President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia said on Wednesday that he expected to meet in person next week with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, setting up an encounter that could help the Kremlin expand its relationship with a country he called a “stable and reliable” partner.
In televised remarks at an economic conference in the far eastern Russian city of Vladivostok, Mr. Putin said he hoped to see Mr. Xi “soon,” at a gathering of Asian leaders in Uzbekistan on Sept. 15 and 16.
Chinese officials did not immediately confirm that Mr. Xi would travel to Uzbekistan for the meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, an eight-nation group that also includes India, Pakistan and four Central Asian countries. But Russia’s ambassador to China described the planned session as the leaders’ “first full-fledged summit during the pandemic.”
Mr. Putin’s remarks came at the outset of a meeting that included Li Zhanshu, the head of the Chinese legislature and the third-highest-ranking member of the Chinese Communist Party.
The severing of economic ties with Western countries after its invasion of Ukraine has pushed Russia into a speedy reorientation of its economy toward Asia, most of all China, making any meeting with Mr. Xi particularly important.
While Beijing has not declared support for the invasion, it has echoed Kremlin talking points in describing the United States as the “main instigator” of the conflict. And it has provided Russia with much-needed economic support, both as a supplier of everything from cars to smartphones as European and American companies pull out of Russia and as a buyer of energy exports that are no longer in demand in the West.
The economic conference on Wednesday included discussions about the construction of a proposed pipeline to China that would be fed by natural gas from Siberian fields that was previously intended for European countries.
Mr. Putin said in a question-and-answer session that Moscow and Beijing had agreed on the main parameters of the new pipeline, and that he planned a separate meeting in Uzbekistan with Mr. Xi and the president of Mongolia, the country through which the proposed pipeline would pass.
“Our Chinese friends are difficult negotiators,” Mr. Putin said, adding that Moscow and Beijing had agreed to pay for the Russian gas in their currencies. “However, they are stable and reliable partners and the market is colossal.”
Russia, for its part, has offered geopolitical backing to China, including in the escalating tensions around Taiwan. And the country hosted Chinese troops for military exercises this month in far eastern Russia.
An in-person meeting between Mr. Putin and Mr. Xi — who has not left China since the start of the coronavirus pandemic in 2020 — could offer further symbolism of a Chinese-Russian alliance opposing a Western-led world order.
“This summit promises to be interesting, because it will be the first full-fledged summit during the pandemic,” Russia’s ambassador to China, Andrei Denisov, was quoted as saying on Wednesday by the Russian state-run Tass news agency.
As his forces struggle in Ukraine and his economy strains under sanctions, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia struck a defiant tone on Wednesday, arguing that the West had failed in its “economic, financial and technological aggression” against Russia and that his country had only gained from the global furor over his invasion.
“We have not lost anything and will not lose anything,” Mr. Putin said at an economic conference in the far eastern Russian city of Vladivostok.
Mr. Putin’s statement was dismissive of the human losses Russia has faced in the grueling campaign since he launched an invasion in February. His own Defense Ministry has acknowledged hundreds of deaths, although that total has not been updated in months. Western estimates are far higher: The United States estimated last month that 80,000 Russian soldiers had been killed or wounded in the war.
Mr. Putin also said that he would meet next week with an increasingly important ally, President Xi Jinping of China, as the Russian leader tries to expand economic ties with Asia to counteract the effects of Western penalties. And he insisted that the invasion, now in its seventh month, had raised Moscow’s international stature and that a crackdown on dissent was cleansing Russia of “harmful” elements, including journalists who have left the country since the conflict began.
“Of course, a certain polarization is taking place — both in the world and within the country — but I believe that this will only be beneficial,” Mr. Putin said. “Because everything that is unnecessary, harmful and everything that prevents us from moving forward will be rejected.”
He also reasserted his interpretation of the war in Ukraine as the culmination of efforts to subvert an unjust world order led by the United States, saying that Western countries were “striving to maintain a former world order that is beneficial only to them.”
