The Week The Week
flag of US
US
flag of UK
UK
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Less than $3 per week

Sign in
  • View Profile
  • Sign out
  • The Explainer
  • The Week Recommends
  • Newsletters
  • Cartoons
  • From the Magazine
  • The Week Junior
  • Student Offers
  • More
    • Politics
    • World News
    • Business
    • Health
    • Science
    • Food & Drink
    • Travel
    • Culture
    • History
    • Personal Finance
    • Puzzles
    • Photos
    • The Blend
    • All Categories
  • Newsletter sign up Newsletter
  • Saturday Wrap, from The Week
    Robot ‘supersoldiers’, Chernobyl’s legacy, and ‘political panto’ in Scotland

     
    controversy of the week

    The rise of the machines: an all-robot victory in Ukraine

    “In video after video, some of Ukraine’s toughest new recruits have shown their mettle,” said Sam Skove in Foreign Policy. Some can be seen lugging supplies under a sky “buzzing” with enemy drones; others, taking Russian soldiers prisoner and evacuating wounded Ukrainian troops without fear of “destruction nor discomfort”. These “supersoldiers” aren’t human; they are ground robots – and they have been playing an increasingly vital role in the four-year conflict with Russia. And last week these “killer robots” reached a significant new milestone, said Jamie Seidel on News.com (Australia). Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy announced that a brigade of these unmanned machines had seized and secured a Russian fortification without a “single Ukrainian soldier in sight”. It was the first robot-only battlefield victory in history – and a “dramatic disruption” of modern combat. 

    “Ukraine is redefining warfare,” said Sergii Kostezh in the Kyiv Post. Russia’s “colossal military advantage” left it with no alternative: outmanned and outgunned by a nuclear state with a military budget then 10 times larger than its own, Kyiv had to turn to unmanned systems to defend itself. We saw it first in the skies with Ukraine’s pioneering drone warfare. Now we’re witnessing it on land with the deployment of tens of thousands of small robots, known as unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs). 

    Ukraine’s front line increasingly resembles a scene from “Terminator”, said Luke Harding in The Guardian. Kitted with remote-control machine guns and grenade launchers, these machines prowl fearlessly across the 25-mile-deep “kill zone”, engaging in combat with human and robot enemies alike. One – a DevDroid TW 12.7 – “defended a position for 45 days”. Another, a “kamikaze” robot carrying 200kg of explosives, “trundled” 12 miles last summer to a school building being used by Russian troops, “and blew it up”. For troops on the ground, the sudden appearance of these robots can be terrifying. “One rolled up to the entrance of our dugout,” said a soldier from the 25th airborne brigade. “I felt like a caveman gazing at alien technology.” 

    Zelenskyy’s announcement last week was “mainly a PR move”, said The Moscow Times. Ukraine’s president didn’t specify where the robot-only assault took place, nor how many Russians surrendered. It likely as not only involved the capture of a small, secondary position. But the direction of travel is clear. Ukraine’s ground robotic systems have already carried out more than 22,000 missions on the front in three months. The real beauty of these unmanned ground vehicles is in their adaptability, said Seth J. Frantzman in The Jerusalem Post. UGVs can be used for all sorts of tasks: to clear minefields, deliver supplies, carry out dangerous missions. With just a small tweak or innovation here or there, “the sky is the limit”. 

    We are witnessing “the early stages of a doctrinal shift”, said Hamish de Bretton-Gordon in The Telegraph. Until now, this war has been defined “by brutal attrition”, with Russia reportedly losing more than 1,000 troops a day. So the fact that Ukraine was able to compel surrender without losing a single soldier is “extraordinary”, and represents a “profound tactical advantage”. Still, we shouldn’t declare Kyiv the victor of this technological battle just yet. “War is a contest of adaptation.” Russia will seek “counters” – not least increasingly sophisticated armed robots of its own. As the two sides innovate and counter-innovate, we’re inevitably going to be heading in only one direction, continues Jamie Seidel: full AI warfare. According to retired US army general David Petraeus, missions are increasingly being executed by machines at speeds no flesh-and-blood soldier can match. “The side that waits for human approval before acting will lose,” warns Petraeus. It won’t be long until fully autonomous killing machines are fighting it out on the battlefield. Then the robot wars really will begin.

