The Guardian reported the information.The first group of seven hostages was released around 8 a.m. local time and handed over to the Red Cross in northern Gaza. There is currently no information on their condition.Relatives and friends of the hostages burst into applause when Israeli TV channels announced that the hostages were now in Red Cross custody.Tens of thousands of Israelis are watching the hostage release on screens set up across the country, with the largest crowds gathered in Tel Aviv.Before the release, Hamas published the names of 20 Israeli hostages:  Bar Abraham Kupershtein, Evyatar David, Yosef-Chaim Ohana, Segev Kalfon, Avinatan Or, Elkana Bohbot, Maxim Herkin, Nimrod Cohen, Matan Angrest, Matan Zangauker, Eitan Horn, Eitan Abraham Mor, Gali Berman, Ziv Berman, Omri Miran, Alon Ohel, Guy Gilboa-Dalal, Rom Braslavski, Ariel Cunio and David Cunio.The remaining hostages are expected to be freed at 10:00 a.m. in Khan Younis. Hamas claims that 20 living hostages will be exchanged for more than 1,900 Palestinians imprisoned by Israel.The story is developing...On October 9, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that Israel and Hamas had agreed on the first phase of a peace deal that would allow for the rapid release of all hostages.On October 10, at 12 p.m., the ceasefire agreement between Israel and the Palestinian group Hamas came into effect.

Ukraine’s General Staff reported the information.Russia's total combat losses from February 24, 2022, to October 13, 2025, are approximately:personnel – about 1,123,950 (+1,140);tanks – 11,251 (+3);armored combat vehicles – 23,345 (+0);artillery systems – 33,599 (+21);MLRS – 1,520 (+2);air defense systems – 1,225 (+0);aircraft – 427 (+0);helicopters – 346 (+0);tactical-level UAVs – 69,242 (+232);cruise missiles – 3,859 (+0);ships/boats – 28 (+0);submarines – 1 (+0);vehicles and fuel tanks – 64,043 (+109);special equipment – 3,977 (+1).The data is being clarified.

