Bloody Sunday: Russia’s strikes on Sumy

Hey, Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. You know one of the perks about having four kids that you know about is actually getting a direct line to the big man up north. And this year he wants you to know the best gift that you can give someone is the gift of Mint Mobile's unlimited wireless for $15 a month.

Now you don't even need to wrap it.

Give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront payment.

Of $45 for a three month plan equivalent to $15 per month. Required new customer offer for first three months only. Speed slow after 35 gigabytes if network's busy, taxes and fees extra. See mintmobile.com hey, Ryan Reynolds here wishing.

You a very happy half off holiday because right now Mint Mobile is offering you the gift of 50% off unlimited. To be clear, that's half price, not half the service. Mint is still premium unlimited wireless for a great price. So that means half day.

Yeah.

Give it a try@mintmobile.com Switch upfront payment.

Of $45 for three month plan equivalent to $15 per month. Required new customer offer for first three months only. Speed slow 135 gigabytes of network busy taxes and fees extra. See mint mobile.com.

The Economist. Hello and welcome to the Intelligence from the Economist. I'm your host, Jason Palmer. Every weekday we provide a fresh perspective on the events shaping your world. The Trump administration's kneecapping of America's science institutions is having an unexpected, unintended, yet entirely predictable effect. Brainy researchers want out. We look at what European institutions are doing and should be doing to hoover up all that talent. And Britain's consumer price index is, as elsewhere, calculated from a notional standard basket of goods. But standards really have changed. We look at what's been in the basket over the years, from cod liver oil to small caged mammals. First up, though.

Sumy is a town near Ukraine's northeastern border. It's a classic small provincial town founded by the Cossacks in the middle of the 17th century.

Tim Judah is a special correspondent for the Economist.

I was there exactly 10 days ago to meet the head of Sumy Province's military administration and refugees who fled from settlements close to the border, which is now being pummeled by the Russians. The border is about 20 miles north of the city. On Sunday, two Russian missiles hit the city of Sumy, killing 34 people, including two children, and wounding at least 117. Videos show that the target of one of the missiles was the building. I interviewed the head of the military administration in yesterday was Palm Sunday. Lots of people were out and about and many would have been in church at the moment of the missile strikes. The second missile killed many who were actually on a trolley bus, and videos show bodies literally scattered over the streets. Firefighters can be seen extinguishing the wrecks of burning cars. Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine's president, said that a baby girl born this year is amongst those who died. Leaders from across Europe have condemned the attacks, which are particularly vicious. They are, said Ursula von der Leyen, head of the eu, a grim reminder that Russia was and remains the aggressor. All of this comes as American negotiators continue to try and seek a peace deal with Russia. Steve Witkoff, President Trump's negotiator, had seen Vladimir Putin in st Petersburg only 48 hours before this attack.

And as horrific as this one is, it's not the only attack of its scope that we've seen in recent days.

Well, that's right. I mean, civilians are dying every day. Yesterday, at the same time as the strike on Sumy, we had three civilians who died in Kherson. But this comes in the wake of real shock in Ukraine at an attack on April 4th in the town of Kryvy Rich, which is the hometown of President Volodymyr zelenskyy, where a miss struck right next to a playground. 19 people died on that day, including nine children. So there seems to be absolutely no let up in these attacks. While President Trump is sending his envoys to talk to Vladimir Putin and the Russians about ending this war and these attacks, of course, and looking for a ceasefire, but we don't see any evidence of that on the horizon.

But the character of the attacks, as many people have alleged, is it looks like strikes deliberately on civilian targets. What do you mean of those allegations?

Look, it's really very hard to know what's in the mind of Russian commanders when they press the button on sending these ballistic missiles out. This is opposed to these drones because drones are something else. But in the Krvi Reef strike, they claimed that they were targeting a restaurant where there were military men meeting with Western military commanders, which turned out to be just complete nonsense. You know, I went to this restaurant, which they missed by hundreds of meters, and there'd been a children's party there. There were still balloons there, There was a big banner from the Chamber of Commerce because there'd been a meeting of people about local beauty products. In the case of Sumy, it's been muddied a little bit because one mayor from Sumy province. And a deputy from parliament has accused the head of the Sumy province military administration of organizing in Sumy that day, kind of an awards ceremony for soldiers. The controversy would be that the Russians would say it was a legitimate military target if they were trying to target a large gathering of soldiers. But we have no way of know whether that's true or not.

