March 19, 2024

Russian Ministry of Defense:   Up to 570 Ukrainian troops killed or wounded in 24 hours

Russian Defense Ministry

The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation continue the special military operation.

▫️ In Kupyansk direction, the Zapad Group of Forces inflicted fire damage on the AFU units and improved the situation along the front line. 

The AFU losses amounted to up to 30 Ukrainian troops, one infantry fighting vehicle, four motor vehicles, two U.S.-made M777 artillery systems, and one Czech-made RM-70 Vampire multiple rocket launcher.

▫️In Belgorod direction, Russian units continue to carry out measures to prevent sabotage and reconnaissance groups of the Armed Forces of Ukraine from entering the border area.

As a result of air strikes and artillery fire against clusters of AFU manpower and hardware in border areas of Ukraine near Kozinka (Belgorod region), the enemy has lost up to 40 troops, two infantry fighting vehicles, and three motor vehicles.

▫️In Donetsk direction, units of the Yug Group of Forces took more advantageous lines and positions, and defeated formations of the 79th Air Assault Brigade, 46th Airmobile Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, and the 118th Territorial Defence Brigade near Novomikhailovka, Razdolovka, and Georgiyevka (Donetsk People’s Republic).

Over 215 Ukrainian troops, three tanks, two infantry fighting vehicles, and four motor vehicles were neutralised.

In the course of counter-battery warfare, one Polish-made Krab self-propelled artillery system, two Gvozdika self-propelled artillery systems, one D-30 howitzer, and one S-60 anti-aircraft artillery system were eliminated. 

▫️In Avdeyevka direction, the Tsentr Group of Forces liberated Orlovka (Donetsk People’s Republic) and improved the situation along the front line. Six counter-attacks of AFU 47th, 53rd, 59th mechanised brigades were repelled near Pervomayskoye, Tonenkoye, and Berdychi (Donetsk People’s Republic).

The AFU losses amounted to up to 125 Ukrainian troops, two armoured fighting vehicles, and five motor vehicles.

In the course of counter-battery warfare, the Russian troops hit one U.S.-made M109 Paladin self-propelled artillery system, one Msta-B howitzer, two D-20 howitzersone D-30 howitzer, and one MT-12 Rapira anti-tank gun.

▫️In South Donetsk direction, the Vostok Group of Forces’ units inflicted fire damage and repelled two counter-attacks of the AFU 72nd Mechanised Brigade’s assault groups close to Staromayorskoye (Donetsk People’s Republic). 

The AFU losses amounted to up to 130 Ukrainian troops, one tank, two infantry fighting vehicles, five motor vehicles, and one Gvozdika self-propelled artillery system.

▫️ In Kherson direction, units of the Dnepr Group of Forces improved the situation along the front line and hit manpower and hardware clusters of the 65th Mechanised Brigade of the AFU and 121st Territorial Defence Brigade close to Rabotino and Pyatikhatki (Zaporozhye region).

The AFU losses amounted to up to 30 Ukrainian troops, two motor vehicles, one U.S.-made M777 artillery system, and one D-30 howitzer.

▫️Operational-Tactical Aviation, unmanned aerial vehicles, and Missile Troops and Artillery of the Russian Groups of Forces have engaged AFU manpower and hardware in 114 areas during the day.

Air defence systems shot down 143 AFU unmanned aerial vehicles and shot down 38 HIMARSOlkhaGrad, and Vampire MLRS projectiles.

▫️In total, 577 airplanes and 270 helicopters, 16,135 unmanned aerial vehicles, 486 air defence missile systems, 15,534 tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles, 1,244 combat vehicles equipped with MLRS, 8,456 field artillery cannons and mortars, as well as 19,933 units of special military equipment have been destroyed during the special military operation.

Share the Post:

Wilson Center

Forced displacement represents one of the most pressing humanitarian issues of our time. Individuals and families, torn from the fabric of their communities, find themselves navigating a world of uncertainty, often without basic necessities or a clear path to safety. There are currently some 110 million forced displaced, and this number is growing by 10 million each year!

At the heart of this crisis are the political triggers. Armed conflicts, ethnic or religious persecutions, and systemic human rights abuses force millions to flee their homes in terror. Many are displaced within their own national boundaries, while others seek asylum abroad. If these factors change as a result of political shifts at home or the pressures from abroad, they can return to their homes. Forced displacement is thus different from environmentally driven displacement, as victims of climate change may never be able to return to their homes.

The ramifications of any sort of displacement are profound, not just for those directly affected, but also for host communities and countries. Overburdened infrastructures, socio-economic strains, and cultural tensions can arise, necessitating comprehensive strategies to foster harmony and integration. Yet the root causes of forced displacement can be remedied with a concerted focus by local players and international diplomacy.

Organizations like Refugees International play a crucial role in this arena, advocating for the rights and needs of the displaced, conducting on-the-ground assessments, and influencing policymakers to take informed actions. Their relentless work underscores the gravity of the situation and the urgency ofinternational cooperation. But they, too, are overwhelmed by the rapid expansion of the crisis.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), with its core principles centered on the protection of civilians during conflicts, plays a pivotal role in this discourse. Yet, despite clear legal frameworks, compliance remains
inconsistent. This initiative emphasizes the importance of upholding and reinforcing these international standards.

It’s not just about recognizing the problem; it’s about active engagement. We urge governments, organizations, and individuals to prioritize the rights and needs of the forced displaced. Through collective efforts, informed policies, and sustained advocacy, we can shift the narrative from passive acknowledgment to proactive intervention.