Latest news with #IOL
IOL News
an hour ago
- Politics
- IOL News
Our Soil, Their War: How Ukraine, NATO and the DA Hijacked South Africa
Ukrainian military intelligence is reportedly conducting covert operations in South Africa, raising serious questions about the implications for national sovereignty and international relations. Image: IOL / Ron AI Last week I reported that Ukrainian military intelligence operatives are conducting clandestine activities in South Africa. Surveillance. Disruption of Russian linked logistics. Plans to attack Russian naval presence in Cape Town. These actions are carried out by GUR agents, foreign military operatives with protected diplomatic status, made legal under a visa agreement quietly ushered in by Democratic Alliance (DA) Minister Leon Schreiber in late 2024. The story broke through veteran Washington Post columnist David Ignatius. His article was not just a piece of reporting. It functioned as an official communique from the heart of the United States intelligence apparatus. Ignatius has long served as a narrative conduit for the CIA and Pentagon. When he singles out South Africa in an exposé about Ukrainian covert war, the implications are pointed. Yet the reaction from South Africa's leadership has been to bury their heads in the sand. No word from President Cyril Ramaphosa. No inquiry from Parliament. No comment from Minister of State Security Khumbudzo Ntshavheni. No diplomatic protest from Minister of International Relations and Cooperation Ronald Lamola. No explanation from Leon Schreiber, Minister of Home Affairs, a department now compromised by Democratic Alliance control. And so the questions remain. Who authorised the presence of a foreign military intelligence force in South Africa? What role did Ramaphosa play in allowing Ukraine to wage shadow warfare from our territory? Why has the state avoided even a minimal response? The GUR claimed they tracked the Lady R to Simon's Town in 2022 and alleged that arms were being transferred to Russia. They admitted to interfering with a Russian cargo flight and acknowledged that their agents contemplated an attack on the Smolnyy, a Russian naval ship docked in Cape Town. These are acts of hostility against a BRICS partner. They were conducted from within our borders. And they have gone unchallenged by the executive. The silence is coordinated. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading GUR chief Kyrylo Budanov has publicly declared Ukraine's mission to target Russian assets globally. He posed a rhetorical question to Ignatius: 'Why should Africa be an exception?' It wasn't a question. It was a threat veiled in smug certainty, certainty that the West's sphere of influence now includes South Africa. Ignatius's article performs a layered function. To Pretoria: You are being monitored. Your diplomatic alignments are under audit. The so called 'non aligned' position is seen as defiance, and defiance has consequences. To Moscow: Your partners are compromised. Your alliances in Africa are penetrable. Your backchannels can be severed at will. To Kyiv: Celebrate your reach, but stay within boundaries. The failed attempt to strike the Smolnyy is mentioned, but the narrative steers blame away from Washington. The mission was conceived in Kyiv, not coordinated through Langley. Deniability remains intact. Ignatius uses his platform to draw the blueprint for a global dirty war, a campaign of psychological and covert disruption dressed up as proactive defence. The framing legitimises a foreign military's activities in sovereign countries far from the battlefield. Africa is presented as free territory for geopolitical experimentation. Nowhere in his column does Ignatius interrogate the legality of these actions. He valorises GUR strikes in Mali and Central African Republic, including a drone attack that reportedly killed over 130 people. This is terrorism, not liberation. It is framed as righteous because it aligns with United States foreign policy. The Gaze, a Kyiv based media outlet tightly aligned with Ukrainian government messaging, amplified the South African aspects of the Ignatius story almost immediately. Its coverage read like a warning to Pretoria. The timing points to a coordinated narrative campaign, not a random editorial interest in Africa. The deeper objective becomes clear: push South Africa further from BRICS and closer to North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) interests. Discredit its partnerships. Isolate its diplomatic independence. Expose the African National Congress (ANC)'s internal fractures and accelerate its ideological collapse. Mali Has Severed Diplomatic Ties With Ukraine And is Now Set To Ban Ukrainian Goods From Entering The Country. The decision follows allegations of Ukraine's intelligence support to rēbel groups behind several attācks on Malian Troops and Russian Wagner forces. — Africa Archives (@AfricaArchives_) June 17, 2025 Ramaphosa's silence is more than evasion. It may point to collaboration. His grooming by corporate capital in the 1970s positioned him as a long game candidate for imperial management. Phala Phala exposed a man entangled in quiet deals and unaccountable wealth. His presidency survives scandals that would sink others, because he remains useful. And with each silent concession, the idea of an ANC government dies a little more. The visa exemptions that granted Ukrainian agents access to our soil were signed under a Democratic Alliance controlled ministry. They became active under Ramaphosa's watch. There has been no reassessment of that agreement. No attempt to vet or restrict those entering. No safeguards against abuse. If Ukraine uses South African territory to target Russia, Pretoria becomes complicit. Under the United Nations Charter, this constitutes a breach of international peace. The consequences will not only be diplomatic. They will be structural. South Africa will be recast as a proxy zone in NATO's extended theatre. Its voice on global platforms will carry less weight. Its people will pay the price for elite submission. The Black working class has already seen how white capital benefits from chaos. Under a Democratic Alliance led administration, land reform will stall. Redistribution will be erased. Afrocentric education will vanish. Political resistance will be criminalised under new definitions of extremism. What was claimed back after apartheid will be recolonised before decolonisation ever begins. Black political movements—the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MK), African Transformation Movement (ATM), and others—must see this moment clearly. Fragmentation will ensure the fall. A revolutionary coalition must form, rooted in sovereignty and grounded in anti imperialist clarity. Otherwise, we hand our country to NATO's security architecture wrapped in DA branding. South Africa has become a chessboard. The pawns are moving. The king remains silent. The war has arrived quietly. And our government let it in with both hands. Ukrainian military intelligence is reportedly conducting covert operations in South Africa, raising serious questions about the implications for national sovereignty and international relations. Image: IOL
IOL News
2 hours ago
- Politics
- IOL News
From Dialogue to Reckoning: What South Africa Needs Now
Thirty years into South Africa's democracy, we must move beyond superficial dialogue to a reckoning that addresses deep-rooted inequalities and demands real change, writes Faiez Jacobs. Image: IOL / Ron AI 'The People Shall Govern.' Not as metaphor, not as sentiment. As a promise. And a demand. Thirty years into our democracy, South Africa does not need another listening tour, another facilitated workshop, or another high-level roundtable with branded lanyards. We need something deeper. Something braver. Something long overdue. We need a reckoning. The recent announcement by President Ramaphosa that South Africa will convene a National Dialogue, coordinated through NEDLAC and guided by an 'Eminent Persons Group', has stirred predictable fanfare and deep scepticism. It is not the idea of dialogue that alarms us. It is the fact that, for too long, dialogue has been deployed in South Africa not to deliver justice, but to delay it. In place of delivery, we have convened. In place of structural change, we have moderated. In place of urgency, we have performed unity. We have been here before. And we cannot afford to be here again. A country built on dialogue but rarely on equal terms From Kliptown in 1955 to CODESA in 1991, South Africa's path to democracy was shaped by dialogue. But these moments were not equal meetings of minds they were unequal negotiations between a people in struggle and a regime in retreat. We must never forget that our political transition was never designed to dismantle all systems of power. It was a ceasefire, not a complete transformation. The elite pact that underpinned our 1994 breakthrough brought democratic rights but postponed economic redress. Today, those delays have caught up with us. We are the world's most unequal society. Millions of black South Africans still live under conditions that echo the structural geography of apartheid. Youth unemployment hovers above 60%. Public services are failing. State capture hollowed our institutions. Violence, corruption, and despair creep into the marrow of daily life. And in this fragile, fractured context, we are now asked again to talk. But before we do, we must ask: Who is asking for this dialogue? Why now? What for? Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading Dialogue, or Deflection? Let us be honest. Much of the dialogue proposed today risks becoming elite-driven spectaclea performance of inclusivity without power-sharing. A repackaging of reconciliation in times of political turbulence. A soft cushion against the hard edges of growing public rage. This new National Dialogue comes with high-profile names, big halls, logos and language like 'shared vision' and 'renewed compact.' But language is not justice. Logos do not build clinics. And dialogue without delivery breaks trust. The danger is not in talking. The danger is in pretending that talk is enough. Our Constitution already provides for participatory democracy. Parliament's committees, ward committees, SGB's, CPF's, RDP forums, municipal IDPs, Chapter 9 institutions all of these exist to facilitate public voice and state responsiveness. If we are serious about rebuilding national consensus, why not invest in strengthening those platforms rather than creating new ones? The answer is clear: we don't have a participation problem we have a delivery problem. We don't lack dialogue. We lack action. The Real Dialogue Happening Outside Power While government convenes its forums, real dialogue happens daily in the silence of broken clinics. In the queues at SASSA. In the burnt tyres of protest. In the quiet rage of mothers burying sons lost to gang bullets or hunger. That is the unscripted, unmoderated, rawdialogue of a society crying for repair, real hope, real change. To those who say this dialogue is necessary for cohesion: let us be clear. Cohesion cannot be built on inequality. Reconciliation cannot be revived while restitution is denied. Real unity requires more than slogans it requires justice that is seen and felt. And to those who say this dialogue is about the future: we say this the future cannot be imagined until the past is confronted. Until the unfinished business of our transition is faced head-on. That business is redistribution. Dignity. Work. Land. Reform. From National Dialogue to National Reckoning What South Africa needs now is not a dialogue. It is a Reckoning. A National Reckoning Plan time-bound, costed, public, and accountable. Here is what it would look like: 1. Corruption Accountability • Dedicated anti-corruption court. • Public progress dashboard updated quarterly. • No dialogue required. Just prosecutions. 2. Public Service Restoration • Professionalise the civil service. • Forensic audits across departments. Get rid of deed wood. Merit and competence based deployment. • Treasury-approved clean-up plan. No slogans needed. 3. Violence and Safety Compact • Dedicated gender-based violence units in all provinces. • Resourced SAPS precincts in crime hotspots. • Community-policing forums with real authority. • Measurable 3-year targets to reduce violence by 70%. 4. Land and Housing • Release state-owned land for housing and smallholder farming. • Title deeds for informal settlements. • Geospatial planning with public oversight. • Justice, not just consultation. 5. Youth Jobs and Township Economies • R10 billion fund for township infrastructure and small enterprise support. • Remove licensing red tape for spaza shops and street traders. • Localise procurement in municipalities. • Youth opportunity desks in every ward. 6. A Real Platform for the People • Strengthen Parliament's portfolio committees as dialogue forums. • Fund civic education, SGBs, and ward committees. • Turn Parliament into the true arena of people's voice not hotels and ballrooms. Dialogue Must Not Substitute Delivery Dialogue is not inherently dangerous. But dialogue without consequence is corrosive. It drains hope. It teaches citizens that participation is performance. That their voices are heard, but never acted upon. That engagement is a dead-end. The greatest threat to democracy is not apathy. It is the experience of being listened to but ignored. This time, there will be no Mandela to hold us together when we fail. This time, failure will explode. Not into civil war, but into permanent distrust, institutional erosion, and a vacuum that extremists, secessionists, and seditionists are already preparing to fill. What Must Be Done This National Dialogue, must be grounded in three non-negotiables: 1. Equal Participation No one should be asked to "participate" unless they are also being resourced, empowered, and heard. Give logistical and financial support to informal workers, rural voices, and youth collectives. 2. Binding Outcomes Every agreement must be costed, time-bound, and linked to implementation agents. We need deliverables, we need accountability, we need delivery, not declarations and leaders who are not only shocked and surprised. 3. Institutional Anchoring The dialogue must be tied into Parliament and the Executives and all levels, not orbitaround and away from it. All outcomes must flow into keeping elected leaders accountable from the top, our President, Ministers, Premiers, MEC's, Mayors, MMC's to councillors via committee work, legislative reform, and budget planning. Let's make Performance Management work and delivery real. The Real Dialogue is in Delivery Dialogue is not neutral. It either reinforces power or redistributes it. South Africans don't need to be heard again. They need to be answered. The ANC must not lead from caution or convenience. We must lead from courage. From conviction. And from truth. The promise of 1994 has been deferred too long. Now is the time to deliver on it not through words, but through work. Let us move from dialogue to reckoning. From performance to policy. From symbolism to substance. Let this be the generation that made justice real. Let this be the moment that reclaimed delivery as democracy. * Faiez Jacobs is a former Member of Parliament, political organiser, and strategic facilitator committed to inclusive governance, ethical leadership, and the renewal of South Africa's democratic promise. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media. IOL Opinion
IOL News
4 hours ago
- Sport
- IOL News
Ashwell Prince: Winning as a diverse team means everything to South Africa
REAL SUCCESS Ashwell Prince celebrated South Africa's World Test Championship win, highlighting the profound significance of diversity and unity in the team's historic success. Picture: Michael Sherman/IOL Image: Michael Sherman/IOL The Proteas victory in the World Test Championship (WTC) as a truly diverse team was the most special moment of South Africa batting coach Ashwell Prince's career. That's quite a statement for the gritty left-handed batsman that played 119 games for South Africa across all three formats. The majority of those matches came in the 66 Tests where Prince scored 11 centuries and as many 50s. Since transitioning into coaching, harnessing all the available talent became one of the keys for Prince. That's why when the Proteas beat Australia in the WTC final at the home of Lord's led by Temba Bavuma and featuring Kagiso Rabada, Lungi Ngidi and Keshav Maharaj it was a moment of unadulterated pride for Prince. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Prince Reflects on the Significance of Winning as a Diverse Team 'It's the most special thing in my sporting career. I remember being a young coach at the Cobras. And it's exactly something that I mentioned to my team back then that I want to achieve. But if you achieve that at provincial level or franchise level, the Titans are not going to be happy about that. I'm talking about winning as a diverse team,' said Prince. 'Other provinces won't be happy about that because that's one province winning. But when you achieve that as the country, this is exactly what it is about. And so, to have the opportunity to be a part of that, it's truly special. It's a special occasion for all of us and for the country.' As the batting coach, it would be expected that Prince's role would always be quite technical for his willow warriors, but he explained how his strategy for their run-chase in the fourth innings was purely a mental approach.
IOL News
4 hours ago
- Sport
- IOL News
Marco Jansen: My role is making the ball swing and talk for Proteas
MATCH MADE IN HEAVEN Marco Jansen (picturerd) discusses his role in leading the Proteas bowling attack alongside Kagiso Rabada, emphasising their strategic approach to exploiting bowling conditions and his awe of Rabada's prowess. Picture: Michael Sherman/IOL Image: Michael Sherman/IOL While it's difficult not to be awestruck at times with Kagiso Rabada bowling at the other end, Marco Jansen is in no doubt about his job of leading the Proteas bowling attack. Jansen was speaking as South Africa received a hero's welcome on Wednesday, after the Proteas beat Australia in the World Test Championship (WTC) final at Lord's, in London, over the weekend. The tall left-arm quick once again proved the perfect foil for Rabada as the pair claimed eight wickets together in the first innings as Australia were bowled out for 212. That set the tone, and despite a match that ebbed and flowed throughout the contest, the Proteas ultimately emerged convincing five-wicket victors to claim their first piece of major ICC glory (not counting the 1998 Champions Trophy). Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading Jansen in Awe of Rabada's Mastery on the Field 'I have a job to do and I have a responsibility to make the ball swing and talk and try and get as many wickets as possible, especially with the new ball,' said Jansen. Bowling with Rabada though, is still sometimes a surreal experience, the 26-year-old explained. 'That guy is good, hey. Every time he gets a wicket, I just... There are a couple of moments or times where he took wickets where I just sort of stood back, sort of like taking in the whole scene, what's happening and stuff like that, reminding me when I was in school, seeing him on TV doing similar things and then sort of snapping out of it in an instant and starting celebrating. 'I think to myself, this is unbelievable. But also at the same time, remembering or telling myself that I also have a job to do. 'I can't just take everything in and just be there and go along for the ride if that makes sense.'
IOL News
4 hours ago
- Politics
- IOL News
The Spectacle of Innocence: How the Narrative of 'Stolen Children' Became the West's Weapon of War
The portrayal of children in the Ukraine-Russia conflict serves as a potent tool of propaganda, revealing the complexities behind the narratives that shape public perception and policy, writes Gillian Schutte. Image: IOL / Ron AI In war, the image of a suffering child has long been one of the most potent tools of propaganda. A child is the cipher of innocence, the mirror of adult failure, the vessel into which we pour our grief, outrage, and moral certainty. It is no wonder, then, that in the ongoing geopolitical conflict between NATO-backed Ukraine and Russia, children have become a front line in the information war. The Washington Post's tear-soaked profile 'Thousands of Ukraine's children vanished into Russia. This one made it back' follows the return of 12-year-old Illia Matviienko, a child allegedly abducted, reprogrammed, and rescued just in time from the clutches of Russian state adoption. It is a finely crafted narrative. Illia is traumatised but eloquent. His grandmother is tireless and brave. His toys are metaphors. His memories are edited for maximum effect. But behind the Lego blocks and Garfield plush toys lies a darker machinery of manipulation. The story reads like it was written by a Pentagon-funded scriptwriter, with emotional cues planted at every paragraph break, not to report on the tragedy of war, but to mobilise sentiment for war. Let us look past the misty-eyed storytelling and ask the harder questions. What really happened to Ukraine's children? Who is keeping the score? And who benefits from turning their suffering into clickbait diplomacy? The Propaganda Template, From Wag the Dog to Wag the Child The Washington Post, long known for its role in manufacturing consent for U.S. foreign policy, frames Illia's ordeal as evidence of systematic Russian child theft. His story becomes the keystone in a broader claim: that tens of thousands of Ukrainian children have been deported, re-educated, and erased by the Russian state. The article even cites figures: 'at least 19,500 children' according to Yale University's Conflict Observatory, whose funding, incidentally, is being cut under Donald Trump's administration. Ukrainian officials inflate the figure still further: 'maybe 50,000, maybe 100,000.' No one knows for sure. No one can prove anything. But certainty is not required in the spectacle of war propaganda, only repetition and righteous tears. The real figures? According to Russia's official delegation at the Istanbul peace talks, led by Vladimir Medinsky, the only list ever presented to Moscow by Ukraine contains 339 names. Russia says it has already returned 101 of these children. Ukraine, for its part, has returned 22 Russian children who ended up in its care. These are verifiable exchanges. And yet the Western press refuses to mention these facts. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad Loading Selective Suffering, Why Is Only One Child a Headline? The case of Illia Matviienko is tragic. But why is it the story? Because it performs well. It has all the ingredients of pathos: dead mother, lonely boy, forbidden adoption, grandmother's heroism, poetic justice. It sells. It moves. It inflames. But in Russia's version of events, there are also children traumatised by shelling, evacuated from war zones, not abducted. Many were found alone in buildings or hospitals. Others were taken to safety at great personal risk by Russian soldiers, some of whom died in the effort. And when relatives come forward, parents, aunts, grandmothers, the children are reunited. No obstacle, no cover-up. Just bureaucracy and war. Yet these stories are not told. There are no Washington Post front pages for the Russian soldier who saves a wounded child under fire. There is no Pulitzer bait in the case of a child returned to a reunited family in Donetsk. These children do not cry in English. They are not crying for NATO. Manufactured Numbers, Manufactured Consent Russia has repeatedly demanded evidence: names, documents, statements from parents. None have been forthcoming. The Ukrainian and U.S. positions rely on estimates, projections, and a deep well of emotional speculation. Russia, meanwhile, says: here is the list you gave us, here are the returns we've made. The disparity between accusation and evidence is not accidental. It mirrors the propaganda campaign that preceded the war in Iraq, the intervention in Syria, the bombardment of Libya. Western soft power thrives on emotional shorthand: Saddam's incubator babies, Gaddafi's Viagra-fuelled soldiers, and now Putin's child kidnappers. It is a pattern. The facts are fluid. The imagery is fixed. What Russia Says, and the West Won't Print Medinsky's statement in Istanbul was clear. Russia is open to verification. Russia is returning children. Russia is establishing regular exchanges. It has proposed temporary ceasefires in 'grey zones' so commanders on both sides can collect the corpses of fallen soldiers, a practical and humane suggestion, met with silence. Meanwhile, Western media focuses on Lego toys and bedtime trauma. It does not ask why Ukraine will not publish a full list of the missing children. It does not examine the political utility of these stories in maintaining Western support, arms supplies, and diplomatic cover. Nor does it question why the first move in any peace negotiation is not truth and reconciliation, but a spotlight on Russian war crimes. The narrative must be secured before the facts can catch up. The Illusion of Innocence Yes, Illia's story is heartbreaking. All war stories involving children are. But to isolate it from the broader matrix of wartime reality, to use it as a blunt weapon against the Russian state, to decontextualise and sentimentalise it into a moral fable, is to exploit that child all over again. War is complex. Children are not pawns. But in the battle of narratives, they become precisely that. They are used to distract from inconvenient truths, to derail diplomacy, to justify endless escalation. And while the West cries for Illia, what of Vitalii, the friend left behind in the Donetsk hospital? What if he was never abducted, just never found? What if he was just another casualty of the same propaganda war that made Illia a headline? Beyond the Toy Box The Washington Post piece may be compelling. It is certainly emotive. But it is not journalism. It is spectacle. A carefully staged morality play in which there are only villains and victims, no context, no complexity, no dissenting voice. The weaponisation of children is one of the oldest tricks in imperial warfare. And as long as mainstream media continues to traffic in half-truths and Hollywood storylines, the real victims of this war, on both sides, will remain unheard. We should care for every child affected by war. But we should be suspicious of which children we are told to care about, and why. The portrayal of children in the Ukraine-Russia conflict serves as a potent tool of propaganda, revealing the complexities behind the narratives that shape public perception and policy, writes Gillian Schutte. Image: IOL
