October 27, 2025

Russian Ministry of Defense: up to 1,380 Ukrainian casualties in the last day

Russian Defense Ministry

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

📍 Units of the Sever Group of Forces inflicted losses on formations of two mechanised brigades, one motorised infantry brigade, one assault regiment of the AFU, and one territorial defence brigade near Andreyevka, Alekseyevka, Pavlovka, Kondratovka, and Varachino (Sumy region).

💥 In Kharkov direction, losses were inflicted on units of one mechanised brigade of the AFU and one territorial defence brigade near Sinelnikovo, Volchansk, and Neskuchnoye (Kharkov region). 

▪️ The AFU losses amounted to up to 185 troops, two armoured fighting vehicles, seven motor vehicles, one artillery gun, and one electronic warfare station.

📍 The Zapad Group of Forces improved the situation along the forward edge. Losses were inflicted on manpower and hardware of three mechanised brigades, one assault brigade of the AFU, and two national guard brigades near Staroverovka, Kupyansk, Kurilovka, Blagodatovka, Monachinovka, Petrovka, Petropavlovka (Kharkov region), Drobyshevo, and Novoselovka (Donetsk People’s Republic).

▪️ The AFU losses amounted to up to 240 troops, seven armoured fighting vehicle, including five Western-made armoured fighting vehicles, 16 motor vehicles, and one field artillery gun. Four electronic warfare stations and seven ammunition depots were destroyed.

📍 The Yug Group of Forces improved the tactical situation. Losses were inflicted on formations of two mechanised brigades, one assault brigade of the AFU, and one territorial defence brigade near Seversk, Zvanovka, Konstantinovka, Verolyubovka, Pleshcheyevka, Yablonovka, and Ivanopolye (Donetsk People’s Republic).

▪️ The AFU losses amounted to more than 140 troops, four armoured fighting vehicles, 21 motor vehicles, one artillery gun, two electronic warfare stations, five ammunition and materiel depots.

📍 The Tsentr Group of Forces’ units took more advantageous lines and positions. Losses were inflicted on manpower and hardware of three mechanised brigades, one jaeger brigade, one assault brigade, one air assault brigade, one assault regiment of the AFU, and two national guard brigades near Krasnoarmeysk, Rodinskoye, Gnatovka, Lysovka, Dimitrov (Donetsk People’s Republic), Novopavlovka, and Ivanovka (Dnepropetrovsk region).

▪️ The AFU losses amounted to more than 455 troops, three Kozak armoured fighting vehicles, three motor vehicles, and two artillery guns.

oaleksandrovka, Vishnevoye (Dnepropetrovsk region), Poltavka, and Malinovka (Zaporozhye region).

▪️ The AFU losses amounted to up to 300 troops, one armoured fighting vehicle, 17 motor vehicles, and one materiel depot.

💥 Units of the Dnepr Group of Forces inflicted losses on manpower and hardware of one mechanised brigade and one mountain assault brigade of the AFU near Stepovoye, Stepnogorsk, Novodanilovka (Zaporozhye region), and Nikolskoye (Kherson region).

▪️ The AFU losses amounted to up to 60 troops, 14 motor vehicles, and three electronic warfare stations.

✈️ Operational-Tactical Aviation, attack drones, missile troops and artillery of the Russian groups of forces struck transport and power infrastructure used to ensure delivery of weaponry and military hardware to the warfare zones in the Donbass by railroads, one military airfield, long-range UAV launch sites as well as temporary deployment areas of Ukrainian armed formations in 150 areas.

🎯 Air defence units shot down two guided aerial bombs, seven U.S.-made HIMARS MLRS projectiles, and 350 fixed-wing unmanned aerial vehicles.

📊  In total, since the beginning of the special military operation, the enemy has lost:

▫️ 668 aircraft,

▫️ 283 helicopters,

▫️ 92,925 unmanned aerial vehicles,

▫️ 633 anti-aircraft missile systems,

▫️ 25,710 tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles,

▫️ 1,607 MLRS combat vehicles,

▫️ 30,822 field artillery guns and mortars,

▫️ 45,045 units of support military 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.