There is still widespread confusion over reports of an armed raid across the Ukrainian border into Russia, with claims of pro-Ukrainian fighters capturing a town and the use of a tank.
Russia says more than 70 attackers have been killed in the Belgorod region and the remnants of their units pushed back into Ukrainian territory after two days of fighting.
Moscow has blamed “Ukrainian militants” but Kyiv portrayed the alleged incursion as an uprising by Russian partisans and said it had nothing to do with it.
Russian troops and security forces spent a second day fighting the reported incursion from Ukraine, which has centred around the town of Graivoron.
On Monday afternoon, Belgorod regional governor Vyacheslav Gladkov reported that a group of saboteurs from the Ukrainian armed forces had entered the town, which is located about three miles inside Russia’s border.
Graivoron also came under attack from drones and Ukrainian artillery fire, he said.
Image: Smoke seen over the Belgorod region following the reported attack
The Freedom of Russia Legion, a militia comprised of Russian volunteers, claimed to have been involved in an attack in Belgorod.
Advertisement
It said on Twitter it had “completely liberated” the town of Kozinka and forward units had reached the district centre of Graivoron.
On Tuesday afternoon Russia’s defence ministry said the remnants of the units it blamed for the incursion had been forced back into Ukrainian territory.
Sky News has been unable to verify the reports coming out of Belgorod.
Image: Military vehicles seen at a Belgorod checkpoint
Who was behind the alleged attack?
It’s a complicated picture. Russia has blamed the Ukrainian armed forces for the reported border incursion but Kyiv has denied any involvement.
“Ukraine is watching the events in the Belgorod region of Russia with interest and studying the situation, but it has nothing to do with it,” Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said on Twitter.
“As you know, tanks are sold at any Russian military store, and underground guerrilla groups are composed of Russian citizens,” he added.
Defence expert, professor Michael Clarke, said it remains unclear who was behind the attack – and who knew about it.
“The big question is was Ukraine in any way behind it, and if they weren’t behind it, did they know about it,” he told Sky News.
“Or was it as much a surprise to them as it was to the Kremlin?
“I think the Zelenskyy government is too clever to do this,” he added.
Image: Still from a video of a helicopter seen releasing flares
Who are the Russian partisans accused of raiding Belgorod?
Two groups – the Russian Volunteer Corps (RVC) and Freedom of Russia Legion – have claimed responsibility.
The Freedom of Russia Legion says it was formed in spring 2022 “out of the wish of Russians to fight in the ranks of the armed forces of Ukraine against Putin’s armed gang”.
It says it cooperates with the Ukrainian armed forces and operates under Ukrainian command.
The Ukrainian military intelligence agency’s spokesperson said on Monday that the attacks in Belgorod only involved Russian citizens and that they were creating a “security zone” to protect Ukrainian civilians. He did not confirm or deny that the forces operating there are a Ukrainian unit.
A video posted by the RVC on Monday showed two men claiming to have captured a Russian armoured personnel carrier.
The Reuters news agency said it was able to identify one of the men as Ilya Bogdanov, a Russian national who received Ukrainian citizenship in 2015 after fighting for Kyiv against Russian-backed forces in Ukraine’s east.
Is the alleged attack important?
Professor Clarke says the reported incursion into Russia isn’t significant in the course of the wider war, but that it potentially has propaganda value.
The Donald Trump peace plan is nothing of the sort. It takes Russian demands and presents them as peace proposals, in what is effectively for Ukraine a surrender ultimatum.
If accepted, it would reward armed aggression. The principle, sacrosanct since the Second World War, for obvious and very good reasons, that even de facto borders cannot be changed by force, will have been trampled on at the behest of the leader of the free world.
The Kremlin will have imposed terms via negotiators on a country it has violated, and whose people its troops have butchered, massacred and raped. It is without doubt the biggest crisis in Trans-Atlantic relations since the war began, if not since the inception of NATO.
The question now is: are Europe’s leaders up to meeting the daunting challenges that will follow. On past form, we cannot be sure.
Image: Vladimir Putin, President of Russia. Pic: Sputnik/Gavriil Grigorov via Reuters
The plan proposes the following:
• Land seized by Vladimir Putin’s unwarranted and unprovoked invasion would be ceded by Kyiv.
