logo
Russian attacks on Ukraine kill at least 10 people, most of them in Kyiv

Russian attacks on Ukraine kill at least 10 people, most of them in Kyiv

Rhyl Journal4 hours ago

Russia fired 352 drones and decoys overnight, as well as 11 ballistic missiles and five cruise missiles, Ukraine's air force said.
Air defences intercepted or jammed 339 drones and 15 missiles before they could reach their targets, a statement said.
The strikes came nearly a week after a Russian attack killed 28 people in Kyiv, 23 of them in a residential building that collapsed after a direct missile hit.
Russian forces for several months have been trying to drive deeper into Ukraine as part of a summer push along the 620-mile front line, though the Institute for the Study of War said progress has failed to make significant gains.
'Russian forces are largely relying on poorly trained infantry to make gains in the face of Ukraine's drone-based defence,' the Washington-based think tank said late Sunday.
Russia also has pounded civilian areas with long-range strikes in an apparent attempt to weaken Ukrainian morale.
Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky said preliminary data indicated that Russian forces used North Korean missiles in the Kyiv strike.
He called Russia, North Korea and Iran, which has provided drones to Russia, a 'coalition of murderers'.
Mr Zelensky said Ukraine's defence and new ways to pressure Russia will be the two main topics in his visit to the United Kingdom on Monday.
Mr Zelensky is set to meet with Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer ahead of this week's Nato summit in The Hague.
French foreign minister Jean-Noel Barrot said the latest strikes demonstrated Russia's 'unlimited cruelty' by deliberately aiming at civilian targets, and promised more European sanctions on Moscow.
Drones and missiles hit residential areas, hospitals and sports infrastructure in numerous districts across Kyiv, emergency services said.
The most severe damage was in Shevchenkivskyi district, where a section of a five-story apartment building collapsed.
Six people were killed in the district, Kyiv mayor Vitali Klitschko said. Ten others, including a pregnant woman, were rescued from a nearby high-rise that also sustained heavy damage. Dozens of vehicles were burned or mangled by flying debris.
The Russian attack also damaged the entrance to the Sviatoshyn subway station in Kyiv, slightly injuring two people, said Timur Tkachenko, the head of Kyiv's military administration. He said more than 30 people were injured across the city.
Underground subway stations have served as shelters for those seeking protection from aerial attacks. During almost nightly strikes, stations across Kyiv are often filled with people waiting out the danger.
Elsewhere in Ukraine, a Russian short-range drone attack killed two people and wounded 10 more in the Chernihiv region late on Sunday, authorities said. Three children were among the wounded, according to the regional administration head, Viacheslav Chaus.
Another person was killed and eight wounded overnight in the city of Bila Tserkva, around 53 miles south west of the capital.
Meanwhile, Russia's Defence Ministry said its air defences shot down 23 Ukrainian drones overnight into Monday.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Macron labels Trump's Iran air strikes 'illegal', pressures Starmer to take a stand
Macron labels Trump's Iran air strikes 'illegal', pressures Starmer to take a stand

Daily Record

time20 minutes ago

  • Daily Record

Macron labels Trump's Iran air strikes 'illegal', pressures Starmer to take a stand

