Russian missiles hit Ukrainian army training ground, killing at least three
It is the latest attack to embarrass military officials as they struggle to make up a severe manpower shortage in the more than three-year war.
Russia's Defence Ministry said Ukraine's 169th training centre near Honcharivske in the Chernihiv region was hit with two Iskander missiles, one armed with multiple submunitions and another with high explosives, killing or wounding about 200 troops.
Meanwhile, Moscow continued its stepped-up aerial campaign against Ukrainian civilian targets, launching 78 attack drones overnight, including up to eight newly developed jet-powered drones, Ukraine's air force said on Wednesday. At least five people were wounded.
The UN mission in Ukraine says there has been a worsening trend in civilian casualties from Russian attacks this year, with 6,754 killed or injured in the first half of 2025 — a 54% increase from the same period in 2024.
Since Moscow launched an all-out invasion of neighbouring Ukraine on February 24 2022, at least 13,580 Ukrainian civilians, including 716 children, have been killed, according to the UN.
In an effort to stop that, US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he is giving Vladimir Putin until August 8 for peace efforts to make progress or Washington will impose punitive sanctions and tariffs. Western leaders have accused the Russian president of dragging his feet in US-led peace efforts in an attempt to capture more Ukrainian land.
Ukrainian forces are mostly hanging on against a grinding summer push by Russia's bigger army, though the Russian Defence Ministry has claimed some recent small advances at places along the 620-mile front line.
Ukrainian ground forces acknowledged that a Russian strike hit a military training ground in the Chernihiv region of northern Ukraine, but its casualty report differed widely from the one issued by Moscow.
A Russian Defence Ministry video showed multiple small explosions apparently caused by a missile with a shrapnel warhead followed by one big blast, apparently from the other one armed with a high-explosive warhead.
A similar Russian strike occurred last September when two ballistic missiles blasted a Ukrainian military academy and nearby hospital, killing more than 50 people and wounding over 200 others.
Ukrainian authorities said a commission led by the head of the Military Law Enforcement Service has been formed to determine whether negligence or misconduct by officials contributed to the casualties in Chernihiv.
The attack was the fourth deadly strike in five months on Ukrainian military facilities. The three previous strikes killed at least 46 soldiers and wounded more than 160, according to official reports.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed a bill on Tuesday that allows Ukrainian men over the age of 60 to voluntarily sign contracts with the armed forces. The law assists those who want to contribute their experience and skills, particularly in non-combat or specialised roles.
In February, Ukraine's Defence Ministry began offering new financial and other benefits it hoped would attract men between the ages of 18 and 24 to military service. Men in that age group are exempt from the country's draft, which covers those aged 25 to 60.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
a minute ago
- The Independent
What does recognising Palestine as a state actually mean?
The UK will recognise a Palestinian state in September unless Israel agrees to a ceasefire and a two-state solution in Gaza, Sir Keir Starmer has vowed. The prime minister said Benjamin Netanyahu's government must end its starvation tactics and allow the supply of aid into the embattled enclave after a UN-backed food security body said the 'worst-case scenario of famine' was playing out in the territory. The announcement on Tuesday came after an emergency virtual cabinet meeting where Sir Keir laid out his plan for peace in the Middle East, agreed over the weekend with French president Emmanuel Macron and German chancellor Friedrich Merz. Sir Keir has come under mounting pressure from his own party to recognise a Palestinian state, which has only grown since Mr Macron announced France's intention to do so by September. In addition, Britain's foreign secretary David Lammy is attending a United Nations conference in New York on Tuesday to urge support for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians. Here, The Independent asks experts about what the UK recognising Palestinian statehood would mean in practice. What would UK recognition of Palestine as a state mean? Dr Julie Norman, an associate professor at UCL specialising in Middle Eastern politics, said it looks likely that the UK will recognise Palestine as a state, which would mean voting for this at the United Nations – but it would be unlikely the UN would be able to recognise Palestinian statehood due to the probability of the United States blocking the move. However, she said countries such as the UK and France voting for recognition at the UN would be a 'significant' move. And she said the UK officially recognising Palestinian statehood would still be of 'value', even if the reality is that not much would change on the ground, with Israel still 'fully rejecting' the prospect of recognition. Speaking of British recognition, Dr Norman said: 'It would be a strong moral commitment and stance to Palestine at a moment when it's never been more fraught in Gaza and the West Bank. 'In the short term, it's a diplomatic stance, and it makes room for policy changes. 