Ukraine war latest: Putin announces truce on Victory Day; Trump believes Zelensky ready to give up Crimea to Russia
Key developments on April 28:
Putin announces 3-day truce on Victory Day's 80th anniversary
Trump says he believes Zelensky is ready to give up Crimea to Russia
Russia demands recognition of Crimea, other Ukrainian regions' annexation in any peace talks
Drones reportedly strike Russian plant producing parts for missiles, radars
Ukraine loses Su-27 fighter jet repelling Russian drone attack, Air Force says
Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a so-called "humanitarian" truce in the war against Ukraine to mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II in Europe, the Kremlin said on April 28.
The ceasefire will be in effect from midnight on May 8 until midnight on May 11, according to the Kremlin's statement. "During this period, all military actions will cease. Russia believes that the Ukrainian side should follow this example," the statement read.
The announcement comes as Moscow continues to reject Kyiv's demand for a full and unconditional ceasefire as the first step toward a broader peace deal.
Join our community Support independent journalism in Ukraine. Join us in this fight. Support Us
U.S. President Donald Trump has intensified his push for a ceasefire in Ukraine, urging Putin to "sit down and sign a deal." U.S. officials have previously threatened to walk away from the peace efforts unless progress is reached soon.
The Kremlin claimed that Russia remains ready for "peace negotiations with Ukraine without preconditions" and expressed willingness for "constructive engagement" with international partners.
Russia celebrates the end of World War II in Europe on May 9, marking the occasion with pompous military parades. Most other European nations, including Ukraine, mark May 8 as Victory in Europe Day.
Ukraine's Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said Russia must immediately cease fire if it wants a truce.
"If Russia truly wants peace, it must cease fire immediately. Why wait until May 8th? If the fire can be ceased now and since any date for 30 days — so it is real, not just for a parade," Sybiha wrote in a post on X.
"Ukraine is ready to support a lasting, durable, and full ceasefire. And this is what we are constantly proposing, for at least 30 days," he added.
Andrii Kovalenko, an official at Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council, questioned why Moscow does not instead declare a "full and comprehensive ceasefire."
"Anything that is not a comprehensive ceasefire is Russian manipulation for informational and military purposes, an attempt to hide its intent to continue the war," Kovalenko said after Putin's announcement.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reacted to Putin's announcement, highlighting that Trump seeks a permanent ceasefire.
"I understand that Vladimir Putin offered a temporary ceasefire this morning. (President Trump) has made it clear he wants to see a permanent ceasefire first to stop the killing, stop the bloodshed. And while he remains optimistic he can strike a deal, he's also being realistic as well," Leavitt said.
"Both leaders need to come to the table to negotiate their way out. And I think that the president's meeting with President Zelensky (on April 26) shows that he is exuding a lot of effort and time into this because he wants to be a peacemaker president, which he was in his first term. He intends to do that again," she added.
The Victory Day ceasefire is the latest in a series of truce initiatives announced by Moscow, which it has itself repeatedly violated.
Earlier this month, Russia declared a ceasefire over the Easter holiday, though President Volodymyr Zelensky accused Moscow of nearly 3,000 violations between April 19 and April 21. Ukraine has also said that Russian forces repeatedly breached a partial truce on attacks against energy facilities brokered on March 25.
Russia has repeatedly proclaimed its supposed readiness for peace talks while simultaneously pushing for maximalist demands. Kyiv has dismissed these declarations as a propaganda stunt, noting that Russian forces have only intensified their attacks on Ukrainian cities and towns.
Read also: Ukraine to continue fighting with or without Trump, experts say
U.S. President Donald Trump said on April 27 that he thinks President Volodymyr Zelensky is prepared to give up Crimea to Russia as part of a potential peace agreement, despite Kyiv's consistent rejection of similar proposals.
When asked whether he thought Zelensky was willing to cede the peninsula, which Russia illegally annexed in 2014, Trump responded: "I think so."
Earlier this week, Trump accused Zelensky of undermining negotiations after the Ukrainian president rejected recognizing Russia's annexation of Crimea as part of a potential peace agreement.
On April 22, Zelensky rejected the reported U.S. proposal to recognize Russia's claim to Crimea, saying, "There's nothing to talk about here. This is against our constitution."
