Ukraine's Defense Forces hit the Novokuibyshevsk oil refinery in Russia's Samara Oblast with FP-1 drones early on 30 October, Ukrainian drone maker Fire Point said, adding that one of the units hit hydrotreats diesel fuel. The strike came hours after WSJ reported that Ukraine had paused strikes on Russian refineries under pressure from US President Donald Trump until after the US midterm elections on 3 November.

Russia is pounding Ukraine's power grid and cities ahead of winter, with a mounting civilian toll, including 14 people killed on a Dnipro railway platform on 29 October. Ukraine's long-range drone strikes on Russian refineries, one of its most effective operations against Moscow, target the oil money that pays for that war. Trump has pressed Kyiv for weeks to stop them, blaming them for high global fuel prices, and Ukraine went quiet without saying so and without getting what it asked for in return, WSJ reported. The Samara strike is the first on Russian oil since then. Kyiv has not said whether the pause is over.

Fires spread across a refinery that makes jet fuel for Russia's military

Residents of Novokuibyshevsk reported drones, explosions, and a fire before dawn. Ukrainian Telegram channel Exilenova+ posted the first photos on Telegram at 05:24 Kyiv time, and Russian Telegram channel Astra geolocated the fire to the refinery, citing its open-source analysis of residents' photos.

Novokuybyshevsk, Samara region: locals report an attack and a fire. pic.twitter.com/9UEgqmkAOU

— Exilenova+ (@Exilenova_plus) October 30, 2026

By morning, Exilenova+ counted at least 11 separate fires at the refinery. Samara Governor Vyacheslav Fedorishchev said air defense and mobile fire groups were repelling an attack, Astra reported. The region had declared a drone alert and closed its airport.

Fire Point said its FP-1 drones scored numerous hits on the refinery grounds, and that one of the units hit hydrotreats diesel fuel. The footage published so far shows several smoke columns over the plant but does not show which units burned. The Rosneft-owned refinery has a design capacity of 8.8 million tons of oil a year and is one of the main producers of jet fuel, according to its website. Astra says it supplies jet fuel to Russia's military. The plant lies about 910 km from the front line. Ukraine's General Staff has not commented.

pic.twitter.com/Ku6KRCKJ6v

— Exilenova+ (@Exilenova_plus) October 30, 2026

Ukrainian drones have hit the plant before. Ukraine's military said its forces hit it in August and caused a fire.

It is the first fire at a Russian refinery since 15 October, when Ryazan's governor reported one at the city's refinery. It is also the first reported strike on Russia's oil industry since 20 October, when Ukrainian drones hit a Druzhba pipeline pumping station in Tambov Oblast. WSJ called that strike the last before the pause.

WSJ claims: Ukraine paused refinery strikes until after the US midterms

Ukraine's military paused its strikes on Russian refineries after weeks of pressure from Trump shook Kyiv's confidence in US support, people with knowledge of the operations told WSJ. The unofficial pause began early last week and is expected to last until after the midterms, and possibly deeper into November. Units carrying out long-range strikes were told in mid-October that the refinery campaign was effectively on hold once missions already under way were completed, two military officials said. Hours after the report, the Novokuibyshevsk strike called that account into question.

Ukraine's government has not announced a pause. Zelenskyy told reporters in Kyiv on 27 October that “our guys tried to be a little more careful during these days. But they do not have an order” not to hit refineries, according to WSJ. He said drone units were hitting other kinds of targets in Russia.

Trump's envoy Jared Kushner repeated the demand to stop the strikes at a meeting with Zelenskyy in Oslo on 20 October, two US officials told WSJ. One of them called the conversation “very tough.” Kushner, who joined remotely, said he and envoy Steve Witkoff were spending a lot of time, energy, and jet fuel on mediating with Moscow, and that a 30-day pause on refineries would be a way for Ukraine to show gratitude, the official said.

Zelenskyy had asked for something in return, WSJ reported: a mutual energy ceasefire with Russia, Patriot missiles for Ukraine's grid, or permission to use Starlink inside Russia so drones could destroy Russian missile launchers. None of those ideas got far. Some of Kyiv's European backers also nudged Zelenskyy to pause until after the midterms, a senior European official said.

The pause showed in Russia's oil industry. Russian refinery utilization at the end of October was 25% higher than at the start of the month as drone attacks subsided, Reuters reported, according to The Moscow Times.

