International

By Sabiu Abdullahi

The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has criticised comments attributed to U.S. Representative Riley Moore concerning Nigeria’s unity, religious persecution, and the movement for Biafran self-determination.

In a statement released on Sunday, Comrade Emma Powerful, IPOB’s Spokesperson and Media/Publicity Secretary, challenged Moore’s view that maintaining Nigeria’s territorial integrity guarantees the protection of Christians.

Moore, who recently concluded a fact-finding visit across Nigeria, warned against the country’s potential balkanisation, arguing that supporting separatist movements could endanger Christians, particularly in the North and Middle Belt regions. According to Moore, his visit included meetings with government officials, church leaders, aid organisations, and Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) to examine what he described as the “rampant persecution of Christians” in the country.

IPOB, however, described Moore’s position as flawed. “With utmost respect, the position attributed to Rep. Riley Moore reflects a familiar but deeply flawed assumption: that preserving the territorial integrity of Nigeria is synonymous with protecting Christians. History proves the opposite,” the statement said. Powerful highlighted that, over the past six decades, Christians in Northern Nigeria, the Middle Belt, and parts of Yorubaland have faced “cyclical massacres, mass displacement, church burnings, and a culture of impunity enabled by the state itself.”

The group also dismissed Moore’s claim that self-determination “emboldens terrorists,” calling it “a line of reasoning born out of 9 million dollars lobbying enterprise in Washington not reason.” Powerful argued, “terror movements are not triggered by oppressed peoples seeking safety; they flourish where centralized states suppress identity, deny autonomy, and reward violence with appeasement.” He cited Afghanistan as an example where decades of military cooperation and aid collapsed while radical ideology resurged.

Referring to history, IPOB’s statement noted that persecuted religious minorities often survived because independent states provided refuge. “The religiously persecuted Huguenots did not survive Catholic France because France became tolerant. They survived because an independent Protestant England already existed — a sovereign refuge with the political will, military capacity, and moral clarity to protect them. Without Protestant England, there would have been no sanctuary for European Protestants fleeing annihilation,” it read.

Powerful linked this historical context to the current Biafran movement led by Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, describing it as “not a call to violence, nor a scheme to destabilize West Africa as British/Nigerian lobbyists in Europe and USA would have us believe. It is a demand for a democratic referendum, the most peaceful conflict-resolution mechanism recognized in international law.”

The statement added that a restored Biafra “would function as a safe civilizational anchor — a homeland where Christians and people of other faiths from across Nigeria can live without fear, and from which persecuted Christians elsewhere could find refuge and protection.” IPOB also claimed that its emergence has helped reduce attacks on Igbos in Northern Nigeria, stating, “Since the emergence of the IPOB, the once-routine mass killings of Igbos in Northern Nigeria abruptly ceased. That outcome was not accidental. Collective self-assertion created deterrence where decades of appeasement failed.”

While acknowledging the value of security cooperation with the United States, IPOB argued that it addresses symptoms rather than the root causes. “Security cooperation between the United States and Nigeria may manage symptoms, but it has never cured the disease. Repeating a strategy that has failed for generations — while dismissing self-determination as dangerous — is not realism; it is historical amnesia,” the statement said.

Powerful concluded that advocacy for self-determination does not conflict with peace or countering violent extremism. “No serious advocate of peace opposes cooperation against violent extremism. But refusing to acknowledge peaceful constitutional exits, while insisting on the permanence of a demonstrably broken state, guarantees the continuation of persecution rather than its end,” he said.

The spokesperson further argued that an independent Biafra would enhance, not threaten, regional stability. “An independent Biafra, like an independent Protestant England or the State of Israel, would not threaten regional stability. It would create it — by giving persecuted peoples something they have never had within Nigeria: a sovereign place of safety.”

“True concern for Christians — and for all Nigerians — begins with intellectual honesty: forced unity has failed. Safety, dignity, and peace have always followed self-rule, not its denial,” Powerful concluded.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

The Embassy of Israel in Nigeria has strongly condemned the recent massacre in Kwara State, which claimed the lives of over 160 people, describing the attack as a “horrific massacre” against innocent civilians.

