Ukraine war latest: Ukrainian drones reportedly strike another Russian missile brigade linked to Sumy attack
Ukrainian drones reportedly strike another Russian missile brigade linked to Sumy attack
North Korea earns over $20 billion aiding Russia's war effort, report says
Kyiv doesn't rule out North Korean participation in Russia's assault on Sumy, Kharkiv oblasts
Russia arms 'kamikaze' drones with chemical weapons, Ukraine says
Russia has violated 'energy ceasefire' more than 30 times, Ukraine says
Ukrainian drones struck the Russian city of Shuya in Ivanovo Oblast on April 16, reportedly targeting military infrastructure linked to Russia's 112th Missile Brigade, according to independent Russian media outlet Astra.
The 112th Brigade, along with the 448th Missile Brigade, was involved in a deadly missile strike on the Ukrainian city of Sumy on Palm Sunday on April 13 that killed at least 35 civilians, Ukraine's intelligence said.
The Russian Defense Ministry claimed that seven Ukrainian drones were destroyed over Ivanovo Oblast on April 16. Local authorities reported no fatalities, but two people were reportedly injured and received medical attention.
The Kyiv Independent could not verify the claims.
Photos from the scene show plumes of smoke, and military equipment was deployed in the city, according to Astra.
Shuya is situated on the Teza River, approximately 33 kilometers (20 miles) from the regional center, Ivanovo. It lies about 700 kilometers (435 miles) northeast of the Ukrainian border.
Earlier, Ukraine's General Staff confirmed on April 15 that its forces had also targeted and struck the base of the 448th Missile Brigade in Kursk Oblast.
The operation involved Ukraine's Unmanned Systems Forces, the Special Operations Forces, and the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) and was launched as retaliation for the Sumy attack.
Ukrainian officials have asserted that cluster munitions were used in the Sumy attack, a serious violation of international humanitarian law when used in civilian areas. The international community widely condemned the strike, labeling it a war crime.
Ukraine's military has pledged to track and retaliate against all Russian units involved in targeting civilian populations.
Join our community Support independent journalism in Ukraine. Join us in this fight. Support Us
North Korea's military support for Russia's full-scale war against Ukraine has already earned Pyongyang more than $20 billion, according to South Korea's Institute for Defense Analyses (KIDA), Newsweek reported on April 16.
KIDA's estimates show that most revenue stems from large-scale artillery ammunition shipments. North Korean munitions now account for roughly half of the Russian army's artillery needs in Ukraine, with some front-line units entirely reliant on the shells.
Between August 2023 and March 2025, North Korea reportedly shipped more than 15,800 containers of munitions to Russia. Satellite imagery revealed 64 voyages by Russian ships, potentially delivering between 4.2 million and 5.8 million rounds of North Korean ammunition.
In return, Pyongyang is said to have received advanced Russian weaponry and military technology, rather than cash. The report suggests North Korea prefers "in-kind and technical assistance" that enhances its own defense industry and supports its long-term strategic goals.
North Korea deployed more than 11,000 troops to support Russia's war efforts, most of whom were sent to Russia's Kursk Oblast. Ukraine estimates 5,000-6,000 casualties among them, highlighting the high human cost of Pyongyang's involvement.
The deepening military alliance raises broader regional concerns, with KIDA warning that closer cooperation could lead to Moscow intervening on the Korean Peninsula in the event of a crisis.
"Russia-North Korea military cooperation raises the chances of Russia stepping in on the Korean peninsula if there's an emergency," the report said, urging the international community to adopt measures to sever the alliance.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has described North Korea as a "partner," confirming that a bilateral defense treaty signed in 2024 is now in force. He has also suggested that Pyongyang could be included in future negotiations to end the war in Ukraine.
Read also: Can civilian areas ever be legitimate military targets? We asked an expert
Ukraine does not rule out the possibility that Russia will deploy North Korean troops in the offensives against the northeastern Sumy and Kharkiv oblasts, Andrii Cherniak, spokesperson for Ukraine's military intelligence (HUR), told Japanese broadcaster NHK in comments published on April 15.
