MOSCOW: The little-known professor suspected of being a link between Russia and the Donald Trump campaign made repeated visits to Russia in recent years, including participating in conferences at a Russian think tank favored by Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Joseph Mifsud, who has been identified as the unnamed London professor who offered to set up meetings with Russian officials who could provide “thousands of emails” with damaging information about Trump’s rival, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, is a vocal Putin backer with ties to several important institutions in Russia.
He has visited Russia at least once a year since 2014, most recently in September, online postings on Russian academic sites show, and has taken part in events at the Valdai Discussion Club favored by the Russian leader and lectured at Moscow State University.
In the US court document laying out the case against former Trump foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, Mifsud is not identified by name and is referred to only as a “London professor” who met repeatedly with Papadopoulos and offered to set up meetings with Russian officials who could provide dirt on Clinton. However, a comparison of court papers and Papadopoulos’ email correspondence obtained by The Associated Press confirm Mifsud is the professor.
Mifsud, who has not been accused of any wrongdoing, did not respond to phone calls and emails from the AP seeking comment. But he told The Telegraph newspaper that he is indeed the “London professor” in the case and says his conscience is clear.
Papadopoulos, 30, has pleaded guilty of lying to the FBI. He is not contesting the facts laid out in the court documents, calling them “true and accurate,” and is now cooperating with the FBI — and has been doing so for several months, raising the prospect that he has agreed to surreptitiously record conversations with people involved with the Russian government and the Trump campaign.
While Mifsud appears to have extensive ties to several important institutions in Russia, the Maltese national’s academic credentials in Britain are far hazier.
He holds a professorial teaching position in the politics department at the University of Stirling in Scotland, according to officials there who said he took up the post in May. However, he is not named on the university’s list of experts and the university press office refused to say how often he is on campus, where a reporter on the student newspaper said he does not even maintain an office.
“There is no evidence Professor Mifsud has even been to the university since joining the staff in May,” said Craig Munro, a reporter at the campus newspaper, Brignews. “He doesn’t have an office here and is based in London. We haven’t been able to find a single student who has met with Professor Mifsud or attended any lectures by him at Stirling.”
Prominent British academics also say they have had little or no contact with Mifsud.
“I’ve never heard of him,” said Robin Niblett, the veteran director of Chatham House, the prominent London think tank.
Nor has Niblett heard of the now-defunct London Academy of Diplomacy, where Mifsud is said to have served as “honorary director” before it closed, according to his biography, or the London Center of International Law Practice, where Mifsud is listed as director of international strategic development.
“He seems to be a classic case of someone floating around on the fringes of the academic world and the think-tanky world without landing anywhere,” Niblett said. “It would strike me that most of these positions are not paid, which raises questions. No doubt Russia cultivates certain academics. There’s no reason to assume he was consciously part of a disinformation operation, but he may have been unwittingly used for that purpose.”
According to the US court documents, Mifsud introduced Papadopoulos to a woman referred to as a “female Russian national,” whom he falsely presented as Putin’s niece and who he said could serve as a potential link to the Russian government.
There is evidence of Mifsud’s ties to several key Russian institutions.
He took part in events at the Putin-linked Valdai think tank in April 2016 that dealt with “What Russian Can Do to Bridge Saudi-Iranian Differences” and “Main Trends and Scenarios of the Global Energy Development.”
In 2012, Mifsud was instrumental in establishing a partnership between the now defunct London Academy of Diplomacy and the Faculty of Global Processes at the Moscow State University, according to the faculty’s website.
On behalf of the academy, Mifsud signed a wide-ranging cooperation agreement with the Moscow State University faculty in 2014 calling for shared research, student and teacher exchanges, the establishment of joint advanced degree programs, and a commitment to hold conferences together and to publish joint research.
Mifsud has also lectured at the Moscow university and frequently moderated its panels. A report on Mifsud’s 2014 visit on the faculty’s website featured a picture of him trying on a T-shirt and a baseball cap with the faculty’s symbols.
The next year, Mifsud joined dozens of people along with several Russian officials and prominent academics in signing a note congratulating the faculty on its 10th anniversary.
His most recent visit to Russia appears to have been in late September when he moderated panels at the faculty’s two-day Global Studies Conference.
He is also credited with helping Moscow State University set up an educational center in conjunction with Link Campus University, a private university based in Italy.
___
Katz reported from London. Associated Press writers Paul Kelbie in Stirling, Scotland, and Chad Day in Washington contributed to this report.