Russia claims over 1,000 drones for a second night as Moscow's airports close again

Russia's Defense Ministry said it downed 1,043 Ukrainian drones overnight over 19 regions, including Samara Oblast, the Moscow region, and Tatarstan. The night before, it claimed 1,214.

Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin stated that 862 drones flew toward the Moscow region between 20:30 on 29 October and 07:30 on 30 October, that most were downed on the far approaches, and that 170 were downed on approach to the capital. Russia's aviation agency restricted flights at all four Moscow airports, Astra reported. A day earlier, more than 460 flights were delayed or canceled at Moscow and St. Petersburg airports, Astra counted.

In Starodub, in Russia's Bryansk Oblast, about 35 km from the Ukrainian border, a building of the Konservsushprod plant, which makes canned food for the Russian army, appeared to be on fire in readers' photos and videos, Astra reported, saying the plant was presumably attacked and that its open-source analyst had not verified the footage. The Atesh partisan movement reported a blast in Aleksandrovka in Rostov Oblast, and air defense fire and an explosion in Orel.

The Pentagon’s independent inspector general has declined a bipartisan request to investigate restrictions imposed on Starlink and Starshield satellite communications in Ukraine, leaving unresolved questions about who authorised the disruption, whether Washington was involved, and how much control Elon Musk exercises over infrastructure essential to Ukraine’s defence.

The decision, disclosed by the Associated Press on 28 October, follows complaints from Ukrainian officials that restrictions introduced earlier this month disrupted military drone operations, including attempts to intercept high-speed Russian attack drones.

Nine US senators, comprising five Democrats and four Republicans, had requested an independent investigation into the circumstances surrounding the interruption.

Instead, Pentagon Inspector General Platte Moring III informed lawmakers in a letter dated 27 October that the questions would be better addressed by the US Air Force and Space Force.

The response has intensified a dispute extending beyond Ukraine’s battlefield communications to the relationship between the American government, its defence contractors and the private companies supplying critical military technology.

Senators Demand Answers Over Starlink Restrictions

The investigation was requested by senators Jeanne Shaheen and Thom Tillis, alongside seven colleagues from both parties.

Their 15 October letter sought to establish whether Pentagon officials or other US government representatives had authorised, approved or received advance notice of changes affecting Ukraine’s satellite communications.

The senators also raised concerns about reported disruptions to intelligence-sharing and early-warning arrangements, including allegations that American personnel in Ukraine experienced difficulties reaching shelters during Russian air raids.

They wanted investigators to determine whether these incidents were connected, whether contractual obligations had been breached and whether SpaceX had acted independently.

Shaheen, the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, criticised the inspector general’s decision.

She argued that contradictory explanations from the Trump administration and SpaceX made an independent examination necessary to establish responsibility and prevent further disruptions.

Mollie Halpern, spokeswoman for the inspector general’s office, defended the decision, saying the congressional request had been carefully considered and that the issues were more appropriately handled within the Pentagon.

She nevertheless left open the possibility of reconsideration if additional information emerged.

Who Ordered the Slowdown?

The controversy began around 14 October, when Ukrainian forces reported that equipment using Starlink and its military-oriented counterpart, Starshield, was losing connectivity when travelling at higher speeds.

The restrictions were particularly damaging to unmanned aircraft.

Ukraine reported communications failures at movement speeds of approximately 130–161 kilometres per hour, limiting the effectiveness of certain strike drones and jet-powered interceptors used against Russian attacks.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Musk personally authorised the slowdown, although accounts differed over whether President Donald Trump or senior administration officials knew about the decision beforehand.

Musk subsequently acknowledged that SpaceX had imposed restrictions on commercial Starlink services, alleging that Ukrainian forces had violated the company’s terms of service by using the network for offensive operations.

Ukrainian representatives disputed that explanation.

Musk also maintained that Starshield was a separate system controlled by the US government, suggesting that decisions affecting its operation ultimately rested with American authorities.

Trump denied ordering the restrictions.

The differing accounts have left unanswered whether the interruption resulted from a corporate decision, an American government directive or a combination of the two.

Trump Intervention and Restoration of Services

The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump contacted Musk on 21 October and requested the removal of the restrictions.

Although some improvement followed, Ukrainian officials initially reported that the systems had not returned to full functionality.

On 24 October, however, Ukraine’s Ministry of Defence confirmed that normal performance had been restored, with stable communications recorded on equipment moving at speeds exceeding 400 kilometres per hour.

President Volodymyr Zelensky subsequently confirmed the restoration and thanked American officials and partners involved in resolving the problem.

