Putin thought he could take this city in three days. Now they wait to toast his demise with champagne
But Kyiv didn't fall. It fought. And it hasn't stopped fighting since.
Today, it's the beating heart of a country that refuses to be broken – and the home of a man who became an icon. Volodymyr Zelensky, the comedian-turned-president, was told to flee in the early days of the invasion. Instead, he stayed. 'I need ammunition, not a ride,' he said.
Tony Abbott recently called Zelensky 'the greatest freedom fighter' of our times. It's hard to disagree. Around the world, his leadership has become a symbol of resistance. But here in Kyiv, he's no demigod, he's simply another Ukrainian fighting.
The city itself is a contradiction – part defiant metropolis, part bruised monument. It has been called 'the new Berlin', a nod to its gritty charm and creative energy. The food is brilliant, the bars are packed, the streets hum with life – even as sirens sound above.
But while this surreal, magnetic city sits hours from the front, it is far from safe. The war doesn't respect geography.
A day before I arrived, Russia launched one of the biggest air assaults Kyiv has seen in months – a 3½-hour barrage of drones and missiles. Explosions were heard across eight of the city's 10 districts. Nine people were killed, including four children; 33 more were injured.
The next day, as I headed towards Dnipro, news came through that a Russian missile had struck a passenger train and civilian infrastructure there. Seventeen people died. Nearly 280 were wounded – among them 27 children.
My trip so far has avoided the worst. But the trauma lingers everywhere. The night is filled with the buzz of drones and the thunder of anti-aircraft batteries. Some sleep in corridors, basement carparks and metro stations. Yet somehow, life goes on.
Kyiv's endurance didn't begin in 2022. This city has been surviving invasions for more than 1500 years.
Founded in 482 AD (or so the legend goes), Kyiv was once the capital of Kievan Rus – a medieval state that laid the foundations for modern Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. In the 10th and 11th centuries, it rivalled Constantinople. The domes of Saint Sophia Cathedral and the Kyiv Pechersk Lavra monastery still rise above the skyline, reminders of a deep and complex history – stretching back to long before Moscow was little more than a forest clearing.
Kyiv has been invaded by Mongols, ruled by Poles and Tsars, occupied by Nazis. It has burned and been rebuilt more times than seems fair. It has never stayed down for long.
At its heart lies Maidan Nezalezhnosti – Independence Square. The site of student protests in the '90s, the Orange Revolution in 2004, and the bloody Euromaidan uprising in 2014 that ousted a Kremlin-backed president and sparked this long war. Today the square is lined with flags and photographs of the fallen – soldiers, civilians, children.
And yet, just around the corner, a bar promises free champagne the day Putin dies. Kyiv's defiance is often laced with wit.
Culture has become a front line. Theatres perform through blackouts. Museums preserve war artefacts. Comedians still take the stage. One official put it simply: 'It's culture that helps us resist. It keeps our soul alive.'
Because this isn't just a war for land. It's a war over identity, memory and truth. Russia wants to erase Ukrainian language and culture. But what I see here is a nation redrawing its future – sometimes with spray paint, sometimes with blood.
This one final visit, alongside a World Vision Australia crew, in my last week as Europe correspondent, is not enough – but it's something. And to everyone I meet, I say the same thing: We won't forget you. We can't afford to.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
Donald Trump has ‘no love' for Vladimir Putin
Filmmaker Ami Horowitz discusses the touching moment Donald Trump was asked a question by a Ukrainian reporter at NATO. Mr Horowitz told Sky News host Rita Panahi that Donald Trump 'really does feel' for the people of Ukraine. 'Trump has no love for Putin, Trump has no love for Russia.'