'And, if and when parties come back to discuss the long-term conflict, it would put Palestine in a better position. So it wouldn't change things immediately, but I would say it still has value.' She added that the move might initially see more change in London than in Ramallah, a city in the central West Bank, which serves as the administrative capital of Palestine – with, for example, the opening of an embassy in the UK capital. This would not mean recognition of Hamas. What is the two-state solution? The idea of dividing the Holy Land goes back decades. When the British mandate over Palestine ended, the UN partition plan in 1947 envisioned dividing the territory into Jewish and Arab states. Upon Israel's declaration of independence the following year, war erupted with its Arab neighbours and the plan was never implemented. Over half of the Palestinian population fled or were forced to flee. Under a 1949 armistice, Jordan held control over the West Bank and east Jerusalem and Egypt over Gaza. Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza in the 1967 six-day war. The Palestinians seek these lands for a future independent state, and the idea of a two-state solution based on Israel's pre-1967 boundaries has been the basis of peace talks dating back to the 1990s. The two-state solution has wide international support, but there is disagreement about how it would be implemented. Israel's creation and expansion of settlements in the Occupied West Bank, which are illegal under international law, are seen as a major obstacle to this. What would recognition of Palestine as a state mean for refugees? Sir Vincent Fean, a former British consul general to Jerusalem and now a trustee of the charity Britain Palestine Project, explained that recognition of Palestine as a state would mean that if Palestinian passports were issued, they would subsequently be recognised by the UK as passports of a state. However, Sir Vincent said Palestinian statehood would not affect the UK's refugee system. 'Does it impact the tally of refugees coming to the UK? No,' he said. This is because he expects the visa regime the UK currently has with Palestine – where travel is only allowed between the two after a successful visa application – would continue. He added that Palestinian statehood 'wouldn't particularly change the right of return for Palestinians to their homeland'. He said this was a 'long-standing right', although it would require negotiation with Israel. What does UK recognition of Palestinian statehood mean for how the two would communicate? Sir Vincent said this was a 'very important point' to clarify, as he highlighted the distinction between recognising the entity of Palestine and recognising factions of government. He said: 'It's important to say the British government doesn't recognise governments, it recognises states. 'So it isn't actually recognising President [Mahmoud] Abbas as head of the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organisation] and head of the Palestinian Authority. 'In practice, he would be the interlocutor in Ramallah, because there isn't an alternative.' He stressed, however, that Britain has already proscribed Hamas as a terrorist group and that this would not change. Dr Norman added that the Palestinian Authority is currently the main governing entity for Palestinians in the West Bank, which the UK has recognised and had lines of communication with for a long time. If Britain were to recognise Palestinian statehood, this would not change and would continue. Sir Vincent also said that the prospect of Hamas running Palestine next is 'practically zero' because the militants' chances of winning an election are 'remote'. He said the plan for the future governance of Gaza involving the Palestinian Authority will be a focus of the UN meeting being held this week. What countries have recognised Palestinian statehood? France has become the latest country to announce it will recognise Palestinian statehood, drawing angry rebukes from Israel and the United States and opening the door for other major nations to perhaps follow suit. Mr Macron last week published a letter sent to Mr Abbas confirming France's intention to press ahead with recognition and work to convince other partners to do the same. He said he would make a formal announcement at the United Nations General Assembly next month. France is now the first major Western power to shift its diplomatic stance on a Palestinian state, after Spain, Ireland, and Norway officially recognised it last year. The three countries made the declaration and agreed its borders would be demarcated as they were before the 1967 war, when Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. However, they also recognised that those borders may change if a final settlement is reached over the territory, and that their decisions did not diminish their belief in Israel's fundamental right to exist in peace and security. About 144 of the 193 UN member states recognise Palestine as a state, including most of the global South as well as Russia, China and India. But only a handful of the 27 European Union members do so, mostly former communist countries as well as Sweden and Cyprus. The UN General Assembly approved the de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine in November 2012 by upgrading its observer status at the world body to 'non-member state' from 'entity'. What implications would UK recognition of Palestinian statehood have internationally? Dr Norman said: 'This is where it can be important'. Two major global powers, such as the UK and France, making the move would be 'significant' and would pave the way for conversations on the issue happening elsewhere, such as in Canada, she said. 'It starts isolating the US as the main major power backing Israel to the exclusion of Palestine,' she said. 'It makes them the exception and shows the rest of the world somewhat united in Palestinian self-determination, which has been the UK's policy for a while now. If we're serious about that, then we need to be serious about that. 'We don't have as much military weight as the US, but we do still have diplomatic weight, and we should use what we can. 'It would show Europe is committed to a two-state solution, and wouldn't let that disappear or sit in the back seat.'
Daily Mirror
2 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
ITV's Lorraine overtakes major show in ratings amid savage schedule cuts
Lorraine is set to undergo major change next year as part of ITV's daytime schedule shake-up - however, the chat show has reportedly received some good ratings news ITV's Lorraine has reportedly seen its viewing figures shoot up despite the daytime show facing savage cuts in the coming months. The long-running chat show has been fronted by Christine Lampard over the last few weeks during the summer holidays. The show will face a major shake-up next year as ITV's daytime slate undergoing huge change. Lorraine will be cut down to only 30 minutes and will air for just 30 weeks of the year, while Good Morning Britain will be extended by half an hour to fill the gap despite the team being braced for redundancies. Now, Lorraine has seen a boost in viewing figures, with the show reportedly attracting a peak of 700,000 viewers yesterday. This means that it took over This Morning, which attracted 675,000 viewers with its programme hosted by Dermot O'Leary and Rochelle Humes. It comes after Lorraine Kelly signed a huge deal with ITV rival amid the cuts. A TV insider told The Daily Mail: "You can only imagine what Lorraine will think. Whilst she's on holiday Christine steps into her shoes and suddenly her show takes over This Morning." The Mirror has reached out to ITV for comment. Earlier this week, Lorraine contributor Nicola Thorp made her opinions known on Keir Starmer's response to the Lioness football win. After the prime minister decided to stay in Scotland with Donald Trump after the Lionesses' historic win, ex Coronation Street star Nicola labelled the move as "appalling". "Awful. Sorry - this is a big slap in the face to the women. What does it say to women? That our prime minister is going to go up to Scotland to meet Donald Trump, considering what Donald Trump thinks about women, rather than come and meet the Lionesses. I think it's actually appalling. It's not that difficult to fly from London to Scotland and back," she said. While during yesterday's show, singer Lulu stopped by the programme and opened up about the loss of Ozzy Osbourne, making a plea to widow Sharon just hours before the funeral. Standing next to stand-in host Christine, she said: "I wanna say, Sharon, I know you won't be watching but if anyone is watching, Melinda, can you call me? I know they're busy but I want to get hold of you guys because I really, really want to be there to support Sharon."
Reuters
4 minutes ago
- Reuters
Pakistan says it wins US tariff deal; Trump cites oil reserves pact
WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD, July 31 (Reuters) - The United States and Pakistan said they had clinched a deal that Islamabad described as leading to lower tariffs on its exports, while President Donald Trump trumpeted a pact to help develop the South Asian nation's oil reserves. Neither mentioned the tariff rate agreed. Pakistan, which Washington has designated a "major non-NATO ally" in its effort to counter rival China's influence in the region, faced a potential tariff of 29% declared in April that was later suspended for 90 days to allow trade talks. "We have just concluded a Deal with the Country of Pakistan, whereby Pakistan and the United States will work together on developing their massive Oil Reserves," Trump wrote on social media. "We are in the process of choosing the Oil Company that will lead this Partnership." He gave no further details. Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar also confirmed the deal. "Deal concluded," he told Reuters, without elaborating. Although Trump did not mention a tariff deal, Pakistan's finance ministry said on Thursday it would lead to "reduction of reciprocal tariffs, especially on Pakistani exports to the United States", but stopped short of revealing the figure. "This deal marks the beginning of a new era of economic collaboration especially in energy, mines and minerals, IT, cryptocurrency and other sectors," it said. The deal was a win-win situation for both nations, Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb, who led the final round of talks in Washington, said in video remarks. "From our perspective, it was always going beyond the immediate trade imperative, and its whole purpose was, and is, that trade and investment have to go hand in hand," he added in the statement from his office. Last week, Dar said both nations were "very close" to a trade deal that could come within days, after he met Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday. They discussed expanding trade and ties in critical minerals and mining, the two sides said afterwards. Other Pakistani officials have also visited for talks in recent weeks. Under Trump, Washington has sought to renegotiate trade deals with many countries which he threatened with tariffs for trade relations he calls unfair, a characterization many economists dispute. U.S. total goods trade with Pakistan was an estimated $7.3 billion in 2024, the office of the U.S. trade representative says on its website, up from about $6.9 billion in 2023. In 2024, its goods trade deficit with Pakistan was $3 billion, up 5.2% from 2023. Trump also said Washington was still negotiating with India on trade after he declared a tariff of 25% on goods imported from Pakistan's arch foe would start from Friday. Pakistan recently said it "appreciated the pivotal role" of Trump and Rubio "in de-escalating tensions between Pakistan and India by facilitating a ceasefire." Trump has repeatedly taken credit for the India-Pakistan ceasefire he announced on social media on May 10 after Washington's talks with both sides. India disputes Trump's claims that the ceasefire resulted from his intervention and trade threats. India's position is that New Delhi and Islamabad must resolve problems directly with no outside involvement. The latest escalation in the decades-old India-Pakistan rivalry was triggered by a deadly April 22 militant attack in India-administered Kashmir that India blamed on Pakistan. Islamabad denied responsibility. India struck Pakistan on May 7 and they exchanged deadly hostilities until the ceasefire.
