Ukraine F-16 pilot killed repelling massive Russian air attack
Ukraine has lost an F-16 aircraft and its pilot while repelling a Russian missile and drone strike, according to country's air force, as heavy fighting in the war, now in its fourth year, grinds on daily with no signs of a ceasefire on the horizon.
After shooting down seven air targets, the plane was damaged and lost altitude overnight, the Ukrainian military said in a statement published on Telegram on Sunday.
'This night, while repelling a massive enemy air attack, a pilot of the 1st class, Lieutenant Colonel Maksym Ustimenko, born in 1993, died on an F-16 aircraft,' it said.
In a separate statement, the air force said Russia launched 537 projectiles against Ukraine, including Shahed drones, cruise and ballistic missiles. Ukraine claimed to have intercepted 475 of them.
According to the Kyiv Independent newspaper, the sound of explosions and strikes was reported in multiple areas across the country, including in southern Mykolaiv, southeastern Zaporizhia and western Lviv.
Ihor Taburets, the governor of central Ukraine's Cherkasy region, said at least six people were injured and civilian infrastructure was damaged in attacks. Three multistorey buildings and a college were damaged in the attack, he said.
Industrial facilities were hit in the southern Ukrainian region of Mykolaiv and the central Dnipropetrovsk region, officials say. Local authorities published photos of high-rise residential buildings with charred walls and broken windows, and rescuers evacuating people.
In Russia, the Ministry of Defence said its forces destroyed three Ukrainian drones in the border regions of Kursk and Rostov, and in Ukraine's annexed Crimean Peninsula.
Russia's state-run RIA Novosti news agency said one person was killed by a Ukrainian drone in the Russian-controlled part of Ukraine's Luhansk region. Moscow also claimed Sunday that it had taken control of the village of Novoukrainka in the partially Russian-occupied Donetsk region.
The latest wave of violence comes after Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Friday he intended to scale back military expenditure and also indicated he was ready for a new round of peace negotiations with Ukraine.
In the past months, Moscow and Kyiv have sent delegations twice to the Turkish city of Istanbul for peace talks, but have made no progress towards ending the conflict, which started after Russia invaded its neighbour more than three years ago.
However, both sides agreed upon and showed cooperation on prisoners' swap.
Meanwhile, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy signed a decree on Sunday setting Ukraine on the road to leaving the antimine Ottawa Convention, according to a document published on his website.
The treaty bans signatories from acquiring, producing, stockpiling or using antipersonnel mines, which are designed to be buried or hidden on the ground, and often cause terrible injuries to victims, including the loss of limbs, who survive their impact.
Rights groups have often decried the long-term risk of unexploded landmines for civilians. More than 160 countries and territories are signatories to the Ottawa Convention, though neither the United States nor Russia has joined.
The decision still must be ratified by the Ukrainian parliament, and the United Nations would then need to be notified.
Confronted with Russia's invasion, 'Ukraine is compelled to give unconditional priority to the security of its citizens and the defence of the state,' Ukraine's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement.
'Russia … uses mines against our military and civilians on a massive scale. We cannot remain bound by conditions when the enemy has no restrictions,' Ukrainian lawmaker Roman Kostenko said on social media.
The treaty withdrawal follows similar decisions by Kyiv's allies – Poland, Finland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia – which are all neighbours of Russia.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Russian forces advance and take first village in Ukraine's Dnipropetrovsk region, state media say
MOSCOW (Reuters) -Russian forces have taken control of the first village in the east-central Ukrainian region of Dnipropetrovsk, Russian state media and war bloggers said on Monday, after Russia took 950 square kms of territory in two months. There was no immediate confirmation from Ukrainian sources or from the Russian Defence Ministry. As Moscow and Kyiv talk of possible peace, the war has intensified with Russian forces carving out a 200 square kilometre (77.22 square miles) chunk of Ukraine's Sumy region and entering the Dnipropetrovsk region last month. The authoritative Ukrainian Deep State map shows that Russia now controls 113,588 square kms of Ukrainian territory, up 943 square km over the two months to June 28. Russia's state RIA news agency quoted a pro-Russian official, Vladimir Rogov, as saying that Russian forces had taken control of the village of Dachnoye just inside the Dnipropetrovsk region. Russia has said it is willing to make peace but that Ukraine must withdraw from the entirety of four regions which Russia mostly controls and which President Vladimir Putin says are now legally part of Russia. Ukraine and its European backers say those terms are tantamount to capitulation and that Russia is not interested in peace and that they will never accept Russian control of a fifth of Ukraine. The areas under Russian control include Crimea, more than 99% of the Luhansk region, over 70% of the Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions, all in the east or southeast, and fragments of the Kharkiv, Sumy and Dnipropetrovsk regions.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
