City levelled to the ground: soldiers post photos showing Vovchansk in Kharkiv Oblast
Soldiers from the 34th Separate Motorised Infantry Battalion Vovkodavy (part of the 57th Separate Motorised Infantry Brigade) have posted photos from the town of Vovchansk in Kharkiv Oblast, where the Russian offensive began exactly one year ago.
Source: The Vovkodavy Battalion
Quote: "The battalion was initially deployed in the village of Tykhe. This is on the eastern outskirts of Vovchansk.
We stopped the enemy and even carried out offensive operations. Then the decision was made to redeploy us to the city of Vovchansk itself. And from that moment on, we have been in Vovchansk for over 10 months.
During this time, we have not lost our positions, and the battalion is holding its defensive area. Next was a large-scale operation to liberate the Aggregate Plant in Vovchansk. After liberating the plant, we conducted a mop-up operation, and it also came under our responsibility."
Details: Soldiers said that within a year, the city had been practically levelled to the ground – the difficult conditions of urban combat had become almost impossible, and they had to hold their defences amongst the ruins.
Quote: "All that's left of the houses are bricks and concrete debris. Underneath them are tunnels. It's a war conducted in tunnels. We're in tunnels, and the occupiers are in tunnels. We see enemy movement; the infantry comes out and shoots them. That's the whole tactic. It's simple and complicated at the same time."
Details: Soldiers noted that no equipment was entering the city and artillery fire was limited.
In these conditions, the infantry is coming to the fore.
The Russians are conducting daily assaults. "Vovchansk has become a meat grinder for the Russians, into which they constantly throw new cannon fodder," the soldiers write.
Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Dem. Senator presses Hegseth on Qatari Air Force One deal
"It's gratifying the president's ego. That's all it is." Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) pressed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on the progress of the deal between the Trump administration and Qatar to send a luxury jet to the United States to be used as the new Air Force One. After Secretary Hegseth refused to answer specific questions surrounding the Qatari airplane saying, "Any specifics about future aircraft that could be Air Force One can't be discussed here," Sen. Reed pressed back saying, "T
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Hegseth takes fire from Republicans at heated Senate hearing
Republican senators came out firing during Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's hearing on Wednesday before the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on armed forces. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) immediately pressed Hegseth over the Russia-Ukraine war, with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) driving home the point later in the hearing; Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the top Senate appropriator, scolded the Pentagon's delays with budget information; and Sen. Lisa Murkowski closed out the hearing by questioning the administration's focus on Greenland in its Arctic strategy. McConnell, one of three Republicans who opposed Hegseth's confirmation, gaveled in the hearing by calling out the Trump administration for what he views as a flat base-line defense budget. He then launched into strong warnings against the U.S. cozying up to Russia in its bid to end its war in Ukraine. McConnell said Washington's allies are 'wondering whether we're in the middle of brokering what appears to be allowing the Russians to define victory. I think victory is defined by the people who have to live there — the Ukrainians.' The former Senate majority leader who now chairs the subcommittee, McConnell asked Hegseth which side he wanted to win the war. The Defense chief said the Trump administration wanted the killing to end but would not choose a side. 'America's reputation is on the line,' McConnell said. 'Will we defend Democratic allies against authoritarian aggressors?' Later in the hearing, Graham asked Hegseth and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. Dan Caine if Russian President Vladimir Putin is going to stop at Ukraine. 'I don't believe he is,' Caine replied. Hegseth, meanwhile, said it 'remains to be seen. Graham fired back, referring to his previous allusion to appeasement of Adolf Hitler: 'Well, he says he's not. This is the '30s all over. It doesn't remain to be seen.' The line of questioning laid bare the ideological divide within the GOP as to how the U.S. should confront Russia, seen by defense hawks as a global threat that must be countered with military assistance to prop up Ukraine and assert U.S. force in the European theater. But many in the Trump administration, including Hegseth, have taken a more ambivalent tone, arguing for an 'America First' approach that could see American troops rotated out of bases in Europe and an end to the flow of military aid from Washington to Kyiv. 'We don't want a headline at the end of this conflict that says Russia wins and America loses,' McConnell told Hegseth. The hearing had a far more adversarial tone compared to Hegseth's appearance before the House Appropriations defense subcommittee a day prior, in which the Pentagon chief emerged largely unscathed, particularly at the hands of GOP members. Democratic and Republican senators grilled Hegseth over a sparsely outlined defense budget for next fiscal year, echoing rare bipartisan criticism during the House hearing. Collins reprimanded the Pentagon for being 'unacceptably slow' in submitting a detailed Pentagon spending request for the fiscal 2026. Congress is waiting on the information as the GOP struggles to agree on Trump's reconciliation package. She also told Hegseth that Trump's budget request represented a reduction in buying power compared to the 2025 military budget, when inflation is taken into account, but suggested the Senate might correct that. McConnell earlier was also critical of the administration's defense spending plan, pushing back at Hegseth's argument that the U.S. would be making the largest investment in the military in 20 years via Trump's reconciliation package. McConnell said putting defense dollars into that package while declining to increase military spending in the regular budget 'may well end up functioning as a shell game to avoid making the most significant annual investments that we spent years urging the Biden administration to make.' There was also no shortage of criticism from the panel's Democrats. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) bashed the Pentagon for cutting military medical research while spending $45 million for a grand military parade marking the Army's 250th birthday, set for Saturday. 