A very important meeting recently took place between the current Pentagon chief, Pete Hegseth, and President Trump, joined by the top ranks of the U.S. military. The meeting was unannounced, and no details of the agenda were made public.It appeared that Trump and Hegseth are preparing to introduce a new U.S. national security doctrine. Interestingly, much of what was discussed seemed unrelated to deterring Russia or China. What was the real purpose of this meeting? Was it meant to showcase Donald Trump’s strength to the military establishment, or perhaps to send a message to the American public ahead of time?It’s a little bit hard to know exactly what the intended rationale was. I think it was likely for Secretary Hegseth to preside over all the senior admirals and generals and to show them who’s boss.He was essentially condescending toward them. He was somewhat insulting, calling them fat and physically unfit, and adopted a lecturing, hectoring tone toward his senior generals. I think many in the room felt like they were being talked to by a headmaster at school rather than respected as senior military leaders who deserve the trust of their boss, the Secretary of Defense.It was a very strange speech. It came across as somewhat amateurish. And if its intent was to instill loyalty in the officer corps, I think it did just the opposite. Most of the generals and admirals who walked away from that meeting probably felt that their boss was a little out of touch with reality.Again, I don’t know what the intended rationale was, but it certainly wasn’t a particularly effective speech. And of course, there was no national defense strategy to announce because it’s still being worked on.Of course, the key issue isn’t what was said but what concrete actions the U.S. administration may or may not take next. One of the main items on the table is the potential deployment of the legendary American Tomahawk missiles, which has already sparked a hysterical reaction from the Kremlin. Clearly, this isn’t just about long-range missiles. It is about symbolism, about readiness, about signaling America’s resolve if Russia continues to escalate in ways that could also endanger European Union countries.The real question is how far the U.S. administration is actually willing to go. Will it move beyond words about deterrence and pressure and truly act to achieve peace through strength?Well, you have to look at the various types of assistance that have been considered and provided to Ukraine so far.Frankly, there hasn’t been a single dollar of military assistance given to Ukraine by the Trump administration. So I don’t know why anyone would expect that the administration would be willing to provide an advanced capability like Tomahawk missiles to partners in Kyiv when, so far, it hasn’t provided any capabilities at all.I know that the Ukrainian side would very much like to have the Tomahawk missile, which would help partially equalize the correlation of forces on the battlefield, because Russia is using long-range missiles against Ukraine, while Ukraine does not have missiles of comparable range to strike back at Russia. The Tomahawk would help level that imbalance, and from Ukrainian territory, it could reach Moscow, which is a significant factor.That’s why I think there has been such a strong negative reaction from Russian leaders.But I have to say, I am not optimistic that the Trump administration would approve either the sale or the transfer of this capability to Ukrainian partners.Last week, our studio guest was former U.S. intelligence officer Ralph Goff, who previously headed the CIA’s Special Operations Center for Europe and Eurasia. He suggested that Ukraine is now capable of conducting special operations even more sophisticated than the “Spiderweb” mission, targeting key nodes of Russia’s military logistics and energy infrastructure.What we are seeing is a kind of strategic duel. Around 40 percent of Russia’s oil refining capacity has been destroyed or severely damaged. In response, Russia has been lashing out with increasing aggression. How do you assess this confrontation, and how much are these strikes actually hurting Russia?So far, you’ve seen that the Ukrainian side has been far more innovative than the Russian side. Operation Spider Web is the perfect example of that – an operation executed flawlessly that took the Russian side completely by surprise and had a significant strategic impact. I think we can expect Ukrainian special operators to launch similar missions in the future, and they are among the best in the world.I would expect them to achieve gains that the Russians are probably unable to achieve in Ukraine. However, the Russians have the advantage of greater mass, and because they are supported by China, they have an almost endless supply of components for their military-industrial complex, including microprocessors, which are vital for the rockets and missiles they fire into Ukraine.This war will continue to test both sides in their ability to innovate and adapt to changing conditions on the battlefield. I believe Ukraine has the upper hand, especially if it receives additional financial support from the European Union. And if the reparations currently being discussed in Brussels come to fruition, I think the Ukrainian side will find itself on much stronger footing than Russia.Do we have a clearer sense yet of what specific signals China is sending to Moscow? Recently, we hosted retired Australian Army General Mick Ryan in our studio. He has a sharp understanding of the risks embedded in China’s updated national security doctrine and its growing reliance on threats and force to advance its interests, and this is about much more than just Taiwan.General Ryan told me that in the current situation, steel will have to be met with steel, otherwise it may soon be too late.When it comes to China’s influence on Russia, how do you see it? Are they encouraging Moscow to take more aggressive actions, including against the European Union? Are they trying to hold Russia back? Or are they simply waiting and using the moment to profit?It’s very hard to say because I’m not privy to those conversations. I don’t think we have any clear indication of what the content of those closed-door discussions between officials from Moscow and Beijing actually is. However, I suspect that Beijing is not encouraging Moscow to be more aggressive or to undertake specific types of operations.They are primarily providing support to Moscow, particularly if they sense that Russia is beginning to lose ground on the battlefield or that its position is becoming weaker. In that case, I think Beijing could consider putting more resources into Russia, because from China’s perspective, they don’t want Western democracies to prevail over autocratic Russia on the battlefield in Ukraine.That said, I don’t think China is managing Russia’s battlefield operations on a day-to-day basis. That remains under Russia’s control – they assume full authority over their forces and their decision-making inside Ukraine.That’s how I see it, but of course, I could be wrong, since I’m not privy to those conversations.There are distinctly Russian objectives in this war. Putin is using it not only to tighten his grip on power but also to pursue broader ambitions. He is taking enormous risks, and Trump openly mocks him, calling him a paper tiger.At the same time, we are witnessing major global shifts – rearmament, the rewriting of military doctrines in many countries, and a growing awareness of new security threats within the European Union. Yet there is still no clear vision of what kind of world is emerging. Developments in the United States and Africa show that where China fails to advance its goals in Europe, it is doing so in Africa and Latin America instead. The world is undergoing a deep geopolitical transformation.The question is, where are we heading – toward a Third World War, or toward a renewed system of alliances and a revitalized NATO?Here’s how I see it. The world order is now undergoing a process of multipolarization. The bipolar structure of the Cold War was followed by the unipolar structure of American hegemony after it ended.Now we are seeing the rise of new powers, greater competition among major states, and the erosion of the so-called rules-based international order. The war between Russia and Ukraine is crucial because it serves as a crucible in which the growing contest between global democracies and global autocracies is becoming clear. The United States has assembled a coalition of roughly 50 democratic nations in support of Ukraine.Just look at the membership of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, also known as the Ramstein format – all democracies supporting Ukraine. The same is true for the G7 and the Ukraine Reconstruction Conference, both composed of democratic nations backing Ukraine. On the other side, we have Russia, Belarus, North Korea, Iran, and China cooperating as autocracies to prevent the victory of Western democracy.So, the way I see the global order evolving is toward a far more contested reality between the forces of democracy and autocracy worldwide. Ukraine is the epicenter of this contest, but it will likely manifest in other regions and other forms in the years ahead.How do you assess Russia’s overall strategic plan? Moscow shows no real willingness to engage in serious negotiations. At the Valdai Forum, Putin made several thinly veiled threats, including one directed at EU countries. We now see provocations unfolding in the Baltic Sea region, with drones targeting Poland, Denmark, and others. At the same time, Putin has claimed that Ukraine’s nuclear power plants could be under threat.How prepared do you think Russia is to launch a full-scale strategic offensive? What separates Putin’s rhetoric from mere bluff? And if he isn’t bluffing, how seriously has he developed a scenario against Ukraine and Europe?I think you’re absolutely right that Putin has no intention of sitting down for any kind of meaningful negotiations. He will continue the war until he achieves his aim, which is the subjugation of Ukraine and the elimination of an independent Ukrainian nation. I do not need to tell Ukrainians this; I think you instinctively