Category News

Russian forces pressed into Ukraine’s eastern towns of Pokrovsk and Myrnohrad during the past week as Kyiv’s military mounted a stout defence.

On Tuesday, Ukraine’s commander-in-chief Oleksandr Syrskii said almost half of the battles on a 1,200km (745-mile) front were happening in the two towns, claiming Russia has committed 150,000 troops – almost a quarter of its strength in Ukraine – to capturing them.

Russia sees Pokrovsk as a gateway to the remaining unoccupied parts of Donetsk, the region it has already claimed as its own in September 2022.

As Ukrainians were gripped by a corruption scandal involving President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s allies, the battlefront was in a fluid state in which no side seemed to gain a decisive advantage.

Both Russia and Ukraine often captured and recaptured neighbourhoods and individual buildings from each other.

Hus, a drone squad commander from the 68th Jaeger brigade on the outskirts of Pokrovsk, told the Reuters news agency, “Here, one building is held by our side, the next occupied by the enemy, and in a few hours it swaps.”

It did appear, however, that the Russians were slowly gaining ground.

Ukrainian troops told Reuters the defence of Pokrovsk was “steadily deteriorating”, despite the army’s efforts to reinforce it.

Russia’s Ministry of Defence said its troops were advancing through Pokrovsk in house-to-house battles.

A Ukrainian unit commander said Russia was leading its assault with Spetsnaz special forces who were looking for Ukrainian mortar firing crews and drone units, aiming to neutralise them and ease the passage of reinforcements.

These tactics had enabled the Russians to capture the centre of Pokrovsk by early November, and in the past week, they were attempting to work their way east and west. Ukrainian defenders appeared to be maintaining a stronghold in the north of Pokrovsk.

In Myrnohrad, to the east of Pokrovsk, Russian troops were infiltrating the eastern reaches of the town, and this week made a marginal advance into its northern edge, while Ukrainian defenders firmly held the bulk of it.

Both towns are precariously situated in a Russian encirclement from the north, south and east, in which supply and escape routes are only available towards the west.

The operational significance of the towns’ seizure by Russia depended on “whether Ukrainian forces conduct an orderly withdrawal or disorderly retreat” and on “Russian forces’ ability to exploit the collapse of the pocket and conduct a successful pursuit”, wrote the Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank.

Russia’s Defence Ministry has repeatedly claimed that the towns’ complete envelopment and surrender with forces still inside was imminent.

Yet Ukraine has defied Russian expectations and fought on, engaging in what Syrskii called an “active defence”, using drones for “search and strike operations” that took a toll.

“Every metre of our land costs Russia hundreds of military lives,” Syrskii wrote on the Telegram messaging platform.

In October alone, Syrskii said, short-range drones had struck 77,000 targets, a 16 percent increase on the 66,500 targets he said had been struck in September, which in turn represented an 11 percent increase on August.

These figures suggested that Russian infiltrators’ efforts in smoking out drone units and cutting off Ukrainian resupply were meeting with less success than the Russian command might have hoped.

At the beginning of the week, Russia also stiffened its offensive near Huliaipole, about 60km (37 miles) southwest of Pokrovsk, on the border of the Donetsk and Zaporizhia regions.

Syrskii said the situation had “significantly worsened” there, and that “exhausting battles” were taking place for Rivnopillia and Yablukove. Geolocated footage showed Ukraine was forced to abandon Rivnopillia on Tuesday.

On Saturday, Axios reported that the United States government shutdown may have delayed delivery of $5bn of weapons systems to NATO allies and Ukraine, though it did not draw a direct connection between this and the defence of Pokrovsk.

Russia kept up pressure on other parts of the front.

Its Defence Ministry claimed to have seized Uspenovka, Novoye and Sladkoye in Zaporizhia, Volchye in Dnipropetrovsk, and Gnatovke in Donetsk.

Ukraine’s deep strikes

Far from the ground war, Ukraine continued to pummel Russian refineries in a bid to cut off its fuel supply to the front.

Lukoil’s Volgograd refinery stopped operations on November 6 after being hit by Ukrainian drones, according to unnamed sources who spoke to Reuters. They said that the primary processing unit, representing a fifth of the plant’s total capability and other equipment was damaged.

On Saturday, Ukraine struck substations near Belgorod, causing a blackout in the city.

On Sunday, Ukraine caused a fire at the port and oil terminal of Tuapse, on the Black Sea. Russia said it destroyed four Ukrainian surface drones heading for the Tuapse oil terminal, which Ukraine has struck repeatedly in recent weeks, but others must have got through.

