Since Russia launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Starlink, and later Starshield, have become vital for Ukraine’s defense and even offensive capabilities.

Amid ongoing tussle over Starshield restrictions, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced on October 20, 2026, that he had positive talks with the United States to resolve the issues.

“I spoke with Marco Rubio, and it was a substantive conversation – focused on the issues that matter. I am grateful for his readiness to help and his clear position. First, ballistic missile interceptors, which are needed to protect lives. Second, early warning of Russian ballistic missile attacks, which is vital.

Third, we need to restore the Starlink/Starshield situation. Of course, all of this comes against the backdrop of our diplomatic efforts to end this horrific war and the constant killing of people. We agreed to get in touch again soon for an update.

Thank you, Marco, for the constructive discussion! Thank you to everyone in America who supports fair approaches!” Zelenskyy said in a post on X.

However, the restrictions have highlighted Ukraine’s heavy military dependence on US-linked satellite systems amid political friction with the  Trump administration, including mounting pressure over Ukrainian strikes on Russian energy infrastructure and related disputes over intelligence sharing and sanctions policy, even as Moscow intensifies attacks.

Why is Starshield?

To understand Starshield and its utility for Ukraine, one must understand Starlink.

Starlink is a satellite internet service developed and operated by SpaceX. It operates a constellation of thousands of smaller satellites at around 550 kilometers above Earth.

Notably, traditional terrestrial and satellite communication (SATCOM) networks cannot match Starlink’s bandwidth. Most conventional SATCOM systems also rely on geostationary (geostationary orbit) satellites, which introduce higher latency and limit the effectiveness of real-time applications such as remote piloting of UAVs, as the EurAsian Times explained earlier.

However, Starlink’s low-earth orbit (LEO) satellite architecture makes it more resilient to jamming and provides a more secure communication channel.

Starshield is SpaceX’s satellite program focused on government and national security. While Starlink is built for consumers, businesses, and general connectivity, delivering high-speed internet via a massive constellation of low-Earth-orbit satellites, Starshield is purpose-built for government customers—primarily the US Department of Defense, intelligence agencies, the US Space Force, and allied countries and their military, like Ukraine.

Ukraine has used both: commercial Starlink terminals widely for communications and logistics, and Starshield for higher-security military needs where available.

When Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022, it systematically targeted fiber-optic cables, cell towers, and power grids, destroying all traditional internet and jamming military radios. This is when Starlink stepped in.

Ukraine wanted Starlink terminals because they don’t rely on ground infrastructure and operate in blacked-out or contested areas. Starlink and Starshield provide connectivity even when the enemy damages or destroys traditional telecommunications infrastructure.

Ukrainian troops currently rely on Starshield for long-distance video transmission for military operations, information gathering, and communication. It serves as the backbone for encrypted voice, messaging, and data links between units, headquarters, and isolated positions. This includes real-time situational awareness systems.

Satellite internet connectivity is especially important for drone operations, which are central to Ukraine’s offensive and defensive strategies. These unmanned Ukrainian systems rely on satellite connectivity because current operations frequently require constant contact between controllers and aircraft.

Starshield enables long-range control and live video feeds from reconnaissance and attack drones far beyond the reach of normal radio links. It also supports interceptor drones that pursue fast Russian jet-powered drones, including the notorious Shahed class.

Ukrainian officials recently alleged that Starshield receptors stopped working in Ukraine when mounted on fast-moving objects, impairing drones that depend on them for onboard guidance over Ukrainian territory.

In fact, a Ukrainian Defense Ministry official said the sensors worked when moving, but only up to 100 miles per hour (160 kph), meaning drones had to slow down significantly. Some units reported disruptions at even lower speeds.

When connectivity is sketchy or slows, missions slow, lose accuracy, and sometimes become impossible. In fact, military officers quoted in media reports alleged that connections were lost during operations and missions were canceled when connectivity failed. These constraints may have been especially painful because Ukraine increasingly uses drones for long-range strikes, as well as air defense and interception.

Ukraine also uses Starshield to launch strikes from ground-based systems. It allows targeting data to flow quickly from sensors and drones to guns and HIMARS, closing the sensor-to-shooter loop and improving precision.

Additionally, Starlink/Starshield are crucial to Ukrainian forces receiving intelligence from allies. Western partners provide Ukraine with surveillance data regarding Russian air strikes, missile launches, troop movements, anti-aircraft positions, and escape routes.

Put succinctly, Ukrainian forces rely heavily on Starlink for battlefield management, Secure communications, Drone operations, artillery coordination and precision strikes, cybersecurity and intelligence sharing, and logistics and command networks.

At the same time, Starlink has significant civilian applications. It has also been crucial for hospitals, emergency services, local administrations, journalists, and ordinary citizens in frontline or occupied areas, who use it to stay connected when conventional networks fail.

By 2025, roughly 50,000 Starlink/Starshield terminals were operating in Ukraine, according to analysis from the Center for Security Studies at ETH Zurich. As of now, Ukraine has no equivalent resilient, high-bandwidth LEO alternative available at comparable scale and speed of deployment.

What is The Ongoing Issue?

Shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine, Ukraine’s former Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Digital Transformation, Mykhailo Fedorov, asked SpaceX owner Elon Musk on X to activate SpaceX’s Starlink satellites.

Musk complied almost immediately and shipped user terminals to Ukraine.

SpaceX’s satellite internet service has since provided resilient communications when ground networks were jammed or destroyed, supported drone operations, logistics, and reconnaissance, and helped maintain connectivity for civilians and the military. In fact, it has become the cornerstone of Ukraine’s offensive and defensive operations throughout the grinding war.

Earlier this month, Ukrainian forces were jolted by connectivity problems with Starshield terminals. The Ukrainian government alleged that the Trump administration and SpaceX had unilaterally restricted its access.

Serhiy Beskrestnov, a presidential adviser on defense technologies and well-known military blogger, stated: “Our armed forces did not receive a warning about these restrictions, and this led to the failure of a number of missions… It’s clear that this action cannot be a coincidence and is connected to the current political situation.”

President Zelenskyy said Russian forces appeared to exploit the disruption, noting that interceptor drones hunting jet-powered Shahed-type munitions depend on the connection.

“It is clear that the Russians are trying to take advantage of the problems with Starlink in Ukraine, as our interceptor drones depend on this connection among other things,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy posted to X.

Responding to the claims, Musk wrote on X that the US government owns and controls the Starshield systems, and that the US military and president control any limits on its speed or use. Starlink “cannot be used for offensive military action, as doing so would be inappropriate for a commercial company,” Musk highlighted in his post.

Citing sources, Reuters reported that the White House had ordered the Department of Defense to slow down Starshield services for Ukraine.

This sparked speculation that the crucial communications system was briefly restricted to add more pressure on Ukraine to stop its strikes on Russian refineries, which US President Donald Trump has repeatedly blamed for skyrocketing fuel costs that are hurting his Republican Party’s chances in the upcoming November midterm elections.

The Trump administration did not confirm these allegations.

However, the sudden Starshield outage coincided with massive Russian ballistic missile attacks for which Ukraine did not receive any warning from the US, just days after the Trump administration warned Kyiv to stop its attacks on Russian refineries or face suspension of intelligence sharing.

Another twist in this grueling tale came when The Telegraph reported that Musk approached Trump about slowing down Starshield in Ukraine.

However, Trump later said he did not believe that either he or Musk was responsible for Ukraine losing access to Starshield.

Over the weekend, Marco Rubio went on record saying Starshield is currently unavailable to Ukraine, adding that a request from Kyiv to use the system for attacks deep inside Russia was “under discussion.”

“Starlink is a commercial product, okay? And so it’s regulated and handled as a commercial product. Starshield is a defense product, a military product,” said Rubio in comments published by the Pentagon. “They’ve asked for access to it in order to conduct deep strikes inside of Russia. They don’t have access to it at the moment. That’s under discussion,” he added.

Ukrainian officials say the restrictions affected Starshield terminals they use for military operations. Secretary Rubio has stated that Starshield itself is not currently available to Ukraine and that Ukraine’s drone operations have relied on commercial Starlink. The two sides do not agree on which system was restricted.

• Contact the author at sakshi.tiwari13 (at) outlook.com
• Follow EurAsian Times on Google News

The post Starshield vs. Starlink: The Satellite Fight Complicating the Ukraine-Russia War and Kyiv’s Ties with the U.S. appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

Russia’s Tupolev Tu-160M, the world’s largest, heaviest, and fastest strategic bomber, has become even more formidable.

Its manufacturer, United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), says it has modernized roughly 80% of the aircraft’s onboard systems and equipment, keeping the nuclear-capable bomber relevant amid rapidly evolving battlefield demands.

The upgraded onboard systems include modern avionics, navigation technology, weapons-control systems, and a complete renewal of onboard radio-electronic equipment and upgrades to the aircraft-control system.

The company has also changed the strategic bomber’s propulsion system, introducing the new NK-32-02 engines, also described as the NK-32 Series 02.

The upgrades provide Russia with a modernized long-range strike platform, capable of delivering nuclear warheads as well as conventional military missions.

The Tu-160M ‘White Swan’ is also a key part of Russia’s nuclear triad, alongside land-based and submarine-launched missiles.

However, although the company has modernized and upgraded 80% of the onboard systems and equipment, it has not tinkered with the aircraft’s airframe, which remains unchanged. This means that the Tu-160M, known by its NATO reporting name Blackjack, retains the distinctive variable-sweep wings and overall appearance of the original Tu-160.

The Tu-160M’s variable-sweep wings can adjust from about 20° fully forward to 65° fully swept back for high-speed flight.

The forward-swept wings maximize lift and wingspan, allowing the massive aircraft to take off with its heavy payload, while the fully swept wings sharply reduce drag, enabling the Tu-160M to reach about Mach 2.05 and making it the fastest operational strategic bomber.

In short, variable-sweep wings let a large strategic bomber combine heavy-lift capability, long endurance, and genuine supersonic performance, a combination fixed-wing designs struggle to match.

More importantly, Russia has rebuilt the engineering and industrial capacity to produce a strategic, nuclear-capable, long-range bomber nearly three decades after Moscow lost this crucial capability.

Tupolev head Yuri Abrosimov discussed the Tu-160M’s modernization efforts in an article published by the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), which includes Tupolev.

Highlighting the Tu-160’s unique characteristics, Abrosimov said, “The Tu-160 strategic missile carrier is still the best supersonic aircraft in the world, surpassing in its characteristics a similar aircraft complex available in the United States.”

“46 official world records have been set on the Tu-160, including the record for flight duration and range. The resumption of mass production of the legendary ‘White Swan’ is the development of unique competencies and industrial and technological sovereignty of our country,” he added.

Abrosimov underlined that, in addition to modernizing 80% of the onboard systems, including a new powerplant, the company has refurbished several assembly lines from scratch using modern technologies.

The company has also upgraded workshop equipment and its flight-test facilities, and introduced electron-beam welding and vacuum annealing systems for titanium assemblies.

Tupolev has also rebuilt supply lines for producing the upgraded Tu-160M bombers.

“One of the main difficulties we are facing is the restoration of production cooperation, starting with suppliers of materials and semi-finished products. We have actually rebuilt the technological chains for a number of units, taking into account the use of modern technologies,” Abrosimov said.

He also highlighted the difficulties Russia faced in restarting Tu-160M production, and the use of modern digital technologies in the process.

“The implementation of the Tu-160 reproduction program required the creation of a fundamentally new unified digital environment for working on the project. The design bureaus of Sukhoi, Mikoyan, and Ilyushin participated in the preparation of digital documentation.”

He further said that the upgradation of onboard systems was done in a way that newer systems can be integrated without requiring modernization of the entire complex.

“When upgrading on-board systems, modern approaches have been applied, which make it possible, if necessary, to further increase the functionality of the systems and the aircraft as a whole, as an aviation complex, without significant improvements.”

“The approaches used in building the architecture of the avionics complex will allow installing new systems to replace those that become obsolete over time, without modernizing the entire complex. This makes it possible to constantly provide a response to the emerging demands of time,” he said.

Notably, Russia has localized the upgrade of the Tu-160M bomber and refurbished its assembly units while under crippling Western sanctions that specifically target the Russian military-industrial and aerospace complex, including the UAC, Rostec, Tupolev, and the Kazan manufacturing plant that produces the Tu-160.

Earlier, the UAC disclosed that it digitized the complete design documentation for the Tu-160M and modernized over 40% of equipment at the Kazan Aviation Plant to restart bomber production.

In the 1980s, during the Soviet era, the Kazan Aircraft Production Plant produced the Tu-160.

Production continued until 1992, when Russian President Boris Yeltsin ordered an end to serial production after the Soviet Union dissolved in December 1991.

During this time, the Kazan plant built nearly 35 Tu-160M bombers.

Notably, when the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991, 19 of the nearly 35 Tu-160M bombers were in Ukraine, which announced their integration into the Ukrainian Air Force.

However, in the following years, Ukraine transferred eight Tu-160 bombers to Russia under a debt-relief program and dismantled the remaining bombers under a Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program with the US.

Russia decided to restart Tu-160M production in 2016 and again chose the same plant, the Kazan Aviation Plant (KAZ), for the job.

The facility required substantial modernization, including new equipment, rebuilding workshops, and restoring titanium-welding capability.

However, sanctions slowed the program. The first round of sanctions was imposed on Russia in 2014, following the occupation of Crimea.

Following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, much stronger sanctions were imposed on Russia, especially on its military-industrial complex.

In June 2024, UAC announced it had completed modernization at three workshops for producing new Tu-160 bombers. Overall, from 2016 to 2024, Russia modernized about 10 production facilities for the strategic bomber.

Despite crippling sanctions, Russia restarted production of the Tu-160M bomber and even achieved 80% modernization of its onboard systems, no small feat.

However, the 80% figure comes from internal company claims and has not been independently verified.

Russia has signed a contract to produce 10 Tu-160M bombers.

The first newly built Tu-160M2 made its maiden flight in Kazan on January 12, 2022, becoming the first new Tu-160 built since 1992.

However, the program has missed repeated deadlines.

Russia was supposed to receive four Tu-160M bombers by 2023: two newly built Tu-160M2 and two upgraded Tu-160Ms.