understand it.Putin has been quite explicit about his aims, and more people in the West need to pay attention to what he is saying rather than try to infer some other goals from his actions. In the coming months, I think he will likely target the Ukrainian electricity grid. He seems to believe that if he can plunge Ukraine into darkness and cold this winter, he can terrorize the population and achieve results he has not been able to obtain on the front lines. For that reason, I expect continued large-scale missile and drone strikes on Ukrainian critical infrastructure. The key now is to surge as much air defense capability to Ukraine as possible. Western countries, rather than wasting time talking about a reassurance force that is unlikely to deploy before a cease fire, should consider the SkyShield approach, which I think is viable and could be implemented relatively quickly. Instead of discussing ground troops, we should talk about Western planes flying from Poland, Slovakia, or Romania to protect the skies of western Ukraine, and potentially allowing Ukrainian pilots to operate further east, closer to the front lines and to Russia. That combination would be a strong and effective step if Western countries were willing to take it.It’s clear that Russia is pursuing several possible scenarios in its war against Ukraine. They have expanded drone production and are systematically targeting our energy infrastructure, not only electricity but also the gas sector, including processing, extraction and transportation facilities. In essence, Russia is preparing Ukraine for a “cold genocide.”The key challenge now is to ensure Ukraine’s protection. This is not just about Patriot systems but also about aircraft and broader resources. Military resources mean more than money; they include actual combat units that can be deployed to Ukraine in the near future.How do you assess this competition in military capabilities between Ukraine and its partners on one side and Russia and its allies on the other?It’s very unfortunate that the United States eliminated the U.S. Agency for International Development, which had been heavily involved in providing passive protection for substations and other parts of Ukraine’s electricity grid. That was a very helpful form of assistance that helped preserve much of Ukraine’s critical infrastructure. European countries will now have to step in and do more of this.You’re right that it requires an all-of-the-above strategy – using air defense systems, strengthening layered air defense, and potentially providing more aircraft so that Ukraine can patrol its skies. It also requires resources to stop Russia through long-range strikes that could destroy some of the airfields from which Russian planes take off. All of this is necessary.I believe Russia is much weaker than many people realize today. The Russian economy is in poor condition: inflation is high, interest rates are high, and there is little room for growth. If Western countries were more deliberate in their efforts to limit Russia’s energy revenues, particularly from oil and gas, Moscow could be left with far fewer financial resources to sustain the war.Unfortunately, the United States is largely absent from this equation under the Trump administration. It is therefore up to European countries to take the lead – to devise a strategy that includes using frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine and to invest in the capabilities that will be critical for the coming winter, which will likely be brutal as Putin tries once again to terrorize the population.What do you think really happened in Anchorage, Alaska? Did President Trump and Putin actually reach any kind of understanding? A few weeks after their meeting, Trump said that Putin had let him down. Trump has been very deliberate in how he talks about Putin – he avoids insults but draws clear lines that Russia must not cross. One example is nuclear blackmail, which the Russians have since largely stopped using.But did Donald Trump ever have a genuine peace plan? Is that plan still on the table today? And could it still be discussed between the Kremlin and Washington?It’s hard for me to know the specifics, and of course I wasn’t in the room. It seems that the Trump administration truly believed it could achieve some sort of ceasefire deal, but one that would have required Ukraine to give up roughly a quarter of its territory, as Putin was demanding. As you know, Putin wanted all of the Donbas, formal recognition of Crimea, and also the Zaporizhzhia region. In other words, he was demanding a lot.Trump seemed to think he could pressure Ukraine into agreeing to such a deal – ceding that territory to Russia – in exchange for promising Moscow sanctions relief, believing that would be enough to get the Kremlin to sign on. That’s my best interpretation of how the Trump administration was prepared to approach these negotiations. As you noted, the Alaska summit produced nothing. Putin was unwilling to accept any deal, and Trump walked away empty-handed.Of course, Ukraine would never agree to give up a quarter of its territory, including areas currently under Ukrainian control. So the whole proposal was a nonstarter from the beginning. Fortunately, it appears that those talks have now been shelved, and Trump seems to be stepping back from any active role in negotiations for the time being.Now it will fall to European leaders to take the lead – to show more initiative in diplomacy and in supporting Ukraine. We are already beginning to see that with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s plans for a reparations law, which truly could be a game changer in how resources are directed to Ukraine.When it comes to resources, unfortunately, Ukraine still depends heavily on support from its European and American partners. At the same time, we see the U.S. administration trying to shift much of the responsibility onto Europe, suggesting that European countries should be the ones buying American weapons for Ukraine. Meanwhile, our own budget is under severe financial strain.As Washington steps up pressure on Russia, it may also increase pressure on Ukraine. Some European governments are actively cooperating with the Trump administration, raising concerns that their support may not always align fully with Ukraine’s interests. The overall balance of relations in Central Europe and between Europe and the United States is clearly changing.How much pressure are our American friends actually able to put on Kyiv?Right. My reading of the situation is that the Trump administration is likely to step back, as I mentioned earlier, from any active role in negotiations. That probably means less pressure on Moscow, but also less pressure on Kyiv, since the United States is unlikely to be directly involved. President Trump appears to be shifting his focus toward the Western Hemisphere, particularly targeting drug trafficking operations in the Caribbean and off the coast of Venezuela.If my sources are correct, the upcoming National Defense Strategy will place the Western Hemisphere as the top U.S. strategic priority, the Indo-Pacific as the second, and the Euro-Atlantic region only as a tertiary area of focus. That gives you a sense of where U.S. strategic thinking is heading.This means European countries will have to take on greater responsibility, both in providing financial support for Ukraine and in supplying weapons. European defense production will have to increase substantially.The good news is that some of the funds from the reparations loan, if it materializes, could be invested directly into Ukraine’s defense industrial base, which is already highly innovative, adaptive, and technologically advanced, particularly in the field of unmanned systems. This could be a winning strategy, channeling resources into Ukraine’s own defense industry to drive innovation and expand production, giving Ukraine a significant advantage compared to where it stands today relative to Russia.Of course, Russia continues to receive support from China, but I don’t think that assistance is as significant as the potential impact of the assets that could start flowing to Ukraine in the coming months.Everyone is now discussing several possible scenarios for the war: Russia backed by China on one side, and Ukraine supported by Europe on the other. What do you see as the pessimistic and optimistic outcomes of this war? The best-case scenario is that the Europeans, and to some extent the United States, work together to apply heavy pressure on the Russian economy. This would mean fully ending European purchases of Russian energy, including oil and gas, and, in the case of the United States, halting imports of Russian nuclear fuel as well. It would also require imposing secondary sanctions on major buyers of Russian oil and full blocking sanctions on Russia’s entire financial sector.Combined with the reparations loan, this could put Ukraine in a much stronger position relative to Russia. It could reverse the momentum on the battlefield. Putin’s aura of invincibility, or at least the narrative he tries to project of inevitable victory, would collapse and Ukraine could begin to push back on the front lines and regain territory. That is the optimistic scenario.I believe it is entirely achievable, but it will require greater European political will, unity, and solidarity than we have seen so far.The negative scenario is that this winter Putin continues attacking Ukraine’s critical infrastructure and Ukraine lacks sufficient technological means to protect its power stations, energy grid, and gas transport systems. As a result, the country could be plunged into cold and darkness during the peak of winter, causing parts of the civilian population to consider leaving and potentially triggering another wave of refugees. That is the worst-case scenario, and it could happen if additional assistance, especially in air defense, is not provided.Still, I see that outcome as less likely. Ukraine will likely be able to distribute its energy generation capacity across regions, reducing the risk of single points of failure. With continued Western support, Ukraine should be able to endure the coming winter, though it will undoubtedly be a very difficult one.