German foreign minister pledges continued support for Ukraine in Kyiv visit
German foreign minister Johann Wadephul is visiting Kyiv in a show of continuing support for Ukraine's fight to repel Russia as US-led international peace efforts fail to make progress. Mr Wadephul is due to meet with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Ukrainian foreign minister Andrii Sybiha. The German minister said in a statement that Germany will help Ukraine 'continue to defend itself successfully – with modern air defence and other weapons, with humanitarian and economic aid'. Our institutions are working on the synchronization of European and Ukrainian sanctions. We are also fully aligning the European sanctions package targeting the regime in Iran, which includes numerous individuals, companies, and entities not only involved in military production… — Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) June 29, 2025 Germany has been Ukraine's second-largest military backer after the United States, whose continuing support is in doubt. However, Berlin has baulked at granting Mr Zelensky's request to provide Ukraine with powerful German- and Swedish-made Taurus long-range missiles. This is due to fears that such a move could enrage the Kremlin and end up drawing Nato into Europe's biggest conflict since the Second World War. Instead, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz pledged in May to help Ukraine develop its own long-range missile systems that would be free of any Western-imposed limitations on their use and targets. Almost all night long, air raid alerts sounded across Ukraine — 477 drones were in our skies, most of them Russian-Iranian Shaheds, along with 60 missiles of various types. The Russians were targeting everything that sustains life. A residential building in Smila was also hit,… — Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський (@ZelenskyyUa) June 29, 2025 Mr Wadephul was accompanied on his trip to Kyiv by German defence industry representatives. Russia's invasion shows no sign of letting up. Its grinding war of attrition along the roughly 620-mile front line and long-range strikes on civilian areas of Ukraine have killed thousands of troops and civilians. The Russian effort to capture more Ukrainian territory has been costly in terms of casualties and damaged armour. But Russian President Vladimir Putin has effectively rejected a ceasefire and has not budged from his war goals. Mr Putin 'doesn't want negotiations, but (Ukrainian) capitulation', Mr Wadephul said in his statement. Russia launched its biggest combined aerial attack against Ukraine at the weekend, Ukrainian officials said, in its escalating bombing campaign that has further dashed hopes for a breakthrough in peace efforts.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
We've been living under Hitler's spell – time to wake up
The age of Hitler was not the Thirties and Forties: it has been our own lifetimes. It began in the Forties, was in full swing by the Sixties and is only now, it seems, coming to an end. In the post-war era, Adolf Hitler has been our most potent, unifying figure. He remains our touchstone and our backstop. In a world where we seem increasingly unable to agree on anything, we can still almost entirely agree on condemning him. Anyone who defends Hitler thereby reveals themselves to be a monster. Whenever we want to condemn someone, we almost instinctively compare them to him. His indisputable evil makes him a unique fixed reference-point in our moral landscape. For example, as soon as Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, memes of Vladimir Putin as Hitler began to appear – even as Putin himself stridently (and absurdly) claimed that his war aim was to 'denazify' Ukraine. Hillary Clinton is one of many people to have called Donald Trump a new Hitler, and compared Trump's 2024 rally at Madison Square Garden, in New York, to the notorious pro-Nazi rally that took place there in 1939. Boris Johnson compared the EU to Hitler; conversely, during the height of Brexit rancour, he himself was regularly depicted with a toothbrush moustache. Even now, it seems, we still define our values with reference to the Nazis. We cannot shake our fascination. I first remember hearing Hitler's name in the late Seventies. I think I was about six years old. I asked my mother something like: who is the worst person ever? Well, who else could she possibly have chosen? Who else would you choose? My next flash of memory – though it might, in reality, have been months later – is of asking her: has anyone ever written a book about Hitler? I remember feeling at the time that my second question was slightly shameful. My instinct was that it was wrong to write a book about a bad man; it was probably wrong even to want to know more about him. But my mother surprised me by pointing to our bookshelves, and a fat hardback with that dreaded name on the spine in barefaced capitals: my father's copy of Alan Bullock's 1952 biography Hitler: A Study in Tyranny. 