The warning follows a statement from Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi, who said on April 9 that Moscow's spring offensive "has actually already begun."
"Unfortunately, we can talk about the evolution, about the successful training of the North Korean military," Cherniak told NHK last week, noting that Pyongyang's forces have adopted Russian tactics of using drones and electronic warfare systems.
According to the intelligence spokesperson, North Korean troops operate in small assault groups and do not require ongoing coordination with Russian commanders.
They are instructed to "reach this or that frontier," after which they move forward independently, Cherniak explained. He added that the soldiers do not constantly communicate with the Russian side.
Cherniak warned that their battlefield experience will be transferred back to North Korea and shared with other units, reinforcing Pyongyang's capabilities and contributing to instability in the Asia-Pacific region.
Cherniak's comments come amid reports of other foreign fighters aiding Moscow. President Volodymyr Zelensky said on April 11 that "several hundred" Chinese nationals are also fighting in Russian ranks. Two were captured in Donetsk Oblast earlier this month.
Beijing has denied any direct involvement in the war, saying it has always appealed to its citizens to avoid armed conflicts.
Russian forces have deployed Shahed-type "kamikaze" drones carrying toxic substances to attack Ukraine, the Center for Countering Disinformation at Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council said on April 16.
Russia has been intensifying its use of chemical agents on the battlefield in Ukraine, with Kyiv recording over 6,000 cases of use of munitions containing hazardous chemicals between February 2023 and 2025.
A capsule with CS gas, a riot control agent, was found in one Russian drone, the center said, adding it had verified the information with Ukraine's security services and the State Emergency Service.
CS gas, also referred to as tear gas, is typically used as a crowd-control agent by law enforcement agencies around the world and is less lethal than other chemical weapons. Its battlefield use is nevertheless banned under the 1925 Geneva Protocol.
"Russian forces may scatter the capsules with poisonous substances to cause harm," the center said on Telegram. At the same time, the agency noted that claims circulating in the media that the drones themselves are coated with poisonous substances have not been confirmed.
Since the beginning of the all-out war, Ukraine's radiation, chemical, and biological intelligence units have been monitoring and recording the use of hazardous chemicals in attacks.
Ukraine struck back at Russia's use of illegal chemical weapons in December 2024, when the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) assassinated Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov, the head of the Russian Armed Forces' radiation, chemical, and biological defense troops.
Read also: As Trump and Moscow align their vision, battle to stabilize Donetsk front rests on a knife edge
Russia has violated a partial ceasefire covering energy infrastructure more than 30 times since it was agreed in March, targeting critical infrastructure across Ukraine, a Ukrainian Foreign Ministry spokesperson said on April 16.
"We regularly send detailed information on each of these violations to partner countries and the headquarters of international organizations," Foreign Ministry spokesperson Heorhii Tykhyi said during a briefing, Ukrinform reported.
Tykhyi noted that three violations were recorded in the past 24 hours. Russian attacks damaged transformers in Mykolaiv Oblast and near Kherson and a power transmission line in Poltava Oblast.
He emphasized that Ukrainian officials are actively sharing information about the breaches with international partners, including the U.S.
The energy ceasefire was intended to shield power infrastructure from attacks and has been in place since March 25. Kyiv has repeatedly accused Moscow of repeatedly disregarding the arrangement.
Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed to a 30-day pause of energy infrastructure strikes during a call with U.S. President Donald Trump on March 18, allegedly ordering a halt of attacks on Ukraine's energy system.
The partial ceasefire agreed to in March also included a maritime truce in the Black Sea. As part of the arrangement, Washington pledged to help facilitate Russia's agricultural and fertilizer exports by easing maritime insurance costs and improving access to ports and payment systems.
The Kremlin stated that its participation in the partial ceasefire in the Black Sea would only begin once certain Western sanctions were lifted.
