Russian commander says situation in Belgorod 'under control' while battles continue in Kursk
(Reuters) - The situation in Russia's Belgorod region is "under control" after the Ukrainian army tried to break through the border two weeks ago, Russian commander Apti Alaudinov was quoted by the state RIA news agency as saying on Friday.
Just as Ukrainian forces are battling to keep their grip on a sliver of Russia's Kursk region they captured last year, they have tried to stage a little-publicised incursion into the adjacent Belgorod region, according to Russian military bloggers.
Alaudinov, commander of Chechnya's Akhmat special forces, told Russian state television that Moscow's forces were "clearing areas" of Ukrainian troops in Belgorod.
"In general, our situation is quite good," RIA cited him as saying. "The enemy does not tire of throwing in new and new meat, although he sees every day that he suffers terrible losses and cannot achieve results."
Reuters could not independently verify Alaudinov's report.
'Two Majors', a pro-Russian war blogger with over 1.2 million subscribers, wrote on Friday that fighting was continuing around Demidovka and Popovka, villages in Belgorod lying just over the border from Ukraine.
"The enemy continues to attempt to break through the forest belts," Two Majors wrote, adding that Ukraine was also attacking four other towns near the frontier in Belgorod.
On Friday Vyacheslav Gladkov, Belgorod's governor, reported multiple Ukrainian shelling and drone attacks over the past day on those four towns - Murom, Malinovka, Masychevo and Shebekino - as well as several others. One man was injured in Shebekino after a drone detonated in a parking lot, Gladkov said.
Separately, the Russian Defence Ministry said on Friday battles were still underway to the north in the Kursk region, where Moscow's forces are fighting to eject Ukrainian troops from their last remaining major stronghold.
Russian war bloggers have reported that more than 300 Ukrainian soldiers are hunkered down in a monastery in Kursk from which they are trying to defend their positions in a village called Guevo.
Reuters was unable to independently verify any of the war bloggers' assertions.
Should Moscow rout Ukraine from Kursk entirely, it would deliver a significant blow to Kyiv, whose army seized a chunk of the region last August to use as a future bargaining chip in talks to end the war.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
25 minutes ago
- The Hill
White House lowers expectations for Trump-Putin summit
The White House is lowering expectations for any breakthrough from President Trump's summit on Friday with Russian President Vladimir Putin, using terms like 'listening session' and 'feel-out meeting' to describe the planned discussion about the war in Ukraine. Trump and other administration officials have indicated Friday's summit in Alaska is not meant to be one that will bring an end to the fighting in Ukraine, which began in 2022 when Russian forces invaded the country. The president and his team have also largely avoided predicting any deliverables that might come out of the meeting and noted that it will likely take a follow-up summit involving both Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky for any concrete progress to be made on a ceasefire. 'There's a very good chance that we're going to have a second meeting that will be more productive than the first,' Trump said Wednesday. 'Because the first is I'm going to find out where we are and what we're doing.' The White House has steered clear of making any firm commitments about what will come out of Friday's gathering in Anchorage, and details have been scarce as officials work to rapidly pull the event together on one week's notice. The president himself as offered mixed signals about what will happen. Trump is expected to meet one-on-one with Putin, press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, and the event will take place at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson. But other logistics were still being sorted out as the summit approached. 'This is a listening exercise for this president,' Leavitt told reporters on Tuesday. 'Look, only one party that's involved in this war is going to be present. And so this is for the president to go and to get, again, a more firm and better understanding of how we can hopefully bring this war to an end.' Trump is a wild card in Friday's meeting. He has avoided setting expectations for the event, telling reporters earlier this week that the conversation with Putin 'will be good, but it might be bad.' Trump on Wednesday threatened 'severe consequences' if Russia did not stop the fighting after this week's summit, then minutes later acknowledged that he is unlikely to be able to get Putin to stop targeting Ukrainian civilians. And he said he hoped to arrange a second meeting quickly involving Putin and Zelensky, or that perhaps a second meeting would not happen at all. 'If the first one goes OK, we'll have a quick second one. I would like to do it almost immediately,' Trump said. 