Ukrainian F-16 pilot killed in combat, Zelensky says
A Ukrainian fighter pilot flying a Western F-16 fighter plane died during a mission, the country's leader confirmed on Saturday.
Advertisement
'Captain Pavlo Ivanov was killed today during a fight in an F-16,' Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said, and expressed his condolences to his family.
He said the circumstances of his death would be clarified. Zelensky also posthumously awarded Ivanov, 26, the title 'Hero of Ukraine'.
Kyiv called repeatedly for F-16 fighter jets during the summer of 2024 before receiving the US-made aircraft from Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark and Norway.
Ukraine later also received French Mirage aircraft. The embattled country deploys the fighters primarily for defence against Russian missile and drone attacks.
Advertisement
It was not clear what happened to the plane itself, but the BBC's Ukrainian service later reported that the aircraft had been shot down by Russian missiles over the Sumy region in northeast Ukraine, citing government sources.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Asia Times
a day ago
- Asia Times
Ukraine in a bind as Russia moves into Dnipropetrovsk
The Russian Ministry of Defense announced on Sunday (June 8) that its forces had entered Ukraine's Dnipropetrovsk Region, which Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed is part of Russian President Vladimir Putin's buffer zone plan. This was foreseen as early as late August once the Battle of Pokrovsk began, but has been achieved even without capturing that strategic fortress town. Russian forces simply went around it after breaking through the southern Donbass front. This development puts Ukraine in a dilemma. It will now have to simultaneously fortify the Dnipropetrovsk front together with the northern Kharkov and southern Zaporozhye ones to guard against Russia using its new position to launch offensives into any of those three. This could put serious strain on the Ukrainian Armed Forces as they are already struggling to prevent a major breakthrough in the Sumy Region from Kursk. Coupled with a depletion of manpower and questions about continued US military-intelligence aid, this might be enough to collapse the frontlines. To be sure, that scenario has been bandied about many times since the invasion, but it now appears closer than ever. Observers also shouldn't forget that Putin told his US counterpart Donald Trump that he would respond to Ukraine's strategic drone strikes on Russia's strategic nuclear forces earlier this month, which could combine with the abovementioned two factors to achieve this long-desired breakthrough. Of course, the retaliation might just be a symbolic demonstration of force, but it could also be something more significant. Ukraine's best chance of preventing this is for the US to either get Russia to agree to freeze the frontlines or to go on another offensive. A frontline freeze could be achieved through a carrot-and-stick approach, proposing a better resource-centric strategic partnership in exchange for the US imposing crippling secondary sanctions on Russia's energy clients (specifically China and India, with likely waivers for the EU). Alternatively, the US could double down on military-intelligence aid if Russia still refuses. As for launching a new offensive, the 120,000 troops that Ukraine has assembled along the Belarusian border, according to President Alexander Lukashenko last summer, could either cross that frontier and/or one of Russia's internationally recognized frontiers. However, both possibilities stand only a slim chance of success: Russia has made it clear that it must achieve more of its goals in the conflict before agreeing to any ceasefire, while its success in pushing Ukraine out of Kursk bodes ill for other invasions. The likelihood of Ukraine cutting its losses by agreeing to more of Russia's demands for peace is nil. Therefore, it might inevitably opt, whether in lieu of the scenarios mentioned above or in parallel with one or both of them, to intensify its 'unconventional operations' against Russia. These refer to assassinations, strategic drone strikes and terrorism. All that will do, however, is provoke more (probably outsized) conventional retaliation from Russia and thus more pain on a Ukraine already poised for defeat. With an eye toward the endgame, it appears as though an inflection point has or is about to be reached in the sense of irreversibly shifting the military-strategic dynamics in Russia's favor. It's very difficult to imagine how Ukraine can extricate itself from this dilemma, although the conflict has already surprised observers on both sides before, so it cannot be entirely ruled out. But it's a far-fetched scenario while Ukraine's defeat increasingly seems imminent. This article was first published on Andrew Korybko's Substack and is republished with kind permission. Become an Andrew Korybko Newsletter subscriber here.
Asia Times
2 days ago
- Asia Times
Taiwan's de-sinicization drive as geostrategic leverage
In an era where US-China tensions run high but full decoupling is unfeasible, Washington must seek new low-cost diplomatic tools. One such tool may lie in an unexpected domain: Taiwan's internal cultural policies. Specifically, the island's ongoing de-sinicization campaign—while locally motivated—has inadvertently become a geopolitical irritant, escalating Beijing's threat perception. This article proposes that the US quietly explore the recalibration of Taiwan's de-Sinicization policies as a symbolic, non-security concession in broader negotiations with Beijing. Such a move could provide a controlled way to reduce tensions while preserving America's core commitments to Taiwan's security and democracy. Since the early 2000s, Taiwan has taken deliberate steps to shift its cultural identity away from China. Curriculum changes, altered national symbols, and linguistic prioritization form part of a longer campaign to assert a distinct Taiwanese identity. While understandable domestically, these measures have consistently provoked sharp reactions from Beijing, feeding its narrative of Taiwan's irreversible drift toward independence. For the United States, de-Sinicization poses a strategic paradox. On the one hand, it reflects democratic agency. On the other, it may undercut regional stability by giving Beijing a perceived justification to escalate. Importantly, Taiwan's cultural trajectory does not directly impact US national security priorities such as freedom of navigation, semiconductor supply chains or military deterrence. Therefore, Washington could — discreetly — signal to Taipei that a soft pause or reframing of the de-Sinicization drive could serve broader strategic goals. This could manifest as a period of 'consolidation' rather than reversal, buying time to focus on national resilience, defense and external alignment. Such a move would not require a formal public endorsement. Instead, it could surface through Track II dialogues, think tank publications or behind-the-scenes diplomatic conversations. Allies like Japan or South Korea could reinforce this approach by advocating for cultural moderation as a path to regional confidence-building. This approach offers several advantages. It provides the US a symbolic concession to offer in potential high-level US-China discussions without undermining core deterrence postures. It demonstrates to Beijing that the US-Taiwan relationship is not driven by ideological maximalism. And it reinforces Washington's image as a responsible power seeking balance, not confrontation, in the Indo-Pacific. Public emotion variable While most Western observers tend to focus on the Chinese government's calculated use of nationalism, what is often overlooked is that the Chinese state itself is restrained by popular nationalist sentiment, especially on issues like Taiwan. On matters of cultural sovereignty and national unity, it is often the Chinese public—not the leadership—that demands hardline responses. This dynamic creates a powerful incentive for Beijing to avoid appearing 'weak' in the face of perceived provocations, even when the government itself may prefer strategic patience. In this context, Taiwan's highly visible cultural distancing from China—through language reforms, educational shifts, and symbolic removals—acts as a flashpoint that fuels public anger more than elite strategic concern. Therefore, if Taiwan were to partially moderate or reframe its de-Sinicization policies—emphasizing cultural heritage, continuity or mutual historical roots—it could significantly lower emotional hostility among the Chinese populace. Such a change would reduce the pressure on Beijing to escalate or retaliate and empower more flexible policy responses. For Washington, this presents a critical window: by encouraging symbolic de-escalation in the cultural sphere, the US can indirectly calm Chinese domestic sentiment, giving the central leadership more room to maneuver diplomatically without being seen as capitulating. In short, strategic signaling toward Beijing doesn't only happen through naval deployments or economic tools—it can also take shape in how narratives of culture and identity are modulated. By understanding and leveraging the emotional logic of Chinese public nationalism, Washington may gain more influence in managing the Taiwan issue than through deterrence alone. L. Y. Chu is a retired engineer and independent analyst focused on cross-strait relations, US-China strategy and the role of cultural signaling in geopolitical competition.
Asia Times
2 days ago
- Asia Times
Russia's war on Ukrainian children
As Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine grinds well into its fourth year, children remain among the war's most vulnerable victims. Ballistic missiles have struck homes, schools, hospitals, and playgrounds. Russia is not only targeting children with missiles, it aims to militarize Ukrainian children on the occupied territories to prepare them for a future war with the West. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has called attention to what he describes as the deliberate targeting of children. 'It is wrong and dangerous to keep silent about the fact that it is Russia that is killing children with ballistic missiles,' he said. Twelve people were killed and 90 civilians – including six children – were injured in a large-scale Russian missile and drone strike on Kyiv on April 24. US President Donald Trump even recently asked his advisers if Russian dictator Vladimir Putin 'has changed since Trump's last time in office, and expressed surprise at some of Putin's military moves, including bombing areas with children.' The attack came just weeks after a devastating April 4 strike on the city of Kryvyi Rih where a Russian cluster-armed Iskander-M ballistic missile hit the city of Kryvyi Rih killing 18 people, including nine children, and wounding over 40 others. One of the youngest victims was just three months old. The attack was a brutal reminder of Russia's continued terror tactics, such as the July 2024 strike on Kyiv's Okhmatdyt children's hospital, a facility filled with young cancer patients. Ruslan, call sign ' a commander in Ukraine's 23rd Brigade, said Russia systematically targets civilians. 