     
     
    Briefing of the week

    Chernobyl, 40 years on

    On 26 April 1986, a reactor at the Chernobyl nuclear power station in Ukraine exploded

    Why did the accident happen? 
    The disaster occurred when technicians at the power station, near Pripyat in the north of Ukraine, then part of the Soviet Union, ran a test on reactor number four to simulate shutting it down during an electricity blackout. A combination of reactor design flaws and technician errors meant that it overheated, leading to a power surge, triggering an explosion. The reactor’s 192 tonnes of uranium fuel partially melted, destroying the reactor core. Graphite blocks inside caught fire, and the resulting explosion blew the reactor’s 1,000-tonne concrete and steel lid into the air, then destroyed much of the turbine hall. Radioactive material spewed into the environment: iodine, strontium, caesium and some plutonium. At least 5% of the reactor’s radioactive fuel is estimated to have been carried into the air over Ukraine, Belarus and Russia – and the rest of Europe. The World Nuclear Association says the disaster was caused by a “flawed” reactor design and lax safety – both consequences of “Cold War isolation”. 

    How did the authorities respond? 
    About 1,000 emergency workers and power station staff, largely untrained and poorly protected, were brought in during the first days of the accident to put out the fire. Soviet officials initially remained in denial; unable to comprehend the gravity of the situation and desperate to contain the bad publicity. But in early May, with the reactor fire still burning, and high radiation levels detected across Europe, the authorities moved to drastic action. A 30km exclusion zone was imposed. Bags of sand were dropped onto the reactor from the open doors of helicopters (analysts now think this did more harm than good). When the fire finally stopped, men climbed onto the roof to clear radioactive debris. Many suffered from acute radiation sickness as a result. In total, at least 600,000 clear-up personnel (“liquidators”) from all over the Soviet Union were involved in the operation. During 1986, a huge concrete “sarcophagus” structure was built to confine the radioactive materials at the explosion site. This was largely successful; estimates suggest that at least 80% of the original radioactive material remains inside the reactor. (In 2017 a new structure was completed at a cost of £1.3 billion.) 

    What were the immediate effects? 
    The official death toll is just 31; two workers at the plant were killed that day. But in 2005, a UN report suggested a total of 4,000 people would eventually die because of radiation exposure. According to UN reports, 134 people, mostly plant workers and emergency workers, received a confirmed diagnosis of acute radiation sickness (ARS). Radiation destroys cell walls and other key molecular structures within the body. Symptoms can begin within one or two hours and may last for several months; they include vomiting, diarrhoea, headache, fever, dizziness, hair loss, and blood in vomit and stools. The human cost of the disaster was documented by Svetlana Alexievich, a Belarusian journalist, who interviewed some 500 eyewitnesses for her 1997 book “Chernobyl Prayer”. One of the most harrowing stories concerns a woman who stayed at the bedside of her dying husband, a firefighter. She described watching his body decay, his skin crack, boils develop. When she touched him – against doctors’ orders – his skin came away in her hands. 

    And the wider effects? 
    Chernobyl is one of only two nuclear accidents rated at the maximum severity on the International Nuclear Event Scale, the other being the 2011 Fukushima accident in Japan. The longer-term effects have been mind-boggling in scale. Some 350,000 people had to be evacuated; about 500 hectares of forest turned red and died; roughly 15 million hectares of land were contaminated. Over 20% of Belarus’ land was affected. Radioactive clouds spread, causing panic as far away as Germany and Britain; millions of litres of milk were dumped; livestock was destroyed or banned from sale. Around 5,000 thyroid cancers have been linked to iodine contamination of milk supplies by the accident, 15 of them fatal. Chernobyl is often described as the most expensive disaster in history, with an estimated cost of $180 billion for Ukraine alone. By 2003, about 3.3 million Ukrainians were receiving benefits as Chernobyl “victims”. 