The deadline was then extended first to 2024, and then to 2025.

By the end of 2025, Russia had received only two Tu-160M strategic bombers. It remains unclear whether the two are new or upgraded.

Still, restarting Tu-160 production, digitizing its engineering design documentation, and upgrading 80% of its onboard systems, including a new engine, despite crippling Western sanctions, remain major achievements for Russian military aviation.

The Tu-160M is not only a nuclear delivery platform but also a strategic conventional military platform, and it has been used in both the Syrian War and the Ukraine War.

It remains the largest combat aircraft in the world; it could carry 45,000 kg of ordnance across its two internal bays, or up to twelve nuclear-armed cruise missiles, and fly 14,000 km without refueling. Its supersonic speed of 2,300 km/h and variable-sweep wings made it a standout in aviation history.

Russia is slowly restarting production and upgrading its Tu-160M bomber, while the US and China are already working on next-generation strategic bombers, the B-21 Raider and H-20.

The Northrop Grumman B-21 stealth bomber remains on track to enter operational service in 2027, and China’s Xi’an H-20 is also in production, though its current status is unknown.

While the Tu-160 is unmatched in payload capacity and can exceed Mach 2, it isn’t stealthy, unlike the B-2 Spirit or the under-development B-21 Raider, which can penetrate contested airspace.

• Sumit Ahlawat has over a decade of experience in news media. He has worked with Press Trust of India, Times Now, Zee News, Economic Times, and Microsoft News. He holds a Master’s Degree in International Media and Modern History from The University of Sheffield, UK. 
• He can be reached at ahlawat.sumit85 (at) gmail.com

The post Russia’s Nuclear Blackjack Returns: Tupolev Says 80% of Systems Renewed on Tu-160M Bomber appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

As Ukraine battles near-daily Russian bombardment, Kyiv must be rueing the fateful decisions made by its leadership in the 1990s, which agreed to voluntarily degrade its military and nuclear capabilities.

Ironically, it was none other than the US and Russia that encouraged Kyiv to transfer/destroy its nuclear bombs, and other critical military assets like ballistic and surface-to-air missiles, and strategic bombers.

As fate would have it, some of the same nuclear-capable bombers that Kyiv transferred to Russia are believed to have been used by Moscow to attack Ukraine.

As the US pressures Ukraine to accept a ceasefire on Russia’s terms, including crippling limits on Ukrainian military size and power, Kyiv would think a million times before any commitment, which could degrade its military.

Ukraine’s Inheritance From The Soviet Union

On December 8, 1991, Boris Yeltsin – President of the Russian Federation in the Soviet Union, Leonid Kravchuk – President of Ukraine, and Stanislav Shushkevich – Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of Belarus, met at a hunting lodge in Belarus and signed an agreement declaring that the Soviet Union “as a subject of international law and a geopolitical reality” had ceased to exist and created the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in its place.

Nearly two weeks later, on December 25, the Kremlin lowered the Soviet Sickle and Hammer flag for the last time, and the Soviet Union became history, fragmenting into 15 new independent states.

At that time, the Soviet Union (USSR) was one of the world’s two superpowers.

It had the world’s largest arsenal of nuclear bombs, thousands of nuclear delivery platforms, including launchers and strategic bombers, and Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs).

The 15 independent states did not divide these military assets orderly, and the country hosting the nuclear warheads and delivery platforms often became their de facto owner.

Ukraine, the second-most populous and economically powerful republic in the Soviet Union, inherited approximately 1900 strategic nuclear warheads, between 2,650 and 4,200 Soviet tactical nuclear weapons, 176 ICBMs (130 SS-19 and 46 SS-24) and associated launchers, nearly 600 nuclear-capable KH-55 cruise missiles, and approximately 102 strategic bombers: 23 Tu-95MS, 19 Tu-160, and more than 60 Tu-22M3.

This large nuclear arsenal would have made Ukraine the world’s third-largest nuclear power, after Russia and the US. Worryingly, Ukraine inherited not only nuclear warheads, but also delivery platforms, such as nuclear-capable missiles, launchers, and nuclear-capable strategic bombers.

The situation was a non-proliferation nightmare for the world, and the US and Russia, the long-time Cold War adversaries, soon found a common cause to come together and take away these new countries’ nuclear assets, in the process robbing them of their deterrence against external aggression.

However, the disarmament process forced Ukraine to transfer not only its nuclear assets but also its conventional military platforms, such as ICBMs, cruise missiles, and strategic bombers, assets that could have been crucial for Kyiv in defending its territory from Russian aggression.

On December 5, 1994, leaders of the US, the UK, and the Russian Federation met in Budapest, Hungary, and signed the Budapest Memorandum, under which the three countries gave security assurances to Ukraine in return for its accession to the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as a non-nuclear-weapons state.

Under the agreement, Ukraine agreed to transfer its nuclear warheads to Russia.

Further, under the 1992 Lisbon Protocol to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) and the US-funded Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program (1993), Ukraine committed to dismantling all strategic nuclear delivery systems by December 5, 2001. This deadline was later extended to 2006.

The Degradation of the Ukrainian Air Force

Ever since the war in Ukraine started in February 2022, Russia has routinely used its strategic bombers to launch missiles at Ukraine.

In 1991, Ukraine inherited approximately 102 strategic bombers: 25 Tu-95MS, 19 Tu-160, and more than 60 Tu-22M3.

According to the Eurasian security think tank Jamestown Foundation, when the Soviet Union collapsed, Ukraine hosted two of its most important strategic air bases.

At Uzin, 70 kilometers south of Kyiv, the Soviets stationed 25 Tu-95MS turboprop nuclear missile carriers. At Pryluky, 130 kilometers east of the capital, the Soviet Union stationed its only operational unit of 19 new, supersonic Tu-160 Blackjack bombers.

In February 1992, the unit at Uzin declared allegiance to Ukraine. In May 1992, just one week after Russia announced it was forming its own national armed forces, Ukraine announced it was taking command of all long-range aviation units on its territory. This included the Tu-160 base at Pryluky.

The Tu-160s were particularly lethal. It was designed to match the American B-1B bomber, but was significantly larger and faster.

It remains the largest combat aircraft in the world; it could carry 45,000 kg of ordnance across its two internal bays, or up to twelve nuclear-armed cruise missiles, and fly 14,000 km without refueling. Its supersonic speed of 2,300 km/h and variable-sweep wings made it a standout in aviation history.

However, under the START-1 treaty and CTR agreement, Ukraine agreed to dismantle all of these strategic bombers.

Thus began the consensual elimination of Ukraine’s strategic aviation.

Under the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction program, the United States funded the destruction of some strategic bombers and missiles, including the extraction of valuable metals.

However, some bombers were not destroyed.

At the time, the newly independent Ukraine was struggling with debt. For decades, as part of the Soviet Union, Ukraine got access to heavily subsidized fuel and gas. When the Soviet Union dissolved abruptly in 1991, Moscow suddenly cut off this subsidized gas.

Struggling with mounting debt, Ukraine agreed to transfer eight Tu-160 and three Tu-95MS bombers to Moscow in exchange for US$285 million in debt relief. This decision remains controversial, as the estimated value of a single Tu-160 was between US$250 and US$300 million.

Between 1999 and 2000, Kyiv transferred Tu-95s and Tu-160s as partial payments on natural-gas debts, along with 575 Kh-55 missiles.

This fateful decision not only degraded Ukraine’s air power and deterrence, but it also multiplied Russia’s air power, creating a military imbalance that Moscow is exploiting in the current war.

In 2024, an investigation by Ukrainian investigative news site Skhemy found that six of the eight Tu-160 bombers transferred to Russia were still active in military operations against Ukraine.

The remaining strategic bombers in Ukraine were dismantled, often with technical and financial assistance from the US.

In March 2007, the US State Department reported that Ukraine had dismantled 57 Tu-22 bombers, 27 Tu-95s, six Tu-142s, 11 Tu-160s, for bomber trainers, 346 Kh-22 ASMs, and 483 Kh-ALCMs (air-launched cruise missiles).

While these platforms were nuclear-capable and theoretically could have been used to launch nukes, they also had conventional military capabilities.

By dismantling and transferring these military assets to Russia, Kyiv delivered a double blow to itself – degrading its own capabilities while multiplying its adversary’s.

In the annals of military history, few decisions have proven as fateful – or as irreversible.

• Sumit Ahlawat has over a decade of experience in news media. He has worked with Press Trust of India, Times Now, Zee News, Economic Times, and Microsoft News. He holds a Master’s Degree in International Media and Modern History from The University of Sheffield, UK. 
• He can be reached at ahlawat.sumit85 (at) gmail.com

The post The Bombers U.S. Paid to Scrap Weakened Ukraine, Helped Russia. Why Did Kyiv Clip Its Own Wings? appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

The world’s first supersonic passenger airliner—the Soviet Tu-144—may have become history after a brief but troubled stint that ended in commercial failure. However, some Russian volunteers refuse to let it vanish into oblivion and are reportedly advancing efforts to restore the aircraft for static display.

At the height of the Cold War, the Tu-144 “Concordski” was seen as an answer to the Anglo-French supersonic aircraft, Concorde.

The Russian airliner beat the Concorde in the skies twice: first with its maiden flight on December 31, 1968, two months before Concorde, and second with its first supersonic flight in June 1969, about four months before Concorde.

To preserve this legacy, a group of Russian volunteers has spent years coaxing life back into a Tu-144 airframe on the shared grounds of the Gromov Flight Research Institute and Zhukovsky Airport.

Interestingly, though, these volunteers are neither engineers from Russia’s state design bureau nor museum-paid technicians, but enthusiasts with limited resources aiming to restore a retired Tupolev Tu-144D. 

The aircraft, registered CCCP-77115, is parked on the shared grounds of the Gromov Flight Research Institute and Zhukovsky Airport outside Moscow. It served as a static exhibit at the MAKS air show for several years, but its fate remains unclear, as the air show has been suspended since 2021 due to the war in Ukraine.

Passionate volunteers have carried out extensive external and internal restoration work on the aircraft. One volunteer involved, Pavel Efter, has posted videos of the work on both airplanes on his YouTube channel, “Restorer144,” since 2023.

In the videos, volunteers can be seen turning on the electrical power supply and batteries, testing the fuel gauge, fuel pump, and fuel pressure indicator in the cockpit, checking the landing gear lights and inflating the tires, testing the cabin lighting, repairing the analog navigation system, examining the electrical schematics, cleaning the outside of the aircraft, inspecting the SSP-2A fire detection system and smoke sensors, raising and lowering the nose, testing the retractable canards, testing the APU’s bay doors beneath the aircraft, and actually installing the TA-6A Auxiliary Power Unit (APU).

In Instagram comments, Efter told enthusiasts and followers that the Tu-144D is being refurbished only for static exhibition and will not return to flight.

Ukraine Begs For U.S. Help as Europe Remains “Blind in Space”: Why Only America Can See Russian Missiles?

Notably, the TA-6A and other mechanical and electrical modifications to the Tu-144D (as seen in the video above) have recently been made, sparking rumors that the volunteers may be preparing the aircraft for another static exhibition at MAKS, probably in 2027.

Nonetheless, the volunteers have been working on restoring the aircraft for several months. In July 2026, media reports noted that the volunteers had already started the electrical system and connected a ground power source, adding that even the well-known nose-lowering mechanism had become operational.

Another Russian state-funded news website, Mir24, provided more details on the volunteers. “There is a problem with such glass fuses now. They aren’t used anywhere; you can’t always find them in old stock. We throw out a cry on the Internet: who has something, who can help with what,” Sergey Chechetkin told the publication at the time. Sergey is a former aviation engineer who devotes all his free time to the Tu-144.

The report also noted that volunteers have completely recreated the plane’s cabin. Volunteers collected the missing devices from across the country and began restoring the aircraft by tidying the service panels and lamps and installing the original chairs. Initially, the 77115 board wasn’t a passenger deck; it served as an experimental testbed. “We find it in different places. Old blocks are transmitted at the bases; you can find something here. Here we are installing the blocks on the mounts,” a volunteer named Alexey told Mir24.

Russia’s Nuclear Blackjack Returns: Tupolev Says 80% of Systems Renewed on Tu-160M Bomber

The project carries no grand political statement. The volunteers do not frame their work as resistance or protest. Instead, they speak of history. “This is not just a museum exhibit, but a legend that we should be proud of. You can still learn a lot from it; many developments aren’t available on other planes yet. It is still ahead of its time,” said Alexey Amelushkin, an engineer at the training and methodological center of PJSC Tupolev, earlier. 

Needless to say, returning this legendary airframe to flight is widely regarded as impractical, especially since Kolesov RD-36-51 engines are long out of production, spare parts are scarce, and certification requirements would be formidable.

Therefore, Efter and his colleagues are only restoring the aircraft’s ability to present itself: nose down in the classic pose, canards extended, cabin lights on, systems powered by its own APU.

First Into The Air, But Not The First To Succeed

The Tupolev Tu-144 was the world’s first supersonic passenger airliner.

Designed by the Tupolev Design Bureau, the aircraft was rushed into development after the then-Soviet leader, Nikita Khrushchev, demanded a supersonic transport that would fly before its Western counterpart.

The prototype made its maiden flight on 31 December 1968 near Moscow, beating Concorde into the air by more than two months. Subsequently, the aircraft went supersonic for the first time in June 1969 and became the first commercial aircraft to reach Mach 2 in May 1970.

The Tu-144 was built to be larger and faster than Concorde, and featured a distinctive double-delta wing and a drooping nose for better landing visibility. Later models also added retractable canards to improve low-speed handling.

However, Western experts and officials claimed the Soviets stole the Concorde plans, which may have helped them build the Tupolev Tu-144 before the Concorde.

These claims reportedly stemmed (at least in part) from the uncanny design similarities between the world’s first two supersonic passenger aircraft.

Despite its early successes over the Concorde, the airplane faced technical issues.

For example, Tu-144’s early Kuznetsov NK-144 engines required constant afterburner use to sustain supersonic cruise, making it extremely noisy, fuel-thirsty, and shorter-range than Concorde, which could supercruise without afterburners. Moreover, reliability problems emerged during testing and maintenance, and the cabin was very noisy and vibrated a lot.