Mr. Putin’s remarks came as his forces face an increasingly difficult situation at the front lines in Ukraine, where they have been unable to capture a major town for more than two months. Ukraine is mounting a counteroffensive that its officials contend is showing initial signs of success.
“All of our actions aim to help people who live in Donbas,” Mr. Putin said, referring to the region of eastern Ukraine that his forces have sought to conquer, vowing to fulfill this “duty to the end.”
The Russian president sought to radiate confidence that the West’s efforts to isolate Moscow were doomed to fail. Participating in an onstage panel with the leader of Myanmar and the prime minister of Mongolia, and with the third-highest-ranking member of the Chinese Communist Party, he indicated that Russia could shift its trade flows toward Asia.
“No matter how much someone wants to isolate Russia, it is impossible to do,” Mr. Putin said. “You just need to look at the map.”
Mr. Putin said that Russia’s currency and financial markets had been stabilized, inflation had been tamed and unemployment had been kept to “record lows.” Yet his rosy pronouncements have been tempered by his own economic policymakers, who say that it will take years for Russia’s economy to rebound to prewar levels and that its growth will be hampered as long as Western sanctions are in place. Many analysts also predict further shocks as European countries press ahead with plans to sharply reduce purchases of Russian oil by the end of the year.
Mr. Putin used part of his speech to question a rare example of cooperation between Russia and Ukraine: a U.N.-brokered deal to allow the export of Ukrainian grain via the Black Sea.
He accused Western countries of “cheating” by diverting ships away from the world’s poorest countries, offering no evidence for that claim. Mr. Putin said that he would consult with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about amending the terms of the deal to limit the flow of grain to Western states.
U.S. officials called Mr. Putin’s comments misleading, saying that huge amounts of grain were reaching needy countries outside of Europe. Last week, a World Food Program ship carrying 23,300 metric tons of Ukrainian grain arrived in Djibouti, on the Horn of Africa, and a second ship carrying 37,000 metric tons departed for Yemen.
One senior U.S. official said Mr. Putin’s remarks could be read as the Russian leader’s latest effort to drive a wedge between Western countries and developing nations in the global south, potentially to create more pressure for an end to the fighting on terms favorable to Moscow.
Michael Crowley contributed reporting.
The United States on Wednesday accused Moscow of sending up to 1.6 million Ukrainians to Russia and subjecting them to a “filtration” process involving invasive security screening, interrogation, family separation and detention.
Thousands of children — including 1,800 in July — have undergone the filtration process, and some have been separated from their parents and placed up for adoption in Russia, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations said at a U.N. Security Council meeting on Wednesday, which was requested by the United States and Albania to discuss the forced displacement of Ukrainians.
Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the U.S. ambassador, told the Security Council that Moscow was transferring Ukrainians “to prepare for an attempted annexation” and “to provide a fraudulent veneer of legitimacy for the Russian occupation and eventual, purported annexation of even more Ukrainian territory.”
Ms. Thomas-Greenfield said Russia’s actions amounted to a war crime and a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which mandates the protection of civilians in conflict zones. She called on Russia to grant access to international observers to investigate the camps and detention facilities where Russia is holding Ukrainian civilians.
The meeting followed a report by Human Rights Watch that documented the forcible transfer of Ukrainians from Mariupol and the Kharkiv region to Russian territory or areas in Ukraine controlled by Russia. The report, which was released last week, said that Russia’s actions constituted war crimes.
“Forced transfers and the filtration process constitute and involve separate and distinct abuses against civilians, although many Ukrainian civilians experienced both,” the report said.
Russia’s U.N. ambassador, Vasily Nebenzya, denied the allegations, calling them disinformation and propaganda “unleashed by Ukraine and its Western backers.”
The Russian Ministry of Defense has framed the moving of Ukrainians as part of a humanitarian relief effort. Mr. Nebenzya said there was no legal definition of “filtration” and that the security screening of Ukrainians was “normal military procedure” similar to what migrants undergo at the southern border of the United States. He reminded the Council that the administration of former President Donald J. Trump had forcibly separated migrant children from their parents, and that the United States had held prisoners without trial for years at Guantánamo Bay.
