Putin appoints 'most bloodthirsty general yet' while attack on Nato fears grow
Russian President Vladimir Putin has appointed his 'most bloodthirsty general' to command Russian land forces in a stark warning to the West amid fears of coming territorial attacks on NATO states.
Colonel General Andrey Mordvichev, 49, was appointed as overnight strikes by Russian and Ukrainian forces stepped up ahead just hours before expected face-to-face peace talks in Istanbul.
Putin's forces hit the Ukrainian capital Kyiv in a drone strike, and hit Volodymyr Zelensky's troops in the southern Donetsk region, also claiming to destroy an ammunition store at Zolotyi Kolodiaz in the same region.
Some 50 shells were fired at Nikopol in Dnipropetrovsk region, damaging a kindergarten, a school, a church, two houses and cars.
Putin fired his long-time commander-in-chief of Russian ground forces Oleg Salyukov, ahead of his 70th birthday.
His replacement, Mordvichev, killed tens of thousands of his own men in the Kremlin's operation to capture the blitzed town of Avdiivka in Ukraine.
The cost in Avdiivka, for which he was made a Hero of Russia, was immense.
Some 16,000 to 17,000 Russian troops were killed and around 30,000 wounded from his cannon fodder advances, in contrast to Ukraine's losses of between 5,000 and 7,000.
The death toll in the 2023-24 Avdiivka operation was more than the Soviet Army lost in a decade of fighting in the USSR's notorious occupation of Afghanistan from 1979-89.
Mordvichev's appointment comes amid fears that any pause in the Ukraine conflict will see Putin engineer combat operations against NATO states.
Dutch military intelligence chief Vice-Admiral Peter Reesink warned recently: 'Russia is producing much more artillery, also with help from other countries, than they need for the war with Ukraine.' More Trending
Putin is not only replenishing depleted stockpiles but moving new artillery units toward NATO borders, including the Baltic countries and Finland, he told Politico, adding: 'That's an indication for us that they are building up capability.'
And a new report from the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) found that Russia could attack NATO as soon as 2027 if a Ukrainian ceasefire is agreed this year.
The report said if a ceasefire is agreed, and if Trump withdraws from NATO and focuses more on China, European allies can't assume the 'US will provide the necessary military support to defend the continent against Russian aggression'.
'Were US forces to disengage from the European theatre from mid-2025, Europe's window of vulnerability would open quickly,' it added.
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.
MORE: Albania's 6ft 7in PM towers over Keir Starmer – see how other leaders stack up
MORE: UK developing new 'deep precision strike' weapon with 1,242-mile range
MORE: Have you seen these men? Putin and Trump missing from Ukraine peace talks
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
5 hours ago
- NBC News
Trump speech at Fort Bragg prompts new questions, concerns about politicization of military
WASHINGTON — Defense Department officials say troops who cheered and jeered Tuesday at President Donald Trump's political statements at a rally at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, did not violate military regulations, but a former military legal officer said they did just that. During the speech, uniformed soldiers yelled in support of Trump's political statements and booed former President Joe Biden and California Gov. Gavin Newsom. 'Do you think this crowd would have showed up for Biden? I don't think so,' Trump said to boos about Biden. Trump made other comments about Newsom and about Karen Bass, the mayor of Los Angeles, where protests against the administration's crackdown on immigrants have been taking place and where Trump has ordered thousands of National Guard members and active-duty Marines deployed in response. Other Trump comments about the 'fake news media,' transgender people, protesters in California and flag-burning also drew boos from the uniformed military members in attendance. Trump is known for his rallies at which he goes after and pokes fun at political enemies and other issues, but typically he makes those remarks at political events, not on U.S. military bases. Such overt political activity on a base is the prerogative of the commander in chief. But military leaders would typically frown upon troops' reacting the way they did as inconsistent with military good order and discipline, and, according to one expert, it is a violation of military regulations found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, or UCMJ. Presidents of both parties often use troops as political props and put them and their commanders in difficult positions by doing so, but Trump's speech took that to a new level, said Geoffrey DeWeese, a retired judge advocate general who is now an attorney with Mark S. Zaid PC. (Zaid has represented whistleblowers on both sides of the aisle, including one who filed a complaint about Trump's call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in 2019 that led to Trump's impeachment, and he was one of the people whose security clearances Trump revoked this year.) 'It's a sad tradition to use the military as a backdrop for political purposes,' DeWeese said. 'To actively attack another president or a sitting governor and incite the crowd to boo, that's a step in a dangerous direction, that really says we want to politicize the military, that sends a bad message.' DeWeese said there were likely to have been violations of the UCMJ. 