International Criminal Court: Investigate Russian Airstrikes And Drone Attacks On Civilians
(KYIV, June 24, 2025)—The International Criminal Court (ICC) should investigate a pattern of recent Russian missile and drone attacks targeting Ukrainian civilians, following one of the deadliest assaults on civilian areas in recent months, Fortify Rights said today. During the night of June 16 to the morning of June 17, a nearly nine-hour-long assault struck multiple civilian locations in Ukraine, including the cities of Kyiv, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Chernihiv, Kharkiv, Sumy, and Poltava. According to the Ukrainian State Emergency Service, the attack killed at least 28 civilians and injured more than 140 in Kyiv alone and caused damage to civilian buildings in eight districts of the capital.
Furthermore, reportedly at least nine more civilians died during Russian drone and missile attacks on Kyiv on the morning of Monday, June 23.
'Russia's egregious violations of the laws of war must not be ignored,' said Aliona Kazanska, Human Rights Associate at Fortify Rights. 'Even though Putin's top military commanders have already been indicted by the International Criminal Court for their massive attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure, such attacks continue unabated, causing many civilian casualties.'
Fortify Rights interviewed six survivors and eyewitnesses to recent attacks, including the June 16–17 missile and drone attacks. Fortify Rights also visited the site of a Russian attack and documented the destruction to civilian infrastructure caused by the attacks.
Yulia, 40, a Kyiv resident who survived the June 16-17 attack, described to Fortify Rights the moment her apartment building, where she lives with her husband and young daughter, was struck by a Russian missile:
[On June 16th] It all started with the [drones], and the air defense shooting them down. When they [drones] started arriving, we went down to the first floor. … Then it became all quiet. We returned to the ninth floor. We still have a small child, so we put her to bed. We heard flying [drones] again. My husband and I went down to the first floor and sat on the floor. It's literally been 15 minutes. … Sitting on the floor in the corridor, in a half-asleep state, I was holding my baby. Then I just saw from the other end of the corridor, from where the shock wave came, the doors flew open, and everything was covered in sand and plaster. It just took a second. In a second, everyone was down. Then I didn't know what to do. … A lot of wounded people were around me.
Yulia added: 'You know, we live on the ninth floor, where the missile struck. If we were at home there, we would not be [alive] anymore.'
The June 16-17 attack was not an isolated incident. Just days earlier, on June 10, Russian forces launched waves of missile and drone attacks targeting residential areas and civilian infrastructure. Iryna, 53, a resident of Kyiv, told Fortify Rights her experience of the June 10 attack:
I did not sleep [because of the incoming attack alerts], and my mother is paralyzed … we had just put her to bed and were about to go to bed. Suddenly, there was a bang! It was deafening, louder than it's ever been. And we also heard the glass shattering. … There was debris almost all over the kitchen. My mother had such thick curtains, and the blinds were also thick. This must have protected her. But we were left without windows.
During the early morning hours of April 24 in the Sviatoshynskyi District of Kyiv, Russian forces launched a massive aerial night-time drone and missile attack, which killed 13 people and injured 87, including six children. Fortify Rights spoke with Olena, 64, a survivor of the attack:
It was sometime after midnight. I heard the alarm. … I didn't react, I just got up, covered my husband [with a blanket], and went to bed. … Then I heard an explosion that was so loud for us. … I opened the door and was going to sit in the corridor, and then [the shockwave of the explosion] hit me. I didn't hear the second explosion. It was just so dark and warm. … I [lost consciousness] and just remember waking up on the floor a minute later.
She continued:
My husband was saved. … He was under a heavy carpet and only had small cuts. … Both my arm and leg were injured. … Now, when the air raid alert goes off, I feel paralyzed with fear. I can't hold it back. I want to give up everything and run somewhere. I used to be very calm about all this.
According to the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), on June 16-17, Russia launched 440 long-range drones and 32 missiles into Ukraine, of which 175 drones and 14 missiles were directed at Kyiv. OHCHR also reported that in the first 17 days of June, Russia launched at least 3,340 drones mostly manufactured by Iran and 135 missiles at Ukrainian targets, mostly striking civilian areas.
The recent wave of Russian aerial attacks directed against Ukraine fails to distinguish between civilian populations and military targets, and should be considered war crimes, Fortify Rights said. It continues a pattern of attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure since the beginning of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, showing clearly that Russia continues to violate the laws of war to a degree that reaches the level of crimes against humanity.