Ilze Brands Kehris, assistant secretary general for human rights at the U.N., told the Council that her office had verified cases of the filtration process that resulted in “numerous human rights violations, including of the rights to liberty, security of person and privacy.”
The U.N.’s human rights agency has also documented a significant number of cases where Ukrainians were forced to relocate to Russia but that, once there, they had freedom of movement and that some had chosen to travel to other countries or return to Ukraine, Ms. Brands Kehris said.
Ferit Hoxha, Albania’s ambassador to the U.N., said the displacement camps were “another face of Russia’s brutality.”
“If you pay allegiance to the occupier, you are free; if you don’t, you are detained and may disappear,” he said.
Another Security Council meeting is scheduled for Thursday afternoon. Russia requested the meeting to discuss “real threats,” including the foreign sources providing military equipment to Ukraine.
Fighting in northeastern Ukraine this week suggests that Kyiv may be attempting to exploit the redeployment of Russian forces defending against a Ukrainian counteroffensive in the south as the sprawling conflict continues into its seventh month.
Ukraine launched an attack outside Kharkiv — the country’s second largest city — targeting the town of Balakliya, which is about 55 miles outside the city, according to Russian media reports and the Institute for the Study of War, a Washington research group. Ukrainian forces “likely drove Russian forces back” from the town on Tuesday and also likely captured the nearby village of Verbivka, the institute said.
In his nightly address on Wednesday, President Volodymyr Zelensky heralded “good news from the Kharkiv region,” though he said it was not the moment to name specific communities restored to Ukrainian control.
“Each success of our military in one direction or another changes the general situation along the entire front line in favor of Ukraine,” he said, adding that the more losses Russia’s military sustains, the better positioned Ukraine will be to push back on all fronts.
In its overnight report, the institute wrote that what appeared to be “opportunistic counterattacks” had allowed Ukraine to retake several settlements in the southern part of Kharkiv Province. The counterattacks were most likely “prompted and facilitated” by Russian redeployments to the south, the report said.
Reports of Russian troop deployments could not be independently verified.
Any push by Ukraine to reclaim ground on the front in the northeast could complicate Russia’s ability to distribute its forces in the conflict’s other main areas of fighting: the eastern Donbas region, made up of Luhansk and Donetsk Provinces, and Kherson, where Ukraine announced on Aug. 29 it had launched a counteroffensive to reclaim territory lost since the invasion began in February.
The counteroffensive was already posing a test to Russia’s ability to coordinate forces on multiple fronts, a British military intelligence report said on Wednesday.
Ukrainian efforts around Balakliya could have repercussions for Russian logistics in the area of Izium, a city about 40 miles southeast of Kharkiv, as well as in towns and villages along a jagged frontline between the two. Moscow has used Izium as a base for its broader attack on the Donbas region, where separatists backed by Moscow have fought Ukrainian forces since 2014.
President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia has prioritized capturing that region. In early July, Russian forces seized the last city in Luhansk, but since then their attempt to advance in neighboring Donetsk has slowed.
Ukraine repelled an attempt by Moscow to seize Kharkiv earlier this year, pushing Russian forces back to positions near the border which, at its closest point, is a mere 30 miles away. But Russian forces remain close enough to launch regular missile strikes, which continue to batter the area.
Russian forces sent shells slamming into the Nemyshlianskyi neighborhood of Kharkiv overnight, according to the city’s mayor, Ihor Terekhov, wrecking several cars and setting an industrial facility on fire.
A chimpanzee in Ukraine enjoyed about two hours of freedom after escaping from the Kharkiv Zoo earlier this week before she was coaxed into returning to the zoo atop a zookeeper’s bicycle.
The 10-year-old chimpanzee, Chichi, roamed through a park and the streets near the central city square in Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, before she was found unharmed by a primate keeper from the zoo.
