February 7, 2025

Russian Ministry of Defense:  Up to 1,090 Ukrainian casualties in the past day

Russian Defense Ministry

of two territorial defence brigades close to Volchansk and Okhrimovka (Kharkov region).

The AFU losses amounted to more than 25 troops, four motor vehicles, and one field artillery gun. One ammunition depot was destroyed.

▫️The Zapad Group of Forces’ units improved the tactical situation and delivered strikes at manpower and hardware of three mechanised brigades, one mountain assault brigade of the AFU, and one national guard brigade close to Peschanoye, Novaya Kruglyakovka, Zeleny Gai, Zagryzovo (Kharkov region), Shangdrigolovo, Novoye, Yampolovka, and Kolodezi (Donetsk People’s Republic).

The AFU losses amounted to more than 200 troops, one tank, five armoured fighting vehicles, to include three U.S.-made M113 armoured personnel carriers, seven motor vehicles, five field artillery guns, two of which were Western-made. One electronic warfare station and four ammunition depots were destroyed.

▫️Units of the Yug Group of Forces took more advantageous lines and positions. Formations of two mechanised brigades, one assault brigade, one motorised infantry brigade of the AFU, and two territorial defence brigades suffered losses near Predtechino, Katerinovka, Orekhovo-Vasilyevka, Nikolayevka, Zelenovka, Sukhiye Yaly, and Chasov Yar (Donetsk People’s Republic).

The AFU losses amounted to up to 180 troops, three motor vehicles, one self-propelled artillery system, and one ammunition depot.

▫️The Tsentr Group of Forces’ units improved the situation along the front line. The Russian troops inflicted losses on manpower and hardware of two heavy mechanised brigades, five mechanised brigades, one jaeger brigade of the AFU, and the Lyut Assault Brigade of the National Police of Ukraine near Druzhba, Shcherbinovka, Udachnoye, Novopavlovka, Tarasovka, Dzerzhinsk, Vodyanoye Vtoroye, and Kotlino (Donetsk People’s Republic).

The AFU losses amounted to more than 505 troops, five armoured fighting vehicles, to include one U.S.-made Bradley infantry fighting vehicle, two motor vehicles, and seven artillery guns, to include one Western-made self-propelled artillery system.

depth of enemy defences. Formations of one tank brigade, three mechanised brigades of the AFU, and three territorial defence brigades were hit near Burlatskoye, Novoselka, Novopol, and Rovnopol (Donetsk People’s Republic).

The AFU losses amounted to up to 135 troops, two armoured fighting vehicles, three motor vehicles, two field artillery guns, to include one U.S.-made 155-mm Paladin self-propelled artillery system.

▫️Units of the Dnepr Group of Forces launched strikes at manpower and hardware of one mountain assault brigade and three coastal defence brigades of the AFU close to Shcherbaki (Zaporozhye region), Dneprovskoye, Yantarnoye, and Nikolskoye (Kherson region).

The AFU losses amounted to up to 45 troops, two motor vehicles, and one uncrewed surface vehicle.

▫️Operational-Tactical Aviation, attack unmanned aerial vehicles, Missile Troops and Artillery of the Russian Groups of Forces engaged the infrastructure of military airfields, storage and training sites for the launch of unmanned aerial vehicles as well as clusters of manpower and hardware of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 142 areas.

▫️Air defence systems have shot down two French-made Hammer guided aerial bombs, ten U.S.-made HIMARS MLRS projectiles, and 106 fixed-wing unmanned aerial vehicles.

▫️In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, 653 aircraft, 283 helicopters, 42,569 unmanned aerial vehicles, 590 anti-aircraft missile systems, 21,047 tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles, 1,513 MLRS combat vehicles, 21,292 field artillery guns and mortars, and 31,239 units of support military vehicles have been neutralised.

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.