'This is not consistent with what the men and women in uniform deserve,' Durbin said. Others, including Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) berated Hegseth for the Trump administration's decision to send National Guard troops and active-duty Marines into Los Angeles this week, calling the actions a wildly out-of-proportion response to sometimes violent protests against Trump's escalating immigration crackdowns. 'Threatening to use our own troops on our own citizens at such scale is unprecedented; it is unconstitutional, and it is downright un-American,' Murray said, noting that the actions were undermining the readiness of the U.S. military. Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) pressed Hegseth to reveal the cost or timeline of refurbishing Trump's luxury jet from the Qatari government, meant to become Air Force One. 'You have signed a contract with a company to reconfigure the Qatari aircraft. What is the price of that contract?' Reed asked. Hegseth replied that the information 'cannot be revealed in this setting,' prompting Reed to fire back. 'Why can't it be revealed? This is the appropriation committee of the United States Senate. We appropriate the money that you will spend,' Reed said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
CNN
3 hours ago
- CNN
Trump administration reviewing Biden-era submarine pact with Australia, UK
US President Donald Trump's administration has launched a formal review of former President Joe Biden's AUKUS defense pact with Australia and Britain to allow Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarines, a US defense official said. Australia, which sees the submarines as critical to its own defense as tensions grow over China's expansive military buildup, said it remained committed to the project and looked forward to working closely with the US on the review. As well as causing alarm in Australia, the review could also throw a wrench in Britain's defense planning. AUKUS, worth hundreds of billions of dollars, is at the center of a planned expansion of Britain's submarine fleet. 'We are reviewing AUKUS as part of ensuring that this initiative of the previous administration is aligned with the President's America First agenda,' the US official said of the review, first reported by Financial Times. 'Any changes to the administration's approach for AUKUS will be communicated through official channels, when appropriate.' AUKUS was formed in 2021 to address worries about China's growing power. It envisages Australia acquiring up to five US Virginia-class submarines from 2032. Then, Britain and Australia would design and build a new class of submarine, with US assistance. The UK would take first delivery in the late 2030s, with delivery to Australia in the early 2040s. Before that, the US and Britain would start forward rotations of their submarines in 2027 out of an Australian naval base in Western Australia. Vocal skeptics among Trump's senior policy officials include Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon's top policy adviser, who cautioned last year that submarines were a scarce, critical commodity, and US industry could not produce enough to meet American demand. Submarines would be central to US military strategy in any confrontation with China centered in the First Island Chain, running from Japan through Taiwan, the Philippines and on to Borneo, enclosing China's coastal seas. 'My concern is why are we giving away this crown jewel asset when we most need it,' Colby said last year. Only six countries operate nuclear-powered submarines: the US, the UK, Russia, China, France and India. A spokesperson for Australia Defense Minister Richard Marles said the US had informed Australia and the UK of the review. 'AUKUS will grow both US and Australian defense industry as well as generating thousands of new manufacturing jobs,' the spokesperson said. A British government spokesperson called AUKUS 'one of the most strategically important partnerships in decades' that also produces 'jobs and economic growth in communities across all three nations.' 'It is understandable that a new administration would want to review its approach to such a major partnership, just as the UK did last year,' the official said, adding that Britain will 'continue to work closely with the US and Australia … to maximize the benefits and opportunities' of AUKUS. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but one official told Reuters the Trump administration 'is regularly reviewing foreign agreements to ensure they align with the American people's interests – especially those initiated under the failed Biden foreign policy agenda.' US Senator Tim Kaine, a Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said AUKUS was 'critical to ensuring a free and open Indo-Pacific' and the administration should work to strengthen it and the US submarine industrial base. 'Anything less would play directly into China's hand,' said Kaine, who represents Virginia, where US submarines are built. AUKUS is Australia's biggest-ever defense project, with Canberra committing to spend A$368 billion ($240 billion) over three decades to the program, which includes billions of dollars of investment in the U.S. production base. On Tuesday, Britain announced plans to invest billions of pounds to upgrade its submarine industry, including at BAE Systems in Barrow and Rolls-Royce Submarines in Derby, to boost submarine production as announced in Britain's Strategic Defence Review. Under this, it will build up to 12 next-generation attack submarines of the model intended to be jointly developed by the UK, US and Australia under AUKUS. In the US Congress on Tuesday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said 'we're having honest conversations with our allies' and added in reference to Australia: 'We want to make sure those capabilities are part of how they use them with their submarines, but also how they integrate with us as allies.' Former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who signed a previous agreement to acquire French submarines shelved in favor of AUKUS, told CNBC last week it was 'more likely than not that Australia will not end up with any submarines at all, but instead, simply provide a large base in Western Australia for the American Navy and maintenance facilities there.' AUKUS expert John Lee at Washington's conservative Hudson Institute think tank said the Pentagon review was aimed at determining whether it could afford to sell up to five submarines when it was not meeting its own production targets. Kathryn Paik, a Biden White House official now at Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies, said providing submarines to Australia would not sacrifice US readiness but instead boost collective deterrence. 'This review most definitely makes our allies in Canberra and London concerned, and could cause them to doubt US reliability as an ally and partner,' she said.
