Russia Hits Ukraine's Kharkiv with Deadly Nighttime Barrage of Drones
A concentrated, nine-minute-long Russian drone attack on Ukraine's second largest city of Kharkiv in the middle of the night killed three people and injured 64, including nine children, Ukrainian officials said on Wednesday.
The overnight attack followed Russia's two biggest air assaults of the war on Ukraine this week, part of intensified bombardments that Moscow said were retaliatory measures for Kyiv's recent attacks in Russia.
Kharkiv, in Ukraine's northeast, withstood Russia's full-scale advance in the early days of the war and has since been a frequent target of drone, missile, and guided aerial bomb assaults.
The intense strikes by 17 drones on Kharkiv sparked fires in 15 units of a five-storey apartment building and caused other damage in the city close to the Russian border, the city's mayor Ihor Terekhov said.
"There are direct hits on multi-storey buildings, private homes, playgrounds, enterprises and public transport," Terekhov said on the Telegram messaging app.
"Every new day now brings new despicable blows from Russia, and almost every blow is telling. Russia deserves increased pressure; with literally every blow it strikes against ordinary life, it proves that the pressure is not enough," President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said on Telegram.
A Reuters witness saw emergency rescuers helping to carry people out of damaged buildings and administering care, while firefighters battled blazes in the dark.
Nine of the injured, including a 2-year-old girl and a 15-year-old boy, have been hospitalized, Oleh Sinehubov, the governor of the broader Kharkiv region, said on Telegram. He added that the strikes also hit a city trolley bus depot and several residential buildings.
In total, the Ukrainian military said Russia had launched 85 drones overnight, 40 of which were shot down.
It said nine were lost - meaning the Ukrainian military used electronic warfare to divert them - or were drone simulators without warheads.
"The main areas of the air strike are Kharkiv, Donetsk and Odesa regions," the military said on Telegram.
There was no immediate comment from Russia.
Both sides deny targeting civilians in the war that Russia launched on its smaller neighbor in February 2022. But thousands of civilians have died in the conflict, the vast majority of them Ukrainian.
"We are holding on. We are helping each other. And we will definitely survive," Terekhov said. "Kharkiv is Ukraine. And it cannot be broken."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Asharq Al-Awsat
19 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Russia Says It Took Control of Three Settlements in Ukraine, State Media Reports
Russian forces have taken control of three new Ukrainian villages, Yablonovka in the northeastern Sumy region, and Koptevo and Komar in the eastern Donetsk region, state media cited the Russian Defense Ministry as saying on Friday. The state TASS news agency cited the ministry as saying that Russian troops had captured six Ukrainian villages over the past week. Reuters could not independently confirm the battlefield reports.
Asharq Al-Awsat
21 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
As Trump Mulls Sanctions, Russia's Military Economy Slows
After three years of doom-defying growth, Russia's heavily militarized economy is slowing, facing a widening budget deficit and weak oil prices, all under the threat of more Western sanctions. Huge spending on guns, tanks, drones, missiles and soldiers for the Ukraine campaign helped ensure Moscow bucked predictions of economic collapse after it launched its offensive in 2022. But as Kyiv's most important backers head Sunday to Canada for the G7, where US President Donald Trump will face pressure to hit Russia with fresh sanctions, the Kremlin's run of economic fortune is showing signs of fatigue. "It is no longer possible to pull the economy along by the military-industrial complex alone," Natalia Zubarevich, an economist at Moscow State University, told AFP. Government spending has jumped 60 percent since before the offensive, with military outlays now at nine percent of GDP, according to President Vladimir Putin. "Almost every other sector is showing zero or even negative growth," said Zubarevich. Russia's economy expanded 1.4 percent on an annualized basis in the first quarter -- down from 4.1 percent in 2024 to its lowest reading in two years. The central bank predicts growth of no more than 1-2 percent this year. Russia's economy "is simply running out of steam", Alexandra Prokopenko, a former central bank advisor and now analyst based outside Russia, wrote in a recent note. Oil reliance Putin, who has reveled in Russia's strong performance, has brushed off concerns. "We do not need such growth," he said at the end of last year, when the slowdown started. Rapid expansion risked creating "imbalances in the economy, that could cause us harm in the long run", he said. Top among those imbalances has been rapid inflation, running at around 10 percent. The Central Bank last week nudged interest