February 2, 2025

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

Russian Defense Ministry

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

▫️In Kharkov direction, units of the Sever Group of Forces inflicted losses on formations of one motorised infantry brigade and one air assault brigade of the AFU near Liptsy and Volchansk (Kharkov region).

The AFU losses amounted to up to 20 troops, two motor vehicles, and four field artillery guns.

▫️Units of the Zapad Group of Forces improved the tactical situation. Losses were inflicted on manpower and hardware of five mechanised brigades and one tank brigade of the AFU near Kondrashovka, Kolodeznoye, Kislovka, Monachinovka (Kharkov region), and Makeyevka (Lugansk People’s Republic).

The AFU losses amounted to up to 295 troops, three armoured fighting vehicles, 11 motor vehicles, one MLRS combat vehicle, and four field artillery guns. Two ammunition depots and one electronic warfare station were destroyed.

▫️Units of the Yug Group of Forces took more advantageous lines and positions. Losses were inflicted on formations of two mechanised brigades of the AFU and two territorial defence brigades near Ulakly, Belogorovka, Verkhnekamenskoye, and Chasov Yar (Donetsk People’s Republic).

The AFU losses amounted to up to 200 troops, two motor vehicles, one MLRS combat vehicle, and seven field artillery guns, including two NATO-made guns. Four AFU field ammunition depots were destroyed.  

▫️Units of the Tsentr Group of Forces continued to engage in active offensive operations. Losses were inflicted on manpower and hardware of two mechanised brigades, two jaeger brigades, one assault regiment of the AFU, and one Lyut Assault Brigade of the National Police of Ukraine near Dzerzhinsk, Druzhba, Lysovka, Nadezhdinka, Shevchenko, Uspenovka, Andreyevka, and Kotlino (Donetsk People’s Republic).

The AFU losses amounted to up to 515 troops, one tank, six armoured fighting vehicles, ten motor vehicles, and six field artillery guns, including one NATO-made gun. 

▫️Units of the Vostok Group of Forces continued advancing into the depth of the enemy’s defences. Losses were inflicted on formations of five mechanised brigades, one air assault brigade of the AFU, and one marine brigade near Veseloye, Burlatskoye, Razliv, Razdolnoye, Rovnopol, Novoselka (Donetsk People’s Republic), and Kalinovskoye (Dnepropetrovsk region).

The AFU losses amounted to more than 140 troops, one tank, two armoured fighting vehicles, and two motor vehicles. Five field artillery guns, including one NATO-made gun, were wiped out.

▫️Units of the Dnepr Group of Forces inflicted losses on manpower and hardware of one mechanised brigade and two coastal defence brigades of the AFU near Rabotino, Primorskoye (Zaporozhye region), and Antonovka (Kherson region).

The AFU losses amounted to up to 60 troops, three motor vehicles, three field artillery guns, and two electronic warfare stations. One ammunition depot was wiped out.

▫️Operational-Tactical Aviation, attack unmanned aerial vehicles, Missile Troops and Artillery of the Russian Groups of Forces struck infrastructure of military airfields, fuel depots used by AFU, as well as engaged manpower and hardware of Ukrainian armed formations in 153 areas.

▫️Air defence units shot down one U.S.-made HIMARS MLRS projectile and 44 fixed-wing unmanned aerial vehicles.

▫️In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, 652 aircraft, 283 helicopters, 42,139 unmanned aerial vehicles, 590 anti-aircraft missile systems, 20,997 tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles, 1,513 MLRS combat vehicles, 21,129 field artillery guns and mortars, and 31,127 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.