
Living on the Edge: A War Correspondent’s View from Ukraine’s Front Lines
Remus Cernea is a Romanian activist, politician, and steadfast advocate for secularism and human rights. Born in 1974 in Bucharest, Cernea has played a significant role in promoting progressive values in a country deeply influenced by tradition and religion. He is the founder of the Solidarity for Freedom of Conscience Association, an organization dedicated to combating church-state collusion and religious discrimination. Over the years, Cernea has championed causes that challenge entrenched norms, making him a polarizing yet vital figure in Romanian politics and activism.
A former president of Romania’s Green Party, Cernea entered the national political stage with a bid for the presidency in 2009, where he garnered 0.62% of the vote. While his presidential run was not a resounding success, it marked the beginning of his career as a reformist voice in Romanian politics. From 2012 to 2016, he served as a member of Parliament, using his platform to introduce bold legislative proposals, including reforms to church financing and the legalization of same-sex civil unions. His initiatives, though often met with fierce opposition, underscored his commitment to human rights and secular governance.
Cernea’s activism extends beyond legislation. He has campaigned vigorously against the presence of religious icons in public schools, arguing for a more secular approach to education. He has also been a vocal proponent of science education, advocating for the inclusion of Darwinian evolution in school curricula. His efforts reflect a broader mission to modernize and secularize Romanian society, often putting him at odds with powerful religious and political institutions.
Recently, Cernea shared harrowing insights from his work as a war correspondent in Ukraine. In Kharkiv, he witnessed the devastation wrought by the conflict, describing towns like Kupyansk, where the majority of buildings have been reduced to rubble. He highlighted the growing threat posed by FPV drones, which have increasingly targeted civilians and military assets alike, heightening risks even far from the front lines. Cernea painted a grim picture of the evolving arms race between Russia and Ukraine, noting how new weaponry and tactics continue to escalate the brutality of the war. During his time in Kyiv, he documented drone strikes, capturing footage that underscores the importance of bearing witness to these atrocities.
Cernea’s work—whether in activism, politics, or journalism—reflects an unwavering commitment to challenging extremism and advocating for a more just and rational world. His journey is a testament to the power of persistence and the necessity of dissent in the face of entrenched power structures.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Today, I’m speaking with Remus Cernea, a former Romanian MP, past president of the Green Party in Romania, and a founding figure in the Humanist Movement in the country, among numerous other roles. Your work has often focused on resisting the intrusion of religious institutions into public life, including opposition to projects like the proposed cathedral. You’ve recently turned your attention to war correspondence, working with Newsweek Romania. Currently, you’re in Kharkiv. Could you tell us how many trips you have made to this region and what motivated your return to Kharkiv on this occasion?
Remus Cernea: I’ve spent nearly 300 days in war zones over the past three years, mainly in Ukraine, although I also spent two weeks covering the conflict between Israel and Hamas. I am in Kharkiv now because I can easily travel to the front lines from here. The front lines are close: the Vovchansk front lines are approximately 30 kilometers away, and the Kupyansk front lines are about 100 kilometers from Kharkiv. Here in Kharkiv, there are frequent events and disruptions.
Unfortunately, there are daily air-raid alarms—often 10, 12, or even 15 a day—and many explosions. Of course, the intensity and drama are far greater near the front lines, particularly in Kupyansk.
I usually come to Ukraine for two, three, or four weeks at a time. This is my sixth trip to Ukraine in the past year. I’ve also been to Kyiv for a while before coming to Kharkiv. Afterward, I’ll return to Kyiv and visit other cities to film and record stories about this tragic war.
Jacobsen: What are your observations about morale in Ukraine’s eastern regions? Recently, I attended a conference in Toronto, Canada, focused on rebuilding Ukraine, and I also participated in a separate event where attendees shared firsthand accounts, including from those directly affected by the war. Among the participants in Canada, morale appeared strikingly high. However, given the complexities of the global political landscape, how would you assess morale within Ukraine, particularly in an oblast so close to the Russian border?
