Ukrainian spy colonel gunned down in Kyiv, assailant flees
People leave a shelter with their belongings near a damaged shopping centre after a night of Russian strikes in Kyiv, on July 10.
KYIV - A senior Ukrainian security officer was gunned down in a residential parking lot in Kyiv on July 10 before his assailant fled on foot in broad daylight, according to authorities and video footage verified by Reuters.
Kyiv's police force said it was working to identify the shooter and that 'measures are being taken to detain him'. The slain agent was a colonel in the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), an official told Reuters.
The SBU, a sprawling domestic spy agency which has thousands of staff, said it had opened a criminal investigation into the murder of one of its employees in Kyiv's southern Holosiivskyi district. They did not identify him.
The agency's remit covers security and counterintelligence, but since
Russia's 2022 invasion it has also played a prominent role in special operations against Moscow, including assassinations and sabotage attacks.
Those include an extraordinary drone operation codenamed Spider's Web that targeted Russian strategic aircraft at bases hundreds of miles from Ukraine, and the assassination of a top Russian general in Moscow using a bomb hidden in a scooter.
Neither the SBU nor the police mentioned possible motives for the killing in Kyiv.
'The Security Service and the National Police are taking a comprehensive set of measures to clarify all the circumstances of the crime and bring the perpetrators to justice,' the SBU said in a statement.
Top stories
Swipe. Select. Stay informed.
Business S'pore to launch new grant for companies, expand support for workers amid US tariff uncertainties
World Trump to use presidential authority to send weapons to Ukraine, sources say
Asia Tariffs overshadow diplomacy as Asean foreign ministers press on with meetings
Opinion Whisper it softly, there's a new Japan rising
Singapore Up to 90% of air-con units can be recycled, including greenhouse gas refrigerant
Singapore What 'skills first' really means: Panellists at SkillsFuture Forum talk culture, systems, mindsets
Singapore KTPH trials 'smart diapers' for adult patients to prevent skin conditions, relieve burden on nurses
Singapore Singaporean fugitive nabbed and charged with drug trafficking, may face death penalty
Ukrainian media outlet Ukrainska Pravda cited a source saying the assailant fired five rounds from a pistol. It identified his victim as Ivan Voronych, an SBU colonel.
Some pro-Kremlin military bloggers cheered the death of the colonel. Mr Alexander Kots, a Russian war correspondent, said he hoped the Russian security services were behind his death. 'The enemy must feel afraid on its own territory.'
Russian officials have not publicly commented.
CCTV footage circulated on Ukrainian social media showed a man in jeans leaving a residential building and walking to a car park where he was approached by another man, who fired at him repeatedly before running away.
Reuters was able to confirm the location of the video of the purported killing as a neighbourhood in Kyiv, using the guard box, buildings and parking lot layout, which match file and satellite imagery of the area.
The date when the video was recorded was verified using the timestamp on the footage and Reuters reporting of the incident. REUTERS
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
17 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Pentagon Golden Dome to have 4-layer defence system, slides show
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox The Golden Dome missile defence system faces an ambitious 2028 deadline set by Mr Trump himself. WASHINGTON - The Trump administration's flagship Golden Dome missile defence system will include four layers - one satellite-based and three on land - with 11 short-range batteries located across the continental US, Alaska and Hawaii, according to a US government slide presentation on the project first reported by Reuters. The slides, tagged 'Go Fast, Think Big!' were presented to 3,000 defence contractors in Huntsville, Alabama, last week and reveal the unprecedented complexity of the system, which faces an ambitious 2028 deadline set by US President Donald Trump. The system is estimated to cost US$175 billion (S$224.53 billion), but the slides show uncertainties still loom over the basic architecture of the project because the number of launchers, interceptors, ground stations, and missile sites needed for the system has yet to be determined. "They have a lot of money, but they don't have a target of what it costs yet," said one US official. So far, Congress has appropriated US$25 billion for Golden Dome in Mr Trump's tax-and-spend Bill passed in July. Another US$45.3 billion is earmarked for Golden Dome in his 2026 presidential budget request. Intended as a multi-layered missile defence shield for the United States, Golden Dome draws inspiration from Israel's Iron Dome, but is significantly bigger due to the geography it will need to protect and the complexity due to the varied threats it will face. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. World US trade team will meet Chinese officials in two or three months, Bessent says Singapore From survivable to liveable: The making of a green city Asia DPM Gan kicks off India visit in Mumbai as Singapore firms ink investment agreements Asia South Korea's former first lady arrested after court issues warrant, Yonhap reports Opinion Singpass use in dating apps raises difficult questions Singapore Luxury items seized in $3b money laundering case handed over to Deloitte for liquidation Singapore Man who stalked woman blasted by judge on appeal for asking scandalous questions in court Singapore SG60: Many hands behind Singapore's success story According to the slides, the system architecture consists of four integrated layers: a space-based sensing and targeting layer for missile warning and tracking as well as "missile defence" and three land-based layers consisting of missile interceptors, radar arrays, and potentially lasers. One surprise was a new large missile field - seemingly in the Midwest according to a map contained in the presentation - for Next Generation Interceptors (NGI) which are made by Lockheed Martin and would be a part of the "upper layer" alongside Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (Thaad) Aegis systems which are also made by Lockheed. NGI is the modernised missile for the Ground-Based Midcourse Defence (GMD) network of radars, interceptors and other equipment - currently the primary missile defence shield to protect the United States from intercontinental ballistic missiles from rogue states. The US operates GMD launch sites in southern California and Alaska. This plan would add a third site in the Midwest to counter additional threats. Other technical hurdles the slides identified included communication latency across the "kill chain" of systems. Contractors such as Lockheed, Northrop Grumman, RTX, and Boeing have a variety of missile defence systems. Notably, the slides did not mention Mr Elon Musk's SpaceX, which was part of a bid for Golden Dome contracts alongside software maker Palantir and defence systems manufacturer Anduril. The Pentagon said it is gathering information "from industry, academia, national labs, and other government agencies for support to Golden Dome" but it would be "imprudent" to release more information on a programme in these early stages. One key goal for Golden Dome is to shoot targets down during their 'boost phase,' the slow and predictable climb through the Earth's atmosphere of a missile. Rather, it seeks to field space-based interceptors that can more quickly intercept incoming missiles. The presentation highlighted that the United States "has built both interceptors and re-entry vehicles" but has never built a vehicle that can handle the heat of reentry while targeting an enemy missile. The last lines of defence dubbed the "under layer" and "Limited Area Defence" will include new radars and current systems like the Patriot missile defence system and a new "common" launcher that will launch current and future interceptors against all threat types. These modular and relocatable systems would be designed to minimise reliance on prepared sites, allowing for rapid deployment across multiple theatres. Space Force General Michael Guetlein, confirmed in July to lead the Golden Dome project, has 30 days from his July 17 confirmation to build a team, another 60 days to deliver an initial system design, and 120 days to present a full implementation plan, including satellite and ground station details, people briefed on a memo signed by Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth have told Reuters. REUTERS
Straits Times
36 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Explainer: Can Trump take control of Washington to fight the city's crime?
