From buffer zone to new front: Russia pushes deeper into Sumy Oblast
In March 2025, as Ukrainian forces made their final retreat from Sudzha in Russia's Kursk Oblast, new grey spots began to appear on open-source maps on the other side of the state border, in Ukraine's Sumy Oblast.
For the first time since 2022, when Moscow's forces retreated frantically from northern Ukraine, Russian troops have once again set their sights on Sumy Oblast.
But for months, as Kyiv continued to claim hold of a thin sliver of Kursk Oblast and Russia's spring offensive escalated in eastern Ukraine, the fighting around the border in Sumy Oblast was often overlooked.
Over June, Russian gains in Sumy Oblast have sped up significantly, taking several villages and coming within 20 kilometers of the regional capital of Sumy, according to territorial changes reported by open-source mapping project DeepState.
As of June 12, fighting has been reported to have begun for the village of Yunakivka, a key stop on the cross-border highway between Sudzha and Sumy and a staging point for Ukraine's incursion into Kursk Oblast.
Over spring and summer, this part of the front line has been subject to strict restrictions on media access, with journalists barred from working with the military north of Sumy.
On June 12, President Volodymyr Zelensky said that Ukrainian forces had managed to 'push the enemy back' in some parts of Sumy Oblast, but these territorial changes are so far impossible to verify.
Speaking to journalists on June 13, Zelensky said that the Russian advance on Sumy Oblast 'had been stopped' no deeper than seven kilometers inside the Ukrainian border, adding that some ground had been regained around the village of Andriivka.
With Russia now holding over 200 square kilometers in Sumy Oblast, similar to that seized in the cross-border offensive on Kharkiv Oblast in May 2024, evaluations of the operation are torn between it being a limited escalation of fighting in the border zone or a major new Russian push.
Not long after launching the Kursk incursion last summer, Kyiv claimed that part of the offensive's aim was to create a 'buffer zone' to protect Sumy Oblast, although in reality, the spike in Ukrainian military activity saw increased Russian strikes on border settlements where Ukrainian troops and equipment were based.
After returning from a visit to Kursk Oblast in May, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced the creation of a 'security buffer zone' of his own along Ukraine's northern state border.
The sentiment was repeated on June 11 by Alexei Zhuravlev, first deputy head of the Russian State Duma's defense committee, adding that Russia was not looking to take all of Sumy Oblast (which is not one of the five regions illegally claimed by Moscow).
'A buffer zone of one hundred kilometers along the Russian border will be enough,' Zhuravlev said. 'Let them evacuate, retreat in fear, waiting everywhere for the attack of the Russian army.'
Even if Moscow wanted to, mounting a direct assault on a large city like Sumy – with a pre-war population of 255,000 – would almost certainly be out of the reach of Russia's capabilities for the moment, said analyst Emil Kastehelmi, a member of the Finland-based open-source intelligence collective Black Bird Group.
'The Russians haven't been able to actually capture any larger cities in Ukraine since 2022 (with the surrounding and capture of Mariupol in Donetsk Oblast),' he said.
'What they can do is put heavy pressure on the Sumy direction and try to gain as much land as possible, in order to bring Sumy into range of artillery and drones, tying Ukrainian troops into defensive battles and giving Russia some leverage in upcoming negotiations.'
Russia's push in Sumy Oblast comes amid a broader spring-summer offensive that has also seen significant gains in Donetsk Oblast, especially on either flank of the embattled city of Pokrovsk.
With the Ukrainian army significantly overstretched along hundreds of kilometers of front line and suffering from chronic manpower shortages, especially in the infantry, Russia's pressure on Sumy Oblast creates more dilemmas.
'The Russians are most likely trying to create as many issues for the Ukrainians as possible in several directions simultaneously,' Kastehelmi said.
'They aim to create a cascading situation where the Ukrainians need to answer to a crisis in a certain sector by throwing in units from another place, resulting in units not being able to do proper rotations.'
Still, with Russian forces relying on the same formula of creeping, infantry-based assaults employed all across a drone-saturated front line, maintaining pressure also comes with sacrifices made in offensive potential elsewhere.