‘London professor’ in Trump case made many Russia trips
‘London professor’ in Trump case made many Russia trips
Delhi Chief Minister Kejriwal’s custody extended until April 1 in graft case
- Delhi CM Kejriwal was arrested in connection with corruption allegations related to city’s liquor policy
- Kejriwal’s Aam Aadmi Party says case is fabricated, politically motivated against him by Indian government
NEW DELHI: An Indian court extended the custody of opposition leader and Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal until April 1 on Thursday in a graft case related to the national capital territory’s liquor policy, local media said.
India’s financial crime-fighting agency arrested Kejriwal last week in connection with corruption allegations related to the city’s liquor policy and he was remanded to its custody until Thursday, weeks before India begins voting in general elections on April 19.
Kejriwal’s Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) says the case is fabricated and politically motivated. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government and his Bharatiya Janata Party deny political interference and say law enforcement agencies are doing their job.
All the main leaders of AAP were already imprisoned in the case before Kejriwal was arrested.
Terming his arrest a “political conspiracy,” Kejriwal, 55, told reporters outside court on Thursday that “the public will respond to this.”
Speaking in court later, he said the Enforcement Directorate (ED), which has arrested him, aims to crush AAP.
ED lawyers told the court that they needed Kejriwal in custody for another seven days as he was “deliberately not cooperating” and needed to be interrogated further.
Kejriwal’s arrest has sparked protests in the national capital and the nearby northern state of Punjab, which is also governed by AAP, over the last few days.
Dozens of AAP supporters were detained on Tuesday as they attempted to march to Modi’s residence to demand his release.
Some AAP workers protesting and distributing leaflets to commuters outside a busy metro station in central Delhi were also detained on Thursday.
“This is the time when we campaign (for elections), our leaders are being put in prison, arrested ... they (federal government) are stopping us from campaigning, (but) nobody can stop us from winning,” a protester told news agency ANI.
A joint rally of the ‘INDIA’ alliance, consisting of more than two dozen political parties including AAP, is planned in the capital on Sunday to protest against the arrest.
The issue has also drawn international attention with the US and Germany calling for a “fair” and “impartial” trial in the case, causing New Delhi to tell Washington and Berlin that India’s legal processes are based on an independent judiciary and that they should stay away from its internal affairs.
China says Philippine ‘provocations’ cause of South China Sea tensions
- ‘China will not allow the Philippines to do whatever it wants, and has responded in a reasonable and forceful manner’
- Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.: ‘We will not be cowed into silence, submission, or subservience
BEIJING/MANILA: China on Thursday blamed Philippine actions for recent rising tension between the two sides in the hotly contested South China Sea.
“The provocations by the Philippine side are the direct cause of the recent heating up of the South China Sea issue,” a statement from the defense ministry read, adding: “China will not allow the Philippines to do whatever it wants, and has responded in a reasonable and forceful manner.”
The Philippines will implement countermeasures proportionate and reasonable against “illegal, coercive, aggressive, and dangerous attacks” by China’s coast guard and maritime militia in the South China Sea, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. said on Thursday.
“We seek no conflict with any nation, more so nations that purport and claim to be our friends but we will not be cowed into silence, submission, or subservience,” Marcos said on Facebook.
He did not specify what the countermeasures would include.
The Philippines has been furious in the past year over what it calls repeated aggression by China’s coast guard and allied fishing vessels around disputed features located inside Manila’s 200-mile exclusive economic zone.
The latest flare-up occurred last week, when China used water cannon to disrupt another Philippine resupply mission to the Second Thomas Shoal for soldiers posted to guard a warship intentionally grounded on a reef 25 years ago.
China, which claims almost the entire South China Sea as its own, has accused the Philippines of encroaching on its territory and says it took necessary measures against the vessels.
China warned the Philippines on Monday to behave cautiously and seek dialogue, saying their relations were at a “crossroads” as confrontations between their coast guards over maritime claims worsened tensions.
Marcos said he met his defense and security officials and has been in communication with “friends in the international community.”
“They have offered to help us on what the Philippines requires to protect and secure our sovereignty, sovereign rights, and jurisdiction while ensuring peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific,” Marcos said.
The deterioration in relations with China come at a time when Marcos seeks to deepen defense ties with the United States. He has increased US access to Philippine military bases and joint exercises have been expanded to include sea and air patrols over the South China Sea, vexing Beijing.
US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on Wednesday reaffirmed Washington’s commitment to a 1951 mutual defense treaty with the Philippines and criticized as “dangerous” China’s actions at the Second Thomas Shoal.
In a phone call on Wednesday with his Philippine counterpart Gilberto Teodoro, Austin “reaffirmed the ironclad US commitment to the Philippines” which it said was undertaking a lawful resupply mission.
The Philippine-US treaty binds both countries to defend each other if under attack and includes coast guard, civilian and military vessels in the South China Sea.