rates down from a two-decade-high saying price rises were moderating. But those high borrowing costs -- combined with falling oil prices -- are the main factors behind the slowdown, economist Anton Tabakh told AFP. Russia's Urals blend of crude oil sold for an average of $52 a barrel in May, down from $68 in January -- a big reduction in energy revenues, which make up more than a quarter of government income. Russia this year has raised taxes on businesses and high earners, essentially forcing them to stump up more for the Ukraine offensive. But the new income "only covers the shortfall in oil sales", said Zubarevich. With tighter finances, Russia's parliament was this week forced to amend state spending plans for 2025. It now expects a budget deficit of 1.7 percent of GDP -- three times higher than initially predicted. Trump factor Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is urging Trump to whack a fresh set of economic sanctions on Moscow as punishment for rejecting ceasefire calls and continuing with its deadly bombardments of Ukrainian cities. "Russia doesn't really care about such human losses. What they do worry about are harsh sanctions," Zelensky said Thursday "That's what really threatens them –- because it could cut off their funding for war and force them to seek peace," he added. Trump's intentions are unclear. He has publicly mulled both hitting Moscow with new sanctions and removing some of the measures already in place. Some US senators, including Republicans, have proposed hitting countries that buy Russian oil with massive tariffs, to try to dent the flow of billions of dollars to Moscow from the likes of China and India. In Moscow, officials flip between blasting sanctions as an "illegal" attack on Russia and brushing them off as an ineffective tool that has backfired on Europe and the United States. Russia has also talked up its ability to continue fighting for years -- whatever the West does -- and has geared its economy to serving the military. Moscow still has the cash to wage its conflict "for a long time", Zubarevich said. "Through 2025 definitely. 2026 will be a bit tougher but they will cut other expenses. This (military) spending will stay."
Asharq Al-Awsat
a day ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Trump: On the Way to Crucial Summits
While President Donald Trump prepares for G-7 and NATO summits later this month political circles and media in Europe are busy trying to cut him down to size before the two events. 'Trump will come empty-handed,' says one commentator. 'None of the things he announced with fanfare has been achieved.' Other commentators use such phrases as 'deflated balloon' and 'bogged down in the mess he created.' At first sight it looks certain that he has not scored big on any of the dramatic goals he announced. His tariff campaign is stalled in a maze of zigzags. His peace-making gambit in Ukraine has led to him humiliating Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and labelling Russian President Vladimir Putin as 'quite mad'. He has not secured the accord with Iran which he had boasted would be done and dusted in an afternoon. Worse still, scores of US judges have lined up to block some of his dramatic measures including the crackdown on illegal immigration. His purge of bureaucracy has also been stalled and the federal government is desperately rehiring many of the staff that Elon Musk fired as 'do-nothing parasites.' In another register, the Gaza tragedy continues and the ceasefire promised seems as remote as ever. The cherry on the top of all that is the riot triggered by illegal immigrants in Los-Angeles leading to the deployment of the National Guard and the Marines, a rare move in American history. Even on the personal side of things his success in securing business contracts for Trump holdings plus a Jumbo Jet is counter-balanced by the acrimonious split with his most ardent backer Elon Musk. With such a tableau, Trump's favorite words 'amazing' and 'wonderful' used to describe his first 100 days in office sound hollow. Well, what can one make of all that? At the start of Trump's second term I suggested that the sky hasn't fallen and advised those who saw the events as an end-of-time catastrophe to take a deep breath and not judge Trump by what he says he might do but wait and see what he does. At the time many Trump critics overestimated his power, indeed the power of any president of the United States and assumed he could do what he likes by fiat or ukase. This time they may be underestimating the United States as the indispensable world power. That misunderstanding is due to the fact that the American model doesn't easily fit into concepts such as democracy and republic. What became the United States was the fruit of a rebellion against a system in which concentration of power contained the threat of tyranny. For the Founding Fathers, therefore, the priority was to prevent any one person or institution of state to monopolize power with a system of checks and balances learned from Xenophon in his 'Cyropaedia' and Montesquieu in 'The Spirit of