In a statement shared on its X handle on Friday, the Israeli mission expressed “deep sympathy with the families of the victims and all those affected by the deadly attack, which is considered one of the worst mass killings in Nigeria in recent times.”

“The Embassy of Israel in Nigeria condemns the horrific massacre in Kwara State, in which over 160 innocent people were brutally murdered,” the statement read. The mission called the deliberate targeting of civilians “an affront to humanity and can never be justified no matter when or where it takes place.”

Israel also affirmed its solidarity with Nigeria, pledging support for the country’s efforts to combat insecurity and safeguard its citizens. “Israel stands in solidarity with the people and Government of Nigeria in their efforts to confront violence and protect innocent lives,” the embassy added.

The condemnation comes amid national and international outrage over the attack, which occurred in a rural community on Tuesday when armed men reportedly invaded the area, killing residents and burning homes. Humanitarian organizations and local residents have placed the death toll at over 160, with additional people still missing.

The massacre has drawn renewed criticism of Nigeria’s security situation, particularly in rural regions that remain vulnerable to armed attacks. President Bola Tinubu condemned the killings, ordered the deployment of security forces to the area, and promised that the perpetrators would face justice. However, civil society groups and residents continue to accuse the government of failing to prevent repeated attacks despite early warnings.

Security analysts warn that unless immediate and coordinated measures are taken to protect rural communities, strengthen intelligence, and address the root causes of violence, mass attacks like the Kwara incident may continue. Survivors and grieving families are calling for justice, accountability, and sustained security presence to prevent further bloodshed.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

United States President Donald Trump has stated he did not err in sharing a video on his official Truth Social account that showed former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama depicted as apes.

Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday, Trump insisted he “didn’t make a mistake” and said he does not need to apologize.

“I didn’t make a mistake,” he emphasized.

Trump acknowledged that he had not watched the entire video before it was posted. He explained:

“I didn’t see the whole thing. I looked at the first part, and it was really about voter fraud in the machines, how crooked it is, how disgusting it is. Then I gave it to the people. Generally, they look at the whole thing. But I guess somebody didn’t.”

When asked whether he condemned the video’s content, Trump replied, “Of course I do.”

The video, posted late Thursday, promoted a conspiracy theory about voting machines used during the 2020 election and included a racist portrayal of the Obamas. It remained on Trump’s account for about 12 hours before being deleted Friday morning after bipartisan calls for its removal.

Earlier, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the post in a statement, describing it as “from an internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from The Lion King.”

She added, “Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public.”

Hours after the statement, the video was removed from Trump’s Truth Social account.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Popular British rapper, Central Cee, has stirred widespread reactions on social media after revealing that he has embraced Islam.

The announcement shifted attention from his music career to his personal faith journey. Shortly after the revelation surfaced online, thousands of fans and followers trooped to his social media pages to express their support and goodwill.

During a live appearance, the rapper disclosed that he had formally entered the Islamic faith. He said, “I declared the Shahada, I have a new name, I am now a Muslim.”

Following the declaration, congratulatory messages poured in from supporters across different platforms. Many welcomed him warmly into the religion. Some of the messages read, “Welcome to Islam, brother,” “You have been honored with Islam,” and “Welcome, Muslim brother.”

The development also triggered conversations about a possible new identity for the music star. This came after he hinted about adopting another name. He had stated, “I have a new name.”

Fans quickly began suggesting options they felt would suit him. Among the various proposals, one name appeared repeatedly in comment sections. Several followers wrote, “Yusuf suits him well,” while others added, “I am curious about the Muslim name, but let it be Yusuf.”

Despite the wave of speculation, the rapper has not released any official confirmation regarding a new name. He has also not provided further clarification on the matter.

Online engagement around the announcement continues to grow, with many admirers still awaiting additional details about his conversion and identity within the faith.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

United States President Donald Trump has drawn widespread condemnation after posting a controversial video on social media that features an AI-generated scene portraying former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama as monkeys.

The video surfaced late Thursday during a flurry of activity on Trump’s Truth Social account. Within less than one hour, the president uploaded dozens of posts on the platform.

One of the materials shared was a compilation video that repeated his long-standing claims that the 2020 presidential election was manipulated. Those allegations have been dismissed in court and through official reviews.

