Residents evacuated from Russian-occupied Oleshky in Ukraine’s southern Kherson region arrived in Belarus on 31 October during a temporary humanitarian truce between Kyiv and Moscow. The operation moved civilians who had voluntarily chosen to leave the city, while fighting and damage to Ukraine’s energy infrastructure continued elsewhere.
The evacuation highlights the continuing humanitarian risks linked to Russia’s war in Ukraine, including the movement of civilians from occupied areas and the difficulty of maintaining local ceasefires during an active conflict.
Evacuees transported to Gomel
Ukrainian officials said the evacuees arrived by air in Gomel, in southeastern Belarus. Dmytro Lubinets, Ukraine’s Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights, shared footage showing residents leaving an aircraft after landing.
David Arakhamia, a Ukrainian politician, said the fourth and final aircraft carrying the evacuees had arrived. He said the Ukrainian citizens and members of the Ukrainian delegation were expected to return to Ukrainian-controlled territory after the operation.
Russia’s Defence Ministry also confirmed that residents of Oleshky who had requested to leave were transported to Gomel. The ministry released footage showing coaches arriving and people boarding an aircraft.
The operation involved civilians from Oleshky, a city in the Kherson region that remains under Russian occupation. Officials said the departures were voluntary.
What the temporary truce covers
The localised ceasefire was arranged to allow the humanitarian evacuation to take place. According to the information provided by officials, the truce was scheduled to remain in force until Sunday evening.
US First Lady Melania Trump said on Friday that a convoy had been prepared for more than 750 people who chose to leave Oleshky. The planned support included 25 buses, 50 medical professionals and ambulances.
The operation demonstrates the narrow and practical nature of the arrangement. It was designed to facilitate the movement of civilians from one occupied city rather than establish a broad halt to hostilities across the front line.
Why the Oleshky evacuation matters
Oleshky lies in the wider Kherson region, an area that has remained central to the war because of its location near the Dnipro River and the continuing division between Ukrainian- and Russian-controlled areas. Civilians living under occupation face uncertainty over security, access to services and the possibility of leaving.
A humanitarian truce can create a limited route for residents to reach safety, but it does not resolve the wider political or military issues between Ukraine and Russia. The arrangement also requires coordination between Ukrainian, Russian and Belarusian officials, as well as transport and medical teams.
For the evacuees, the immediate priority is safe passage. For the wider region, the operation is another indication of how local humanitarian measures are being used amid the continuing war in Ukraine.
Russian strikes leave households without power
The evacuation took place as Ukraine reported fresh damage to its electricity network following overnight Russian strikes.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said approximately 280,000 households were without electricity. He said around 200,000 households in Dnipro and the surrounding region had lost power, while at least 80,000 more in the Kyiv region were affected.
Zelenskyy said Russian forces had struck a combined heat and power plant in Kyiv and four electrical substations in the eastern Dnipro region, among other targets. Repair crews were working to restore supplies, according to his statement.
Damage to energy infrastructure has repeatedly created difficulties for Ukrainian households and public services. Electricity outages can also affect heating, water systems, communications and medical facilities, particularly as temperatures fall.
Different developments occurring at the same time
The evacuation and the reported strikes underline the fragmented nature of the conflict. A local ceasefire can permit a humanitarian operation in one area while attacks and infrastructure damage continue elsewhere.
That distinction is important when assessing reports of a truce. The arrangement described in this case was localised and time-limited. It should not be interpreted as a general ceasefire covering Ukraine or as evidence that wider hostilities have ended.
What happens next?
The immediate next step is the transfer of the evacuees from Belarus back to Ukrainian-controlled territory, as described by Ukrainian officials. The truce was expected to continue until Sunday evening, after which the security situation around Oleshky could change.
Further information will be needed to establish the final number of people evacuated, their onward destinations and whether additional humanitarian movements will be arranged. The restoration of electricity in Kyiv and the Dnipro region will also depend on the extent of the damage and the ability of repair teams to work safely.
There was no indication in the supplied information that the local arrangement represented a broader political agreement between Kyiv and Moscow. Its immediate purpose was humanitarian: enabling civilians who wished to leave an occupied city to do so.
Conclusion
The arrival of Oleshky evacuees in Belarus marks a significant humanitarian operation during the continuing war in Ukraine. The temporary truce created a narrow route out for civilians, but simultaneous reports of Russian strikes and widespread power cuts show that the wider conflict remains active. The key issues now are the safe onward movement of those evacuated, the restoration of Ukraine’s electricity supply and whether further local humanitarian arrangements can be secured.