The restoration addressed the immediate operational disruption but did not establish who had originally authorised the restrictions.

Private Technology and Military Accountability

The episode has renewed scrutiny of the Pentagon’s dependence on SpaceX, whose satellite networks have become important components of Ukrainian battlefield communications.

Starshield was developed to serve government and national security requirements, including military applications. Nevertheless, the dispute illustrates the difficulty of determining responsibility when essential defence capabilities depend on systems developed and operated by commercial contractors.

The issue has historical precedent.

In 2022, Musk ordered restrictions on Starlink availability in parts of Russian-occupied Ukraine, citing concerns that expanded military use might escalate the conflict.

The latest incident has prompted renewed discussion of whether contractual arrangements provide sufficient safeguards against unexpected interruptions.

Following the October restrictions, Finnish satellite company ICEYE announced discussions with Nokia and Ukraine’s Defence Ministry concerning cooperation on sovereign satellite communications.

Such alternatives could eventually reduce dependence on individual commercial providers, although developing and deploying replacement capabilities would require additional investment and time.

For American lawmakers, meanwhile, the immediate question remains unresolved.

The Pentagon has directed their concerns towards the military services responsible for aspects of satellite communications, rather than opening an independent inspector general investigation.

Whether those services can establish precisely who ordered the restrictions, what authority was exercised and whether contractual safeguards were observed will determine how much accountability emerges from the episode.

For Ukraine, the communications have been restored. The question of who could interrupt them, and under whose authority, remains unanswered.

In an extensive conversation with EU Today publisher Gary Cartwright, Ukrainian-American lawyer and political commentator Askold Lozynskyj delivers a sharply critical assessment of Donald Trump, examines the possibility of a geopolitical bargain with Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, and explains why November’s American midterm elections could determine far more than the composition of Congress.

There is something peculiarly unsettling about a world in which the leaders of three nuclear powers might gather to discuss the future of smaller nations without troubling to invite the nations concerned. It is a diplomatic arrangement with considerable historical precedent, although not necessarily the sort that ought to inspire confidence.

For Askold S. Lozynskyj, a New York lawyer, former president of the Ukrainian World Congress and regular contributor to EU Today, the prospect of Donald Trump sitting down with Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping raises precisely this concern.

His latest opinion piece, The Thug Summit, published on 23 October, presents an uncompromising interpretation of the proposed trilateral meeting in China. In a wide-ranging conversation with EU Today publisher Gary Cartwright, Lozynskyj expands upon that argument, moving from the peculiarities of Trump’s political personality to the constitutional foundations of American democracy, the future of Europe and the increasingly precarious standing of international law.

The resulting discussion is occasionally caustic, frequently humorous and consistently concerned with a question that extends well beyond the current occupant of the White House: how resilient are democratic institutions when confronted by leaders who regard constitutional constraints as inconveniences?

Watch the full interview with Askold S. Lozynskyj and Gary Cartwright below.

From the Oval Office to the Beverly Hillbillies

The conversation begins with Trump’s political ascent, which Lozynskyj regards as one of the more extraordinary developments in modern American history.

He recalls the incredulity surrounding Trump’s original presidential ambitions and questions how a politician whose personal conduct had attracted considerable controversy managed to secure such enthusiastic support among conservative Christian voters.

Cartwright introduces a lighter comparison, recalling a photograph of Trump surrounded by his senior advisers in the Oval Office.

The only person missing, he suggests, was Jed Clampett, the fictional patriarch of the American television comedy The Beverly Hillbillies.

Lozynskyj is not inclined to defend the administration’s sophistication. Yet behind the humour lies a more serious argument about the disappearance of independent-minded advisers and the consequences of political loyalty becoming the principal qualification for high office.

“Donald Trump is not a conservative. Donald Trump is a thug,” he declares.

It is an unequivocal assessment, characteristic of Lozynskyj’s commentary, although his criticism extends beyond Trump himself to the Republican Party’s willingness to accommodate his leadership.

The elections that could change Washington

Much of the interview centres on the American midterm elections scheduled for 3 November.

Lozynskyj predicts that Democrats will regain control of the House of Representatives and potentially transform the remainder of Trump’s presidency through congressional investigations, subpoenas and impeachment proceedings.

His prediction is emphatic, although the eventual balance of power remains uncertain.

Control of the House would give Democrats substantial investigative authority, although the president would retain his executive powers. Removing him from office following impeachment would still require a two-thirds majority in the Senate.