The Advertiser
4 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Australia sticks to guns on defence as allies shell out
Australia is standing firm against US pressure to lift defence spending but looks "underdone" as European leaders endorse a five per cent commitment of their gross domestic product to security. On the sidelines of the NATO summit in the Netherlands, Defence Minister Richard Marles said Australia would decide its spending levels to meet its military needs. The move risks a rebuke from US President Donald Trump, who has made clear he expects allies to drastically step up and increase their share of deterrence. The nation moving to a floor of a three per cent spend on defence was a "prudent minimum", Australian Strategic Policy Institute senior analyst Euan Graham said. He said the defence force had been "hollowed out", so the federal government could afford to invest in future capabilities which might be needed sooner than previously thought. "Australia in broad terms now is looking rather underdone in terms of defence, having committed just over the 2 per cent GDP equivalent, which was the old NATO target, but that was for a different era," Dr Graham said. "The narrative has been changed, both by US pressure and let's not forget also the primary factor, which is deteriorating security globally." NATO members agreed to increase defence and security spending to five per cent of GDP. But Spain objected to the pledge, prompting Mr Trump to threaten to punish the Iberian nation with a tougher trade deal. Australia is also seeking to negotiate a reprieve from tariffs imposed by the US on imports, including a 50 per cent levy on steel and aluminium. Mr Marles maintained Australia would stick with its own process, which involves the nation's defence spending increasing from two to 2.3 per cent by 2033/34. "A very significant decision has been made here in relation to European defence spending and that is fundamentally a matter for NATO," he said. "We'll continue to assess what our needs are going forward. As our prime minister has said, we will resource that." Mr Marles did not meet with Mr Trump, or US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, despite intensive efforts by government officials to tee up a first face-to-face of an Australian minister with the US president. Dr Graham said any embarrassment on Australia's part was mitigated by the limited representation of Asian partners at the summit. Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor reiterated the coalition's call for spending to lift to three per cent of the economy. He took aim at Labor's failure to secure a meeting with Mr Trump, pointing to a flagged sit down with Xi Jinping. "It seems that the prime minister is better able to get a meeting with the president of China than the president of the United States," Mr Taylor said. But the defence minister did meet with his Ukrainian counterpart Rustem Umerov as Australia reaffirmed its support for Kyiv in its fight against Russia. Mr Marles announced Australia will deploy a RAAF Wedgetail surveillance aircraft to Poland, in addition to 100 defence force personnel, to help provide visibility for key humanitarian and military supply routes into Ukraine. The aircraft will be deployed for three months, concluding in November, and follows an earlier six-month deployment which was highly valued by the Ukrainians. Australia announced new financial sanctions and travel bans on 37 individuals and seven financial entities involved in Russia's defence, energy, transport, insurance, electronics and finance sectors, as well as "promulgators of Russian disinformation and propaganda". Mr Marles also signed an agreement with the NATO Support and Procurement Organisation, increasing co-operation in non-combat activities including logistics and capability acquisition. with Reuters Australia is standing firm against US pressure to lift defence spending but looks "underdone" as European leaders endorse a five per cent commitment of their gross domestic product to security. On the sidelines of the NATO summit in the Netherlands, Defence Minister Richard Marles said Australia would decide its spending levels to meet its military needs. The move risks a rebuke from US President Donald Trump, who has made clear he expects allies to drastically step up and increase their share of deterrence. The nation moving to a floor of a three per cent spend on defence was a "prudent minimum", Australian Strategic Policy Institute senior analyst Euan Graham said. He said the defence force had been "hollowed out", so the federal government could afford to invest in future capabilities which might be needed sooner than previously thought. "Australia in broad terms now is looking rather underdone in terms of defence, having committed just over the 2 per cent GDP equivalent, which was the old NATO target, but that was for a different era," Dr Graham said. "The narrative has been changed, both by US pressure and let's not forget also the primary factor, which is deteriorating security globally." NATO members agreed to increase defence and security spending to five per cent of GDP. But Spain objected to the pledge, prompting Mr Trump to threaten to punish the Iberian nation with a tougher trade deal. Australia is also seeking to negotiate a reprieve from tariffs imposed by the US on imports, including a 50 per cent levy on steel and aluminium. Mr Marles maintained Australia would stick with its own process, which involves the nation's defence spending increasing from two to 2.3 per cent by 2033/34. "A very significant decision has been made here in relation to European defence spending and that is fundamentally a matter for NATO," he said. "We'll continue to assess what our needs are going forward. As our prime minister has said, we will resource that." Mr Marles did not meet with Mr Trump, or US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, despite intensive efforts by government officials to tee up a first face-to-face of an Australian minister with the US president. Dr Graham said any embarrassment on Australia's part was mitigated by the limited representation of Asian partners at the summit. Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor reiterated the coalition's call for spending to lift to three per cent of the economy. He took aim at Labor's failure to secure a meeting with Mr Trump, pointing to a flagged sit down with Xi Jinping. "It seems that the prime minister is better able to get a meeting with the president of China than the president of the United States," Mr Taylor said. But the defence minister did meet with his Ukrainian counterpart Rustem Umerov as Australia reaffirmed its support for Kyiv in its fight against Russia. Mr Marles announced Australia will deploy a RAAF Wedgetail surveillance aircraft to Poland, in addition to 100 defence force personnel, to help provide visibility for key humanitarian and military supply routes into Ukraine. The aircraft will be deployed for three months, concluding in November, and follows an earlier six-month deployment which was highly valued by the Ukrainians. Australia announced new financial sanctions and travel bans on 37 individuals and seven financial entities involved in Russia's defence, energy, transport, insurance, electronics and finance sectors, as well as "promulgators of Russian disinformation and propaganda". Mr Marles also signed an agreement with the NATO Support and Procurement Organisation, increasing co-operation in non-combat activities including logistics and capability acquisition. with Reuters Australia is standing firm against US pressure to lift defence spending but looks "underdone" as European leaders endorse a five per cent commitment of their gross domestic product to security. On the sidelines of the NATO summit in the Netherlands, Defence Minister Richard Marles said Australia would decide its spending levels to meet its military needs. The move risks a rebuke from US President Donald Trump, who has made clear he expects allies to drastically step up and increase their share of deterrence. The nation moving to a floor of a three per cent spend on defence was a "prudent minimum", Australian Strategic Policy Institute senior analyst Euan Graham said. He said the defence force had been "hollowed out", so the federal government could afford to invest in future capabilities which might be needed sooner than previously thought. "Australia in broad terms now is looking rather underdone in terms of defence, having committed just over the 2 per cent GDP equivalent, which was the old NATO target, but that was for a different era," Dr Graham said. "The narrative has been changed, both by US pressure and let's not forget also the primary factor, which is deteriorating security globally." NATO members agreed to increase defence and security spending to five per cent of GDP. But Spain objected to the pledge, prompting Mr Trump to threaten to punish the Iberian nation with a tougher trade deal. Australia is also seeking to negotiate a reprieve from tariffs imposed by the US on imports, including a 50 per cent levy on steel and aluminium. Mr Marles maintained Australia would stick with its own process, which involves the nation's defence spending increasing from two to 2.3 per cent by 2033/34. "A very significant decision has been made here in relation to European defence spending and that is fundamentally a matter for NATO," he said. "We'll continue to assess what our needs are going forward. As our prime minister has said, we will resource that." Mr Marles did not meet with Mr Trump, or US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, despite intensive efforts by government officials to tee up a first face-to-face of an Australian minister with the US president. Dr Graham said any embarrassment on Australia's part was mitigated by the limited representation of Asian partners at the summit. Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor reiterated the coalition's call for spending to lift to three per cent of the economy. He took aim at Labor's failure to secure a meeting with Mr Trump, pointing to a flagged sit down with Xi Jinping. "It seems that the prime minister is better able to get a meeting with the president of China than the president of the United States," Mr Taylor said. But the defence minister did meet with his Ukrainian counterpart Rustem Umerov as Australia reaffirmed its support for Kyiv in its fight against Russia. Mr Marles announced Australia will deploy a RAAF Wedgetail surveillance aircraft to Poland, in addition to 100 defence force personnel, to help provide visibility for key humanitarian and military supply routes into Ukraine. The aircraft will be deployed for three months, concluding in November, and follows an earlier six-month deployment which was highly valued by the Ukrainians. Australia announced new financial sanctions and travel bans on 37 individuals and seven financial entities involved in Russia's defence, energy, transport, insurance, electronics and finance sectors, as well as "promulgators of Russian disinformation and propaganda". Mr Marles also signed an agreement with the NATO Support and Procurement Organisation, increasing co-operation in non-combat activities including logistics and capability acquisition. with Reuters Australia is standing firm against US pressure to lift defence spending but looks "underdone" as European leaders endorse a five per cent commitment of their gross domestic product to security. On the sidelines of the NATO summit in the Netherlands, Defence Minister Richard Marles said Australia would decide its spending levels to meet its military needs. The move risks a rebuke from US President Donald Trump, who has made clear he expects allies to drastically step up and increase their share of deterrence. The nation moving to a