Ukraine says it hit Russian airbase following huge drone strike
The moves form part of a stepped-up bombing campaign that has further dashed hopes for a breakthrough in efforts to end the more than 3-year-old war.
Ukraine's military General Staff said Saturday that Ukrainian forces had struck the Borisoglebsk airbase in Russia's Voronezh region, describing it as the 'home base' of Russia's Su-34, Su-35S and Su-30SM fighter jets.
Writing on Facebook, the General Staff said it hit a depot containing glide bombs, a training aircraft and 'possibly other aircraft."
Russian officials did not immediately comment on the attack.
Russia fired 322 drones and decoys into Ukraine overnight into Saturday, Ukraine's air force said. Of these, 157 were shot down and 135 were lost, likely having been electronically jammed.
According to the air force, Ukraine's western Khmelnytskyi region was the main target of the attack. Regional Gov. Serhii Tyurin said Saturday that no damage, injuries or deaths had been reported.
Russia has been stepping up its long-range attacks on Ukraine. Waves of drones and missiles targeted Kyiv overnight into Friday in the largest aerial assault since Russia's invasion of Ukraine began, killing one person and wounding at least 26 others.
The fresh wave of attacks came after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Friday that he had a 'very important and productive' phone call with U.S. President Donald Trump.
The two leaders discussed how Ukrainian air defenses might be strengthened, possible joint weapons production between the U.S. and Ukraine, and broader U.S-led efforts to end the war with Russia, according to a statement by Zelenksyy.
Asked Friday night by reporters about the call, Trump said, 'We had a very good call, I think.'
When asked about finding a way to end the fighting, Trump said: 'I don't know. I can't tell you whether or not that's going to happen.'
The U.S. has paused some shipments of military aid to Ukraine, including crucial air defense missiles. Ukraine's main European backers are considering how they can help pick up the slack. Zelenskyy says plans are afoot to build up Ukraine's domestic arms industry, but scaling up will take time.
Russia's Defense Ministry said it shot down 94 Ukrainian drones overnight into Saturday, along with 12 further drones on Saturday morning. No casualties were reported.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
44 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Zelensky blasts NATO members' 'slow' spending increase
Volodymyr Zelensky warned that Vladimir Putin could attack a NATO country within the next five years, as he criticised the alliance for a slow spending ramp up. Speaking to Sky News about the proposed NATO spending target of 5 percent of GDP by 2035, the Ukrainian leader said: 'In my view, this is slow because we believe that starting from 2030 Putin can have significantly greater capabilities.' Zelensky said that although Putin's soldiers 'are all getting annihilated and wiped out at the battlefield' and that the Russian leader 'needs a pause', he said '10 years is a very long time. 'He will have a new army ready [by then].' Zelensky's remarks come after NATO members agreed on Sunday to a big increase in their defence spending target to 5 percent of GDP, as demanded by US President Donald Trump. The UK was among the 32 member countries to agree to the goal, with Prime Minister Keir Starmer vowing to commit Britain to spending 3.5 percent of GDP on core defence spending, plus a further 1.5 per cent on security-related domestic infrastructure. Starmer's pledge came as he welcomed Zelensky to Downing Street over the weekend ahead of the NATO summit on Tuesday. Sir Keir also announced plans for a new agreement with Ukraine. 'I'm really proud that this afternoon we are able to announce an industrial military co-production agreement, the first of its kind so far as Ukraine and the UK are concerned, which will be a massive step forward now in the contribution that we can continue to make, and is really a symbol of not only our joint work in this conflict, but the 100-year agreement that we've put in place', the prime minister said. It also comes as the Ukrainian leader and Trump are set to meet on Wednesday on the sidelines of the NATO summit in The Hague, a senior source in the Ukrainian presidency told AFP. The war-time leader has been a central figure at recent summits but given his fractious relationship with Trump, Zelensky has not been invited to the main working session with NATO members. 'The teams are finalising the details' of the meeting, the source told AFP, adding that the talks were scheduled for the 'early afternoon' in the Netherlands. The source added that the discussion would focus on Ukraine's 'purchase of a defence package, a large part of which consists of air defence systems'. The leaders would also discuss more 'sanctions against Russia, and a price cap on oil', the source added. Ukraine and its allies have sought to lower an existing oil cap imposed on Russia after it invaded Ukraine more than three years ago, from $60 to $45, to dent the Kremlin war chest. Trump so far has frustrated Western allies by refusing to impose new sanctions on Russia despite President Vladimir Putin's refusal to agree to a Ukraine ceasefire. Trump and his NATO counterparts are due to gather today for a summit that could unite the world's biggest security organisation around a new defense spending pledge or widen divisions among the 32 allies. Last week, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte was optimistic the European members and Canada would commit to invest at least as much of their economic growth on defense as the United States does for the first time. Then Spain rejected the new NATO target for each country to spend 5 percent of its gross domestic product on defense needs, calling it 'unreasonable.' Trump also insists on that figure. The alliance operates on a consensus that requires the backing of all 32 members. The following day, Trump said the U.S. should not have to respect the goal. 