Ukraine's 'chaotic' withdrawal from Russia, in its soldiers' words
Until just over a week ago, Artem Kariakin and his unit were making regular trips across Ukraine's border into the Russian town of Sudzha.He shows me video taken with a phone of their very last trip, as Ukrainian forces retreated from Russia's Kursk region. It shows them making their way past dozens of burnt out military and civilian vehicles.A soldier armed with a shotgun, their last line of defence, scans the horizon for Russian drones. Out of nowhere, one flies towards the back of their truck. Sparks fly, but they keep on going.Artem says they were lucky - the explosive charge was not big enough to stop them.Another truck nearby was less fortunate. It was already in flames.Artem admits Ukraine's retreat from Sudzha, the largest town Ukraine held in Kursk, was "not well organised"."It was pretty chaotic," he tells me. "Many units left in disarray. I think the problem was the order to withdraw came too late."It wasn't helped, he says, because units were operating without proper communications. The Starlink satellite systems they normally rely on didn't work inside Russia.
The 27-year-old soldier still views the Kursk offensive as broadly successful. Artem says it forced Russia to divert its forces from the east. Most of Ukraine's troops still managed to escape in time – even if for many it was on foot.But he believes Ukraine's surprise incursion into Russian territory, launched last August, was too deep and too narrow - relying on just one main road for supplies and reinforcements.While Artem and his men were fleeing for their lives, US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin were talking by phone about trying to bring the war to an end. Artem says he finds that "absurd"."To me these calls between Trump and Putin are just surreal," he says. "Trump wants to end the war because he promised to do it - and Putin wants to deceive Trump to continue his war. I can't take their conversations seriously."Artem, whose home is in the now Russian-occupied Luhansk region, tells me he feels disappointed with the US and Trump. "What can I feel when they just want to give away my home?"
Artem says he never believed that Putin would be willing to trade any part of Russia for Ukraine's occupied territories. But he still believes the Kursk offensive was important to protect its own border. Ukrainian troops may have been forced to retreat, but they still occupy high ground just over the border with Sumy.Ukraine is continuing its cross-border raids – not just into Kursk, but Belgorod too. Serhiy's assault battalion helps plan these attacks – finding a way through Russian minefields and anti-tank obstacles known as "dragon's teeth".We joined him on a night-time mission to locate and recover armoured vehicles in need of repairs. It's the safest time to move close to the Russian border.Serhiy himself is no stranger to Russia: he was born there. He now has Belorussian citizenship, but he chose to fight for Ukraine. He justifies Ukraine's incursions into his former home. Russia too, he says, has been trying to create a buffer zone inside Ukrainian territory.Travelling in his Ukrainian-made armoured vehicle, Serhiy still lists the likely threats, now we are less than 10km from the Russian border: glide bombs, rockets and artillery, and drones fitted with thermal imaging cameras.
His own vehicle is fitted with electronic counter-measures to jam enemy drones, but even those won't work against drones operated via fibre optic wires. Those can't be stopped, though on some routes Ukraine has now erected netting to try to catch the drones before they can hit their target.Our original search near the Russian border for a damaged US-made Bradley armoured vehicle is abandoned when Serhiy receives intelligence that Russian drones are operating nearby. Instead, he tries to locate another broken-down Bradley where the risks will be smaller.He and his driver still have to overcome obstacles along the way. Trees and branches lie strewn across their path – remnants from a recent Russian air strike. We see several more explosions in the distance, briefly turning the night sky orange.Serhiy eventually finds his broken-down Bradley. It's already been retrieved from the battlefield across the border and has been loaded onto a lorry to be taken back for repairs.The Bradley commander confirms to me that they've been fighting in Russia. He describes the situations across the border as "difficult, but we're holding on".
