标签： Europe

Almost two years after he was captured while fighting as a volunteer with Ukraine’s Foreign Legion, a former 12-year veteran of the British Army has delivered a searing accusation against his home government, saying he has been left abandoned and without critical support while serving a 15-year sentence in a maximum-security Russian prison colony.

Thirty-three-year-old Hayden Davies was captured by Russian forces more than 18 months ago after sustaining catastrophic injuries on Ukraine’s front lines. In a series of censored letters shared with the BBC from his detention facility — which Davies approved for publication — he detailed the brutal ordeal that led to his capture. After his radio failed and his combat partner was killed, Davies was trapped with a severely broken leg, bone protruding through the skin. With no route for evacuation, he made the desperate choice to crawl 150 meters over an entire day to a ruined building’s basement, where he survived on tinned food for two months before Russian forces discovered him. He treated his own injury by pushing the protruding bone back into his leg and crafting makeshift splints and crutches from scrap wood, describing the pain as the worst he had ever experienced.

Davies was first convicted on charges of mercenaryism — a criminal accusation under Russian law that targets individuals fighting in foreign conflicts for material gain — by a Russian-controlled court in occupied Donetsk last December, which sentenced him to 13 years in prison. The UK does not recognize Russia’s occupation of Donetsk nor the authority of the courts operating there. Last week, a Moscow judge extended the sentence by an additional two years, ruling the original penalty was too lenient.

In detention, Davies spent 12 months in solitary confinement before being moved to a shared cell. He told the BBC he has never received any communication from UK government representatives, and remains without the medical care his leg injury requires. After 12 years of service to the UK, he said, the total lack of support feels like a disgrace. “I served my country for 12 years in the British Army, and now, when I need help and medical treatment, no-one wants to know. This is a disgrace,” he wrote.

A spokesperson for the UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) confirmed the government maintains close contact with Davies’ family and provides consular assistance, and issued a strong condemnation of his conviction on what it calls false mercenaryism charges. But the FCDO has not responded to specific claims from activists who say UK officials have taken no tangible action to secure Davies’ release or support his legal team based in Russia.

Anastasia Shevchenko, a Lithuania-based political activist who supports prisoners of war held in Russian captivity, told the BBC she notified both the UK embassies in Ukraine and Lithuania of Davies’ capture and detention last year, after connecting with him through fellow Ukrainian detainees held in the same facility. She said the only response she received was a note of thanks and a generic message wishing Davies courage. Unlike other nations that take more aggressive action to support their detained nationals, Shevchenko said, the UK has failed to provide even basic assistance: Davies has gone without adequate food, clothing and medication, forcing her to send personal funds to cover his basic needs. “This is the most important thing in captivity, not to be forgotten,” Shevchenko said, adding that the UK has the ability to do far more to secure Davies’ release and improve his conditions.

International human rights groups have long documented systemic violations against prisoners of war and detained foreign fighters in Russia and Russian-controlled Ukrainian territory, including the widespread denial of adequate medical care, a charge Russian authorities consistently reject. The International Committee of the Red Cross has confirmed it does not have full, unimpeded access to POWs in these regions, a requirement explicitly laid out in the Geneva Conventions. A source close to Davies confirmed the former soldier continues to receive no medical care for his serious leg injury, and that UK officials have not reached out to Davies’ Russia-based legal team.

To date, Davies has received only two letters from relatives since his capture, one from his sister and a second from another family member. The BBC’s attempts to contact Davies’ family for comment received no response.

A Ukrainian government source with knowledge of the case told the BBC there is no evidence of active efforts by UK authorities to assist detained British citizens like Davies. The case echoes the experience of another captured British ex-soldier, Shaun Pinner, who was sentenced to death by a Russian-controlled court in 2022 and held for five months before being released in a prisoner swap brokered by the Saudi government. Pinner said the FCDO did a good job of keeping in regular contact with his family throughout his captivity, but played no role in negotiating his release.

Pinner noted that Russia’s ongoing refusal to grant British diplomats access to detained foreign fighters makes direct government intervention extremely difficult. “I can understand there’s a lot of frustration over lack of access but if Russia doesn’t let diplomats in to see POWs, there’s not a lot you can do,” he said, adding that prisoner swaps are most effectively negotiated through Ukrainian channels.

The FCDO has reiterated that under international law and the Geneva Conventions, prisoners of war cannot be prosecuted for taking part in hostilities, and has called on Russia to end its prosecution of detained fighters for political and propaganda purposes. In its official travel guidance for Ukraine, the FCDO warns British nationals that traveling to Ukraine to fight may violate UK domestic law and could result in prosecution on return to the UK. It also explicitly notes that the British government’s ability to provide assistance to captured or detained British fighters in Ukraine is extremely limited, a position that has drawn criticism from activists who argue the government has a duty to support its former service members even when they volunteer for foreign conflicts.

A former senior official at English Premier League football club Everton has failed in a High Court legal bid to overturn UK government sanctions imposed over his family connection to a Kremlin-aligned Russian oligarch, a court has ruled.

Sarvar Ismailov, who once served on Everton’s board of directors, and his brother Sanjar were first added to the UK’s sanctions register in 2022, shortly after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The designation stemmed from their close familial tie to Alisher Usmanov, an Uzbek-Russian billionaire with long-documented links to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

After the initial imposition of sanctions, Ismailov requested a formal government review of his designation in 2023. While minor wording adjustments were made to his sanction listing in 2024, the restrictive measures against him remained in place, prompting him to launch a judicial challenge against the Foreign Office.