Cernea: Morale is high. Earlier today, I spoke with soldiers from the 57th Brigade, which has been defending Kharkiv for a significant period. I had previously met with the brigade’s artillery troops. Today, I met with members of the mechanized infantry and even went inside one of their infantry vehicles. The morale among these soldiers is steadfast. They are determined to defeat the Russians and are steadily achieving this goal.
Every day, there are dozens of Russian attacks, but nearly all of them—almost 100%—are repelled, often with heavy losses inflicted on the Russian side. While Ukrainian forces also suffer casualties, they continue to prevail in the Kharkiv region. Ukrainian forces consistently win numerous battles and skirmishes daily.
Although these engagements are not large-scale battles, they are fierce. The Russians persist in attempting advances, but Ukrainian defenders repel them remarkably. Occasionally, the Russians gain some territory, but it is minimal. Each square kilometer they capture comes at a tremendous cost. For every kilometer gained, the Russians lost a significant number of soldiers, tanks, and other military equipment.
The Ukrainians are highly skilled, resourceful, and determined to resist. They successfully repel attack after attack, demonstrating extraordinary resilience and strength in the face of this ongoing aggression.

Jacobsen: You also visited Kupyansk, where you reported that 80% to 90% of the buildings had been destroyed. Can you share what you witnessed and the implications of such widespread devastation?
Cernea: Yes, I was there on Friday, three days ago, with a mission to evacuate people. Despite the devastation, individuals still live in these ruins and destroyed buildings. We evacuated two families, along with their cats. Almost all of the buildings on their streets were already destroyed. Somehow, their homes had not yet been destroyed. Still, the houses nearby had been obliterated by shelling, artillery, missiles, and drones.
The drones, in particular, are extremely dangerous now. Let me show you this part. This fragment of a drone hit about 30 meters away from me on Thursday, January 16, 2025. First, we heard the sound of the drone, and then we heard Ukrainian soldiers firing at it. The drone was hit, fell, and exploded about 30 meters from where we were standing. I was with three other Ukrainian journalists at the time.
The primary danger near the front lines now comes from drones. I will explain why drones are the most dangerous threat on the battlefield. Unlike artillery or missiles, drones can actively pursue individuals targeting specific areas. With artillery, for instance, there is a target, and if you happen to be near it, there is a chance you might be wounded or killed. However, you often have seconds to move or run before the shell hits.
Drones, especially FPV (first-person view) equipped with cameras, are operated by Russian soldiers who can see and actively follow their targets. Even if you try to leave, move away, or run—whether on foot or in a vehicle—the drone can follow you and is likely to harm, wound, or kill you. That is why drones are now the greatest threat near the front lines.
Typically, drones range from 5 to 10 kilometers, sometimes up to 20 kilometers. Anything within that range can be targeted, making it extremely difficult to escape.
In the last few months, or perhaps the last year, Ukrainians have developed anti-drone devices that attempt to scramble the signal to prevent drones from reaching their targets. While these devices are helpful, they are not 100% effective. Sometimes, they work, and other times, they do not.
Meanwhile, the Russians are targeting many civilians. For example, in Kherson, they conduct what can only be described as “human safari.” They deploy FPV drones and intentionally target people they see on the streets, killing them.

Jacobsen: Why do you think they are doing this?
Cernea: The answer is clear—they have no morals. This is beyond question. They are targeting civilians deliberately, with no regard for human life.
Jacobsen: You’ve spoken about the use of drones targeting civilians. Could you delve deeper into the strategic logic or motivations behind this approach? What does it reveal about the broader dynamics of the conflict?
Cernea: Yes, there’s a profoundly cynical rationale behind it. Imagine a drone operator. His primary task is to locate and target military assets. However, there are times when he cannot find any military targets. In such cases, if the operator sees movement—a citizen walking on the street, an ordinary person, a car, or even rescue teams evacuating people—he will often choose to strike. The drone would be considered a wasted resource if he didn’t strike.
