Ukraine sees ‘most massive' Russian airstrike of 537 weapons, F-16 pilot killed; Zelensky seeks US support
Russia launched its largest aerial assault on Ukraine overnight, involving hundreds of drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles, a Ukrainian official said Sunday. The Ukrainian Air Force confirmed that an F-16 fighter pilot died while trying to repel the attack. The jet was reportedly flown away from a populated area before crashing, leaving the pilot no time to eject. Firefighters work at the site of an apartment building damaged during Russian drone and missile strikes, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in the town of Smila, Cherkasy region, Ukraine June 29, 2025. (via REUTERS)
The strike damaged homes and infrastructure across the country, injuring at least 12 people, according to local officials cited by Bloomberg. In Kyiv, families took shelter in metro stations as machine-gun fire and explosions were heard across the capital. Similar attacks were also reported in Lviv, a region that typically sees fewer strikes.
President Volodymyr Zelensky renewed his call for greater military support from Washington and Western allies, urging immediate reinforcement of Ukraine's air defences in the face of intensifying Russian attacks. According to a Bloomberg report, Ukraine has now lost three US-made F-16 jets since their deployment last year, though the total size of the fleet remains undisclosed.
The latest assault comes shortly after Russian President Vladimir Putin said Moscow is open to a new round of peace talks in Istanbul. Previous negotiations between Russian and Ukrainian officials in the Turkish city were brief and failed to yield any progress. Also Read | Why has Russia amassed 110,000 troops in Pokrovsk? Here's what we know about 'hottest spot' along Ukraine's front lines Russia fired a total of 537 aerial weapons at Ukraine
Russia launched a total of 537 aerial weapons on Ukraine in what officials described as the 'most massive airstrike' since the start of the full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine's air force said. The assault included 477 drones and decoys, along with 60 missiles. Of these, 249 aerial threats were shot down, while 226 were either jammed electronically or considered non-explosive decoys, according to the Associated Press.
Ukrainian forces reported destroying 211 drones and 38 missiles. The attack targeted multiple regions, including areas in western Ukraine far from the front lines. Lviv's Drohobych city saw a large fire at an industrial site and partial power outages due to drone strikes.
Air defences in Poland and allied countries were activated to secure Polish airspace amid the cross-border threat.
At least 10 people were killed in the assault. Three fatalities each were reported in the Kherson, Kharkiv, and Dnipropetrovsk regions due to drone strikes. One person died in an airstrike on Kostyantynivka, while another was killed during shelling in Kherson. In Zaporizhzhia, a 70-year-old woman was found dead under the rubble of a nine-story building hit by Russian shelling. Russian troops advance in Donetsk
Russia's defence ministry said three Ukrainian drones were shot down overnight. In a separate incident, two people were injured in a Ukrainian drone strike on the western Russian city of Bryansk, according to regional governor Alexander Bogomaz. He added that seven additional drones were downed over the region.
Meanwhile, Russia claimed it has captured the village of Novoukrainka in the partially occupied Donetsk region, where its forces continue slow, incremental advances along parts of the 1,000-kilometre front line. These gains, however, have come at a significant cost in terms of personnel and equipment.
In a related development, Russia's foreign intelligence chief, Sergei Naryshkin, said he recently spoke by phone with CIA Director John Ratcliffe. 'I had a phone call with my American counterpart and we reserved for each other the possibility to call at any time and discuss issues of interest to us,' Naryshkin told state media.
(With inputs from Associated Press and Bloomberg)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
14 minutes ago
- First Post
Why do nations acquire nukes? Decoding Iran's dilemma
It is a dominating West which encourages nuclear proliferation, but the world, as always, remains silent read more Ursula Von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, tweeted during the Iran-Israel conflict, 'Iran must never acquire the bomb.' She subsequently welcomed the announcement of a ceasefire by Trump and added, 'We call on Iran to engage seriously in a credible diplomatic process. Because the negotiating table remains the only viable path forward.' Evidently the West appears to believe that they possess the power to determine who can develop nuclear weapons and who should not. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD They have also taken it upon themselves to remove regimes which they assume are acting against their interests. To achieve their aims, they occasionally exploit global bodies such as the United Nations to legalise their actions. In recent times, they have begun ignoring the UN and acting on their own. Wherever the West has interfered, they have left behind a mess or were forced to withdraw in defeat. The only nations which are secure are those who possess a deterrent in terms of nuclear weapons. It has hence become an unwritten rule that a nation with political systems at odds with the West must possess nuclear weapons or bow to Western supremacy to ensure its security, as many monarchies in West Asia have done. In March 2003, Nato invaded Iraq, claiming it possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). The sole intent was the removal of Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein was overthrown, captured, tried and hanged, but no WMDs were discovered, a fact known well even before the invasion was considered. Evidently, the intent was not WMDs but possibly oil. Since then, US forces have remained deployed in Iraq's oil fields, whose operations are controlled by US companies. Almost five thousand US troops and over a hundred thousand Iraqis have been killed and millions displaced since Saddam Hussein's removal. ISIS rose in the vacuum created by Saddam's ouster. It needed years and thousands of casualties before they were finally subdued. Iraq remains politically unstable, with multiple insurgent groups backed by Iran continuing to operate. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Libya had pursued a nuclear weapons program once Gaddafi assumed power in 1969. Post the Cold War, Gaddafi attempted to enhance relations with the West and sought the lifting of sanctions. It was compelled to surrender its nuclear weapons program and finally signed an agreement on it in December 2003. Without nuclear weapons, Libya was vulnerable to Western manipulation. Following the Arab Spring, which commenced at the end of 2010 and spread to Libya in 2011, the US pushed a resolution in the UNSC authorising the use of force to protect civilians in Libya. It launched airstrikes and supported anti-Gaddafi forces. Gaddafi was overthrown. Over a decade later, Libya remains divided and violence continues unabated, with thousands of civilians killed. Libya, once the most thriving economy in North Africa, is now struggling to survive. Once again, the reason for Gaddafi's removal was Libya's oil resources. When questioned on what was his biggest mistake as president, Barack Obama stated, 'Probably failing to plan for the day after what I think was the right thing to do in intervening in Libya.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Twenty years in Afghanistan, and the US could show nothing. It handed over the country to the same Taliban which it overthrew. Pak was the only nation which gained by playing both sides. As per reports, the US suffered over 2500 dead and 20,000 wounded, while almost forty-five thousand Afghans lost their lives. Currently Afghanistan is no better than what it was in 2001. Osama Bin Laden, whom the US hunted for the 26/9 attacks, was finally eliminated in Abbottabad in Pakistan. On obtaining independence from the USSR in 1991, Ukraine possessed the world's third-largest nuclear arsenal, including almost 2000 strategic warheads, 170 intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and strategic bombers. In December 1994, the US, UK and Russia signed the 'Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances' with Ukraine. The agreement provided security assurance against the use of force against Ukraine. It also promised to respect its sovereignty and existing borders. Based on this agreement, Ukraine surrendered all its nuclear weapons to Russia and signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Today it faces loss of territory and attacks by Russia. Would it have happened if it had held onto its nuclear weapons? Agreements and promises mean nothing with the passage of time. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The Kim Jong Un regime in North Korea is secure only because it possesses nuclear weapons. The nation may be isolated and amongst the world's most sanctioned, but no major power has ever attempted to push a regime change or destroy its nuclear stockpiles. It is reported to have sold nuclear weapon technology to nations including Pakistan but has yet to be acted against. North Korea has, over the years, developed missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads to Europe and the US, imposing further caution. All that the West can do is impose sanctions and threats, which are meaningless against the authoritarian state. Iran was attacked on June 13 because Israel felt threatened by it developing nuclear weapons. On the contrary, because it is a US ally, Israel's holding of nuclear weapons is acceptable. Tehran remains amongst the world's most sanctioned regimes. It was in talks with the US on its nuclear program; however, Israel, with the backing of the US, decided to act unilaterally. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The US joined in the attack intending to destroy Iran's nuclear program. Rather than criticise Israel's and the US's unilateral actions, the EU President commented that Iran must not be permitted to have nuclear weapons. The action was a manifestation of partiality towards particular countries. The trigger for attacking Iran was the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) resolution in its board meeting on June 12 claiming Tehran was 'breaching its non-proliferation obligations'. The IAEA Director-General, Rafael Grossi, in a subsequent interview with al-Jazeera on June 19, mentioned, 'Iran's alleged violations of its assurances had not led this agency to conclude that Tehran was building bombs.' Both Trump and Netanyahu, in their desperation to attack Iran, ignored the statement by the US Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who had mentioned, '(US intelligence) continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorised the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003.' Trump rebuked her on her statement. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Nations which are traditionally against Western views and concepts will always remain at risk of being subjected to regime change unless they possess a reliable deterrent in the form of nuclear weapons. It is, in reality, a dominating West which encourages nuclear proliferation. But the world, as always, remains silent. The author is a former Indian Army officer, strategic analyst and columnist. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
United News of India
17 minutes ago
- United News of India
Sergey Lavrov says Russia monitoring Serbian protests, hopes they will be resolved as per law
Moscow/Belgrade, June 30 (UNI) Expressing concern over the massive student-led demonstrations in Serbia, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said that Moscow is monitoring the situation and hopes that the protests in the Slavic country will be resolved on the basis of the country's Constitution and laws. 'We are monitoring the situation. We support calming the unrest, as Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić said, in line with the Constitution and laws of this friendly state,' he said, reports Moscow Times. "We note the readiness of the Serbian leadership for dialogue. Dialogue is the way to resolve any issues," Lavrov said, with the Kremlin stating that Serbian authorities would 'no doubt' be able to 'return law and order' to the country, while also suggesting some hand of Western governments behind the unrest. 'We hope Western countries, which often exploit domestic affairs in other states to advance their interests, will refrain from colour revolutions this time,' Lavrov added. This comes as protests across the Central European nation only seem to be intensifying. On Saturday, around 140,000 people took part in protests in central Belgrade, demanding snap elections and an end to Vučić's 12-year rule. Police, who estimated the crowd at 36,000 people, used tear gas and batons to disperse demonstrators, some of whom threw flares and bottles. Serbian authorities said 48 police officers were injured, 22 people sought medical help and 77 were arrested. Eight protesters face charges, including planning to block roads and attack government buildings. Demonstrations intensified further on Sunday, as thousands blocked major roadways in Belgrade and other cities. The demonstrations mark the latest in over six months of public anger, initially sparked by the deadly collapse of a train station roof in Novi Sad last November — an incident widely blamed on corruption. The protests have already led to the prime minister's resignation and a cabinet reshuffle. Today, thousands of students staged anti-government protests in the country, and took to the streets in mass demonstrations, blocking roads and traffic points across 18 cities in Serbia. UNI ANV SS
India Gazette
18 minutes ago
- India Gazette
"Trend lines of India-US bilateral ties very positive": Jaishankar expresses hope for successful trade-deal
Washington, DC [US], July 1 (ANI): External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar has hailed the relationship between India and the US, particularly over the course of 25 years noting that the two countries have enjoyed strong and 'very positive' ties under the last five US Presidents. In an interview with the Newsweek, Jaishankar who is currently on a visit to the US used the financial term 'trend lines' to emphasise that the ties between India and the US at the end of every presidency spread over a span of past five US presidents have been better than they were at the beginning of the presidency. The External Affairs Minister Jaishankar expressed hope that India and the US will reach a successful conclusion to the trade US-India trade deal is being finalised by trade negotiators in the White House. 'We are in the middle, hopefully more than the middle, of a very intricate trade negotiation. Obviously, my hope would be that we bring it to a successful conclusion, I cannot guarantee, because there's another party to that discussion, but no question,' Jaishankar said in the Newsweek interview. 'I believe it's possible, and I think we'll have to watch this space for the next few days,' the EAM said. Jaishankar emphasised that the ties between India and the US at the end of every presidency spread over a span of past five US presidents have been better than they were at the beginning of the presidency. Jaishankar noted that the trend line of India-US ties over the past 25 years has been 'very strong' due to structural factors that work in favour of the relationship with, economics, technology, education, security, and energy acting as 'drivers of the relationship.' On how he sees India-US partnership evolving over the next two years, Jaishankar said, 'I would say, again, I say this over multiple administrations, but particularly for the last 10-11 years, if you look at the trend line of the US-India relations, the trend lines have been very positive.' 'Just think back over the last five presidents of America Clinton, George W Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden, back to Trump, five very different presidents and yet at the end of every presidency, if you were to do a dipstick on India US relations you'll find it's better off than it was at the beginning of that presidency and the trend line over the 20 over the last 25 years has actually been very very strong because I think there are structural factors that work for the relationship, that the economics, the technology the human bridges, the education, the security, the energy, all these are today drivers of the relationship.' He noted that ties can never be free of issues or differences, but the two sides should have the ability to address them and maintain that trend in a positive direction. He also spoke about the issues with regards to India-US ties when he served as India's Ambassador to the US. He said, 'Now, are there arguments, are there differences, are there episodes, sure it happens, it won't be for the first time I mean, in fact at every one of these presidencies, I can think of something which at that time was a fiction point. I mean I remember even the time when I was ambassador here I mean I I literally came in a few days after we had a problem of a one of related to one of our diplomats in the city and then I had to deal with 301 issues with compulsory licensing controversies, with plans to sell F-16 aircraft to Pakistan, we dealt with it. So, it's not you know, relationships will never be free of issues, even I would say differences. I think what matters is the ability to deal with it and to keep that trend going in the positive direction.' EAM Jaishankar also expressed hope that India and the US will reach a successful conclusion to the trade negotiations. 'Yes, we are in the middle, hopefully more than the middle of a very intricate trade negotiation. Obviously, my hope would be that we bring it to a successful conclusion, I cannot guarantee it because there's another party to that discussion. But no question we do think today that that trade you know there will have to be give and as people in the US may have views about India, people in India too have views about the US and we will have to find a kind of a middle ground there, I believe it's possible and I think we'll have to watch the space for the next few days,' Jaishankar said.. India is negotiating a trade deal with the US, known as the bilateral trade agreement (BTA), the first tranche of which is expected to be completed by the fall of 2025. Jaishankar is on an official visit to the US at the invitation of US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, to participate in the next edition of the Quad Foreign Ministers' Meeting (QFMM), scheduled for July 1. During the meeting, the leaders will build upon the discussions held during the last QFMM, which took place in Washington, DC, on January 21. In the press release, MEA stated, 'They will exchange views on regional and global developments, particularly those concerning the Indo-Pacific, and review the progress made on various Quad initiatives in the run-up to the Quad Leaders' Summit, which India will host. The Ministers are also expected to deliberate on new proposals to advance the shared vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific.' Before arriving in Washington, DC, Jaishankar was in New York, where he inaugurated an exhibition at the United Nations on 'The Human Cost of Terrorism,' highlighting the need to expose state sponsorship of terrorism. (ANI)