'I think the second meeting – if the second meeting takes place. Now there may be no second meeting, because if I feel it's not appropriate to have it because I didn't get the answers that we have to have, then we're not going to have a second meeting.' Some critics have bemoaned that Trump is giving Putin a win simply by holding the meeting on U.S. soil without Zelensky or leadership from Ukraine present. And European allies have approached Friday's meeting with caution, expressing appreciation for Trump's efforts while bracing for the possibility that he may go off script. Trump has in recent days suggested Ukraine may have to give up land to Russia as part of a peace agreement, something Ukrainian leaders have said is a non-starter. 'Pressure on Russia works. Peace has no alternative. Clear results are needed. Together, we can deliver them,' Zelensky said in a statement after a Wednesday call with Trump and European leaders. Trump has said he intends to call Zelensky and European leaders upon the conclusion of his meeting with Putin on Friday. The president and his allies have long argued there is little harm in holding a meeting or bettering relations with another country, and officials have made the case that this president takes a different approach to diplomacy. 'People have to understand, for President Trump, a meeting is not a concession,' Secretary of State Marco Rubio told radio host Sid Rosenberg. 'If you watch some of the news…these people are going nuts. Oh, this is – what a win for Putin; he gets a meeting. He doesn't view it that way,' Rubio said. 'A meeting is what you do to kind of figure out and make your decision. I want to have all the facts. I want to look this guy in the eye. And that's what the president wants to do.'
Atlantic
26 minutes ago
- Atlantic
Will Trump Get His Potemkin Statistics?
In 2013, ahead of a scheduled visit from President Vladimir Putin to the small Russian town of Suzdal, local officials worried that he would be disappointed by the dilapidated buildings. In a modern revival of Grigory Potemkin's possibly apocryphal deception of Catherine the Great, they slapped exterior wallpaper onto buildings, hoping to hide the decaying concrete behind illustrations of charming village homes. It was intended as a comforting myth to keep Putin happy. (In the end, Putin never showed up.) On August 1, President Donald Trump demanded a comforting myth of his own, one that could have far greater consequences for the world economy. He began by firing a skilled economist, Erika McEntarfer, from her job running the Bureau of Labor Statistics, for a cardinal sin that ordinarily exists only in dictatorships: producing 'bad numbers.' In authoritarian regimes, good numbers are always right, and if anyone says otherwise—if they are foolish enough to produce statistics that suggest the economy is souring or that Dear Leader isn't producing historic growth and blockbuster jobs numbers—then it's curtains on their career (if not their life). As is so often the case with Trump, reality itself seems to be ' rigged.' Time to fix reality with Potemkin statistics. This week, Trump named E. J. Antoni, the chief economist at the Heritage Foundation, as McEntarfer's replacement, subject to the charade of Senate Republican rubber-stamping that has become so common in Trump's second term. As with despots throughout the world, Trump selected Antoni on the two criteria that consistently warm a dictator's heart: loyalty and ideology. Antoni, who contributed to Project 2025, has a résumé that's thin on qualifications. Five years ago, according to his LinkedIn profile, he completed his doctorate in economics at Northern Illinois University, after a short stint teaching at Sauk Valley Community College. His only scholarly publication—ever—appears to be his doctoral thesis, which has been cited by other economists a grand total of one time. That sole citation came from a policy briefing written by Antoni's then-colleague at the archconservative Texas Public Policy Foundation. Tim Naftali: Trump just did what not even Nixon dared to do Antoni has shown ignorance of basic economic data, including in a recent social-media post supporting Trump's tariffs, in which he appeared to not grasp that a major index of import prices did not include tariffs in its published data. (Several established economists helpfully pointed this out to him.) Menzie Chinn, a renowned economics professor at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, has chronicled a wide array of Antoni's basic misunderstandings, misrepresentations, and mistakes. In other words, Antoni would probably not get hired as a junior economist at the agency he's now slated to run. By contrast, McEntarfer received her doctorate from Virginia Tech in 2002, then worked as an economist in a variety of roles at the Census Bureau—under both Republican and Democratic presidents—as well as in top jobs at the Treasury Department and the White House Council of Economic Advisers. Last year, she was confirmed by the Senate to run the Bureau of Labor Statistics on a bipartisan 86–8 vote. Then-Senators J. D. Vance and Marco Rubio both voted