International humanitarian law, also known as the laws of war, governs the conduct of parties to international armed conflicts. Article 43 of Additional Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions states that:
In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.
Further, Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the ICC explicitly categorizes 'Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population' as a war crime.
Before Ukraine ratified the Rome Statute of the ICC in 2024, Ukrainian authorities twice accepted the court's jurisdiction. On April 9, 2014, Ukraine accepted the ICC's jurisdiction under Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute pertaining to acts committed in Ukraine from November 21, 2013, to February 22, 2014. On September 8, 2015, Ukraine extended the court's jurisdiction to focus on alleged crimes committed throughout Ukraine from February 20, 2014, onwards. Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute allows non-ICC member states to accept the jurisdiction of the Court.
As part of the investigation into war crimes and crimes against humanity during Russian aggression against Ukraine, the ICC has already issued an arrest warrant against Lieutenant General Sergei Kobylash and Admiral Viktor Sokolov for directing attacks at civilian objects and for causing excessive harm to civilians or damage to civilian objects.
'Russia's continuing direct attacks against Ukrainian civilians and civilian infrastructure demand international attention and accountability,' said Aliona Kazanska. 'The International Criminal Court must respond to this pattern of deliberate aerial attacks against civilians, and countries around the world must intensify their efforts to block the Russian military from continuing its attacks against Ukrainian civilians by strengthening sanctions and blocking its access to weapons technology.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
3 days ago
- Scoop
International Criminal Court: Investigate Russian Airstrikes And Drone Attacks On Civilians
(KYIV, June 24, 2025)—The International Criminal Court (ICC) should investigate a pattern of recent Russian missile and drone attacks targeting Ukrainian civilians, following one of the deadliest assaults on civilian areas in recent months, Fortify Rights said today. During the night of June 16 to the morning of June 17, a nearly nine-hour-long assault struck multiple civilian locations in Ukraine, including the cities of Kyiv, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Chernihiv, Kharkiv, Sumy, and Poltava. According to the Ukrainian State Emergency Service, the attack killed at least 28 civilians and injured more than 140 in Kyiv alone and caused damage to civilian buildings in eight districts of the capital. Furthermore, reportedly at least nine more civilians died during Russian drone and missile attacks on Kyiv on the morning of Monday, June 23. 'Russia's egregious violations of the laws of war must not be ignored,' said Aliona Kazanska, Human Rights Associate at Fortify Rights. 'Even though Putin's top military commanders have already been indicted by the International Criminal Court for their massive attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure, such attacks continue unabated, causing many civilian casualties.' Fortify Rights interviewed six survivors and eyewitnesses to recent attacks, including the June 16–17 missile and drone attacks. Fortify Rights also visited the site of a Russian attack and documented the destruction to civilian infrastructure caused by the attacks. Yulia, 40, a Kyiv resident who survived the June 16-17 attack, described to Fortify Rights the moment her apartment building, where she lives with her husband and young daughter, was struck by a Russian missile: [On June 16th] It all started with the [drones], and the air defense shooting them down. When they [drones] started arriving, we went down to the first floor. … Then it became all quiet. We returned to the ninth floor. We still have a small child, so we put her to bed. We heard flying [drones] again. My husband and I went down to the first floor and sat on the floor. It's literally been 15 minutes. … Sitting on the floor in the corridor, in a half-asleep state, I was holding my baby. Then I just saw from the other end of the corridor, from where the shock wave came, the doors flew open, and everything was covered in sand and plaster. It just took a second. In a second, everyone was down. Then I didn't know what to do. … A lot of wounded people were around me. Yulia added: 'You know, we live on the ninth floor, where the missile struck. If we were at home there, we would not be [alive] anymore.' The June 16-17 attack was not an isolated incident. Just days earlier, on June 10, Russian forces launched waves of missile and drone attacks targeting residential areas and civilian infrastructure. Iryna, 53, a resident of Kyiv, told Fortify Rights her experience of the June 10 attack: I did not sleep [because of the incoming attack alerts], and my mother is paralyzed … we had just put her to bed and were about to go to bed. Suddenly, there was a bang! It was deafening, louder than it's ever been. And we also heard the glass shattering. … There was debris almost all over the kitchen. My mother had such thick curtains, and the blinds were also thick. This must have protected her. But we were left without windows. During the early morning hours of April 24 in the Sviatoshynskyi District of Kyiv, Russian forces launched a massive aerial night-time drone and missile attack, which killed 13 people and injured 87, including six children. Fortify Rights spoke with Olena, 64, a survivor of the attack: It was sometime after midnight. I heard the alarm. … I didn't react, I just got up, covered my husband [with a blanket], and went to bed. … Then I heard an explosion that was so