Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

Lithuania turns to intelligence services over Volkov — could a Navalny ally lose temporary status?

After screenshots of the correspondence were published, the Lithuanian Migration Service asked the security services for an assessment. The decision will affect not just one person — it will test European countries' readiness to defend democracy while simultaneously ensuring their own security.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

January 6, 2026 · 2 min read

Lithuania turns to intelligence services over Volkov — could a Navalny ally lose temporary status?

What happened

The Migration Department of Lithuania has turned to the State Security Department regarding Russian citizen Leonid Volkov, who lives in the country. Delfi reported: after receiving a response from the security service, the question of canceling Volkov's temporary status may arise.

"For once, denazification really happened. The Nazi croaked, who by his very existence was a gift to Kremlin propaganda..."

— Leonid Volkov, screenshot of correspondence (published by Anna Tiron)

Details of correspondence and context

Screenshots of the correspondence, published by the political representative of the Russian Volunteer Corps Anna Tiron, contain expressions of joy over the alleged death of RVC commander Denis Kapustin and wishes for the imprisonment of several Ukrainian officials. The correspondence is dated December 29 and was the reason for the migration service's inquiry.

Two days earlier the RVC announced Kapustin's death, but on January 1 Ukrainian military intelligence reported that the death had been staged, and that the funds Russia had supposedly allocated for the liquidation were redirected to help defenders. Reuters previously described Kapustin's ties to radical circles in Russia and refuted the simplistic labels often used to describe such figures.

Why this matters for Ukraine and the EU

This story is not only about private messages: it touches on the balance between law-enforcement and migration mechanisms in the EU. If a host country discovers that a resident calls for or rejoices in violence and has ties to military units, that calls into question both security and the political reputation of the host.

The real question — can European institutions promptly filter out those who pose a risk without undermining asylum mechanisms for genuine refugees. For Ukraine this is also a test: how partners respond to threats associated with actors who directly or indirectly affect our security interests.

What sources say

According to Delfi, the Migration Department initiated an official request to the security service. Ukrainian military intelligence stated that Kapustin's death was staged and reported the redistribution of funds that were supposedly directed to his liquidation.

Reuters provides additional context regarding Kapustin's prior ties to radical groups and emphasizes that the profiles of individual commanders are often more complex than the simplified labels used in the media.

Conclusion

The decision of Lithuanian authorities will show how quickly the EU can combine migration policy with national security concerns. For Ukraine it is important that partners act consistently: declarations of support for security must be backed up by concrete actions. Whether the Volkov case will set a precedent for tougher screening of residents with suspicious ties is a question awaiting an answer.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026