Massive strikes hit Kyiv hours after Putin agrees to fresh peace talks

Kyiv faced a major Russian overnight attack as diplomatic efforts appeared to be moving forward. Vladimir Putin had told US special envoy Steve Witkoff that Russia was willing to resume talks with Ukraine and the United States after November 10. The timing made the attack especially striking.

The first explosions struck Kyiv three minutes before President Donald Trump said his administration was “the closest we’ve been” to settling the war. Russia launched 21 missiles and 210 drones in the wider attack. Ukrainian officials also said a cluster warhead hit central Kyiv.

The strikes killed two people and injured 34, according to Volodymyr Zelensky. Air raid warnings continued on Thursday, with officials warning of more ballistic missiles. The attack therefore followed diplomatic contact almost immediately, raising doubts about whether negotiations had changed Russia’s military conduct.

The strikes were large and deadly across several locations. Russia attacked Kyiv with 21 missiles and 210 drones overnight. Two people died in the capital, and 34 others were injured, according to Zelensky. Central Kyiv was reportedly hit by a cluster warhead.

The damage was not limited to the capital. A Russian attack struck a market in Lozova, in the Kharkiv region, while people were shopping. The mayor said at least two people were killed and dozens were injured. This brought the reported Ukrainian death toll from the attacks to at least four.

Russia also reported a separate attack near Moscow. The mayor said 630 drones flew toward the region overnight, injuring two people in rural Voronovo, although most were intercepted. The figures show simultaneous attacks across a wide area, rather than one isolated strike.

Trilateral peace talks are negotiations involving three parties instead of only two. Here, the parties are Russia, Ukraine, and the United States. The format matters because the war directly involves Russia and Ukraine, while the United States is conducting a diplomatic effort aimed at helping end the conflict.

Steve Witkoff met Putin for three hours in St. Petersburg and met Zelensky in Norway the previous day. Witkoff described both discussions as constructive. Putin’s aide said a future round could take place in Abu Dhabi, although no final meeting was confirmed.

The talks are intended to address how the war could end and what security arrangements might follow. Putin’s aide mentioned a possible “security framework” for Russia and Ukraine, but gave no details. The article also says Russia has not dropped its maximalist demands, so holding three-way discussions does not prove agreement is near.

Ballistic missiles are long-range weapons that follow a fast, arcing flight path after launch. They are difficult to stop because they can travel at very high speed and approach targets from above. This general definition comes from established military knowledge; the article focuses on their use against Kyiv.

The Ukrainian Air Force said none of the ballistic missiles that hit Kyiv were intercepted. Ukrainian officials reported three waves of ballistic strikes, and air raid sirens continued warning of more attacks. The attack also included drones and other missiles.

The article links the failed interceptions to a critical shortage of US-made Patriot defense missiles, but does not explain whether every missile could have been stopped with more supplies. Ukraine’s call for rapid delivery of air-defense missiles shows that its defensive capacity is under pressure. Further shortages could leave cities more exposed to future strikes.

Holding talks and reaching a ceasefire are different outcomes. Talks create a channel for discussion, but they do not automatically stop military operations. A ceasefire requires the sides to change their actions and halt fighting for an agreed period.

The clearest example came after Putin told Witkoff that Russia was willing to resume talks after November 10. Soon afterward, Russia launched an attack involving 21 missiles and 210 drones. The first Kyiv explosions came three minutes before Trump spoke about being close to a settlement. Two people died in Kyiv, and 34 were injured.

The continued attacks suggest that diplomacy had not yet changed Russia’s conduct. Zelensky said there had been no real change in Russia’s attitude and called for pressure to stop the killings. The article also reports no sign that Moscow had abandoned its major demands, so future talks remained uncertain.

Russia’s stated demands reach across Ukraine’s territory, military strength, and foreign alliances. Moscow has called for Ukraine to give up the entire eastern Donbas region, reduce the size of its military dramatically, and promise never to join NATO. The article describes these demands as amounting to near-total victory for Russia.

Each demand would produce a major strategic gain for Moscow. Giving up all Donbas would formalize Russian control over territory that is now mostly occupied. Reducing Ukraine’s military would limit its ability to defend itself. A permanent pledge against NATO would restrict Ukraine’s future security choices and relationship with the alliance.

The article says there is no indication Russia has softened these positions. That makes the proposed talks difficult. Even if negotiators meet in November, the gap between Russia’s demands and Ukraine’s security interests could remain very wide.

Territory, military strength, and alliances are core parts of national security. Control of territory lets a government exercise authority over its people and resources. A capable military helps protect that territory. Alliance choices can provide diplomatic and security support beyond what a country can supply alone.

In this case, Russia demands that Ukraine surrender all of Donbas, reduce its military, and never join NATO. Together, those conditions would affect where Ukraine governs, how strongly it can defend itself, and which security partnerships it may pursue. They are connected rather than separate issues.

That is why the article describes Russia’s demands as near-total victory for Moscow. They would constrain Ukraine’s control, defenses, and future choices at the same time. Russia has not shown that it has abandoned these positions, so any future peace framework would need to address fundamental questions about Ukraine’s sovereignty and security.