Close to the one-minute point of the footage, an altered segment appears. It shows the Obamas’ faces placed on monkeys’ bodies. The background audio features the song ‘The Lion Sleeps Tonight’.

Trump reposted the same video twice. The timing fueled further anger online because the incident occurred during Black History Month.

Users on X and other social media platforms reacted strongly. Many described the clip as racist and degrading. Some critics argued that the post reinforced racist stereotypes historically used against Black people.

The controversial upload formed part of a broader late-night posting spree. During the same period, Trump again promoted discredited narratives about widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election, despite the absence of supporting evidence.

In a separate post that drew attention, Trump shared a screenshot bearing the message, “This can be a great option if things don’t work out,” alongside a fight scene video of martial artist Bruce Lee. He did not clarify the meaning of the message, leaving observers to speculate.

The uproar followed renewed scrutiny of Trump’s remarks about the U.S. electoral process. Earlier in the week, he suggested that Republicans should assume control of election administration in several areas and proposed federal involvement in voting oversight.

“The Republicans should say, ‘We want to take over,’” Trump reportedly said during a conservative podcast released Monday.

During the same conversation with former deputy FBI director Dan Bongino, he added that elections should be “nationalised.”

However, in an interview with NBC News correspondent Tom Llamas on Wednesday, Trump attempted to retract that position.

“I didn’t say nationalise,” he claimed, even though recordings of the earlier remarks circulated widely.

The White House later tried to ease tensions sparked by the statements. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the president remains loyal to the U.S. Constitution. She added that he believes previous elections were affected by “fraud and irregularities,” although no verified evidence supports the claim.

Only hours after that clarification, Trump appeared to reinforce his stance while speaking in the Oval Office.

“The federal government should get involved,” he said.

The developments have continued to generate debate across political and civic circles in the United States. Critics argue that both the video controversy and the election comments raise concerns about political rhetoric and democratic norms.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

The Republic of Türkiye has denounced the deadly terrorist assault on Woro and Nuku communities in Kaiama Local Government Area of Kwara State, expressing grief over the casualties recorded in the incident.

In a statement released on Thursday through its Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Turkish government said it was “deeply saddened by the loss of lives caused by the terrorist attack that took place in Nigeria’s Kwara State.”

“We strongly condemn this heinous attack and extend our condolences to the families of those who lost their lives and to the people of Nigeria. Türkiye will continue to support Nigeria in its fight against terrorism,” the statement read.

Meanwhile, Nigeria’s Defence Headquarters (DHQ) in Abuja said the attackers struck after residents rejected attempts to subject them to ideological indoctrination.

In a separate statement signed by the Director of Defence Information, Major General Samaila Uba, the military described the incident as a “cowardly terrorist attack.” It also conveyed sympathy to bereaved families and affected communities.

Reports indicated that more than 170 residents lost their lives during the Tuesday onslaught.

According to the DHQ, the assailants had earlier approached Woro village seeking approval to “conduct preaching and indoctrination sessions,” a request the villagers declined.

Troops were deployed to the area after security agencies received intelligence about the threat. Military patrols and surveillance operations continued for about two weeks.

“However, weeks after the troops withdrew, the cowardly terrorists returned to kill innocent citizens in protest and in a bid to terrorise inhabitants and others,” the statement said.

The Armed Forces of Nigeria commended residents of the affected communities for standing firm despite threats. It praised their refusal to abandon their beliefs and constitutional loyalty.

“The AFN mourns with the families of those who have lost loved ones in these and other similar brutal attacks on defenceless citizens defending community values and freedom across Nigeria,” the military said.

The DHQ urged Nigerians to remain resolute and resist extremist indoctrination. It warned that violent groups aim to impose “twisted beliefs through terror and intimidation.”

Citizens were also encouraged to cooperate with security agencies. The military stressed that unity and resilience remain vital in confronting terrorism.

It added that security forces, in collaboration with other agencies, have intensified efforts to identify and prosecute those behind the Kwara attack and related acts nationwide.

Amnesty International also reacted to the wave of violence. The organisation condemned what it called a troubling rise in killings and abductions across the country.