Ukraine and the United States previously agreed to a complete 30-day ceasefire during talks in Jeddah on March 11. Russia rejected the proposal unless it included concessions that would undermine Kyiv's ability to defend itself, including a full halt to foreign military aid.
While U.S.-led diplomatic efforts to end the war are ongoing, Ukrainian officials say Russia continues to insist on maximalist demands and has shown little willingness to pursue a comprehensive peace agreement. Kyiv maintains it is ready for a complete ceasefire if Moscow agrees to reciprocate.
Throughout the full-scale war, Russia has consistently targeted Ukraine's power grid with missile and drone strikes. In response, Ukraine has used long-range drones to strike oil and gas facilities deep inside Russian territory.
Ukraine War Latest is put together by the Kyiv Independent news desk team, who keep you informed 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If you value our work and want to ensure we have the resources to continue, join the Kyiv Independent community.
Read also: Can civilian areas ever be legitimate military targets? We asked an expert
We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
24 minutes ago
- Politico
Gabbard declassifies new docs in latest push to cast doubt on Russia assessment
It also took no issue with the determination that Putin sought to undermine both American democracy generally and Clinton, who the Russian leader assumed would be the country's next president. 'Most ICA judgments on Russian activities in the U.S. election employed proper tradecraft and were consistent with observed Russian behavior,' the review stated. It found fault mainly with how the intelligence community arrived at its third high-confidence assessment about that year's election: that Putin and others in the Russian government wanted to see Trump in the White House. Obama-era intelligence officials based their conclusion largely on a 'scant, unclear and unverifiable fragment' from a single spy source, the report said. It also argued that the agency did not adhere to spy community standards in sufficiently considering alternative explanations for Putin's actions or informing policymakers of intelligence that called his alleged preference for Trump into question. For example, the report said Russian intelligence services had explosive information on Clinton that they never leaked to the press. That included information allegedly indicating Clinton had significant health issues, the report said. The report heaps significant criticism on then-CIA Director John Brennan. It finds Brennan pushed for inclusion of the assessment on Putin's preference for Trump in the aftermath of the 2016 vote and against the recommendation of some analysts beneath him. Brennan could not be reached for comment. But a spokesperson for Obama offered a rare public rebuke of the allegations after Trump accused the former president and other former senior officials of treason on Tuesday night. The House panel's report in some places echoed the CIA's recent review. Both raise questions about how few intelligence officials were involved in conducting the assessment, and whether Obama administration officials were transparent about the extent to which they relied on the now-debunked Steele dossier, for example. In their statements Wednesday, Warner and Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) both pointed out that a multivolume review produced by the Senate Intelligence Committee did not find the same issues as the 44-page House review.
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Targeting Obama, Trump's retribution campaign takes another turn
Displaying a willingness to weaponize the federal government in ways that were as novel as they were audacious, he took on a wide variety of individuals and institutions — from law firms and universities to journalists and federal bureaucrats — that he felt had crossed him, failed to fall in line or embodied ideological values that he rejected. Advertisement But on Tuesday, Trump reverted to earlier form, resurfacing — in a remarkably unfiltered and aggressive rant — his grievances against Obama, prominent figures in past administrations and others he associated with what he considers a long campaign of persecution dating back to the 2016 election. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Seeking to change the topic at a time when he is under bipartisan political pressure over his unwillingness to do more to release investigative files into Jeffrey Epstein, he said the time had come for his opponents to face criminal charges. President Trump on DNI report on 2016 Russian interference claims: "The leader of the gang was President Obama. Barack Hussein Obama, have you heard of him?...He's guilty. It's not a question. You know, I like to say let's give it time. It's there. He's guilty. This was treason." — CSPAN (@cspan) 'I let her off the hook, and I'm very happy I did, but it's time to start after what they did to me,' Trump said of Hillary Clinton, adding: 'Whether it's right or wrong, it's time to go after people. Obama's been caught directly.' Advertisement 'He's guilty,' he added. 