'I don't think we should, but I think they should,' he said. Trump lashed out at Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez's government, saying: 'NATO is going to have to deal with Spain. Spain's been a very low payer.' He also criticized Canada as 'a low payer.' Spain was the lowest spender in the alliance last year, directing less than 2% of its GDP on defense expenditure, while Canada was spending 1.45%, according to NATO figures. The two-day summit in The Hague involves an informal dinner Tuesday and one working session Wednesday morning. A very short summit statement has been drafted to ensure the meeting is not derailed by fights over details and wording. Founded in 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed by 12 nations to counter the threat to security in Europe posed by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, notably via a strong U.S. presence on the continent. NATO's ranks have grown to 32 countries since the Washington Treaty was signed 75 years ago. Sweden joined last year, worried by an increasingly aggressive Russia.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Iran's Supreme Leader makes first public appearance since the 12-day war between Israel and Iran began
Iran 's Supreme Leader has made his first public appearance since the 12-day war between Israel and Iran began. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, 86, on Saturday attended a mourning ceremony on the eve of Ashoura - a significant day in Islam marking the death of Husayn ibn Ali, the Prophet Muhammad's grandson. The octogenarian leader was shown in state TV footage waving to the cheering crowds and greeting worshippers who had gathered at a mosque near his office in Tehran. Khamenei could be seen on stage dressed in black and white as the audience before him, fists in the air, chanted: 'The blood in our veins for our leader!' State TV said the clip was filmed at central Tehran's Imam Khomeini Mosque, named for the founder of the Islamic republic. The leader, who has been in power since 1989, spoke last week in a pre-recorded video, but had not been seen in public since before Israel initiated the conflict with a shower of surprise airstrikes on June 13. Khamenei's absence during the war suggested the Iranian leader, who has final say on all state matters, had been in seclusion in a bunker - something not acknowledged by state media. There was no immediate report on any public statement made. Iranian officials such as the parliament speaker were present. Such events are always held under heavy security. The octogenarian leader was shown in a video broadcast by state television greeting people and being cheered at a mosque on Saturday After the US inserted itself into the war by bombing three key nuclear sites in Iran, US President Donald Trump sent warnings via social media to the 86-year-old Khamenei that the US knew where he was but had no plans to kill him, 'at least for now.' On June 26, shortly after a ceasefire began, Khamenei made his first public statement in days, saying in a prerecorded statement that Tehran had delivered a 'slap to America's face' by striking a US air base in Qatar, and warning against further attacks by the US or Israel on Iran. Trump replied, in remarks to reporters and on social media: 'Look, you're a man of great faith. A man who's highly respected in his country. You have to tell the truth. You got beat to hell.' Iran has acknowledged the deaths of more than 900 people in the war, as well as thousands of injured. It also has confirmed serious damage to its nuclear facilities, and has denied access to them for inspectors with the U.N. nuclear watchdog. Iran's president on Wednesday ordered the country to suspend its cooperation with the watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, further limiting inspectors' ability to track a program that had been enriching uranium to near weapons-grade levels. Israel launched the war fearing that Iran was trying to develop atomic weapons. It remains unclear just how badly damaged the nuclear facilities are, whether any enriched uranium or centrifuges had been moved before the attacks, and whether Tehran still would be willing to continue negotiations with the United States over its nuclear program. Israel also targeted defense systems, high-ranking military officials and atomic scientists. In retaliation, Iran fired more than 550 ballistic missiles at Israel, most of them intercepted, killing 28 people and causing damage in many areas. The ceremony that Khamenei hosted Saturday was a remembrance of the 7th century martyrdom of the Prophet Muhammad's grandson, Hussein. Shiites represent over 10 per cent of the world's 1.8 billion Muslims, and they view Hussein as the rightful successor to the Prophet Muhammad. Hussein's death in battle at the hands of Sunnis at Karbala, south of Baghdad, created a rift in Islam and continues to play a key role in shaping Shiite identity. In predominantly Shiite Iran, red flags represented Hussein's blood and black funeral tents and clothes represented mourning. Processions of chest-beating and self-flagellating men demonstrated fervor. Some sprayed water over the mourners in the intense heat. NetBlocks, a global internet monitor, reported late Saturday on X that there was a 'major disruption to internet connectivity' in Iran. It said the disruption corroborated widespread user reports of problems accessing the internet. The development comes just weeks after authorities shut down telecoms during the war.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Is Israel on the brink of a golden age?