It described Tuesday, February 3, 2026, as a “Bloody Tuesday,” following coordinated assaults in several locations.

“Alarming escalation of attacks, abductions for ransom and frequent killings across Nigeria have left people feeling more unsafe, showing utter failure of the Nigerian authorities to protect lives and properties,” Amnesty International had said.

The group cited attacks in Woro and Nuku in Kwara State, Doma Tafoki in Katsina State and Abande in Benue State, where many residents were reportedly killed.

The incident has drawn both local and international concern, with renewed calls for stronger security measures to curb terrorism and protect vulnerable communities.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has expressed regret over his past association with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, as renewed attention surrounding recently released Epstein files stirs fresh controversy.

The latest disclosures have revived public and political interest in Epstein’s network of high-profile contacts. Among those facing renewed scrutiny are former US President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who have both been named in the documents and have agreed to testify before a House committee examining Epstein’s activities.

Gates addressed the issue publicly after allegations surfaced in newly released records. Reports claimed he concealed a sexually transmitted disease from his former wife, Melinda French Gates, following alleged encounters with “Russian girls.” Epstein was also alleged to have suggested that Gates attempted to secretly administer antibiotics to his wife.

Gates’ office rejected the accusations, describing them as “absolutely absurd and completely false.” Speaking during an interview with Australia’s Channel 9News, the billionaire dismissed the claims and accused Epstein of attempting to damage his reputation or pressure him.

“Apparently, Jeffrey wrote an email to himself. That email was never sent. The email is false,” Gates said.

“I don’t know what his thinking was there. Was he trying to attack me in some way? Every minute I spent with him, I regret, and I apologise that I did that.”

Melinda French Gates also spoke about the renewed attention during an appearance on NPR’s Wild Card podcast. She said the resurfacing details had reopened painful memories from their 27-year marriage, which ended in divorce in 2021.

“For me, it’s personally hard whenever those details come up, right? Because it brings back memories of some very, very painful times in my marriage,” French Gates told the radio network’s Wild.

She continued: “Whatever questions remain there of what – I can’t even begin to know all of it – those questions are for those people and for even my ex-husband. They need to answer to those things, not me.”

Gates confirmed that he met Epstein in 2011 and shared dinners with him on several occasions. He said the meetings centred on efforts to mobilise wealthy donors for global health projects. He denied visiting Epstein’s private Caribbean island and rejected claims of sexual relations with women linked to the financier.

“The focus was always, he knew a lot of very rich people, and he was saying he could get them to give money to global health. In retrospect, that was a dead end,” Gates said.

“I was foolish to spend time with him. I was one of many people who regret ever knowing him. The more that comes out, the more clear it will be that, although the time was a mistake, it has nothing to do with that kind of behaviour.”

Reflecting on the broader scandal, Melinda French Gates described the situation as a societal reckoning and lamented the trauma suffered by victims.

“No girl should ever be put in the situation they were put in by Epstein and whatever was going on with all of the various people around him. It’s beyond heartbreaking,” she said.

“I remember being those ages the girls were, I remember my daughters being those ages.”

She added that learning about allegations connected to her former husband left her with “just unbelievable sadness,” though she emphasised that her concern remains with those directly affected. “What they went through is unimaginable,” she said.

Political reaction has also emerged. Republican congresswoman Nancy Mace of South Carolina disclosed that she had requested House Oversight Committee chair James Comer to subpoena Gates.

“Mace wrote on X, that she has questions for Bill Gates about Epstein, saying she supported Melinda French Gates’s assertion that her ex-husband must answer lingering questions.

Epstein died by suicide in August 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges. Despite his death, investigations and document releases tied to his activities continue to generate global attention and draw prominent figures back into public focus.

By Iranloye Sofiu Taiye

The world has entered a phase in which power no longer feels compelled to wear moral disguises. From Eastern Europe to the Middle East, from East Asia to Latin America, coercion has re-emerged as an acceptable instrument of statecraft, and sovereignty has become increasingly conditional, least respected when convenient and violated when costly restraint disappears.

The Russia–Ukraine war, China’s posture towards Taiwan, Israel’s war in Gaza, and the long-standing pressure campaign against Venezuela are not isolated crises. They are symptoms of a systemic transition: the erosion of post–Cold War restraint and the reassertion of raw power politics in a crowded, mistrustful, and increasingly multipolar international system.