'This was treason. This was every word you can think of.' But if his enemies list was familiar, his capacity to pursue retribution appears to be expanding. Repeatedly in his first term, Trump accused his perceived enemies of treason and tried to push the FBI and Justice Department to indict them. He told his chief of staff that he wanted to 'get the IRS' on those who crossed him. Many of them were investigated, and two of them were the subjects of highly unusual and invasive audits, but none of them were ever charged. The difference now is that Trump, much more so than during his first term, is surrounded by aides and Cabinet members who often appear willing to follow through on his angriest and most authoritarian impulses. The Justice Department, whose top ranks are populated by loyalists, including two of his own lawyers, has shown a willingness to carry out Trump's personal agenda. The department has dismissed prosecutors involved not just in the criminal cases brought against him two years ago by a special counsel but also those who pursued Jan. 6 rioters. The department also dropped a prosecution against New York City's mayor after he agreed to help Trump on immigration issues. And the administration also targeted first-term officials who became public critics of Trump, like Miles Taylor and Chris Krebs. But now the efforts to target top officials from previous administrations appears to be gaining momentum. The intelligence community under Trump is engaged in a campaign seeking to show that Obama and his aides wrongly sought to tie Trump to Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election in Trump's favor -- and that some of Obama's officials and perhaps Obama himself should be held criminally liable. Advertisement John Ratcliffe, the CIA director, conducted a review that was deeply critical of the Obama administration and former CIA director John Brennan. Ratcliffe wrote on social media that the review had shown that the process was corrupt and then he made a criminal referral to the FBI. Trump's director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, issued another report last week including documents that she asserted showed that there was a 'treasonous conspiracy' in 2016 by the Obama administration to harm Trump. On Wednesday, Gabbard released more material: a 2017 House Intelligence Committee report that took issue with elements of the Obama administration's assessment. Those House findings were at odds with a bipartisan series of Senate reports that later affirmed the work of the CIA and the other intelligence agencies. The Trump administration reports have so far provided little or no evidence of wrongdoing by Obama or his aides, but Sunday, Trump posted a fake video of Obama being apprehended by FBI agents in the Oval Office. It is not yet clear whether even a compliant Justice Department will be willing to open criminal investigations into Obama or other prominent Democrats and Trump critics, or be able to find grounds to do so. Even if prosecutors lodged charges, prosecutions could be difficult. Obama, like Trump, presumably enjoys immunity from prosecution for any official acts while in office, based on the Supreme Court's landmark presidential immunity ruling last year. But Trump often seems intent on using the federal government to subject his foes to the same kinds of scrutiny he has undergone. Advertisement Infuriated by what he has sought to characterize as 'witch hunt' investigations and legal proceedings against him that started with the investigation into the 2016 election and morphed into the obstruction-of-justice investigation into him, he has levied crippling executive orders against law firms that had even fleeting connections to those episodes. That process has pressured many of the firms into committing nearly $1 billion in pro bono legal work to causes he favors. Casting universities as breeding grounds for antisemitism and a brand of woke liberalism that he feels has opposed and denigrated him at every turn, his administration made an example of Harvard, using a whole-of-government approach to demand major changes. He pelted Harvard with major cuts to its research funding, tried to take visas away from its international students and launched a series of invasive and onerous investigations into the school. Harvard is now negotiating a settlement with the White House, but the administration kept up the pressure by informing the school of a new investigation Wednesday. He took an ax to what he saw as pockets of 'deep state' resistance inside his own government. He has sought to cow news organizations, barring The Associated Press from the White House press pool, extracting big financial settlements from the owners of ABC and CBS in disputes over their coverage, and filing suit against The Wall Street Journal for its reporting on his ties to Epstein. But, as his own supporters acknowledge, none of that is as important as putting one of his perceived enemies behind bars. 'If you tell the base of people, who support you, of deep state treasonous crimes, election interference, blackmail, and rich powerful elite evil cabals, then you must take down every enemy of The People,' Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., posted Sunday. 'If not. The base will turn and there's no going back. Dangling bits of red meat no longer satisfies. They want the whole steak dinner and will accept nothing else.' Advertisement This article originally appeared in .