Video of the episode shows the employee, Victoria Kozyreva, sitting with Chichi and unsuccessfully trying to persuade her to return to the zoo with members of the zoo’s staff. But later, when it started to rain, Chichi ran back to Ms. Kozyreva, who covered the animal in her own jacket before the two embraced.
Chichi was then wheeled back to the Kharkiv Zoo, perched on a zookeeper’s bicycle. Oleksiy Grigoriev, the zoo’s director, confirmed to the Ukrainian public broadcaster, Suspilne, that the chimpanzee had been returned safely to her enclosure.
How the animal escaped remained unclear.
Several videos of the efforts to corral Chichi were shared widely on social media, offering a Ukrainian city that has faced unrelenting bombardment by Russian forces a rare moment of levity.
Over the past six months, Kharkiv has endured a nearly constant stream of incoming artillery. Early in the war, Russian forces tried to surround and capture the city, but were eventually forced back by the Ukrainians.
Chichi, who a Zoo spokesman said was known for her warm and friendly nature, has also overcome great odds. On the first day of the Russian invasion, she was evacuated from Feldman Ecopark, an outdoor zoo in an area of northern Kharkiv that has been under constant threat since February.
According to the zoo spokesman, Vadym Vorotynskyi, all of the animals from Feldman Ecopark have been relocated, many of them to the Ukrainian cities of Poltava, Dnipro, Lviv and Odesa. But shelling during the evacuation effort killed around 100 animals, including two orangutans, a chimpanzee, two bison, a large number of big cats and countless birds.
The zoo’s owner, Oleksandr Feldman, has told reporters that at least six people who volunteered to help with the evacuation of the animals from Feldman Ecopark were killed.
But even after being moved, Chichi and the other animals at the Kharkiv Zoo remain in danger and susceptible to stress from the noise of air raid sirens and artillery fire, which remains a constant threat.
Senior Ukrainian officials said on Tuesday that three civilians had been killed by Russian rocket attacks outside Kharkiv. Separately, another rocket badly damaged a mostly vacant apartment building near the city center.
RIGA, Latvia — Alarmed that their eastern borders with Russia and Belarus have become a popular channel for Russian tourists traveling to Europe while their country wages war in Ukraine, the three Baltic countries agreed on Wednesday to ban Russians from crossing into their countries by land, sealing one of the last relatively easy routes out of Russia.
The European Union banned flights to and from Russia soon after Moscow invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, with only Serbia, which is not a member of the bloc, still offering regular flights. The suspension of air traffic meant that the easiest and cheapest option for many Russian tourists was to travel by land to Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Finland to catch flights to holiday destinations.
In a statement to The New York Times, Ingrida Simonyte, the prime minister of Lithuania, said that Russians, including those with valid visas, had “no reason to go to beaches and shopping here when Putin is killing the people of Ukraine.” She added: “We have been, are and will be attentive to people who are threatened for their activities or political position in Russia. But I want to stress that an E.U. visa is not an automatic right to cross the E.U. border.”
In a confidential report, the European Union’s border service, Frontex, recorded that more than 928,000 Russians had entered Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Finland in the six-month period after the start of the war.
Under pressure from Ukraine and countries in Eastern and Central Europe with bitter memories of past Russian aggression, European foreign ministers last week agreed to suspend a 2007 agreement with Moscow that makes it easier for Russians to get visas, but they balked at imposing a ban on all Russian tourists.
France and Germany opposed such a ban as a form of collective punishment that would only feed the Russian government’s narrative about what it characterizes as a defensive war against Western encroachment.
The Baltic States, which are among Ukraine’s most robust supporters in the European Union, have now decided to do this on their own, hoping that other members of the bloc will follow their lead. Finland has slashed the number of visas it issues to Russians but has not barred entry to those already holding valid visas, insisting that the European Union must act as a whole if the flow of tourists from Russia is to be slowed.