Why UAE Pulled Out Of Rafale F5 Co-Development? Did EDGE Group Demand More Than It Could Chew?

On June 3, 1973, during a demonstration flight at the Paris Air Show, a production Tu-144 broke apart in midair and crashed into the French village of Goussainville, killing all six crew members along with eight additional people on the ground.

Although the most widely accepted explanation is that the crew overstressed the airframe during fast maneuvers, the precise cause of this disaster remains uncertain.

The Tu-144 entered limited commercial service with Aeroflot in 1975, initially carrying mail and cargo on the Moscow–Almaty route, followed by passenger flights in Nov 1977.

However, the aircraft flew only about 55 passenger services before a second major incident. In May 1978, a fuel-line rupture and fire during a test flight claimed the lives of two crew members and formally ended passenger operations.

After this debacle, the aircraft continued brief cargo and experimental work even as its rival program—the Concorde—struggled with its own set of issues.

Both programs were eventually canceled because of poor safety records and concerns about economic viability. However, Concorde was far more successful than the Tu-144 and wasn’t discontinued until 2003.

The Soviet Union, for its part, built only 16 airframes before operations ceased in 1983. A few surviving examples later trained pilots for the Soviet Buran space shuttle, and one modified aircraft served as a flying laboratory in a joint NASA–Russian research program from 1996 to 1999, conducting its final flights in support of future supersonic transport studies, as earlier explained in detail by the EurAsian Times. 

Though neither the Tu-144 nor the Concorde survived, both programs have inspired people worldwide to make supersonic commercial travel a reality. Earlier this year, United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) CEO Vadim Badekha confirmed that the Zhukovsky National Research Center is working on a supersonic airliner prototype. He said the effort had moved beyond paper studies into “hardware,” with UAC providing active support, and expressed confidence that the center would complete the work.

The Bombers U.S. Paid to Scrap Weakened Ukraine, Helped Russia. Why Did Kyiv Clip Its Own Wings?

“Yes, such work is underway at the Zhukovsky Research Center, and we are actively assisting. The work is no longer confined to paper – it is already being carried out in hardware. A prototype of such an aircraft is under development, and we believe the Zhukovsky Research Center will successfully complete this work,” he told TASS.

Meanwhile, NASA is advancing work on the X-59, an experimental aircraft in the agency’s Quiet Supersonic Technology (Quesst) program that could go supersonic without generating a sonic boom or a loud, thunder-like sound when it exceeds the speed of sound.  In addition, China is developing a supersonic passenger aircraft that could make its maiden flight by 2027. Last year, reports noted that the Chinese commercial aerospace company leading the project conducted the first test flight of a detonation ramjet engine. 

As for the Tu-144, this aircraft is remembered as a bold but ultimately unsuccessful engineering achievement. It is, perhaps, for this reason that the volunteers outside the state machinery of Russia are doing everything they can to ensure that the supersonic airliner does not get lost in pages of history.

• Contact the author at sakshi.tiwari13 (at) outlook.com
• Follow EurAsian Times on Google News

 

The post Russia’s ‘Concorde’ is Back: World’s 1st Supersonic Passenger Airliner Lives On as Volunteers Fix Tu-144 appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

There is now a growing debate over what constitutes war and whether it should include strikes on data centers. They represent a new front in warfare, in which facilities powering the technology behind many critical industries have become targets.

As it is, the definition of a military attack seems to be changing over time.

Conventionally, it was understood to occur when tanks or fighter planes crossed a border. Then it was expanded to include the use of missiles that were fired without crossing the border but hitting a city and causing physical destruction of “vital infrastructure and death”.

Such attacks justified a country retaliating under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, which legitimizes a war under “Right to Self Defense” if an “armed attack occurs.”

Now there is a growing school of thought that “vital infrastructure” must include any disruptive attack on data centers, whether kinetic or non-kinetic, amounting to significant loss of function. It should be treated as a use of force and trigger the affected country’s right to self-defense under Article 51, the argument goes.

Apparently, vulnerabilities in modern digital infrastructure have turned data centers into primary targets in contemporary warfare. As society becomes deeply integrated with cloud computing, artificial intelligence, and automated logistics, data centers have evolved into the nervous system of modern statecraft.

Attacks on digital infrastructure are no longer limited to cyberattacks (non-kinetic) that cause banking collapses and disrupt vital systems like power grids and hospitals by cutting off Internet access; they now include kinetic strikes on data hubs that affect nations’ military capabilities and expose financial vulnerabilities.

After all, modern defense systems rely heavily on cloud-based logistics. Data centers process satellite imagery, coordinate drone operations, run predictive maintenance algorithms for fighter jets, and host classified communication networks. Thus, taking down these nodes effectively blinds an adversary’s command structure.

This has been noticed in the recent conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine. For instance, on September 23, Russian Geran-5 jet drones hit the Inkom Business Center in Kyiv,  housing Datagroup’s data center. Four people died, and internet service for 100,000 households was down for hours.

On September 27, Kyivstar — Ukraine’s central mobile operator — and Vodafone Ukraine’s data centers were hit. Russia’s Defense Ministry  justified this by saying that “Data centers were being used for the benefit of the Ukrainian military.”

Two weeks later, Ukraine returned the favor. It launched highly targeted long-range drone strikes hitting major data hubs across Russia, inflicting significant disruption on the country’s digital economy.

Between October 8 and October 14, 2026, Ukrainian forces carried out a series of “symmetrical responses” to counter earlier Russian attacks on Ukrainian internet and telecommunications assets. The strikes specifically crippled infrastructure belonging to Yandex (often called “Russia’s Google”) and Sberbank, Russia’s largest banking and technology conglomerate.

Similarly, in February-March 2026, during US-Israeli strikes on Iran, the latter hit back not only at oil but at data centers — Google, Microsoft, and Oracle cloud infrastructure in the Gulf, particularly those located in Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.

Apparently, when Amazon Web Services’ Bahrain facility suffered “physical damage to cooling infrastructure from debris”, it became the first known case of an AWS data center damaged in an interstate war.

Iranian missiles near Al Udeid Air Base damaged an Oracle Cloud data center in Doha. Microsoft also confirmed “connectivity issues” in the Qatar Central region.

The same happened to the Google data center in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, which hosts Aramco cloud.

G42 [UAE AI company backed by Microsoft] data center in Abu Dhabi was also affected, forcing it into blackout mode.

In other words, from Kyiv to Bahrain, a pattern is clearly apparent  — belligerents no longer distinguish between cloud and command. Data centers that host banks and brigades are treated as brigades. They have officially transitioned from commercial tech infrastructures to critical national security assets.

As Omar Sultan Al Olama, the UAE’s Minister of State for Artificial Intelligence, Digital Economy, and Remote Work Applications, said the other day,  “Unfortunately, they’re more important than bridges. They’re more important than roads. They’re more important than tunnels because our whole lives are on these devices that we’re using”.

Incidentally, the UAE is revising plans for a 5-gigawatt AI data center project following the Iranian strikes. The original plan envisioned a 10-square-mile campus in Abu Dhabi, to be built in partnership with American tech companies like Oracle, Nvidia, and Cisco. Now the data centers will likely be spread out across the UAE. Sultan Al Olama said, “ The UAE will change its data centre rules and stop promoting where they are”.

According to Kirk Cameron, founding director of the Institute for Advanced Computing at Virginia Tech, “Data centers are now on the critical path for modern digital infrastructure. The loss of key data centers could collapse economies, disrupt public and private transportation with loss of GPS, and affect government essential services for health, emergency dispatch, and power grids.”

Many agree with him when he argues that  “Data centers are competitive advantages in warfare. Knocking out capabilities means potentially crippling combat operations for an adversary. It’s also a form of economic warfare and could lead to longer-term competitive challenges for the target.”

All this brings the question of whether bombing a data center constitutes an act of war.  Does the definition of war need to change?

The main challenge to this question lies in what is called the “Gray Zone” of conflict, particularly in non-kinetic attacks. Unlike a missile launch, which leaves clear radar signatures and identifiable points of origin, cyber operations offer plausible deniability.

Under International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, attacking a dual-use target is governed by the principles of distinction and proportionality.  Here, attacking a dual-use target is legal only if the military advantage gained outweighs the civilian collateral damage.

If an attack on a data center shuts down military communications but also disables the life-support monitoring systems of dozens of regional hospitals, the strike violates proportionality. Such an operation can be classified as a war crime, reinforcing the argument that major cyber infrastructure operations carry the same legal weight and consequences as traditional warfare.

But any clear distinction in such cases is neither easy nor free from contention. For instance, when Russia attacked data centers in Ukraine, it claimed that these were being used by Ukrainian intelligence and military. However, Ukraine denied the charge.

As  Kasia Klonowska, an authority on international law, says, “Due to a lack of a definition of the treaty- terms weapons, means or methods of warfare, it is unclear whether non-weaponized AI decision-support systems should be subjected to a legal review prescribed by Article 36 of the Additional Protocol I. It remains a challenge to determine exactly what should be subjected to review beyond weapons.

“You have very limited situations in which they would actually qualify as lawful targets when they’re used by the military, and even then, it’s very difficult for the attacker to know whether that’s happening or not. If they are purely processing military data, they could be legitimate targets. But many, if not most, are dual-use.”

To address the legal ambiguity surrounding digital warfare, Prof. Ben Hines has proposed what he calls a “Substantive Necessity” framework, reinterpreting international law under Article 51 of the UN Charter.

Under this framework, a non-kinetic cyber attack amounts to an armed attack when the victim state, based on clear and convincing evidence, apprehends a hostile act that has fundamentally compromised, or is imminently poised to compromise, the functioning or security of infrastructure crucial to the state’s ability to function.

The framework argues that traditional international legal thresholds for “force” and “gravity” do not inherently require physical destruction or kinetic weaponry. Under this test, taking down a country’s primary data center cluster that hosts banking, health, emergency dispatch, GPS — even without an explosion — is an armed attack. Because effects equal or exceed kinetic.

Viewed thus, it is not surprising that Western nations like the US, the Netherlands, and France are clearly asserting that a disruptive attack on data centers that causes significant loss of function will be treated as a use of force and may trigger the right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter.

In sum, as the line between the physical and digital worlds disappears, international law is adapting to treat high-consequence infrastructure attacks as equivalent to an armed attack.

Data centers are now firmly on the front lines of global conflict, where a single breach can serve as the definitive catalyst for war. The lines between civilian infrastructure and military assets are dangerously blurring.

• Author and veteran journalist Prakash Nanda is Chairman of the Editorial Board of the EurAsian Times and has been commenting on politics, foreign policy, and strategic affairs for nearly three decades. He is a former National Fellow of the Indian Council for Historical Research and a recipient of the Seoul Peace Prize Scholarship.
• CONTACT: prakash.nanda (at) hotmail.com

The post Iran Hit Amazon. Russia Struck Kyiv’s Data Centers. Ukraine Hit Yandex. Can Such Attacks Trigger Article 51? appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

Russia is prepared to halt attacks on Ukraine for a single day to allow presidential elections but will not agree to a longer ceasefire, the Kremlin said on Monday. 

But had the Russian attack on Ukraine, as planned, succeeded in the initial days, the Ukraine-Russia war would not have dragged into the fifth year, and there would have been no talks of changes in leadership.

Dmitry Peskov said President Vladimir Putin would order Russian forces not to strike Ukraine on polling day if elections were held. “If they truly want to hold elections in Kyiv, then the president of Russia, the commander-in-chief, will be ready to give an order not to launch strikes on Ukraine on election day, specifically on election day,” Peskov told reporters.

He rejected Zelenskiy’s call for a 60-day ceasefire, saying Russia seeks a lasting peace agreement rather than a temporary halt.

“In the Kremlin, both President Putin and officials at other levels have repeatedly stated that we do not want a ceasefire,” Peskov said. “We want long-term peace and are prepared to do everything possible to achieve it.”

Zelenskiy made the 60-day offer on Sunday in an ABC News interview. He said Ukraine would organize elections if Russia agreed to a full ceasefire lasting two months.

“Please tell Putin, give us two months, 60 days of total ceasefire, 60 days, and we will organize elections,” Zelenskiy said.

His comments came a day after U.S. President Donald Trump said Ukraine should replace its President. Trump told reporters that Zelenskiy had failed to reach a deal with Russia and that it was time for a change.

“I think it’s time for Ukraine to get a new president,” Trump said. He criticized Ukraine’s strikes on Russian oil refineries, which followed a U.S. agreement to ease restrictions on Russian diesel exports.

Why Putin Failed To Seize Kyiv?

Russia had a clear plan to capture Kyiv and force a surrender.

On 24 February 2022, Russia’s Airborne Forces launched an operation toward Kyiv, supported by missile strikes and air cover, using attack and transport helicopters.

The objective of this blitzkrieg-style maneuver was to seize Antonov Airport in Hostomel, north of Kyiv, establish a bridgehead, create a secure air corridor for additional airborne troops, and then rapidly advance toward Kyiv.

The plan was to quickly deploy Russian Special Forces and military equipment at Hostomel and then overwhelm Ukrainian resistance after a couple of hard strikes.

If successful, Russian troops, armor, artillery, and supplies could be flown into the airport, allowing them to deploy into Kyiv and overthrow the Ukrainian government.

To execute this mission, Russia tasked its elite Airborne Forces (VDV), particularly the 31st Guards Air Assault Brigade, a unit with extensive combat experience from operations in Chechnya, Crimea, and Donbas.

The operation began on February 24 with a coordinated attack involving numerous Russian Ka-52 “Alligator” attack helicopters, which used low-flying tactics to avoid radar detection.

These helicopters fired guided missiles and cannons at the airport’s defenses to suppress Ukrainian forces. Despite intense resistance that cost Russia several helicopters, the assault continued for several hours.

Russian forces seized Hostomel Airport on February 25, 2022. Afterward, the Russian Army and its Airborne Forces tried to turn the airport into a critical forward operating base for their planned push toward Kyiv.

However, Russia’s offensive soon faced considerable setbacks. Russia’s failure to clear the area around the airport quickly led to catastrophe. Ukrainian forces, including special operations units from Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense Main Intelligence Directorate, launched a counteroffensive.