Nevertheless, Lozynskyj believes the elections could fundamentally alter Washington’s political atmosphere.

“They will tie up Trump like never before,” he argues.

Cartwright raises a more disturbing possibility: could Trump manufacture an emergency to postpone an election or otherwise attempt to prolong his presidency?

“I think he could try, but I don’t believe that he will prevail,” Lozynskyj responds, expressing confidence that America’s constitutional institutions would ultimately resist such an attempt.

The exchange moves naturally towards the events of 6 January 2021, presidential immunity and the effectiveness of the checks and balances upon which the American constitutional system depends.

Ukraine, Europe and the price of great-power diplomacy

For Lozynskyj, whose public career has been closely associated with Ukrainian interests, the implications of Trump’s foreign policy are particularly troubling.

His central concern is that negotiations among Washington, Moscow and Beijing could revive the notion that major powers possess an informal entitlement to determine the political and territorial futures of their neighbours.

In his opinion piece, he raises the possibility that Ukraine and Taiwan could become bargaining instruments in a wider geopolitical settlement. These are his warnings about potential outcomes, not established agreements between the three governments.

Yet his criticism of Washington is accompanied by considerable appreciation for Europe’s role in sustaining Ukraine’s resistance to Russia’s invasion.

“Without Europe, Ukraine could never have survived as long as it has survived,” he tells Cartwright.

He also ventures into the British debate over European integration, arguing that the United Kingdom should return to the European Union.

It is an intervention likely to provoke disagreement, but it reflects his broader conviction that collective institutions provide an essential counterweight to unilateral political power.

Democracy, disorder and the limits of authority

The discussion also examines political unrest in Europe, changing national identities and the relationship between elected governments and the populations they represent.

Cartwright points to social tensions in European cities and the growing importance of regional identity, including the independence debate in Flanders.

Lozynskyj approaches these developments through the history of democratic protest, citing Ukraine’s Orange Revolution, the Revolution of Dignity and more recent demonstrations over the independence of anti-corruption institutions.

For him, public opposition to governments is not necessarily evidence of democracy’s failure. It can also demonstrate that political authority remains subject to popular consent.

The conversation concludes with international law, the International Criminal Court and the difficulty of enforcing common rules when powerful states refuse to accept external constraints.

Lozynskyj’s observations are deliberately provocative, and his forecasts will be tested by events. But the interview offers something more substantial than another exchange of opinions about Donald Trump.

It is a discussion about the relationship between power and restraint, the responsibilities of democratic institutions and the uncomfortable possibility that the international order may be entering another period in which military and economic strength increasingly determine political outcomes.

As the United States approaches its midterm elections and speculation continues over a possible meeting between Trump, Putin and Xi, those questions are unlikely to disappear.

The full conversation with Askold S. Lozynskyj is available in the video above.

Kyiv had accused US of strangling systems it depends on defend itself from Russian missile and drone attacks

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on 20 October that he had spoken with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio about ballistic missile interceptors, early warning of Russian launches, and “the situation with Starlink/Starshield, which needs to be restored,” he wrote on X. He thanked Rubio for “his readiness to help and his clear position” and said they would speak again soon. A day earlier, he had told US senators how each of those supplies had stalled.

This comes as the US presses Kyiv to stop its strikes on Russian oil refineries, which Trump has blamed for high fuel prices at home, and Zelenskyy counts the Starlink slowdown among the steps he says look like an effort to push Ukraine to capitulate. Ukraine’s interceptor drones depend on the service to hunt Russia’s jet-powered Shaheds, and Kyiv says they now lose the link at speeds too low to catch them. The call appears not to have settled whether that cap is gone. If it stays, Ukrainian cities could face Russia’s drone waves this winter with one fewer means to stop them, as Russia keeps striking the grid.

On 17 October, Rubio told reporters that nobody in the US ordered Starlink slowed, that the slowdown “wasn’t deliberate,” and that “my understanding is it’s been restored.” He drew a line between the two services. Ukraine’s drones, he said, ran on commercial Starlink, while Starshield, the military version, is not available to Ukraine. Kyiv has asked for it to carry out strikes deep inside Russia, and that request is under discussion, he said.

The next day, Zelenskyy told Bloomberg that Starlink in Ukraine cuts out above 161 km/h, and Kyiv says its Starshield terminals are capped as well. His post after the call still says the service needs to be restored.