Russia strikes Ukraine’s Kharkiv with aerial bombs for the first time since 2022
The airstrikes caused widespread damage, hitting several residential buildings and damaging the city’s institute for emergency surgery.
Russia has escalated its attacks on Ukraine in recent days, launching several missile barrages on the capital Kyiv and hitting energy infrastructure across the country in apparent retaliation for recent Ukrainian aerial attacks on the Russian border region of Belgorod. Such sporadic attacks, however, have been common throughout the war.
The Kharkiv region cuts across the front line where Ukrainian and Russian forces have been locked in battles for over two years since Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. The region is frequently attacked with missiles and drones.
Sergey Bolvinov, head of the investigative police department in Kharkiv, said in a Telegram post that Wednesday’s attack marked the first time aerial bombs were used since 2022. Regional governor Oleh Syniehubov also reported the use of aerial bombs.
The recent escalation comes as exhausted Ukrainian troops struggle with a shortage of personnel and ammunition and face growing Russian pressure along the front line that stretches over 1,000 kilometers (620 miles).
On Tuesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky sacked one of his top security officials, replacing him with the head of Ukraine’s foreign spy agency in a new reshuffle.
Zelensky dismissed Oleksii Danilov, who served as secretary of the National Security and Defense Council, thanking him for his service in a video address late Tuesday. The president gave no reason and said, without providing details, that Danilov will be “reassigned to another area.”
Zelensky replaced him with Oleksandr Lytvynenko, who served as head of Ukraine’s Foreign Intelligence Service.
The National Security Council is a policy coordination body that is chaired by Zelensky. Danilov had held his position since October 2019, a few months after Zelensky took office.
The dismissal follows Zelensky’s decision in February to fire Ukraine’s chief military officer, Gen. Valerii Zaluzhnyi, and replace him with Col. Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi. Tensions between Zaluzhnyi and the president grew after Ukraine’s much-touted 2023 summer counteroffensive failed to reach its goals. This month, Zaluzhnyi was named Ukraine’s ambassador to the United Kingdom.
US-Israel rift heads for moment of truth over Rafah
- As Netanhayu refused to heed warnings against attacking Rafah, the US for the first time allowed a UN Security Council ceasefire resolution to pass
- But critics say Biden's not using his key point of leverage — cutting US military assistance to Israel — shows his action is more of a PR stunt
WASHINGTON: The United States has taken a public distance from Israel as never before over the Gaza war but the decisive test will be Rafah and whether Israel heeds US warnings against an offensive in the packed city.
The United States on Monday abstained at the Security Council, allowing a resolution to pass for the first time that called for an immediate ceasefire, infuriating Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who delayed a delegation to Washington to discuss US concerns on Rafah.
But in a stance surely noted by Netanyahu, President Joe Biden has made clear he will not use his key point of leverage — cutting US military assistance to Israel.
Annelle Sheline, who recently resigned in protest from the State Department, where she had been on a fellowship working on human rights, said the Biden administration may be shifting but that its actions so far — including the resolution and plans for an emergency pier to bring in aid — amounted to “PR stunts.”
“I can only hope that things are starting to change. Unfortunately, I don’t yet see the US actually using its leverage as far as ending or withdrawing support for Israeli military operations, turning off the tap of weapons,” she told AFP.
Michael Singh, managing director of the Washington Institute who was a top White House aide on the Middle East under former president George W. Bush, said Biden was responding at the United Nations not just to domestic politics but to calls from US allies to compromise and not keep vetoing resolutions.
A resolution “is a signal, but it doesn’t in any tangible way impact Israel’s ability to prosecute the conflict,” Singh said, while arms restrictions would “come at a much higher cost” strategically and politically.
Israel has been waging a relentless military campaign in Gaza in response to Hamas’s surprise attack on October 7 that was the deadliest in Israel in its history.
The United States has repeatedly warned Israel not to attack Rafah, the southern city where more than 1.4 million Palestinians have taken shelter, but Netanyahu last week vowed to press ahead after a direct appeal from visiting Secretary of State Antony Blinken.
US officials say they will present alternatives to the Israeli delegation on Rafah that will focus on striking Hamas targets while limiting civilian casualties.
Stephen Wertheim, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said that US officials’ presentation of alternatives “indicates to me that they believe some sort of military operations will occur and they’re trying to limit the damage of that operation.”
Singh said the holding pattern on Rafah hurt the United States and Israel as international pressure builds.
“I would say that probably there’s a desire in Washington for them to get on with whatever they’re going to do one way or the other — absolutely protect civilians from harm, but this kind of perpetual indecision, I think, is itself harmful,” Singh said.
James Ryan, executive director of the Middle East Research and Information Project, said: “You do own it a bit more if you give them plans and they don’t go well.”