to confirm her. During her time in public service—not in academia—she produced at least 44 publications, which have been cited by other scholars 1,327 times. But what Antoni lacks in credentials and expertise he makes up for in his MAGA worldview. On X, he follows a who's who of Trump acolytes, including Carpe Donktum, a prolific meme creator who once shared an AI-generated video depicting Trump killing journalists and critics, and Jack Posobiec and Mike Cernovich, who both promoted the debunked Pizzagate conspiracy theory. International investors can see this, too—and they understand that nonpartisan government officials devoted to statistical accuracy do not behave like this. Even conservative economists can see what's going on. Stan Veuger, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, has noted that economists had hoped that Trump would appoint a competent, fair expert who could ensure confidence in the government's data. 'EJ Antoni is really the opposite of that,' Veuger lamented. 'Even the people who may be somewhat sympathetic to his economic policy views don't think he's qualified.' Yet again, the United States is lurching toward dynamics previously seen only in authoritarian regimes and dictatorships. Autocrats and wannabe despots consistently cook the books, manipulating statistics to make their nation's economy appear better than it is. This comes at a cost: Once the statistical facade peels away, providing a glimpse of the crumbling structure below, investors stop believing the data. Eventually they flee, taking their money with them. The economist Luis Martinez has used satellite images to test whether dictators were overstating their country's growth rate. (Because real, sustained GDP growth inevitably produces increased light pollution in developing countries as cities expand and economic activity increases, nighttime images from space have proved to be a good proxy for economic growth.) Martinez's data showed that the answer was yes—and by a lot. The leaders he studied were overstating GDP numbers by up to 35 percent. And they weren't just fudging the numbers; they were almost certainly making them up. Similarly, after Rwanda—which has long promoted itself as an African success story under the economic management of its dictator, Paul Kagame—boasted that it had reduced poverty by 6 percent over a five-year period, independent researchers concluded that poverty had actually increased by 5 to 7 percent. Other studies have confirmed that authoritarians frequently manipulate statistics strategically, ensuring that bad news never coincides with election cycles. Rogé Karma: The mystery of the strong economy has finally been solved A dictator's ability to snap their fingers and transform economic malaise into a perceived miracle is an exercise of unconstrained personal power. But it is also a sign of weakness—one that inflicts significant damage to a country's economy. That's because economic investments involve putting capital at calculated risk, and those risks become unattractive when the underlying calculations are not based on trustworthy information. By contrast, leaders in functioning democracies tie themselves to the economic masts of independent institutions that are designed to speak truth to power—and investors trust them accordingly with their money. Effective decision making is impossible without reliable, accurate information. And many crucial decisions in economic governance and investment rely on the BLS jobs numbers. The monthly reports sway Federal Reserve decisions, affect pension-payout calculations, and are factored into virtually every determination involving major global investment. Economists have expressed their worries that if the jobs data are even perceived as being subject to political pressure, international lending to the United States will decline. When Fox News highlighted this week that Antoni had previously expressed his desire to get rid of the monthly jobs reports, the value of the dollar fell shortly thereafter. Antoni might not be able to manipulate the statistics themselves. Many economists are involved in compiling the data, and cooking the books without drawing notice would be difficult. But in the current American information environment, Antoni could do enormous damage simply by giving misleading political ammunition to the MAGA movement, dressed up in the official guise of a previously nonpartisan office. Antoni presumably has few qualms about the political pressure he's inevitably going to face from Trump; after all, he has accepted a nomination for a job that now clearly comes with a risk of being fired if the official statistics aren't to the president's liking. And that means the clock is ticking for Antoni even if he is confirmed, because Potemkin villages all eventually crumble.
Epoch Times
26 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
What Would Be a Decent Outcome of the Trump–Putin Meeting?
(Left) U.S. President Donald Trump at Andrews Air Force Base, Md., on July 29, 2025. (Right) Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Kremlin in Moscow on May 8, 2025.