Astra and OSINT specialist Blinzka reported the information.The OSINT expert conducted geolocation analysis of a video, identifying the exact location of the operator at 54.81031, 32.05208 and the filming direction. The analysis showed smoke rising from the direction of the aviation plant.Location of point of view: Smolensk (Смоленск), Smolensk Oblast, Russia near 54.81031, 32.05208 https://t.co/ewuzhhO0T4 @UAControlMap #geoconfirmed @GeoConfirmed Smoke or steam from the direction of the airport and aircraft factory in Smolensk, Russia. pic.twitter.com/EN0QXHgasY— blinzka (@blinzka) October 11, 2025 The Smolensk Aviation Plant has been sanctioned by the EU, Ukraine, and several other countries for producing Kh-59 precision missiles and components for Kh-101 cruise missiles, which Russia uses in strikes on Ukraine. The facility also manufactures drones, aerial targets, front-line aviation components, and light aircraft for various purposes.On October 11, long-range drones from the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) targeted the Bashneft-UNPZ oil refinery in Ufa, Republic of Bashkortostan.

Military and political observer Oleksandr Kovalenko discussed the issue.In 2025, the Russian forces concentrated near Pokrovsk were tasked with capturing the city “as quickly as possible,” driven by both military and political motives.“In particular, the Kremlin sought to demonstrate to newly elected U.S. President Donald Trump its ability to advance and capture territory. But Moscow failed to impress Trump, and the 100,000-strong Russian force became bogged down near Pokrovsk for months,” the military expert noted.During the summer offensive, Russian forces planned to encircle Pokrovsk from three sides to prepare for urban combat, but the 90th Tank Division failed to advance beyond the Kurakhove area or reach Dnipropetrovsk region.“Throughout June and July, Russian occupation forces failed to achieve significant progress, and on the eve of the Trump-Putin meeting in Alaska, the 51st Combined Arms Army launched what could be called the 'Dobropillia breakthrough,' which ultimately turned into a suicidal performance,” he said.On the night of August 8–9, Russian forces launched an operation with small infantry groups near Nove Shakhove, advancing 15–16 km into the weakest Ukrainian defenses using the complex terrain, the ravines near Zolotyi Kolodiaz and gaps between brigade positions.However, the lack of stable logistics and secure flanks caused the Russian units that had advanced to become isolated by Ukrainian Defense Forces and eventually completely encircled.“Thus, the Dobropillia operation that began two months ago turned into a 'meat grinder' for the Russian forces, resulting in the loss of combat capability of several battalions and a collapse along the entire Pokrovsk direction, while also weakening other sectors from which scarce troops and resources had been diverted. The Russian command is determined to take Pokrovsk during the 2025–2026 autumn-winter period, but it set similarly ambitious goals last year as well,” Kovalenko concluded.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy made these remarks on Telegram.“Russia continues its aerial terror against our cities and communities, intensifying strikes on our energy infrastructure. The immorality of these crimes is such that every day Russians kill our people. Yesterday in Kostiantynivka, a child was killed in a church by an aerial bomb,” he emphasized.According to Zelenskyy, over the past week alone, the Russians used more than 3,100 drones, 92 missiles, and about 1,360 guided aerial bombs against Ukraine.He added that emergency services across the country continue to eliminate the consequences of strikes and carry out repairs.“Moscow allows itself to escalate its strikes, openly exploiting the fact that the world is focused on ensuring peace in the Middle East. That is precisely why no weakening of pressure can be allowed. Sanctions, tariffs, and joint actions against the buyers of Russian oil – those who finance this war – must all remain on the table,” Zelenskyy stressed.He noted that maintaining this pressure could pave the way for lasting peace in Europe. “The world can ensure this in parallel with the peace process in the Middle East,” the president added.On Saturday evening, October 11, the Russian occupation army launched attack drones against Ukraine. In the Dnipropetrovsk region, a fire broke out at an infrastructure facility. In the Kharkiv region, the Russians struck a school building in the city of Chuhuiv, injuring five people.

Colonel Valentyn Manko, head of the newly formed Assault Troops Directorate within the Ukrainian Ground Forces, announced the information on Sunday, October 12.“Good news from the Zaporizhzhia direction. The assault units of the 24th Battalion and the 33rd Regiment carried out a successful counteroffensive special operation, and liberated Mali Shcherbaky, Shcherbaky, surrounding areas, and partially Stepove. We advanced nearly 3.5 km forward and over 5 km along the front line. The operation continues. Prymorske, Stepnohirsk, Plavni, and partially Kamianske remain under Ukrainian control,” Manko said in a statement on his Facebook page.“Once again, the assault troops have demonstrated their strength. Believe in the Armed Forces of Ukraine! Glory to the Assault Troops! Glory to Ukraine!” the officer emphasized.

This was reported by the analytical group Frontelligence Insight, which obtained internal documents from the Russian Uralvagonzavod plant — the country’s main armored vehicle manufacturer — confirming that the Russian defense industry is actively restructuring for a prolonged war.It has been established that Moscow plans to nearly double tank production by 2028, including new T-90M and modernized T-90M2 Ryvok-1 (Dash-1) models. In 2028 alone, the plant is expected to produce over 420 units, and between 2027 and 2029, more than 1,100 tanks.Analysts note that such figures indicate Russia’s strategic preparation for a potential conflict with NATO. To achieve this, the country is modernizing production, automating processes, and training new operators.Even partial implementation of the plans will allow the Kremlin to restore its pre-war armored potential. According to Frontelligence Insight, by 2036 Russia could produce over 2,000 modernized tanks, replenishing reserves and strengthening the eastern flank.At the same time, Moscow is modernizing older T-72 tanks in preparation for prolonged combat operations in Ukraine and future missions. Experts believe these trends indicate a shift in the Russian economy toward a long-term military course, posing a serious threat to European security.On October 7, the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) reported that Russia has launched a large-scale information and psychological campaign, which could be part of preparations for a potential armed confrontation with NATO.