US criticism has been mounting against Netanyahu with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a staunch backer of Israel and the highest-level elected American Jew, in a bombshell speech criticizing the conduct of the war and urging new elections.
A Gallup poll released Wednesday said only 36 percent of Americans approved of Israel’s actions, down from 50 percent in November.
Biden is a lifelong supporter of Israel who, facing a tough reelection fight in November, is feeling the wrath of the left in his Democratic Party on Gaza, where the United Nations is predicting famine.
Netanyahu, also battling for his political life at the helm of a far-right coalition, is a veteran fighter in Washington who has aligned himself with much of the Republican Party and clashed with three Democratic presidents.
“Both Biden and Netanyahu benefit from having some degree of friction between them,” Wertheim said.
“Possibly the one thing that could save Netanyahu's government once a new election occurs is for Netanyahu to be able to say to the public, I’m the one figure who was able to stand up to the Americans and also preserve America’s support for us,” he said.
Biden, in turn, is eager to show he is pushing back against Israeli “brutality” without imposing costs by restricting weapons.
“What we’re seeing is a lot of theater that serves the political interests of the leaders,” Wertheim said.
Indonesia’s top court hears appeals from losing presidential candidates who want a revote
- Dozens of protesters held a peaceful but noisy rally near the court building, declaring that they would oversee the trial
JAKARTA, Indonesia: Indonesia’s top court heard appeals lodged by two losing presidential candidates who are demanding a revote, alleging widespread irregularities and fraud at the polls in appearances before the judges Wednesday.
Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto won the election with an overwhelming margin: 58.6 percent, or more than 96 million votes, according to the General Election Commission — more than twice the runner-up’s share in the three-way race.
But the losing candidates — Former Jakarta Gov. Anies Baswedan and former Central Java Gov. Ganjar Pranowo — argue that the election was marred by irregularities throughout the campaign. They’re asking the Constitutional Court to annul the election results and order a revote, in separate lawsuits.
Both candidates presented parts of their cases in person, focusing on allegations that the court itself, as well as outgoing President Joko Widodo, bent laws and norms to support Subianto.
“We witness with deep concern a series of irregularities that have tarnished the integrity of our democracy,” Baswedan told the court.
Dozens of protesters held a peaceful but noisy rally near the court building, declaring that they would oversee the trial. Authorities blocked streets leading to the court where about 400 police were deployed in and around the building.
Indonesian presidents are expected to stay neutral in races to succeed them, but Subianto, a longtime former rival of Widodo who twice lost elections to him before joining his government, ran as his successor. He even chose Widodo’s son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, as running mate, even though Raka did not meet a constitutional requirement that candidates be at least 40 years old.
Baswedan and Pranowo argue that Raka should have been disqualified, and are asking the court to bar him from a revote. Before the election, the Constitutional Court made a controversial exception to the minimum age that allowed him to run, under the leadership of then-chief justice Anwar Usman, who is Widodo’s brother in law. Usman was later forced to resign as chief justice for failing to recuse himself.
“The Constitutional Court was designed to guard the constitution and stem arbitrariness, not to legitimize fraud and crime,” said Todung Mulya Lubis, a prominent lawyer who led Pranowo’s legal team, “This election is an opportunity for the Constitutional Court to reclaim its authority and dignity.”
Baswedan also said that regional officials were pressured or given rewards to influence political choices, and that state social assistance was used as “a transactional tool to help one of the candidates.”
Hefty social aid from the government was disbursed in the middle of the campaign — far more than the amounts spent during the COVID-19 pandemic — and Widodo distributed funds in person in a number of provinces.
“If we do not make corrections, the practices that occurred recently will be considered normal and become habits, then become culture, and ultimately become national character,” Baswedan said before the eight-judge panel.
Subianto himself twice went to the top court to challenge the results of elections he lost to Widodo, but the court rejected his claims as groundless both times. Subianto refused to accept the results of the 2019 presidential election, leading to violence that left seven dead in Jakarta.
Baswedan had the first turn before the court in the morning, while Pranowo spoke in the afternoon.
“What shocked us all, what really destroyed morale, was the abuse of power,” Pranowo told the court, “When the government uses all state resources to support certain candidates, when the security forces are used to defend personal political interests, then it is time for us to take a firm stand to reject all forms of intimidation and oppression.”
Chief Justice Suhartoyo, who like many Indonesians uses a single name, adjourned the hearing until Thursday, when Subianto and the General Election Commission will respond. The verdict, expected on April 22, cannot be appealed.
The case will be decided by eight justices instead of the full nine-member court because Usman, who is still on the court as an associate justice, is required to recuse himself.