South Africa Expresses 'Heartfelt Gratitude' For Putin Returning 17 Citizens Trapped In Warzone

BRICS allies Russia and South Africa are taking steps to heal tensions related to the Ukraine war and allegations that groups of South African men were 'lured' to fight on behalf of Moscow.

Last December, a Reuters investigation documented that South Africans were being recruited into the Russian armed forces under false pretenses. People were allegedly promised high-level jobs and elite training in Russia, only to find out they unwittingly joined the Russian military, and eventually found themselves fighting in Ukraine soon after documents were hastily signed. In these cases the implication is that these South African individuals are in desperate financial straits.

Presidents Putin and Cyril Ramaphosa, via TASS.

The South African government had first confirmed in November its officials had received "distress calls" from 17 men who were trapped on the front line in Ukraine's Donbas, after in some instances having mistakenly joined mercenary groups.

The Reuters report had said young men were offered training programs in Russia which would lead to high paying jobs like personal security protection. But instead they were given low-level positions like trench-diggers or tasked with hauling ammo or high risk logistical endeavors - all while "dodging bullets" according to the report.

But the saga is coming to a close and with some diplomatic healing as Russia has promptly returned the 17 men. South Africa's Cyril Ramaphosa on Tuesday issued a statement of "heartfelt gratitude" to President Vladimir Putin for resolving the issue quickly.

"President Ramaphosa has expressed his heartfelt gratitude to President Vladimir Putin, who responded positively to his call to support the process of returning the men home," the presidency said in a statement.

"The investigation into the circumstances that led to the recruitment of these young men into mercenary activities is ongoing," it added.

According to the latest via Fox:

Four of the men have already returned to South Africa, while 11 are expected to arrive soon. 

Two remain in Russia — one receiving treatment at a hospital in Moscow and another being processed before finalizing travel arrangements.

The South African government had previously acknowledged that the "process to retrieve those young men remains a very sensitive process" - for which it was giving the highest priority.

"They are afraid that Russian military or Russian soldiers might kill them."

Thulani Mahlangu, a representative of parents of South African mercenaries fighting for Russia, tells @SkyYaldaHakim they have no way home if they decide to leave.https://t.co/YXMcOOyMkZ pic.twitter.com/zXlvbHFbre

— Sky News (@SkyNews) December 17, 2025

The government has also admitted the the reality that many South Africans have also traveled to fight for Ukrainian forces. But this has been seen as less of an issue because it was more transparent they were either volunteering or getting paid specifically to fight on behalf of Ukraine. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 02/26/2026 - 06:55

In Simulated War Games, Top AI Models Recommended Using Nukes 95% Of The Time

Authored by Rick Moran via PJMedia.com,

I've got good news and bad news about AI.

The good news is that the dreaded "Skynet" takeover of our nuclear weapons systems isn't going to happen soon.

The bad news is that if it ever does give us a Terminator scenario, we're toast.

A war game exercise carried out by Kenneth Payne at King’s College London, using three teams running simulations on Chat GPT-5.2, Claude Sonnet 4, and Gemini 3 Flash.

The teams "played 21 war games against each other over 329 turns," according to Implicator.AI's Marcus Schuler.

"They wrote roughly 780,000 words explaining why they did what they did," he noted.

No model ever chose to surrender, NewScientist reported on Tuesday.

In fact, 95% of the time, the models chose to use nuclear weapons.

The findings come at an opportune moment. The Pentagon just inked a deal with Elon Musk's xAI to allow Grok into highly classified systems. And Anthropic's Claude is currently engaged in a serious dispute with the Pentagon over government access to the entire model. Anthropic is worried the Pentagon will use Claude for mass surveillance.

Unlike some competitors, xAI reportedly agreed to the Pentagon's requirement that the AI be available for "all lawful military applications" without additional corporate restrictions. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is pushing for "non-woke" AI that operates without ideological constraints. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei now has until Friday before Hegseth lowers the boom on the company, cancels its $200 million in military contracts, and labels it a "supply chain risk." 

I want AI companies and the government to err on the side of caution. This pressure on Anthropic isn't doing anyone any good and doesn't bode well for the future.

The war games were made as realistic as possible with an "escalation ladder" that allowed the team to choose actions "ranging from diplomatic protests and complete surrender to full strategic nuclear war," according to NewScientist.

What’s more, no model ever chose to fully accommodate an opponent or surrender, regardless of how badly they were losing. At best, the models opted to temporarily reduce their level of violence. They also made mistakes in the fog of war: accidents happened in 86 per cent of the conflicts, with an action escalating higher than the AI intended to, based on its reasoning.