Speaking by telephone on Wednesday after a meeting of Baltic and Nordic foreign ministers, the Latvian foreign minister, Edgars Rinkevics, said that Latvia and its two fellow Baltic states, all of which had previously imposed their own restrictions, had decided they needed to act in a “coordinated manner” to close loopholes and stanch the flow of Russians traveling through their territory. The restrictions on Russian travelers, which the ministers said was necessary for national security as well as for moral reasons, should come into force within 10 days following approval by national authorities in each Baltic state, Mr. Rinkevics said.
Some exceptions will be made, he said, for truck drivers, humanitarian cases and Russians fleeing persecution, but vacationers and other Russians holding valid visas to the European bloc’s border-free Schengen zone will not be allowed in. The 26 countries in this zone usually allow free travel without border checks and honor visas issued by one another, but they can impose restrictions on national security grounds.
Banning Russians tourists, Mr. Rinkevics said, would keep out Russians who “just want to cross our borders to take a flight to Barcelona” or other sunny holiday destinations.
Tomas Dapkus contributed reporting.
BRUSSELS — With Russia’s invasion of Ukraine triggering a devastating energy crisis in Europe, the European Commission said on Wednesday that it would ask countries to approve a broad cap on the price of Russian gas. It is also proposing measures like mandatory cuts in electricity use, a tax on oil and gas companies, and a tax on the price of electricity generated by renewables.
The moves, which were outlined by the Commission’s president, Ursula von der Leyen, set the stage for a period of intensive and urgent debate in the European Union to quickly tackle the unprecedented energy crisis engulfing the region as Russia cuts its supply of natural gas to many E.U. member states, sending the gas and its linked electricity markets into a sharp spiral.
Russia has turned the gas tap on and off to punish European countries, primarily Germany, for supporting Ukraine, blaming the widespread disruptions on technical problems and maintenance.
E.U. energy ministers will meet on Friday in Brussels to debate the bloc’s proposals. European governments from Germany to Greece are burning through billions of euros a month to subsidize consumers’ and businesses’ electricity bills, which are in some cases five times as high as last year.
Managing electricity prices is not only an economic and social goal, but also a political imperative in Europe. With memories of the “yellow vest” protests in France over energy prices still raw, and new movements bubbling up to denounce rises in the cost of living and, in some cases, continued support for Ukraine against Russia’s invasion, European politicians have little choice but to take unorthodox and expensive measures to placate outraged consumers.
“We are facing an extraordinary situation because Russia is an unreliable supplier and is manipulating our energy markets,” Ms. von der Leyen said in a statement on Wednesday.
She added that the bloc’s natural gas storage facilities were already 82 percent full and that Russian gas imports had dwindled from 40 percent of the bloc’s total to a mere 9 percent. Thirteen of the European Union’s 27 members are facing partial or total Russian gas shutdowns, with the biggest effect being felt in Germany, the bloc’s biggest economy and the most reliant by far on Russian gas.
Other European countries have also been highly dependent on Russia for their gas, but gas represents a less crucial part of their energy mix, making them a little less vulnerable to Moscow’s shutdowns.
President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia was defiant in the face of the price cap threat, calling it another example of “stupidity.”
“All administrative restrictions in global trade only lead to imbalances and higher prices,” he said on Wednesday at an economic news conference in the Russian far-eastern city of Vladivostok.
In her speech on Wednesday, Ms. von der Leyen said governments needed to intervene urgently in the gas and electricity markets — a concept that most E.U. countries agree on, although there are disagreements over how to best do that.
“We are confronted with astronomic electricity prices for households and companies and with enormous market volatility,” she said.
In July, the Commission secured support for voluntary cuts in energy use of 15 percent by next summer; on Wednesday, Ms. von der Leyen said she would propose mandatory cuts in electricity use during peak hours.
Because the European electricity market links the price of electricity to the price of the most expensive fuel used to generate it — in the current moment, gas — Ms. von der Leyen also said she would ask E.U. countries to effectively tax companies that generate electricity from non-gas sources.
Following a model already in place in Greece, Ms. von der Leyen said governments should use these funds to “support vulnerable people and companies to adapt.”