Join our community Support independent journalism in Ukraine. Join us in this fight. Support us
Speaking to the Kyiv Independent, Volodymyr Martyniak, a company commander in the 22nd Special Purpose Battalion of Ukraine's 1st Presidential Brigade, said that Russia's main advantage in Sumy Oblast remained their ability to send wave after wave of lightly-mounted infantry at the Ukrainian defense.
'They are being organized into ultra-minimal teams, of just a couple of people, using the bare minimum of equipment,' he said,' things like quad bikes, other motorized vehicles, motorcycles to move quickly through rough terrain.'
According to Martyniak, Russian forces in the area use a mix of expendable, cannon-fodder style infantry troops in the first waves of an attack, which are then followed by more experienced soldiers, demonstrating tactics refined since the Battle of Bakhmut over two years ago.
'At first, soldiers go in simply to move forward and dig in,' he described. 'Then, once enough of them have gathered in a certain area, enough to justify bringing in something more serious, a more advanced, better-trained, and correspondingly more professional unit follows.'
Read also: 'Find and destroy' – how Ukraine's own Peaky Blinders mastered the art of bomber drones
Just as when Russian troops broke across the border toward Kharkiv last May, the current advance in Sumy has raised concerns among the military and society about the preparedness of Ukrainian fortifications along the state border.
As per the Defense Ministry's fortification-building initiative laid out in late 2023 and executed over 2024, while Ukrainian brigades and combat engineers would build the two lines of defense closest to the enemy, the third and strongest line of defense would be built by civilian contractors coordinated and paid for by regional administrations.
Rather than coherent lines of defense, these fortifications were built around platoon strongpoints — individual fortresses consisting of several reinforced concrete bunkers connected by trenches.
But as in Kharkiv and Donetsk oblasts, these fortifications have been criticized as poorly designed and built. Trenches and platoon strongpoints planned in 2024 were often constructed in open fields, with little regard for concealment or protection from drones.
One Ukrainian combat medic, who requested to remain anonymous for security reasons, said that compared to areas in Donetsk Oblast where fortifications had been built in advance even if not ideally, nothing of the like could be seen in Sumy Oblast.Although defending Ukrainian territory was easier than holding positions across the border because of better logistics routes, he said, there were still little to no prepared lines of defense waiting for them after the withdrawal.
Ultimately, the strength of any line of defense is dependent not only on the fortifications themselves, but on the ability of the defending side to man them with enough combat effective infantry.
Excess losses among Ukrainian units holding Kursk Oblast, where Ukrainian commanders had reported politically-motivated orders to hold Russian territory despite logistics routes being controlled by Russian drones, have made it easier for Russian forces to continue their advance across the border.
In these conditions, Martyniak — whose battalion fought inside Kursk Oblast before crossing the border — says the defense of territory inside Ukraine started straight after the withdrawal from Sudzha in March.
According to the commander, Ukraine's main problem in defense consistently remains the lack of manpower in the infantry.
Efforts have been made to improve training and focus more on replenishing existing brigades rather than creating new ones, but by 2025, almost all new Ukrainian infantrymen are mobilized rather than volunteer soldiers.Meanwhile, as the skies above the front line become more saturated with enemy drones with each passing month, the experience of the foot soldier only gets deadlier and more difficult.
'Replenishments come in, but they must be trained, they must be professional, and, let's say, they must have some kind of motivation,' Martyniak said.
Read also: As Russia inches closer to Dnipropetrovsk Oblast, new Ukrainian region might soon be at war
Further Russian gains toward Sumy could gradually bring the city into range of enemy first-person view (FPV) drones, which Russian forces often use not only to cut off enemy logistics, but to make entire cities unlivable by targeting civilian vehicles, as has been done with Kherson in the south.
With Russian forces constantly improving the range of their FPV drones, including those running on unjammable fiber optic connections, the first such drones could fly into Sumy sooner rather than later.Recent strikes increasingly deep behind Ukrainian lines in Donetsk Oblast including on the cities of Sloviansk and Druzhkivka have shown how FPV drones can fly further and further into the Ukrainian rear even if the front line itself doesn't move much.