And you've been doing a lot of reporting on the ground in Ukraine. What's the feeling you get from civilians at this change in character of the attacks, the intensity of the attacks?

Well, the best way to sum it up is what I saw and what I heard in Kirby Rich. That was when the attack was, which killed the 19, including the nine children. And I went there five days after the attack and the first thing I noticed, which was really quite strange, was this district felt like a whole silence had fallen on this area. The whole area was in complete shock. And what you could see at the playground was this constant stream of people bringing teddy bears, bringing toys and flowers and leaving them in these ever growing mounds in the playground. But when I talked to people, you know, I said, well, do you think that this means there should be a ceasefire? Everyone should stop fighting? Now, I met one who said, you cannot wipe blood away with blood. But actually, that was, I think, an exception. And the vast majority of the people that I spoke to from this shock had come to this position of, no, we must answer this. And as one person said, who was standing literally two metres away from where her friend had been killed and had fallen on top of a child and had saved the child's life, she said, we need revenge. And I think that slowly but surely that's the feat. Feeling that was happening could have been, and there's no reason to think that it should be any different in Sumy once the shock starts to wear off.

And so how to put these attacks into the context of peace negotiations and how you feel Vladimir Putin is approaching them?

Well, quite simply, it looks from the outside as though he's simply stringing Trump and his envoys along. I think that Mr. Putin and I think that many people here in Ukraine think that Mr. Putin is actually not interested in peace talks, so he's not interested in stopping the war. I think he thinks he's doing well. He thinks he's got Ukraine on the back foot, perhaps he thinks that he can somehow have the blame for everything fall on Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and that the Americans cut off military aid and intelligence once again, as they did briefly a couple of weeks ago. Basically, I don't see any evidence that Mr. Putin wants to stop the war because he thinks he's doing okay.

But what do you think of that thought? I mean, what we have heard in recent weeks is that Russia is making fewer and fewer gains. Ukraine is holding the line better. There is simply a shift at in morale on the Ukrainian side.

I think things are feeling better on the front line. I think the soldiers and people that I spoke to said that compared to several months ago, that their supplies of both imported and domestically produced arms are much better than before. Morale seems to be better than before. But, you know, the question is, like, how long can this war grind on for?

I guess the bigger question here in the context of negotiations with America for some kind of ceasefire, is whether all of these attacks, especially this most recent one, of change the calculus, to change the prospects for peace.

Well, so far, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that that will happen. I mean, Mr. Trump is on record now condemning the attacks. I think it was terrible, and I.

Was told they made a mistake. But I think it's a horrible thing. I think the whole war is a horrible thing.

I think the whole thing is, okay, well, what are you going to do about it if Mr. Putin is still continuing to fire these ballistic missiles and killing large amounts of civilians? It looks to me like there might be sort of divisions within the administration amongst those dealing with Ukraine. General Keith Kellogg, who's the special envoy for Ukraine, said on social media today's Palm Sunday attack by Russian forces on civilian targets in Sumy crosses any line of decency. And then he went on to say, that's exactly why President Trump is, and I'm quote, working hard to end this war. But on the other hand, as I said, we've had Steve Witkoff, who actually did the negotiations or has been talking to Mr. Putin, and we haven't heard from. So, you know, let's see what happens. I mean, what is interesting is that one idea doing the rounds is that next Sunday, which is Easter Sunday, will be some sort of symbolic date, and the Russians had better decide whether they're going to come on board on a ceasefire or not. But let's see. I mean, Mr. Trump said he was going to end the war in 24 hours. He's failed to do that. Let's see if he makes any success in and either war at all.

Tim, thanks very much for joining us.

Thanks very much for having me.

After the Nazis came to power in 1933, many scientists fled Germany. Among them, Albert Einstein. John von Neumann and some of them fled to America.

Christian Odendaal is our European Economics editor.

These refugees then created new fields of research in America. And the Second World War and the Cold War led to further scientific progress. Beneath the sinister mushroom, 80,000 died at Hiroshima today. Behind the mushroom, science marshals its atomic resources to fight disease, drive industry, propel ships and aircraft employing In America alone 150,000 men and women. America has continued to blur Europe's scientific talent across the Atlantic. But now that immigrants and science are targets of the Trump administration, Europe sees an opportunity to reverse that decade long brain drain.