    What is in Chernobyl now? 
    The Chernobyl exclusion zone encompasses the 2,600 sq km area within the 30km radius. It is under military control, and public access is restricted to prevent contamination. Today, the zone is one of the most radioactively contaminated areas on Earth; the reactor is still smouldering. It draws significant scientific interest for the high levels of radiation exposure in the environment – and, until the war, was popular with disaster tourists. Due to the lack of human activity, it has become a thriving nature sanctuary, with some of the highest biodiversity and thickest forests in all Ukraine. European bison, golden eagles, lynx and elk inhabit the area. 

    How did the disaster affect nuclear policy? 
    It kickstarted a global push for stricter nuclear regulation. Governments were nervous because similar reactors were in use around the world. The International Atomic Energy Agency, a UN-affiliated agency, was tasked with improving international safety standards for reactor designs, and with coordinating long-term radiation monitoring. The agency does not have the power to enforce these rules, but the disaster motivated many countries to comply with regulations. Politically, the effects were also very significant. Chernobyl destroyed public trust and exposed systemic failures within the USSR, particularly in Ukraine. Mikhail Gorbachev maintained the accident was a more important factor in the fall of the Soviet Union than his programmes of liberal reform. Oddly enough, at least one of Chernobyl’s other reactors remained in use until 2000.

    Wartime in Chernobyl 
    The Chernobyl exclusion zone was captured by Russian forces on 24 February 2022, the first day of the Ukraine war; they withdrew a month later when Russia abandoned the Kyiv offensive. They dug trenches and bunkers in some heavily contaminated areas, against the advice of local technicians, including in the Red Forest; some were reportedly treated for radiation sickness. Since then, Ukraine has controlled the exclusion zone. In February last year, the structure protecting the reactor was hit by a Russian drone. Last December, the IAEA found that the protective structure built over the reactor to contain the worst of the radiation had been damaged to such a degree it had lost its “primary safety functions”, and could no longer prevent radiation leakage, although the older concrete structure inside was still effectively containing radioactive dust. Dust poses the greatest threat to the surrounding area, because it can be carried vast distances by wind. In January 2026, the plant experienced a complete loss of on-site power due to Russian drone and missile bombardment. Last month, G7 nations considered funding repairs to the protective shelter, with costs estimated at more than $575 million.

     
     

    Spirit of the age

    Etsy already offers gift registers for weddings and new babies; now, it is adding break-up lists to its roster of services. According to Etsy’s research, 50% of Gen Z and millennials think the end of a relationship merits its own rituals.

     
     
    VIEWPOINT

    Named and shamed

    “You have to feel for Andy Mycock, whose unfortunate surname was the subject of a recent Radio 4 show. Though he certainly got off easier than his mother, Pat. Becoming an academic, he made life even harder: he is now Doctor Mycock. But had he been born in the 19th century, his name would barely have raised a titter. Not with people like Dick Trickle around (Lancashire, 1841). I have a book full of scarcely believable names taken from censuses. Were the parents of Ophelia Pubes (Louisiana, 1870) mad? Ditto those of Tinie Cock (Pembroke, 1861)? In 1855, a Herefordshire girl was named... Fanny Pong. I hope Dr Mycock finds that a comfort.” 

    Carol Midgley in The Times

     
     
    talking point

    The SNP: heading for a loveless landslide

    Two summers ago, the Scottish National Party was in a sorry state, said Annabel Denham in The Telegraph. It had lost 38 Westminster seats in a punishing general election, and the party was “mired in scandal”, with its chief executive being investigated for embezzlement. It was haunted by policy failures – including a “stagnant education attainment gap”, poor health outcomes and “deteriorating public services” – that remain a problem today. A recent poll found that 58% of Scots disapprove of the party’s record in government. Yet bizarrely, the SNP is set to come top in next month’s Holyrood elections, a result that would secure it its fifth win in a row.