Over 2025, amid Sumy's increasing proximity to the front line and continued intense fighting along the border has seen the city subject to strikes from other weapons, including a missile strike in April that killed 35 people and wounded 129.
On June 4, Russia struck Sumy with multiple-launch rocket systems, killing four and wounding 28, in the first attack with this kind of weapon recorded on the city since it was almost surrounded by Russian forces at the onset of the full-scale invasion in 2022.
As the summer campaign in Ukraine heats up, Sumy Oblast threatens to become a new regular hotspot along the front line, whether or not Russian forces can keep up their pace of attack.
'Their real advantage here is that they have a massive military resource, first and foremost — a very large one,' said Martyniak, 'the enemy, as always, is building up its forces; they don't stand still, things are always in motion on their side, and they're constantly coming up with something new.'
'We, for our part, also try to respond with the same skills, the same experience, the same capability; we are carrying out our missions and holding the line with dignity.'
Hi, this is Francis Farrell, and thank you for reading this article. When thinking about a major new front opening in Sumy Oblast, I can only hope that Zelensky is right when he says that Russia's advance has been stopped, and that just like with Kharkiv Oblast last year, the lines will stabilize and no more red will appear on the map in the area. Hope is nice, but whatever happens Russia only stops if they are stopped, and that comes at a price. For that reason, we will not stop what we are doing for a minute.
We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
With 40,000 troops in the region, U.S. braces for response as Iran weighs its options
WASHINGTON — Fallout from President Trump's historic gamble to strike Iran's nuclear facilities reverberated across the Middle East Sunday, as Washington braced for an unpredictable response from a cornered but determined Islamic Republic. While the Iranian government downplayed the impact of the U.S. attack, noting the depths of its nuclear know-how built over decades of study, U.S. military officials said its precision strikes against Iran's three main nuclear facilities caused 'extremely severe damage and destruction.' A senior Israeli official told The Times that Jerusalem was so satisfied with the operation that it was prepared to suspend hostilities if Iran ends its missile salvos against Israeli territory. 'We are ready to be done,' the Israeli official said, granted anonymity to speak candidly. As the dust settled, the sun rose and satellite imagery emerged of the wreckage, the main question among Trump administration officials became how Tehran would respond — both militarily, against U.S. interests in the Persian Gulf and around the world, as well as with the remnants of its nuclear program, with so much of it destroyed. Tehran's nuclear-armed allies, in Russia and North Korea, have been critical of the military campaign, with former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev raising the prospect of Moscow giving Iran a nuclear warhead in response to the attacks. The Israeli official dismissed that idea, alluding to direct talks with Moscow over the Iranian program. 'We are not concerned,' the official said. Trump's military action, dubbed 'Operation Midnight Hammer,' was a contingency years in the making, prepared and much feared by Trump's predecessors over two decades as a desperate last resort to a nuclear Iran. Ever since Tehran resumed its fissile enrichment program in 2005, Republican and Democratic presidents alike have warned that the Islamic Republic could never be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. But a constellation of diplomatic talks and complex agreements have failed to dissuade Tehran from a fundamental principle of a 'right to enrich' uranium — near to weapons grade — on its own soil. Despite the dramatic nature of the U.S. air raid, few in Washington expressed an appetite for a prolonged U.S. war with Iran and echoed Israel's interest in a truce after assessing its initial operations a success. Vice President JD Vance denied that the United States was 'at war' with Iran on Sunday, telling CBS that the nation is, instead, 'at war with Iran's nuclear program.' But the prospect of another full-scale U.S. war in the Middle East, made palpable by the weekend strikes, shook Capitol Hill on Sunday, compelling Democrats who have long advocated a tough approach to Iran to push for a vote to restrict Trump under the War Powers Act. More than 60 members of Congress, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, both of New York, called on the Trump administration to seek congressional authorization for any further action. At least one Republican, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, joined in the call. The Pentagon said that seven B-2 Spirit stealth bombers deployed a total of 14 Massive Ordnance Penetrators — 30,000-pound bombs known as 'bunker busters,' for their ability to destroy facilities buried deep underground — against Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. The U.S. operation followed an Israeli campaign that began last week with strikes against Iranian air defenses and nuclear facilities, scientists and research facilities, as well as against military generals, ballistic missile launch pads and storage depots. While the United States and Israel believe that Saturday's strikes were a strategic victory, some concern remains that Iran may have removed critical equipment and materiel from its site in Fordow — an enrichment facility that had been burrowed into the side of a mountain — to an undisclosed location before the U.S. operation began, the Israeli official said. 