December 14, 2024

Russian Ministry of Defense: up to 1,375 Ukrainian casualties in the past day

Russian Defense Ministry

In Kharkov direction, the Sever Group of Forces hit formations of two territorial defence brigades and one border detachment of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine near Aleksandrovka and Volchansk (Kharkov region).

The AFU losses amounted to up to 60 troops, two armoured personnel carriers, three motor vehicles, and two 122-mm D-30 howitzers. 

The Zapad Group of Forces improved the tactical situation. Strikes were delivered at manpower and hardware of three mechanised brigades, one airborne brigade, and one jaeger brigade near Lozovaya, Zagryzovo (Kharkov region), Nadiya (Lugansk People’s Republic), Olivovsky Yar, and Serebryansky forestry. Two AFU counter-attacks were repelled. 

The AFU losses amounted to up to 540 troops, two armoured personnel carriers, four pickup trucks, a UK-made 155-mm Braveheart self-propelled artillery system, a UK-made 155-mm FH-70 howitzer, a U.S.-made 155-mm M198 howitzer, U.S.-made 155-mm M777 howitzer, a U.S.-made 105-mm M119 gun, six 122-mm D-30 howitzers, an Italian-made 105-mm Melara Mod 56 howitzer. Two Zakhist-AF and Anklav electronic warfare stations were eliminated. 

The Yug Group of Forces took more advantageous lines. Russian units hit formations of two AFU mechanised brigades, one motorised infantry brigade, one marine brigade, and one territorial defence brigade close to Kurakhovo, Novoyelizavetovka, Ostrovskoye, and Dalneye (Donetsk People’s Republic). Two counter-attacks of AFU units were repelled. 

The AFU losses amounted to up to 225 troops, two armoured fighting vehicles, and a 122-mm D-30 howitzer. 

The Tsentr Group of Forces improved the tactical situation. Russian units engaged manpower and materiel of two mechanised brigades, one jaeger brigade, one motorised infantry brigade, one assault brigade of the AFU, one marine brigade, and two national guard brigades close to Dzerzhinsk, Dimitrov, Shevchenko, Novopustynka, Starye Terny, Novaya Poltavka, and Shcherbinovka (Donetsk People’s Republic). Four counter-attacks launched by AFU assault detachments were repelled. 

The enemy lost up to 365 troops, an armoured fighting vehicle, three motor vehicles, a 152-mm D-20 gun, three 152-mm Msta-B howitzers, and three 122-mm D-30 howitzers. 

territorial defence brigades and one border detachment of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine near Aleksandrovka and Volchansk (Kharkov region).

The AFU losses amounted to up to 150 troops, two armoured fighting vehicles, three motor vehicles, a Polish-made 155-mm Krab self-propelled artillery system, a 152-mm Akatsiya self-propelled artillery system, and a 122-mm D-30 howitzer. 

▫️The Dnepr Group of Forces engaged manpower and hardware of two territorial defence brigades close to Antonovka (Kherson region) and Malaya Tokmachka (Zaporozhye region). 

The AFU losses amounted to up to 35 troops and three motor vehicles. 

▫️Operational-Tactical Aviation, attack unmanned aerial vehicles, Missile Troops and Artillery of the Russian Groups of Forces have engaged three depots of unmanned aerial vehicles, as well as hit clusters of enemy manpower and military hardware in 153 areas during the day. 

Air defence units shot down six U.S.-made HIMARS MLRS projectiles and 60 fixed-wing unmanned aerial vehicles. 

📊 In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, 649 aircraft, 283 helicopters, 37,693 unmanned aerial vehicles, 586 anti-aircraft missile systems, 19,784 tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles, 1,500 MLRS combat vehicles, 19,574 field artillery guns and mortars, and 29,206 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.