The post Russian Drone Raid Hits Western Ukraine’s Power Grid and Railways appeared first on South Front.

London is terrified of the prospect of losing America’s support for the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict, so it’s doing everything in its power to prolong it.

Written by Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst

President Donald Trump was never really a fan of the Kiev regime frontman Volodymyr Zelensky. Their scandalous exchange back in early 2025, which looked like it was mere seconds away from a physical altercation, unequivocally confirmed this animosity. Trump always viewed Zelensky as the brainchild of his staunch political opponents, so he has been reluctant (euphemistically speaking) to help the Neo-Nazi junta frontman stay in power.

Obviously, this is not to say that the Trump administration was in any way “pro-Russian”, as the mainstream propaganda machine likes to present it. Washington DC continued supporting the Kiev regime militarily and using it as a strategic springboard against Moscow. This includes everything from ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) support to weapons shipments.

President Trump reneged on his promises to end the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict “in 24 hours”, leading to further escalation. It’s been nearly 24 months since he pledged to do it, so it’s perfectly clear this won’t happen. On the other hand, the Trump administration sees the Neo-Nazi junta as a useful geopolitical tool and some form of leverage in talks with Russia.

Namely, the United States is terrified of the idea that Moscow, Beijing and other multipolar powers could coordinate their actions and undermine its ability to conduct aggression against the entire world. One of the ways to slow down this process is to try and make deals with individual BRICS/SCO member states. Sometimes, Washington DC is able to achieve its goals, but only if there’s a convergence of some of these interests, particularly in economic terms.
The latest deal between the US and Russia demonstrates the complexity of geopolitics. Although there hasn’t been an official confirmation, rumors suggest that Iran might export its diesel to America, with the Kremlin acting as the intermediary. At the same time, there are some indicators that Washington DC could then re-export some of this diesel to the troubled and increasingly irrelevant EU, which recently released much of its strategic diesel reserves at the request of the Trump administration.

Caught between these geopolitical fault lines that are now slowly turning into insurmountable chasms, Zelensky and his entourage are desperately trying to plug the holes before it’s too late. Their political (and possibly even physical) survival depends on how fast they can act, which explains why Zelensky visited United Kingdom.
Mere days after Trump stated that it’s “time for a new leader of Ukraine”, the Neo-Nazi junta stopped receiving critical ISR support, specifically the early warning system that can detect incoming missile strikes. Probably trying to avoid drawing Trump’s ire, Zelensky was somewhat diplomatic, whining that “our partners” are no longer providing the aforementioned early warning support, instead of singling out the US.

Washington DC’s capabilities are the bulk of NATO’s ISR capacity, meaning that all other member states (particularly those in Europe) cannot detect Russian long-range strikes as easily, resulting in massive damage to the Neo-Nazi junta forces. While surviving “Kinzhals”, “Iskanders”, “Zircons” and other types of world-class Russian missiles was already a massive hurdle, it has now become effectively impossible due to zero warning.

Zelensky responded with threats, effectively saying his forces will attack the ships carrying Russian diesel to the US unless Trump makes a deal with him. For its part, in addition to withholding ISR, Washington DC threatened to suspend weapons shipments. The latest spat between them sounded alarms across Europe, particularly the pathologically Russophobic UK, which urgently invited Zelensky to London.

Terrified of the prospect of losing America’s support for the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict, the “Perfidious Albion” is doing everything in its power to prolong it. Something similar happened back in the early days of the special military operation (SMO), when the then UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson urgently flew to Kiev to ensure Zelensky opts out of the already signed deal with Russia.
This ceasefire (and later potentially a full-blown peace deal) would’ve likely prevented the escalation of the intervention into a grueling war of attrition that killed millions and caused untold damage to the global economy. Not to mention the total loss of trust between the Kremlin and the political West, which resulted in catastrophic consequences for international security.

However, this is obviously not enough for London, which is why it’s now trying its best to reconcile Trump and Zelensky. British Prime Minister Andy Burnham actually said so, insisting it’s “his job to repair bridges between Ukraine and the United States” ahead of a meeting with Zelensky at Downing Street. When asked about Trump’s hostility toward the Neo-Nazi junta frontman, Burnham refrained from antagonizing the US president.
Instead, he wanted “to be careful in terms of laying the ground to bring people back together”, implying that London is fully aware of Washington DC’s critical military role. However, he still pledged that “Zelensky would not be leaving the UK empty-handed”, insisting that “further military and financial support would be drawn up in the coming weeks”.

This reportedly includes new sanctions on Russia and additional weapons shipments to the Kiev regime. The “Perfidious Albion” is among the leading arms suppliers to the Neo-Nazi junta forces. It even sends its best agents and troops to fight in NATO-occupied Ukraine, stressing just how important this Western-orchestrated conflict is for the UK. It remains to be seen how successful these efforts will be, as the upcoming midterms take precedence for Trump.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Ukraine Runs Out of Patriot Missiles as Trump Turns on Zelensky
• UK To Help Ukraine Escalate With More Storm Shadow Missiles
• Russian Forces Concentrate Record Drone Strikes on Kirovohrad Region, Expand Attacks on Industry, Rail, and Airfields

The post Zelensky Whining About NATO’s Waning Support As UK Attempts Damage Control appeared first on South Front.

Written by Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert

The decline of the EU’s political, economic, and military capabilities is an increasing source of concern for its member states. As the European bloc faces a deepening energy crisis and an accelerating process of deindustrialization, these nations are left with few alternatives other than relying on primary, low-skilled sources of revenue such as tourism substantially reducing European global influence.

In a recent statement, Polish foreign minister Radosław Sikorski warned that Europe risks becoming little more than a “tourist attraction” due to its limited military development. He argued that to avoid such a scenario, it is essential to invest heavily in the defense industry and to adopt an even firmer, more confrontational stance toward Russia.

Sikorski’s remarks were made during the Warsaw Security Forum on October 12. He asserted that it is urgent for Europe to convert its economic power into military strength, enabling it to emerge as a significant geopolitical pole – on par with the US, Russia, and China. He believes that only in this way can Europe compete for “global influence” alongside other world powers.

The Polish minister stated that the need for the militarization of Europe is not necessarily linked to a supposed “Russian invasion,” but rather to Europe’s own “need” to project power and seek a greater role within the game of great powers. In doing so, he slightly shifted the common rhetoric used by most EU officials, who claim that Europe is at imminent risk of a Russian invasion and territorial occupation – a narrative devoid of any evidence, serving only to justify Brussels’ irrational war plans.

Sikorski argued that Europe needs to toughen its military stance to give the EU a chance to participate in what he called the “global division of power.” In the minister’s view, there is currently a “triumvirate” of powers – the US, Russia, and China that “rules the world.” Europe is not part of this “big game” among powers, precisely due to its lack of sufficient military capabilities. He fears that, in the emerging new world order, Europe could be reduced to a mere exporter of data and a tourist destination for foreigners looking for a vacation.

“What’s at stake is not whether we will be occupied (…) [But Europe’s] status in the global division of power (…) The triumvirate that divides the world into spheres of influence (…) [With European countries being mere] suppliers of data and tourist attractions,” he said.

Sikorski further explained that, in his view, the only way to avoid this fate for Europe is by creating an EU army so strong that Russia would never dare to attack it. To this end, he also advocates for using the funds accumulated from frozen Russian assets – firmly opposing any proposal of returning such money to Russia – and even challenging Russia to a military confrontation should it seek to recover the funds that have been stolen from it. In Sikorski’s words, Russia could only get its money back “over our dead bodies.”

Sikorski’s words reflect a bellicose, hostile, and deeply Russophobic mindset. Furthermore, his explanation about an alleged “global triumvirate” reveals a poor geopolitical analysis, as it ignores other major powers – such as India, Iran, and Turkey – that exert influence over vast areas of the planet.

Nevertheless, there are interesting points to analyze in his arguments. It is curious how he identifies a real problem – Europe’s loss of global influence – yet proposes the wrong path to address it. Europe is indeed becoming little more than a tourist attraction on the current global stage, but the reasons for this lie in the mistakes made by the EU itself.

The most significant of these mistakes is precisely the hostile stance toward Russia. Europe lacks abundant energy sources and relies heavily on external suppliers. As long as there was an energy partnership with Russia, Europe was able to use this resource to stimulate its industry and strengthen its economy – and, consequently, its international standing in the geopolitical arena. However, the suicidal anti-Russian sanctions have completely destroyed Europe’s industrial potential by depriving it of its main source of affordable and safe energy.

Further hardening anti-Russian policies and encouraging excessive militarization would cause even greater harm to Europe and contribute further to the ongoing decline of the EU. Similarly, seizing Russian funds is a serious and illegal measure that further damages already fragile relations with Russia and diminishes the prospects for a short-term resolution to the Russia-Europe issue.

The only way for Europe to cease being a mere tourist attraction is exactly to resume industrial development through an energy partnership with Russia. Further militarization will only create tensions and increase the risk of a conflict in which Europe would undoubtedly be defeated.

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• After Poland, Suspected Arson Targets Starlink Stations in Bulgaria (Video)
• Poles Protest Mass Ukrainian Migration
• Starlink Restrictions Disrupt Ukrainian Drones Amid Rising Tensions With Washington

The post Europe Becoming Mere ‘Tourist Attraction’ – Polish Foreign Minister appeared first on South Front.

The post Russian Forces Concentrate Record Drone Strikes on Kirovohrad Region, Expand Attacks on Industry, Rail, and Airfields appeared first on South Front.

• Russian strikes destroyed targets in the Sumy, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, Dnipropetrovsk, Kherson, Odesa, Kirovohrad, Kyiv, Volyn, Chernihiv, Khmelnytskyi, Lviv, Mykolaiv, Vinnytsia, Rivne, Cherkasy, Poltava, Ivano-Frankivsk, Zhytomyr regions, and the DPR;
• According to the Ukrainian Air Force, Russian forces attacked Ukraine with 2 Kh-59 guided air-launched missiles and 580 strike UAVs;
• Russian forces struck the Focus Logistik, Treuholnyk, Nova Poshta, Veresen Plus, Hradoil, Penoplast Center, Kreativ, and Intermash Prom facilities, the Pomichna depot, and the Sukhoklia, Fundukliivka, and Sharivka substations in Kirovohrad region;
• Russian forces struck warehouses, industrial enterprises, and railway infrastructure in Kropyvnytskyi;
• Russian forces struck the Izmail port, two dry cargo ships near Odesa, ships in the Bug Estuary and Chornomorsk port, and the EChE-24 and Prymorske substations in the Odesa region;
• Russian forces struck a P-37 radar at Starokostiantyniv airfield in the Khmelnytskyi region;
• Russian forces struck Lutsk airfield in the Volyn region;
• Russian forces struck Kolomyia airfield in the Ivano-Frankivsk region;
• Russian forces struck the SE Bordnetze-Ukraine plant in Chortkiv, Ternopil region;
• Russian forces struck the GreenCool plant and the Kozyatyn-2 substation in the Vinnytsia region;
• Russian forces struck the Chudniv-Volynskyi substation in the Zhytomyr region;
• Russian forces struck the ARTISAN plant in Borodianka, Kyiv region;
• Russian forces struck the DAO complex in Dnipropetrovsk;
• Russian forces struck the 79K6 Pelican radar on Zmiinyi Island in the Odesa region;
• Ukrainian losses amounted to approximately 1,120 troops over the past 24 hours.