floor of a three per cent spend on defence was a "prudent minimum", Australian Strategic Policy Institute senior analyst Euan Graham said. He said the defence force had been "hollowed out", so the federal government could afford to invest in future capabilities which might be needed sooner than previously thought. "Australia in broad terms now is looking rather underdone in terms of defence, having committed just over the 2 per cent GDP equivalent, which was the old NATO target, but that was for a different era," Dr Graham said. "The narrative has been changed, both by US pressure and let's not forget also the primary factor, which is deteriorating security globally." NATO members agreed to increase defence and security spending to five per cent of GDP. But Spain objected to the pledge, prompting Mr Trump to threaten to punish the Iberian nation with a tougher trade deal. Australia is also seeking to negotiate a reprieve from tariffs imposed by the US on imports, including a 50 per cent levy on steel and aluminium. Mr Marles maintained Australia would stick with its own process, which involves the nation's defence spending increasing from two to 2.3 per cent by 2033/34. "A very significant decision has been made here in relation to European defence spending and that is fundamentally a matter for NATO," he said. "We'll continue to assess what our needs are going forward. As our prime minister has said, we will resource that." Mr Marles did not meet with Mr Trump, or US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, despite intensive efforts by government officials to tee up a first face-to-face of an Australian minister with the US president. Dr Graham said any embarrassment on Australia's part was mitigated by the limited representation of Asian partners at the summit. Opposition defence spokesman Angus Taylor reiterated the coalition's call for spending to lift to three per cent of the economy. He took aim at Labor's failure to secure a meeting with Mr Trump, pointing to a flagged sit down with Xi Jinping. "It seems that the prime minister is better able to get a meeting with the president of China than the president of the United States," Mr Taylor said. But the defence minister did meet with his Ukrainian counterpart Rustem Umerov as Australia reaffirmed its support for Kyiv in its fight against Russia. Mr Marles announced Australia will deploy a RAAF Wedgetail surveillance aircraft to Poland, in addition to 100 defence force personnel, to help provide visibility for key humanitarian and military supply routes into Ukraine. The aircraft will be deployed for three months, concluding in November, and follows an earlier six-month deployment which was highly valued by the Ukrainians. Australia announced new financial sanctions and travel bans on 37 individuals and seven financial entities involved in Russia's defence, energy, transport, insurance, electronics and finance sectors, as well as "promulgators of Russian disinformation and propaganda". Mr Marles also signed an agreement with the NATO Support and Procurement Organisation, increasing co-operation in non-combat activities including logistics and capability acquisition. with Reuters


The Advertiser
4 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Special tribunal to try Russian leaders over Ukraine
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has formally approved plans to set up a new international court to prosecute senior Russian officials for the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The special tribunal will be created through an agreement between Ukraine and the Council of Europe, the continent's top human rights body. Zelenskiy visited the Strasbourg-based organisation for the first time as part of the announcement. The special tribunal aims to target senior Russian leaders for the "crime of aggression", which underpins the countless war crimes Ukraine accuses Russian forces of committing since the start of the war on February 24, 2022. Existing international courts, including the International Criminal Court in The Hague lack jurisdiction to prosecute Russian nationals for that specific offence. Since early in the conflict, Kyiv has been pushing for the creation of a special tribunal that goes beyond prosecuting war crimes that Ukraine alleged Russian forces committed, including bombing civilian infrastructure, killing civilians, rape, taking hostages and torture. Russia denies those accusations. There are logistical details still to be resolved, including where the court will be based. The Hague has been suggested because of its existing legal infrastructure, but no final decision has been made. Russia does not extradite its own citizens, and whether or not Russian President Vladimir Putin will ever end up in the dock remains to be seen. Under international law, sitting heads of state and certain other top officials - often referred to as the "troika", including a country's head of state, head of government and foreign minister - enjoy immunity from prosecution. That means any potential indictment of Putin could only move forward if he leaves office. There is no statute of limitation on the crime of aggression. The institution will be funded by supporting countries known as the Core Group, including the Netherlands, Japan and Canada. The United States backed the project under former president Joe Biden, but President Donald Trump's administration did not support the initiative. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has formally approved plans to set up a new international court to prosecute senior Russian officials for the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The special tribunal will be created through an agreement between Ukraine and the Council of Europe, the continent's top human rights body. Zelenskiy visited the Strasbourg-based organisation for the first time as part of the announcement. The special tribunal aims to target senior Russian leaders for the "crime of aggression", which underpins the countless war crimes Ukraine accuses Russian forces of committing since the start of the war on February 24, 2022. Existing international courts, including the International Criminal Court in The Hague lack jurisdiction to prosecute Russian nationals for that specific offence. Since early in the conflict, Kyiv has been pushing for the creation of a special tribunal that goes beyond prosecuting war crimes that Ukraine alleged Russian forces committed, including bombing civilian infrastructure, killing civilians, rape, taking hostages and torture. Russia denies those accusations. There are logistical details still to be resolved, including where the court will be based. The Hague has been suggested because of its existing legal infrastructure, but no final decision has been made. Russia does not extradite its own citizens, and whether or not Russian President Vladimir Putin will ever end up in the dock remains to be seen. Under international law, sitting heads of state and certain other top officials - often referred to as the "troika", including a country's head of state, head of government and foreign minister - enjoy immunity from prosecution. That means any potential indictment of Putin could only move forward if he leaves office. There is no statute of limitation on the crime of aggression. The institution will be funded by supporting countries known as the Core Group, including the Netherlands, Japan and Canada. The United States backed the project under former president Joe Biden, but President Donald Trump's administration did not support the initiative. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has formally approved plans to set up a new international court to prosecute senior Russian officials for the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The special tribunal will be created through an agreement between Ukraine and the Council of Europe, the continent's top human rights body. Zelenskiy visited the Strasbourg-based organisation for the first time as part of the announcement. The special tribunal aims to target senior Russian leaders for the "crime of aggression", which underpins the countless war crimes Ukraine accuses Russian forces of committing since the start of the war on February 24, 2022. Existing international courts, including the International Criminal Court in The Hague lack jurisdiction to prosecute Russian nationals for that specific offence. Since early in the conflict, Kyiv has been pushing for the creation of a special tribunal that goes beyond prosecuting war crimes that Ukraine alleged Russian forces committed, including bombing civilian infrastructure, killing civilians, rape, taking hostages and torture. Russia denies those accusations. There are logistical details still to be resolved, including where the court will be based. The Hague has been suggested because of its existing legal infrastructure, but no final decision has been made. Russia does not extradite its own citizens, and whether or not Russian President Vladimir Putin will ever end up in the dock remains to be seen. Under international law, sitting heads of state and certain other top officials - often referred to as the "troika", including a country's head of state, head of government and foreign minister - enjoy immunity from prosecution. That means any potential indictment of Putin could only move forward if he leaves office. There is no statute of limitation on the crime of aggression. The institution will be funded by supporting countries known as the Core Group, including the Netherlands, Japan and Canada. The United States backed the project under former president Joe Biden, but President Donald Trump's administration did not support the initiative. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has formally approved plans to set up a new international court to prosecute senior Russian officials for the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The special tribunal will be created through an agreement between Ukraine and the Council of Europe, the continent's top human rights body. Zelenskiy visited the Strasbourg-based organisation for the first time as part of the announcement. The special tribunal aims to target senior Russian leaders for the "crime of aggression", which underpins the countless war crimes Ukraine accuses Russian forces of committing since the start of the war on February 24, 2022. Existing international courts, including the International Criminal Court in The Hague lack jurisdiction to prosecute Russian nationals for that specific offence. Since early in the conflict, Kyiv has been pushing for the creation of a special tribunal that goes beyond prosecuting war crimes that Ukraine alleged Russian forces committed, including bombing civilian infrastructure, killing civilians, rape, taking hostages and torture. Russia denies those accusations. There are logistical details still to be resolved, including where the court will be based. The Hague has been suggested because of its existing legal infrastructure, but no final decision has been made. Russia does not extradite its own citizens, and whether or not Russian President Vladimir Putin will ever end up in the dock remains to be seen. Under international law, sitting heads of state and certain other top officials - often referred to as the "troika", including a country's head of state, head of government and foreign minister - enjoy immunity from prosecution. That means any potential indictment of Putin could only move forward if he leaves office. There is no statute of limitation on the crime of aggression. The institution will be funded by supporting countries known as the Core Group, including the Netherlands, Japan and Canada. The United States backed the project under former president Joe Biden, but President Donald Trump's administration did not support the initiative.