January 14, 2026

Russian Ministry of. Defense: up to 1,345 Ukrainian casualties in the last day

Russian Defense Ministry

Russian Defence Ministry on progress of special military operationΒ as of 14 January 2026

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

 As a result of active and resolute actions, units of the Sever Group of Forces liberated Komarovka in Sumy region.

πŸ’₯ Russian troops engaged formations of one mechanised brigade, one air assault brigade of the AFU and one territorial defence brigade close to Khoten, Yastrebinoye, and Kondratovka (Sumy region).

πŸ”₯ In Kharkov direction, units of three mechanised brigades of the AFU and one border detachment of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine have been hit near Krugloye, Ternovaya, Staritsa, and Volchanskiye Khutora (Kharkov region).

β–ͺ️ The AFU losses amounted to up to 190 troops, two armoured fighting vehicles, 16 motor vehicles, and two field artillery guns. One fuel depot and three material depot were destroyed.

πŸ“ Units of the Zapad Group of Forces took more advantageous lines and positions. Strikes were delivered at manpower and hardware of three mechanised brigades, one engineering brigade of the AFU, two territorial defence brigades, and two national guard brigades close to Shiykovka, Osinovo, Glushkovka, Berezovka, Kupyansk-Uzlovoy, Kutkovka, Cherneshchina (Kharkov region), Mayaki, and Krasny Liman (Donetsk People’s Republic).

β–ͺ️ The enemy losses amounted to up to 200 troops, three armoured fighting vehicles, 26 motor vehicles, two artillery guns, and one U.S.-made AN/TPQ-50 counter-fire radar. Six ammunition depots were wiped out.

πŸ“ Units of the Yug Group of Forces improved the tactical situation along the front line. Russian troops hit three mechanised brigades, one airmobile brigade, one assault brigade of the AFU, one marine brigade, and the Azov Special Forces Brigade near Zakotnoye, Konstantinovka, Kramatorsk, and Novotroitskoye (Donetsk People’s Republic).

β–ͺ️ The AFU lost up to 125 troops, six armoured fighting vehicles, including one Italian-made Puma armoured personnel carrier, 15 motor vehicles, four field artillery guns, including two Western-made ones, and two electronic warfare stations.

πŸ“ The Tsentr Group of Forces improved the tactical situation. The Group’s units inflicted losses on manpower and hardware of five mechanised brigades, one jaeger brigade, one airborne brigade, two air assault brigades, two assault regiments of the AFU, one marine brigade, one territorial defence brigade, four national guard brigades, and the Azov Special Forces Brigade near Belitskoye, Grishino, Shevchenko, Toretskoye, Lenino (Donetsk People’s Republic), Ivanovka, Novopavlovka, and Novopodgorodnoye (Dnepropetrovsk region).

β–ͺ️ The AFU losses amounted to up to 440 troops, two tanks, one infantry fighting vehicle, two U.S.-made M113 armoured personnel carriers, four Kazak armoured fighting vehicles, and seven motor vehicles.

Russian Defence Ministry on progress of special military operation as of 14 January 2026

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

 As a result of active and resolute actions, units of the Sever Group of Forces liberated Komarovka in Sumy region.

πŸ’₯ Russian troops engaged formations of one mechanised brigade, one air assault brigade of the AFU and one territorial defence brigade close to Khoten, Yastrebinoye, and Kondratovka (Sumy region).

πŸ”₯ In Kharkov direction, units of three mechanised brigades of the AFU and one border detachment of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine have been hit near Krugloye, Ternovaya, Staritsa, and Volchanskiye Khutora (Kharkov region).

β–ͺ️ The AFU losses amounted to up to 190 troops, two armoured fighting vehicles, 16 motor vehicles, and two field artillery guns. One fuel depot and three material depot were destroyed.

πŸ“ Units of the Zapad Group of Forces took more advantageous lines and positions. Strikes were delivered at manpower and hardware of three mechanised brigades, one engineering brigade of the AFU, two territorial defence brigades, and two national guard brigades close to Shiykovka, Osinovo, Glushkovka, Berezovka, Kupyansk-Uzlovoy, Kutkovka, Cherneshchina (Kharkov region), Mayaki, and Krasny Liman (Donetsk People’s Republic).

β–ͺ️ The enemy losses amounted to up to 200 troops, three armoured fighting vehicles, 26 motor vehicles, two artillery guns, and one U.S.-made AN/TPQ-50 counter-fire radar. Six ammunition depots were wiped out.

πŸ“ Units of the Yug Group of Forces improved the tactical situation along the front line. Russian troops hit three mechanised brigades, one airmobile brigade, one assault brigade of the AFU, one marine brigade, and the Azov Special Forces Brigade near Zakotnoye, Konstantinovka, Kramatorsk, and Novotroitskoye (Donetsk People’s Republic).

β–ͺ️ The AFU lost up to 125 troops, six armoured fighting vehicles, including one Italian-made Puma armoured personnel carrier, 15 motor vehicles, four field artillery guns, including two Western-made ones, and two electronic warfare stations.

πŸ“ The Tsentr Group of Forces improved the tactical situation. The Group’s units inflicted losses on manpower and hardware of five mechanised brigades, one jaeger brigade, one airborne brigade, two air assault brigades, two assault regiments of the AFU, one marine brigade, one territorial defence brigade, four national guard brigades, and the Azov Special Forces Brigade near Belitskoye, Grishino, Shevchenko, Toretskoye, Lenino (Donetsk People’s Republic), Ivanovka, Novopavlovka, and Novopodgorodnoye (Dnepropetrovsk region).

β–ͺ️ The AFU losses amounted to up to 440 troops, two tanks, one infantry fighting vehicle, two U.S.-made M113 armoured personnel carriers, four Kazak armoured fighting vehicles, and seven motor vehicles.

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.