The OSINT project DeepState reported the information.According to updated data from the battlefield map, the Russians had partial successes in Kharkiv region — near the settlements of Pishchane and Malynivka, and also in Donetsk region — in the area of the village of Torske.“The Russians advanced near Pishchane, Torske, and Malynivka,” the report says.Over the past month, Russian forces captured 44% less territory than in August, with the most problematic front being the Novopavlivka sector.

The Cuban Foreign Ministry reported the information.“The Government of the Republic of Cuba rejects the mendacious allegations being spread by the United States Government concerning an alleged involvement of Cuba in the military conflict in Ukraine. This is a slanderous accusation first launched in 2023 by certain media outlets without offering any evidence or substantiation of any kind, and clearly serving an assigned purpose. The Cuban Government categorically reaffirms that Cuba is not part of the armed conflict in Ukraine, nor does it participate with military personnel there or in any other country,” the statement reads.The ministry stressed that no Cuban who may have taken part in hostilities acted with the consent or support of the state. At the same time, the government acknowledged that some citizens may have joined foreign armed groups on their own initiative, without any connection to the official authorities.“In accordance with its national legislation and international obligations, the Cuban Government maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward mercenarism, human trafficking, and the participation of its nationals in any armed confrontation in another country — all of which constitute serious crimes subject to severe penalties under national law,” the ministry explained.The ministry noted that from 2023 to 2025, Cuban law enforcement disrupted schemes to recruit citizens for participation in the war in Ukraine. During this period, courts considered nine criminal cases related to mercenary activity and sentenced 26 people to terms of 5 to 14 years in prison.“Cubans participating on both sides of the armed conflict have been recruited through organizations not based in our country and having no connection whatsoever with the Cuban Government. In the vast majority of cases, this recruitment has been carried out abroad among Cuban nationals residing or temporarily staying in various countries, just as recruitment for that conflict has taken place among people of many other nationalities, in numbers that also remain imprecise. The United States Government has not provided and will not be able to offer a single piece of evidence to support its baseless and mendacious accusations in this new defamatory campaign against Cuba,” the ministry concluded.On October 5, Reuters reported that the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump demands that American diplomats prevent the lifting of the long-standing embargo against Cuba, citing that over five thousand Cubans are fighting on Russia’s side against Ukraine. 

Andrii Kuskov "Cesar," commander of the 3rd battalion of the 15th Brigade of the National Guard, shared the information on Espreso TV.“Today, the Russians lack the capacity for a large-scale offensive on the Kupiansk front. They face logistical problems, particularly with crossings over the Oskil River, preventing them from concentrating significant forces and equipment. Russian troops rely on one tactic — mass assaults in small groups. These assaults are continuous, putting pressure on the Defense Forces, but they should not be expected to change the strategic or operational situation,” Kuskov explained.He also noted that changing weather conditions now help Ukrainian units better detect the Russians.“The changing weather works in our favor. Russian forces continue to use natural cover, which is abundant in Kharkiv region, especially forests. This was a challenge for us, but as leaves fall, it becomes easier to spot the enemy. We have strengthened and fortified our positions,” he added.Since the start of October 11, 160 combat clashes have been recorded on the Russian-Ukrainian front. The Russians attacked Ukrainian positions 46 times in the Pokrovsk sector.

Bloomberg reported the information.UK Defence Secretary Luke Pollard said at the Defence Industry Forum in Kyiv that the project, called Octopus, is currently under negotiation and could be implemented in the coming months.“Very shortly we’ll be producing around 2,000 drones a month, deliberately shipping all of them to Ukraine so they can be used to intercept Russian drones,” he said.Initial production will be rolled out in the UK, Pollard added, but the scheme is designed to respond quickly to frontline needs.“UK is outstanding at R&D and advanced manufacture, so we can add something that our Ukrainian friends don’t have in this respect,” Pollard said. “We need to be fast and we need to be first.”He also noted that the UK plans other projects with Ukraine, including the production of gliders.“We’re starting with drones for obvious reasons,” he stressed. “But in general Ukraine is an essential partner for us in terms of creating the technologies we need to deter Russia and to re-arm Europe.”On October 11, Ukraine and the United Kingdom signed a statement of intent to cooperate on developing battlefield technologies under a new partnership called the LYRA program, including a project agreement on joint artillery production.

The Ministry of Energy reported the information."Tonight, the Russians again attacked Ukraine’s energy and gas transport infrastructure. Damage occurred to energy facilities in Donetsk, Odesa, and Chernihiv regions," the statement reads.Rescuers from the State Emergency Service and energy workers are currently on site working to stabilize the electricity supply as quickly as possible."The Ministry of Energy is grateful to the energy workers and rescuers who, despite the risks to their own lives, continue to perform their duties and ensure the functioning of the energy system," the ministry emphasized.On October 11, the Russian army launched attack drones against Ukraine. In the Dnipropetrovsk region, a fire broke out at an infrastructure facility. In the Kharkiv region, the Russians struck a school building in the city of Chuhuiv, injuring five people.