Even after hitting civilians, they report to their superiors that they’ve “eliminated Nazis.” Russian propaganda consistently labels Ukrainians as Nazis, so there’s an incentive for drone operators to justify their actions. This leads to what can only be described as a “human safari,” where civilians in cities near the front lines, such as Kherson and Kupyansk, are deliberately targeted by FPV drones. These drones, with 5 to 20 kilometers ranges, create constant danger in their operational zones.
Jacobsen: According to recent reports, such as those from the Kyiv Independent, casualties have risen significantly. What insights can you offer regarding this trend, and what does it suggest about the current state of the conflict?
Cernea: Yes, the number of casualties has increased significantly. During our first trip to Ukraine in November and December 2023, the death toll per day was likely around 850 to 950. By our second trip in August and September 2024, the numbers had risen to approximately 1,000 per day. Now, in early 2025, the numbers range between 1,500 and 2,000 deaths per day on the Russian side alone, and that doesn’t include Ukrainian losses.
This escalation reflects the growing volatility of the war. The Russians are becoming increasingly desperate and ferocious. Their tactics have intensified, and their use of weaponry has evolved. For example, they are now bombing Ukrainian cities more frequently and targeting residential areas with ballistic missiles and glide bombs.
Jacobsen: From your perspective, how has the ongoing escalation of violence impacted the lives and infrastructure of Ukrainian cities? Are there specific patterns or stories that have mainly stood out to you?
Cernea: The destruction is immense. In Kharkiv, for instance, I’ve seen entire residential blocks obliterated by glide bombs. One block of flats, with 10 floors, was destroyed. The Russians are deliberately targeting civilians and residential areas more aggressively than before.
On New Year’s Eve and January 1, I was in Kyiv. For the first time, the Russians launched four drones that directly struck the city center, an unprecedented event. Two of these drones hit within 100 meters of the presidential administration building. I was there and captured footage of the aftermath.
Jacobsen: What kind of reactions have you received for your documentation?
Cernea: Other journalists were astonished by the footage I managed to capture. They asked how I recorded these explosions, and I explained that this is what I do. Whenever I hear an air raid alarm, I set up my camera near a window and start recording. On January 1, I listened to the drones, placed my camera by the window, and captured dramatic footage of four drones striking the center of Kyiv. This kind of work is critical for documenting the brutal reality of this war.
Jacobsen: You’ve referenced the drone attacks on Kyiv that occurred on January 1, suggesting that they were intended as a symbolic message from Russia. Could you elaborate on that interpretation and the broader implications of such acts of aggression?
Cernea: It was a clear message from Russia to President Zelensky and Ukraine, signaling that Russia intends to remain ferocious in its attacks. From what I understood, those four drones contained some Chinese components. These components allowed the drones to bypass Kyiv’s air defense entirely—no defense was in place.
Imagine that: no defense. I was shocked but deeply concerned, wondering where the air defense was. It’s one thing for a single drone to evade detection, but four drones striking the center of Kyiv is alarming. A few days later, an official statement confirmed that these drones were a new variant based on the Shahed-136 model. Adding new Chinese components made them capable of evading existing air defense systems.
Jacobsen: It sounds like an arms race is unfolding.
Cernea: It’s a new arms race. Both sides are constantly trying to outpace each other. One side develops new weapons to strike harder, and the other scrambles to create defenses while working on its advanced weaponry. It’s a cycle of escalation, and it’s relentless.
Even now, I’ve paused because I heard noises that might be drones. You’re always on edge in an area like this, listening for potential threats. If drones appear, I’ll film them.
Jacobsen: Stay safe, Remus. Don’t take any unnecessary risks.
Cernea: Thank you. But as you know, there’s always a risk. You experienced this yourself during your time in Ukraine. You never know where the next missile or drone will strike. If you’re near the front lines, the risk is even higher.
Now, with these FPV drones, it’s a nightmare. When a missile or a shell hits you, it feels like traditional warfare. But these drones can follow you, making them much more dangerous and unpredictable. It’s an entirely new level of threat.