KYIV: Ukrainian men of draft age with permanent residency in other countries will in most cases no longer be able to leave Ukraine if they visit, officials said.
Ukraine is desperate to fill the depleted ranks of its armed forces with fresh recruits and recently lowered the mobilization age from 27 to 25.
Previously Ukrainian men aged 18 to 60 who had permanent residency outside the country were allowed to travel abroad.
They will now be subject to the same restrictions as other Ukrainian military age men, who are barred from leaving unless they meet some narrow criteria, such as on health grounds or a government-approved cultural or sporting trip.
The US Embassy in Kyiv said Tuesday it “understands that, effective June 1, Ukraine has eliminated a ‘residence abroad’ exception that previously allowed certain Ukrainian males aged 18 to 60 to depart the country.”
Kyiv is tightening pressure on Ukrainian men living abroad who have not faced being called up to fight during the first two years of the war.
Border Guard spokesman Andriy Demchenko separately confirmed to AFP that Ukraine does not recognize dual citizenship and that men with permanent residency in another country are no longer allowed out.
“Under martial law, Ukrainian citizens who permanently resided outside Ukraine ... could travel outside Ukraine,” he said.
“This possibility is now limited for them,” he added, citing changes in legislation linked to military service.
The US Embassy told Ukrainians with US citizenship that they should not travel to Ukraine if they “do not wish to stay in Ukraine indefinitely.”
Ukraine further restricts draft-age men from leaving: officials
Short Url
https://arab.news/rcwxx
Ukraine further restricts draft-age men from leaving: officials
- Ukraine is desperate to fill the depleted ranks of its armed forces with fresh recruits
- Men with permanent residency in another country are no longer allowed out
US judge rejects Trump administration’s halt of wind energy permits
- 17 Democratic-led states challenged the suspension
- Offshore wind group supports ruling for economic and energy priorities
BOSTON: A federal judge on Monday struck down an order by US President Donald Trump’s administration to halt all federal approvals for new wind energy projects, saying that agencies’ efforts to implement his directive were unlawful and arbitrary.
Agencies including the US Departments of the Interior and Commerce and the Environmental Protection Agency have been implementing a directive to halt all new approvals needed for both onshore and offshore wind projects pending a review of leasing and permitting practices.
Siding with a group of 17 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, US District Judge Patti Saris in Boston said those agencies had failed to provide reasoned explanations for the actions they took to carry out the directive Trump issued on his first day back in office on January 20.
They could not lawfully under the Administrative Procedure Act indefinitely decline to review applications for permits, added Saris, who was appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat whose state led the legal challenge, called the ruling “a big victory in our fight to keep tackling the climate crisis” in a social media post.
White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said in a statement that Trump through his order had “unleashed America’s energy dominance to protect our economic and national security.”
Trump has sought to boost government support for fossil fuels and maximize output in the United States, the world’s top oil and gas producer, after campaigning for the presidency on the refrain of “drill, baby, drill.”
The states, led by New York, sued in May, after the Interior Department ordered Norway’s Equinor to halt construction on its Empire Wind offshore wind project off the coast of New York.
While the administration allowed work on Empire Wind to resume, the states say the broader pause on permitting and leasing continues to have harmful economic effects.
The states said the agencies implementing Trump’s order never said why they were abruptly changing longstanding policy supporting wind energy development.
Saris agreed, saying the policy “constitutes a change of course from decades of agencies issuing (or denying) permits related to wind energy projects.”
The defendants “candidly concede that the sole factor they considered in deciding to stop issuing permits was the President’s direction to do so,” Saris wrote.
An offshore wind energy trade group welcomed the ruling.
“Overturning the unlawful blanket halt to offshore wind permitting activities is needed to achieve our nation’s energy and economic priorities of bringing more power online quickly, improving grid reliability, and driving billions of new American steel manufacturing and shipbuilding investments,” Oceantic Network CEO Liz Burdock said in a statement.
Agencies including the US Departments of the Interior and Commerce and the Environmental Protection Agency have been implementing a directive to halt all new approvals needed for both onshore and offshore wind projects pending a review of leasing and permitting practices.
Siding with a group of 17 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, US District Judge Patti Saris in Boston said those agencies had failed to provide reasoned explanations for the actions they took to carry out the directive Trump issued on his first day back in office on January 20.
They could not lawfully under the Administrative Procedure Act indefinitely decline to review applications for permits, added Saris, who was appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat whose state led the legal challenge, called the ruling “a big victory in our fight to keep tackling the climate crisis” in a social media post.
White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said in a statement that Trump through his order had “unleashed America’s energy dominance to protect our economic and national security.”
Trump has sought to boost government support for fossil fuels and maximize output in the United States, the world’s top oil and gas producer, after campaigning for the presidency on the refrain of “drill, baby, drill.”
The states, led by New York, sued in May, after the Interior Department ordered Norway’s Equinor to halt construction on its Empire Wind offshore wind project off the coast of New York.
While the administration allowed work on Empire Wind to resume, the states say the broader pause on permitting and leasing continues to have harmful economic effects.
The states said the agencies implementing Trump’s order never said why they were abruptly changing longstanding policy supporting wind energy development.
Saris agreed, saying the policy “constitutes a change of course from decades of agencies issuing (or denying) permits related to wind energy projects.”
The defendants “candidly concede that the sole factor they considered in deciding to stop issuing permits was the President’s direction to do so,” Saris wrote.
An offshore wind energy trade group welcomed the ruling.
“Overturning the unlawful blanket halt to offshore wind permitting activities is needed to achieve our nation’s energy and economic priorities of bringing more power online quickly, improving grid reliability, and driving billions of new American steel manufacturing and shipbuilding investments,” Oceantic Network CEO Liz Burdock said in a statement.
© 2025 SAUDI RESEARCH & PUBLISHING COMPANY, All Rights Reserved And subject to Terms of Use Agreement.










