Russia attacks Kyiv with waves of drones
A mass drone attack struck several districts of the Ukrainian capital Kyiv early on Tuesday, damaging an apartment building and injuring up to 11 people, city officials said.
Mayor Vitali Klitschko said swarms of drones continued to move towards the capital and warned of a danger of Russian missiles being deployed.
"Enemy drones are coming over the city from three directions. There is also the danger of missiles," Klitschko wrote on the Telegram messaging app.
Klitschko said a strike had damaged the top floor of an apartment block and non-residential areas in the Solomianskyi district near the centre of the capital. He said 11 people were injured, including six receiving treatment in hospital.
Both Ukraine and Russia have launched mass drone attacks in recent weeks as the two sides have held two sessions of direct talks on ending the more than three-year-old war. The talks have produced agreements on freeing prisoners of war and returning the bodies of fallen soldiers, but little more.
"More strikes by Russian drones on residential buildings in Kyiv," Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy's chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, wrote on Telegram. "Russia is continuing its war on civilians."
Rescue teams were also headed for sites of strikes in three other districts and air defence units were in operation.
Tymur Tkachenko, head of the city's military administration, said there had been repeated strikes in Solomianskyi district and a fire triggered by fallen drone fragments in Darnytskyi district on the eastern edge of the capital.
"This is a very difficult night," he wrote, adding that there had been power cuts in some areas. REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
G-7 statement expresses support for Israel, calls Iran source of instability
The statement issued late on June 16 by the G-7 nations has called for peace and stability in the Middle East. PHOTO: EPA-EFE WASHINGTON – The Group of Seven (G-7) nations expressed support for Israel and labelled its rival Iran as a source of instability in the Middle East, in a statement issued late on June 16 that called for peace and stability in the region. 'We affirm that Israel has a right to defend itself,' the statement said. 'We have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.' 'We urge that the resolution of the Iranian crisis leads to a broader de-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East, including a ceasefire in Gaza.' The air war between Iran and Israel – which began on June 13 when Israel attacked Iran with air strikes – has raised alarm in a region that had already been on edge since the start of Israel's military assault on Gaza in October 2023. REUTERS, AFP More to come Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
2 hours ago
- Straits Times
Trump's Iran choice: Last-chance diplomacy or a bunker-busting bomb
If US President Donald Trump decides to go ahead, the US will become a direct participant in a new conflict, taking on Iran. PHOTO: REUTERS WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump is weighing a critical decision in the four-day-old war between Israel and Iran: whether to enter the fray by helping Israel destroy the deeply buried nuclear enrichment facility at Fordo, which only US 'bunker busters,' dropped by US B-2 bombers, can reach. If he decides to go ahead, the United States will become a direct participant in a new conflict in the Middle East, taking on Iran in exactly the kind of war Mr Trump has sworn, in two campaigns, he would avoid. Iranian officials have warned that US participation in an attack on its facilities will imperil any remaining chance of the nuclear disarmament deal that Mr Trump insists he is still interested in pursuing. Mr Trump has encouraged Vice-President JD Vance and his Middle East envoy, Mr Steve Witkoff, to offer to meet the Iranians this week, according to a US official. The offer may be well received. Mr Trump, at the Group of 7 (G-7) summit in Canada, said late on June 16 , 'I think Iran basically is at the negotiating table, they want to make a deal.' If such a meeting happened, officials say, the likely Iranian interlocutor would be the country's foreign minister, Mr Abbas Araghchi, who played a key role in the 2015 nuclear deal with the Obama administration and knows every element of Iran's sprawling nuclear complex. Mr Araghchi, who has been Mr Witkoff's counterpart in recent negotiations, signalled his openness to a deal on June 16 , saying in a statement, 'If President Trump is genuine about diplomacy and interested in stopping this war, next steps are consequential.' 'It takes one phone call from Washington to muzzle someone like Netanyahu,' he said, referring to the Israeli prime minister. 'That may pave the way for a return to diplomacy.' But if that diplomatic effort fizzles, or the Iranians remain unwilling to give in to Mr Trump's central demand that they must ultimately end all uranium enrichment on Iranian soil, the president will still have the option of ordering that Fordo and other nuclear facilities be destroyed. There is only one weapon for the job, experts contend. It is called the Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or the GBU-57, and it weighs so much – 30,000 pounds – that it can be lifted only by a B-2 bomber. Israel does not own either the weapon or the bomber needed to get it aloft and over a target. If Mr Trump holds back, it could well mean that Israel's main objective in the war is never completed. 'Fordo has always been the crux of this thing,' said Mr Brett McGurk, who worked on Middle East issues for four successive US presidents, from Mr George W. Bush to Mr Joe Biden. 