Zelensky warned that any discussion of Crimea risks shifting negotiations into a framework dictated by the Kremlin. He said such proposals play directly into Russian President Vladimir Putin's "game."
Article 2 of Ukraine's constitution states that sovereignty "extends throughout its entire territory," which "within its present border is indivisible and inviolable." Any change in Ukraine's territory must be decided in a nationwide referendum authorized by the Ukrainian parliament.
Trump also voiced frustration with Russia and urged Putin to stop attacks and finalize a U.S.-brokered peace deal to end the war in Ukraine.
"Well, I want him to stop shooting, sit down and sign a deal," Trump told reporters when asked about his expectations for Putin. "We have the confines of a deal, I believe, and I want him to sign it and be done with it," he added, signaling growing impatience as negotiations stall.
Trump's comments came after Russia launched its deadliest attack on Kyiv in nine months, with missile and drone strikes killing 12 people and injuring 90, including six children. "I was very disappointed that missiles were flying, (fired) by Russia," Trump said.
Read also: Trump's latest Crimea comments put Zelensky between a rock and a hard place, again
Russia insists on the international recognition of its hold over Crimea, as well as the entirety of Ukraine's Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson oblasts, as a condition for peace negotiations, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in an interview with Brazilian news outlet O Globo published on April 28.
This demand, reinforced last week by Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, underscores how Russia continues to push its maximalist demands despite U.S. efforts to broker a peace deal.
Russia illegally declared the four Ukrainian oblasts as annexed in 2022 following widely condemned sham referenda, but it does not fully control the territories. Crimea, occupied by Russia since 2014, was also included in Moscow's territorial claims.
The U.S. is reportedly considering a de jure recognition of Russia's control over Crimea as part of a potential peace deal and de facto control over other occupied territories. At the same time, U.S. officials are said to have rejected a demand for Ukraine's complete withdrawal from the other four regions.
Asked about Russia's conditions to enter peace talks, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov also named a ban on Ukraine's entry into NATO, the country's demilitarization, and changes to Ukraine's legislation that would restore the position of the Russian language, culture, and religious organizations.
These conditions are effectively the same as the initial demands raised by Moscow at the start of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Read also: 'No point in negotiating:' Russia's deadly attack on Kyiv sows distrust in Trump peace plan
Lavrov also said that Ukraine's ban on direct negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin must be lifted. Previously, the Kremlin said that Putin would be ready to enter talks with Kyiv without "any preconditions" once this restriction was removed, seemingly contradicting Lavrov's later statements.
Ukraine has ruled out ceding its territory as part of any peace agreement, and both Kyiv and its allies have rejected demands for a reduction of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
"All of Kyiv's commitments must be legally guaranteed, have enforcement mechanisms, and be permanent," Lavrov said, adding that Russia also demands the lifting of Western sanctions, the abolition of international lawsuits and arrest warrants against Russian officials, and the return of frozen Russian assets.
Western governments have already begun using money linked to those assets to support Ukraine. In October 2024, the Group of Seven (G7) approved nearly $50 billion in loans for Kyiv, to be repaid using interest earned on frozen Russian funds.
Additionally, Lavrov said Moscow would demand "reliable security guarantees" from NATO, the European Union, and their member states against supposed future threats on Russia's western borders.
Lavrov said Russia remains open to negotiations but claimed "the ball is not on our side," accusing Kyiv of lacking "political will for peace." He also said that the U.S. "has begun to better understand" Russia's positions, hinting at the foreign policy shift brought about by U.S. President Donald Trump.
It has been more than 45 days since Ukraine accepted a U.S.-proposed 30-day ceasefire first introduced in March. Moscow rejected the plan, demanding a complete halt to Western military aid to Ukraine.
Despite claiming to support de-escalation, Russia has continued offensive operations along the front lines. Moscow has also intensified its attacks on civilian infrastructure, most recently killing 13 people in an attack on Kyiv on April 24.
Meanwhile, a separate partial ceasefire covering Ukraine's energy infrastructure, brokered during talks in Saudi Arabia in late March, has also been repeatedly violated.