'That remains a question mark,' the official added, while expressing confidence that Israeli intelligence would be aware of any other significant nuclear facilities. Addressing the nation on the attacks on Saturday night, Trump warned Iran that U.S. attacks could continue if it refuses to give up on its nuclear program. 'There will be either peace, or there will be tragedy for Iran, far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days,' Trump said, flanked by his vice president, national security advisor and secretary of defense. 'Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes.' Across the region Sunday, the question paramount on observers' minds was what shape Iran's response would take. Iranian officials downplayed the strikes' impact, acknowledging damage to nuclear facilities but that the know-how remained intact. 'They [the United States and Israel] should know this industry has roots in our country, and the roots of this national industry cannot be destroyed,' said Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesman of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, according to a Sunday interview with the semi-official Tasnim News Agency. 'Of course, we have suffered some losses, but this is not the first time that the industry has suffered damage. … Naturally, this industry must continue and its growth will not stop.' Hassan Abedini, the deputy political director of Iran's state broadcaster IRIB, said the three targeted nuclear sites had already been emptied some time before the attacks and that they 'didn't suffer a major blow because the materials had already been taken out.' Other officials, including leaders in the targeted areas in Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow, reassured residents there was no nuclear contamination as a result of the strikes and that they could 'go on with their lives,' according to a statement Sunday from government spokesperson Fatemah Mohajerani. The U.S. attacks drew swift pleas for restraint from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, both of which issued statements calling on all parties to de-escalate. Iraq, meanwhile, said the U.S. escalation 'constitutes a grave threat to peace and security in the Middle East,' according to an interview with its government spokesman on Qatari broadcaster Al-Jazeera. Oman, a key mediator in the negotiations between Tehran and Washington, was more scathing, expressing what it said was its 'denunciation and condemnation' of the U.S.'s attacks. In Europe, as well, governments urged caution and affirmed support for Israel. 'We have consistently been clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon and can no longer pose a threat to regional security,' France, Germany, and Italy, known as the E3, said in a statement. 'Our aim continues to be to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.' The last significant face-off between Iran and the United States happened during Trump's first term, when he ordered the assassination of top Iranian commander Gen. Qassem Suleimani in 2020. That attack spurred predictions of a furious retaliation, with fears of Tehran deploying its missile arsenal or activating its network of regional militias to attack U.S. forces and interests across Washington's footprint in the region. Instead, Tehran reacted with little more than an openly telegraphed ballistic missile barrage on a U.S. base in Iraq. Iran's options are even more limited this time. Much of that network — known as the 'Axis of Resistance' and which included militias and pro-Tehran governments in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Gaza, Afghanistan and Yemen — lies incapacitated after more than 20 months of Israeli attacks. Allies such as Russia and China, though issuing condemnations of the U.S. attack, appear to have little appetite for involvement beyond statements and offers of mediation. And how much remains of Tehran's missile capacity is unclear, with the Israeli official estimating roughly 1,000 ballistic missiles – half of their capacity before the most recent conflict started – remaining available to them. Nevertheless, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps warned that the United States should expect 'regrettable responses.' 'Instead of learning from repeated failures, Washington effectively placed itself on the front lines of aggression by directly attacking peaceful installations,' said a statement from the Guard Corps on Sunday. It hinted that its targets would include U.S. military presence in the region. 'The number, dispersion, and size of U.S. military bases in the region are not a strength, but have doubled their vulnerability,' the statement said. The United States has more than 40,000 stationed in the region, according to Pentagon figures, and has bases in at least 10 countries in the region, not to mention a significant presence at sea. Yet experts say the likeliest scenario would involve disruptions to shipping lanes, with Iran leveraging its control of the Strait of Hormuz, an oil transit chokepoint handling a fifth of the world's energy flows, that is 30 miles wide at its narrowest point; or calling on Yemen's Houthis to intensify their harassment campaign of merchant vessels on the Red Sea. It a situation in which Iran has experience: During its conflict with Iraq in the eighties, Tehran engaged in the the so-called 'Tanker War,' attacked hundreds of Iraqi ships near Hormuz and entering into direct confrontations with the U.S. Navy. Shippers are already girding themselves for disruptions. But Danish shipping giant Maersk said it was continuing to use the Strait of Hormuz for the time being. 'We will continuously monitor the security risk to our specific vessels in the region and are ready to take operational actions as needed,' Maersk said in a statement. Wilner reported from Washington, Bulos from Beirut.