'I would be cringing if I was a senior officer and it happened under my watch,' he said. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has said repeatedly that he wants to take politics out of the military by removing diversity, equity and inclusion programs and banning service by transgender service members. Kori Schake, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who worked at the State Department and the National Security Council under former President George W. Bush and at the Pentagon under former President George H.W. Bush, said in an email that commanders at Fort Bragg should have done a better job preparing troops there. 'It's terrible,' she wrote. 'It's predictably bad behavior by the President to try and score political points in a military setting, and it's a command failure by leaders at Ft Bragg not to prepare soldiers for that bad behavior and counsel them not to participate.' The Pentagon said in a statement that there had been no violation of the UCMJ and suggested the media was against policies that Trump has championed. Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell also alleged in a statement that the media 'cheered on the Biden administration' and its policies regarding the Defense Department 'when they forced drag queen performances on military bases, promoted service members on the basis of race and sex in violation of federal law, and fired troops who refused an experimental vaccine.' 'Believe me, no one needs to be encouraged to boo the media,' Parnell said. 'Look no further than this query, which is nothing more than a disgraceful attempt to ruin the lives of young soldiers.' On Wednesday, Army officials at Fort Bragg addressed the sale of some MAGA merchandise at the event, which was planned in cooperation with a nonpartisan organization, American 250. 'The Army remains committed to its core values and apolitical service to the nation,' Col. Mary Ricks, a spokeswoman for the Army's 18th Airborne Corps at Bragg, said in a statement. 'The Army does not endorse political merchandise or the views it represents. The vendor's presence is under review to determine how it was permitted and to prevent similar circumstances in the future.' The Army's own new field manual, published recently, says the apolitical nature of being a U.S. soldier is what contributes to the public trust. The Army 'as an institution must be nonpartisan and appear so, too,' says the new field manual, 'The Army: A Primer to Our Profession of Arms.' 'Being nonpartisan means not favoring any specific political party or group. Nonpartisanship assures the public that our Army will always serve the Constitution and our people loyally and responsively.' U.S. troops can participate in political functions, just not while on duty or in uniform, the book says. 'As a private citizen you are encouraged to participate in our democratic process, but as a soldier you must be mindful of how your actions may affect the reputation and perceived trustworthiness of our Army as an institution,' it says.
Spectator
6 hours ago
- Spectator
Imperialism still overshadows our intellectual history
Peter Watson begins his survey of the history of ideas in Britain with the assertion that the national mindset (which at that time was the English mindset) changed significantly after the accession of Elizabeth I. His book – a guide to the nature of British intellectual curiosity since the mid-16th century – begins there, just as England had undergone a liberation from a dominant European authority: the shaking off of the influence of the Roman Catholic church and the advent of the Reformation, and the new opportunities that offered for the people. He describes how a culture based largely on poetry and on the court of Elizabeth then redirected the prevailing intellectual forces of the time. This affected not just literature (Marlowe, Shakespeare and Jonson) but also helped develop an interest in science that grew remarkably throughout the next few centuries. The 'imagination' of Watson's title is not merely the creative artistic imagination, but also that of scientists and inventors and, indeed, of people adept at both. The book is, according to its footnotes, based on secondary sources, so those well read in the history of the intellect in Britain since the Reformation will find much that is familiar. There is the odd surprise, such as one that stems from the book's occasional focus on the British empire and the need felt today to discuss its iniquities. Watson writes that the portion of the British economy based on the slave trade (which must not be conflated with empire) was between 1 per cent and 1.4 per cent. He also writes that for much of the era of slavery the British had a non-racial view of it, since their main experience of the odious trade was of white people being captured by Barbary pirates and held to ransom. While this cannot excuse the barbarism endured by Africans shipped by British (and other) slavers across the Atlantic, it lends some perspective to a question in serious danger of losing any vestige of one. Watson does not come down on one side or the other in the empire debate, eschewing the 'balance sheet' approach taken by historians such as Nigel Biggar and Niall Ferguson; but he devotes too much of the last section of his book to the question, when other intellectual