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox US President Trump has in recent months directed federal law enforcement agencies such as the FBI to increase the police presence in Washington. WASHINGTON - US President Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened to put Washington under full federal control to reduce crime, even as city officials stressed crime is already falling. While Trump does have some authority over the capital city's police force and National Guard soldiers, a full federal takeover would likely be blocked in court. Here is why. What does the constitution say about control of Washington? The US Constitution, ratified in 1787, provides for the creation of a federal capital district to serve as the permanent seat of the government. The Constitution makes clear that Congress has complete legislative authority over the district. But Congress has historically delegated at least some of the day-to-day work of municipal government to other entities. How is the capital governed? A federal law passed by Congress in 1973, known as the Home Rule Act, allows city residents to elect a mayor and council, who have some autonomy to pass their own laws. Congress still has budgetary oversight over Washington, however, and can overturn local legislation. Congress did that most recently in 2023, voting to overturn changes to Washington's laws that lowered penalties for some crimes. Who controls the city's law enforcement? The Democratic mayor of Washington, Ms Muriel Bowser, has authority over the city's Metropolitan Police Department (MPD). But the Home Rule Act allows the president to take control of the MPD for federal purposes during emergencies if 'special conditions of an emergency nature exist'. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. World US trade team will meet Chinese officials in two or three months, Bessent says Singapore From survivable to liveable: The making of a green city Asia DPM Gan kicks off India visit in Mumbai as Singapore firms ink investment agreements Asia South Korea's former first lady arrested after court issues warrant, Yonhap reports Singapore Luxury items seized in $3b money laundering case handed over to Deloitte for liquidation Singapore MyRepublic customers air concerns over broadband speed after sale to StarHub Singapore Man who stalked woman blasted by judge on appeal for asking scandalous questions in court Singapore SG60: Many hands behind Singapore's success story A presidential takeover is limited to 30 days, unless Congress votes to extend it through a joint resolution. Mr Trump invoked this part of the Home Rule Act on Aug 11, saying in an executive order that there is a "crime emergency" in the city that necessitates federal management of the police department. Ms Bowser has pushed back on Mr Trump's claims of unchecked violence, saying the city is "not experiencing a crime spike" and highlighting that violent crime hit its lowest level in more than three decades last year. Violent crime, including murders, spiked in 2023, turning Washington into one of the nation's deadliest cities, according to city police data. However, that dropped 35 per cent in 2024, according to federal data, and it has fallen an additional 26 per cent in the first seven months of 2025. Mr Trump also has broad control over the DC National Guard's 2,700 soldiers and airmen. They report directly to the president, unlike counterparts in other states and territories. The US President said on Aug 11 that he was deploying 800 National Guard troops to Washington. So can Trump 'federalise' Washington? It is highly unlikely. To exert full federal control of Washington, Mr Trump would need Congress to repeal the Home Rule Act. Such a repeal would require 60 votes in the US Senate, where Mr Trump's Republican Party has a 53-47 advantage. Democrats have been supportive of home rule for Washington and are not expected to cross party lines to endorse the US President's vision. But there are ways Mr Trump can exert more influence over the district without fully taking it over. He has in recent months directed federal law enforcement agencies such as the FBI to increase the police presence in Washington. He has broad authority to reallocate FBI personnel, and in recent months, FBI agents around the country have been given temporary assignments to help with immigration enforcement. Mr Trump also signed an executive order in March to make Washington "safe and beautiful", establishing a task force to increase police presence in public areas, maximise immigration enforcement, and expedite concealed carry licences. Can Trump evict Washington's homeless population? Mr Trump has said homeless people must move out of Washington , without offering specifics of a plan to accomplish this. "I'm going to make our Capital safer and more beautiful than it ever was before," the US President said on Truth Social. "The Homeless have to move out, IMMEDIATELY. We will give you places to stay, but FAR from the Capital." The federal government owns much of Washington's parkland, so the Trump administration has legal authority to clear homeless encampments in those areas, like President Joe Biden did while in office. But the federal government cannot force people to move out of the city because they lack shelter, legal experts said. REUTERS
CNA
an hour ago
- CNA
Commentary: The dangers of US-Russia dealmaking without Ukraine at the table