During the High Court hearing held earlier this month, Ismailov’s legal team argued that the continued sanctions were inherently unfair. They asserted that Ismailov was being penalized solely for his biological relation to Usmanov, a position they described as “outrageously unfair”.

In defending the government’s decision, barristers representing the Foreign Office told the London court that sanctioning individuals connected by family to targeted oligarchs serves multiple clear, rational and legitimate policy goals within the broader sanctions regime.

Delivering his 46-page ruling, Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini dismissed Ismailov’s legal challenge. The judge found that the Foreign Office holds unique institutional insight and position to evaluate whether sanctions measures will meet their intended policy objectives, and concluded that the department’s decision to maintain sanctions against Ismailov was not irrational.

Justice Saini further accepted that it was reasonable for the Foreign Office to infer that Ismailov retains the ability to exert influence over his uncle, Alisher Usmanov. He noted that the decision to keep Ismailov under sanction is clearly tied to the core objectives of the UK’s Russia sanctions regime, one of which is to demonstrate that any association with individuals linked to the Russian government will carry tangible negative consequences.

“The question is not whether the claimant’s designation will of itself bring the conflict to an end,” Justice Saini wrote. “Rather, the question is whether the measure is capable of contributing to the stated objective as part of the overall sanctions regime. The decision to maintain the designation of the claimant is so capable.”

He added: “The claimant’s designation, and others like him who are ‘associated with’ [Mr Usmanov], makes an important contribution to the overall cumulative impact of sanctions and enhances pressure on Russia in respect of its actions in Ukraine.”

Ismailov, who was born in Uzbekistan, joined Everton’s organizational structure in 2019 and was elevated to the club’s board of directors in mid-2021. However, he stepped down from all his positions at the club just months later that November, after facing a criminal charge that was ultimately dismissed.

Hugo Keith KC, Ismailov’s lead barrister, told the court that his client moved to the United Kingdom at the age of 13, has never resided in Russia as an adult, holds no political influence or connections within Russia, and has no personal relationship or access to President Putin or any senior member of the Russian government. Keith also stressed that there is no evidence to show Ismailov has ever supported the Russian government or its invasion of Ukraine, calling the continued sanctioning of his client “utterly purposeless,” “plainly irrational” and “capricious.”

Jason Pobjoy KC, representing the Foreign Office, countered that the department acted well within its legal authority in choosing to maintain sanctions against Ismailov. Even acknowledging the significant personal impact the measures have on Ismailov, Pobjoy argued that the decision advances the overarching policy goals of the UK’s sanctions regime against Russia. He added that the Foreign Office is granted a broad margin of discretion in making sanction designations, and there is no valid legal basis to overturn the department’s ruling.

LONDON — Just two years after securing a historic landslide general election victory, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer finds himself fighting to save his job, grappling with an unprecedented internal rebellion triggered by the Labour Party’s catastrophic performance in the May 7 local and regional elections. On Monday, Starmer rallied party staff at Labour’s London headquarters, seeking to shore up his crumbling support amid growing calls for his resignation from dozens of sitting party members.

NUUK, Greenland – In a recent high-level diplomatic encounter held in Greenland’s capital, the Arctic territory’s top leader has drawn a clear line in the sand on sovereignty, even as he described a cordial, constructive meeting with a special representative from former U.S. President Donald Trump. Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen told reporters Monday that his courtesy meeting with U.S. envoy Jeff Landry, the sitting governor of Louisiana, unfolded in a respectful, positive atmosphere – but left no ambiguity about Greenland’s long-held position on self-governance.

LONDON – In a strategic shift that aligns with growing public demands for greater accountability from Britain’s royal household, Prince William’s Duchy of Cornwall has announced plans to divest roughly 20% of its £1 billion ($1.3 billion) property portfolio over the next 10 years. The proceeds from the land sales will be redirected toward large-scale initiatives including the construction of thousands of new homes, expanded renewable energy generation, and targeted wildlife restoration projects across the region.

The 14th-century estate, established specifically to generate independent income for the holder of the title Prince of Wales, currently holds more than 52,000 hectares of land spread across 19 English counties. Duchy Chief Executive Will Bax shared the details of the long-term plan in an interview with The Times of London, published Monday, confirming the move builds on a broader strategic direction first outlined in the duchy’s most recent annual report: consolidating its scattered, far-flung landholdings and refocusing investments on projects that deliver environmental and social public benefit.
Bax emphasized that Prince William has guided a fundamental reorientation of the duchy’s core mission. “William has decided that the duchy shouldn’t just exist to own land,” Bax told the outlet. “It should first and foremost exist to have a positive impact on the world.”

Under the new plan, the duchy will center its future holdings around five concentrated “heartland” regions: the Isles of Scilly, Cornwall, Dartmoor, the Bath area (all in southwest England), and London’s Kennington district. Bax confirmed that the sales are projected to free up roughly £500 million for targeted investment in the new priority projects: affordable and market housing development, expanded clean energy infrastructure, and ecological restoration work.

The Duchy of Cornwall’s annual profits fund the public and private activities of the current Prince of Wales, his wife Princess Catherine, and their three children. In the 2024-2025 financial year ending March 31, the duchy reported a net profit of £22.9 million. While the sitting Prince of Wales receives the estate’s operating profits, strict governance rules prevent him from selling duchy assets for personal gain. A independent board of directors oversees all duchy activities, tasked with preserving the estate’s value for future holders of the title, and all large property transactions require formal approval from the UK government to protect the long-term integrity of the assets.

This strategic overhaul comes at a time when the British monarchy as an institution, and the Duchy of Cornwall in particular, faces mounting public and political pressure to increase transparency around its finances and demonstrate clear public value for the privileges it holds under UK law.