    There are two main explanations for this, said Ian Swanson in the Edinburgh Evening News. One is that the party can always count on a solid base of support among pro-independence Scots. The other is that the rise of Reform UK as a political force in Scotland has fragmented the opposition vote. The result is that the SNP, like Labour in 2024, is on track to win a “loveless landslide”. 

    Under John Swinney, the SNP is doing its best to woo voters by sticking with its strategy of making Scotland the home of “free stuff”, said Chris Deerin in The New Statesman. Having already delivered free university tuition, eye tests and prescriptions, and baby boxes for every new parent, it’s now promising a free school bag of stationery and books for every new primary school pupil. The SNP also plans to cap prices for essential food items in supermarkets. Then, of course, there’s the lure of the independence issue: Swinney insists that a vote on breaking up the UK could be held as early as 2028. 

    On this issue, Swinney has got himself in a bit of a pickle, however. When he declared last year that the SNP would push for “Indyref2” if it won a majority in the Holyrood election, he no doubt assumed that he had set the bar safely high, said Andy Maciver in The Herald. The party is weakened, and it doesn’t feel confident of winning a referendum now. It would rather leave the fight until the end of the decade, by which time it can hope to have a stronger record in government to point to – and the divisive Nigel Farage might be in No. 10. The timing is not right for the SNP, agreed Robert Shrimsley in the Financial Times. But it can still safely demand a new referendum because it knows Labour will veto any such effort. Swinney can then act all aggrieved. Everyone will play their part in this “political panto”, knowing full well that nothing will come of it. “The starting gun for the break-up of the union? Oh no it isn’t.”

     
     

    It wasn’t all bad

    The possibility of restoring British woodland ravaged by ash dieback has been given a boost by the discovery of a way of reducing the germination time of ash seeds from two to three years to a matter of days. A team at the John Innes Centre in Norwich say they have produced in their labs about 2,000 dieback-resistant seedlings using their embryo extraction technique; the next step is to perfect a “kitchen table” method that will require only basic ingredients such as bleach to treat the seeds. This might enable Britain’s ash forests to be repopulated by volunteers in their own homes.

     
     
    People

    George Takei

    George Takei is known to millions as Hikaru Sulu in “Star Trek”; but at the age of 88, his mind has been cast back to events long before he found TV fame, by the sight of US residents being detained by Ice agents. “What’s happening now,” he told Decca Aitkenhead in The Sunday Times, “is like what happened when I was a child.” 

    In 1942, two months after Pearl Harbor, almost every Japanese-American in California was rounded up and interned. Takei’s father had arrived in the US with his own family aged 12; he’d married an American-born woman in 1935, and they had built up a thriving dry cleaning business. Takei was four years old when two soldiers banged on their door, and ordered the family onto a bus at gunpoint. For the next four years, they were herded from camp to camp. “We were all categorised as enemies, with no proof, no evidence, no due process, no trial.” 

    By the time they were released, to a skid row hotel in LA in 1946, months after VJ Day, the family had lost their home, their business, everything. For a while, his father had to work as a dishwasher, but he rebuilt his career, and somehow retained his faith in the American dream, and its democracy. The constitution is “a magnificent document”, he would tell his children; it is the people who are fallible. Had it not been for that, Takei thinks he’d have grown up bitter and mistrustful. “I owe who I am to my father.”

     
     

    Image credits, from top: Dmytro Smolienko / Ukrinform / NurPhoto / Getty Images; Kyrylo Chubotin / Ukrinform / NurPhoto / Getty Images; Jeff J. Mitchell / Getty Images; Santiago Felipe / Getty Images
     

    Recent editions

    • Morning Report

      A US soldier’s alleged bad bet

    • Evening Review

      What Orbán’s loss means for Ukraine

    • Morning Report

      Navy secretary out in Hegseth purge

    VIEW ALL
    TheWeek
    • About Us
    • Contact Future's experts
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Cookie Policy
    • Advertise With Us
    • FAQ
    Add as a preferred source on Google Add as a preferred source on Google

    The Week is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site.

    © Future US, Inc. Full 7th Floor, 130 West 42nd Street, New York, NY 10036.