Laws'. Thus the US couldn't become a state modeled on Athenian democracy in which the 'people', which in fact meant a small minority of free male citizens could do whatever they liked with the power won through elections. Nor could the US become a republic modeled on the Roman republic or the more recent Venetian version where power was wielded by narrow patrician elites. To complicate matters further the system the founding fathers designed included elements both of democracy and republic. It is a democracy because almost all public positions are filled through elections. However, those elected face a series of constraints both in having their election confirmed and when exercising the power delegated to them. Worse still the art of winning an election isn't the same as the craft of governing. In other words a genius in winning elections may turn out to be a dunce in governing. In that system the Leviathan, Hobbes' symbol of state power, is heavily chained down. The aim of those who designed it was to make sure it did as little as possible. In what could be a constitutional republic democracy is more of a point of moral reference than a blank cheque to exercise power. This is why President Barack Obama, a closet collectivist, was unable to implement his agenda and inject a heavy dose of socialism into the American economy and foreign policy. George Shultz, one of the wisest American politicians of the last century, noted that no political battle in the US is ever won or lost forever. The US is a giant cruiser set on its course by mystical elements and couldn't be suddenly put on another course wished by the captain of the moment and his crew. Politicians, therefore, are either swimming with the tide or as L.H Mencken charged 'brothers in pillage.' According to Shultz, the American system doesn't allow radical changes; in its reform, could only be incremental. A passing revolutionary mood may help you win an election. Soon, however, you shall find out that you are in office but not in power to implement your promised revolutionary agenda. The American system is designed to slow down decision making to avoid both tyranny and anarchy. The ideal government in that model is one that doesn't do anything, thus allowing individuals who make up the society to shape their lives in a framework of laws that guarantees freedom. The key concept in the American system is consent which, if and when achieved, could allow changes of course, innovations and what is branded as reform. The political set-up against which Trump led his 'revolution' was the fruit of a consent that started with President Lyndon Johnson's 'Great Society' reforms and took almost half a century to shape the status quo that Trump challenged. The Trump 'revolution' was also the fruit of a new consent that took decades to shape as a challenge the status quo created by the previous consent in its many forms including positive discrimination, political correctness, globalism and more recently wokism. But, once the revolutionary mood ebbs reality strikes back with people who wish to light the chimney without setting their home on fire. Though the fruit of a rebellion dressed as a revolution American society has always been deeply conservative in politics. In some cases political power comes with a heavy dose of personal attributes. Nero wasn't satisfied with just being emperor and fancied himself as a great musician and poet. Although he had a squeaking voice he was convinced he was the best singer in the empire. Commodus believed he was a descendant of Hercules and showed his strength by strangling savage beasts in the forum. More recently, Obama saw himself as a magician to conjure a new American rabbit out of his cylinder hat while reforming the Islamic world. The Caesar may be able to tame the whole world but is unable to rule his own inner self. That task is always performed by reality which obeys no Caesar. Thus the best option is to wait until that golden rule of history is applied to Trump who continues to represent a desire by many Americans, perhaps still a majority, to put the giant cruiser on a new course. Reality will teach them that the American system allows only incremental changes of course. The Trump-Musk fall-off may not be a mere lovers' tiff but is also unlikely to be as final as it seems. Love cools, friends fall off, brothers divide belongs to theatre. In politics a Cato cannot re-script his role as a Brutus. The Trump-Musk duel may turn out to be a palatial version of catch wrestling popular in the US in which adversaries seem to be killing each other with incredibly violent attacks which turn out to be harmless show-off gestures. These are known as kayfabe in wrestling circles and regarded as an art form. Let us return to George Shultz. He believed that a US president could regard himself as immensely successful if he manages to implement 10 per cent of his agenda. Mencken, for his part, noted that all US presidential terms end either with a scandal or a sense of dissatisfaction. Well, who knows, maybe the system is so designed to produce only such outcomes.