loud for us. … I opened the door and was going to sit in the corridor, and then [the shockwave of the explosion] hit me. I didn't hear the second explosion. It was just so dark and warm. … I [lost consciousness] and just remember waking up on the floor a minute later. She continued: My husband was saved. … He was under a heavy carpet and only had small cuts. … Both my arm and leg were injured. … Now, when the air raid alert goes off, I feel paralyzed with fear. I can't hold it back. I want to give up everything and run somewhere. I used to be very calm about all this. According to the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), on June 16-17, Russia launched 440 long-range drones and 32 missiles into Ukraine, of which 175 drones and 14 missiles were directed at Kyiv. OHCHR also reported that in the first 17 days of June, Russia launched at least 3,340 drones mostly manufactured by Iran and 135 missiles at Ukrainian targets, mostly striking civilian areas. The recent wave of Russian aerial attacks directed against Ukraine fails to distinguish between civilian populations and military targets, and should be considered war crimes, Fortify Rights said. It continues a pattern of attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure since the beginning of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, showing clearly that Russia continues to violate the laws of war to a degree that reaches the level of crimes against humanity. International humanitarian law, also known as the laws of war, governs the conduct of parties to international armed conflicts. Article 43 of Additional Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions states that: In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives. Further, Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the ICC explicitly categorizes 'Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population' as a war crime. Before Ukraine ratified the Rome Statute of the ICC in 2024, Ukrainian authorities twice accepted the court's jurisdiction. On April 9, 2014, Ukraine accepted the ICC's jurisdiction under Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute pertaining to acts committed in Ukraine from November 21, 2013, to February 22, 2014. On September 8, 2015, Ukraine extended the court's jurisdiction to focus on alleged crimes committed throughout Ukraine from February 20, 2014, onwards. Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute allows non-ICC member states to accept the jurisdiction of the Court. As part of the investigation into war crimes and crimes against humanity during Russian aggression against Ukraine, the ICC has already issued an arrest warrant against Lieutenant General Sergei Kobylash and Admiral Viktor Sokolov for directing attacks at civilian objects and for causing excessive harm to civilians or damage to civilian objects. 'Russia's continuing direct attacks against Ukrainian civilians and civilian infrastructure demand international attention and accountability,' said Aliona Kazanska. 'The International Criminal Court must respond to this pattern of deliberate aerial attacks against civilians, and countries around the world must intensify their efforts to block the Russian military from continuing its attacks against Ukrainian civilians by strengthening sanctions and blocking its access to weapons technology.'
Scoop
3 days ago
- Scoop
UN Rights Mission Condemns Civilian Toll In Deadly Missile Strikes On Ukraine
25 June 2025 At least 24 people were reported killed and over 300 injured – including 32 children – when ballistic missiles struck Ukraine's Dnipro and Odesa regions on Monday and Tuesday, the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU) said on Wednesday. The attacks destroyed homes, schools, hospitals, and other civilian infrastructure, and left hundreds wounded. 'The attacks struck during the day when civilians were at work, on trains, or at school,' said Danielle Bell, head of HRMMU. 'The timing alone made the high number of civilian casualties entirely foreseeable.' On 23 June, two ballistic missiles launched by Russian forces hit Lyceum No. 1, a middle school in Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi, Odesa region. Although the school year had ended, staff and students were present for administrative work. The strike killed three educators and injured 14 others, including two boys. The school, which served over 700 students, sustained critical damage. No military objective HRMMU, which visited the attacks sites, reported no evidence of military presence at the school, and people confirmed that no military presence had been stationed there. 'The school in Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi was not a military objective,' Ms. Bell said. 'Yet it was hit by two ballistic missiles, killing educators and injuring children.' The following day, 24 June, missiles struck an industrial area of Dnipro city at around 11 AM local time. The blast shattered windows in nearby schools, hospitals and residential buildings. HRMMU confirmed that two dormitories were hit, injuring numerous residents. A nearby passenger train was also impacted – windows blown out by the shockwave – injuring more than 20 travellers, according to a UN monitor onboard. A troubling trend These strikes followed a series of other attacks in June that have resulted in significant civilian harm, including in Kyiv city on 17 and 23 June, according to the human rights mission. Civilian casualties in the first five months of 2025 were nearly 50 percent higher than during the same period last year, with increases typically seen during the summer months. 'Ballistic missiles, when used in densely populated areas, cause predictable and widespread harm to civilians, as demonstrated by these recent attacks,' Ms. Bell said. 'The rising civilian casualties reflect the severity of that risk.'