Local fighters and Ukrainian forces on the ground inflicted heavy damage on the Russian troops. In one of the most noteworthy junctures of the battle, a sniper killed Major General Andrei Sukhovetsky, the commanding general of the Russian 7th Airborne Division, by the end of February 2022.

The invasion’s initial momentum slowed, leading to the infamous 40-mile-long convoy and entire units of Russian troops stalling due to fuel shortages.

By March 4, Russian state television aired footage showing large numbers of destroyed Russian military equipment, struck by Ukrainian artillery, scattered across the base. Russian forces became immobilized without clear orders to advance or retreat.

The situation remained dire until March 29, when Russian commanders finally ordered a retreat from Kyiv Oblast. This marked the beginning of the Russian withdrawal from Hostomel, with damaged equipment that could not be evacuated. Ukrainian artillery fire targeted the retreating forces, further complicating their situation.

Among the equipment left behind were 16 modern BMD-4M armored fighting vehicles and a 1L262E Rtut-BM electronic warfare system. These items were either destroyed during the retreat preparation or intentionally blown up by Russian forces.

When Ukrainian troops reentered Hostomel, they found evidence of the hastily abandoned Russian positions, with remnants of daily life scattered around.

These included unopened food packages, personal items like passports and bank cards, and even Ukrainian armored vehicles that had been captured by Russian forces but could not be taken with them.

The loss of surprise, the inability to clear surrounding areas, and the vulnerability of airborne operations to counterattacks demonstrated how quickly airborne missions can go wrong.

The Russian failure to capture Hostomel Airport proved fatal for Moscow’s overall military strategy in Ukraine. After the Hostomel disaster, Russia withdrew from Kyiv oblast and then regrouped in Ukraine’s southern and eastern provinces to stabilize the frontlines.

This initial failure to seize Hostomel and then proceed to Kyiv also allowed Western countries to mobilize support for Ukraine and resume supplying Kyiv with critical military and humanitarian aid.

• Sumit Ahlawat has over a decade of experience in news media. He has worked with Press Trust of India, Times Now, Zee News, Economic Times, and Microsoft News. He holds a Master’s Degree in International Media and Modern History from the University of Sheffield, UK. 
• He can be reached at ahlawat.sumit85 (at) gmail.com

The post Putin’s 2022 Plan to Seize Kyiv Failed — Now Trump Wants a New President & Moscow Offers One Day Solace appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

Nearly six years after the COVID outbreak, there are fears of another health emergency after reports of the death of a Russian researcher in a suspected case of plague, which has prompted authorities to quarantine over 200 people in the remote Siberian region and enforce strict mask mandates.

Notably, reports suggest that the suspected plague bacteria might have originated from a Russian Anti-Plague Institute, bringing attention to Russia’s secretive biological weapons research programs and bringing back memories of the deadly 1979 Anthrax outbreak in the Soviet Union, which also originated from a research facility.

Authorities have acknowledged the death of a researcher due to a “suspected case of a particularly dangerous infection,” described as “pneumonia of unknown etiology.” However, federal authorities deny any lab release and say tests found no work-related pathogens.

However, concerns remain that Russia is hiding crucial details about the outbreak that could hinder an effective response.

The 28-year-old lab technician Darya Shipilova died on October 2 after reportedly breaking a test tube with live Yersinia pestis at an Anti-Plague Institute on September 25 while handling samples.

According to Russia’s national public health agency, Rospotrebnadzor, the researcher worked at the Irkutsk Anti-Plague Research Institute of Siberia and the Far East in Shelekhov.

Meanwhile, independent regional outlet Liudi Baikala reported that the death of the lab technician has prompted authorities to place nearly 200 people under observation at a hospital and enforce strict mask mandates in the region.

Igor Kobzev, the governor of Irkutsk, noted on Telegram that this was in response to a “suspected case of a particularly dangerous infection.”

Alexey Tsydenov, the head of the neighboring region of Buryatia, said the woman “may have died of the plague.”

Meanwhile, US media outlet Axios reported that the White House is monitoring reports of a suspected plague case and related quarantines in Russia.

Russian health authorities, however, are trying to downplay the incident, saying the situation is under control and rejecting reports of a lab leak.

In a statement issued on October 4, Rospotrebnadzor said the “sanitary and epidemiological situation” in Irkutsk and Shelekhov was “stable,” Forbes reported.

The agency further said it conducted extensive testing and found no pathogens linked to the deceased patient’s laboratory work in her sample.

It added that testing of hundreds of people in primary or secondary contact with the deceased researcher has detected no new infections.

According to the World Health Organization, Plague is caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis, a zoonotic bacterium usually found in small mammals and their fleas. People infected with Y. pestis often develop symptoms after an incubation period of one to seven days.

Bubonic plague is the most common clinical form.

Plague is transmitted between animals and humans through bites from infected fleas, direct contact with infected tissues, and inhalation of infected respiratory particles.

Plague can be a very severe disease in people, with a case-fatality ratio of 30% to 60% for the bubonic type, and it is always fatal for the pneumonic and septicemic kinds when left untreated.

Pneumonic plague is especially contagious and can trigger severe epidemics through person-to-person transmission via respiratory particles.

Historically, plague caused widespread pandemics with high mortality. It was known as the “Black Death” during the fourteenth century, causing more than 50 million deaths in Europe.

According to some estimates, Black Death wiped out one-third to one-half of the European population between 1347 and 1353.

Today, however, antibacterial medicines have greatly reduced plague fatality rates.

According to the WHO, during 2019–2025, most plague cases reported to the WHO occurred in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Madagascar.

While Russian authorities are rejecting the lab-leak theory, saying there are no links to the lab technician’s death and her research work at the Anti-Plague Institute, Moscow’s previous record in handling such lab-leak incidents and hiding crucial information has prompted fears that it is hiding more information than it is sharing.

Notably, the lab-leak theory has brought back the painful memories of the 1979 Sverdlovsk anthrax leak, which, according to the official Soviet Union version, led to the death of 66 people, but according to independent researchers, caused the death of over a hundred people.

The 1979 Sverdlovsk Anthrax Leak In The Soviet Union

In April 1979, a missing or improperly reinstalled exhaust filter at Compound 19, a military microbiology facility involved in the Soviet biological-weapons program, released aerosolized Bacillus anthracis spores.

Over the next few hours, wind carried the plume over the city. People in the plume developed inhalation anthrax over the following days; livestock in the area were also affected.

The Soviet authorities initially suggested the bacteria spread through “contaminated meat.”

However, hospital records, autopsy and epidemiologic evidence, victim interviews, independent research, and Russia’s own investigation in 1992 showed that the pathology was inhalation anthrax, not the gastrointestinal form claimed in the official “contaminated meat” story, and that most of the infections clustered geographically along the wind direction from the facility, and the strain matched material worked on at the site, establishing the lab leak theory.

Boris Yeltsin, the regional Communist Party official at the time who later became Russian president, publicly acknowledged in 1992 that the outbreak came from the military facility.

A 1994 investigation led by Matthew Meselson, which had access to official records and used wind data, victim locations, and strain comparisons, confirmed an accidental airborne release of a laboratory strain.

In 2016, researchers finally sequenced the genome of the bacteria behind the deaths, confirming it was a strain of the anthrax-causing bacterium Bacillus anthracis that Soviet scientists had modified.

It was one of the largest inhalation anthrax outbreaks in history and irrefutable evidence of the Soviet Union’s secret dabbling in offensive bioweapons research.

The event is sometimes called “Biological Chernobyl.”

Notably, the Soviet Union’s Compound 19 biological weapons research facility violated the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention, which the USSR had signed.

According to reports, the Soviets did similar tinkering with plague bacteria (Yersinia pestis); Francisella tularensis, the bacterium that causes tularemia; and Legionella bacteria, which cause Legionnaires’ disease.

There are also reports of similar leaks of deadly viruses and bacteria from Soviet biological weapons labs in the past.

For instance, in 1971, a young scientist reportedly fell ill after a research vessel, the Lev Berg, strayed too close to Vozrozhdeniya Island in Uzbekistan, where Soviets ran a secretive biological weapons research lab. Days later, the scientist was diagnosed with smallpox.

A year later, the corpses of two missing fishermen were found nearby, drifting in their boat. It’s thought that they had caught the plague.

Clearly, the Soviets continued working on offensive biological weapons even after signing the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention.

There are fears that Russia continued such research even after the Soviet Union collapsed.

In fact, dangerous viruses and bacteria have leaked from labs not just in Russia, but in other countries too.

For instance, after the natural SARS epidemic ended, the virus reappeared only through laboratory accidents.

For instance, in 2003, a 27-year-old researcher was infected when West Nile virus samples were cross-contaminated with live SARS coronavirus in a BSL-3 lab in Singapore.

Similarly, after natural smallpox transmission had largely ended in the UK, accredited labs were the source of outbreaks.

In 1973, a laboratory technician at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine was infected after observing open-bench harvesting of smallpox virus. She transmitted it in the hospital before isolation; two visitors died, and a nurse was infected.

In 1978, a medical photographer, Janet Parker, whose workplace was above a smallpox laboratory in Birmingham, contracted the disease and died.

In 2015, CDC labs potentially exposed dozens of staff to live anthrax after incomplete inactivation. Separately, Dugway Proving Ground shipped inactivated anthrax spores that remained viable to nearly 200 laboratories in the US and several other countries.

In fact, researchers in the US have cataloged thousands of overt laboratory-associated infections in the 20th century alone.

According to the National Library of Medicine, “analysis of the available information revealed that only 18% of the infections were due to known accidents; 42% were caused by bacteria; 27% by viruses; 15% by rickettsiae; 9% by fungi; 3% by chlamydiae; and 3% by parasites.”

A Lancet study on ‘Laboratory-acquired infections and pathogen escapes worldwide between 2000 and 2021’ identified 309 published lab-acquired infections – eight fatal, including plague, meningococcus, Ebola, and one prion case – and 16 pathogen-escape events beyond the immediate worker, among them the Lanzhou Brucella outbreak, multiple anthrax and SARS incidents, poliovirus, and foot-and-mouth virus.

Clearly, lab leaks of viruses, bacteria, and pathogens are neither rare nor unprecedented.

However, the risks associated with such leaks increase manifold when the country of origin hides information and tries to mislead the world community to avoid responsibility.

At this stage, we can only sincerely hope that that is not the case with the death of a young Russian researcher in Siberia.

• Sumit Ahlawat has over a decade of experience in news media. He has worked with Press Trust of India, Times Now, Zee News, Economic Times, and Microsoft News. He holds a Master’s Degree in International Media and Modern History from the University of Sheffield, UK. 
• He can be reached at ahlawat.sumit85 (at) gmail.com
• Story with Updated Headlines

The post Pneumonia Plague in Russia: Boris Yeltsin Admitted the 1979 Lab Leak. But Moscow Says Siberia is Different. appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

Amid nuclear threats to NATO and warnings of a “very short war”, the Russian military has struck another major bridge in Kyiv as German chancellor Friedrich Merz arrived in the Ukrainian capital.

Zelensky told Merz that people were suffering “terrible nights and days” from the relentless Russian attacks, and called Ukraine’s adversaries “absolute barbarians”.

“We can see the entire pointlessness of this war at this place,” noted Merz. “These barbarous attacks on the civilian population of Ukraine must stop. These are war crimes that are being committed daily here.”

Merz said Ukraine “needs all our support in the coming weeks”. “If Russia is not stopped, its war machine will sooner or later turn against us,” he added.

Meanwhile, Russia’s defense ministry has pledged to accelerate strikes on “military and military-industrial facilities” and “related infrastructure in Kyiv” and elsewhere after Zelensky said Ukraine would intensify its attacks against Russian oil facilities.

On Saturday, Moscow had alerted foreigners and diplomats to leave Kyiv, saying “massive” new airstrikes would hit the city.

“The EU Delegation is staying. Threatening us will not stop Europe’s support for Ukraine. It only reminds us why that support matters!” EU ambassador Katarina Mathernova wrote on X on Sunday.

Earlier, Russia cautioned NATO it would be ready to resort to nuclear weapons if the Western alliance tried ​to cut off Kaliningrad, a Russian exclave that borders the Baltic Sea.

In a document sent to NATO, Moscow accused the alliance of ‌a “dangerous and reckless course” that entailed “high risks of the outbreak of a direct armed conflict”.

According to the document, this included the possibility of “Russian strikes against decision-making centers in the alliance’s member states right from the outset”.

“Russia will be ready to use the entire arsenal of forces and capabilities at its disposal, including nuclear weapons, in order to defend its territory should NATO countries undertake any attempt aimed at isolating the Kaliningrad Region from the ​rest of the country,” the diplomatic note said.

“If Europe attacks Russia, it will be a completely different sort of war – ​a very short war, ” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova wrote. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said the alliance had responded to Russia’s message by declaring: “We are a defensive alliance. And stop the nuclear threats. This is absolutely not called for and not helpful.”

Russia’s Red Line?

Earlier attacks on a Russian oil refinery in Moscow angered powerful Russians, including members of the State Duma, who urged radical change in military strategy.

The First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Defense Committee, Alexei Zhuravlyov, was quoted saying: “There is only one way out of this situation, and it is quite simple: the destruction of the terrorist Kyiv regime”.

He called for the elimination of all logistics, bridges, tunnels, and bomb railway stations — “it’s finally time to begin fighting seriously”.

Konstantin Malofeev, founder of Tsargrad media, questioned why Russia isn’t “fighting for real” and asked why Moscow was not using Nukes: “What else has to happen before we start fighting for real?” and “Why aren’t we using the nuclear weapons that our ancestors created and stockpiled… precisely for moments like this?”

State Duma deputy Andrey Gurulyov, a retired lieutenant general, has called upon Russia to “strike the enemy mercilessly, without hesitation” or “without overthinking it.”

The big question is: what would Russia attack, and what would the repercussions be?

Potential use of Russian nukes will result in widespread destruction and heavy loss of life. It would significantly reduce Ukraine’s chances of surviving as a neutral buffer state that actually contributes to Russia’s security, ex-IAF pilot and expert on the Russian military Vijainder K Thakur argues.