The Bradley is another reminder of Ukraine's reliance on US military support. That now seems less certain with Trump's focus on peace talks. Serhiy says it's already clear to him that there's "haggling behind Ukraine's back".I ask Serhiy if he thinks European nations can fill any void left by the US. Is a European "coalition of the willing" enough to guarantee Ukraine's security? "I think if America doesn't help Ukraine, then a ceasefire will be agreed soon - but on extremely unfavourable terms for Ukraine," Serhiy replies."Europe clearly cannot resolve this conflict alone. They're not strong enough. They've been focussing on their own economies instead of thinking about security."Serhiy says he wants the war to end. Like many Ukrainians, he would like to see peace - but not at any price.Additional reporting by Volodymyr Lozkho and Anastasiia Levchenko
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
32 minutes ago
- Times
US withdraws embassy staff as Israel ‘prepares strikes on Iran'
The United States is scaling down embassy staff in the Middle East amid reports that Israel is preparing an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. The partial withdrawal was announced by President Trump, who said he was less confident now that negotiations with Iran would succeed. Non-essential staff at the American embassy in Iraq, which has come under attack by pro-Iranian militia in the past, have been ordered home, and military dependents in several neighbouring countries will be allowed to leave. 'They are being moved out because it could be a dangerous place, and we'll see what happens,' Trump told reporters. 'We've given notice to move out.' Pro-Iran militia in Iraq attacked the American embassy in Baghdad after a US drone strike killed the leading Iranian military commander, Qasem Soleimani, alongside an Iraqi militia leader as they left the Baghdad airport in January 2020.
Scottish Sun
44 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
Putin's Ukraine war toll tops 1MILLION Russians dead & wounded 40 months into ‘days-long operation'…with no end in sight
With no end in sight and new offensives reportedly in the works, the number of dead and wounded is expected to keep rising MACHINE OF DEATH Putin's Ukraine war toll tops 1MILLION Russians dead & wounded 40 months into 'days-long operation'…with no end in sight Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) PUTIN's battlefield casualties have soared past the bloody one million milestone after 40 months of a war he expected to win within days. Ukraine's fierce resistance has ensured Russia has paid a mighty toll for every inch of land it has taken, and its advances remain painfully slow. 6 Vladimir Putin has lost at least one million men in his bloody war with Ukraine Credit: AP 6 According to Ukraine's General Staff, a whopping 628,000 of those deaths took place in the last six months alone Credit: AP 6 The staggering milestone includes troops who have been killed or wounded so severely they cannot fight on. According to the Ukrainian General Staff, one million Russian military troops have been killed since February 24, 2022, with 628,000 of those deaths occurring in the last six months. Burning through a million troops has won Putin just 20 per cent of Ukraine's total territory - mainly in southern and eastern areas - which is a humiliating conversion rate. Despite the devastating losses which have already ripped a scar in Russian society, experts fear that Putin is likely unaffected by the numbers, because mass sacrifice is ingrained in his battle plan. Read more on Vladimir Putin VLAD'S MARCH WEST We know Russia is plotting to invade Nato, says Germany's MI6 spy boss Dr Stephen Hall, politics lecturer at the University of Bath, said that as far as the warmongering dictator is concerned, things are heading in the right direction, so he will keep on condemning young Russians to their deaths. He told The Sun: "Putin believes he's winning the war. The Russian army is moving forward like it or not. "He believes that he can outlast the West, that the West is weak." Russia's strategy, Dr Hall said, has been one of "meat assault". This relies on the logic that if you flood the front line with overwhelming numbers, "eventually some will get through". Dr Hall said Putin has learned this strategy from his ruthless Soviet predecessors in World War Two. Their idea was "ten men to every rifle", which meant: "You pick up the rifle of a fall soldier. You keep going, you get shot. You're next. Your buddy picks up your rifle. We know Russia is plotting to invade Nato – Ukraine is just the beginning for Putin, says head of Germany's MI6 "The Soviet army would eventually push through. So that remains the case in Russia." And that approach suits Putin just fine, because he "doesn't care about his men", Dr Hall said. He said the Russian people "know how to suffer", which allows