Former Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis warned the influential British outlet The Telegraph that Vladimir Putin’s hybrid war is pushing Europe toward a new deadly “Pearl Harbor” moment. Landsbergis emphasized: “Do we accept the reality that we may already be at war, or do we still believe we control the situation? We are allowing escalating tensions without proper responses. If this continues, we should expect Europe to experience a day like Pearl Harbor, when escalation becomes impossible to ignore and forces the West to awaken.”And indeed, this is the case. Europeans are hesitating while "Russia has become not just a European, but a global problem." Dictator Putin is one of the most dangerous war criminals in world history, who has made the genocide of Ukrainians the central focus of his life.However, the horrors of World War II have warped Western decision-making to such an extent that leaders in the collective West, when confronted with Russia’s war in Ukraine, concluded that limited military engagement with limited losses was preferable to full-scale confrontation with the enemy.From the outset, it was clear that delayed decisions could not solve the problem and only prolong it.Any military conflict is inherently risky and uncertain, but the assumption that limited involvement is the optimal solution was strategically flawed from the start. Such an approach leads to longer wars, higher casualties and costs, and ultimately further provokes Putin to continue his bloody war in Ukraine.By starting the war, Russia underestimated the willpower and state-minded convictions of the Ukrainian people, who refused to fall under the rule of a mad, bloodthirsty despot who regarded all Ukrainian lands as his rightful spoils. But the United States, while expressing support for Ukrainian sovereignty, effectively tied one of Ukraine’s hands behind its back with its restrictions and bans. When a once‑dominant army launches total war, it can never be defeated by defense alone.Putin will never stop the war until the people of the Russian Federation themselves feel that the war has come to them too — that it has brought them pain and suffering. As long as the consequences of retaliation concern only Ukrainians, people in Russia do not feel the cost of retribution for the atrocities they have committed on Ukrainian territory.We must acknowledge that the idea of providing Ukraine with half‑measures was laid down during the presidency of Joe Biden. Sadly, it was not abandoned during the term of the 47th U.S. president, Donald Trump. Yet limiting Ukraine’s support to what is only necessary for defensive operations, and withholding modern weapons needed to deliver a knockout blow to Putin’s terrorist forces, does not serve the geopolitical interests of the United States.A Ukrainian victory over Russia would help deter China from any planned invasion of Taiwan, at least for a time, removing the prospect of a U.S.–China clash. When will the West finally understand that appeasement, half‑measures and compromises with tyrants do not work? Peace can come only when enemies feel your strength, and your military power serves as a reliable shield protecting your country and its allies from hostile attacks.Therefore, the fastest path to peace is simple: a decisive Ukrainian victory on the battlefield.Putin must not be allowed to hide behind the threat of a Third World War or an exchange of nuclear strikes — threats he uses to terrorize Ukraine’s civilian population and reduce cities and villages in eastern and southern Ukraine to rubble. He has turned the lives of Ukrainian civilians into hell, and that hell must be returned to Russia as retribution for his unprovoked invasion of a sovereign state — a founding member of the United Nations, which has so far failed to stop Russia’s aggression against Ukraine.It is evident that in the United States and united Europe, the prevailing view has been that the Russia-Ukraine war in its current form would continue until Russia is exhausted militarily, economically, politically, and diplomatically, and until Putin loses the desire to start a new war in the near future.However, Putin imposes no limits on his actions in Ukraine, attacking civilian targets and critical infrastructure, while Ukrainians are forced to restrain their counterattacks due to American restrictions. As a result, Moscow has no incentive to halt its aggressive actions or consider moving toward a peace agreement. Without applying forceful methods to check the despot, there is little hope of ending this protracted war.Putin started the war but refuses to take responsibility for its consequences. He seeks a boxing match in which his opponent’s hands are tied. The dictator views the conflict as a kind of military operation in which the West helps Ukraine only minimally, while he does whatever he wants on Ukrainian territory and continually refuses to negotiate.Now he is testing NATO countries through drones, airspace incursions, and troop buildups on the alliance’s borders. The Kremlin leader cannot imagine ending the war without Ukraine’s defeat, and he does not even consider the possibility of his own partial or total defeat.The United States must finally resolve the issue of providing Ukrainians with the weapons needed to end the Russian-Ukrainian war. It is clear that long-range missiles capable of destroying a significant portion of Russia’s oil production could reduce the risk posed by the mad bear.Meanwhile, he believes he can intimidate Europe, putting forward absurd claims that European intervention in the war and assistance to Ukraine would be considered aggression against Russia. The Putin theater of absurdity continues, and when Europe truly decides to help Ukraine, it will be an act of defense, not aggression.Moscow accuses Europe of doing what it does itself — provoking confrontation and waging hybrid war. But from the start, Moscow’s actions have been impossible to explain logically. They act entirely illogically, have no moral obligations, and lie in every situation. And this is nothing new for anyone who has ever dealt with Russians.A direct analogy is clear: if Great Britain and France had helped Czechoslovakia stop Germany’s invasion, World War II might never have begun. Likewise, if Putin’s Russia is not stopped in Ukraine, the rogue Russian army will continue its advance into Europe, and one can only imagine how many European civilians would be killed.Putin’s determination regarding Ukraine is fueled by his belief that he can get away with a limited nuclear strike, after which, in his view, Ukrainians must surrender. He assumes the United States will not risk American cities to defend Europe, and that Europeans have a very limited nuclear arsenal to use against Russia.This can be partly explained by former U.S. President Donald Trump’s isolationist tendencies, reminiscent of early attempts by the 32nd president, Franklin Roosevelt, to keep the U.S. out of World War II. Yet such a Trump-like stance significantly increases the risk of a Third World nuclear war.Putin, still trapped in the illusions of his Soviet communist past, dreams not only of reviving the USSR by occupying Ukraine but also of being the world’s ruler, ideally facing no resistance to his aggression and having the world bend to his absurd demands.As 25 years ago, he operates under the flawed and unproven belief that the collective West is too divided and weak to confront Russia. European states, with their inept and constantly changing leadership, unlike his lifelong rule, cannot realistically oppose him.Where he gets the notion that European countries are weak, their economies uncompetitive, and their militaries ineffective is unclear. Meanwhile, any gaps in Europe’s defense are being effectively addressed, and defense budgets are rising to counter the Russian threat.Europe’s joint defense system is evolving rapidly, and national intelligence services monitor Moscow’s intentions and take necessary actions in response.Yet all this is clearly insufficient. Moscow is targeting the European continent. So what more must Russia do for Europe to finally realize that the war in Ukraine is also their war?Speaking on the apparent passivity of European leaders, Gabrielius Landsbergis called it a “geopolitical Groundhog Day,” emphasizing: “Instead of asking whether we risk starting a Third World War, the question is whether we dare to stop it.”SourceAbout the author. Viktor Kaspruk, journalist.The editorial team does not always share the opinions expressed by blog or column authors.