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Europe is finally ready to spend more on defense. The hard part is how.
Advertisement This is a 'global reset,' Lieutenant General Sean Clancy, the new chief of the European Union's military committee, said at a security conference in Brussels this month. But 'we haven't even defined what the transition looks like.' Money, though, is far from the only issue Europe confronts now that it has reluctantly accepted the reality that it must be able to protect itself without help from the United States. Formidable political, strategic, and regulatory hurdles remain. EU leaders must maintain public support for common military spending and joint weapons procurement, even as right-wing nationalist sentiments oppose giving the bloc more power. And the farther from the Russian border, the less urgent the threat feels. Poland, for instance, is already spending nearly 5 percent of its gross domestic product on defense while Spain dedicated just 1.3 percent last year. Advertisement The European Union and Britain must also figure out how to prepare for the new kind of war that Russian aggression presents. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Europe's military has been focused on deploying troops to hot spots like Afghanistan and Iraq. Now they must be able to defend their own territory. Intelligence officials warn that Russian forces could be ready to attack a NATO country in five years. Complicating the decision-making are rapid advancements in intelligence, surveillance, battlefield management, and cyber technologies. Warfare is undergoing a transformation that is akin to what occurred during World War I, when horse-drawn wagons, muskets, and swords were replaced by tanks, machine guns, and airplanes. Look at Ukraine's battlefields. They are dominated by new technologies and throwback strategies, millions of drones and muddy trenches. 'Today 80 percent of targets in Ukraine are destroyed by drones,' said Andrius Kubilius, European Commissioner for defense and space. 'Every two months, there is a need for radical innovation of the drones in operation.' In recognition, the British Defense Ministry announced this month a startling overhaul of its warfighting approach, moving away from the Cold War-era focus on heavy armor and mechanized infantry. Under the plan, 80 percent of combat capability will rely on remote-controlled, reusable ground vehicles and drones as well as missiles, shells, and self-destructing drones. The EU has also taken steps to revise its strategy. In March, the 27 member nations issued a blueprint for combat readiness by 2030. Last month, the EU created a 150 billion euro (about $173 billion) program allowing joint investments in security. (Twenty-three countries are members of both the EU and NATO.) Advertisement But higgledy-piggledy rules and practices still hamper efforts to rapidly turn Europe's fragmented defenses into a unified and efficient fighting force. Joint financing is more the exception than the rule. Red tape, lack of coordination, and slow decision-making across the continent are causing delays, supply shortages, waste, and duplication, according to political and industry leaders. Overall strategy and standards are set by NATO commanders, but military budgets, specifications, quality control, export licenses, purchasing, and planning are handled by individual nations. The result is that a German-made component going into a French-made plane needs a separate export certification that can delay delivery by months. And though 12 European countries use NH90 helicopters, there are 17 versions, said Camille Grand, a former senior NATO official who leads defense studies at the European Council on Foreign Relations. Europe is also looking to decrease its dependence on American weaponry. The share of military equipment supplied to the European members of NATO by the United States has grown to nearly two-thirds, from about half less than a decade ago, according to a report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Europe has put a priority on investment in its own defense industry and is looking to make its supply chains for key materials, like gunpowder, more resilient. 'There is an adjustment in terms of the business model for the European defense industry,' Grand said, as it shifts to standardized mass production. That, he said, will require more consolidation to create economies of scale and joint procurement. Industry leaders, meanwhile, complain that they cannot invest in expanded production and research without more direction from government officials. Advertisement 'The political machinery is slow,' said Jan Pie, secretary-general of ASD, a trade group that represents 4,000 companies across Europe. 