The Spinoff
3 days ago
- The Spinoff
World War III's a meme now, but is it a useful way to talk about escalating global conflict?
After US strikes on three nuclear facilities in Iran, social media has been flooded with memes about a world war starting. Two experts explain why we might be concerned about this – and why it might not be a useful reference today. Being alive and online in 2025 is to live in a permanent state of whiplash. Responses to global events career along the same algorithmic highways, and bear the same weight, as ads for pubic hair razors. The signals that give information a hierarchy aren't being received by many. Everything is noise. Anything can be parody, fact or a lie and anyone can be an authority. Since news broke of US military strikes on three of Iran's nuclear facilities over the weekend, after a week of conflict between Israel and Iran prompted by Israel's attacks on Iranian nuclear and military sites, my social media feed has been a jarring and completely normalised juxtapositional hell. A lava flow from a genre I'll call comedic millennial nihilism pushed videos about being conscripted to fight in World War III, AirPods still in as Nicki Minaj's 'Starship' dropped, alongside heated debates about whether the costuming of the actress playing Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy in Ryan Murphy's latest series is right, surreal videos of a saxophonist playing on a Beirut rooftop as missiles flew overhead, and ads for 'scaping your bush. Doing it for the lols and the views aside, the addition of the Israel/Iran/US conflict to an already large slate of destruction, war, suffering and injustice around the globe seems to have tipped people, especially those who belong to the 'polycrisis generation', into a new phase of fatalism and concern. Search queries for 'world war three' in New Zealand hit 100 in Google's search trend index on June 23 (a value of 100 is peak popularity for a term). This was accompanied by searches for 'has world war three started' and 'is world war three happening now'. A YouGov survey in May showed that between 41% and 55% of people in Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Spain think that another world war is likely to occur within the next five to 10 years. Talk of World War III isn't confined to anxious citizens either. US president Donald Trump warned Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy that he was 'gambling with World War III' during their heated Oval Office meeting in February. Trump's former adviser on Russia, Fiona Hill, has warned of the prospect of World War III. When asked if she wanted the job before being confirmed, Tulsi Gabbard, Trump's director of national intelligence, said, 'If there's a way I can help achieve the goal of preventing World War III and nuclear war? Of course.' A world war, using conventional definitions, is an international conflict that involves most or all of the world's major powers. Alexander Gillespie, a professor of law at the University of Waikato and author of a series of books on the causes of war, says the essence of a world war involves superpowers 'really going for each other' and extends beyond regional or proxy conflicts. The terminology is also distinctly attached to two wars, the last of which ended 80 years ago. In the context of today's world, what does 'world war' mean, and how likely is a repeat of global conflict at that scale? Both Gillespie and Robert Patman, professor of international relations at the University of Otago, agree that another world war, as we might understand it using the previous two as reference points, isn't likely. Both cite the enormous amount of technological, political and economic change since the second world war. Gillespie cuts to the chase, focusing on the technology of war. 'If you get to a third world war where you have got the superpowers unleashing, it's nothing like what would happen in World War II. It's an extinction event.' To be clear, he is referencing the detonation of nuclear weapons. Gillespie notes that some people might have images of Hiroshima in their minds when they imagine nuclear war, something horrific but able to be observed from afar without widespread consequence. As he points out, the device used in Hiroshima was 15 kilotons, and it's now common to have devices over 150 kilotons. 'The warfare in the 21st Century is as different [to the two world wars] as the warfare of the 20th century was to Napoleonic times. It's such a quantum leap, and yet, many people assume that it's still going to be like World War II,' he says. The prospect of a nuclear apocalypse isn't comforting, but Gillespie's key point is that warfare has changed so drastically since World War II, with more than 9,000 nuclear weapons now in existence, that 'world war' as we might think of it isn't really a useful framework to use in 2025 – and that the prospect of nuclear obliteration isn't something 'sane, rational' people or actors want. 