikes on small boats that the administration labels cartel or “narco-terrorist” assets, sinking vessels, and killing dozens of people. Officials present these actions as security operations tied to a broader national strategy, not as traditional law-enforcement interdictions.

The Trump administration is framing these operations in the language of armed conflict. Officials routinely describe cartels as “narco-terrorist” organizations and suggest the president can use military force as necessary to defend the US from cartel-related threats. If operations against cartels are treated as part of a non-international armed conflict, then the law of armed conflict governs questions of targeting, detention, and accountability. If they remain below that threshold, international human rights law and peacetime law-enforcement standards apply, including stricter limits on the use of lethal force, especially against persons at sea who are not resisting.

The “Trump Corollary” also revives long-standing regional concerns about spheres of influence. Many Latin American governments and scholars have viewed the Monroe Doctrine as a policy that has historically served to justify US intervention, not a neutral principle of regional security. A strategy that openly promises to “reassert” US pre-eminence, condition aid and investment on unwinding Chinese-backed infrastructure projects, and “push out” foreign companies from key sectors, will likely rekindle debates over sovereignty and unequal power relations in the inter-American system.

There is also a broader tension concerning international law. The US formally supports the UN Charter’s ban on the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, and the principle of sovereign equality. A doctrine that treats the Western Hemisphere as a US security zone sits uneasily with those commitments. It also risks weakening US objections to similar arguments by others. If Washington insists that major powers keep their hands off Latin American ports and telecoms on strategic grounds, it may face hard questions when it opposes Russian claims over Ukraine or Chinese claims over Taiwan and nearby waters, similarly framed in “regional security” terms.

The National Security Strategy also signals a shift in how Washington views its traditional allies. The same document that elevates the Western Hemisphere warns that parts of Europe face “civilizational erasure,” and calls for “cultivating resistance” to some European policies on migration and speech. European officials have criticized that language as echoing far-right narratives. They have also linked it to concerns that US attention and resources are moving away from the Euro-Atlantic theater, even amid demands that Europe shoulder more of NATO’s conventional defense burden.

From JURIST, Dec. 7. Used with permission. Internal links added.

Photo: USS Gerald R. Ford. Credit: US Navy via Wikimedia Commons