According to Ukraine's Foreign Ministry, Russia has breached the energy truce more than 30 times since it came into effect on March 25, targeting critical power infrastructure across the country.
Read also: 'Territories are first and foremost people:' Zaporizhzhia, Kherson residents anxiously watch Witkoff debate the land they live on
An overnight drone strike targeted a key Russian electronics plant in the city of Bryansk, Russian Telegram channels and a Ukrainian official claimed on April 28.
Bryansk Oblast Governor Alexander Bogomaz claimed that Ukrainian forces launched a "massive attack" against the region, with Russian air defenses allegedly intercepting and destroying 102 drones.
"Unidentified" drones targeted the Kremniy-El plant, a major facility specializing in microelectronics for Russia's military-industrial complex, said Andrii Kovalenko, an official at Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council.
Russian Telegram channels supported this assertion, which was not confirmed by local authorities.
The plant produces components for missile systems such as the Topol-M, Bulava, and Iskander, as well as for radars, electronic warfare systems, drones, and the onboard electronics of military aircraft, according to Russian open sources.
Images and videos posted on Telegram showed fires burning in parts of the city overnight, with residents reporting flashes in the sky.
Local media reported at least 10 to 15 explosions in Bryansk, with damage to civilian infrastructure, vehicles, and residential buildings. Bogomaz claimed that one civilian was killed and another injured in the attacks.
Ukrainian forces have not yet commented on the attack. The Kyiv Independent could not verify the claims.
Bryansk lies around 100 kilometers (60 miles) north of the Russia-Ukraine border. Ukrainian forces have repeatedly targeted Russian military and industrial facilities in the rear to undermine Moscow's ability to wage its all-out war.
Ukraine lost a Su-27 fighter jet while it was repelling a Russian drone attack and providing air support to ground troops on the morning of April 28, Ukraine's Air Force reported.
The pilot ejected and is receiving medical attention, according to the statement. The cause of the incident is under investigation.
The Su-27, also known under the NATO code name "Flanker," is a highly maneuverable Soviet-era air superiority fighter used by both Ukraine and Russia.
Throughout the war, Ukraine has rarely reported losses of its fighter jets and other military equipment targeted by Russia. Meanwhile, Moscow periodically claims to have carried out strikes on Ukrainian airfields, which cannot be independently verified.
In mid-April, Pavlo Ivanov, a 26-year-old Ukrainian F-16 pilot, was killed during a combat mission. Ivanov's death marks the second F-16 pilot loss for Ukraine since receiving these jets, following Oleksii Mes's death last August.
Russia has lost over 370 planes since the beginning of the full-scale invasion on Feb. 24, 2022, the General Staff of Ukraine's Armed Forces reported on April 28. The Kyiv Independent could not independently verify these figures.
Ukraine War Latest is put together by the Kyiv Independent news desk team, who keep you informed 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If you value our work and want to ensure we have the resources to continue, join the Kyiv Independent community.
Read also: Trump's latest Crimea comments put Zelensky between a rock and a hard place, again
We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Wild videos capture fiery scenes from a massive Ukrainian drone attack on Russian bombers shielded by tires
Ukraine carried out a massive drone attack targeting Russian bombers on Sunday. A Ukrainian security source said at least 40 aircraft were struck in the attack. Footage shows the Ukrainian strikes on Russian bombers shielded only by tires. Ukrainian forces carried out a massive drone attack targeting Russian bombers and other aircraft on Sunday, striking dozens of planes, a security source told Business Insider. The source in the Security Service of Ukraine said that the agency carried out "a large-scale special operation" to destroy Russian bombers deep inside the country. They said that the attack drones hit at least 40 aircraft, including Beriev A-50 airborne early warning and control planes and Tupolev Tu-95 and Tupolev Tu-22M strategic bombers. Video footage captured by a drone and obtained by BI shows a row of Russian bombers burning, sending thick plumes of black smoke into the air. Another video captures the moment a drone hits an aircraft. At least two bombers in this footage, including the one that gets struck, are covered in tires. Russia has used this tactic throughout the war in an apparent attempt to confuse Ukrainian weapons systems, like drones and missiles, that are looking for the aircraft. "Enemy strategic bombers are burning en masse in Russia," the SBU source shared in translated remarks. They said that Ukraine attacked four airbases across Russia and said Moscow's losses amount to billions of dollars, adding that the number of damaged planes could increase. The source said the operation, which was supervised by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, involved more than a year and a half of planning and was "extremely