Emmanuel Macron has hit out at Donald Trump's air strikes on Iran, branding them 'illegal' and deepening the row over whether the US action broke international law French President Emmanuel Macron has strongly condemned the US air strikes on Iran, deeming them "illegal" and fuelling the debate over whether the American action violated international law. Macron stated that while targeting nuclear facilities posing a threat may be seen as "legitimate", the recent strikes by the US and Israel lacked a valid legal basis. ‌ Macron's comments came as UK Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer and senior government officials refrained from explicitly endorsing or condemning US President Donald Trump's decision, despite growing pressure for the Prime Minister to take a clear stance. ‌ The UK Prime Minister had been cautioned by Attorney General Lord Hermer that participating in a US-led attack could put Britain in violation of international law. Unlike Macron, Starmer has not denounced the bombing, seemingly aligning with the Attorney General's advice. Starmer appeared to appreciate the outcome of the US bombing, stating it would "alleviate" the Iran nuclear issue, prompting accusations of accepting the consequence of the bombing while not endorsing the method itself, reports the Express. The US strikes came after European leaders spent a week publicly and privately urging Trump to avoid unilateral action. Instead, the US conducted a surprise stealth attack on three Iranian nuclear sites, which Trump hailed as a mission that left all targets "obliterated." The decision has sparked serious concerns about the potential influence of Sir Keir and other Western leaders on President Trump's global strategy. This follows the US president's abrupt departure from the G7 summit in Canada last week, with another confrontation anticipated at the upcoming Nato summit in The Hague on Wednesday. ‌ Speaking to journalists, Mr Macron remarked: "It may be considered legitimate... to neutralise nuclear facilities in Iran, given our objectives. "However, there is no legal framework, no. And so we must say it as it is: there is no legality to these strikes. "Even though France shares the objective of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, we have consistently believed from the outset that this can only be achieved through diplomatic and technical means. ‌ "I say this because I hear many commentators who basically accuse you of inefficiency when you defend the diplomatic route on these issues. But when you are consistent, you can claim to be effective." He continued: "We continue to believe that it is through negotiation and re-engagement that we can achieve our goals." ‌ Norway's Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store supported this view, stating: "International law has some clear principles on the use of force. It can be granted by the Security Council or it can be in pure self-defence," thus indicating that the US attacks fall "outside the realm of international law". Mr Macron's stance contrasted sharply with the views expressed by Germany and NATO chief Mark Rutte, who maintained that the preemptive US intervention was lawful. When queried about how the scenario equates to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Mr Rutte asserted: "My biggest fear would be for Iran to own and be able to use and deploy a nuclear weapon to be a stranglehold on Israel, on the whole region and other parts of the world. ‌ "This is a consistent position of Nato: Iran should not have its hands on a nuclear weapon," he added. "I would not agree that this is against international law - what the US did." Similarly, Friedrich Merz, the Chancellor of Germany, supported the actions of the US and Israel stating there was "no reason to criticise" their tactics, arguing that it wasn't feasible to leave Iran's nuclear progress unchallenged. Back in Westminster, Ministers echoed Mr Macron's prudent approach. Numerous ministers sidestepped giving a direct endorsement of the bombings as either lawful or substantiated, opting instead to convey relief that Iran's development towards a nuclear armament was hindered. Questioned about the strikes' legal status on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Foreign Secretary David Lammy responded: "Well, we weren't involved, it's for the Americans to discuss those issues."

Macron labels Trump's Iran air strikes 'illegal', piling pressure on Starmer
Macron labels Trump's Iran air strikes 'illegal', piling pressure on Starmer

Daily Mirror

time35 minutes ago

  • Daily Mirror

Macron labels Trump's Iran air strikes 'illegal', piling pressure on Starmer

Emmanuel Macron has broken ranks with allies by declaring that Donald Trump's air strikes on Iran were "illegal", deepening the row over whether the US action broke international law Emmanuel Macron has lashed out at US President Donald Trump's recent air strikes on Iran, labelling them "illegal" and escalating tensions over potential violations of international law, as reported by The Telegraph. The French president cautioned that while striking nuclear facilities presenting a threat could be seen as "legitimate", there was no legal grounding for the strikes executed by America and Israel last Saturday. ‌ Macron's remarks come amid hesitation from Sir Keir Starmer and top ministers to clearly state their position on the US president's decision, despite growing calls for the PM to decisively state his stance. ‌ Sir Keir had been warned before by his Attorney General, Lord Hermer, that allying with the US in an attack might contravene international law. However, unlike Macron, he has not openly condemned the strikes – a move in line with the legal advice he received. In contrast, Starmer appeared to approve of the outcome of the US bombing by suggesting it would help "alleviate" the Iranian nuclear issue, sparking criticism for seemingly condoning the results without endorsing the methods, reports the Express. The strikes from the US were preceded by intensive attempts over the past week by European leaders to dissuade Trump from acting alone. Disregarding their appeals, the US spearheaded a covert operation against three Iranian nuclear facilities on Saturday night—a move which Trump later celebrated as a triumph that totally "obliterated" the targets. The recent actions have sparked concerns over Sir Keir and other Western leaders' sway in steering Trump's global strategies. The tension follows Trump's abrupt departure from the G7 summit in Canada, with another potential showdown expected at the Nato summit in The Hague this Wednesday. ‌ Macron addressed journalists, stating: "It may be considered legitimate... to neutralise nuclear facilities in Iran, given our objectives." He underscored the absence of a legal basis for such measures: "However, there is no legal framework, no. And so we must say it as it is: there is no legality to these strikes." ‌ Even though France is in agreement on preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear capabilities, Macron underscored their long-standing stance: "Even though France shares the objective of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, we have consistently believed from the outset that this can only be achieved through diplomatic and technical means." He defended the effectiveness of diplomacy: "I say this because I hear many commentators who basically accuse you of inefficiency when you defend the diplomatic route on these issues. But when you are consistent, you can claim to be effective." Macron further insisted: "We continue to believe that it is through negotiation and re-engagement that we can achieve our goals." ‌ Echoing Macron's sentiments, Norway's Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store also weighed in, citing international law: "International law has some clear principles on the use of force. It can be granted by the Security Council or it can be in pure self-defence," thereby emphasising that the US operations were "outside the realm of international law". Macron's comments appear to be starkly at odds with German and Nato counterparts like Mark Rutte, who maintain that the US's pre-emptive actions were legal. When questioned on parallels drawn between this and Russia's incursion into Ukraine, Mr Rutte remarked: "My biggest fear would be for Iran to own and be able to use and deploy a nuclear weapon to be a stranglehold on Israel, on the whole region and other parts of the world. ‌ "This is a consistent position of Nato: Iran should not have its hands on a nuclear weapon," he added. "I would not agree that this is against international law - what the US did." Friedrich Merz, Germany's Chancellor, also stood by America and Israel, stating there is "no reason to criticise" their operations, asserting that neglecting Iran's nuclear programme wasn't a viable option. In Westminster, however, ministers followed Macron's prudent stance, refraining from explicitly labelling the strikes as lawful or justified, but instead expressing relief over thwarting Iran's nuclear capabilities. Foreign Secretary David Lammy adopted a careful approach during his interview on BBC Radio 4's Today programme regarding the legality of the bombings, simply stating: "Well, we weren't involved, it's for the Americans to discuss those issues."