'There's no winner. There's absolutely no winner. You don't get up to go to work the next day, it's not something that humanity can survive, and so we've got to use everything in our power to make sure that it doesn't occur,' he says. The risk, he says, is posed by the accidental, inadvertent or non-rational actor trying to trigger it. Patman doesn't think talk of a new cold war or World War III does justice to how different the world is now compared to the 1930s or the circumstances in which the cold war emerged from the second world war, nor does he think that a third world war is imminent. He points to the 'abysmal' failure of unilateral action taken by superpowers, as well as the world's interconnectivity and economic interdependencies, as some of the reasons why he thinks we're not staring down the barrel of a repeat of either. Pushing against the 'drumbeat' of calls that say we're on the verge of World War III because of the actions of one superpower in specific regions, Patman points to the track record of great powers acting unilaterally. He cites the 'fiasco' that was the US in Iraq, China in the South China Sea and Vladimir Putin saying Russian military action in Ukraine would be over in a week. He points to a 21st-century paradox of power: 'Great powers today, like the United States and China, are more powerful than the great powers of the past, but their scope for using that power has been reduced.' Patman's reasoning is that many of the problems we face, such as climate change, pandemics, transnational terrorism and financial contagion, do not respect borders and cannot be fixed unilaterally. 'Putin and Trump are fragile monsters, in the sense that they can't run the world. If they could, they would. They can't,' Patman says. Trump's frustration at what might be categorised as an example of the impotence of superpowers was on full display yesterday when he lost his rag about an initial faltering in the Iran and Israel ceasefire. 'We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the fuck they're doing,' he said. Economic interdependence between superpowers creates another constraint for superpower-on-superpower warfare. 'The economies of the two biggest superpowers are inextricably interlinked,' Patman notes. China's rise came through the global market economy, with the US as its top export destination. The imposition and walkback of tariffs highlights this, says Patman. 'You can impose tariffs on other countries, but they come back to bite you.' Our interconnectedness, says Patman, also 'makes decision-making, particularly for authoritarian governments, but also for democratic governments' more difficult. 'Being able to create a scenario where you contemplate a global war would be a big ask. [Interconnectedness] has created what Clausewitz, the great Prussian strategist, would call friction. It's more difficult for governments now to seal off their population from the rest of the world, and to prepare them for prolonged confrontation.' Patman also thinks there are some inauthentic and politically motivated reasons for stirring up fear about World War III, citing Trump's words to Zelenskyy and Gabbard's stirring and war-mongering patriotism. 'It's a way of pressurising people to accept what they would not otherwise accept.' If you were being unkind about the stirring up of war rhetoric and casual mentions of World War III, you might quote Harry Frankfurter, who said, 'Bullshit is unavoidable whenever circumstances require someone to talk without knowing what he is talking about.' If nihilism is your poison, the fervent posting about it is Neil Postman 's nightmare made real, and we are 'amusing ourselves to death '. Patman holds a more empathetic and measured view. 'Some people genuinely are concerned, and that genuine concern is linked to a lack of global leadership,' he says. He lays that at the feet of the 'completely dysfunctional' and 'marginalised' UN Security Council, which is at the mercy of the power of veto held by France, Russia, China, the United States and the United Kingdom. He cites the failure of the United States to deliver a ceasefire in Gaza, while using its power on the Security Council to veto UN calls for an unconditional ceasefire five times, as an example of why people have lost faith in global leadership and the failure of unilateral action by superpowers. Patman does have hope, though. He thinks we're in an 'awful international transition', 'caught between a picture of alarm and hope'. For him, the hope lies in some of the reasons he doesn't believe we're on the brink of World War III: our interconnectedness and interdependency. He looks at the problems that don't respect borders and thinks of them as a stimulus for ultimate cooperation. He also thinks there's an opportunity for 'the rise of the rest', the countries that aren't superpowers but could still take on global leadership roles if they spoke up. He does see some parallels between now and the 1930s, however, but notes that one of the main lessons from that time was that you should not reward aggression. Gillespie has been pushing back on the World War III rhetoric 'because I don't want people to start freaking out that the end of time is just around the corner'. But he acknowledges volatility, particularly with regard to non-rational actors and a US president who doesn't believe in the rules-based order, and risk, especially 'if we don't get our shit together'. Both Patman and Gillespie offer some reassurance about the likelihood of a world war occurring that counters the fervour and panic of our hierarchy-free information environment, but there are uncomfortable truths in what both experts say. The world has undergone a fundamental shift, one that raises questions about whether the concept of a world war is an outdated map for navigating genuinely new terrain and whether the stakes are now too high for superpowers to engage in direct, large-scale military conflict. However, the continued escalation of proxy and regional conflicts, a lack of global leadership, nuclear armament, and the involvement of 'non-rational actors' offer more than enough reason to understand why our Google search histories and social media feeds appear as they do. We're not idiots, we're just anxious, exhausted and waiting for the rise of the rest. The whiplash continues.