Reuters’ sources point to the White House. Washington denies it

The order to slow Starshield came from inside the White House, Reuters reported, citing two US officials and a Western official. They described it as the Starshield service for the Ukrainian military, the version Rubio says Ukraine does not have. A senior Ukrainian official told Reuters that Kyiv had been told it was a White House decision. A senior US official told the agency the president never made such a request, and the White House did not answer whether other officials had. Rubio called a report that the White House ordered Starlink slowed “categorically false.”

Missile warnings and Patriots are also in dispute

Overnight on 18–19 October, Ukraine got no partner warning before the first of two Russian ballistic waves, Air Force spokesman Yurii Ihnat said on the national telethon. That came hours after Zelenskyy said US warnings had resumed. On 19 October, Rubio pushed back against suggestions of a pause in US intelligence sharing, AFP reported.

Zelenskyy also told Bloomberg the US sends only 12 Patriot interceptors a month and has authorized only part of those “we have paid for” under PURL. Ukrainian officials told the Kyiv Independent that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has not signed the contracts. A US government official called those claims “not true.”

Ukraine got no early warning from its partners of the first wave of Russian ballistic missiles on the night of 18–19 October, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told US senators on 19 October. He also said Starlink and Starshield terminals still stop working above certain speeds on parts of the front, and that Washington has explained neither problem. In the same video call, according to a transcript obtained by Axios, he said US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is not signing off on deliveries of Patriot interceptors and AIM-9X missiles for NASAMS that NATO countries have already paid for.

This comes as the US presses Kyiv to stop its strikes on Russian oil refineries, which Trump has blamed for high fuel prices at home. Washington supplies both the early launch warnings and the Patriot interceptors Ukraine needs against Russian ballistic missiles, and Zelenskyy says both are now failing at once, as Russia keeps firing ballistic missiles at Ukraine’s grid ahead of winter. If neither the warnings nor the interceptors come through, Ukrainian cities would face winter strikes with less notice and fewer means to stop them.

On the morning of 20 October, Zelenskyy wrote that he had spoken with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio about interceptors against ballistic missiles, early warning of Russian ballistic attacks, and restoring Starlink and Starshield. He thanked Rubio for his readiness to help and his clear position, and said they had agreed to speak again soon. He did not say whether anything had been resolved.

Patriots paid for, not signed

“We have almost no Patriot interceptors left from the US partners,” Zelenskyy told the senators.

Hegseth “has the contracts for Patriot missiles on his desk,” a Ukrainian official told the Kyiv Independent, adding that allies had already paid for them. Another senior official called the batch “significant.” One of the main channels for Ukraine’s Patriot supply is NATO’s PURL mechanism, under which allies fund purchases of US weapons for Ukraine, a senior Ukrainian military official told the outlet.

On 19 October, Zelenskyy wrote that some types of vital supplies were being delayed at the US Department of War, as the Trump administration also calls the Pentagon. He added that some political agreements had not been carried out at the working level.

A NATO official told the Kyiv Independent that PURL deliveries, including air defense, were continuing. Another said some shipments could face delays, but that political reasons were unlikely to explain them. A US government official called Ukraine’s claims “not true.” The Pentagon did not respond to the outlet.

No warning for Kyiv hours after Zelenskyy said US alerts were back

On 18 October, Zelenskyy said on NBC that US warnings of ballistic launches had resumed after three days without them. That night, Russia launched two ballistic waves at Ukraine, and information from partners did not arrive before the first, Air Force spokesperson Yurii Ihnat said. Zelenskyy told the senators Ukraine had not received US warnings on three occasions in the past week. “We have received no clear explanation from Washington,” he said.

“All of this suggests that some political decision has been made to slow down support for us,” Zelenskyy said.

Zelenskyy offered a 30-day pause on refinery strikes for Patriots

Zelenskyy told the senators he had offered US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner a 30-day halt on strikes against Russian refineries. In return, the US would supply Patriot interceptors to cover that period. He said the envoys had shown no openness to the idea.

On 20 October, Norway announced talks in Oslo that day between Zelenskyy, Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, and Finnish President Alexander Stubb, with Witkoff attending in person and Kushner by video.

Senators back Kyiv. Trump says intelligence still flows

Senator Thom Tillis said he and his colleagues remain committed to standing with Ukraine and its European allies, while Senator Richard Blumenthal wrote that bipartisan support was “clear and unequivocal” and would be expressed “in upcoming action.”

US President Donald Trump told reporters on 19 October that Washington is still sharing intelligence with Ukraine and that he did not know who ordered the throttling of Starlink, Axios reported.