Trump's strikes on Iran could upend delicate plans for NATO summit deal on defense spending
Trump's strikes on Iran could upend delicate plans for NATO summit deal on defense spending

The Independent

timean hour ago

  • The Independent

Trump's strikes on Iran could upend delicate plans for NATO summit deal on defense spending

On Tuesday, two major diplomatic happenings will get underway: the start of a NATO summit in the Netherlands, which President Donald Trump is expected to attend, and the reported beginning of a ceasefire ending the hostilities between Israel and Iran. The president's decision to unilaterally intervene in the latter could drastically change the former, European officials and commentators suggest. 'Of course, the news about Iran is at this moment, grabbing all the headlines,' NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte told reporters on Monday. NATO leaders had hoped the two-day summit would be short, sweet, and concrete, producing a commitment from the 32 member nations to spend five percent of their GDP on defense, a figure high enough to reverse what Trump sees as decades of Europe freeloading on American defense largesse, reenergizing US interest in the transatlantic alliance after Trump once suggested the US might do its 'own thing' if its allies didn't invest more. Planners for the event reportedly sought to appeal to Trump by throwing a lavish dinner at the Dutch king's palace and tiptoeing around the role of Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky. As the war between Israel and Iran intensified, Trump seemed to be charting a different course from his allies on a number of issues. The US operation to launch strikes on multiple Iranian facilities was underway on Friday even as European diplomats attempted to negotiate with Tehran in Geneva over the war and Iran's supplying of drones to Russia. The 15-ton US bunker buster bombs that hit Iran's nuclear site at Fordow were another reminder of the vast distance on the Iran issue between Europe and the US, which pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal during Trump's first term. The same day as Europe was attempting in vain to stall further hostilities with Iran, Trump suggested the US might not need to hit the five percent defense spending target. 'I don't think we should, but I think they should,' Trump said of European nations. The stance, after months of American tariffs on European nations and quickly eroding support for Ukraine, left some European observers alarmed over what Trump may do if he attends the summit. 'Our American ally has became so elusive and hostile that no one dares to imagine how this NATO summit will unfold,' columnist Sylvie Kauffmann wrote in the French newspaper Le Monde. Trump is not the only wildcard at the summit. Last week, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez warned in a letter to Rutte that his country 'cannot commit to a specific spending target in terms of GDP.' On Monday, Rutte fired back, insisting NATO members don't have the option for 'opt-out' provisions or 'side deals.' 'The fact is that Spain thinks they can achieve those targets on a percentage of 2.1 percent,' Rutte said. 'NATO is absolutely convinced Spain will have to spend 3.5%, to get there.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store