He made the statement on his Facebook page.“We face a hot autumn. Europe is moving faster toward war. A few weeks ago in Copenhagen, Brussels presented a war plan: Europe pays, Ukrainians fight, and Russia will be exhausted. We were not told how much this would cost or how long it would last. Instead of a strategy, it was just wishful thinking by Brussels,” Orbán wrote.The minister said that during the EU summit in early October in Copenhagen, he clearly stated: “We did not ask for this.” Since then, according to Orbán, the EU has launched a campaign against Hungary, including “accusations of spying, fake news, and legal manipulations.”“They moved against us in Brussels… We cannot stand aside and watch this! We must show once again that the Hungarian people do not want war. That is why we are starting a petition against Brussels’ war plans,” the Hungarian prime minister added.On October 2, the European Political Community summit took place in Copenhagen, Denmark, attended by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. On the sidelines, Zelenskyy held several meetings with European leaders on Ukraine’s security issues.

In a phone interview with TV Informer, Vučić explained that he had expected a three-year gas supply contract to be signed back in May and that the Serbian side had been “more than fair and honest” in negotiations, according to Radio Slobodna Evropa.“They want to tell us: ‘If you start nationalizing NIS or anything else, we can cut off gas on December 31.’ And this is a very, very bad signal for me in every sense. Not because we planned to nationalize, because if we did, we wouldn’t face sanctions,” Vučić said.According to Vučić, U.S. officials suggested Serbia nationalize NIS to avoid sanctions, but he refused.As for Russia, he plans to meet with them and propose “new ideas” regarding the sanctioned company, though he did not specify what those ideas are.U.S. sanctions against the company Naftna Industrija Srbije (NIS) began on Thursday, October 9. NIS was added to the U.S. sanctions list due to the so-called “secondary risk,” as Russia owns the controlling stake through Gazprom Neft.

The Financial Times reported the information.Several Ukrainian and U.S. officials familiar with this campaign said American intelligence has enabled Ukrainian forces to strike critical Russian energy sites, including oil refineries far from the front lines.This support, which intensified from mid-summer, had not been previously reported.The shift came after a phone call between Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelenskyy in July, during which, according to FT, the U.S. president asked whether Ukraine could strike Moscow if Washington provided long-range weapons.Trump reportedly expressed support for a strategy intended to “make them [the Russians] feel pain” and push the Kremlin toward negotiations, according to two sources familiar with the conversation. The White House later said Trump “was simply asking a question, not encouraging further killings.”Officials familiar with the matter said U.S. intelligence assists Kyiv in planning flight paths, altitude, timing, and mission decisions, enabling Ukrainian long-range drones to avoid Russian air defenses.Three people familiar with the operation said Washington was closely involved in all stages of planning. A U.S. official said Ukraine selected targets for strikes, after which Washington provided intelligence on the vulnerabilities of those sites.Other sources involved in the operations said the U.S. also identified priority targets for Ukraine. One described Ukrainian drones as a “tool” for Washington to weaken Russia’s economy and push Putin toward an agreement.Trump had openly expressed frustration with Putin since hosting the Russian leader at the Alaska summit, which yielded little progress. According to sources, this also influenced Trump’s support for long-range strikes.On October 11, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy spoke by phone with U.S. President Donald Trump to discuss Russia’s recent large-scale attack on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure.

His article was published on October 11, 2025, in the Daily Mail.How to help Ukraine now“He [Trump] knows that he cannot hope to emulate Ronald Reagan – the victor of the Cold War – if he allows the West to be beaten in Ukraine. Now is the time for all of us – the UK, Europe, NATO – to help him put pressure on Putin. Let’s immediately unfreeze that $250 billion of Russian assets and give it to Ukraine as a down payment on Putin’s reparations. It is disgraceful that cash is still largely in a Brussels bank account. Let’s give the Ukrainians the kit they need to take out the bases from which Putin is launching his evil raids, not just Tomahawks but the 1,000 German Taurus missiles that have still not been sent; and let’s give the Ukrainians permission to use the long-range weapons they already have,” Johnson writes.Regarding Putin’s shadow fleet used to sell his oil, the former British leader suggested it “will be no bad thing” to sink one of his tankers and generally halt all shipments by these vessels.“Let’s crack down on Putin’s fleet of sanctions-busting oil tankers, and if one of them should find its way to Davy Jones’s locker, that will be no bad thing. Let’s back Trump by financially penalising the countries that are still buying Russian oil and gas and enabling Putin’s slaughter.”Coalition of the Willing or Coalition of the WaitingJohnson also addressed the leaders of NATO countries that joined the Coalition of the Willing.“As for the ‘Coalition of the Willing’, the Western boots on the ground in Ukraine, let’s have that now. Under no circumstances will these troops be deployed in warfighting. They are there to provide support away from the front, in logistics and training. Since most of Ukraine is safe, there is no reason why they could not go now, if only to make this crucial point to Moscow: that it is up to Ukrainians to decide which foreign forces visit their country – and not up to Putin. This war is fundamentally about the destiny and freedom of Ukraine; and we can show Putin now that Ukraine must always be free to choose that destiny. That is why we should deploy now, without waiting for Putin to agree, or the Coalition of the Willing will be the Coalition of the Waiting,” the British ex-PM outlined.“The killing in Ukraine has gone on long enough. It is time for Putin to feel the weight of pressure that Trump can apply. It goes without saying that when he does – and I believe he will – that Nobel Prize will be nailed on,” Johnson concluded.The Coalition of the Willing was formed on March 2, 2025, in London. Its members included leaders of the U.K., Canada, and NATO member states, excluding Belgium, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, Slovenia, Bulgaria, and the Baltic countries. EU and NATO leaders also joined the summit.