“Zelensky doesn’t know what he is talking about,” Trump said.

Russia attacked Kyiv with ballistic missiles in two waves overnight on 18–19 October. Information from partners did not arrive before the first wave, at around 23:00, Air Force spokesperson Yurii Ihnat said on national television. A warning came before the second wave, at around 03:00, but the window was short, he told NV.

Hours earlier, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told NBC that US warnings of Russian ballistic launches were working again after three days without them, and that only the United States has that intelligence. Those warnings have for years given Ukrainian authorities several minutes to sound alarms and let civilians reach shelters before ballistic missiles hit.

“Once again, a Russian ballistic attack in several waves overnight, and once again there was no warning from partners,” Zelenskyy wrote. It was at least the third ballistic strike on Kyiv in a week to begin without warning from partners, following attacks on 12 October and 13 October.

Metro station damaged on Kyiv’s left bank

One person was killed and eight injured in Kyiv, Ukrainian Prime Minister Serhii Koretskyi said. A strike damaged a metro station on Kyiv’s left bank, and debris broke the rails beside it, Mayor Vitali Klitschko said. City authorities said the damaged station was above ground, closed Chernihivska and Lisova stations, and said red-line trains would run only between Akademmistechko and Darnytsia. The attack also damaged a 25-story building, a medical facility, and the Cosmo Multimall shopping center in the Solomianskyi district, NV reported, and Zelenskyy said a school was hit too.

The attack also damaged one of Ukraine’s main ice arenas, on Shalett Street in Kyiv, which hosts Ukrainian championship hockey games and youth training, hockey Telegram channel Flamingo reported. Parts of the facade, metal structures, and roof were damaged, but the ice surface showed no significant visible damage, according to preliminary information, Suspilne reported.

Damage in 11 oblasts, three missing in Irpin

Koretskyi said energy and infrastructure were the main targets, with damage in 11 oblasts. Russia also hit warehouses of medicines, railway stations, shops, and homes, he said. In Kyiv Oblast, Russian strikes injured six people in Irpin, including three children, and three more were missing, oblast head Tymur Tkachenko said. In Kharkiv Oblast, six people were injured, including two children, Koretskyi said. In Rivne Oblast, four people were injured, and one of them was hospitalized, regional police reported.

Zelenskyy said that more than 10 energy facilities were damaged and at least 550,000 families lost power. Ukrenergo reported new outages in 10 oblasts: Volyn, Zhytomyr, Rivne, Ternopil, Khmelnytskyi, Vinnytsia, Kirovohrad, Kharkiv, Odesa, and Mykolaiv. In Volyn Oblast, about 15 jet-powered Shahed-type drones targeted the region, and around 66,000 customers were without power on the morning of 19 October, oblast head Roman Romaniuk said. Kovel, Manevychi, and Lutsk were hit hardest, and no casualties were reported. In Vinnytsia Oblast, a critical infrastructure facility in Koziatyn was damaged, and power there would stay unstable for some time, city council secretary Iryna Repalo said, Suspilne reported.

Zelenskyy said Russia fired 16 ballistic missiles at Kyiv and Kyiv Oblast. The Air Force reported that Russia also used Iskander-K cruise missiles and 269 drones, and that by 09:00 air defenses had shot down or suppressed four Iskander-K cruise missiles and 243 drones. Its preliminary count did not list any ballistic missiles among the intercepted targets.

Rubio denies any pause and points to a software problem in Ukraine’s warning system

On 19 October, Rubio told reporters in Samarkand, Uzbekistan, that “there’s been no pause” in intelligence-sharing with Ukraine, Reuters reported. He said he did not know where Zelenskyy was getting such claims and that he should focus on ending the war. He also said he did not know whether a failure had happened the previous night, but that a few nights earlier there had been a software problem with “their early warning system,” and that US European Command was looking into the strikes, The Guardian reported. US officials had not mentioned a software glitch before, and in at least one case Ukraine was told that bad weather over southern Russia had hidden launch preparations, the newspaper noted.

Ihnat said Ukrainian specialists and their partners were working to establish why information about the first launch had not arrived. He added that similar gaps had occurred during earlier attacks.

Zelenskyy wrote that when missile supplies for Ukraine’s air defense are blocked while Russia gets sanctions relief or delays, “this is, unfortunately, a denial of reality on the part of partners.” A night earlier, Russia had hit Ukraine’s energy system again, while Ukrainian drones set fire to St. Petersburg’s oil terminal despite Washington’s pressure to stop refinery strikes.