Instead, it would give US-led NATO an opportunity to indefinitely extend sanctions and bleed Russia to the point where it could be dismembered, Thakur adds.

If the Ukraine war continues for another four years, NATO could be in a position to enter a full-scale conventional war with Russia under the pretext of liberating Ukrainian territory. As long as the war in Ukraine remains conventional, NATO’s relative strength will continue to grow over time, and Russia’s chances of ending the conflict will fade away, Thakur believes.

Russia’s choice today is whether to fight NATO now, while it is still relatively weak, or to act decisively to end the conflict in its favor, letting NATO decide how to respond to Russia’s decisive action, whatever it may be, Thakur says.

• Mail us at: editor (at) eurasiantimes.com
• This is a News + Opinion Article
• With AFP Inputs

The post Latest on Ukraine War: Russia’s Nuclear Warning, a Kyiv Bridge Strike & Germany’s Call to Stop Moscow appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

Story Updated

Ukraine has outrightly rejected reports of maintenance and supply problems with its F-16 fighter jets, insisting it can keep them flying through winter.

Earlier, as EurAsian Times reported, citing The Wall Street Journal, maintenance delays and a parts shortage had grounded more than half of Ukraine’s fleet.

Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Georgiy Tykhy acknowledged that Ukraine’s F-16s operate “intensively and under demanding conditions” and maintenance was “challenging”.

“Certain components for this early F-16 variant are no longer in production and are becoming increasingly difficult to source,” he wrote on X on Friday.

“However, recent reports alleging catastrophically low aircraft availability rates and excessively long maintenance turnaround times are simply false,” he added.

Tykhy said allies were now delivering overhauled aircraft faster than before.

“We have full confidence in our industry partners and their ability to further optimize sustainment processes, ensuring the highest possible levels of F-16 readiness and availability during the coming winter months, when these capabilities will be needed most,” he said.

Belgian company Sabena Engineering, which services Ukraine’s F-16s, also denied what it called “erroneous reports citing significant delays in this critical maintenance program”.

“All appropriate measures are being proactively implemented, in collaboration with its government and industry partners, to maximize aircraft availability and return the aircraft to service,” it said in a statement on Thursday.

Earlier Report

Ukraine’s F-16 fleet is currently facing a major maintenance crisis amid high-tempo operations driven by incessant Russian attacks, The Wall Street Journal stated in an opinion piece on September 30, citing informed sources.

Currently, more than half the fleet is allegedly in a “suspended” or “limbo” state while awaiting repairs and cannot be deployed for combat missions, the source reportedly told the publication.

This means at least half of Ukraine’s F-16 fleet is temporarily out of service.

Although Ukraine has not revealed the size of its F-16 fleet, reports suggest the embattled country has received between 40 and 50 aircraft so far. Of these, at least five have been lost in crashes since August 2024, as the EurAsian Times previously reported, and some have been deployed overseas to NATO countries for training Ukrainian pilots.

The Ukrainian Air Force may currently have fewer than 20, or perhaps 15, F-16s in flyable condition, as per EurAsian Times estimates. Ukraine could exhaust the remainder of its available aircraft by the end of the year at the current rate of operations and maintenance.

Notably, the F-16 requires a scheduled phase inspection every 300 flight hours. The inspection involves checks and servicing of the engine, avionics, hydraulics, fuel systems, and other critical components. This inspection typically takes two to six weeks in the US, but turnarounds are significantly longer in Belgium, where the Ukrainian F-16s are maintained.

The US contracted Sabena Aerospace Engineering in Belgium for intermediate- and depot-level maintenance of Ukraine’s F-16s under a deal worth up to $235.5 million. A phase inspection in Belgium is reportedly stretching to 40 weeks, the publication stated, citing the US Navy’s Rear Admiral Mark Montgomery.

However, experts believe the long maintenance schedule could also stem from delays in obtaining spare parts, extra repairs, scheduling gaps, and other work. In fact, the availability of individual spare parts and components has also been flagged as another pressing concern that further extends maintenance timelines.

It is pertinent to note that aircraft flying intense air-defense missions against Russian drones and missiles accumulate hours faster, especially given the incessant barrage of Russian air strikes.

In general, combat use demands more frequent or deeper maintenance, especially for aging airframes like the Ukrainian F-16s. Each sortie adds flight hours, which calls for inspection and maintenance.

The unavailability of F-16s in the future could be a major setback for Kyiv, as the Fighting Falcons are key to Ukrainian air defense missions. Ukrainian pilots flying F-16 fighter jets have already shot down over 3,150 enemy aerial targets, including 666 cruise missiles and about 2,500 drones of various types, as recently revealed by the Ukrainian Air Force.

The jets equipped with missiles, cannons, and APKWS II laser rockets have proven especially effective—and cost-efficient—against Russia’s growing fleet of one-way attack jet drones. These platforms, which fly at speeds of roughly 375–600 mph (600+ km/h), outpace many of Ukraine’s slower interceptor drones.

Russia launched nearly 2,000 such jet-powered drones in September alone, up from about 350 in June, according to figures cited by the Journal and consistent with Ukrainian official tallies. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s interception rate dropped to about 55% against jet drones, compared with more than 90 percent against older propeller-driven Shaheds.

Notably, the latest reports come days after Ukrainian officials warned that the country has run out of AIM-120 and AIM-9 air-to-air missiles for F-16 fighter jets.

“In Ukraine, the missiles F-16s use are almost gone. AIM-120s and AIM-9s are running out. Patriot batteries are also critically short of PAC-3 interceptors needed to stop ballistic missiles,” Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky’s former press secretary Yulia Mendel said in a post on X.

About two weeks ago, the Ukrainian Defense Ministry wrote: “An F-16 without missiles is a ‘useless tool.”That’s how “Phantom,” an F-16 wing commander with @KpsZSU, puts it. Every night, our pilots take on Russian drones and cruise missiles over Ukrainian cities. On some missions, with air-to-air missiles in short supply, they finish the job with the onboard cannon. The jets are here. The skill is here. What we need now is more AIM-9s or AIM-120s and Patriot missiles,” appealing for the supply of the key munitions.

This could be especially troubling because the Ukrainian Air Force has increasingly deployed F-16s for offensive missions since March 2025.

One of these jets reportedly downed a Russian Su-35 multirole fighter jet on the eastern front in July 2026, as previously reported by the EurAsian Times.

The Ukrainian Air Force states that the F-16 crews have carried out more than 650 airstrikes against ground targets so far. Both the AIM-120 and the AIM-9 are used in both fighters and ground-based air defense systems, further compounding Ukraine’s long-sustained air defense troubles.

Ukraine’s F-16 Conundrum

The F-16 Fighting Falcon’s unavailability is expected to put Ukraine in a bind in the coming months. 

With the F-16s stuck on the ground and Ukraine’s ground-based air defenses running critically low on interceptors, the country may face an increasing barrage of attacks as it approaches another harsh winter.

In fact, Russia could exploit this vacuum to intensify attacks on major infrastructure and energy targets, just as it has done in the past by increasing the use of ballistic missiles to exploit the shortage of Patriot interceptors.

Besides the F-16s, Ukraine also uses the French-donated Mirage 2000 for air defense missions, but it has only a handful in its inventory. Meanwhile, the other two aircraft, the Su-27 and the MiG-29, are mainly deployed for strike missions and are aging Soviet platforms.

That said, even though Ukraine has publicly disclosed its F-16 woes (missile shortages), it appears to be working to bolster the fleet. Zelensky announced earlier this week that Belgium will transfer three F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine by the end ‌of the year to aid its combat operations against Russia.

”There is an important agreement with Belgium on the transfer of three F-16 fighter jets by the end of this year,” he wrote on X. “We will work to receive these aircraft through an accelerated procedure.”

A coalition of NATO allies pledged more than 100 F-16 fighters to Ukraine, although deliveries have not proceeded at pace. The Ukrainian administration could further press allies to expedite deliveries.

Zelenskyy also said the country received “urgent deliveries” of F-16 ammunition from Belgium and Spain, ahead of a “very good” assistance package: a NASAMS air defense system developed jointly by the United States and Norway.

According to previous reports, the Ukrainian Defense Industry has held talks with Lockheed Martin about localizing intermediate and some depot-level work.

Doing more work domestically would cut transit time and reduce dependence on a single Belgian facility. Ukraine could also tap into regional maintenance facilities in countries like Romania and Poland.

At the same time, Ukraine’s military and political leadership has been reaching out to allies and arms firms to augment its existing capabilities well into the future.

The Ukrainian Air Force commander Lieutenant General Anatoliy Kryvonozhko met with representatives of Lockheed Martin. At the meeting, Conor McGuire, head of F-16 capability development at Lockheed, said the company intends to help Ukraine enhance the combat capability of its existing aircraft platform. Additionally, the two sides discussed a potential transition to the upgraded F-16 Block 70/72 variant, according to reports.

Beyond the F-16, Ukraine also signed a deal with Sweden in June 2026 for Gripen fighters, which includes the transfer of 16 older Saab Gripen-C/D aircraft. However, they will only start arriving in the country in 2027, as the EurAsian Times reported earlier. 

For now, Ukraine is disproportionately dependent on its aging F-16 airframes to shoot down Russian drones and missiles, and issues with their combat readiness and shortage of spare parts could put the country in a state of extreme duress, at least until it mass-produces interceptor drones capable of downing Russian jet drones at scale or iron out maintenance issues on a war footing.

• Contact the author at sakshi.tiwari13 (at) outlook.com
• Follow EurAsian Times on Google News
• With AFP Inputs

The post “Simply False”: Ukraine Rejects Reports That Over 50% Of Its F-16 Fighting Falcons Are Out of Action appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

France has started preparations to train Ukrainian pilots to fly Rafale fighter jets ahead of delivery, Benjamin Haddad, France’s Minister Delegate for European Affairs, said. The question is: Will France-supplied Rafale jets end up like Russian Su-57s?

“We are currently discussing with the Ukrainians the issue of deploying Rafale fighter jets, piloted not by French but by Ukrainian pilots, in Ukrainian airspace. That is why we have also begun work on training these pilots,” said Haddad.

Earlier, French President Emmanuel Macron told reporters on July 13 that France and Ukraine agreed on a roadmap that will enable Ukraine to acquire 16 Rafale aircraft, besides other weapons.

“Earlier this afternoon, President (Volodymyr) Zelenskyy and I agreed on a roadmap between our two countries, implementing what had been agreed in principle last November regarding our bilateral defense cooperation,” Macron said at a news conference, referring to the Letter of Intent (LoI) signed between the two leaders for Kyiv’s procurement of the SAMP/T next-generation air defense system and up to 100 Rafale jet fighters.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky had acknowledged that the training for Ukrainian pilots and mechanics will begin in France this year. Once training is complete, Zelensky said the first four Rafale jets will be delivered to Kyiv.

“The first aircraft should be flying in Ukrainian skies in 2028-2029. There will also be additional radars and additional missiles,” the French President said.

Ukrainian pilots are highly experienced on Soviet-era warplanes and have mastered flying F-16 and Mirage-2000 jets, but moving to the cutting-edge Rafales could still be a formidable task and could take 12–18 months for experienced pilots to reach combat-ready status.

Ukraine already operates the Mirage 2000-5F delivered by France last year.

Since the Rafales are not expected to arrive in Ukraine for at least the next few years, Ukraine will bet on Mirage 2000-5 and F-16 jets amid Russia’s attacks on the country. But nearly 50% of F-16s and ground-attack aircraft could be out of action by year-end because of maintenance issues, EurAsian Times reported yesterday.

The omnirole Rafale can perform air superiority, ground attack, reconnaissance, and even nuclear deterrence missions. It can switch between missions with ease, unlike single-role planes, making it versatile across evolving battlefields. Rafale also provides sensor fusion, a digital architecture, Link 16 data links, and networked operations.

The Rafale features an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, which enables it to identify and track targets at up to 200 kilometers, and the sophisticated SPECTRA electronic warfare system, which provides 360-degree threat detection.

These features will boost the Ukrainian Air Force’s situational awareness, survivability in contested airspace, and the ability to operate effectively against Russian air defenses and jets. The aircraft can carry SCALP-EG cruise missiles, AASM Hammer precision-guided bombs, and a heavy payload across 14 hardpoints while retaining air-to-air weapons such as Meteor and MICA.

“Meteor missiles that destroy targets at distances exceeding 200 kilometers will help us push Russian jets away so that they can’t use glide bombs en masse anymore,” Zelensky earlier wrote in a post on X.

F-35 For India “Quite Possible” But “Avoid” — Veteran Air Marshal Says as U.S. Stealth Jets Roar Over Jodhpur

Su-57 vs Rafale

Russia has only a few dozen Su-57s in service. They are expensive and slow to replace, especially under tight Western sanctions, while Moscow works aggressively to export them and generate much-needed revenue.

India remains Moscow’s No. 1 client state for arms, and Putin has pitched the aircraft to New Delhi himself. India is believed to be evaluating the 5th-gen jet, despite reports of the IAF not looking for more Sukhoi variants.

Losing one over Ukraine would be a military and political blow for the Kremlin.

It would not only hand Western analysts the wreckage of arguably Russia’s most advanced fighter jet, but the aircraft falling into enemy hands could also seriously hurt its Russian export potential.

Ukrainian and Western reporting describes Su-57s firing Kh-59 and Kh-69 cruise missiles from well inside Russian airspace—often hundreds of kilometers behind the front lines. They have also been tasked with long-range shots at drones and cruise missiles heading for Russian territory, sometimes with short-range missiles carried externally.

Russia has claimed air-to-air kills with Su-57s (of drones and not fighter jets), but it has received little attention in the global media. However, Ukraine’s drones reportedly damaged Su-57s on the ground at Akhtubinsk in 2024 and deeper inside Russia in 2026, which were better reported.

There was no confirmation from Moscow, but things could have been very different had Ukraine flaunted the Su-57 wreckage.

Taiwan’s Brand New F-16 Vipers Land at Chihhang AFB. Analyst Says Its Radar May Detect China’s J-20 Stealth Jet

Ukraine is doing something similar with its fighter jets. F-16s and the Mirage 2000-5 fleet spend most of their sorties on air defense—intercepting cruise missiles and attack drones. They also launch glide bombs and AASM Hammers from Ukrainian-controlled airspace.