Benjamin Netanyahu was in favour. So, too, was Ehud Barak, his defence minister at the time in 2011. But Israel's top generals and intelligence chiefs were aghast. An attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, they feared, could result in tens of thousands of Israeli civilian deaths. Months after retiring as Mossad chief that year, Meir Dagan – one of Israel's most revered spymasters – even went as far as to call the idea 'the stupidest I've ever heard'. Yet 14 years later, despite widespread opposition at home and abroad, Mr Netanyahu's boldest gamble appears to have paid off. In just 12 days, he humbled Iran at a cost much lower than even Israel's most optimistic military planners would have dared hope. When he walks into the White House on Monday, the Israeli prime minister's meeting with Donald Trump will therefore have the feel of a Roman triumph. Both men will portray their battlefield success as vindication over the wishy-washiness of their critics. But they are also thinking beyond victory laps. Mr Trump hopes to burnish his peacemaking credentials by brokering another ceasefire in Gaza. His guest will aim higher still, arguing that he has helped birth a new regional order – one that could mark the dawn of a golden era for Israel. Since the horrors of Oct 7 2023, Israel has made a Herculean effort to sever the limbs of the Iranian Hydra – Hamas and Hezbollah – before going for the head itself as it launched its first direct war with a foreign state since 1973. Mr Netanyahu now believes a legacy-defining peace dividend is within reach: new alliances with Arab states, containment of Iran and the isolation – perhaps even the marginalisation – of the Palestinians. Several Arab states are seriously considering the Abraham Accords, says Gen Yossi Kuperwasser, former director-general of Israel's Ministry of Strategic Affairs, referring to the 2020 deal that normalised relations with Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Morocco and Sudan. 'There is a golden opportunity,' he said. 'Iran is weakened. The Iranian threat feared by many countries in the Middle East is much decreased. We are even talking about countries like Syria and Lebanon hopefully joining the Abraham Accords. Who would ever have dreamed that?' But while Mr Netanyahu may have won the war, there is scepticism over whether he is the man to win the peace. Much depends on whether he can reverse Carl von Clausewitz's famous dictum and pursue diplomacy 'as the continuation of war by other means', says Col Eran Lerman, a former deputy national security adviser. That Mr Netanyahu is even in a position to consider reshaping the Middle East would once have seemed miraculous. In 2010 and again in 2012, as he edged towards war with Iran, senior military and intelligence officials were so anxious they took to privately briefing The Telegraph and other Western media on the risks. Iran's Lebanese proxy Hezbollah had amassed such a vast missile arsenal they estimated retaliatory strikes could kill up to 50,000 people. Entire neighbourhoods of Tel Aviv would be reduced to rubble. The political cost – a possible rupture with Barack Obama, then US president – was also deemed too great. In hindsight, Israel may have overestimated the potency of Iran's proxies. By 2024, Israeli missile defences and battlefield intelligence had dramatically improved, allowing the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to defeat Hezbollah in eight weeks last year and Iran itself in under a fortnight. But this was not simply a 12-day campaign of air strikes and covert hits. It was the culmination of 46 years of hostility, dating back to 1979, when Israel made peace with Egypt, formerly its greatest foe, and lost Iran – once its closest regional ally – to revolution. From the outset, the Islamic Republic waged an undeclared war on Israel, pledging its destruction and founding Hezbollah to fight Israeli forces in southern Lebanon. But for years Israeli strategists focused more on Palestinian militants than the Iranian threat – so much so that during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, Israel secretly sold arms to Tehran through the Iran-Contra Affair. After the first Lebanon war, Israel redoubled its efforts to penetrate Hezbollah. But in 2006, when Israeli troops re-entered southern Lebanon, the results were sobering. The 34-day war ended in stalemate. Gen Assaf Orion, the IDF's former head of strategic planning, calls it 'not the brightest campaign we've run'. Few understood that better than Gen Mickey Edelstein, then commander of the Nahal Brigade, who recalls how unprepared his troops were. Accustomed to small operations against Palestinian groups, they struggled with full-scale warfare. Tactical goals were vague. Air support was inconsistent. Orders were sometimes contradictory. 'My brigade was shifted between three different divisions over the war,' he recalled. 'We would go into Lebanon, be pulled back into Israel and sent out again with a different division. A lot of mistakes were made.' After the war, senior commanders privately acknowledged failures in planning, command and intelligence – and lessons were learnt. Soldiers were retrained for major warfare. When Gen Edelstein returned to battle in Gaza in 2014, the forces he led were significantly more capable. Intelligence also underwent wholesale reform, said Col Lerman. 