'So it's difficult to scale up.' Environmental approvals needed before a new weapons factory may be built can take up to five years, Pie said. He said that despite the talk about the need for urgency, the defense industry was not given priority in times of shortages. Nammo, a Norwegian ammunitions manufacturer that supplies Ukraine, for instance, was unable to ramp up production in 2023 because a nearby TikTok data center had already bought up the region's surplus electricity. As economies slow across Europe, budget battles are expected to continue to soak up the spotlight. It's doubtful that some countries will ever reach the 5 percent target. Still, as far as funding goes, Europe has turned a corner, several European leaders and military experts said. 'There's a lot of discussion about numbers, percentages, financing,' Nadia Calviño, president of the European Investment Bank, the EU's lending arm, said in Brussels recently. 'But I want to be very clear: Europe is a rich continent, and we can mobilize the necessary financing.' This article originally appeared in
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
11 days in June: Trump's path to ‘yes' on bombing Iran
Here's a look at how the last 11 days unfolded, a cascade of events that could reshape a combustible corner of the globe. All dates below are in Eastern time. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Wednesday, June 11 Advertisement The first sign that conflict could be on the horizon came when families of U.S. troops began leaving the Middle East. 'They are being moved out because it could be a dangerous place, and we'll see what happens,' Trump said as he arrived at the Kennedy Center for opening night of 'Les Misérables,' one of his favorite musicals. It wasn't clear whether Israel was preparing to strike, fulfilling years of threats to attack Iran's nuclear program, or if the movements were a feint to increase pressure for negotiations. The next round of talks between Washington and Tehran was just days away, and Trump was adamant about reaching a diplomatic solution. Advertisement Behind the scenes, the Israeli military operation was already taking shape. Thursday, June 12 Trump said an attack by Israel 'could very well happen.' But Iran still seemed to be taken by surprise. Around 8 p.m. in Washington, explosions in Tehran killed top military leaders and scientists. Multiple sites connected to Iran's nuclear program were also hit. Israel said 200 warplanes took part in the first wave of attacks. More damage was done with drones that Israeli spies had smuggled into the country, destroying air defenses and missile launchers. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described it as a 'targeted military operation to roll back the Iranian threat to Israel's very survival.' Although Iran has long maintained that its nuclear program was for peaceful purposes, Israeli leaders claimed it was an imminent threat. Trump posted on social media that Friday, June 13 Iran retaliated against Israel with missiles and drones, many of which were shot down by air defenses. As Trump started his day in Washington, he seemed impressed by Israeli military prowess and his tone became more aggressive toward Iran. 'The United States makes the best and most lethal military equipment anywhere in the World, BY FAR, and that Israel has a lot of it, with much more to come - And they know how to use it,' he But Trump suggested that diplomacy was his first choice, and urged Iran to make a deal. Saturday, June 14 Trump talked to Russian President Vladimir Putin in the morning, and they discussed the conflict between Israel and Iran. The next round of talks between the U.S. and Iran was canceled. Advertisement As Israel and Iran continued to trade strikes, Trump attended a military parade in Washington. It was the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army, as well as his 79th birthday. The muscular display of American military might — tanks, troops, paratroopers and a 21-gun salute — played out in the nation's capital as the potential for a new conflict loomed. Sunday, June 15 Trump spent the day talking up his reputation as a peacemaker, encouraging Iran and Israel to 'make a deal' similar to how he had brokered an end to fighting between India and Pakistan. 