So, Christian, as first port of call here, in what ways is the Trump administration targeting science and indeed scientists?

To the extent that I understand what the Trump administration is trying to do here, they are targeting sciences they disagree with, like climate science, gender studies or public health. And I think they're attacking universities because these are centers of free thinking, critical thinking, progressive thinking, which the Trump administration only seemed to like when such thinking comes to the same conclusions as those in power. And we have seen staff laid off at major science funding organizations in America. Mr. Trump threatened Columbia University with funding cuts unless it changes a few policies. So these are the things that are happening in America right now.

And you think because of that hostility and funding drying up that the brain drain may naturally reverse itself?

Well, scientists are a pretty independent bunch of people, right? They hate being told what to do. So scientific freedom is part of the research environment. And there, Europe may have something to offer now, but that is not all. Of course, if you are a researcher in say, artificial intelligence, right, you want to be where the cutting edge research is done, and that's America. And more generally, scientists want to be where other top scientists are and of course, where funding for their research is available. I think Europe sees an opportunity at this moment to get mostly European talent back, people who might have considered moving home anyway. And universities and research funders are all considering options. We know from Germany's Max Planck Society, which funds world leading researchers, that they have been approached and are looking at options. French politicians and universities are probably the most aggressive at the moment. But also EU science ministers wrote a letter to the European Commission recently that they want immediate action to attract talents from abroad. And of course, it remains to be seen whether this time is different than during the first Trump administration. For example, one researcher told me that there was a lot of talk about leaving America, but very few in the end did.

And you hinted earlier about the link between technological advance and military technology. Do you think the current geopolitical mess is having an effect on what kind of research Europe is now doing.

Yeah, I think science overall is no longer sort of a nice to have in the geopolitical conflict that Europe finds itself in. Now it has to be at the cutting edge of defense research and military technologies. For example, China is far ahead in AI and quantum computing and cybersecurity, which then could create new vulnerabilities. The dependence on digital services from Silicon Valley no longer looks wise. That is also what the science ministers say very explicitly in their letter to the commission. They say research, science and talents are necessary to enhance Europe's strategic autonomy. And then of course, there is economic growth. Right. Europe's economic model is aging, much like its population. So science and innovation more broadly becomes the main way through which the European economy can grow. Together with what is happening in America, this could be Europe's chance. As one scientist put it to me, if we don't manage to boost science now, I don't know if we ever will.

And so do you think those goals are achievable, are reasonable? Is Europe expecting too much change too fast after all these decades?

Yeah, I think there's maybe a bit too much optimism in Europe on this one. At the moment. America is just very, very far ahead in sciences. If we just look at the money, for example, America spends 3.5% roughly of GDP on research and development, and Europe 2%. So that's a pretty sizable gap already. But that even doesn't tell the full story. So America's highest spending is mostly private businesses. And for Europe to get to such a high research and development spending by businesses, it needs to have much more research intensive industries, much deeper capital markets for risky innovative firms and startups, a more unified European market, so that startups want to start and scale in Europe and not leave for America the first chance they get. And then even in higher education spending, where Europe holds up quite well, it spends less on the high quality research in universities, it spreads it much wider. That is laudable, I guess, in trying to spread education and science across the continent. But for the scientific advances that Europe needs, for the innovation that it needs, the talent that it needs, it has to have more excellent universities and institutes, and that means taking money away elsewhere. And that will be a very tough political cell.

But if Europe makes itself more welcoming to talent from abroad, America in particular, it's going to make itself attractive to talent more generally outside America.

Yeah, exactly. That's a hugely important point. One American scientist put it to me that American universities are basically run on foreign PhD students. Another said that America has this hunger for foreign talent that Europe does not have, and so Europe will need to develop that in many ways, from visas to making a more welcoming culture to make universities more attractive, less administratively burdensome, and so forth forth. And what is happening in America may in fact now divert some of that foreign talent to Europe. There was a fascinating new study looking at the first Trump term and the restrictions on high skilled H1B visas. Canada was the major beneficiary because foreign talent went there instead. And then boosting Canadian firms and even the wages of natives and going all the way back to historical migrations again, the scientists that fled at Germany, they build up new research in America, but it mostly worked through the young new talent that build on the input of the refugees. So Europe should make sure that it attracts the best young talent to make the most of it this time.