'Intelligence in 2006 was clearly insufficient for the conduct of successful operations. After the war, there was serious self-questioning about how well intelligence was collected and how well it was distributed to forces on the ground.' Amos Yadlin, then head of military intelligence, led sweeping changes that continue to shape Israeli warfare. From 2006 on, Israel grasped the full extent of the Iran-Hezbollah nexus. Of the 121 Israeli soldiers killed in 2006, many died from Iranian-made weapons – some fired by Iranian troops embedded with Hezbollah, according to Israeli officials. In the following years, Iran poured resources into Hezbollah, providing cash, training and ever more sophisticated rockets, missiles and drones. The goal was clear: build a deterrent so fearsome it would stop Israel from ever striking Iran's nuclear programme. But that scale became a vulnerability. 'From a nimble guerrilla organisation, it became an established army, requiring greater management,' said Gen Orion. 'And with that came the exposures and weaknesses of larger organisations.' Israeli intelligence infiltrated Hezbollah deeply. It even sold the group the explosive-laden pagers and walkie-talkies that maimed thousands of Hezbollah operatives over two days last September. Most of Hezbollah's senior leadership, including its overall commander Hassan Nasrallah, was also assassinated thanks to what Col Lerman describes as a 'deeply penetrating, co-ordinated effort stretching back decades'. It wasn't just personnel. Israeli planners had mapped Hezbollah and Iranian missile sites with such precision that they destroyed most launch capabilities before the first volleys were fired. As a result, Israel was able to strike Iran, kill much of its leadership and damage its nuclear programme – and face far more muted retaliation than once feared. Although 28 Israelis were killed and 15,000 lost their homes, neither Hezbollah nor Hamas launched a single rocket in Iran's defence. 'Really the most dramatic aspect of all this is that the organisation exclusively built for one purpose – to punish Israel horrendously if it dared attack Iran – did not fire a single shot during 12 days of war,' said Col Lerman. How should Israel use its dominance? Israel has therefore emerged as the dominant military force in the region, with Mr Netanyahu's allies believing they can dictate a new dispensation for the region. Yet how the Israeli prime minister uses that dominance is now a central question. Since a ceasefire deal with Hezbollah in November, Israel has killed some 300 members of its fighters in targeted strikes – reportedly with the tacit consent of parts of the Lebanese government, which may now be looking to disarm the group entirely. Covert action in Iran is also expected to continue. Military action beyond Israel's borders aside, however, what kind of future Mr Netanyahu envisions is up for debate. There are three possible paths, says Eran Etzion, a former deputy head of Israel's National Security Council and a critic of Mr Netanyahu. One is to 'live by the sword', fighting a 'forever war', a view, he said, preferred by elements on the Right of Mr Netanyahu's coalition, who argue Israel will never be accepted in the region. Another is 'conflict management' – continuing low-intensity fighting with Hamas, expanding West Bank settlements and perhaps trying to remove Palestinians from Gaza even while seeking friendship with Arab states. 'It's a vision of perpetual war with the Palestinians while striking normalisation agreements with other Arab countries,' says Mr Etzion, who believes this is the strategy Mr Netanyahu is most likely to adopt. 'Peace is off the table' The third option – long-term peace-building – is, in Mr Etzion's view, off the table under the present government. Critics warn that Mr Netanyahu's vision of victory risks being both fragile and short-lived if it depends solely on violence. The idea that Israel can indefinitely deter aggression without addressing Palestinian aspirations may prove illusory. Saudi Arabia, the biggest prize of all, insists that any Abraham Accords-style agreement requires progress towards a two-state solution. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is thought to be eager for a deal, but without movement on a Palestinian state, his hands may be tied by public opinion, inflamed by the devastation inflicted on Gaza. Lebanon and Syria may also see advantage in rapprochement with Israel. But public sentiment remains volatile in both countries, too. Ahmed al-Sharaa, Syria's new president, appears conducive to the idea of better ties, particularly as he seeks to rebuild relations with the West. But many members of his group, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), are deeply hostile to Israel. A splinter faction recently claimed responsibility for a suicide bombing in a Damascus church that killed 25 people last month. Mr Sharaa may fear pushing his hardliners too far. Israel, for all its strengths, may overreach. It is 'still numerically and materially inferior to the sum of all its potential enemies', said Gen Orion. 'Which is why it must retain its qualitative military edge and creative diplomacy.' Meanwhile, unless a robust diplomatic agreement emerges, Iran is likely to attempt to rebuild the triad of threats that once made it so formidable: its nuclear programme, ballistic missile arsenal and regional proxy network. 'The regional landscape is shifting dramatically,' said Shai Agmon, a fellow at New College, Oxford and academic director of Molad, a liberal Israeli think tank. 'Israel can reshape it to serve its own security interests and create a thriving regional order – or it can squander it. 'Israel is the strongest force around for now. But in the absence of a stable diplomatic resolution, Iran and its proxies will regroup and try to escalate the situation again. 'And unless the government is willing to consider a path towards regional peace – which necessarily entails some form of two-state solution, an idea it has so far refused even to entertain – it is hard to see how lasting stability will be achieved.'