'Many calls and meetings now taking place,' Iran's health ministry said 224 people had been killed by Israeli strikes at this point in the conflict. Reports also emerged that Trump had rejected an Israeli plan to kill Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. U.S. officials viewed the idea as dangerously destabilizing. Trump flew to Canada for the annual Group of Seven summit, which gathers the world's most powerful democracies. He would not be there long. Monday, June 16 Israel claimed it had achieved 'aerial superiority' over Tehran, allowing its warplanes to operate freely in the skies above Iran's capital. One of the strikes hit Iran's state-run television, abruptly stopping a live broadcast. Netanyahu said Israeli strikes set back Iran's nuclear program a 'very, very long time.' However, the extent of the damage was unclear, and U.S. and Israeli officials believed only American planes with specially designed 'bunker buster' bombs had the capability to destroy nuclear sites buried deep underground. Advertisement After a single day at the G7 summit, the White House abruptly announced that Trump would leave early on a red-eye flight to Washington to meet with his national security team. Tuesday, June 17 Trump demanded Iran's 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER' in a post on social media and he told reporters aboard Air Force One that he wanted 'a real end' to the conflict, not just a ceasefire. He expressed frustration with Iranian leaders for failing to reach an agreement. 'They should have done the deal. I told them, 'Do the deal,'' he said. 'So I don't know. I'm not too much in the mood to negotiate.' Trump also brushed off assessments from U.S. spy agencies that Iran hadn't decided to build a nuclear weapon. He insisted they were 'very close.' The sun had not yet risen when Trump arrived at the White House. He took part in a meeting in the Situation Room, but did not appear publicly. With little clarity on next steps, State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce told reporters that 'I'm here to take questions, not necessarily answer them.' Wednesday, June 18 By this point, there was no question that Trump was considering joining Israel's attacks on Iran. 'I may do it, I may not do it,' he said that morning. 'Nobody knows what I'm going to do.' The president spoke to reporters while overseeing the installation of a massive new flagpole on the South Lawn of the White House, toggling back and forth between chatting up construction workers in hard hats and sizing up the Iranian nuclear threat. Later, in the Oval Office, Trump again suggested that the U.S. might get directly involved to thwart Iran's atomic ambitions. 'I'm not looking to fight,' he said. 'But if it's a choice between fighting and having a nuclear weapon, you have to do what you have to do.' Advertisement On Capitol Hill, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told lawmakers the Pentagon was presenting Trump with military options. Thursday, June 19 It was a federal holiday — Juneteenth — and much of Washington took the hot, steamy day off, but White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt scheduled a briefing nonetheless. She entered the briefing room to deliver a message from the president: He would decide within two weeks whether to become directly involved in Israel's war on Iran. Trump has long been known to toss out 'two week' deadlines for actions that never materialize, so the statement left people guessing on his next move. Friday, June 20 Trump convened another meeting of his national security advisers and then flew to his golf club in New Jersey, where he attended a political fundraiser in the evening. He talked to reporters briefly en route, long enough to say his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was 'wrong' when she previously said that the U.S. believed Iran wasn't building a nuclear weapon. Saturday, June 21 Around midnight, the U.S. military operation began in secret: B-2 stealth bombers taking off from a base in Missouri. They headed east, over the Atlantic Ocean, refueling from airborne tankers along the way. It would take them 18 hours to reach Iran. A decoy flight went west, toward the Pacific. Trump returned to the White House from New Jersey around 6 p.m. Less than an hour later, American ordinance began exploding in Tehran. More than two dozen Tomahawk missiles were fired from a U.S. submarine. Fighter jets scanned for Iranian interceptors. The stealth bombers dropped 14 bunker buster bombs, marking the first time that the 30,000-pound weapon had been used in combat. Advertisement Trump announced the strikes on social media, saying it was a 'very successful attack and 'NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!' In a brief national address from the White House, the president threatened to attack Iran again if there was any retaliation. 'There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran,' he said.