Deutsche Welle reported the information.The parade took place in Kim Il Sung Square to mark the 80th anniversary of the founding of the ruling Workers’ Party of Korea. During the event, North Korea’s leadership showcased a new intercontinental ballistic missile.According to the state propaganda agency KCNA, the Hwasong-20 missile is North Korea’s “most powerful strategic nuclear weapon,” allegedly capable of striking targets within the United States.North Korean leader Kim Jong Un called on the armed forces to become an “invincible” power capable of eliminating any threats.Among the parade’s distinguished guests were Chinese Premier Li Qiang, Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev, and General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam To Lam.On September 27, Kim Jong Un ordered the mobilization of all available resources to develop the country’s nuclear program to strengthen its defense and protect its sovereignty.

Kharkiv regionAccording to the Kharkiv Regional Police, Russian forces launched a drone strike on the city of Chuhuiv overnight. The target was a school building.The blast shattered windows and doors, damaged the facade and roof, and caused a fire at the site.Nearby apartment buildings and cars were also damaged.Five people were injured: a 12-year-old girl, women aged 59 and 78, and men aged 54 and 69 — all suffered acute stress reactions.In Vovchansk, a house caught fire after a drone strike, but no casualties were reported.Dnipropetrovsk regionHead of the Dnipropetrovsk Regional Administration Serhii Lysak reported that the Russians attacked the Pavlohrad district with drones.“In the early morning, it was loud in the Pavlohrad district. The Russian UAVs struck there, causing a fire at one of the infrastructure facilities. No residents were injured,” he said.

Ukraine’s General Staff reported the information.Russia's total combat losses from February 24, 2022, to October 12, 2025, are approximately:personnel – about 1,122,810 (+1,240);tanks – 11,248 (+1);armored combat vehicles – 23,345 (+0);artillery systems – 33,578 (+10);MLRS – 1,518 (+0);air defense systems – 1,225 (+0);aircraft – 427 (+0);helicopters – 346 (+0);tactical-level UAVs – 69,010 (+244);cruise missiles – 3,859 (+0);ships/boats – 28 (+0);submarines – 1 (+0);vehicles and fuel tanks – 63,934 (+87);special equipment – 3,976 (+3).The data is being clarified.

Spiegel reported the information.“It annoys me that only now are people realizing the urgency of the drone problem,” Gerber said. “We have been pointing out this problem for ten years.”Gerber stressed that the detection and neutralization of drones near airports is a matter of national security.“At civilian airports, the federal police should have the authority to stop drones and, if necessary, shoot them down,” he said. “An hour of downtime always means millions in losses.”Federal Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt announced that the government is taking steps to strengthen Germany’s drone defense capabilities. Later this year, a special drone defense unit will be created within the federal police, and a joint drone defense center involving federal and state authorities will be launched.The issue has gained urgency following a series of drone-related incidents in early October.On the evening of October 2, unknown drones were spotted near Munich’s airspace, forcing the cancellation of more than a dozen flights. Less than 24 hours later, both of Munich Airport’s runways were closed again due to the reappearance of unidentified drones.

Reuters reported the information. “This was a substantial joint mission with our U.S. and NATO allies,” said UK Defense Minister John Healey, noting that the operation aimed to enhance intelligence and demonstrate alliance unity.“Not only does this provide valuable intelligence to boost the operational awareness of our Armed Forces, but sends a powerful message of NATO unity to Putin and our adversaries,” Healey added.According to the British Defense Ministry, an RC-135 Rivet Joint electronic surveillance aircraft and a P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol plane flew from the Arctic region past Belarus and Ukraine, supported by a U.S. Air Force KC-135 refuelling aircraft.The mission followed a series of airspace violations in Poland, Romania, and Estonia. It comes as EU leaders recently agreed to strengthen the bloc’s defenses against Russian drone activity, underscoring growing regional concerns about Moscow’s air provocations.

The country’s defense ministry announced the information.The measures are intended to assess how quickly troops can respond to threats and carry out assigned tasks, the ministry said in a statement.“A number of armed forces units will be put on combat alert, will move to designated areas, and will conduct activities outlined in the order,” it said.The inspection is being conducted under the supervision of the State Secretariat of the Security Council and includes command and staff drills, troop movements, and field exercises to evaluate unit coordination and mobility.The announcement follows annual mobilization readiness exercises held across Belarus from October 7 to 10 under the leadership of regional authorities.

Zelenskyy’s press service reported the information.“I informed President Trump about Russia’s attacks on our energy system—and I appreciate his willingness to support us. We discussed opportunities to bolster our air defense, as well as concrete agreements that we are working on to ensure this. There are good options and solid ideas on how to truly strengthen us,” Zelenskyy said about the results of the discussion.In addition, he congratulated Trump “on his success and the Middle East deal he was able to secure, which is an outstanding achievement.” “If a war can be stopped in one region, then surely other wars can be stopped as well—including the Russian war,” the head of state added.“There needs to be readiness on the Russian side to engage in real diplomacy—this can be achieved through strength,” Zelenskyy concluded.