'Hospitals, residential buildings, and shopping centers are struck, yet Russian media claims they're hitting military facilities.' Peter Gelpi, an American volunteer in Ukraine since 2022, said he has been targeted despite driving vehicles clearly marked as 'humanitarian' and 'volunteer.' 'Each strike was extremely accurate,' he said. 'These can't be mistakes.' Between April 1 and April 24 alone, Russian strikes killed 151 people and injured 697 others, according to the UN – a 46% increase in civilian casualties from the same period last year. Russia's war on children extends beyond missile strikes. It has forcibly deported more than 19,000 children to Russia. These actions have drawn accusations of genocide. During the 1932–1933 Holodomor (death by hunger), children were among the most vulnerable and targeted victims of the Soviet-engineered famine in Ukraine. The Soviet government starved millions of Ukrainians to death. Despite their parents' desperate efforts to protect them, millions of children starved, with historians estimating between 1.5 to 4 million child deaths. Those who survived often grew up in orphanages that functioned as death camps, and many remain unrecognized as official victims. 'The Holodomor has played a pivotal historical role in Russia's ongoing war against Ukraine. Beyond the battlefield, this war has been, in many ways, about the fight for historical narratives,' said John Vsetecka, Assistant Professor of History at Nova Southeastern University. Natalia Kuzovova, Head of the Department of History, Archeology and Teaching Methods at Kherson State University, reflected on the generational efforts of Russia to kill Ukrainians, stating, 'We talk about children who will grow up. Yet hundreds of Ukrainian children will never reach adulthood because they were killed by Russia.' She drew parallels with the Holodomor, when the status of children in society differed significantly from today. At that time, the family structure was patriarchal, survival hinged on a man's physical labor, and society was not child-centered. Family relations extended beyond the modern concept of a nuclear family, and during the Holodomor, as well as during the campaign against peasants considered wealthy, called kulaks, starting in the 1920s, entire 'households' were subjected to repression. 'Even very young children were labeled enemies of the Soviet state and deported with their families, many dying en route or becoming orphans,' said Kuzovova. Teenagers were arrested for failing to meet grain quotas and starved to death in prisons and penal colonies. Children whose parents had been arrested were often left on the streets without care, and those placed in shelters perished due to a lack of food. 'It is believed,' Kuzovova noted, 'that the most numerous victims of the Holodomor were children under the age of four, due to their mothers' loss of lactation and the absence of age-appropriate food.' 'Even very young children were labeled enemies and deported with their families,' she said. 'Children starved in shelters, prisons, and streets.' The most common victims, she noted, were children under four. The psychological toll on today's children is immense. Yuliia Matvievieva of the Volia Fund said reports show rising rates of anxiety, sleep disorders, PTSD, and depression. Displacement, broken family ties, constant danger, and emotionally unavailable caregivers are all contributing factors. 'Children retreat into the internet,' said Alina Holovko, coordinator at Dobra Sprava. 'They live under chronic stress, fear of death, and psychological overload.' She noted that schools need bomb shelters and spaces for group activities. 'In-person schooling would solve many psychological issues,' she said. Sophia Yushchenko, co-founder of Code for Ukraine, said children will face lifelong consequences. 'Education is disrupted, families are broken, and their sense of safety is gone,' she said. She divided the crisis into three groups. First, children in free territories who have suffered physically and emotionally. Second, those abroad who may never return. Third, those in occupied zones taken to reeducation camps or adopted into Russian families. The UN has hesitated to call this genocide, but Yushchenko pointed to the Genocide Convention's clause on forcibly transferring children. 'That's exactly what's happening,' she said. She added that Russian troops often bring textbooks, destroy Ukrainian literature and churches, and install pro-Russia curriculum. 'They replace identity with militarism,' she said. Since 2014, Russia has promoted 'patriotic education' in occupied Ukraine. After 2022, those efforts accelerated. Groups like Yunarmia indoctrinate children with military ideology. Some members have gone on to fight against Ukraine. On May 9, children in red berets marched through Red Square in Moscow, not to celebrate peace, but as part of Russia's growing militarized youth corps, Yunarmiya. Russia also seems to be using children's summer camps in occupied Crimea as human shields to deter Ukrainian strikes, violating international humanitarian law by placing military assets near civilian areas. During the Istanbul talks in early June, Russia's lead negotiator, Vladimir Medinsky, reportedly mocked Ukraine's demand to return deported children, dismissing it as 'a show for childless European grandmothers.' The UN reports over 2,500 Ukrainian children killed or injured since the full-scale invasion. These are not isolated tragedies, but the result of a systematic campaign to terrorize civilians and break Ukraine's resolve. It echoes the brutal tactics of the 1930s, when Moscow deliberately starved millions of Ukrainians during the Holodomor to crush their aspirations for independence. Then, as now, Russia seeks to subjugate Ukraine by targeting its most vulnerable. An associate research fellow of the London-based Henry Jackson Society think tank, David Kirichenko is a Ukrainian-American freelance journalist, activist and security engineer who, multiple times during the Ukraine War, has traveled to and worked in the areas being fought over. He can be found on the social media platform X @DVKirichenko