Christian, thanks very much for joining us.

Thanks for having me, Jesse.

Cod liver oil 1947-1951 mercifully passed away swiftly. Liver lasted a little longer, 1947-1998 avocados didn't arrive until 1993, but they have thrived since then.

Catherine Nixie is a culture correspondent for the Economist.

To read the contents list of the basket of goods, updated recently by Britain's Office for National Statistics, is an intriguing experience. For economists, this offers a sober measure of consumer price inflation. For everyone else, it's a births and deaths column for British consumerism, announcing the arrival of some objects and acting for others as their epitaph. So most recently it's announced the arrival of men's sliders and the demise of newspaper advertisements. It has previously recorded the end of Linoleum 1980, of Corsets 1970 and of Oil Lamps 1947. Its very name is a relic. That word basket sounds like something that might have hung from the arm of a British housewife as she went to the shops in her mackintosh 1947-1952 to buy Brussels sprouts 1947-2006 sometimes it's simply an enigma. In the 2000s, a small caged mammal appeared unexpectedly in the ONS's calculations. The basket itself was born in 1947. After the Second World War, the political mood was extremely tense. British families had had to pay a high price, in some case the ultimate price for the war, and they were annoyed at how high the prices for everything else were in the piece. It was in this era that macroeconomic theory began. Now Britain's bean counters needed microeconomic data on things like the price of beans to apply those theories. And that meant shoe leather. Reporting Shoe repairs, 1947-2003. Every month, the government's bean counters, 280 of them, set out the shops in around 140 places across Britain to collect 180,000 prices of hundreds of goods and services. These prices are then gathered into categories. So the small caged mammal goes to make up a larger category on pets. Then the changes in the price are calculated and this enables the government to know about inflation and at least something about the price of eggs. What they also show is how much Britain has changed. The 1947 list, made at the height of rationing, shows a nation that survived thriving on Brussels sprouts, margarine and the ominously opaque compound cooking fat. Evelyn Moore later wrote that this was a bleak period of present privation, and he added even more bleakly of soya beans. In the so called hungry novels of wartime and post war Britain, British novelists with poor diets and rich imaginations allowed their characters to gorge on the foods which they could not. In Brideshead revisit, Sebastian Fleit eats strawberries and sips Chateau Peyguet beneath a spreading summer elm. It isn't a wine you've ever tasted, he tells his companion. Given that Brideshead was published in 1945 and table wine didn't appear on lists until 1980, this was very probably true. These ONS records offer a picture not merely of national consumerism, but of national character. Julian Barnes, the novelist, once said that to build a character you must start with the shoes. And the basket does indeed give you Britain's footwear, from men's leather oxfords 1947 to plimsolls 1947 to 1987 to the casually late arrival of the trainer, 1987. But the lists also give you detail on Britain's underwear, which in 1962 included a girdle, and on where Britons spend their time climbing walls have now replaced placed bingo hauls. It's not just the items on these lists that have changed, it's the length of the lists themselves. Early lists aren't just nasty with that cod liver oil or occasionally brutish. 1952, for example, offers home killed mutton and lamb. They're also very short. The 1947 basket has only around 200 items in it. The current one, by contrast, has 750. One study found that in the early 1970s, Americans could choose between five types of running shoe. By the late 1990s, they had 285 one of the defining features of our modern lives is choice in everything. And that's from whether or not to fight in a war to whether or not to spend your money on avocados or even on small caged mammals.

That's all for this episode of the Intelligence. We'll see you back here tomorrow.

When you think of skyrocketing brands like Aloe, Allbirds or Skims, it's easy to credit their success to great products, sleek branding and brilliant marketing. But here's the overlooked secret. The real magic lies in the engine behind the scenes, the business powering their business. For millions of brands, that engine is Shopify, making selling seamless for them and shopping effortless for us. Upgrade your business and get the same checkout Alo Yoga uses. Sign up for your $1 per month trial period at shopify.com retail all lowercase go to shopify.com retail to upgrade your selling today. Shopify.com retail.