Ukraine also struck a power plant in Voronezh.

On Tuesday, the Saratov refinery caught fire after being attacked by drones. Explosions were also heard coming from the nearby refinery in Orsk.

“Russia has an air defence deficit, with losses including S-300, S-400, and many Pantsir [air defence] systems that protected facilities,” wrote the head of Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation, Andriy Kovalenko.

“Most of the enemy’s air defence is near the front and Moscow, creating significant gaps in Russia’s airspace. To understand, most Russians in the country are not protected by [President Vladimir] Putin at all, although he constantly promised security to everyone.”

Rescuers in Indonesia have been searching for survivors of a landslide that inundated three villages in Java, after days of heavy rainfall. Several people have been reported killed.

Venezuela on Tuesday announced what it called a major nationwide military deployment in response to the presence of growing United States naval forces off its coast.

On Thursday, the US also unveiled an operation, called Southern Spear, which it said was intended to target “narco-terrorists” in the Western Hemisphere.

The escalation has raised alarm in Caracas, where officials worry the US may be using these operations as a pretext to force President Nicolas Maduro out of power.

“We tell the American empire not to dare: We are prepared,” Foreign Minister Yvan Gil said on Thursday at an event in Caracas.

But is Venezuela really prepared for a US attack or invasion? What are its military capabilities? And what might be the calculus driving the decisions of US President Donald Trump and Maduro, respectively?

What has happened over the past few weeks?

Tensions between Washington and Caracas have been spiralling for weeks, as the Trump administration has hit a series of boats in the Caribbean Sea and, more recently, the Pacific Ocean, claiming they were carrying individuals smuggling narcotics into the US.

The 20th strike took place this week, US officials have said. In all, about 80 people have been killed. The Trump administration has not presented any evidence to back its assertion that the bombed boats had narcotics or drug smugglers on them, or that the vessels were even headed to the US. It has also not offered any legal justification for its actions, which many experts believe violate international law.

At the centre of Washington’s allegations is an unsubstantiated claim that Venezuela’s Maduro is driving the narcotics smuggling to the US in cahoots with cartels.

Meanwhile, the US has dispatched the USS Gerald R Ford carrier strike group into Caribbean and Latin American waters, a powerful naval formation built around the world’s most advanced and largest aircraft carrier.

An aircraft carrier is a floating airbase – a warship that can launch, land, refuel, and arm military aircraft at sea.

The Ford is a nuclear-powered supercarrier equipped with advanced technology, sailing alongside guided-missile destroyers and support ships, with more than 4,000 personnel and dozens of tactical aircraft ready for rapid deployment.

#Venezuela: I’ve often described the USS Gerald R. Ford in the media as a “floating fortress of American power.” Some facts and figures showing why: pic.twitter.com/f53PeACIOB

As Washington expands its military presence in the region, analysts say the stated goals of the mission have broadened and may not fully align with the capabilities of the forces being deployed.

“The administration has said that the deployment is to stop the flow of illegal drugs to the US, and also to degrade the cartels, but over time the US goal has expanded to include anti-Maduro regime activities,” said Mark Cancian, senior adviser in the defence and security program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), in an analysis posted on X early on Friday.

Cancian noted that the carrier may not be fully optimised for the mission as described. “The Ford is not well suited for counter-drug operations… It’s well suited to attack adversaries either at sea or on land.”

He also pointed out that the deployment of the Ford cannot be indefinite.

“There are demands around the world for its presence because it’s such a powerful military asset, and eventually it’ll have to go home – so Southern Command will need to either use it or stand down,” he said, referring to the US military command under which the Caribbean and the Pacific Ocean fall.

Is Venezuela prepared for an attack?

On Tuesday, Venezuela’s government announced a “massive” mobilisation of troops and civilians to prepare for any potential US action.

Venezuelan Defence Minister Vladimir Padrino Lopez announced a “higher phase” of the Independence Plan 200, a military response mechanism ordered in September to strengthen defence measures against the US presence in the Caribbean.

“Nearly 200,000 troops have been deployed throughout the national territory for this exercise,” Padrino Lopez added.

The exercise was scheduled to start Tuesday and end on Wednesday.

Padrino Lopez also stressed that the country’s military forces were united. He said “more than 90 percent of the people reject any aggression against Venezuela,” dismissing opposition groups he described as “minority, subversive, [and] fascist”, and claiming they “no longer exist” in the national political landscape.

He framed the mobilisation as part of a broader stand against “imperialist aggression” and Washington’s attempts to act as “the world’s hegemon” and “the world’s police”, insisting that Venezuela remains committed to its independence, liberty and sovereignty.

According to analysts, Venezuela’s armed forces indeed are – for the most part – closely tied, politically, economically, and institutionally to the movement known as Chavismo that has shaped the Venezuelan state for more than 20 years.

The military doctrine is based on policies laid out by the late Hugo Chavez, and it is based on members being “patriotic, popular and anti-imperialist”. Maduro took over as president after Chavez died in 2013.

“I don’t think that the Venezuelan government and the military are going to fracture only because of threats,” Elias Ferrer, founder of Orinoco Research and the lead editor of Venezuelan media organisation Guacamaya, told Al Jazeera.

“Because of the way they think in front of threats, they’ve always stuck together and strengthened their position,” he added.

What is Venezuela’s current military capability?

According to Global Firepower’s 2025 Military Strength Ranking, Venezuela places 50th worldwide out of 160 countries assessed in terms of military capabilities.

Within Latin America, it ranks seventh.

It falls behind regional militaries such as those of Brazil, Mexico and Argentina, and sits in a similar range to Colombia, Chile, and Peru.

According to a report released by CSIS this week, Venezuela’s air force is small and only partially functional.

Roughly 30 of its 49 aircraft are believed to be operational, and only three F-16s can still fly, due to a lack of spare parts caused by US sanctions.

According to Military.com, a platform focused on the US military and veteran community, Venezuela has invested billions in Russian-made weapons systems, including missiles and fighter jets, intended to deter or challenge US ships and aircraft.

Venezuela has at least 21 operational Su-30s, a Russian fighter aircraft developed in the 1980s.

The Su-30s can be armed with supersonic antiship missiles, such as the Kh-31A, which are a significant threat to naval warships operating near Venezuela.

The CSIS report notes that in the event of a conflict, Venezuelan airfields and aircraft would likely be among the first US targets. The US has deployed F-35 stealth fighters to the region, and they are likely intended to counter both Venezuelan fighter-jet manoeuvres and the country’s air-defence systems.

On the ground, however, the analysis suggests that Venezuela maintains a significantly larger troop presence and greater firepower than the limited US forces currently positioned offshore.

According to Global Firepower, from a total population of 31 million, the Venezuelan military has an active military personnel of 337,000. Of them, 109,000 are active members, 220,000 belong to paramilitary forces, and the remaining 8,000 are reserve personnel.

But experts say these numbers mask a more troublesome reality for Venezuela: Its military forces have been hampered by years of limited warfighting training and a focus on internal security.

Its navy, meanwhile, is no match for the US and its uncontested control at sea.

Ultimately, analysts agree that the US is militarily far superior to Venezuela.

“No one can match the power of the United States military in conventional warfare,” Ferrer, the Orinoco Research founder, told Al Jazeera.

“What we need to think about in Venezuela is the capacity of the local armed forces to resist or to make the country ungovernable.

“They can make it so costly that it’s not worth it; that’s how you win in asymmetric warfare,” Ferrer added.

Is the US preparing to attack Venezuela?

Trump has justified the recent military buildup by arguing it is necessary to curb the flow of drugs into the US. But many analysts believe this is an effort to increase pressure on Nicolas Maduro.

The US president has said he does not plan to invade Venezuela, and Carlos Pina, a Venezuelan political scientist, believes Washington’s preferred strategy is indeed still political rather than military.

“I still believe that the main option for the US is not to carry out any armed attack, but to apply enough pressure for Nicolas Maduro to resign and hand over power peacefully,” he said. “In my opinion, that remains the most desirable option for the US.”

Pina argued that Maduro is fully aware of this strategy and is responding accordingly. “Maduro knows this, and because he knows it, he tries to raise the cost of any potential intervention,” Pina said. “He also counts on the fact that, both in the region and even within the country, a military invasion would likely not be well regarded or well received.”

However, Pina warned that the scale of the US deployment creates political pressure of its own in Washington.

“After sending so much military equipment to the Caribbean, it would be a political and diplomatic defeat for Trump to do nothing, to pull back and leave things as they were before the mobilisation,” he said.

Because of this, Pina said he expects the US to continue escalating rather than retreating. “Trump will probably do something to avoid that defeat,” he said. “He will likely keep increasing military pressure to force a political change, to initiate a transition. And as the days go by, he will continue building up more force-equipment, ships, planes, even troops in the Caribbean.”