'Oh, yes,' she said, 'there are lots.' There are indeed, and more every year: not just because Hitler was an enormously consequential figure, but because I'm not the only person to have found his evil fascinating. We cannot stop retelling and reinventing his story, and the endlessly rich story of the war against him. A lifetime later, the films, the books, the ever more tenuous documentaries keep coming; to judge by the schedule of the History Channel, and the lists of many publishers, the Second World War is almost the only event in human history. And historians are forced to share Hitler with storytellers and myth-makers – anyone who wants to stiffen whatever they're drinking with a shot of cheap moral spirits. Sauron, the Daleks, Darth Vader, Lord Voldemort: they're all, unmistakably and unashamedly, Nazi tribute acts. The age of Hitler is the age in which the Western victors of the Second World War have set the terms of global conversation. Many of us have lived the majority of our lives in an era of broad and stable consensus about our most basic shared values. Human lives are fundamentally of equal worth; all human beings have fundamental and inalienable rights; our lives, bodies and consciences belong to us and to no-one else. These truths seem self-evident to the point of banality. Nonetheless, most people in most periods of human history have not believed any such things. And consider what happens when anyone refuses to conform to those supposedly universal anti-Nazi values. For example, in Zimbabwe in the late Nineties, Chenjerai Hunzvi, a particularly brutal enforcer acting on behalf of Robert Mugabe, adopted and gloried in the nickname 'Hitler'. It signalled his ruthlessness to the regime's opponents, to terrify them and to defy any criticism they might level at him. On that level, it worked. For the rest of the world, though, it only cemented the view that Zimbabwe's rulers had become mere predators, and contributed to Mugabe's ostracism on the international stage. Deliberately aligning yourself with Hitler is rare. More commonly, people or movements discredit themselves with unintended or ill-concealed echoes of Nazism. The most obvious examples of this are found in the persistent tendency of many anti-Israeli and anti-Zionist movements around the world to stray, or lapse, into open anti-Semitism. For most of my lifetime, people in Western societies who broke that taboo have automatically ostracised themselves. It's a mark of the end of the age of Hitler that that taboo is clearly decaying. Belligerence, too, can activate our anti-Nazi antibodies. Vladimir Putin may have been surprised that his invasion of Ukraine in 2022 met with such a startlingly different Western response from the one received by his war in Chechnya, or his annexation of Crimea. But those earlier acts hadn't involved a full-scale, unconcealed armed invasion of a neighbouring sovereign state. When Putin tried such an act, it triggered Europe's collective memories of 1938-40. I'm not the first person to notice that the modern world is preoccupied by Nazism, nor that the Nazis have an outsized role in our ethics. But the people who make this point often come from one end of the political spectrum. Take the French writer Renaud Camus, notorious as the originator of the far-Right conspiracy theory the 'Great Replacement': he has lamented what he calls 'the second career of Adolf Hitler', meaning the Führer's career as a moral symbol. Camus and other activists resent how the spectre of Nazism is invoked when they propose mass expulsion of immigrants, purges of the judiciary or restrictions on Muslims' religious freedoms. It's time, these people believe, that we stop being frightened of bogeymen with swastikas. This is not my view. I don't want us to unlearn the lessons of Nazism, lessons that were learned at such a terrible cost. To recognise Hitler as representing a truly exceptional evil is the beginning of wisdom. But this recognition isn't enough. Simply knowing that Hitler was a monster is not an adequate guide to the world we live in. In Britain our instinct has long been to compare every crisis to the Second World War: we even, ludicrously, tried it with Covid-19. There are some evils which the age of Hitler has simply not prepared us to face, and some misleading lessons it has taught us. Shouting 'Nazi!' at each other is a hopeless way to deal with our economic, environmental and demographic crises. And a knee-jerk rejection of 'appeasement', on its own, is a poor guide to international relations in a nuclear age. Our values are more fragile than we think. Our sense of what's right and wrong, our deep convictions about justice and human rights, feel like timeless, self-evident truths, and we can't help looking down on ancestors who didn't have the wit to see them. Nor can we help believing that, now we've grasped those truths, we'll never let go of them. Surely people will always believe in democracy and human rights; surely the arc of the moral universe does bend towards justice? But this is demonstrably, factually incorrect. Our values, my values, your values, are the outcome of a particular historical process, a process in which the Second World War was decisive. And now those values are again on the move. On the Right, across Europe and beyond, the taboo against parties that have a whiff of fascism has virtually gone. Trump's acolytes play with 'Hitler salutes' and the like because they enjoy making their opponents splutter with outrage. Meanwhile, on the Left, the new identity politics of race and gender have challenged ideas that used to be truisms, such as simple egalitarianism, the aspiration to be colour-blind or the conviction that anti-Semitism is an exceptional evil to be avoided at all costs. Indeed both sides, to no-one's surprise, have started spitting venom about Jews again. We can strive to keep the post-1945 consensus going, but the war is falling off the edge of living memory. Like it or not, the age of Hitler, the age when appalled fascination with the Nazis dominated our moral imagination, is coming to an end. The question is: what will come next? The Age of Hitler and How We Will Survive It by Alec Ryrie (Reaktion, £15.95) will be published on July 1. Alec Ryrie will be speaking at Oxford Literary Festival, in partnership with The Telegraph, on July 30. Tickets:
