After too many nights of pulling children from the rubble of Russian drone strikes, the weekend’s devastating attacks on Moscow’s military pride mark a moment of brief respite for Ukrainian morale, and yet another twist of the unexpected in the Kremlin’s war of choice.

It may be hard to fathom the precise impact of Ukraine’s wily drone assault on Russian air bases thousands of miles beyond the Ukrainian border. Kyiv said 41 long-range bomber jets were set aflame and that the attacks hit 34% of Russia’s strategic cruise missile carriers at its main bases.

We don’t know how many bombers Russia had that were fully functional – after years of taxing nightly missions over Ukraine – and how many others had been cannibalized for spare parts, but some reports suggest Russia only had about 20 of the propeller-driven Tu-95s and about 60 supersonic Tu-22M3s in service.

It will become clear in the months ahead to what extent this really dents the terror the air raid sirens bring across Ukraine. But if what Kyiv says is true – 117 relatively cheap drones taking out dozens of planes and causing what one security source estimated to be $7 billion in damage – then the economics of the war have shifted.

And it marks another point in which guile triumphs over the giant. Russia’s main card is its vastness – of military resources, frontline manpower, tolerance for pain and financial reserves. But repeatedly, Kyiv has shown targeted pin pricks can burst these bubbles.

In late 2022, the Ukrainians struck supply lines across occupied northern parts of Ukraine, causing a swift and embarrassing collapse of Russian positions. In 2023, they hit the Kerch Strait bridge linking Russia to occupied Crimea. And last year they invaded Kursk, Russia proper, exposing the vulnerability of the Russian war machine’s borders.

On each occasion, the narrative of the war swung back in Ukraine’s favor. But no time is it needed more than this week, after months in which the vital plank of US support has been in doubt, and as Russian and Ukrainian delegations met for a second round of peace talks in Turkey.

It also brings to the forefront one of the key lessons of this war: the capacity for advances in technology, solid intelligence and bold execution to reverse military trajectories many observers felt were settled. Ukraine’s first use of attack drones in 2023 has evolved to a widescale tactic, enabling it to survive the onslaught of overwhelming Russian infantry attacks across wide, imperiled frontlines. It has sent sea-drones to hit Russia’s prized Black Sea Fleet.

And most extraordinarily, this weekend, Ukraine says its air defenses repelled, with unparalleled success, a record Russian drone attack of 472 Shaheds. Ukraine shot down or used electronic warfare to block 382 of them, according to the air force, a feat that again suggests a technological advance, and the possibility that dwindling air defense interceptor supplies from the United States may not be the immediate horrific threat thought a month ago.

But what of the wider impact of the bold drone attack inside Russia – one so deep, in Belaya, Irkutsk, that it was almost halfway across Siberia? What does it change in a war where Russia is slowly advancing, and showing little genuine interest in a ceasefire and the peace that might come with it? This is an unknowable, but not a zero. Losing these aircraft has a practical effect, and impacts upon Russian military pride and anxiety. Even airfields deep in Siberia are not safe.

Russia’s lumbering bulk of a military machine projects invulnerability and fearlessness towards the longest of wars as a tactic. It uses the idea of time being on its side as a key asset. But strikes like the weekend’s show its hardware is vulnerable, limited and probably not easy to replace.

Moscow may brush off this latest setback, its rigidly subservient state media able to sustain any narrative the Kremlin chooses. But that does not alter the reality of its troubles. It did not stop the short-lived Wagner rebellion of 2023, or the Ukrainian incursion into Kursk last year.

The damage is twofold: to the internal narrative that Moscow can do this indefinitely – it clearly cannot, if surprises like these keep coming. And secondly, to its ability to visit the sort of bulk destruction it has relied upon to grind forwards in the war. The latter can slow its progress, but former is more dangerous. Tiny cracks can spread. For now, they are all Ukraine is able to inflict, but their longer-term impact, like so much in this war, is utterly unpredictable.

Police investigating the disappearance of British toddler Madeleine McCann will carry out fresh searches near the Portuguese holiday resort she was last seen 18 years ago, authorities said on Monday.

The 3-year-old disappeared from her bed while on vacation with her family in the Praia da Luz resort, in southern Portugal, on May 3, 2007. She has not been seen since.

Detectives acting on a request from a German public prosecutor will carry out “a broad range” of searches this week in the area of Lagos, in southern Portugal, a Portuguese police statement said.

The main suspect in the case is a German national identified by media as Christian Brueckner, who is currently serving a seven-year prison sentence in Germany for raping a 72-year-old woman in Portugal in 2005.

He is under investigation on suspicion of murder in the McCann case but hasn’t been charged. He spent many years in Portugal, including in Praia da Luz, around the time of the child’s disappearance. Brueckner has denied any involvement in her disappearance.

Prosecutors in Braunschweig, Germany, who are responsible for the investigation, didn’t give details of the “judicial measures” taking place in Portugal, according to Germany’s dpa news agency. They said the measures are being carried out by Portuguese authorities with support from officers from Germany’s Federal Criminal Police Office.

Britain’s Metropolitan Police said it was “aware of the searches being carried by the BKA (German federal police) in Portugal as part of their investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.”

“The Metropolitan Police Service is not present at the search, we will support our international colleagues where necessary,” the force added, without giving more details.

The McCann case received worldwide interest for several years, with reports of sightings of her stretching as far away as Australia as well as books and television documentaries about her disappearance.

Almost two decades on, investigators in the UK, Portugal and Germany are still piecing together what happened on the night she disappeared. She was in the same room as her brother and sister — 2-year-old twins — while their parents, Kate and Gerry, had dinner with friends at a nearby restaurant.

The last time police resumed searches in the case was in 2023, when detectives from the three countries took part in an operation searching near a dam and a reservoir about 50 kilometers (30 miles) from the Praia da Luz resort.

Madeleine’s family marked the 18th anniversary of her disappearance last month, and expressed their determination to keep searching.

Ukraine’s drone attack against Russian airfields was audacious and daring. But most of all, it was meticulously planned and flawlessly executed.

Kyiv struck where it could make a difference, damaging or destroying military aircraft that Moscow has been using to terrorize Ukrainian civilians with near daily aerial attacks.

The Ukrainian Security Service said 41 Russian aircraft were hit, including strategic bombers and surveillance planes, although it is unclear how many were taken completely out of action.

Justin Bronk, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in London, said the attack was “a stunning success for Ukraine’s special services.”

“If even half the total claim of 41 aircraft damaged/destroyed is confirmed, it will have a significant impact on the capacity of the Russian Long Range Aviation force to keep up its regular large-scale cruise missile salvos against Ukrainian cities and infrastructure, whilst also maintaining their nuclear deterrence and signaling patrols against NATO and Japan,” he wrote in a note.

This is what we know about how the attack unfolded.

Striking from within Russia

The attacks targeted four airfields deep inside Russia, with the farthest one, the Belaya base in Irkutsk region, some 4,500 kilometers (2,800 miles) from Ukraine’s border with Russia.

The other targets included the Olenya base near Murmansk in the Arctic Circle, more than 2,000 kilometers (1,200 miles) from Ukraine; the Diaghilev airbase in Ryazan Oblast, some 520 kilometers (320 miles) from Ukraine; and the Ivanovo air base, which is a base for Russian military transport aircraft, some 800 kilometers (500 miles) from the border.

A visual shared by the SBU, Ukraine’s security agency, also showed another base in the eastern Amur region as a target. It is not clear whether an attack on this base failed or was aborted.

It’s these huge distances from the border with Ukraine that likely made Russia complacent about protecting the sites.

Its most prized aircraft at the Belaya base were regularly parked in plain sight in the airfield, clearly visible in publicly available satellite images – including on Google Maps.

Moscow likely believed the distance itself was enough to keep the aircraft safe from Ukrainian attacks.

Russia maintains air superiority over Ukraine and while Kyiv’s allies have supplied Ukraine with some long-range missile systems, including US-made ATACMS and British-French Storm Shadows, neither has the range to strike this deep inside Russia.

Ukraine has been using drones against targets inside Russia, including in Moscow, but the low speed at which they travel makes them relatively easy for Russian air defenses to strike them.

This is where the audacity of the attack really played out: rather than trying to fly the drones all the way from the border, Ukraine managed to smuggle them right next to the sites it wanted to target and launched them from there.

Insufficient Russian defenses

Russia’s radar and air defenses at these bases were not prepared for such a low-altitude and sudden attack.

The only effective way to stop an attack like this is with heavy machine guns. Russia has been using these against Ukrainian sea drones in the Black Sea.

But these were either not available or not deployed quickly enough at the air bases targeted by Ukraine on Sunday – most likely because Russia simply didn’t foresee this type of attack.

Russia’s Defense Ministry confirmed in a statement that the attacks – which it called “terror attacks” were launched from the vicinity of the airfields.

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky said 117 drones were used in the operation.

According to the SBU, the drones were smuggled into Russia by its operatives. At some point, likely while already in Russia, the drones were then hidden inside mobile wooden sheds.

These wooden cabins were then placed on trucks and driven to locations near the bases.

Ukraine did not disclose how exactly it managed to get the vehicles into the vicinity of high-profile military targets without detection, but reports in Russian media suggested it was relatively simple.

Baza and Astra, two Russian Telegram channels, both reported that the trucks were bought by a Ukrainian man who lived in Russia who then simply paid a quartet of drivers to get them where he needed them.

Neither Russian nor Ukrainian authorities commented on these reports, but the Russian state news agency RIA reported that authorities in the Irkutsk region were searching for a man who was suspected of being involved in the attack. His name matched the name reported by Baza and Astra.

The Ukrainian Security Service said the operatives involved in the operation were safely back in Ukraine by the time the attacks started. Zelensky said they worked across multiple Russian regions spanning three time zones.

“They would have likely setup an internet hub allowing the pilots to (control them) remotely, each rapidly deploying each FPV (first person view drones), hitting each target one by one.”

The source said the communication hub could be “a simple Russian cell phone” which is harder to track than other systems, such as Starlink that is used widely in Ukraine.

A source briefed on the matter confirmed the attack was carried out via Russian telecommunications networks.

Once the trucks were in place and the drones ready to go, the cabin roofs opened and the drones flew towards their targets.

‘Brilliant operation’

They are seen heading towards the Belaya air base in the distance, where thick dark smoke is already billowing from a previous strike.

Another video from the same location shows the truck used to transport the drones on fire after what appears to be an explosion designed to self-destruct the truck.

Zelensky said on Sunday that the attack was in the making for one year, six months and nine days, and praised the security services for a “brilliant” operation.

Russian officials have downplayed the attack, saying strikes were repelled in the Ivanovo, Ryazan and Amur regions but that “several pieces of aircraft” caught fire after attacks in the Murmansk and Irkutsk regions. It added that the fires had since been extinguished.

It said there were no casualties. But while Russian authorities tried to downplay the attack, several high-profile Russian military bloggers have been vocal in their criticism.

Rybar, a high-profile Russian military blog, said the attack caused a “tragic loss for the entire Russian air fleet” and was a result of “criminal negligence.”

Ukraine said it destroyed several TU-95 and Tu-22M3 strategic bombers and one of Russia’s few remaining A-50 surveillance planes.

A source briefed on the matter said 27 Tu-95, four Tu-160, two Tu-22M3 and “probably” an A-50 were hit.

The Tu-22M3 is Russia’s long-range missile strike platform that can perform stand-off attacks, launching missiles from Russian airspace well behind the front lines to stay out of range of Ukrainian anti-aircraft fire.

Russia had 55 Tu-22M3 jets and 57 Tu-95s in its fleet at the beginning of the year, according to the “Military Balance 2025” report from the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank.

The Tu-95 joined the Soviet Union air force in the 1950s, and Russia has modified them to launch cruise missiles like the Tu-22.

Bronk, the RUSI expert, said that replacing some of these aircraft would be very difficult for Russia because they have not been produced for decades.

So, Russia and Ukraine are still as far apart as ever, with the two warring countries unable to make a significant breakthrough in direct talks in Istanbul.

While there was agreement to exchange more prisoners, Moscow and Kyiv remain deeply divided over how to bring the costly and bitter Ukraine war to an end.

Russia has shown itself to be particularly uncompromising, handing Ukrainian negotiators a memorandum re-stating its maximalist, hardline terms which would essentially amount to a Ukrainian surrender.

Expectations were always low for a Kremlin compromise. But Moscow appears to have eliminated any hint of a readiness to soften its demands.

The Russian memorandum again calls on Ukraine to withdraw from four partially occupied regions that Russia has annexed but not captured: a territorial concession that Kyiv has repeatedly rejected.

It says Ukraine must accept strict limits on its armed forces, never join a military alliance, host foreign troops or aquire nuclear weapons. It would be Ukrainian demilitarization in its most hardline form, unpalatable to Ukraine and much of Europe, which sees the country as a barrier against further Russian expansion.

Other Russian demands include the restoration of full diplomatic and economic ties, specifically that no reparations will be demanded by either side and that all Western sanctions on Russia be lifted.

It is a Kremlin wish-list that, while familiar, speaks volumes about how Moscow continues to imagine the future of Ukraine as a subjugated state in the thrall of Russia, with no significant military of its own nor real independence.

This uncompromising position comes despite two important factors which may have given the Kremlin pause.

Firstly, Ukraine has developed the technical capability to strike deep inside Russia, despite its staggering disparity of territory and resources. The stunning drone strikes recently targeting Russian strategic bombers at bases thousands of miles from Ukraine is a powerful illustration of that. Ukraine, it seems, has some cards after all, and is using them effectively.

Secondly – and arguably more dangerously for Moscow – the Kremlin’s latest hardline demands come despite US President Donald Trump’s increasing frustrations with his own Ukraine peace efforts.

Trump has already expressed annoyance with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, who he said had gone “absolutely MAD” after massive Russian strikes on Ukraine last week.

But now, Trump himself is under pressure as a cornerstone of his second term foreign policy – bringing a rapid end the Ukraine war – looks decidedly shaky.

There are powerful levers to pull if Trump chooses, like increasing US military aid or imposing tough new sanctions, such as those overwhelmingly supported in the US Senate. One of the key backers of a cross-party senate bill that aims to impose “crippling” new measures on Moscow, Senator Richard Blumenthal, accused Russia of “mocking peace efforts” at the Istanbul talks and in a carefully worded post on X accused the Kremlin of “playing Trump and America for fools.”

It is unclear at the moment how the mercurial US president will react, or what – if anything – he will do.

But the outcome of the Ukraine war, specifically the brokering of peace deal to end it, has become inextricably linked with the current administration in the White House.

The fact that Putin has once again dug in his heels and presented an uncompromising response to calls for peace, may now force Trump to act.

Around 13% of Mexicans likely turned out to vote in the country’s first-ever judicial election, Mexico’s INE electoral authority said on Monday, as the government hailed a successful process while analysts said the low turnout could undermine an already controversial reform.

President Claudia Sheinbaum estimated that some 13 million of around 100 million eligible voters cast ballots on Sunday to elect some 2,600 judges and magistrates, including all nine Supreme Court justices.

Counting is set to conclude on June 15, but INE officials estimated the turnout at between 12.57% and 13.32% using a calculation based on several samples taken across the country.

Sheinbaum called the process a “complete success,” citing a free vote and a frugal campaign at a morning press conference.

“Everything can be perfected. We will draw conclusions from yesterday to make improvements for 2027,” she said, pointing to another vote in two years that is scheduled to fill over 1,000 more judicial positions.

Interior Minister Rosa Icela Rodriguez said that “the voting took place in a climate of peace and tranquility across the length and breadth of the country.”

“Yesterday’s turnout at the polls met expectations,” she said. “It was an innovative process that generated interest among the participants.”

Voting in Mexico is not mandatory and there is no minimum turnout required to legitimize an election. Pollsters had warned of poor turnout over boycott calls by the opposition and the complexity of voting for a large number of candidates.

Questionable credentials

Goldman Sachs’ chief Latin America economist, Alberto Ramos, said in a note that the low turnout took away from the process’ legitimacy, and that the pre-selection process and logistical organization were “fraught with controversy.”

“The vast majority of the roughly 3,400 candidates were largely unknown, many have limited legal experience and some questionable credentials for the seats they are seeking,” he said.

Bradesco analyst Rodolfo Ramos said he thought the turnout was surprisingly low, “considering Sheinbaum’s high approval rating and the fact that the majority of Mexicans were in favor of directly voting for judges.”

Sheinbaum, who inherited the judicial election project from her predecessor and mentor, former President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, has backed the vote as a way to democratize justice and root out corruption and nepotism.

However, critics say it could remove checks and balances on the executive power and allow for organized crime groups to wield greater influence by running their own candidates.

The run-up to the vote had been dominated by a scandal over some of the candidates, including a convicted drug smuggler and a former lawyer of drug kingpin Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman.

Late on Sunday, Mexico’s Specialized Prosecutor’s Office for Electoral Crimes said it had received 23 reports of possible electoral crimes related to the elections of nearly 900 positions at the federal-level judiciary.

Peru’s decision to shrink its archeological park home to the famous Nazca Lines by around 42% — an area roughly the size of 1,400 soccer fields — has sparked alarm among conservationists, archaeologists and environmental advocates.

Critics say the rollback paves the way for informal mining and weakens decades of cultural and ecological protection, while the government says the adjustment reflects updated scientific studies and does not compromise the UNESCO World Heritage status or the site’s core protections.

“The reduction not only removes protections — it does so precisely where extractive activity is expanding,” said Mariano Castro, Peru’s former vice minister of the environment, adding that the decision could cause “very serious risks and cumulative damage,” as it excludes zones with active or pending mining claims.

Castro added that safeguards for archaeological heritage during the formalization of artisanal mining are already limited.

“This is made worse by the ministry of culture’s failure to consider the cumulative impact of dozens or even hundreds of mining operations on sensitive archaeological zones,” he said.

The area in question forms part of a UNESCO-recognized World Heritage Site, home to the Nazca Lines — massive geoglyphs etched into the desert thousands of years ago — and one of Peru’s most fragile desert ecosystems.

UNESCO told The Associated Press it hasn’t been notified by Peruvian authorities of any changes to the boundaries of the World Heritage site, which are crucial for its protection. The organization will request more information from the authorities.

Peruvian environmental lawyer César Ipenza, who has closely followed the decision, said the resolution has already been approved and that it reduces the Nazca zone by more than 1,000 hectares.

“This is a weakening of both environmental and cultural protections,” Ipenza said. “The state should be upholding its commitments under international agreements, not yielding to private interests.”

Ipenza and others say the rollback reflects a pattern of regulatory concessions to mostly informal gold miners.

“There’s an alliance between the current government and informal mining sectors,” he said. “The legal framework continues to be relaxed to benefit them.”

Peru’s ministry of culture, which decided on May 30 to reduce the Nazca reserve from about 5,600 square kilometers to roughly 3,200 square kilometers, declined to answer specific questions from the AP. Instead, it sent a press release saying the adjustment was based on updated archaeological studies and does not affect the UNESCO World Heritage designation or its buffer zone.

The ministry said it remains committed to preserving the site’s cultural heritage through regulated management.

A day after the May 30 decision, Peru’s Minister of Culture Fabricio Valencia acknowledged that illegal mining exists within the reserve.

“Unfortunately, informal mining is an activity present in this area, but the measure we have taken does not mean it will be encouraged, nor that the likelihood of any harm from informal mining will increase. That will not happen,” Valencia said on RPP, one of Peru’s largest radio programs.

When asked for more details about the presence of illegal activity in the reserve, Valencia said, “there are some mining deposits, but I don’t have exact information on what type of mineral is there.”

Castro, the former vice minister, warned the move could violate Peru’s own laws.

“It contravenes Article 5(h) of the Environmental Impact Assessment Law, which mandates the protection of archaeological and historical heritage,” he said.

Ipenza said the government is enabling illegality under the guise of technical adjustments.

“It is shameful to forget our ancestors and our heritage, and to disguise decisions that pave the way for sectors seeking to impose illegality, such as illegal and informal mining,” he said. “This decision benefits those groups and harms all Peruvians.”

The far-right Party for Freedom (PVV) is leaving the Netherlands’ government, toppling the governing coalition, its leader Geert Wilders said on Tuesday.

Wilders, who is not himself part of government, presented the cabinet with an ultimatum last week to strengthen its asylum policy.

“No signature for our asylum plans,” he posted on X on Tuesday. “PVV is leaving the coalition.”

This is a developing story and will be updated.