the regime to continue with its meat-grinder tactics. The Kremlin also meets less resistance from the Russian people than a million losses should merit, because it simply lies to them, Dr Hall said. He said: "They're simply not going to be told, especially in the poorer areas where Russia is recruiting - like Buryatia and Bashkortostan and elsewhere." Dr Hall also explained why he has little faith in the peace negotiations bringing an end to the war any time soon. Even if Ukraine makes land concessions, Putin won't feel his goals are fulfilled. Dr Hall said: 'Putin has been very clear. They're not fighting Ukraine. Ukraine is the battleground. They're fighting the West.' "Ukraine has been forced to fight a war with two hands tied behind its back — a war that NATO would never fight." Dr Hall said Putin's hope is that "Ukraine will have to just accept whatever negotiations Russia is going to give [...] because the West is going to tide over this war, and the Russian military is going to keep on going forward." Even with the death toll climbing higher by the day — over 1,140 Russian soldiers killed or wounded just yesterday, according to Ukraine's military — Putin appears to be doubling down. The General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine said Russia's total personnel losses since the invasion began now stand at approximately 1,000,340. The tally includes not just dead soldiers but those so grievously wounded they can't return to the battlefield. 6 Ukrainian forces, meanwhile, have shown great strength and resilience in the battlefield as they protect their homeland from the Kremlin tyrant's troops Credit: Getty 6 Putin's men just clenched 20 per cent of Ukraine's total territory Credit: AFP 6 Ukrainian Army soldiers use a 105mm American M101 Howitzer artillery piece on Ukraines northeastern frontline with Russia Credit: Getty The bloody milestone comes as Putin calls for a major upgrade to Russia's ground forces, Ukrainian outlet Pravda reportas. The Kremlin tyrant declared them the 'dominant force' in modern warfare and demanding faster development of 'advanced weapons systems' with 'the highest tactical and technical specifications.' In a meeting on the state armaments programme, Putin also directed resources toward strengthening Russia's navy, further signalling his long-term military ambitions. British volunteer fighter Macer Gifford, who previously fought alongside Ukrainian units, said the million mark is a tragic reminder of just how far off course Russia has veered under Putin. 'It's another grim milestone in a war that's dragged on for too long,' he said. 'It's also a reminder that Vladimir Putin is a tragedy for Russia, as well as Ukraine. A million casualties is a horrifying figure to comprehend. 'There are millions of Russians who have now lost a loved one in Ukraine. 'Millions more have to deal with the physical and emotional injuries of the wounded. He added: 'Putin once compared himself to Peter the Great, but his legacy is now much closer to Stalin. 'The two men share many of the same delusions and a profound disregard for human life. 'Stalin once said, 'A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic.' Since Putin has made no effort to end this war, it's clear he feels the same way.'
Spectator
44 minutes ago
- Spectator
Could Donald Trump scrap Aukus?
America's policy undersecretary of defence, Elbridge Colby, is one of the brightest brains in Donald Trump's administration. Having served in the first Trump presidency, Colby has an outstanding reputation as a defence and strategic thinker. He is also, however, very much aligned with Trump's America First thinking in respect of foreign policy, and the United States' relationship with her allies. That would be a strategic disaster for Australia and Britain In tasking Colby on Wednesday with reviewing the Aukus nuclear submarine-centred strategic partnership between the US, the UK and Australia, the president sends a clear message to Britain and Australia: Aukus is part of his inheritance from Joe Biden, and its future therefore is far from assured. In a media statement, the Pentagon said: 'The department is reviewing Aukus as part of ensuring that this initiative of the previous administration is aligned with the president's America First agenda. As (Defense) Secretary (Pete) Hegseth has made clear, this means ensuring the highest readiness of our service members, that allies step up fully to do their part for collective defence, and that the defence industrial base is meeting our needs. This review will ensure the initiative meets these common sense, America First criteria.' Colby himself has been ambivalent about Aukus ever since it was established by Biden, and then Australian and British prime ministers, Scott Morrison and Rishi Sunak, in 2021. Addressing a Policy Exchange forum last year, Colby said he was 'quite sceptical' about the Aukus pact, and questioned its viability and ultimate benefits. In a more recent interview with the Australian newspaper, Colby said Aukus's Pillar 1 – the nuclear submarine programme under which Australia would purchase several Virginia-class boats, pending the acquisition of new generation UK-Australian Acute-class submarines – is 'very problematic'. He did say, however, that Pillar 2 – the sharing of military intelligence and technical know-how between the partners – 'is great, no problem'. Colby's long-standing concern is the US's ability to take on China if it ever comes to conflict in the Asia-Pacific, especially over Taiwan. 