'If this ends with Fordo still enriching, then it's not a strategic gain.' That has been true for a long time, and over the past two years the US military has refined the operation, under close White House scrutiny. The exercises led to the conclusion that one bomb would not solve the problem; any attack on Fordo would have to come in waves, with B-2s releasing one bomb after another down the same hole. And the operation would have to be executed by an American pilot and crew. This was all in the world of war planning until the opening salvos on the morning of June 13 in Tehran, Iran's capital, when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered the strikes, declaring that Israel had discovered an 'imminent' threat that required 'preemptive action'. New intelligence, he suggested without describing the details, indicated that Iran was on the cusp of turning its fuel stockpile into weapons. US intelligence officials who have followed the Iranian program for years agree that Iranian scientists and nuclear specialists have been working to shorten the time it would take to manufacture a nuclear bomb, but they saw no huge breakthroughs. Yet they agree with Mr McGurk and other experts on one point: If the Fordo facility survives the conflict, Iran will retain the key equipment it needs to stay on a pathway to the bomb, even if it would first have to rebuild much of the nuclear infrastructure that Israel has left in ruins over four days of precision bombing. There may be other alternatives to bombing it, though they are hardly a sure thing. If the power to Fordo gets cut, by saboteurs or bombing, it could damage or destroy the centrifuges that spin at supersonic speeds. Mr Rafael Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said on J une 1 6 that this might have happened at the country's other major uranium enrichment center, Natanz. Israel took out the power supplies to the plant on June 13, and Mr Grossi said that the disruption probably sent them spinning out of control. Mr Trump rarely talks about Fordo by name, but he has occasionally alluded to the GBU-57, sometimes telling aides that he ordered its development. That is not correct: The United States began designing the weapon in 2004, during the Bush administration, specifically to collapse the mountains protecting some of the deepest nuclear facilities in Iran and North Korea. It was, however, tested during Mr Trump's first term, and added to the arsenal. Mr Netanyahu has pressed for the United States to make its bunker busters available since the Bush administration, so far to no avail. But people who have spoken to Mr Trump in recent months say the topic has come up repeatedly in his conversations with the prime minister. When Mr Trump has been asked about it, he usually avoids a direct answer. Now the pressure is on. Former Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, who resigned in a split with Mr Netanyahu, told CNN's Bianna Golodryga on June 16 that 'the job has to be done, by Israel, by the United States,' an apparent reference to the fact that the bomb would have to be dropped by an American pilot in a US airplane. He said that Mr Trump had 'the option to change the Middle East and influence the world'. And Senator Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who often speaks for the traditional, hawkish members of his party, said on CBS on Ju ne 15 that 'if diplomacy is not successful' he will 'urge President Trump to go all in to make sure that, when this operation is over, there's nothing left standing in Iran regarding their nuclear programme'. 'If that means providing bombs, provide bombs,' he said, adding, in a clear reference to the Massive Ordinance Penetrator, 'whatever bombs. If it means flying with Israel, fly with Israel'. But Republicans are hardly united in that view. And the split in the party over the decision of whether to make use of one of the Pentagon's most powerful conventional weapons to help one of America's closest allies has highlighted a far deeper divide. It is not only about crippling the centrifuges of Fordo; it is also about MAGA's view of what kinds of wars the United States should avoid at all costs. The anti-interventionist wing of the party, given its most prominent voice by influential podcaster Tucker Carlson, has argued that the lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan is that there is nothing but downside risk in getting deeply into another Middle East war. On J une 1 3, Mr Carlson wrote that the United States should 'drop Israel' and 'let them fight their own wars.' 'If Israel wants to wage this war, it has every right to do so,' he continued. 'It is a sovereign country, and it can do as it pleases. But not with America's backing.' At the Pentagon, opinion is divided for other reasons. Mr Elbridge A. Colby, the under-secretary of defense for policy, the Pentagon's No. 3 post, has long argued that every military asset devoted to the wars of the Middle East is one diverted from the Pacific and the containment of China. (Mr Colby had to amend his views on Iran somewhat to get confirmed.) For now, Mr Trump can afford to keep one foot in both camps. By making one more run at coercive diplomacy, he can make the case to the MAGA faithful that he is using the threat of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator to bring the conflict to a peaceful end. And he can tell the Iranians that they are going to cease enriching uranium one way or the other, either by diplomatic agreement or because a GBU-57 imploded the mountain. But if the combination of persuasion and coercion fails, he will have to decide whether this is Israel's war or America's. NYTIMES Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
AsiaOne
2 hours ago
- AsiaOne
US official says Trump not signing G7 statement on Israel-Iran de-escalation, World News
CALGARY, Alberta — A US official said on Monday (June 16) that President Donald Trump would not sign a draft statement from Group of Seven leaders calling for de-escalation of the Israel-Iran conflict. The draft statement, seen by Reuters, also commits to safeguarding market stability, including energy markets, says Iran must never have a nuclear weapon, and that Israel has the right to defend itself. Canadian and European diplomats said G7 attendees are continuing discussions on the conflict at the summit in Canada, which ends on Tuesday. [[nid:719159]]