complex from a logistical point of view." The SBU transported numerous small first-person-view (FPV) drones to Russia, along with what looked like wooden shipping crates. Once all the pieces were in the country, the drones were hidden in the crates, which were placed on trucks. On Sunday, the tops of the crates were remotely opened, and the drones flew out. BI could not independently verify the shared details of the operation against Russia. Russia's defense ministry has yet to issue a public statement on the attack, nor did it respond to BI's request for comment on the attack. The Russian embassy was also unresponsive. The Tu-95 and Tu-22M strategic bombers have been used to launch missile strikes against Ukrainian targets. Russia's attacks have intensified recently; Moscow launched more than 900 drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles over just a three-day period in late May, officials said. On Sunday, the Ukrainian Air Force said Russia launched 472 attack drones and decoy drones — Moscow's biggest bombardment with uncrewed systems so far. Kyiv said 385 enemy air vehicles were taken down. The Ukrainian attack on Sunday marks Ukraine's latest deep strike into Russia. Kyiv's forces have repeatedly used domestically produced drones and missiles to hit airbases, ammunition depots, and weapons-making sites far behind enemy lines over the past year. Read the original article on Business Insider
The Hill
29 minutes ago
- The Hill
For universities, Trump's punishments far exceed the alleged crimes
The adage 'let the punishment fit the crime,' articulated by the Roman philosopher Cicero some 2,060 years ago, reflects a principle fundamental to every modern legal system. The notion of reciprocal justice — 'an eye for an eye' and not 'two eyes for an eye' — also appears in the Code of Hammurabi and the Book of Exodus. The Magna Carta in 1215 mandated that an offender should be fined 'only in proportion to the degree of his offence,' a concept later reflected in the English Bill of Rights, the Common Law tradition and the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme Court has recognized the importance of proportionality to the rule of law, often framing it in terms of balancing tests or 'levels of scrutiny.' Perhaps more important, proportionality is central to Americans' sense of fundamental fairness, from the playground to the courtroom. In the Trump administration, however, scorched earth warfare has replaced the idea that punishment should fit the crime. Accusing Harvard University of tolerating antisemitism, the administration has frozen or terminated billions in research funding, launched at least eight intrusive investigations, threatened to revoke the university's tax-exempt status and terminated its ability to enroll international students. While inflicting enormous damage, these sanctions are not tied to any discernible gain. Harvard has sued the government, and its legal case is strong. A judge recently issued a temporary restraining order securing its right to enroll international students. But even if Harvard prevails in the courts, the cost will be exorbitant. And Harvard is just one of many universities under attack. People of good will can differ about whether Harvard and its peer universities have met their legal obligations to Jewish students. But, by any standard, the Trump administration's response has been grotesquely disproportionate. Proportionality analysis in law takes different forms. Common elements intended to constrain excessive government actions include such phrases as 'legitimate goal' — as in, government sanctions should be designed to further a legitimate goal, with a rational connection between the sanction and that goal. Another is 'necessity,' meaning sanctions should be necessary to achieve the goal and the least restrictive means available. A third is 'undue burden,' meaning that penalties should be commensurate with the moral culpability of the person or institution sanctioned and should not cause society more harm than good. These principles are reflected in Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the main anti-discrimination statute the government is relying on to justify its attacks on higher education. Title VI contains multiple procedural safeguards 'designed to spur agencies into seeking consensual resolutions with recipients.' The Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights, which oversees most Title VI cases, may only seek to terminate federal funding as 'a last resort, to be used only if all else fails,' because 'cutoffs of Federal funds would defeat important objectives of Federal legislation, without commensurate gains in eliminating' discrimination. As Supreme Court Justice Byron White once explained, 'to ensure that this intent would be respected, Congress included an explicit provision … that requires that any administrative enforcement action be 'consistent with achievement of the objectives of the statute authorizing the financial assistance in connection with which the action is taken.''' And as the Justice Department's guidelines for the enforcement of Title VI make clear, 'in each case, the objective should be to secure prompt and full compliance so that needed Federal assistance may commence or continue.' In the early years of Title VI, the Office of