The Ukrainian Air Force has credited F-16s with thousands of drone and missile kills and hundreds of standoff strikes, plus at least one Su-35 shot down in 2026. They still stay away from flying deep and closer to  Russian S-400 coverage.

A Rafale deployment might follow the same logic: a July 2026 roadmap for an initial 16 aircraft (out of 100 per the letter of intent), with the first four transferable only after Ukrainian pilots and mechanics finish training, and operational use in Ukrainian skies discussed for 2028–2029.

Haddad’s point—Ukrainian pilots, not French ones—matches that.

Those jets would be most useful doing what the F-16s already do, only with longer-range tools: Meteor and MICA for cruise-missile and fighter defense, AASM Hammer for standoff strikes, all launched from behind Ukraine’s own air defenses.

“Indian Pilot Crashes UAE Jet Full of Israelis” — The Headline That Would Have Run, Had Machchhar Not Fought Back: OPED

Using them for deep penetration could endanger them, the same way Russia has refused to burn its Su-57s. Both Ukraine and Russia face the same constraint: a handful of cutting-edge fighters that must be protected at all costs.

• Contact EurAsian Times at editor (at) eurasiantimes.com
• Follow EurAsian Times on Google News

 

The post Rafale Jets to Face Su-57-like Limits in Ukraine War. Too Few, Too Costly and Too Valuable To Use Freely appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

Ukraine is staring down a new and deeply unsettling threat: a possible North Korean missile unit deployment to western Russia amid a lack of anti-ballistic interceptors in its arsenal. 

North Korea is preparing to deploy a missile unit to western Russia, according to a Ukrainian military intelligence official, marking a significant escalation in the conflict.

Andrii Cherniak of Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence (GUR) told Reuters that the deployment involves Russia’s 112th Guards Missile Brigade and about 90 North Korean personnel based in the Voronezh region, which borders Ukraine.

While the exact composition of missiles will be finalized during senior-level talks next month, Pyongyang has already sent a new batch of 40 KN-23 and KN-24 missiles and personnel ​to Russia, the GUR official claimed.

Further, he noted that the unit could eventually field up to 120 short-range ballistic missiles along with six launchers.

An informed source reportedly told Reuters that the United States was aware of the plan but did not provide further details.

Designed to evade missile defenses by flying on a lower, “depressed” trajectory that reduces radar detection, the KN-23—resembling the Russian Iskander—has a range of 800-900 kilometers.

Previous reports indicated that Moscow had allegedly modified the missile to enhance its accuracy.

Meanwhile, the KN-24 has a comparatively shorter range of about 410 kilometers and employs a quasi-ballistic or depressed trajectory with possible in-flight maneuvers, making it harder to intercept.

GUR’s claims could not be officially verified, and the Pentagon has not made a statement acknowledging any such intelligence reports. Nevertheless, the GUR’s assessment comes days after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced Russia used a North Korean missile for a strike on July 30, which killed five members of a family.

Although Russia has previously used North Korean ballistic missiles, the Ukrainian reports hinted that Moscow might have received a fresh supply.

Earlier, Pyongyang had reportedly delivered more than 100 short-range ballistic missiles (primarily KN-23 and KN-24), millions of artillery shells, over 120 long-range self-propelled artillery systems, and more than 120 multiple rocket launch systems. Additionally, it had deployed an estimated 11,000 troops for the Ukraine war, of whom approximately 2,300 were killed in combat.

While the US and NATO are on the ground in Ukraine, studying the realities of modern warfare and using those lessons to develop the next generation of military technology, North Korea, Iran, and China are also closely observing the conflict to refine their own weapons and military doctrines.

Why is Ukraine Alarmed

Russia has been exploiting gaps in Ukraine’s air defenses to launch frequent ballistic and hypersonic missile strikes.

On August 4, Russia conducted a major overnight attack with drones and ballistic missiles that killed 17 people. Ukrainian forces intercepted 98 of 115 drones but failed to shoot down even a single ballistic missile, as recently reported by the EurAsian Times

Having run out of Patriot interceptors, which are the only reliable defense against ballistic missiles, Ukraine is practically left defenseless.

Ukraine has been pleading with its allies to supply more Patriot batteries and interceptors, which remain among the few weapons capable of countering ballistic missile threats such as North Korea’s KN-23 and KN-24 and Russia’s Iskander.

“Ballistic missile interceptors could have saved the lives of those killed today,” Zelenskyy wrote on social media after the August 4 strike. “It is very important that our partners understand that delays in supplying them, or an unwillingness to provide anti-ballistic systems, lead directly to such horrific casualties and destruction.”

Notably, the US has been sending Patriot missiles to Ukraine, among other weapons and munitions—including through the Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL), a new system wherein NATO nations pay for the transfer of weapons from the US. However, recent reports suggest that the US has expended a massive chunk of its own Patriot interceptors in the Ukraine war, eroding any space to make fresh deliveries to Kyiv.

Meanwhile, other NATO allies remain wary of aiding Ukraine with Patriots amid heightened security threats and long production timelines.

The Patriot shortage has allowed Moscow to use ballistic missiles with near impunity, creating a dangerous “window of vulnerability” for Ukraine that will only expand with North Korea’s deployment. In fact, experts fear that the situation will get increasingly challenging as winter approaches, which is when Russia intensifies attacks on Ukraine’s power grids.

The expanding Russia-North Korea partnership also carries broader geopolitical implications for Ukraine after nearly five years of war.

“Kyiv is rattled not because North Korean missiles are more advanced than Russia’s Iskander, but because they signal a deeper, more dangerous geopolitical alignment—and their sheer volume and indiscriminate use are overwhelming Ukraine’s already strained defenses. This isn’t just about weapons—it’s about the normalization of new military collaboration and geopolitical alignment. Russia’s use of North Korean missiles also suggests Pyongyang has replenished Moscow’s arsenal, enabling intensified bombardments as Russia seeks to break Ukrainian morale. For Kyiv, each KN-23/24 impact is both a physical and symbolic blow,” Air Marshal G.S. Bedi (retd) told the EurAsian Times.

Notably, North Korea’s short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs) are believed to be less accurate compared to their Russian counterparts. A previous Ukrainian state prosecutor’s report stated that about half of the KN-23s launched by Russia between late December 2023 and late February 2024 veered off course and sometimes exploded midair.

Moreover, strikes launched using these missiles have caused large-scale civilian casualties.

Nonetheless, the deployment of North Korean missiles will give Russia what it needs to overwhelm and batter Ukraine: volume.

This allows Moscow to reserve more precise systems such as the Iskander for high-value targets while using KN-23 and KN-24 missiles against population centers and infrastructure to increase pressure on Kyiv.

Interestingly, during a meeting of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy reportedly announced that his country will destroy Russian missile launchers to reduce attacks on Ukrainian cities.

“Our military knows they must destroy the enemy’s launchers to reduce strikes on Ukraine, its critical infrastructure, and civilians. They are working on this and will continue to do so,” Zelenskyy said.

• Contact the author at sakshi.tiwari13 (at) outlook.com
• Follow EurAsian Times on Google News

The post North Korea’s Missiles Are Moving West — 120 of Them May Head Toward Ukraine Amid Kyiv’s Plea For Help appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

Russia has for the first time officially claimed that its fifth-generation fighter jet, the Su-57, has registered its first air-to-air kill in the Ukraine War, using a hybrid RVV-SDM missile.

Alexander Mikheev, Director General of Rosoboronexport, Russia’s state arms exporter, said that the stealth aircraft has proved its superiority in all aspects of warfare, including hitting targets on the ground and in the air.

This, he said, is fueling a heightened global interest in the Su-57E fifth-generation fighter.

“Rosoboronexport notes increased global market interest in the Su-57E fifth-generation fighter. It has proven its superiority in real combat conditions when countering the most advanced air defense and electronic warfare systems. The aircraft has engaged numerous airborne, ground, and surface targets with Russian air-to-air munitions, including the latest RVV-SDM guided missile,” Russia’s state-controlled news agency TASS quoted Mikheyev as saying.

The RVV-SDM is a new medium-range air-to-air missile introduced by Russia’s Rosoboronexport to arm the export variant of the fifth-generation Su-57E stealth fighter. It features fire-and-forget capabilities, active-passive radar guidance, and high resistance to electronic warfare.

According to Vijainder K Thakur, former Indian Air Force (IAF) pilot and defense analyst, the RVV-SDM is a medium-range missile, most likely a derivative of the RVV-SD tweaked for internal carriage by the Su-57 and improved performance.

While reports of Su-57’s first aerial kill have been doing rounds for some time now, this is the first official acknowledgment by Russia of Su-57’s air-to-air kill in the Ukraine War.

In April 2026, a report attributed to Sergei Lebedev claimed that a Su-57 had destroyed a Ukrainian Air Force aircraft in an aerial engagement over the Mykolaiv region using a long-range missile.

In May 2026, Russian media and Telegram channels claimed that a Su-57 had used a long-range R-37M missile to shoot down a Swedish Saab 340 AEW&C aircraft transferred to Ukraine over eastern Ukraine.

Mikheyev said that Su-57’s combat performance in the war has fueled global interest in the aircraft’s export variant, the single-seat Su-57E. However, despite its best efforts to promote the aircraft in the international market, so far there has been only one confirmed customer of the Su-57.

Algeria was the first country to confirm the acquisition of the Su-57E. The country, which has a fleet of Soviet-Russian Su-30MKA, MiG-29, and MiG-25 fighters, has bought an unspecified number of aircraft and has reportedly deployed the jet on operational duty.

In November last year, Vadim Badekha, the Director General of United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), which manufactures the Su-57, announced that Russia has delivered two Su-57E stealth aircraft to a foreign client.

“Our foreign customer, our foreign partner, has already received the first two aircraft. They have begun to carry out combat duty and demonstrate their best qualities. Our customer is satisfied,” Badeja said.

Russia is also pitching the Su-57E to India and has even promised full Transfer of Technology (ToT) and to localize the production of the stealth aircraft in India. However, New Delhi has not made a decision yet.

According to Russian officials, the Su-57’s combat experience in the Ukraine War and limited exposure during the Syria war is a key highlight of the stealth fighter jet’s export potential.

Russia has, however, used the Su-57 very cautiously in the Ukraine war. According to security analysts, the aircraft has been mostly used for stand-off strikes from long distances.

Earlier this month, it was reported that Moscow is also using the stealth jet in anti-drone operations near Moscow.

Notably, just a few days earlier, a picture emerged showing the Su-57 fitted with R-73 air-to-air missiles attached to its wing pylons rather than in its internal weapons bay.

Carrying the missiles beneath the wing pylons would compromise the Su-57’s stealth; however, if the jet is deployed primarily for anti-drone operations, maintaining stealth is of no use.

Carrying these short-range AAMs externally suggests that the Su-57 load-out was optimized for close-range aerial engagements, most likely against the long-range Ukrainian one-way attack drones and cruise missiles that Kyiv has recently begun using.

Critics argue that Moscow is deliberately limiting the aircraft’s exposure to protect its export potential. Any confirmed losses to Ukrainian forces, they say, would severely damage the jet’s credibility in the international export market.

Still, an official acknowledgment by Russia of Su-57’s first aerial kill will no doubt boost the jet’s credibility, which has so far struggled to find many export customers.

Notably, while the US’s F-35 fighter jet has been in service for 11 years and has seen action in many wars, including in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Gaza, and Iran, it scored its first air-to-air kill in March this year.

An Israeli Air Force F-35I “Adir” stealth fighter jet shot down an Iranian YAK-130 aircraft over Tehran, according to a statement by Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

“This is the world’s first shootdown of a manned fighter jet by an F-35,” the statement added.

It must also be noted that Ukrainian airspace is heavily defended by frontline Western air defense systems such as Patriots. This is in contrast to where the F-35 has seen combat, in the poorly defended airspace of Gaza, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Iran.

Meanwhile, the USAF’s F-35 fighter jet also got hit by an Iranian drone-missile hybrid in the Iran war, underscoring that even most advanced Western stealth fighter jets are not completely invisible or invincible.

Additionally, while Russia initially faced many issues with the Su-57, including production delays, Moscow has made key improvements to the aircraft in recent years, increasing its lethality and survivability in contested airspace.

Su-57’s Continuous Upgradation

In February this year, Moscow’s Rostec press service said that the Russian Aerospace Forces (VKS) have inducted a new batch of Su-57 fighters featuring a “new technical profile.”

The upgraded version of Russia’s fifth-generation fighter incorporated enhanced onboard systems and a new weapons configuration that significantly expanded the jet’s combat role.

“To fulfill the targets set by the Russian Defense Ministry for the supply of highly sought-after weapons and military equipment to the troops, crews of the Russian Aerospace Forces have accepted the Su-57 aircraft in its new technical configuration,” the Rostec press service quoted a Su-57 pilot as saying.

“The aircraft has already proven itself during the special military operation (Ukraine War). The new technical configuration will provide for the expansion of the range of missions for which this aircraft type is deployed. The advanced capabilities incorporated into the aircraft armament system make it possible to use new types of aircraft weapons,” the pilot added.

While Rostec provided no details of the upgraded onboard systems or the new weapons package, analysis of higher-resolution images released by UAC and examined by OSINT analyst George N. revealed visible changes to the 101KS electro-optical complex, which supports self-protection and missile warning functions.

The 101KS complex is an electro-optical targeting system that provides the Su-57 with all-weather surveillance and passive infrared detection.

The 101KS complements the radar by detecting and tracking targets in the infrared and visible spectra. It can detect heat signatures of missiles and aircraft and conduct passive situational monitoring.

This allows the fighter to operate without active emissions, enhancing survivability in highly contested environments.

The aircraft also received revised apertures, presumably operating across multiple spectral bands, including visible, mid- and long-wave infrared (IIR), and possibly ultraviolet (UV), pointing to a substantial expansion of passive observation capabilities.

The imagery suggested that the 101KS would no longer function solely as a defensive sensor, but rather as a key element of situational awareness, aligned with the philosophy of the AN/AAQ-37 Distributed Aperture System (DAS) carried by the F-35.

It underscored that the Su-57 is moving toward a distributed, passive surveillance capability that can detect and track airborne threats without relying solely on radar.