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Trump Administration Live Updates: Judge Denies Request to Unseal Epstein Grand Jury Transcripts in Florida
Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, has contended that the intelligence work in 2016 was not only flawed but also amounted to a conspiracy against President Trump. Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, released a document on Wednesday that she said undermined the conclusion of intelligence agencies during the Obama administration that Russia favored the election of Donald J. Trump in 2016. The document was a report that the House Intelligence Committee originally drafted in 2017, when Republicans led the panel. The report took issue with the conclusion reached in December 2016 that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia had favored Mr. Trump. The new material provides some interesting insights into the development of the review of Russian activity by American spy agencies, and the debate over their assessment. But none of the new information changes the fundamental view that Russia meddled in the election and that Mr. Putin hoped to damage Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee. On Sunday, Ms. Gabbard promised to refer the details of her findings to the Justice Department. And on Wednesday, she said in a social media post that Mr. Trump had ordered the declassification of the report and that the information showed the 'most egregious weaponization and politicization of intelligence in American history.' The Obama administration, Ms. Gabbard wrote, was 'promoting the LIE that Vladimir Putin and the Russian government helped President Trump win the 2016 election.' Ms. Gabbard has won praise from Mr. Trump for her investigation into the intelligence findings and spoke at length about how the 2016 assessment was part of a witch hunt against him. The president has been under sharp criticism for his handling of documents related to the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, and his attacks on the Obama administration appear to be part of a distract-and-deflect strategy. Ms. Gabbard reiterated her assertion that the intelligence assessment was intended to undermine Mr. Trump's presidency. 'In doing so, they conspired to subvert the will of the American people,' she wrote, 'working with their partners in the media to promote the lie, in order to undermine the legitimacy of President Trump, essentially enacting a years-long coup against him.' The report was released with relatively few redactions, prompting criticism from Democrats. 'Given the rushed and unusual 'declassification' process the D.N.I. has implemented, I fear that the public release of this report could compromise sensitive sources and methods and endanger our national security,' said Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, referring to the director of national intelligence. Officials familiar with the matter said that another, more heavily redacted version took care to hide more information about U.S. sources and had been considered for release. Ms. Gabbard said on social media that Mr. Trump had declassified the report. Kash Patel, now Mr. Trump's F.B.I. director, was a key author of the report released on Wednesday, according to officials. Only Republicans on the committee participated in the drafting of the 2017 report and revisions in 2020. The House report found that most of the judgments made by the intelligence community in 2016 were sound. But it argued that the work was rushed, as a recent tradecraft analysis by the C.I.A. also found. The assessment that Mr. Putin had favored Mr. Trump did not follow the 'professional criteria' of the other findings, the House report said. The findings were at odds with a bipartisan series of Senate reports from a committee that included Marco Rubio, then a Republican senator from Florida and now Mr. Trump's secretary of state. The Senate Intelligence Committee affirmed the work of the C.I.A. and the other intelligence agencies on the 2016 assessment. The judgment about Mr. Putin's preference, the House report said, was based on a single source who was biased against the Russian government. The raw intelligence was fragmentary and lacked context, the report added. The detailed discussion of the source has not been made public before, although the U.S. decision to extract and relocate him, first to Virginia, has become public. Russia officials made the source's identity public and said he was an aide to a senior Russian official. The 2017 report portrays the information as incomplete and subject to interpretation, pointing to a single piece of intelligence from the man that said Mr. Putin had decided to leak emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee because Mrs. Clinton had better odds of the election and Mr. Trump, 'whose victory Putin was counting, most likely would not be able to pull off a convincing victory.' But current and former American officials pushed back on the characterization of the source's intelligence, saying he was well placed and had provided sound information