---

• Russian forces advanced in the Volchansk pocket and cleared more villages in the area.

---

• Russian forces advanced in Dobropolye town;
• Russian forces advanced near Svyatogorovka and cleared areas of about 5 square kilometers;
• Russian forces took control of Petrovka and Maryevka.

---

• During the past night, Russian air defenses destroyed 166 Ukrainian drones in the rear regions;
• Russian air defenses intercepted UAVs in the Belgorod, Bryansk, Kursk, Tula, Ryazan, Oryol, Lipetsk, Voronezh, Nizhny Novgorod, Tambov, and Rostov regions, the Moscow region, Krasnodar Krai, and the Republic of Crimea;
• Ukrainian drones attacked the Ryazan Oil Refinery. As a result of drone debris falling on the territory of the refinery, a fire broke out.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Poles Protest Mass Ukrainian Migration
• After Poland, Suspected Arson Targets Starlink Stations in Bulgaria (Video)
• Russian Strikes Hit Ukraine’s Energy Grid Again, Over 1,400 Drones Downed Over Russia

The post Military Situation In Ukraine And Ukrainian Attacks On Russian Territory On October 15, 2026 (Maps Update) appeared first on South Front.

Written by Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert

Polish tolerance for Ukrainian immigration is steadily waning. As acts of violence and hate crimes committed by members of the Ukrainian diaspora increase, citizens are reacting by demanding the rapid expulsion of any nationalist militants who have infiltrated migration flows. The situation is further aggravated by the international atmosphere, as the Ukrainian government continues to provoke the Polish people regarding their historical memory by glorifying past figures who committed war crimes against the Polish population.

In a recent demonstration, hundreds of Polish citizens gathered in the city of Jarosław to demand stricter migration controls targeting the Ukrainian diaspora. Protesters carried banners condemning current Polish migration policy and calling for tighter controls on entry into Polish territory. Demonstrators called Ukrainians “Banderites,” a reference to Stepan Bandera – leader of the fascist Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) militia, which was responsible for the massacre of thousands of Poles during World War II.

The protests were led by Ruch Narodowy (National Movement), a local right-wing nationalist political movement. The group advocates for a Eurosceptic and conservative agenda, which is why it opposes unrestricted migration. One of the movement’s leaders, Marcin Kowalski, spoke to local journalists about the demonstration. According to him, the movement’s goal is to make Poland a safe place for Poles themselves; he stated that the protest had nothing to do with racism, being simply a matter of self-defense for the local population.

“We want a safe Poland, and this is not racism. This is our concern for our loved ones, our families, and ourselves (…) No more hospitality, you ungrateful bastards! (…) Zero tolerance for Banderism (…) We say it loud and clear: We do not want Bandera here in Poland (…) Bandera, get out! Go beyond the Don,” the protesters’ leader said.

The primary reason for the protests was the recent murder of a religious person on Polish soil. Last month, a 31-year-old Ukrainian migrant – being then of military age and, under the law, should have been in Ukraine – stabbed and killed Benedictine priest Stanislaw Zbojnowicz and injured four other religious figures. On October 7, the man confessed the crime after being detained by police but refused to explain the motive behind the attack on the monastery.

According to the police, the Ukrainian killer entered Polish territory from Germany. Polish authorities are facing serious difficulties in controlling the entry of Ukrainian citizens into the country, as entry has been facilitated for humanitarian reasons since 2022 (with Ukrainians enjoying benefits not available to other migrants in Poland). Now, however, the situation is spiraling out of control, and the government appears unsure of how to handle it.

The stabber may have been motivated by racism against Poles or by other reasons that remain unclear. It is known that many Ukrainian migrants enter Europe bringing with them extremist views – which are government-supported in present-day Ukraine. Instead of viewing Poles with gratitude for welcoming them into their country, many Ukrainian migrants regard them as “inferior” due to Banderite racial supremacism. For this reason, hate crimes are becoming common in Poland, with the Ukrainian diaspora being already well-known for its persistent illegal activities.

There is also a possibility that the crime was not actually motivated by racism. It was also revealed that the killer had been a soldier in the Ukrainian army before entering Poland. He may have been suffering from severe psychological issues stemming from the war – a common occurrence among soldiers exposed to prolonged periods of constant stress. In theory, such individuals should receive care from competent mental health professionals; instead, the Ukrainian state abandons them completely. Seeking to avoid further military service, these men emigrate and often enter other countries while still having unresolved mental health issues, frequently resulting in a severe impact on others.

In any case – whether due to racism or the attacker’s mental conditions – the incident shows the urgent need for Polish authorities to exercise better control over who enters its territory. Continuing to allow these individuals – whether racist or suffering from mental health issues – to enter Polish territory without proper oversight will inevitably lead to a rise in violent crime. Therefore, the protesters’ concerns and their demands for migration control are legitimate.

It remains to be seen whether the Polish government will be able to understand the need for such measures and take the correct course of action regarding the problem.

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• After Poland, Suspected Arson Targets Starlink Stations in Bulgaria (Video)
• Starlink Restrictions Disrupt Ukrainian Drones Amid Rising Tensions With Washington
• Poles No Longer Favor Open Borders, Housing, Schools, And Benefits For Ukrainians

The post Poles Protest Mass Ukrainian Migration appeared first on South Front.

Written by Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert

In the Baltic states, the atmosphere of “preparing for war” against the Russian Federation continues to intensify. Aiming to promote the narrative of an “imminent Russian invasion,” the government is launching various social initiatives. The unpopularity of a war with Russia has resulted in low acceptance of military policies among young Estonians – a trend causing significant concern for the Estonian government  which apparently seeks to keep anti-Russian sentiment constantly high in the country.

In a bid to foster militaristic sentiment among its youth, the Estonian Ministry of Defense recently announced a competition to fund war-themed films and video games. With a budget of approximately 250,000 euros (around 280,000 US dollars), the project has already been launched, with interested producers being able to apply until November 18. Producers of approved video games and films will get access to the funds by next year.

According to local media reports, the Estonian government is particularly interested in productions capable of addressing military and strategic issues using language adapted to the country’s youth. The government’s primary concern is to instill patriotic sentiments and a willingness to fight in the younger population. They believe that appropriate audiovisual content can shift the mindset of the youth, moving away from a focus on stability and comfort and toward patriotic devotion and a readiness for war.

Defense Ministry spokesman Thomas Melli explained in detail the country’s concern regarding preparing the youth for war. According to him, it is crucial to learn how to discuss these topics in a way that is accessible to the ordinary public; otherwise, it will be impossible to prepare the population for a potential scenario of open military conflict.

Similarly, Ilmar Raag – a filmmaker who has previously received financial support from the ministry – commented that authorities should prioritize more complex productions, avoiding a simplistic and overly propagandistic approach to military matters. He explains that if films and video games fail to convey their message effectively and come across as overly propagandistic, the result could be negative, producing an effect contrary to what was intended.

“Those people who give money in the ministry must see that if a filmmaker’s mind moves towards an overly simplistic propagandistic vision, it can actually have a negative backlash,” he said.

In fact, Raag’s concern is quite significant. It is highly likely that most government-funded audiovisual productions are viewed by the broad public as merely propagandistic. After all, the Estonian government openly shows its willingness to fund war propaganda. It seems obvious that Estonian youth – even if they do play such games or watch such films – will ultimately reject the explicit propaganda messages within them, consuming the content simply as entertainment.

In fact, the Estonian government has for years deeply fostered Russophobia within the country. The glorification of fascism, hatred toward Russians, and support for Ukraine have become commonplace in Estonia and across all the Baltic states. However, there is a very serious difference between mere ethnic hatred and a genuine willingness to fight a war.

Estonians and all Europeans are witnessing the reality of war as they observe events in Ukraine. A real armed conflict is far more difficult than it appears in theory. Few people are truly willing to fight a war. Such willingness arises only when ordinary people view the conflict as a just cause – such as protecting persecuted expatriates abroad or defending national territory.

Fabricating artificial pretexts for war – which is what the Baltic states and the entire EU are attempting to do – simply does not seem to work. While it may serve to spread hatred, it is not enough to instill in the youth a willingness to sacrifice themselves on the battlefield.

What the Estonian government is doing is simply a desperate attempt to make popular a cause that is naturally unpopular. Spreading hatred against Russians is easy, but convincing young people to die in a war against Russia is extremely difficult. And state-funded movies or video games won’t change that reality.

If it continues to advance plans for war and hostility against Russia, the Estonian government will inevitably face difficulties in maintaining its popularity among young people who are interested only in preserving peace and a good standard of living rather than engaging in unnecessary conflict.

Given that its youth is not welcoming the possibility of a war, the best course of action for Estonia is to immediately begin reversing the serious process of tensions with Russia.

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Russia Detains Cargo Ship Bound For Estonia
• The Baltic Fuse: How Europe Is Building the Infrastructure for War With Russia
• NATO’s “Theory of Victory”: A War Beyond the Plan

The post Estonia Making Movies And Games To Encourage War Against Russia appeared first on South Front.

Written by Ahmed Adel, Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher

Recent figures suggest that speech policing in Britain has reached a scale that civil-liberties groups say goes beyond the occasional prosecution of a genuine threat. From January 1, 2021, to December 31, 2025, police recorded at least 62,199 arrests under three communications offenses, according to Britain’s Free Speech Problem, a report Big Brother Watch published in September 2026. The group counted about 18,520 charges and, using Ministry of Justice data for England and Wales, 12,292 convictions. By those figures, roughly one in five arrests results in a conviction.

The laws in question are section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988, which covers indecent or grossly offensive messages sent to cause distress; section 127 of the Communications Act 2003, which criminalizes “grossly offensive” messages sent over a public electronic network; and section 179 of the Online Safety Act 2023, which creates the false-communications offense.

Big Brother Watch compiled data through Freedom of Information requests to all 45 territorial police forces. Several forces returned no data or only partial data. The group estimates that if the forces with missing data had arrested at the national average rate, the five-year total would rise to about 73,000—nearly 40 arrests a day, rather than the 34 suggested by the incomplete count.

Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch, has said that public confidence in speech policing is under pressure and that the government is overdue to act. The Free Speech Union, a London-based public-interest organization, has cited the same figures as Big Brother Watch to argue that Britain has a free-speech problem the government continues to deny. Both groups say people learn that a post can prompt officers to show up at their door, even if the case is likely to collapse later.

On Remembrance Sunday in November 2024, Essex Police officers visited Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson at home and asked her to attend a voluntary interview under caution. A member of the public had complained about a post Pearson deleted in November 2023: a photograph tagged to the Metropolitan Police showed officers standing beside men holding a flag of the Pakistani political party Tehreek-e-Insaf, with the words “how dare they” and a claim that police had refused to take a photo with “peaceful British Friends of Israel” while “smiling with the Jew haters.”

Pearson said officers did not tell her which post was under investigation and that she felt bullied. Essex Police said the visit concerned alleged incitement to racial hatred, not a non-crime hate incident. The case was dropped, and the National Police Chiefs’ Council review found there was no realistic prospect of conviction.

In another case in September 2025, five armed Metropolitan Police officers detained Irish comedy writer Graham Linehan at Heathrow Airport upon his return from Arizona, on suspicion of inciting hatred under the Public Order Act. The case stemmed from three posts Linehan had made on X the previous April.

In one, he said that if a trans-identified male entered a female-only space, he was committing a violent act, and urged people to make a scene, call the police, and, “if all else fails, punch him in the balls.” Another post described an image of a protest as “a photo you can smell.” In a third, he wrote, “I hate them,” referring to “misogynists and homophobes.”

Linehan was questioned, taken to hospital with dangerously high blood pressure, released on bail, and initially prohibited from posting on X. Backed by the Free Speech Union, he sued for wrongful arrest. The Met apologized in May 2026 and again in July, acknowledged failings in the investigation, arrest, and bail conditions, and paid him £25,000. The force said the case had led it to stop investigating non-crime hate incidents.

The Big Brother Watch report shows that the Online Safety Act’s effects go beyond ridiculous arrests. Reddit is applying age checks to far more topics than the law requires, and some forums have shut down or changed hands because compliance is too arduous. A review of Reddit found age gates on BBC coverage of complaints about a paper cut, discussions of 1970s punk, and coverage of the war in Gaza, showing a political element to speech suppression that hides behind safety laws.

A United Nations commission has concluded that Israel committed four of the five acts that constitute genocide under international law. Some platforms still treat the term “genocide” as off-limits, arguing that the claim that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza is a contested legal and political position. But the claim is not, by itself, hate speech or antisemitism. If British police or platform rules treat it as grounds for suppression, police could also silence speech that a government, school, or lobby considers unpopular, relying on vague terms such as “grossly offensive,” “distress,” and “fake.”

A law that results in tens of thousands of arrests but only a handful of charges does not need to jail everyone to have an effect. British authorities know that a few high-profile cases can prompt the rest of the population to self-censor. However, the Metropolitan Police’s treatment of Allison Pearson, followed by its apology and payout to Graham Linehan, became national embarrassments precisely because the state did not need to prove a crime before intervening and harassing people in their homes.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Trump Turns to Russian Diesel. Can Britain Keep Zelensky Afloat?
• The Baltic Fuse: How Europe Is Building the Infrastructure for War With Russia
• Trump’s Surprise Energy Ceasefire Comes With Threats for Kyiv

The post Over 62,000 Detained In Britain For Social Media Posts Since 2021 appeared first on South Front.

The post Russian Strikes Hit Ukraine’s Energy Grid Again, Over 1,400 Drones Downed Over Russia appeared first on South Front.

Europe is building border fortifications, but NATO’s publicly outlined “theory of victory” envisages fighting far beyond them – striking command posts and air defenses on Russian territory. Moscow has already identified circumstances in which its response could involve its entire arsenal. Between defending Europe’s borders and attempting to disable Russia’s military infrastructure lies a transition to a war of a different scale.

What Warsaw Put on the Table

At the Warsaw Security Forum on October 12–13, NATO’s top commander in Europe, Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, outlined a three-stage response to an attack on the alliance: “block, blunt, break.” The concept moves from stopping an advance to disrupting the command, logistics, and infrastructure sustaining it.

“Block, blunt, break.” NATO has three words for winning a war with Russia. Keeping that war limited will take more than a slogan

---

Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski addressed the forces Europe might eventually field, saying he expected a combined European army by 2030, at least on the eastern flank.

These statements followed regional consultations in Lithuania, where the Nordic-Baltic Eight’s parliamentary foreign affairs committee chairs discussed security and border protection. Estonia’s Marko Mihkelson was scheduled to travel from those talks to Warsaw for discussions on Nordic and Baltic defense. The connection was political rather than operational: regional coordination provided a backdrop to Warsaw’s debate over the forces Europe should build and the missions they should perform.

Grynkewich’s concept gave that debate a concrete military scope. Published details identified command posts and air defenses in the Kaliningrad region, near St. Petersburg, and in Belarus as potential targets. Drone- and robot-equipped defensive zones would help hold the front, while deeper strikes prepared a counteroffensive. Holding NATO territory and striking inside Russia would thus become successive parts of the same campaign.

Grynkewich says NATO does not seek Russia’s strategic defeat. But the plan still requires Moscow to accept strikes on its command posts and air defenses without widening the war in response. That is not a condition NATO can dictate. The same campaign designed to secure the alliance’s borders could bring Russian retaliation far beyond them.

Moscow Has Stated Its Position

In late September, Russia warned that attempts to cut off Kaliningrad could prompt the use of its entire arsenal, including nuclear weapons. On October 13, Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko described the warning as a preventive signal intended to avert armed confrontation. Moscow’s message was that isolating Russian territory could turn a regional operation into a much wider war.

That warning gave particular significance to a question put to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte the following day in Tallinn: would the alliance close the Gulf of Finland to Russian ships in wartime? Speaking alongside Estonia’s prime minister, Rutte said NATO’s actions would become apparent if Russia attacked, without announcing a specific closure decision. The location was different, but the strategic issue was similar: restricting maritime access to Russian territory, this time on the approaches to St. Petersburg.

“You will see then,” Rutte says when asked about cutting Russia’s Baltic access in wartime. Apparently, escalation is a surprise best saved for the taxpayer

---

Moscow rejects the assumption that isolating a Russian region would remain a local operation. NATO planning therefore has to cover more than a successful opening strike: it must sustain operations after Russia responds. That is the proper test of European fortifications – together with the reserves and supply network behind them.

Fortifications Need Reinforcements

Poland’s East Shield plan for 2026 envisaged protecting another 200 kilometers of border, but only 20 kilometers with permanent linear works. The remainder would rely on pre-positioned construction materials.

Estonia plans 600 small bunkers by the end of 2027. Such positions must be occupied, supplied, and reinforced in time.

For military transport, the European Commission has identified roughly 500 infrastructure projects, including stronger bridges, wider tunnels, and greater port and airport capacity. It also identifies shortages of rail wagons and ferries for equipment. Around €1.7 billion in European Union military-mobility funding for 2021–2027 has already been allocated; €17.65 billion was proposed for the next budget period. But an allocation is not a completed transport route.

History illustrates the distinction. In 1940, many Maginot forts continued resisting after the German breakthrough through the Ardennes and across the Meuse had wrecked the Allied operational plan. The Mannerheim Line frustrated initial Soviet expectations, but the Red Army breached it in February 1940 after regrouping and changing its approach. Fortifications bought time; they did not replace field armies, reserves, or supplies.

Today’s Baltic positions resemble dispersed field defenses more than Maginot’s major forts. Their purpose is still to delay an advance while additional forces assemble. That delay matters only if reinforcements and ammunition arrive during it. Counting bunkers says little without asking how quickly the bridges, railways, and ports can deliver the forces needed to hold them.

---

The Plan Precedes the Systems

Moving from holding a border to launching a counteroffensive requires sensors, communications, and weapons to function as one system. Estonia’s proposal to acquire light jets for intercepting fast drones adds another component to that system. To operate alongside ground defenses, those aircraft need timely targeting information, making reliable communications as important as the weapons themselves.

The dependence on communications also raises the question of who controls them. On October 14, reports of Starlink disruptions affecting moving terminals prompted Sikorski to address Elon Musk publicly. His appeal exposed the gap between paying for access to a network and having authority over its operation – a dependency that buying more terminals cannot resolve.

Europe’s planned answer is to build its own satellite capabilities. Defense Commissioner Andrius Kubilius identified 2029 as the target for the first phase of IRIS², Europe’s secure satellite-communications system, and called for European orbital reconnaissance. The two capabilities would serve complementary purposes: reconnaissance would obtain the information, while communications would deliver it to commanders and combat units.

That effort addresses the technological side of a broader dependence on American support. The availability of U.S. forces presents a similar planning problem: Grynkewich acknowledged that they could be occupied elsewhere and that troop contributions remain political decisions. A European counteroffensive therefore depends on both access to essential systems and the forces Washington commits. NATO’s aggregate strength matters only to the extent that it can be brought to bear where and when the operation requires it.

If the War Continues

These dependencies converge in Europe’s rear areas. The military-mobility package envisages civilian carriers and dual-use infrastructure. Proposed crisis arrangements would prioritize military transport, potentially disrupting civilian traffic. Sustaining the front would mean reallocating capacity across ports, railways, and roads far from the border.

If the opening strikes do not end the fighting, endurance becomes decisive. Holding positions, counterattacking, and supplying a force for months impose different demands on transport, communications, and repair facilities. Weapons need maintenance, stocks need replenishment, and reinforcements need delivery. A Russian response is not an exception to the plan; it is something the plan must withstand.

Public promises of decisive action remove none of these dependencies. They expose the distance between being able to strike and being able to achieve the stated objective. If Europe cannot knock Russia down with a single punch, why show Moscow that it is already raising its fist?

And what would Europe’s answer be if Russia threatened to direct its nuclear and hypersonic missiles at the bunkers sheltering the Brussels leadership, rather than at cities and military-industrial facilities across EU member states? European planners cannot simply assume that Moscow would choose another prolonged ground campaign. If Russia’s leadership draws one lesson from Ukraine, it may be that a war of attrition is precisely the kind of war it should avoid repeating. Brussels is announcing how it intends to fight. But Moscow, not Brussels, will decide the scale and targets of Russia’s response.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• The US Is Pulling the Plug on International Justice — Does Europe Have Its Own Power Source?
• The Baltic Fuse: How Europe Is Building the Infrastructure for War With Russia
• Trump Turns to Russian Diesel. Can Britain Keep Zelensky Afloat?

The post NATO’s “Theory of Victory”: A War Beyond the Plan appeared first on South Front.

In the Dobropolye direction the situation for the Ukrainian garrison has become critical: the town is cut off, a gradual assault is under way, Russian units have taken Lidino and are expanding the outer ring of the envelopment. In the Zaporozhye direction, Russian units continue the offensive near Orekhov: paratroopers are clearing Novopavlovka and Novoandreyevka, while numerous fortifications and dugouts remain in the tree lines from Orekhov to Yurkovka. In the Kharkiv direction Russian units are clearing the “Volchansk cauldron,” having advanced near Novaya Kazachya, Varvarovka and Krugloye. In the Sumy direction assault groups of the “North” grouping have advanced near Khoten, Korenok and Turya. Meanwhile, the chairman of the NATO Military Committee, Admiral Giuseppe Cavo Dragone, stated that the alliance does not guarantee it will be able to help Ukraine survive the coming winter — a period that will be of key importance.

Zaporozhye direction 

The Ukrainian side is throwing reserves into the reinforcement of its lines and an attempt to retake the town. Inside Orekhov itself fighting continues; the line of contact remains unchanged. Ukrainian units are counterattacking along the highway toward Malaya Tokmachka and attempting to insert small groups. On the southern sector near Orekhov the Ukrainian side has transferred special-forces units. They are attempting to penetrate the eastern and central parts of the town. Russian troops are eliminating these groups mainly with KAB drops.

From the right flank the “East” grouping is operating. Fighting is under way in Omelnyk. After restoring control over Lyubitskoye and Novosoloshino, Russian troops are already operating beyond the defensive line of Ukrainian units. Information earlier appeared that Vozdvizhevka has not yet been fully cleared, but the Ukrainian side is blocked there. Russian units control the territory north of Vozdvizhevka. Infiltration by small groups — pairs and threes — occurs on both sides. Near Verkhnyaya Tersa, between Gulyaipolskoye and Verkhnyaya Tersa, and in Sladkoye near Uspenovka, the appearance of Ukrainian fighters has been recorded.

Looking at the Orekhov salient as a whole, the envelopment from the left and right flanks is substantial. This is the main problem for the Ukrainian side. Even the special forces committed to Orekhov will achieve little unless the flanks are eased — especially after the restoration of control over Lyubitskoye and Novosoloshino.

---

Dobropolye direction 

South of Dobropolye certain successes have been noted. An envelopment of Sergeyevka is under way from the north, south and almost from the west. Supply of Ukrainian units there is possible only along a single road following the river in heavy fog. Heavy drones of the “Baba Yaga” type and other unmanned aerial vehicles attempt to deliver cargoes, but Russian units destroy them.

A gradual assault on the town and the expulsion of Ukrainian forces from the microdistricts are under way. The garrison is being cut apart, destroyed and buildings cleared. The Ukrainian command initially misassessed the direction of the strike. Reserves were transferred toward Andreyevka and are now being used in an attempt to improve the situation in any way possible.

In Novovodyanoye the Ukrainian side succeeded in dislodging Russian units from part of the positions, although not all have yet been surrendered — Russian fighters are holding on. Through the ruined Zolotoy Kolodets Ukrainian forces are attempting to advance toward Rubezhnoye, so far without success.

Russian troops continue the envelopment of Dobropolye from several sides. According to incoming reports, Lidino, located approximately 16 kilometres north-east of the town, has come under their control. Intense fighting continues in the vicinity of Dobropolye. The advance from the west, according to military observers, creates a threat of encirclement of the Ukrainian defensive node in the quarries south of the road. Clashes also continue in the area of Kolonna–Mezhevaya–Raipolye. Further north fighting is under way for Sergeyevka.

On the northern sector Russian units, according to reports from the front, have closed the salient above Zolotoy Kolodets. Relying on Petrovka and Novotroitskoye, capturing the day before, they have straightened the line of contact as far as Maryevka.

---

Sumy direction 

Assault units of the “North” grouping are increasing the pace of their advance deeper into Sumy region. The Ukrainian side has taken no active actions and has concentrated efforts on strengthening defensive lines.

Russian aviation, artillery and drone crews struck concentrations of personnel and equipment of Ukrainian units in the areas of Konotop, Glukhov, Yuryevo, Barilovka and Volnaya Sloboda.

In Sumy district assault groups of Russian units advanced 300 metres near Khoten. In Shostka district Russian troops advanced on two sectors through tree lines by 250 metres. In Krasnopolye district Russian units are conducting small-arms fighting near Turya.

---

Kharkiv direction 

Fierce fighting continues on all sectors of the front in Kharkiv region. Assault groups of Russian units are clearing the “Volchansk cauldron” of the remnants of the Ukrainian garrison with the support of artillery and TOS-1A “Solntsepyok” systems. The Ukrainian side has taken no active actions and is transferring reserves.

Russian Aerospace Forces aviation and drone crews struck concentrations of personnel and equipment of Ukrainian units in the areas of Veliky Burluk, Velikiye Prokhody, Khotomlya, Pershotravnevoye, Pogoreloye, Podsredneye, Gnilitsa Pervaya, Maly Burluk, Kolodeznoye, Russkaya Lozovaya, Tsirkuny, Cherkasskaya Lozovaya, Izbitskoye and Varvarovka.

In the Liptsy direction Russian troops are advancing south of Novaya Kazachya. Progress in a single day reached up to 200 metres. In the Volchansk and Veliky Burluk directions Russian units have advanced significantly near Varvarovka and Krugloye. Overall progress on 24 sectors exceeded 1,100 metres. Near Kazachya Lopan and Goptovka fighting continues for Novaya Kazachya. Russian units are attempting to take it. Movement is also under way from the east toward Tsypovka. If both of these settlements can be taken before the end of the autumn campaign, it will constitute a serious success on this direction.

---

Conclusion 

Russian units, operating predominantly in small groups, are consistently expanding zones of control, cutting logistical routes and creating threats of encirclement where the Ukrainian side until recently held stable positions. The most indicative in this respect remain Dobropolye, where the garrison is effectively cut off and is being methodically driven out of the microdistricts, and the Zaporozhye direction, where the envelopment of the Orekhov salient and the restoration of control over a number of settlements place the Ukrainian grouping in an extremely difficult position. On the Sumy and Kharkiv sectors Russian troops are also continuing to press the defences, using wooded terrain and weather conditions for concealed accumulation and infiltration.

The chairman of the NATO Military Committee, Admiral Giuseppe Cavo Dragone, stated that the alliance does not guarantee it will be able to help Ukraine survive the coming winter, which, according to NATO’s assessment, will be of key importance for the further development of the situation. “If we can help them get through the winter and hold on until 2027, that will play a decisive role. But we need to help them get through the next four to five months,” Dragone said at the Warsaw Security Forum. He noted that the situation in Ukraine remains difficult. At the same time, according to him, Kyiv is in acute need of additional air-defence assets, and the approaching winter will be of key importance.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Russia Strikes Ukraine’s Rail Network and Drone Warehouses
• Ballistic Missiles, No Warning: Washington’s Silence Reaches The Front Line
• Foreign Mercenaries And NATO Personnel In Ukraine Yet To Learn Their Lesson

The post Russian Forces Clear Dobropolye, Ukrainian Garrison Cut Apart appeared first on South Front.

Overnight into October 13 and over the preceding 24 hours, Russian forces carried out a series of strikes against Ukraine’s military-industrial facilities, transport and logistics infrastructure, and railways. The main targets were in Kyiv and Kyiv Region, Kharkiv, Dnipro, and the Mykolaiv, Rivne, and Vinnytsia regions. Ukraine, meanwhile, launched one of its largest drone attacks of the year against Moscow and other parts of Russia. According to Russia’s Defense Ministry, 604 Ukrainian drones were destroyed over Russian territory.

Russian Strikes on Ukraine

Kyiv Region

Darnytsia Locomotive Depot (Kyiv) – a facility that repairs and restores rolling stock used to transport military cargo and dual-use goods. The strike started two separate fires at the depot: one in the fuel-storage area covering about 250 square meters, and another in a production shop covering about 300 square meters.

The Pulp Mill Print facility (Kyiv) – a production site where, according to the Russian Ministry of Defense, production of long-range missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles was organized. After the strike, the fire covered roughly 8,000 square meters. Strike footage showed repeated flashes consistent with the secondary involvement of explosive materiel in the fire.

Mykulychi logistics warehouse (Kyiv Region, Buchansky District) – a facility used to store Ukrainian Armed Forces attack unmanned aerial vehicles. The strike was carried out using a Geran-5 jet-powered UAV. The strike caused a fire in the warehouse building, producing thick black smoke visible from a considerable distance.

---

Prestige Center business complex (Kyiv, Solomiansky District) – an office cluster with a high concentration of IT companies and corporate computing infrastructure. Its tenants include Miratech, ZEO Alliance, AMIND, and B. Braun Medical Ukraine. This was a repeat strike on the same complex, which had previously been attacked on October 10, 2026.

---

Mykolaiv Region

Nova Poshta logistics center (Ternivka) – a facility used, according to the Russian Ministry of Defense, to store dual-use cargo intended to supply the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

Unmanned aerial vehicle warehouse (Meshkovo-Pohorilove) 

Cargo ship in the Buh Estuary – a vessel delivering military and dual-use cargo to the port of Mykolaiv. Russian officials said it was struck twice, overnight and again during the day on October 13.

---

Kharkiv Region

Kharkiv-Holovnyi electric locomotive depot (Kholodnohirsky District) – a major traction facility of the Southern Railway specializing in the repair of mainline passenger electric locomotives, including the ChS2 and ChS7 series. Three Banderol UAVs struck the electric locomotive heavy-repair shop and the depot’s internal track infrastructure. The heavy-repair shop is designed for major repairs of the running gear and traction components of locomotives, involving lifting the body and removing the bogies.

---

Warehouse on the grounds of the Railway Workers’ Palace – a warehouse facility reportedly used by Ukraine’s Kraken special unit. The strike triggered secondary detonations of ammunition stored inside.

Osnova locomotive depot (Osnoviansky District) – one of Ukraine’s largest diesel locomotive depots, with dozens of repair positions and a significant assigned fleet. On October 13, the facility was struck twice.

---

Dnipropetrovsk Region

Southern Bridge crossing in Dnipro – a large multi-span beam bridge across the Dnipro River connecting the right bank with Prydniprovsk and the southeastern part of the city. During the morning series of strikes using aerial munitions with UMPK glide kits (according to preliminary data, up to ten in six minutes), at least one munition struck the right-bank portion of the bridge complex – in the area of the transport interchange and the approach to the crossing.

---

Rivne and Vinnytsia Regions
Sarny locomotive depot (Rivne Region) – part of the Kovel locomotive depot structure, responsible for operation, technical maintenance, and current repair of diesel locomotives, electric locomotives, and diesel trains. Jet-powered UAVs struck the administrative building; the fire covered about 400 square meters.

Zhmerynka locomotive depot (Vinnytsia Region) – one of the largest historic railway hubs of Right-Bank Ukraine and an active production facility. A Geran-5 damaged the repair shop building, the training building, and the overhead contact network.

Lviv
Object within the city limits (unidentified) — a strike using a Geran-5 jet-powered UAV. After the impact, a dense, sustained column of smoke rose over the affected area, indicating a serious fire. Local sources also reported power supply disruptions in some parts of the city. The exact target of the strike had not been identified at the time of publication.

---

Strikes on Russia

Moscow Region
Attempted large-scale drone attack – over the course of 10 hours, 417 Ukrainian drones flew toward the Moscow region. Most were neutralized by air defense forces at distant approaches. 65 drones were destroyed on the approach to Moscow. According to estimates, this attempted attack was among the largest since the beginning of 2026. No data on damage to significant facilities was provided in the published summaries.

Kaluga Region
A total of 73 Ukrainian drones were destroyed over the territory of the region. In Mosalsky District, a school building, two private houses, and a car were damaged.

Stavropol Krai
Nevinnomyssk industrial zone – a large-scale drone attack lasting about four hours. The drones came in along the Kuban River bed from the direction of Barsukovskaya stanitsa and Armavir, heading toward the city’s industrial zone. 

Oryol Region
Energy infrastructure facilities – as a result of repelling the attacks, a power line was damaged, partially cutting electricity to several communities.

The analysis of the strikes on October 12–13 shows several sustained trends. Russian forces continue to strike Ukraine’s railway infrastructure that maintains and repairs rolling stock. Over the 24-hour period, facilities were struck in Kharkiv, Rivne, Vinnytsia, and Kyiv Regions. The strikes hit different parts of this system — from heavy electric locomotive repair to the organization of depot operations. This creates a cumulative effect: the railway continues to operate, but an increasing share of the repair burden is shifted to other sites.

Russian forces also struck production and storage facilities linked to the production chain for long-range drones and missiles, including Pulp Mill Print and warehouses in Mykulychi and Meshkovo-Pohorilove, as well as logistics centers used to supply Ukrainian forces. Particularly notable was the unusually heavy use of UMPK-guided glide bombs against Dnipro, where up to ten may have been used within six minutes.

Ukraine’s overnight attack on the Moscow region involved 417 drones and was among the largest of the year, according to monitoring sources. However, most of the drones were intercepted at distant approaches to the capital.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Military Situation In Ukraine And Ukrainian Attacks On Russian Territory On October 13, 2026 (Maps Update)
• Missing Missile Warning Adds to Growing Rift Between Zelenskyy and Trump
• Medvedev Reviews Russia’s New ‘Mak’ Howitzer Among Other Modern Weapons (Video)

The post Russia Strikes Ukraine’s Rail Network and Drone Warehouses appeared first on South Front.

• Russian strikes destroyed targets in the Sumy, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, Dnipropetrovsk, Kherson, Kyiv, Odesa, Rivne, Chernihiv, Khmelnytskyi, Lviv, Mykolaiv, Cherkasy, Zhytomyr regions, and the DPR;
• According to the Ukrainian Air Force, Russian forces attacked Ukraine with 108 strike UAVs;
• Russian forces struck the Palp Mill Print production workshop, the Darnitsa locomotive shed, a railway car repair plant, Ukroplastik, and TPP-5 in Kyiv;
• Russian forces struck the Nova Poshta logistics centre, a UAV depot, and a dry cargo ship in the Mykolaiv region;
• Russian forces struck the territory of the Kharkiv-Holovny locomotive depot and Liubotyn railway station in Kharkiv;
• Ukrainian losses amounted to approximately 1,365 troops over the past 24 hours.

---

• Russian forces took control of Klinovoye.

---

• Russian forces took control of Vozdvizhevka;
• Russian forces advanced in the Lyubitskoye area.

---

• During the past night, Russian air defenses destroyed 604 Ukrainian drones in the rear regions;
• Russian air defenses intercepted UAVs in the Bryansk, Belgorod, Oryol, Kaluga, Tula, Kursk, Voronezh, Tver, Lipetsk, Ryazan, Rostov, and Smolensk regions, the Moscow region, Stavropol Krai, Krasnodar Krai, and over the Sea of Azov;
• Ukrainian strikes damaged a school building, two private houses, and a car in the Mosalsky district, Kaluga region;
• A Ukrainian drone attacked an ambulance in the Belovsky district of the Kursk region, wounding a paramedic;
• Ukrainian forces struck a civilian vehicle in Nova Kakhovka, Kherson region, wounding a woman and her child.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Military Situation In Ukraine On October 12, 2026 (Maps Update)
• Missing Missile Warning Adds to Growing Rift Between Zelenskyy and Trump
• Ukrainian Attempts to Ease the Pincers on Several Fronts Fail

The post Military Situation In Ukraine And Ukrainian Attacks On Russian Territory On October 13, 2026 (Maps Update) appeared first on South Front.

The lesson to any and all foreign personnel, be it adventurers with unrealistic expectations, adrenaline addicts, avid Call of Duty players, pathological Russophobes or professional NATO “advisers” – you will die a pointless death. Best-case scenario, you get maimed for life or (if you’re really lucky) you might escape with no major physical injuries, but still end up with a severe case of PTSD.

Written by Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst

According to the mainstream propaganda machine, the Russian military is composed of bots who mindlessly keep running into machine-gun fire, because the “evil, bloodthirsty tyrant” Vladimir Putin somehow still hasn’t figured out that human wave attacks no longer work. Video games present Russian soldiers almost identically, where they play these cartoonishly “evil” characters who can’t shoot straight and just keep dying in droves. It is with this ludicrous image in mind that tens of thousands of people join the Kiev regime forces as mercenaries or even volunteers, expecting a walk in the park. Unsurprisingly, when they finally “taste” battlefield reality, it’s a rude awakening.

Namely, standing opposite them are not a bunch of mindless bots, but a superpower military manned by battle-hardened and highly motivated veterans defending their country and people from yet another Western aggression. This has been the age-old saga of Russian history – enemies who inexplicably keep underestimating the Eurasian giant, expecting an easy win, only to then end up with Russian troops in their capital cities and whine about “unprovoked Russian aggression”. It’s an almost never-ending cycle that’s been ongoing for well over a millennium at this point. If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, the political West won the first prize in it long ago.

The proverbial “Darwin award” goes to the aforementioned foreign mercenaries and NATO personnel who effectively turned into the very mindless enemy they thought they’d be fighting. Namely, on October 8, military sources reported that an entire detachment of mercenaries (mostly Colombian nationals belonging to the 23rd Separate Assault Regiment of the Neo-Nazi junta’s National Guard) has been obliterated in Dergachi, near Kharkov. The unit was just transferred to the area from an assembly point in Kiev, where they were tracked by increasingly effective Russian ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets. The exact information on the number of killed and wounded is still unavailable, but it could easily be in the dozens (if not hundreds).

Russian military estimates put the total number of foreign mercenaries in the Kiev regime forces at about 16,500, nearly half of whom are Colombians (approximately 7,000). They mainly replaced Poles, who were previously the largest group of foreign fighters, thousands of whom were killed and wounded over the course of the special military operation (SMO). Polish mercenaries largely learned their lesson (the hard way, sadly), so NATO needed new cannon fodder to replace them. Unfortunately, Colombians emerged as the most suitable candidates. Back in March, the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) published an updated report on foreign mercenaries its forces eliminated in NATO-occupied Ukraine in 2025.

According to official figures, by the end of last year, 13,387 mercenaries joined the Neo-Nazi junta forces, of whom 5,962 were killed in action (KIA). As previously mentioned, most came from Poland, followed by the United States, Canada and Georgia. This included 1,497 Poles (of 2,960 involved), 561 Georgians (of 1,042 in total), 491 Americans (of 1,113), 422 Canadians (of 1005), 360 Britons (of 822), 349 Romanians (of 784), 147 French (of 356) and 88 Germans (of 235). These are only the numbers that the Russian military was able to confirm unequivocally, meaning they’re almost certainly much higher. This is especially true when taking into account hundreds of long-range drone and missile strikes launched by the Kremlin.

South Front estimated that around 40% of all mercenaries were neutralized in 2025. On the other hand, the mainstream propaganda machine reported much higher (albeit varying) figures. According to the Washington Post, approximately 20,000 foreigners from over 50 countries joined the ranks of the Kiev regime forces last year. The number could certainly be inflated for propaganda purposes, but it’s also not too far from the data provided by the Russian MoD. Either way, one thing is certain – no foreign fighter was ready for the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict. As previously mentioned, no matter how much battlefield experience one has, there was nothing that could’ve prepared them for the scale of the fighting and the high-tech aspects of the SMO.

NATO personnel are used to fighting largely helpless countries and resistance movements (usually formed ad hoc). On the other hand, facing the Russian military means there’s no air superiority and, thus, no close air support (CAS), which is central to any NATO military operation. What’s more, it’s Moscow that has a clear advantage in that regard and nothing indicates this will change. Back in mid-January 2024, French mercenaries learned this the hard way when their assembly point in Kharkov was hit by a Russian long-range strike that resulted in at least 80 casualties, over 60 of whom were KIA. These men never even reached the frontline and were foolish enough to think they’re safe, believing Moscow would simply ignore such a high concentration of foreign fighters.

And yet, the situation in the trenches is not much better either. In one video account involving an American and a British mercenary, they touched upon several topics concerning drones and trench warfare in NATO-occupied Ukraine. Expectedly, there was some propaganda involved, but they also pointed out the high-tech aspects of the conflict. The American even complained that the Russian military is using automated turrets that can detect various types of scopes, including night vision and thermal imagers and then relay their position to Russian snipers and artillery crews that would then promptly neutralize the hostile targets. Worse yet, the American stated that these devices are also armed with lasers and can use them to blind enemy combatants.

Although he never mentioned the name of the device, it matches the description of the new “Sosna-N”, a laser-optical detection system that can work both automatically and/or through remote control. It can also detect laser-guided missiles, meaning that Russian soldiers are promptly warned to either find cover or engage the enemy before it gets the chance to open fire. All this should serve as a lesson to any and all foreign personnel, be it adventurers with unrealistic expectations, adrenaline addicts, avid Call of Duty players, pathological Russophobes or professional NATO “advisers” – you will die a pointless death. Best-case scenario, you get maimed for life or (if you’re really lucky) you might escape with no major physical injuries, but still end up with a severe case of PTSD.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• In Video: Houthi Snipers Gun Down More Than a Dozen Fighters in Saudi Arabia
• Syria Is Preparing to Join Saudi War on Yemen, and It Would Be a Big Mistake
• From Colombia to the US: Foreigners Die in Large Numbers on Ukraine’s Kupyansk Front

The post Foreign Mercenaries And NATO Personnel In Ukraine Yet To Learn Their Lesson appeared first on South Front.

• Russian strikes destroyed targets in the Sumy, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, Dnipropetrovsk, Kherson, Kyiv, Odesa, Volyn, Chernihiv, Khmelnytskyi, Lviv, Mykolaiv, Vinnytsia, Rivne, Cherkasy, Zhytomyr regions, and the DPR;
• According to the Ukrainian Air Force, Russian forces attacked Ukraine with 121 strike UAVs;
• Russian forces struck a cargo ship and a postal terminal in Odesa;
• Russian forces struck a gas station in the Kharkiv region;
• Russian forces struck an industrial facility in Pavlohrad;
• Russian forces struck Nova Poshta terminals in Mykolaiv;
• Russian forces struck railway infrastructure and oil depots in the Zhytomyr region;
• Ukrainian losses amounted to approximately 1,410 troops over the past 24 hours.

---

• Russian forces took control of Kupiansk-Uzlovoy.

---

• Russian forces took control of Starye Yary.

---

• Russian forces took control of Lidino.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Ukrainian Attempts to Ease the Pincers on Several Fronts Fail
• Kyiv Loses Residents: Power Infrastructure Destroyed, City Enters “Survival Mode”
• Washington Gets The Diesel – Kyiv Gets The Bill

The post Military Situation In Ukraine On October 12, 2026 (Maps Update) appeared first on South Front.

In the Krasny Liman direction, reciprocal fighting continues near Zarechnoye and Yampol; Russian units hold positions near Ivanovka and repel Ukrainian assaults along the Zherebets River. In the Sumy direction, heavy small-arms fighting is under way north of Sumy near Khoten; Russian assault groups are advancing near Korenok and Turya. In the Kharkov direction, Russian units continue clearing the “Volchansk cauldron,” having advanced more than 1,000 metres on 25 sectors in a single day. In the Zaporozhye direction, Russian troops are fighting in Omelnyk, control Lyubitskoye and Novosoloshino, while the Ukrainian grouping in Orekhov is supplied mainly under cover of fog and by drones. In the Dobropolye direction, Russian units are enveloping Sergeyevka from three sides; the garrison in Dobropolye is cut off and a gradual assault on the town is under way. 

Krasny Liman direction 

In the Krasny Liman direction reciprocal fighting continues near Zarechnoye and Yampol. Ukrainian units hold their positions and mount counterattacks. Russian troops continue to hold positions near Ivanovka and Zarechnoye despite the presence and activity of Ukrainian forces on individual sectors. Fighting for Zarechnoye continues. The situation on the approaches to Krasny Liman remains difficult. Russian fighters are holding back the pressure of Ukrainian units along the Zherebets River, preventing any significant forces from breaking across it.

Heavy reciprocal fighting is under way near Katerinovka, Novomikhaylovka and Ivanovka. Partial Russian control is retained in Ivanovka. Ukrainian attacks from the direction of Drobyshevo do not cease. The Ukrainian side has not abandoned attempts to increase pressure from here toward Kolodezi. Fierce fighting continues in the area of Krasny Liman and its vicinity. Fresh Ukrainian reserves are regularly committed here. Russian troops hold the lines. Russian units are pressing Ukrainian defences from the direction of Zarechnoye. Attacks are also being conducted from the forest tracts in the northern part of the city. The Ukrainian side continues to mount active assaults toward the Mirnoye–Ivanovka strongpoints. Near Yampol Russian troops hold their positions and repel the assaults.

---

---

Sumy direction 

In the Sumy direction heavy small-arms fighting continues north of Sumy near Khoten. The “North” grouping reports advances by assault units near Korenok in Shostka district and Turya in Krasnopolye district. The Ukrainian side is attempting to infiltrate through tree lines into the rear of Russian units.

Russian aviation, artillery and drone crews struck concentrations of personnel and equipment of Ukrainian units in the areas of Yuryevo, Barilovka, Radkovka, Velikaya Rybitsa and Demyanovka. In Shostka district Russian troops continue to advance near Korenok. In Krasnopolye district assault groups of Russian units are advancing near Turya.

---

Kharkov direction 

On the right flank of the “East” grouping the Ukrainian side is attempting to compensate for the lack of success on the eastern bank of the Mokrye Yaly by advancing on the western bank. Consolidation in Fyodorovka and attempts to reach Bolshaya Novosyolka represent an effort to retain the initiative. However, the restoration of control over Ivanovka could sharply alter the balance: the flank would begin to exert pressure, and drone operators would obtain advantageous positions.

On the sector south of Kharkov, near Kazachya Lopan and Goptovka, fighting continues for Novaya Kazachya. Russian units are attempting to take it. At the same time there is movement toward Tsypovka from the east. The capture of Tsypovka and Novaya Kazachya before the end of the autumn campaign would constitute a notable success. In the Liptsy direction fierce fighting continues near Bugayevka and Tokarevka.

The Ukrainian side conducted one counterattack with two assault groups of the 58th Separate Motorised Infantry Brigade near Novaya Kazachya. It achieved no success; one assault group was completely destroyed, the second withdrew to its starting positions with losses. In the Volchansk and Veliky Burluk directions Russian troops continue clearing the “Volchansk cauldron.” In a single day progress exceeded 1,000 metres on 25 sectors.

---

Zaporozhye direction 

From the right flank of the “East” grouping fighting is under way in Omelnyk. An important point is control over Lyubitskoye and Novosoloshino. Having taken these settlements, Russian units are already fighting beyond the defensive line. Vozdvizhevka has not yet been fully cleared, but the Ukrainian side is blocked there. The territory north of Vozdvizhevka is under Russian control.

In the southern part of Ternovatoye Russian units are present; Ukrainian units are largely blocked by drones. Full control over territories such as Zelyonaya Dubrava, Zarnitsa, Svetlaya Dolina, Tersyanka and others has not yet been established. Favourable trends are noted near Ternovoye, Beryozovoye and Zaporozhskoye. The Ukrainian advance here has been localised; its grouping is blocked and cannot develop operations from this salient.

Looking at the Orekhov salient as a whole, the envelopments from the left and right flanks remain substantial. This is the main problem for the Ukrainian side. Even the transferred special forces will achieve little until the flanks near Yurkovka and Lyubitskoye are eased. Supply into Orekhov is now possible mainly under cover of fog or by drones. Almost no other options remain. This creates constant difficulties and losses. The restoration of control over Lyubitskoye and Novosoloshino, together with the continuing offensive, creates mounting problems for the Ukrainian side. The attempt to ease the flank near Vozdvizhevka failed.

---

Dobropolye direction 

South of Novopavlovka reciprocal fighting continues. The Ukrainian side is counterattacking in an attempt to dislodge Russian units. It is still too early to speak of a decisive turning point; the situation is developing dynamically. Successes have been noted in the area south of Dobropolye. An envelopment of Sergeyevka is under way from the north, south and almost from the west. Supply of Ukrainian units is possible mainly along a single road following the river — and then only in heavy fog.

Inside Dobropolye itself the situation for the Ukrainian side is deteriorating rapidly. The garrison is cut off; a gradual assault on the town and the expulsion of Ukrainian forces from the microdistricts are under way. There is a chance that the town will be taken by the end of October. The Ukrainian side is attempting to reverse the situation after its initial misassessment of the direction of the strike. Reserves transferred in expectation of a movement toward Andreyevka are now being partially redirected to the south-west. Counterattacks are under way near Zolotoy Kolodets and Novovodyanoye. In Novovodyanoye the Ukrainian side succeeded in dislodging part of the positions, but not all. Through the ruined Zolotoy Kolodets it is attempting to advance toward Rubezhnoye — so far without success.

Across the front, the pattern is the same: Russian units hold the line in the Krasny Liman direction, advance in Sumy and Kharkov, tighten the encirclement at Orekhov and Dobropolye. Drones, artillery and aviation remain decisive, and difficult terrain slows the pace without changing the trend. The Ukrainian side continues to transfer reserves and counterattack, yet fails to achieve a turning point.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Kyiv Loses Residents: Power Infrastructure Destroyed, City Enters “Survival Mode”
• Washington Gets The Diesel – Kyiv Gets The Bill
• Moscow Calls Out Kyiv’s Election Ceasefire Bluff

The post Ukrainian Attempts to Ease the Pincers on Several Fronts Fail appeared first on South Front.

The post Kyiv Loses Residents: Power Infrastructure Destroyed, City Enters “Survival Mode” appeared first on South Front.

On October 9, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced blocking sanctions against the International Criminal Court as an institution: a ban on all transactions, the freezing of assets under US jurisdiction, and the cutoff of cloud services, software, and payment processing. “Either the ICC will end its threats, or we will end the ICC,” he said. The sanctions include a six-month transition period and take full effect by April 2027. That date, not the announcement itself, is Europe’s real deadline.

Rubio has repeatedly tied Israeli interests to US actions against the court. The ICC previously issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant on charges of war crimes in Gaza. While the October 9 announcement focused heavily on protecting American personnel, the administration had previously denounced the tribunal’s investigations against “the United States and our close ally Israel” as “illegitimate and baseless,” indicating that Washington’s campaign is aimed at shielding both US and Israeli officials.

---

Europe: Between Declaration and Enforcement

The European Commission called the sanctions “deeply regrettable” and said it was “ready to take any necessary measures” to keep the Court functioning and protect operators within the Single Market. But the same formula contains a brake: the six-month delay “leaves room for dialogue.”

Kaja Kallas, speaking for the EU, called threats against the Court “unacceptable,” reaffirming commitment to the rules-based order but stopping short of announcing any protective mechanism. António Costa promised support through political, diplomatic, financial, and practical means, without naming a single concrete instrument.

Belgian Foreign Minister Maxime Prévot is one of those publicly demanding activation of the EU Blocking Statute. “The Court’s independence cannot depend on whom it investigates. Europe must act,” he said, after securing a place for the issue on the agenda of the October 12 meeting of EU foreign ministers.

The Netherlands, where the Court sits, asked the European Commission to prepare the statute but called it a “nuclear option,” emphasizing that six months provide space for dialogue. Germany and France joined a joint statement by eight countries expressing “strong disagreement,” without mentioning countermeasures.

Why the Blocking Statute Is No Panacea

The Blocking Statute (Council Regulation No. 2271/96 of 1996) was created to counter US extraterritorial sanctions related to Cuba, Iran, and Libya. Its mechanism includes a prohibition on EU companies and citizens complying with the designated third-country sanctions, a refusal to recognize foreign court judgments based on those sanctions, and the right to recover damages in court. In 2018, after the US withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal, the regulation was expanded.

Adding the US sanctions against the ICC to the regulation’s annex would mean a legal prohibition on European banks, insurers, and cloud providers complying with the US restrictions. But its purpose is not to save the ICC itself. It protects European operators and jurisdiction: the regulation binds European operators and cannot compel American banks, Microsoft, Amazon, or payment systems to keep servicing the Court.

Activating the statute in this case would be unprecedented: in its thirty years of existence, it has never been applied against US sanctions affecting an international judicial institution. Its earlier use concerned US measures against those same countries, which were bilateral trade restrictions rather than an assault on a body of international justice. If the EU goes ahead, it would be the first time the Blocking Statute is transformed from a trade-defense instrument into an instrument for defending what Brussels calls the “international legal order.”

That is why it is called “nuclear”: it means legal confrontation, but it does not solve the problem of technological dependence. The ICC relies on American banking services, payment systems, cloud servers, and software. The Blocking Statute can prohibit European companies from complying with the sanctions, but it does not create an alternative to dollar clearing, global payment networks, or the servers where the Court’s data is stored.

For Washington, it is enough that American companies themselves refuse to work with the ICC because of the risk of secondary sanctions; the Blocking Statute cannot prevent that.

What Is Already Happening and What Might Happen

The practical effects of the sanctions are already beginning to show. In response to earlier US measures, the ICC has shifted its office and collaboration software from Microsoft to openDesk, a German open-source platform, and developed workarounds for banking, insurance, and payroll. It has also paid staff months in advance to limit potential payroll disruption. But these safeguards do not eliminate the Court’s broader reliance on American financial and technological infrastructure, and full sanctions could still disrupt its operations.

The alternatives Europe can offer are limited: activating the Blocking Statute, developing payment and clearing alternatives to dollar-based infrastructure, and providing European cloud services. None can be implemented quickly enough to replace American financial and technological infrastructure by April 2027.

The Asymmetry That Explains Everything

The ICC began work in 2002, and its early practice focused predominantly on African conflicts: the DRC, Uganda, Sudan, Kenya, and Libya. This imbalance fueled accusations of selectivity and neocolonialism; in 2025, three Sahel states announced their withdrawal, calling the Court an “instrument of neocolonial suppression.”

The United States signed the Rome Statute under Clinton but never ratified it; in 2002, Congress passed the American Service Members’ Protection Act, authorizing the president to use “all necessary means” to free any American detained by the ICC. Washington did not object to the Court’s early focus on African situations, even as it rejected jurisdiction over itself. Its opposition hardened once the ICC moved toward cases involving the US and its allies.

In 2020, after the Appeals Chamber authorized an investigation into crimes by US military personnel and the CIA in Afghanistan, Washington sanctioned Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and a senior Court official. The following year, Prosecutor Karim Khan “deprioritized” the American component of the case. No US citizen has ever been indicted by the ICC.

Rubio calls the ICC a “body of globalists” threatening US sovereignty and has urged US allies to rein it in. The criticism has a real basis: the Court can hear cases involving crimes committed on the territory of a state party even if the accused’s country has not joined the Rome Statute. But the ICC remains a treaty court, dependent on state cooperation, Western donors, and political decisions of the UN Security Council.

Washington’s contradiction is built into the design itself: the US is attacking an institution that grew out of the liberal order it helped create. Europe’s is different: a declaratory commitment to international law coexists with the practical costs of reducing reliance on American infrastructure.

What October 12 Will Reveal

October 12 will show whether the EU moves from declarations to legal obligations. If the final document includes a European Commission decision to add the US sanctions against the ICC to the annex of Regulation 2271/96, that would mean a legal prohibition on European companies complying with the US measures — an unprecedented use of the Blocking Statute.

If the outcome is a general declaration, a call on Washington to rescind the sanctions, and a mandate for the Commission to “prepare options,” that would confirm a scenario in which Europe defends the principle of ICC independence but is not prepared to pay for that defense through a direct collision with US extraterritorial jurisdiction.

The probability of full and immediate activation of the statute on October 12 is low. A more realistic scenario is a political declaration of support, a Commission mandate to prepare a legal mechanism, and the preservation of the six-month pause for negotiations.

The Dilemma Beyond The Hague

The question is not whether the ICC survives past April 2027. The question is whether Europe can defend what Brussels calls the “international legal order” when the costs of that defense fall on its own companies, banks, and technological supply chains.

The Blocking Statute is a test of the EU’s ability to act not as a regulator but as a geopolitical player willing to bear the costs of conflict. If Europe limits itself to declarations and negotiations, it will confirm the formula Washington has already internalized: European sovereignty ends where American extraterritorial jurisdiction begins.

If it activates the statute, it will launch an open legal conflict with an ally on which its security depends. For now, every signal points to a third option: prepare the instrument, defer the decision, and bet that Washington will back down on its own.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Saudi Arabia Has Allies. But Who Will Fight Its War in Yemen?
• The Baltic Fuse: How Europe Is Building the Infrastructure for War With Russia
• Trump’s Surprise Energy Ceasefire Comes With Threats for Kyiv

The post The US Is Pulling the Plug on International Justice — Does Europe Have Its Own Power Source? appeared first on South Front.

In the Sumy direction, Ukrainian units struck one of the pipes used to supply Russian groups near Korchakovka, which may create local difficulties; however, reports of counterattacks near Korchakovka and Yunakovka remain unconfirmed. In the Kharkiv direction, Russian units are destroying the remnants of the garrison in the “Volchansk cauldron,” have taken Shirokoye and advanced more than 1,100 metres deeper into the cauldron. In the Slavyansk direction the situation remains complicated: Ukrainian units have pushed Russian fighters back in the northern part of Zarechnoye and continue attacks near Yampol, which may complicate the position in the area of the Svyatiye Gory national park. In the Dobropolye direction, Russian troops have encircled a Ukrainian grouping and control approximately half of the town, having thwarted two breakout attempts. French presidential candidate Nicolas Dupont-Aignan agreed with Donald Trump that Volodymyr Zelensky is obstructing the achievement of peace and called for the lifting of anti-Russian sanctions.

Sumy direction 

Ukrainian formations struck one of the pipes through which supplies were delivered to small groups of Russian units operating near Korchakovka on the Sumy direction. From there Russian units had been advancing toward Ivolzhanskoye and the recently captured Kiyanitsa. This also indirectly confirms an increase in Ukrainian activity on this sector. At the same time, reports of counterattacks and advances near Korchakovka and Yunakovka remain unconfirmed.

North of Miropolye crossings on the edge of the village were struck. Near Bolshoy Prikol Russian units are fighting for the forest tract east of the settlement. Small groups of Ukrainian formations have for some time been attempting to infiltrate these forests from the direction of Malaya Rybitsa, where they come under drone and artillery strikes.

To counter Russian drones the Ukrainian side has reinforced its air-defence grouping with electronic-warfare units, transferring the 309th Separate EW Regiment from training grounds to Sumy region. Heavy fighting continues near Khoten. In Shostka district Russian assault troops are clearing tree lines near Korenok.

---

Kharkiv direction 

Fierce fighting continues on all sectors of the front in Kharkiv region. Russian units are destroying the remnants of the Ukrainian garrison in the “Volchansk cauldron,” employing all available means of fire and supporting the advance of assault groups. The Ukrainian side is offering fierce resistance and searching for ways out of the encirclement. Ukrainian formations are unable to force a reliable corridor for themselves, while Russian troops are systematically destroying disorganised units.

Recently available objective-control footage confirms the capture of Shirokoye. Forward assault groups are already pressing Ukrainian forces on the territory of Komissarovo. Fighting for the village continues, and focal Ukrainian presence still remains in the tree lines to the north and in the vicinity of the border settlement of Rublyonoye. Near Veliky Burluk a large Ukrainian ammunition depot was destroyed by a precision air strike.

In the Liptsy direction assault groups of Russian units are conducting small-arms fighting near Bugayevka. There is progress near Tokarevka. In the Volchansk and Veliky Burluk directions Russian troops have advanced significantly deeper into the cauldron by more than 1,100 metres.

---

Slavyansk direction 

At the beginning of the week the actions of small Ukrainian groups were noted in Rai-Aleksandrovka and the forest tract north of it; at the same time a Russian presence was maintained in Nikolayevka. Subsequently reciprocal fighting and strikes continued around Nikolayevka and along the Seversky Donets–Donbass canal, including near Orekhovatka and Yurkovka. Russian positions were also repeatedly noted in Fyodorovka.

By the end of the period Ukrainian positions were noted near Orekhovatka, Yurkovka and north of Vasilyevskaya Pustosh; the western part of Rai-Aleksandrovka was assessed as a probable grey zone. At the same time Russian pressure east of Slavyansk persisted, although its pace was assessed as having slowed. Ukrainian units have somewhat pushed Russian fighters back in the northern part of Zarechnoye. Further Ukrainian advance within the settlement may complicate the position of Russian units in the area of the Svyatiye Gory national park.

Simultaneously Ukrainian forces continue attacks near Yampol. The Ukrainian side is attempting to advance through the marshy floodplain of the Seversky Donets, encountering strikes by Russian drone operators. Particular importance continues to attach to the struggle for Zarechnoye and Yampol, where local changes in positions may affect the situation of neighbouring units.

---

Dobropolye direction 

In the area of Dobropolye Russian units are conducting a successful assault. The Ukrainian grouping has been taken into encirclement and is being cut into two parts. Approximately half of the town is already under control. Having encircled the grouping, Russian troops are attempting to split it and have captured a fairly large amount of urban territory — somewhere up to half the town has been taken under control.

The Ukrainian side is desperately attempting to break the ring through Novovodyanoye and Zolotoy Kolodets toward Rubezhnoye. In Novovodyanoye positions are intermingled. Fighting is stubborn. Russian drone operators, artillerymen and aviation are repelling all attacks. Until Dobropolye is taken, further movement is likely to be difficult. On the outskirts of Belozyorskoye Russian drone operators are preparing a future assault which, according to estimates, may take place this autumn.

Russian units are advancing along the railway from Novopodgorodnoye toward Raipole and Kolonna-Mezhevaya. Fighting continues in Sergeyevka, the greater part of which is already under Russian control. Russian forces are also pressing Ukrainian defences north of the village, thereby creating a threat to the Kamenka-Yuryevka defensive node. Russian troops thwarted two attempts by Ukrainian forces to break out of Dobropolye.

Conclusion 

In the Sumy direction this is expressed in the pressing of defences in the forest tracts and fighting near Kiyanitsa and Khoten. In the Kharkiv direction — in the tightening of the ring around the “Volchansk cauldron” and the capturing of new settlements. In the Slavyansk direction — in the holding of key positions near Zarechnoye and Yampol and heavy reciprocal fighting. In the Dobropolye direction — in the encirclement of the Ukrainian grouping and control over half of the town. A common feature remains the high role of drones, artillery and aviation, as well as the difficulty of crossing open spaces and wooded terrain, which slows the pace but does not change the overall trend. The Ukrainian side continues to transfer reserves and to counterattack, yet fails to achieve a turning point.

French presidential candidate and leader of the party “Debout la France,” Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, agreed with U.S. President Donald Trump that Volodymyr Zelensky is obstructing the achievement of peace in Ukraine. “He is right. This is an obstacle on the path to peace. He is right,” Dupont-Aignan said on the CNews television channel. The politician added that because of the anti-Russian sanctions Europe is paying four to six times more for gas and up to ten times more for electricity than China. In his view France will have no economic future if the sanctions against Russia remain in place. “Therefore the sanctions must be lifted. We must help Trump conclude peace with Putin,” he noted. U.S. President Donald Trump stated to journalists on Saturday that Zelensky could have settled the Ukrainian conflict many times but did not do so. Therefore, according to him, Ukraine needs a new leader.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Trump Turns to Russian Diesel. Can Britain Keep Zelensky Afloat?
• Ukranian Defenses Crack in Zaporozhye
• Military Situation In Ukraine On October 10, 2026 (Maps Update)

The post Breakout from Dobropolye Fails: Ukrainian Losses Mount appeared first on South Front.

Saudi Arabia is desperately trying to reverse its losses on the ground in the Yemeni conflict, while Houthi attacks reach its airports and threaten its oil trade. Yet the coalition Riyadh has assembled does not match the war it wants to fight. Washington is engaged in the conflict with Iran, Turkey excludes offensive deployments, and Pakistan draws the line at crossing into Yemen. The kingdom has foreign support, but the burden of recovering and holding territory still falls on its weakened Yemeni partners.

Retreat Before the Counteroffensive

By early October 2026, Riyadh was responding to a deteriorating military position. The Houthis’ September advance along Yemen’s western coast brought the loss of Mokha and strategic positions around Bab el-Mandeb. These setbacks exposed the weakness of Saudi-backed forces and strengthened the Houthis’ leverage over a shipping route increasingly important to Saudi oil exports.

The renewed Saudi–Houthi escalation began with the July 13, 2026, strike on Sanaa airport’s runway. Saudi aircraft sought to prevent an Iranian Mahan Air flight carrying a senior Houthi delegation from landing without coalition permission. The plane later landed in Hodeida after Omani mediation, but the Houthis retaliated against Abha airport and subsequently announced a blockade on Saudi shipping. The strike broke the relative calm established by the 2022 truce; September’s coastal offensive then turned the confrontation into a major territorial setback for Riyadh’s partners.

The retreat exposed divisions within the anti-Houthi camp. Saudi–Emirati cooperation had broken down, and the withdrawal of the UAE left command arrangements that Riyadh failed to replace effectively. The factions expected to carry the offensive remained divided and poorly prepared for a sustained campaign. Saudi airpower could not compensate for the absence of a coherent local force.

The cost is also being felt inside Saudi Arabia. The October 10, 2026, attack on Riyadh’s King Khalid International Airport killed 12 people and wounded 309, according to Saudi authorities, and temporarily suspended operations. Riyadh blamed the Houthis, who renewed their warning against using Saudi airports and airspace on October 11. Airport disruption, cancelled flights and attacks on oil facilities bring the economic consequences of the war directly into the kingdom. The Saudi air campaign has not secured its civilian infrastructure.

Operation Dawn of Yemen began on October 5, 2026, after Saudi-backed Yemeni leader Rashad al-Alimi announced military action the previous day. The immediate objective was to recover the coastal positions lost in September, alongside the Saudi-backed Yemeni government’s broader ambition to restore its authority over Houthi-held territory. On October 11, the coalition announced the destruction of 136 military targets in a large-scale operation. That tally says little about whether Saudi-backed units can hold territory, secure supply routes or reopen shipping lanes.

Houthi footage released October 10, 2026: Shawaz drone strikes on Saudi-backed forces in Kahbub and Al-Waziya, as presented by the movement’s military media

---

Why Taiz Matters

The counteroffensive has produced conflicting accounts of control on the coast. On October 9, 2026, Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to Yemen announced that Bab el-Mandeb and Mayun Island had been cleared of Houthi forces. The Houthis maintained that they still held those positions. Control of the waterway remains contested, despite Riyadh’s announcements of success.

Taiz adds another strain after the coastal setbacks. Pressure on its approaches threatens supply routes and forces Saudi-backed units to divide their effort between the inland front and the Red Sea coast. The Houthis can disrupt their opponents’ counteroffensive without winning every coastal engagement: sustained pressure inland prevents those opponents from concentrating their forces. Saudi airpower does not resolve the fragmentation of the Saudi-backed Yemeni forces expected to hold the ground.

Houthi military footage released October 10, 2026: the movement presents advances and the surrender of opposing fighters in Sami, As-Silw and Al-Mawasit, Taiz province. The fighting places further pressure on the ground forces on which Riyadh’s campaign depends

---

The Iran War Narrows Saudi Options

The US–Israeli war with Iran, which began in February 2026, has expanded the military demands on Washington. Regional deployments, shipping protection and operations against Iran compete with Saudi requests for a larger American role in Yemen. Riyadh cannot assume that American support will expand on its terms. Its dependence on outside assistance has grown at the same time as the regional war has made that assistance more conditional.

The Iran war compounds Saudi Arabia’s vulnerability. Disruption at Hormuz has increased Riyadh’s dependence on its westbound pipeline and Red Sea ports. Southbound cargoes from Yanbu must pass Bab el-Mandeb; northbound exports follow a different route. Moving crude across the peninsula bypasses Hormuz, but it does not remove the threat to shipping off Yemen.

Pressure at Bab el-Mandeb gives Iran an additional advantage while the Houthis gain territory and bargaining power of their own. Their overlapping interests put Riyadh under pressure on two fronts. A Washington–Tehran agreement would not automatically end the war in Yemen: the Houthis have their own territorial, political and economic demands.

Washington is already involved through military advisers, intelligence and targeting support. The issue is the extent of that involvement, not American neutrality. Earlier in October 2026, Trump rejected Saudi requests for direct strikes; after the Riyadh airport attack, he said the United States might join them. Riyadh still lacks a firm American commitment to the wider offensive. Its requests compete with Washington’s military operations and priorities in the Iran war.

Allies Draw Their Own Lines

Riyadh’s response is to widen its support network through the Mecca pact, signed with Turkey and Pakistan on August 7, 2026, and activated on October 5. But an agreement to defend Saudi Arabia is not an agreement to win its war in Yemen. Pakistan’s military presence and Turkey’s technical, intelligence and air-defense assistance address the kingdom’s security without supplying a joint ground campaign across the border.

The alliance has a secretary-general, retired Pakistani general Nauman Mahmood, but its detailed force-generation timetable, operational command arrangements, cost-sharing formula and mission duration remain unpublished. On October 8, 2026, Ankara excluded offensive operations while parliamentary ratification was pending. On October 9, Islamabad confirmed a substantial military presence in the kingdom but ruled out crossing into Yemen to attack the Houthis. Riyadh is obtaining defensive commitments, not a combined expeditionary army.

Pakistan’s decision-making has also shifted. In 2015, parliament unanimously rejected participation in the Yemen war while promising to defend Saudi territory and holy sites. In October 2026, reinforcement commitments are proceeding without a parliamentary vote. The government says it followed the necessary procedures. The political result is a narrower domestic debate over a commitment that could draw Pakistan further into the conflict.

Fewer political checks make deployments easier to authorize and harder to reconsider once costs and casualties accumulate. Pakistan’s own security pressures add another burden: the October 11, 2026, emergency in opposition-run Khyber Pakhtunkhwa coincides with its commitments to Saudi Arabia. Islamabad is extending support abroad while managing a deepening confrontation at home.

Saudi-led coalition footage, October 9, 2026: the coalition announces strikes on three Houthi missile launchers. The continuing attacks inside Saudi Arabia expose the limits of destroying individual launch sites

---

Defensive support can still sustain the offensive by freeing Saudi assets for use in Yemen. France’s support for the defense of Yanbu and Britain’s refueling assistance contribute to that effort. But none of this repairs the weakness of Riyadh’s Yemeni ground forces. Pakistan also has its border with Iran and its mediation role to consider, while Turkey keeps its commitment separate from offensive operations. Each partner sets limits according to its own interests.

Different Interests, No Shared Victory

Pakistan’s proposed $1.21 billion IMF disbursement awaits board approval. Turkey’s September 2026 inflation was 29.73%, with its policy rate at 37%. Both face financial pressures that favor limited missions over an open-ended expedition. Who pays for the current assistance remains undisclosed.

Saudi Arabia’s updated deficit forecast is 4.9% of GDP. September 2026’s non-oil purchasing managers’ index stood at 55.3, indicating expansion before the latest escalation. The airport attacks and disruption to transport now place that activity under additional pressure. Riyadh must finance the campaign while protecting the infrastructure and trade on which its wider economic plans depend.

The Houthis are using that pressure to advance their negotiating demands. On October 10, 2026, the Houthi authorities proposed reciprocal exclusion of airports, ports and other humanitarian infrastructure from blockade and attack. The proposal seeks to exchange limits on disruption for concessions over access and blockade. It puts the economic consequences of continued fighting at the center of the bargaining.

The conflict of interests runs through the entire coalition. Riyadh wants to reverse Houthi gains and protect Saudi infrastructure. The Saudi-backed Yemeni government wants to restore its authority. Turkey and Pakistan seek bounded commitments, and Washington calculates its involvement against the Iran war. The Houthis seek concessions while preserving their military leverage. A common adversary has not produced an agreed objective or a shared willingness to bear the cost.

Saudi Arabia therefore has partners willing to help defend the kingdom, but those partners have made no common commitment to reverse Riyadh’s setbacks in Yemen or sustain the ground campaign of the Saudi-backed Yemeni government. That is the gap behind the coalition’s announcements and strike tallies. Without stronger local forces and a political settlement addressing shipping, attacks and access, additional foreign support can prolong the campaign without resolving it. Riyadh risks remaining surrounded by allies while carrying a war none of them has agreed to finish.

---

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Houthis Claim Key Taiz District as Pressure Tightens on Provincial Capital (Videos)
• Military Situation In Yemen On October 11, 2026 (Map Update)
• Houthis Strike Riyadh Airport Again, Claim Hits on Saudi Oil and Gas Facilities (Videos)

The post Saudi Arabia Has Allies. But Who Will Fight Its War in Yemen? appeared first on South Front.