The announcement came nearly two months after the UAC confirmed it had tested the Su-57 with a new Izdliye 177 engine, a powerplant developed by the United Engine Corporation (UEC) specifically for the Su-57.

The new Izdliye 177 engine was tested with the Su-57 in December 2025. According to a Rostec official, each Izdliye 177 engine can deliver up to 16,000 kg of thrust (approximately 35,000 pounds) with the afterburner engaged.

The new engine will further reduce fuel consumption and is stated to be far more durable than the previous power plant, the Saturn AL-41F1 afterburning turbofan engine.

In fact, the fighter jet has been steadily upgraded since its induction into the VKS in 2020.

Vadim Badekha, CEO of UAC, recently said the platform continues to evolve.

“The fifth-generation Su-57 aircraft system is the best aircraft in its class, but we’re not resting on our laurels. The fighter has undergone a tremendous evolution, and its improvement continues today – the aircraft’s weapons and systems capabilities are being upgraded,” Badekha said.

“This fighter allows us to solve the most important tasks today, demonstrating efficiency and excellent maneuverability and combat capabilities,” he added.

All these upgrades fit within the progressive maturation of the Su-57 program, also known as the Megapolis development program.

Under it, the Su-57 would receive incremental upgrades to its avionics, cockpit, engine, sensors, and weaponry.

Russian engineers claim that the Su-57 is a future-oriented project that will evolve as Moscow’s principal air combat system well beyond 2040.

At the same time, these upgrades will also boost the jet’s export potential.

The post Su-57: Russia Claims 1st Air-to-Air Kill For Its Stealth Fighter in Ukraine War Using Hybrid RVV-SDM Missile appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

Russia has charged Telegram founder Pavel Durov with facilitating terrorist activity in the country and put him on an international wanted list, alleging that his hugely popular messaging app was being used by ‌Ukrainian spies to organize attacks inside Russia.

The charges, announced by the Federal Security Service (FSB), followed a long investigation into Telegram.

The FSB accused Telegram of failing to remove “numerous channels, chats and bots” allegedly used by “Ukrainian intelligence agencies, terrorist and extremist organizations to prepare and coordinate acts of sabotage and terrorism, mass murder, and cyberfraud” in Russia, which resulted in “numerous human casualties.”

It further said that a chatbot available on Telegram called “Daivinchik/Leo” had been ​used by Ukrainian spies to recruit young Russians to carry out sabotage and terrorist operations.

Reportedly, Ukrainian special agents pose as young women on the app to recruit Russian men and use them for spying or carrying out sabotage activities.

Russia has also issued an international arrest warrant against Durov, who was born in Russia but currently lives in Dubai.

Notably, the Telegram app, which is hugely popular in Russia, is already heavily restricted in Russia.

Russian citizens can now access Telegram only by using a VPN to encrypt their traffic and conceal their location. However, despite these restrictions, state bodies, including the Kremlin and the defense ministry, continue to post ⁠on it regularly.

The crackdown on Telegram is part of Russia’s broader effort to restrict access to foreign tech platforms and assert control over the internet. Apart from Telegram, other popular messaging apps such as WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook Messenger, Signal, Discord, Snapchat, and Apple FaceTime are also banned in Russia.

Russia has now gone one step ahead and formally charged Telegram founder Durov with aiding terrorism, despite the fact that the app is hugely popular in Russia.

However, notwithstanding Russian restrictions on Telegram and the charging of its founder with terrorism, both Russia and Ukraine have used the app extensively in the ongoing war.

In fact, the Telegram app has also been described as a “virtual battlefield” in the war between Russia and Ukraine, where it is used ​by officials, soldiers, defense ministry handles, and influential bloggers on both sides.

So, how did a messaging app become key to the Russia-Ukraine War?

Telegram As A “Virtual Battlefield” in the Russia-Ukraine War

In the Soviet Union, media was heavily controlled by the state to control public discourse.

Russia inherited this culture of controlling the narrative through its influence on the media. However, with the proliferation of digital and social media, the state’s ability to control the media weakened.

Telegram was one of the most popular messaging apps in Russia and Ukraine in 2022 when the war began.

In Russia, Ukraine, and many Eastern European countries, Telegram served as a crucial alternative to state-monitored communication channels for sharing news.

With Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Facebook and Instagram were banned over extremism charges by a Moscow court, and access to Twitter was restricted by the Russian censorship body Roskomnadzor.

As there was disdain for traditional state-controlled media in Russia and many other social media channels were banned outright, the role of Telegram, already hugely popular in Russia, in shaping narratives and controlling perceptions of the war became even more critical.

According to a Levada survey, among Russian youth aged 18-24, TV was the least popular news source, with 41% relying on Telegram channels for news. Additionally, during the first two months of the conflict, 76.6% of Ukrainians used social media for news, with Telegram as the most favored platform at 65.7%.

Telegram was also used by both the Russian and Ukrainian governments to broadcast air raid warnings and distribute maps of local bomb shelters.

Some of Telegram’s unique features, such as the ability to make a channel public or private, the option to have unlimited subscribers, and the lack of algorithms that boost or restrict content visibility, have made Telegram a popular information-dissemination tool for both pro- and anti-war voices.

According to a research paper titled ‘Telegram as a Battlefield,’ over 40% of Telegram channels are dedicated to news, with approximately 17% directly related to the war and ongoing events in Ukraine.

As the war progressed, many war bloggers who were not part of traditional media outlets began posting on Telegram, reaching millions of people.

For millions of people, these war bloggers became an alternative source of information and war updates, often coming straight from the front lines.

Given its popularity as a source of information for war updates, many pro-government channels also used Telegram to push their narrative and spread disinformation.

The paper ‘Telegram as a Battlefield’ also found that after the invasion, average views per post for Pro-Kremlin channels rose from 15,929 to 67,442 (a 323% increase) and for Anti-Kremlin channels from 25,346 to 104,778 (313% increase), highlighting how Telegram emerged as a critical battlefield for disseminating information, propaganda, and shaping narratives.

However, it noted that anti-Kremlin channels consistently garnered higher viewership than pro-Kremlin channels, especially post-invasion.

Also, as the war progressed, Ukraine, just like in the case of drone technology, used Telegram in more innovative ways than Russian government circles.

Ukrainians used it for air-raid alerts, bomb-shelter maps, and official updates from President Zelensky and military commands.

Ukraine also used Telegram as an intelligence-collecting tool. It crowdsourced intelligence via tip bots and channels that shared enemy vehicle movements, leading to successful strikes.

Common people in Ukrainian villages often shared information on Russian military movements with the Ukrainian military and intelligence securely via Telegram.

Telegram, in fact, became a vast depository of HUMINT (human intelligence) for Ukraine.

Furthermore, the platform was also used by Russian government critics to share information with the Ukrainian military across the border.

Telegram was also used to document war crimes and OSINT (open source intelligence).

Ukrainian intelligence also used Telegram to communicate with people in occupied territories and to encourage them to share intelligence on the Russian military.

Frontline troops also use the app to organize logistics, share drone feeds, and have informal discussions with their military commands.

Telegram has also been described as the conflict’s digital battle space, where organizing logistics, war blogging from the frontlines, propaganda, disinformation campaigns, narrative warfare, intelligence collection, recruitment of spies and saboteurs, cataloging of war crimes, and dissemination of public interest information like air raid warnings and bomb shelter maps all take place in real time.

Telegram, in fact, is providing the most unfiltered view of the war.

“Telegram has become this really key battleground in the information war,” Dr. Ian Garner, a historian and translator of Russian war propaganda, told Time magazine. “And it’s interesting that this information war has been outsourced to a private company.”

While Russia has often tried to use Telegram to its advantage, Ukraine has shown much more ingenuity in using it, which explains Moscow’s love-hate relationship with the app.

Russia might have restricted the app and now formally charged its founder with terrorism, but official Russian media handles are still using it, and even common Russian citizens can use it using VPN services.

However, even after these formal charges, Telegram will continue to remain the digital battle space of the Russia-Ukraine War.

• Sumit Ahlawat has over a decade of experience in news media. He has worked with Press Trust of India, Times Now, Zee  News, Economic Times, and Microsoft  News. He holds a Master’s Degree in International Media and Modern History from the University of Sheffield, UK. 
• He can be reached at ahlawat.sumit85 (at) gmail.com

The post Why is Putin Hunting Telegram’s Founder Pavel Durov and Branding Him a Terror Facilitator? appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

A Ukrainian F-16 fighter jet crashed during a combat mission chasing aerial targets launched by Russia, marking the fifth loss of the US-origin aircraft. Interestingly, the crash occurred after a Ukrainian Fighting Falcon allegedly scored a historic first air-to-air kill against a Russian Su-35.

On July 29, the Ukrainian Air Force lost contact with an F-16 Fighting Falcon jet while it was performing a combat mission to intercept Russian aerial targets on the frontline, the service announced in a statement posted on Telegram. “According to preliminary data, an emergency situation occurred on board the aircraft, and the pilot was forced to eject.”

“The pilot is currently safe. He was successfully evacuated and taken to a medical facility for examination and diagnostic tests,” the service noted.

The exact cause of the crash and the nature of the emergency are unclear, but experts are purportedly examining the crash site to determine the cause. 

Some reports swirling on social media claimed that the F-16 had been shot down by Russia, but the claims could not be corroborated.

An F-16 fighter jet operated by the Ukrainian Air Force crashed while performing a combat mission near the frontlines on July 29, the Ukrainian side informed.

According to avaliable information, an unspecified "emergency situation" occured on board the plane, forcing the pilot… pic.twitter.com/o6110OfjWa

— Status-6 (War & Military News) (@Archer83Able) July 29, 2026

Ukraine has received dozens of F-16 AM/BM aircraft from NATO allies. These jets are used primarily for air defense against missiles and drones, though they have increasingly been employed in more offensive and integrated missions.

In fact, the latest crash surprisingly comes just days after General Dan Caine, Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed that one of these jets downed a Russian jet.

“I want to highlight the incredible work that the Ukrainian industrial base is doing. It ranges from their surface-to-air capabilities to their air-to-air capabilities. I’ll note that recently we had the first air-to-air kill where a Ukrainian F-16 shot down a Russian fighter,”  Air Force General Dan Caine, Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Caine did not identify the type of Russian aircraft, but the experts posited that the timing and context point strongly to the Russian Su-35 claimed to have been downed by the Ukrainian Air Force on the eastern front on July 8, 2026. In fact, footage of the burning wreckage of an alleged Su-35 was also posted to social media at the time.

U.S. General John “Dan” Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff:

“Recently we had the first air-to-air kill where a Ukrainian F-16 shot down a Russian fighter.”

This almost certainly refers to the July 8, 2026 shootdown of a Russian Su-35 on the eastern front. https://t.co/nuoqscFLAB pic.twitter.com/eXr6pOSMhU

— Special Kherson Cat (@bayraktar_1love) July 21, 2026

The Ukrainians hailed the kill as historic, given that their F-16 fighters are older-generation aircraft, whereas Russia’s Su-35 is a cutting-edge 4.5th-generation jet with thrust-vectoring engines, powerful radar, and long-range missiles.

According to several OSINT (Open-Source Intelligence) reports, the kill was part of a well-planned ambush that included a Patriot surface-to-air missile system and three F-16s.

According to these claims, one Ukrainian F-16 flew low as bait, simulating an attack to lure a Russian Su-35 into a vulnerable position, while two others provided cover from a higher altitude. Meanwhile, a nearby Patriot system illuminated the target with its radar, aiding the engagement by exploiting gaps in the Su-35’s awareness. 

Subsequently, the Russian pilot flew into the trap and was shot down, most likely by an AIM-120 AMRAAM launched from an F-16.

The purported shootdown suggested that Ukrainian pilots and planners are now conducting more complex, offensive, and integrated operations. In fact, experts went so far as to say that if these tactics are sustained, the Ukrainian forces would be able to gradually erode Russia’s long-standing advantage in contested airspace along the front, forcing Russian aircraft to fly higher, farther back, or with greater caution.

The latest crash, however, underscores that F-16s remain heavily committed to intercepting Russian drone and missile swarms.

The loss is a setback for Ukraine, which has received only a limited number of F-16s so far and has already lost 5 to crashes.

Ukrainian F-16 Losses: Setback For Ukraine

The first F-16 crash occurred just weeks after Ukraine received the first aircraft in August 2024, and claimed the life of the pilot. Even though the tragic incident was first thought to be the result of a technical issue or pilot error, later reports raised the potential of friendly fire from a Ukrainian Patriot missile defense system.

The second crash of an F-16 occurred in April 2025, killing the pilot again. Initially, several theories, including that of an air-to-air combat between Russia and Ukraine, as well as friendly fire, were floated. However, Russia put all speculations to rest by announcing that the F-16 was shot down by an air defense system.

The third crash was reported to have occurred on May 16, 2025, when the F-16 in question was repelling a Russian aerial attack. At the time, reports stated that the pilot destroyed three Russian aerial targets and was using an aircraft cannon to attack a fourth when an unknown emergency occurred, and the Air Force lost contact with the pilot.

The Air Force said the pilot steered the plane away from the settlement it was flying over and successfully ejected, after which he was rescued.

The fourth crash came merely a month after this, on June 29, 2025. The aircraft was damaged, entered a spin, lost control, and crashed during a large Russian aerial attack. The pilot did everything he could and flew the jet away from the settlement, but did not have time to eject.

• Contact the author at sakshi.tiwari13 (at) outlook.com
• Follow EurAsian Times on Google News

 

The post F-16 Crashes in Ukraine: Days After “Historic” Su-35 Shootdown, Ukraine Loses Its Fifth Fighting Falcon appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

A senior official from the Indian Ministry of Defense (MoD) has indicated that New Delhi is not currently planning to buy new Sukhois. The statement comes as Moscow has been aggressively pushing to export its Su-57 fighter jets to the IAF

In a recent interview with Moneycontrol, Defense Secretary Rajesh Kumar Singh stated that India has no plans to acquire a “new version of the Sukhois.”