• Territory his forces have fought but failed to take with colossal loss of life will be thrown into the bargain for good measure.
• Ukraine will be barred from NATO, from having long-range weapons, from hosting foreign troops, from allowing foreign diplomatic planes to land, and its military neutered, reduced in size by more than half.
Image: Donald Trump meeting Vladimir Putin in Alaska in August, File pic: Reuters
And most worryingly for Western leaders, the plan proposes NATO and Russia negotiate with America acting as mediator.
Lest we forget, America is meant to be the strongest partner in NATO, not an outside arbitrator. In one clause, Mr Trump’s lack of commitment to the Western alliance is laid bare in chilling clarity.
And even for all that, the plan will not bring peace. Mr Putin has made it abundantly clear he wants all of Ukraine.
He has a proven track record of retiring, rallying his forces, then returning for more. Reward a bully as they say, and he will only come back for more. Why wouldn’t he, if he is handed the fortress cities of Donetsk and a clear run over open tank country to Kyiv in a few years?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:29
US draft Russia peace plan
Since the beginning of Trump’s presidency, Europe has tried to keep the maverick president onside when his true sympathies have repeatedly reverted to Moscow.
It has been a demeaning and sycophantic spectacle, NATO’s secretary general stooping even to calling the US president ‘Daddy’. And it hasn’t worked. It may have made matters worse.
Image: A choir sing in front of an apartment building destroyed in a Russian missile strike in Ternopil, Ukraine. Pic: Reuters
The parade of world leaders trooping through Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, lavishing praise on his Gaza ceasefire plan, only encouraged him to believe he is capable of solving the world’s most complex conflicts with the minimum of effort.
The Gaza plan is mired in deepening difficulty, and it never came near addressing the underlying causes of the war.
Most importantly, principles the West has held inviolable for eight decades cannot be torn up for the sake of a quick and uncertain peace.
With a partner as unreliable, the challenge to Europe cannot be clearer.
In the words of one former Baltic foreign minister: “There is a glaringly obvious message for Europe in the 28-point plan: This is the end of the end.
“We have been told repeatedly and unambiguously that Ukraine’s security, and therefore Europe’s security, will be Europe’s responsibility. And now it is. Entirely.”
If Europe does not step up to the plate and guarantee Ukraine’s security in the face of this American betrayal, we could all pay the consequences.
“Terrible”, “weird”, “peculiar” and “baffling” – some of the adjectives being levelled by observers at the Donald Trump administration’s peace plan for Ukraine.
The 28-point proposal was cooked up between Trump negotiator Steve Witkoff and Kremlin official Kirill Dmitriev without European and Ukrainian involvement.
It effectively dresses up Russian demands as a peace proposal. Demands first made by Russia at the high watermark of its invasion in 2022, before defeats forced it to retreat from much of Ukraine.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:38
Ukrainian support for peace plan ‘very much in doubt’
The suspicion is Mr Witkoff and Mr Dmitriev conspired together to choose this moment to put even more pressure on the Ukrainian president.
Perversely, though, it may help him.
There has been universal condemnation and outrage in Kyiv at the Witkoff-Dmitriev plan. Rivals have little choice but to rally around the wartime Ukrainian leader as he faces such unreasonable demands.
The genesis of this plan is unclear.
Was it born from Donald Trump’s overinflated belief in his peacemaking abilities? His overrated Gaza ceasefire plan attracted lavish praise from world leaders, but now seems mired in deepening difficulty.
The fear is Mr Trump’s team are finding ways to allow him to walk away from this conflict altogether, blaming Ukrainian intransigence for the failure of his diplomacy.
Mr Trump has already ended financial support for Ukraine, acting as an arms dealer instead, selling weapons to Europe to pass on to the invaded democracy.
If he were to take away military intelligence support too, Ukraine would be blind to the kind of attacks that in recent days have killed scores of civilians.
Europe and Ukraine cannot reject the plan entirely and risk alienating Mr Trump.
They will play for time and hope against all the evidence he can still be persuaded to desert the Kremlin and put pressure on Vladimir Putin to end the war, rather than force Ukraine to surrender instead.