to the United States on Mr. Putin's intentions. While details about the debate over the source are new, the overall view of the House Intelligence Committee was well known, and members frequently took issue with the finding. But the full report with details of the C.I.A.'s work on the 2016 intelligence assessment has not been released. Attacking the conclusions of the 2016 assessment that Russia sought to denigrate Mrs. Clinton and help Mr. Trump has been a hobby horse of some of the president's supporters. Republicans have long taken particular aim at the idea that the Kremlin favored Mr. Trump, arguing instead that Russia was simply trying to sow chaos or undermine democratic institutions. The attacks on the documents have intensified in recent weeks as first the C.I.A. and then Ms. Gabbard's office have raised questions about the effort. Bipartisan Senate reviews have validated the C.I.A.'s work in 2016, and John H. Durham, a special prosecutor appointed by Attorney General William P. Barr during Mr. Trump's first term, also failed to find any evidence undermining the intelligence agencies' conclusions. While Mr. Trump's Republican supporters criticized the assessment during his first term, the president focused much of his ire on Robert S. Mueller III, the former F.B.I. director appointed to investigate any ties between the Trump campaign and Russian officials. The newly released House document also takes a close look at the role that a dossier prepared by a former British intelligence officer, Christopher Steele, played in the 2016 assessment. Trump administration officials have maintained that the 2016 intelligence review was tainted by unverified information in the so-called Steele dossier. A classified annex to the report mentioned the dossier, but former officials said the C.I.A. did not take it seriously and did not allow it to influence their assessment. Few if any of the claims in Mr. Steele's work about Mr. Trump have been verified in the ensuing years. In interviews this week, former officials insisted the Steele dossier did not influence the findings of the 2016 assessment. But the House report took issue with that, noting that in one of the bullet points in the original, classified version, the assessment referred readers to the annex discussing the dossier. The House report said the two-page annex summarizing the dossier 'misrepresented the significance and credibility' of Mr. Steele's work. The dossier 'was written in an amateurish conspiracy and political propaganda tone that invited skepticism, if not ridicule, over its content,' the report continued. The House review also said one C.I.A. officer said he confronted John O. Brennan, the agency's director at the time, with the flaws of the dossier. Mr. Brennan, according to the House report, acknowledged the flaws but added, 'doesn't it ring true.' Mr. Brennan, who emerged as one of the sharpest critics of Mr. Trump, has long denied that the dossier colored the assessment and said that he backed C.I.A. officers who wanted it kept out of the main body. He has said he placed the dossier in the annex at the insistence of the F.B.I. Former Obama administration officials acknowledged in hindsight that including the unverified dossier in the annex was a mistake, given the justifiable criticisms Republicans had of Mr. Steele's assertions. But the officials said the F.B.I. felt it had no choice but to include it in the annex to avoid appearing as if they were hiding something from Mr. Trump. C.I.A. officials wanted to be sure the F.B.I. signed on to the overall assessments, and they felt that the bureau would do that only if the annex was included, former officials said. The existence of the dossier was initially exposed by CNN, and then Buzzfeed published its contents. Since Mr. Trump's return to office, the C.I.A. and Ms. Gabbard have tried to sow doubts about the assessment. Ms. Gabbard has contended that the intelligence work in 2016 was not just flawed but also amounted to a conspiracy against Mr. Trump. On Friday, Ms. Gabbard issued a report that she said exposed a 'treasonous conspiracy,' claiming senior Obama administration officials had pressured the intelligence committee to change its views on Russian meddling. The documents presented showed that the Obama administration was eager to quickly complete its work but not that the intelligence agencies were altering their conclusions. Mr. Trump has praised Ms. Gabbard, after criticizing her work just weeks earlier. Referring to Ms. Gabbard's report, Mr. Trump said on Tuesday that while in office, President Barack Obama 'was trying to lead a coup.' Ms. Gabbard has said she wants to end the weaponization of intelligence. She has condemned politicians for what she sees as the use of selective bits of intelligence against their opponents. While she has portrayed the release of the documents as a corrective to the errors and missteps of the Obama administration, former officials and even some allies of Ms. Gabbard have said her effort to throw a lifeline to Mr. Trump is an example of the very politicization she has vowed to stamp out.