“No, we have not thought about Sukhois. If you are asking about the new version of the Sukhois, the answer is no. But we are actively considering upgrading the existing Sukhois… It is a success story. It is a very important platform with the induction of BrahMos missiles, and we hope to further upgrade and improve it,” Singh said when asked whether there are any plans to buy a fifth-generation aircraft outside of the AMCA (Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft), India’s own indigenous fifth-generation fighter program.

While he did not name either aircraft, the remarks have been widely interpreted as referring to Russia’s Su-57 fifth-generation fighter. In fact, the statement marks a clearer official signal against a near-term Su-57 acquisition, in contrast to previous signals.

In April 2026, for instance, Chairman and Managing Director of the state-run Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), Dr. D.K. Sunil, said, “A committee of Russians has also studied and said that roughly 50% of the facilities can be used for producing this aircraft, but some new investments will be required.” Thus, hinting that, while India was neither committing to nor rejecting the offer, it was merely in a pre-decision, information-gathering phase.

Meanwhile, the Indian Air Force (IAF) chief, Air Chief Marshal A.P. Singh, indicated last year that the service might have to opt for an off-the-shelf purchase of a fifth-generation stealth aircraft.

“As far as the Su-57 is concerned, I just want to say that we have to weigh all the options, and we in the defense ministry and the Indian Air Force have a very set process for the induction of any weapon system, and that process will be followed. So what comes will depend on what meets the requirement and what is best for us,” he stated.

Singh’s latest comments also align with the IAF’s upgrade program for the Su-30MKI fleet aimed at modernizing avionics, sensors, and other systems while increasing domestic content.

“We are processing an upgrade program for the existing Su-30 MKI fleet. This will be the first time an indigenous upgrade of any fleet is being planned,” the IAF chief told Prakash Nanda, the Chairman of the Editorial Board of the EurAsian Times.

India’s Su-57 Conundrum

Russia first publicly offered the Su-57E export variant to India at Aero India in February 2025. This was followed by a “golden deal” that included the supply of off-the-shelf aircraft, the production of the Su-57 in India, and assistance in developing India’s fifth-generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft (AMCA).

Later, the Russian state arms exporter Rosoboronexport expanded it to include the use of existing Su-30MKI infrastructure to facilitate local manufacturing of the Su-57E in India, as previously reported by the EurAsian Times.

In June 2026, Russian President Vladimir Putin publicly renewed the pitch, citing the former FGFA (Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft) collaboration between the two allies and calling it the world’s best fifth-generation aircraft. Additionally, he stated that Russia was ready to work with India “without any issues or limitations.”

Notably, India and Russia had earlier collaborated on the Fifth-Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) program under a 2007 agreement. However, India later withdrew from the program, amid shortfalls in stealth performance, engine capability, insufficient access to design data and source code, and concerns that the aircraft did not fully meet the Indian Air Force’s requirements for independent upgradeability and maintenance, as explained in a detailed EurAsian Times report you can read here.

Ex-Rafale Pilot Who Praised China’s J-10C & JF-17 Fighter Jets Now Under Investigation for Beijing Ties

In fact, doubts about the aircraft’s stealth characteristics and the extent to which Moscow would be willing to part with technology persist to this day, and are believed to be one of the reasons why India has been reluctant to acquire the Su-57.

Moreover, critics have expressed skepticism that the purchase or joint production of the Russian fighter may divert attention from India’s AMCA fifth-generation fighter program and put the indigenous aircraft on the back burner, as has happened in the past.

However, the situation has become increasingly complex, as AMCA appears to be farther away than initially anticipated. Defense observers and veterans predict the first flight may slip to 2032, as private manufacturers may not meet tight deadlines.

This would leave the IAF with a major stealth gap vis-à-vis the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF), which has two operational fifth-generation fighters, the J-20 and the J-35. In fact, it has expanded its J-20 inventory to 500 fighters, according to recent reports.

Not just that, China has been testing two different sixth-generation prototypes: the J-36 and the J-50, both of which are regularly spotted in flight, suggesting that development is taking place at an unprecedented pace. In fact, Beijing may be ready to induct a sixth-generation fighter by the time India inducts its first AMCA.

The situation can become overly dangerous if Pakistan acquires the Chinese J-35A stealth fighters, as consistently noted by media reports.

Staring at a dwindling squadron strength, the IAF is currently inching closer to signing a deal for 114 Rafale fighter jets, 94 of which will be produced locally.

F-16 Crashes in Ukraine: Days After “Historic” Su-35 Shootdown, Ukraine Loses Its Fifth Fighting Falcon

While this acquisition will help add the numbers needed for a large-scale two-front war, it will not arrest the growing technological gap between India and its adversaries.

Some veterans have argued that a limited off-the-shelf purchase of Su-57s could serve as an interim measure, provided it does not divert resources or attention from the AMCA.

“The 114 Rafales will address the quantitative requirement but not the qualitative enhancement requirement. That leaves only the Su-57 as the only available near-term option, though it is not perfect,” the IAF veteran and ex-Vice Chief of IAF, Air Marshal Anil Khosla, earlier told the EurAsian Times. “A deal for a limited number may be considered, provided it advances the AMCA program rather than curtails it.”

Others emphasize viewing large-scale commitment to a foreign fifth-generation platform as carrying industrial, sustainment, and strategic risks.

For example, IAF veteran, Air Marshal Anil Chopra, told EurAsian Times: “India should focus on producing the Rafale locally, advance work on AMCA and its variants, accelerate production of the indigenous Tejas fighters, and buy about 40 Su-57 fighters off-the-shelf from Russia as an interim solution instead of getting into local production.

Earlier this year, the Indian MoD informed the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defense of its interest in joining a sixth-generation fighter. India has two options: join the UK-Japan-Italy GCAP program or team up with France for their potential 6th-gen aircraft.

• Contact the author at sakshi.tiwari13 (at) outlook.com
• Follow EurAsian Times on Google News

The post Su-57 For IAF: India Rules Out New Sukhoi Fighter Jets, To Prioritize Su-30 MKI Upgrades appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

Although Russia scaled back its 2026 Navy Day celebrations amid Ukrainian threats, it projected an optimistic outlook by confirming plans for the imminent launch of the Perm-class nuclear submarine armed with hypersonic Zircon missiles, and announcing substantial progress on the nuclear-capable Poseidon unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV).

Russia scaled down the main St. Petersburg naval parade for the second consecutive year, citing security concerns over Ukrainian long-range drones. Instead, President Vladimir Putin marked the day at Navy headquarters in St. Petersburg, praising the Navy’s contribution to the war in Ukraine and the strengthening of the naval leg of the nuclear triad.

As visuals of the event surfaced online, Ukraine-based military bloggers and pro-Ukraine OSINT analysts pointed to a submarine painted on the wall visible in the video, while mocking the absence of actual warships from the parade.

“The cameraman is probably in Kolyma by now,” netizens joked, referring to Soviet-era labor camps.

Meanwhile, the Navy Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy, Admiral Alexander Moiseyev, presented a status report on the induction of new vessels into service. Moiseyev reported to President Vladimir Putin that 20 ships, vessels, and boats had already been commissioned in 2026, with plans for another 21 by the end of this year.

The most noteworthy of these upcoming inductions is that of the Perm-class nuclear submarine armed with the Zircon (or Tsirkon) hypersonic missile.

Russian Navy Chief Moiseyev reports to Putin:

First nuclear-powered submarine capable of carrying Zircon nuke-capable hypersonic missiles — to be commissioned by end of year.

21 more vessels to be commissioned before year-end. pic.twitter.com/OlDLUMIQva

— Sputnik India (@Sputnik_India) July 26, 2026

Perm is the fifth boat in the Yasen-M series. The keel for its construction was laid in 2016, and the submarine was launched in March 2025 in a ceremony attended remotely by Putin.

Designed by the Malakhit Design Bureau and built at Sevmash, it features a partial double-hull configuration, a rubber coating to reduce its acoustic signature, modern navigation, communication, and hydroacoustic systems, high-precision weapons, and robotic equipment. The mast housing of the Perm submarine includes a rescue chamber capable of holding the entire crew. During the launch ceremony, Putin described it as the first multipurpose submarine equipped to carry Tsirkon hypersonic cruise missiles.

Zircon is a sea-launched hypersonic missile that Russia claims can reach Mach 8–9 and has a range of 500–1,000 km. It is intended for both anti-ship and land-attack roles

Zircon’s high speed is designed to compress defender reaction times and complicate interception compared with conventional subsonic or supersonic cruise missiles. Analysts believe that since kinetic energy is the best predictor of lethality against large surface targets, the missile’s extraordinary speed would make it a great attack vector against larger warships, such as an adversary’s aircraft carrier groups

Russian officials state that the hypersonic missile’s kinetic energy on impact will enable Russia to attack hardened, deep, and ground targets.

The missile has been used to launch devastating strikes on Ukraine on several occasions. In fact, Boris Obnosov, CEO of Tactical Missiles Corporation, earlier said in an interview with Rossiya-24 television that the missile can defeat nearly all air defense systems.

Speaking at the Navy Day event, Putin said ongoing work is improving its accuracy, noting that “its latest combat use shows that it is becoming increasingly accurate” and that few countries field comparable weapons. Additionally, he boasted that few countries in the world possess weapons like Zircon.

Experts believe the combination of the Perm submarine and the Zircon missile could prove lethal. Equipping a quiet nuclear attack submarine with Zircon would allow relatively close approaches to high-value targets, such as aircraft-carrier groups, major surface combatants, or coastal infrastructure. The launch of hypersonic missiles would, thus, leave defenders little warning and time to react.

The Perm submarine will carry a mixed load of Zircon, Oniks, and Kalibr missiles, as well as torpedoes, enabling it to switch between anti-ship, land-attack, and anti-submarine roles.

The induction of a modern Yasen-M boat would strengthen the multipurpose nuclear attack submarine force, support sea denial and power projection objectives, and complement the strategic ballistic-missile submarine force that forms part of the nuclear triad. Moreover, it would be akin to a shot in the arm for the overall combat posture, especially as Russia’s Black Sea Fleet (BSF) has been hammered by Ukraine in the ongoing war, signaling vulnerability of the Russian naval forces.

Separately, Putin announced another weapon system expected to take Russia’s underwater combat capability to another level: the Poseidon is nearing completion.

Poseidon Nearing Completion

Putin announced that the Poseidon nuclear-powered unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) is in its final stage of development.

“As for the Poseidon we have been talking a lot about, this uncrewed underwater vehicle is at the final stage,” he said at a meeting with Russian Navy servicemen, as reported by TASS News Agency. “We are about to complete [the work on it] and put it on combat alert.”

The statement follows his October 2025 claim of a successful test in which the vehicle’s nuclear power plant was activated after launch from a submarine, as reported by EurAsian Times at the time.

During the launch, the Russian President claimed there was “no way to intercept” the drone torpedo, which could travel faster than conventional submarines and reach any continent in the world. “It is unlikely that anything similar will appear in the near future,” he noted, adding that no country could match Poseidon’s speed and diving depth.

Specific details about Poseidon remain shrouded in secrecy. However,  open-source reports indicate it can carry a nuclear warhead of up to two megatons, uses nuclear propulsion for long range and endurance, and may be deployed from specialized motherships such as the Belgorod or the purpose-built Khabarovsk-class boats under construction.

Notably, the Poseidon torpedo can be remotely steered to its targets, functioning like a drone once released from the submarine.

Poseidon can reportedly operate at depths of more than 1 kilometer (0.6 mile) and travel at speeds of up to 70 knots while remaining undetectable. Russian commentators have noted that its torpedoes can produce radioactive tsunamis up to 1,000 feet high, in veiled threats issued to the West amid tensions stirred by the invasion of Ukraine.

Despite dismissing these threats as a gross exaggeration, military analysts have acknowledged that Poseidon torpedoes could seriously target coastal cities, ports, naval bases, and high-value maritime infrastructure of hostile states. In fact, experts believe that it is merely a new weapon meant to enforce Russia’s nuclear triad.

“Poseidon is a doomsday weapon. It is a post-apocalypse weapon. Most importantly, it is a nuclear weapon. As such, it can serve only as a deterrent. It has no combat value. It cannot be used in wars. It can only prevent wars,” Vijainder K. Thakur, an Indian Air Force veteran and military expert, earlier told EurAsian Times.

The development of Poseidon is believed to be a hedge against advances in NATO missile defense systems and to add redundancy to the sea-based leg of the nuclear triad. Poseidon’s main potential contribution is to Russia’s strategic nuclear posture at sea, providing a hard-to-counter second-strike option and complicating adversary planning.

• Contact the author at sakshi.tiwari13 (at) outlook.com
• Follow EurAsian Times on Google News

The post Russia Confirms Imminent Induction of Perm Nuclear Sub with Hypersonic Zircon Missiles and Poseidon UUV appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.

Iran has warned of “unforeseen” consequences after Ukraine’s attack on an Iranian vessel in the Caspian Sea.

“This action by Ukraine was an absolutely illegal and unjustified act, contrary to the Charter of the United Nations, as well as a dangerous act of adventurism that will certainly not go unanswered by us,” the ministry’s spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said in a weekly press briefing, adding that the consequences of Ukraine’s action “will certainly be unforeseen”.

Earlier, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned that Tehran would respond to a deadly attack by Ukraine on an Iranian ship.

It came after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Kyiv had carried out long-range strikes in the Caspian Sea against vessels transporting military cargo involving Iran, underscoring the increasingly international dimensions of Russia’s war in Ukraine.”

Zelenskyy has attacked an Iranian commercial vessel, killing a sailor,” Araghchi said on X, describing it as “a blatant UN Charter violation done at Israel’s behest to drag Europe into its war”.He added that, during calls with the European Union’s Kaja Kallas and Russian top diplomat Sergei Lavrov, he “made clear that what the freeloader in Kyiv did CANNOT GO UNANSWERED”.

Iran’s foreign ministry said the attack caused the ship “to explode, killing one sailor and injuring several others”.The Islamic republic “has never intervened in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine”, the ministry said in a statement.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said on social media that armed forces had achieved “very strong results with long‑range strikes in the Caspian Sea — including vessels used in military cargo shipments involving Iran, as well as a warship”.

The post Ukraine Just Punched a Hole in Iran & Russia’s Secret Caspian Highway — Tehran Vows Consequences appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.