She also suggested that oil and gas companies, which are making huge profits, should pay a “solidarity contribution” and that governments should be able to subsidize national utility companies that are facing large input costs to continue producing electricity.
Ivan Nechepurenko contributed reporting.
Since fighting broke out in Ukraine nearly seven months ago, Russia and Europe have been waging an economic war over energy, one that could have dire consequences for millions of households and businesses across the continent.
Last year, nearly 40 percent of the natural gas used to heat homes and power businesses throughout the European Union came from Russia, one of the continent’s largest and most important trading partners for energy.
Now barely half that amount enters Europe, government statistics show, stoking fears of shortages this winter.
As part of a wide-ranging effort to cripple Russia’s economy, which is largely propelled by the sale of fossil fuels, the European Union has imposed huge sanctions and has vowed to eventually stop buying Russian gas. The European Commission said on Wednesday that it would also ask countries to approve a broad cap on the price of Russia’s gas.
But with Europe still dependent on Russia in the meantime, Moscow has retaliated by severely restricting the flow of energy to Europe, forcing governments to try to find alternatives.
President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia “is using energy as a weapon by cutting supply and manipulating our energy markets,” Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, wrote on Twitter.
This battle has proved costly for both sides.
Alternative buyers of Russia’s oil and gas, including China and India, are taking advantage of the situation and pushing for steep discounts. That is limiting the revenue that Moscow needs to power its economy, as well as to build pipelines and ports to supply energy to Asia more regularly.
European governments are paying high prices to stock up on the fuel, asking citizens and companies to save energy and unveiling sweeping emergency packages to cap energy bills and bail out struggling businesses.
Even countries that don’t import Russian gas are suffering, because electricity prices are closely linked to gas. The benchmark wholesale price of natural gas in Europe, which has been incredibly volatile since the war in Ukraine began, is roughly four times what it was a year ago.
The average European household is facing a monthly energy bill of 500 euros ($494) next year, triple the amount in 2021, according to estimates by analysts at Goldman Sachs. Applied to all energy users, that implies a €2 trillion increase in spending on heat and electricity.
The squeeze is particularly acute in Germany, Europe’s largest economy, which relies on Russia as its biggest supplier of gas. The bulk of it flows through Nord Stream 1, a 760-mile passageway that connects the two countries via the Baltic Sea.
Since the war, the Russian-controlled operator of the pipeline, Gazprom, has twice reduced the amount of gas it sends to Germany and twice shut the pipeline down for maintenance. After the most recent shutdown last week, Gazprom postponed a planned restart, citing faulty equipment, and provided no timeline for reopening, with officials in the Kremlin blaming sanctions for delaying repairs.
Critics suggested that last week’s move was a cynical response by Russia after finance ministers for the Group of 7 countries said they had agreed to impose a price cap mechanism on Russian oil in a bid to choke off some of the revenue Moscow still generates from Europe.
The indefinite shutdown nonetheless raised fears that it could become permanent. A complete cutoff from Russian gas would push Europeans’ energy bills even higher and hit the region’s economy even harder, with experts projecting a potentially deep recession in the most exposed countries. A shutdown would subtract nearly 3 percent from Germany’s economy next year, economists at the International Monetary Fund have estimated.
“In our view, the market continues to underestimate the depth, the breadth and the structural repercussions of the crisis,” the Goldman Sachs analysts wrote. “We believe these will be even deeper than the 1970s oil crisis.”
BRUSSELS — Polling conducted in 22 countries across the globe shows a wide divergence in popular support for Ukraine in its battle against a Russian invasion, highlighting one of the challenges the United States and its NATO allies face as they try to convince the global South of the importance of the war.
According to the polling of more than 21,400 people — more than two-thirds of whom live in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East — 56 percent of respondents in India, 54 percent in Nigeria and 49 percent in South Africa agree that Russia is “justified in wanting to have greater influence over its neighbor Ukraine.”