WELLINGTON: Uncertainty, and no little trepidation, surrounds the upcoming Trump-Putin meeting on Aug 15 in Alaska. While Trump has (for now) ruled out attendance at the meeting by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, it's still not clear what is on the negotiating table. There is a lot at stake – most immediately for Ukraine but also for broader European security – and the auguries aren't encouraging. Trump says his objective is to end the fighting, and evidently sees his face-to-face meeting with Putin on Friday as key to this. While talk of possible 'land-swaps' and recovering 'prime oceanfront land' for Ukraine suggests the US President is in deal-making mode, Trump has also described Friday's encounter with Putin as just a 'feel-out' meeting, suggesting more a preliminary encounter. Trump's sudden and unexpected decision late last week to meet with Putin – on the very day his self-imposed deadline to Putin to agree to a ceasefire or face more sanctions was due to expire – was at once characteristic of his mercurial operating style, but also his conviction that only the two leaders themselves could resolve the matter. KYIV AND EUROPE FACE A DILEMMA For its part, Europe, caught off balance by the announcement of the summit, has been scrambling, fearful of being presented with a done deal. European leaders have reiterated their strong support for Ukraine, insisting that Kyiv must be involved in any negotiations concerning Ukraine's security. Together with Zelenskyy, they plan to hold a 'virtual' meeting with Trump on Wednesday this week, Aug 13, seeking to shape the outcomes of the summit. Zelenskyy has declared that any agreement reached at the summit without input from Kyiv would amount to 'dead decisions'. Kyiv sees no evidence on the battlefield that Russia is ready to end the fighting – indeed warning that any concessions to Putin would only encourage Russia to continue the war. Yet Kyiv (and its European backers) face a dilemma: While wary of being presented with an unpalatable deal, they don't want to risk angering Washington by appearing to be the obstacle to a negotiated agreement. For Putin, Washington's agreement to hold the summit is itself a gift – an unrequited concession. Such meetings, echoing past US-Soviet high-level encounters, give the Russian leader the status and respect as an equal partner he craves, and accords with Putin's view of how great powers should dispose of world affairs between themselves, deciding spheres of influence. Moreover, Washington's comments to media, suggesting possible 'territorial swaps' before the summit has even occurred, and absent any credible signs of Russia's willingness to stop the fighting, fuels unfortunate speculation that the talks will be held on Moscow's terms. To be sure, Kyiv may indeed have to accept Russian de facto control of parts of eastern Ukraine as part of any eventual settlement to end the fighting. But to concede this likelihood up front is a puzzling negotiating tactic. It will alarm those who suspect that Ukraine, and Washington's European allies, will be presented with a fait accompli, and fuel speculation that the administration's main objective is to reach a quick deal, and promote normalisation of relations with Russia. THE BEST OUTCOME More details may emerge over coming days that provide greater reassurance about how the United States will be approaching Friday's summit. But perhaps the best outcome that can realistically be expected is for a ceasefire along the current line of contact to end the fighting, at least for now. Such a ceasefire would certainly offer a welcome respite for Ukraine from the constant barrage of damaging missile and drone attacks on its troops, its civilian population and infrastructure. But the hard work of converting any ceasefire into some kind of longer-term settlement would remain. And there should be no illusions about how challenging this will prove. Bear in mind that Russia too would benefit from a ceasefire, allowing it to reconstitute its forces and relieve pressure on its overheating economy – especially if it were accompanied by a relaxation of Western sanctions. And given the Kremlin's near-complete control of the information space within Russia, underpinned by its formidable internal security apparatus, Moscow can spin any outcome to the conflict in Ukraine as a victory for Russia. Moreover, there are no grounds to suppose that Putin has resiled from his core objective of bringing Ukraine to heel, installing a more pliable government in Kyiv and bringing Ukraine back firmly within Russia's sphere of influence. This was underscored in May during Russia's latest (abortive) talks with Ukraine in Istanbul, where Moscow reiterated its maximalist demands: full control of the four territories it has annexed in eastern Ukraine (plus Crimea), Ukrainian neutrality and repudiation of NATO membership aspirations, demilitarisation and 'denazification'. More broadly, Russia remains intent on revising the post-Cold War European security framework as set out in Moscow's draft treaties in December 2021 – including the drawdown of forward-deployed NATO forces in its eastern member states. At best, then, the upcoming summit in Alaska might offer an end to the fighting in Ukraine – at least for now. But this will only be the start of a long and arduous process, the outcome of which will remain crucial, not only for the future of Ukraine but also for wider European and global security. Ian Hill is Adjunct Professor in the Centre for Defence and Security Studies at Massey University and Senior Fellow in the Centre for Strategic Studies at Victoria University of Wellington. This commentary first appeared