Civil Rights did ultimately terminate federal funding for Southern schools that refused to desegregate. But as Sen. Hubert Humphrey, the lead author of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, observed, 'it is not expected that funds would be cut off so long as reasonable steps were being taken in good faith to end unconstitutional segregation.' During the 30 years before the Trump administration's decision in March to cancel $400 million in grants and contracts to Columbia University — taken without a hearing or any semblance of due process — no college or university was stripped of federal funding under Title VI. The administration's slash-and-burn approach fails every conceivable proportionality test. Combating antisemitism is, of course, a legitimate goal. But even assuming that the administration is not using antisemitism as a pretext to pursue a broader political agenda of undermining critics, democratic institutions and the rule of law, there is no rational connection between terminating research on cancer, artificial intelligence or nanotechnology and ending antisemitism. Nor has the administration even tried to demonstrate how barring Harvard from enrolling all international students, as opposed to students proven to have engaged in antisemitic activity, advances its supposed objectives. If implemented, the Trump administration's sanctions would devastate Harvard's ability to remain one of the world's leading research universities. And the sanctions are hardly the least restrictive means available to address campus antisemitism. Harvard has acknowledged the challenges it faces in ensuring a safe and supportive environment for its Jewish community. And, unlike the Southern schools whose continued resistance to Title VI's antidiscrimination mandate in the 1960s was clear, Harvard had already taken significant steps to combat antisemitism and indicated a willingness to address the government's concerns before officials sent it an extravagant list of demands. (Many of those demands, such as plagiarism reviews for all faculty, bore little or no connection to antisemitism.) Whether Harvard has done enough, quickly enough, is a matter that can be debated. But the administration has certainly not proven that Harvard displayed the 'deliberate indifference' that warrants a finding of institutional responsibility for the harassment of Jewish students under Title VI, much less a degree of culpability to justify the penalties the government continues to pile on. Nor is it possible to conclude that slashing funding for scientific and medical research, banning all international students or revoking Harvard's tax-exempt status do more good than harm. The Trump administration is imposing crushing penalties wholly incommensurate with any fault of the targeted institutions simply because it can — or thinks it can — and because it believes that 'shock and awe' will compel all institutions of higher education and their faculty to fall in line. Abandoning the principle that the punishment must fit the crime would set our democratic standard of justice back to the 'might makes right,' Sticks and Stone Age. Glenn C. Altschuler is the Thomas and Dorothy Litwin Emeritus Professor of American Studies at Cornell University. David Wippman is emeritus president of Hamilton College.
The Hill
30 minutes ago
- The Hill
Jeffries says Americans ‘aren't interested in bending the knee to a wannabe king'
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said Sunday that Americans 'aren't interested in bending the knee to a wannabe king,' referring to President Trump. 'Donald Trump has learned an important lesson, the American people aren't interested in bending the knee to a wannabe king,' Jeffries said on CNN's 'State of the Union' to the outlet's Dana Bash. 'It's the reason why Donald Trump actually is the most unpopular president at this point of a presidency in American history,' he added. The president's approval rating currently sits at 45.9 percent in the Decision Desk/The Hill polling average, with 51.7 percent in the average not backing the president. The president recently went through consistent drops in his approval ratings, but his approval rating in the Decision Desk/The Hill average now sits above 2 points higher than it was at the start of May. Trump and his administration have taken swift action on issues such as how the federal government functions, immigration, trade policy, and LGBTQ rights in his first few months since returning to Washington. The action has drawn pushback from those on the American left and Democrats, but Democrats have also been criticized for a perceived lack of response to Trump administration moves. 'Democrats, of course, are the party that is determined to make life more affordable for everyday Americans, for hardworking American taxpayers,' Jeffries said Sunday. Republican strategist Karl Rove said in a recent opinion piece for The Wall Street Journal that President Trump's tariff rhetoric could cost the GOP its majorities in Congress. 'Republicans should hope the president really believes in reciprocity—the policy that if countries lower their tariffs, we'll lower ours. He should have confidence that America can compete if the playing field is level,' he added. The Hill has reached out to the White House for comment.