By contrast, 78 percent in Britain and 58 percent in both France and the United States disagree. In Germany, however, only 53 percent disagree.
Perhaps most striking, only 22 percent of respondents in the United States listed Ukraine as a Top 3 global issue, despite enormous American financial and military aid for Kyiv. More respondents in Kenya than Germany ranked the invasion as a top global challenge (37 percent versus 33 percent), and the figures in France and South Africa were similar, at 29 percent.
The United States and its allies have portrayed the war as a battle for international law against unprovoked aggression against a sovereign state. But much of the world, including China, India and large parts of Africa and Latin America, either support Russia or more commonly see the war as a superpower, U.S.-Russia conflict that they want to avoid.
The polling was done between July 22 and Aug. 15 for the Open Society Foundations by YouGov, Datapraxis and two local providers in Moldova and Ukraine. The margin of error for the polling is not published and would vary slightly among different countries, though it is about plus or minus 3 percent, the pollsters said. The findings are published in a report, “Fault Lines: Global Perspectives on a World in Crisis.”
While Russia’s invasion was found to be the second-highest concern globally, after climate change, that perception was particularly pronounced in Eastern European and Group of 7 countries, with the notable exception of the United States. Fifty percent of respondents in Japan included Ukraine as a Top 3 issue, 45 percent in Poland and 39 percent in Britain. That view dropped to 21 percent in Nigeria and India, and less than 20 percent in Colombia, Egypt, Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
The poll also showed widespread fear that the conflict could lead to a nuclear war, with 62 percent sharing that view, while 65 percent agree that Russia is a threat to world security. But majorities in each of the 22 countries want their governments to encourage a peace deal so the world can focus on other issues and needs.
BRUSSELS — Even as Russia’s war on Ukraine grinds on with no end in sight, Ukraine’s allies are facing complicated questions about the country’s reconstruction.
Who will pay for what, and who should control the process and funds? What kind of external oversight of the money should be required and what changes must Ukraine make?
An international conference on reconstruction is scheduled for next month in Berlin to grapple with those issues, and also determine whether reconstruction should begin before a peace settlement. There is also the vexed question of what kind of security guarantees should be offered to encourage private investment in the rebuilding.
To that end, the German government has asked a research institution it helps finance, the Washington-based German Marshall Fund, to come up with proposals for donor countries. Their report was provided to The New York Times and is already being discussed among donor countries as “a private note to stakeholders.”
Among the key recommendations are that the Group of 7 industrialized nations appoint a Ukraine coordinator to oversee reconstruction, ideally an American with global stature; that existing institutions be used for the project to ensure timeliness; and that different multilateral financial institutions should be used, to limit the influence of Russian or Chinese board members.
MOSCOW — On a recent evening in Red Square, a corps of elite paratroopers dressed in camouflage performed a battle-like dance with pyrotechnics. An Egyptian performer dressed as a pharaoh rode back and forth in a chariot wielding an ankh, the ancient Egyptian symbol of life, as a band played “Katyusha,” a Soviet-era patriotic war song.
Nataliya Nikonova, 44, was one of thousands of spectators cheering from the bleachers at a festival celebrating the militaries of Russia and friendly nations including Belarus, India and Venezuela.
“I was so thrilled that I just about lost my voice!” she said.
Russia’s army is now waging a slow-moving war that has left tens of thousands dead and contributed to global inflation and a surge in energy prices.
But Ms. Nikonova said she hadn’t experienced many disruptions to her life in the past six months.
“Nothing has really changed,” she said. “Sure, the prices went up, but we can endure that.” She rushed off to listen to an encore of “Katyusha” from the Egyptian Military Symphonic Band.
Very little about day-to-day life seems to have changed in Moscow, where people have the financial resources to weather significant price increases, unlike much of the rest of the country. GUM, the luxury mall next to Red Square, is full of shoppers — though many Western stores like Prada, Gucci and Christian Dior are closed — and restaurants and theaters do thriving business. Moscow’s roads still teem with luxury cars like Lamborghinis and Porsches.