For Africa, this moment is not abstract. It is existential. The same forces reshaping Europe, Asia, and Latin America are already present on the African continent through resource competition, security outsourcing, debt diplomacy, sanctions regimes, proxy alignments, and political conditionality. The difference is that Africa often confronts these forces without a unified strategy, relying instead on appeals to history, morality, or international goodwill. That approach is no longer sufficient.

Realist theory, as articulated by thinkers such as Hans Morgenthau and John Mearsheimer, offers a brutally honest diagnosis of the international system. It reminds us that global politics is characterised by anarchy, not law; that survival, not virtue, motivates states; and that power, not rhetoric, ultimately determines outcomes.

Recent conflicts confirm realism’s core claims: Russia acted in Ukraine not because of moral failure but because it perceived a narrowing window to secure its sphere of influence. China’s pressure on Taiwan is driven less by ideology than by long-term assessments of capability, timing, and strategic opportunity. Israel’s conduct in Gaza reflects the logic of overwhelming deterrence in an insecure regional environment. The United States’ treatment of Venezuela illustrates how economic warfare substitutes for direct military intervention in an era of reputational constraints.

In each case, capability trumped legality, and vulnerability invited pressure. Yet realism, while accurate in diagnosing power behaviour, becomes dangerous when treated as destiny. Taken to its logical extreme, it suggests that weaker states have only three options: submission, alignment, or destruction. This is analytically lazy and politically paralysing.

History and current global practice demonstrate that survival is not reserved for the strongest but for the most strategically positioned. The key distinction between states that withstand pressure and those that collapse is not moral standing but strategic architecture.

Ukraine did not survive Russia’s invasion because it matched Moscow militarily. It survived because it transformed a bilateral war into a multilateral stake. By embedding its security dilemma within NATO, the EU, and global norms, Ukraine increased the cost of Russian victory beyond the battlefield.

Taiwan’s resilience lies not only in its arms but also in its economy. Its centrality to global semiconductor supply chains converts any military action into a worldwide economic crisis. Invasion becomes irrational not because it is impossible, but because it is prohibitively disruptive.

Palestine commands unprecedented global sympathy yet remains structurally vulnerable. Without credible security guarantees, economic leverage, or institutional power, moral legitimacy alone has not translated into sovereignty.

Venezuela’s leadership adopted confrontational rhetoric without building defensive alliances, diversified economic networks, or institutional shields. The result has been isolation, sanctions, and internal fragility, confirming that outrage without insulation invites coercion. The lesson is stark: states do not survive because they are right; they survive because they are costly to dominate. Afghanistan’s resilience is a case study. 

Africa today occupies a paradoxical position. The continent is: Central to the global energy transition (critical minerals), demographically pivotal, geopolitically courted by rival powers, and numerically powerful in multilateral institutions; alas, Africa remains strategically fragmented. Most African states still approach global politics through the language of gratitude, alignment, or moral appeal rather than through calculated leverage. The continent’s diplomatic posture is often reactive rather than anticipatory.

This is dangerous in a world where: aid is weaponised, debt is politicised, sanctions are normalised, and security assistance comes with strategic strings. Africa risks becoming the quiet theatre of the next great-power contest, not because it is weak, but because it is insufficiently coordinated.

What Africa requires is neither idealism nor cynicism, but strategic realism with agency a doctrine that accepts power politics while refusing subjugation.

Such a doctrine would rest on five pillars.

1. Strategic Indispensability: Africa must move beyond raw resource exportation toward value-chain centrality. Countries that control processing, logistics, and industrial ecosystems are harder to coerce than those that merely supply inputs.

2. Networked Sovereignty: Sovereignty in the 21st century is not isolationist. It is embedded on favourable terms through regional blocs, trade regimes, and security compacts that dilute unilateral pressure.

3. Institutional Power, Not Institutional Faith: Africa must stop treating international institutions as moral referees and start using them as arenas of contestation. Voting blocs, agenda-setting, and procedural leverage matter.