'How are we supposed to give away nuclear attack submarines in the years of the window of potential conflict with China?' he told the Australian. 'A nuclear attack submarine is the most important asset for a western Pacific fight, for Taiwan, conventionally. But we don't have enough, and we're not going to have enough.' If this is the starting position for Colby's review, its scepticism contradicts the steadfast commitment to Aukus from the current Australian and British Labour governments. Indeed, Britain's latest Strategic Defence Review places high priority on the Aukus partnership as an integral element of British strategic and force planning. Given Colby's previous form on Aukus, the review may well recommend scaling back or discontinuing the nuclear submarine Aukus pillar. But that would be a strategic disaster for Australia and Britain, let alone for Colby's own strategic vision, outlined in his 2021 book, of an 'anti-hegemonic coalition to contain the military ambitions of China', in which he specifically envisioned Australia. Arguably, it doesn't matter which country mans the attack nuclear submarines assigned to the Asia-Pacific theatre, as long as the boats are there. But will Colby see it that way? In Australia, however, the administration's announcement immediately set a cat amongst the pigeons. Currently, Australia spends just over two per cent of GDP on defence, and the Trump administration, including Colby, is pressuring on Australia to do far more. This month, Hegseth, told his Australian counterpart that Australia should be committing at least 3.5 per cent of GDP to ensure not just Aukus, but that her fighting personnel and ageing military hardware are fit for purpose and contributing commensurately to the Western alliance. After his face-to-face meeting with Hegseth, Australian defence minister Richard Marles seemed open to the suggestion. His prime minister, Anthony Albanese, is not. In his first major media appearance since his thumping election win a month ago, Albanese was asked whether the US could renege on supplying nuclear submarines to Australia if spending is deemed inadequate. 'Well, I think Australia should decide on what we spend on Australia's defence. Simple as that', Albanese replied. It hasn't escaped notice here that the Pentagon announced its Aukus review less than 48 hours after Albanese made his declaration, and just days before the Australian prime minister is expected to have his first personal meeting with Trump at the G7 Leaders' Summit in Canada. That meeting, carrying the risk of a public Trump rebuke, surely will be dreaded by Albanese. Dealing with the Americans' insistence on a near-doubling of Australia's defence investment is politically diabolical for Albanese. He has just won re-election on a manifesto promising huge additional social investments, especially in Australia's version of the NHS and a fiscally ravenous National Disability Insurance Scheme. Albanese must keep his left-wing support base onside by expanding already huge public investments and subsidies in pursuing his government's ideological Net Zero and 100 per cent renewable energy goals. All that on top of a burgeoning national debt. To achieve Nato's GDP defence spending target of 3 per cent, let alone Hegseth's 3.5, something has to give. Albanese cannot deliver both massive social spending and vast defence outlays: to keep the Americans happy, and justify the continuation of both Aukus pillars, he will need to either prove himself a Bismarck-calibre statesman, or risk electoral wrath if he retreats on his domestic spending promises, and cuts existing programmes across his government, to afford adequate defence spending headroom. Australia needs America to be a strong ally in our troubled region, but the United States needs steadfast allies like Australia and Britain. Now the administration's scepticism about Aukus's value to the US is officially on the table, with a review entrusted to its biggest Aukus sceptic in Elbridge Colby, Australia and Britain must justify why all aspects of the partnership are a worthwhile investment with them, as America's partners, committed to playing their part in full. How well they do it will be a measure of their political and diplomatic competence.