currents in the opening decades of the 21st century might have been more profitably explored, not least the continuing viability of democracy. Earlier on, he gives much space to an analysis of Edward Said, and questions such as whether Jane Austen expressed her antipathy to slavery sufficiently clearly in the novel Mansfield Park. But then some of Watson's own analyses of writers and thinkers are not always easily supported. He is better on the 18th century – dealing well with the Scottish enlightenment (giving a perfectly nuanced account of Adam Smith) and writers such as Burke and Gibbon – than he appears to be on the 19th. He gives Carlyle his due, but cites an article in a learned American journal from 40 years ago to justify his claim that Carlyle's 'reputation took a knock' in 1849 with the publication of his Occasional Discourse on the Negro Question. Watson says readers were offended by the use of the term 'Quashee' to describe a black man. They may well, if so, have been unsettled by the still less palatable title that the Discourse was subsequently given, which was The Nigger Question: it appeared thus in a 1853 pamphlet and in the Centenary Edition of Carlyle's works in 1899. That indicates the Discourse did Carlyle's reputation no lasting harm at the time, whatever it may have done since. In seeking to pack so much into fewer than 500 pages of text, Watson does skate over a few crucial figures. Some of his musings on empire might have been sacrificed to make more space for George Orwell, for example. A chapter in whose title his name appears features just one brief paragraph on him, about Homage to Catalonia, and later there is a page or so on Animal Farm, which says nothing new. Of Orwell's extensive and mould-breaking journalism there is nothing – somewhat surprising in a book about the British imagination when dealing with one of its leading exponents of the past century. Watson emphasises scientific discovery and innovation, and the effect on national life and ideas caused by the Industrial Revolution. These are all essential consequences of our intellectual curiosity, and he is right to conclude that the historic significance of Britain in these fields is immense. He includes league tables of Nobel prizewinners by nation in which Britain shows remarkably well. But these prizes are not the only means by which the contribution to civilisation and progress by a people are measured. There are notable omissions. Although Watson talks about the elitist nature of 'high culture' – such as Eliot and The Waste Land – he does not discuss how far the British imagination, and the British contribution to world civilisation, might have advanced had we taken the education of the masses more seriously earlier. We were, until the Butler Education Act of 1944, appalling at developing our human resources, and have not been much better since. It is surprising that there is no discussion of British music, one of the greatest fruits of the imagination of the past 150 years. And there is no analysis of the role of architecture, which, given its impact and its centrality to many people's idea of themselves as British, surely merited examination. The book shows extensive and intelligent reading, but trying to cram so much information and commentary into one volume has not been a complete success, or resulted in something entirely coherent.
Scottish Sun
7 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Six members of Russian spy ring to have ‘too lenient' jail sentences reviewed
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) SIX members of a Russian spy ring are to have their jail sentences reviewed for being too lenient, we can reveal. The Bulgarians — who lived and worked in the UK — plotted sex stings, and targeted Russian dissidents and journalists critical of President Vladimir Putin's war effort against Ukraine. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 7 Russian Spy Vanya Gaberova was sentenced to eight years in jail Credit: Reuters 7 The operations was run out of a Great Yarmouth guesthouse Credit: PA The ring included lab worker Katrin Ivanova, 33, and beauty shop owner Vanya Gaberova, 30 — dubbed 'killer sexy brunettes' by cell leaders. Ivanova got nine years and eight months and Gaberova eight years. They were both found guilty in March of breaching the Official Secrets Act by conspiring to provide information useful to an enemy between August 2020 and February 2023. Ivanova also got a concurrent sentence of 15 months for forged ID documents. read more on russia BRAND OF EVIL Ukrainian PoW released in swap left with 'Glory to Russia' burned on his body All six got a total of more than 50 years last month. The Attorney General's Office has been asked to consider the sentences under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme. The ULS scheme allows anyone to ask for a Crown Court sentence to be assessed by the Attorney General's office if they think it is too lenient. Law officers have 28 days from sentencing to make a decision. 7 Katrin Ivanova was sentenced to nine years and eight months Credit: Central News 7 Orlin Roussev ran the spy ring Credit: PA 7 Ivan Iliev Stoyanov was convicted of carrying out surveillance for Putin 7 Tihomir Ivanov Ivanchev was also jailed for his part in the spy ring Credit: PA 7 Biser Dzhambazov was convicted as part of the ring Credit: PA Unlock even more award-winning articles as The Sun launches brand new membership programme - Sun Club.