4. Strategic Non-Alignment, Not Passivity: Non-alignment must evolve from rhetorical neutrality into active hedging, diversifying partnerships, avoiding dependency traps, and exploiting multipolar competition without becoming a proxy.

5. Continental Coordination: No African state, regardless of size, can negotiate effectively alone in a hardened global system. Continental coherence in economic, diplomatic, and security-related is no longer aspirational; it is existential.

Conclusively, power will not wait for Africa to be ready; the defining feature of the emerging world order is not chaos, but selective constraint. Power will be exercised where resistance is weak, fragmented, or sentimental and restrained where costs are high, and consequences diffuse. Africa cannot afford another century of learning this lesson too late. The continent must abandon the illusion that shared history, moral standing, or international sympathy will shield it from coercion. Those narratives did not protect Ukraine, Palestine, or Venezuela. They will not protect Africa.

What will protect Africa is a strategy: the ability to anticipate pressure, restructure vulnerability, and convert relevance into leverage. In a world where power has shed its disguises, survival belongs not to the loudest protester, but to the most strategically prepared.

Iranloye Sofiu Taiye is a policy analyst and wrote via iranloye100@gmail.com.

By Ibrahym El-Caleel

Jeffery Epstein, despite being a MOSSAD agent who successfully lured high profile individuals and world leaders into his web to obtain their dirty secrets, was afraid of Nigerians scamming him in oil deal.

Epstein is afraid of Nigerians. Hehe.

Ladies and gentlemen, I want to officially tell you that I am also afraid of Nigerians from now going forward.

But jokes aside, Nigerians are a special breed. If a Nigerian decides to settle for anything, he ensures that he masters it to the best of his or her ability.

In the wake of the US’s disregard for Nigeria’s sovereignty in December last year, I read a post on X made by a security analyst. The handle is @GallantDaletian, and he opined that yes, the US military might have the tech, air power, and naval dominance, but when it comes to guerrilla and asymmetric warfare, the Nigerian military is a force to be reckoned with!

He said, the US may have advanced technology, drones, and aircraft carriers, but Nigeria’s military has mastered the art of unconventional warfare, leveraging local knowledge and intelligence to outmaneuver adversaries.

It’s not about comparing strengths, but acknowledging different areas of expertise. Nigeria’s focus on regional security, counter terrorism, and peacekeeping has earned it respect, while the US excels in global reach and high tech warfare.

Clearly Jeffery Epstein, despite his notoriety, believes that the fear of Nigerians is the beginning of wisdom. Sharp guy.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Ukraine’s sports minister has criticised Fifa president Gianni Infantino over comments suggesting that world football’s governing body could reconsider the ban placed on Russia, describing his remarks as “irresponsible” and “infantile.”

Russian national teams and clubs were suspended by Fifa and Uefa in February 2022 following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, a decision that has kept the country out of major tournaments, including the 2022 World Cup, Euro 2024 and the 2026 World Cup.

Despite the ongoing war, Infantino said the ban “has not achieved anything” and “has just created more frustration and hatred,” adding that “having girls and boys from Russia being able to play football games in other parts of Europe would help.”

Reacting in a post on social media, Ukraine’s sports minister, Matvii Bidnyi, said: “Gianni Infantino’s words sound irresponsible – not to say infantile,” adding that they “detach football from the reality in which children are being killed.”

Bidnyi stated that more than 650 Ukrainian athletes and coaches, including over 100 footballers, have been killed since the start of the war, and added: “War is a crime, not politics,” insisting that Russia’s flag and national symbols “have no place among people who respect values such as justice, integrity and fair play.”

Serhii Palkin, chief executive of Ukrainian club Shakhtar Donetsk, also condemned Infantino’s comments, saying they “represent a complete detachment from reality” and amount to “an attempt to pretend that war and aggression do not exist.”

He warned that football cannot ignore events outside the pitch, stating: “Football cannot exist outside reality and it has no right to turn a blind eye to evil,” while stressing that any move to reintegrate Russia would carry “responsibility for complicity in the silencing of war crimes.”

Although Russia has played matches against some non-Western nations outside the Fifa and Uefa framework, the ban remains in place, even as Ukraine continues to oppose any steps toward Russia’s return to international sport.