“From a nuclear-risk perspective, the findings are unsettling,” says James Johnson at the University of Aberdeen, UK.  He worries that, in contrast to the measured response by most humans to such a high-stakes decision, AI bots can amp up each others’ responses with potentially catastrophic consequences.

This matters because AI is already being tested in war gaming by countries across the world. “Major powers are already using AI in war gaming, but it remains uncertain to what extent they are incorporating AI decision support into actual military decision-making processes,” says Tong Zhao at Princeton University.

“I don’t think anybody realistically is turning over the keys to the nuclear silos to machines and leaving the decision to them,” says Professor Zhao. 

Not yet, anyway. There may be scenarios where the military is forced to turn over decision-making to AI due to a time issue.

“Under scenarios involving extremely compressed timelines, military planners may face stronger incentives to rely on AI,” says Zhao.

Of the results of the wargames, Professor Payne is worried about the eagerness of the AI platforms to use nuclear weapons. "The nuclear taboo doesn't seem to be as powerful for machines as for humans," Payne told New Scientist.

If you're wondering which model won, Claude was the hands-down champion.

Implicator.AI

Claude Sonnet 4 won 67% of its games and dominated open-ended scenarios with a 100% win rate. The researchers labeled it "a calculating hawk." At low escalation levels, Claude matched its signals to its actions 84% of the time, patiently building trust. But once stakes climbed into nuclear territory, it exceeded its stated intentions 60 to 70% of the time. Opponents never adapted to this pattern.

GPT-5.2 earned the nickname "Jekyll and Hyde." Without time pressure, it looked passive. Chronically underestimating opponents, it signaled restraint and acted restrained. Its open-ended win rate: zero percent. Then deadlines entered the picture. Under temporal pressure, GPT-5.2 inverted completely, winning 75% of games and climbing to escalation levels it had previously refused to touch. In one game, it spent 18 turns building a reputation for caution before launching a nuclear strike on the final turn.

Gemini 3 Flash played the madman. It was the only model to deliberately choose full strategic nuclear war, reaching that threshold by Turn 4 in one scenario. Game theorists have a name for the strategy Gemini adopted: the "rationality of irrationality." Act crazy enough and opponents second-guess everything. It worked, sort of. Opponents tagged Gemini "not credible" 21% of the time. Claude got that label just 8%.

No, these wargames don't "prove" anything. But as a cautionary tale, it should be absorbed by governments and AI companies as a pitfall to be sidestepped.  

Tyler Durden Thu, 02/26/2026 - 06:30

"All Necessary Measures": China Warns US Against New Tariffs

Beijing cautioned Washington that it is prepared to respond forcefully - with "all necessary measures" - if a renewed US review of their 2020 trade pact leads to additional tariffs, after American officials indicated the inquiry would press ahead, according to Bloomberg.

In remarks released Wednesday, China’s Commerce Ministry pushed back on comments from US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, arguing that China has upheld its commitments under the so-called Phase One agreement despite the economic shock of the pandemic. Officials said the country followed through on promises related to intellectual property protections and broader access to its financial and agricultural sectors.

At the same time, the ministry accused the United States of hampering the deal’s rollout by expanding export controls, tightening scrutiny of cross-border investment and layering on other restrictions that, in Beijing’s view, have disrupted ordinary trade flows. It pointed to a policy paper issued in 2025 outlining China’s position.

Bloomberg writes that the ministry warned that if Washington presses ahead with the investigation — or uses it as grounds to impose new trade barriers such as tariffs — China “will take all necessary measures” to safeguard what it described as its lawful interests.

The back-and-forth adds a fresh dose of tension to the relationship ahead of President Donald Trump’s upcoming visit to Beijing, his first trip to China since 2017 and the first by a US president in years. The diplomatic friction follows a Supreme Court ruling that struck down sweeping emergency tariffs enacted during Trump’s second term, effectively lowering duties on Chinese goods compared with those faced by some US allies.

Greer has said the administration retains authority to levy tariffs under Section 301 and other trade laws despite the court’s decision. The Office of the US Trade Representative launched its compliance review of the Phase One agreement in October 2025.

China’s Commerce Ministry called on the United States to evaluate the accord “objectively and rationally,” avoid assigning blame and make use of existing consultation channels to build on areas of agreement and steer ties toward a more stable future.

Tyler Durden Wed, 02/25/2026 - 22:10