报道

食品通过无人机抵达奥列什基，但安全通道仍未开通。

据报道，4吨食品通过无人机送达约100个地点。对于面临饥饿的俄罗斯占领区奥列什基平民来说，这批物资带来了救济，却没有建立可靠的供给路线或安全撤离通道。

播出 2026年9月27日 GMT-5 10:08文字 2026年9月27日 GMT-5 10:17阅读需 5 分钟54 个来源

译自英文原文。

原语言视频

文字实录 · 正在加载

据估计，约有2,000名平民仍留在俄罗斯占领的奥列什基及附近村庄。据报道，乌克兰军队已向第聂伯河对岸空投4吨食品——在人们形容自己靠吃野草充饥的情况下，这是一批数量可观的物资，但并非可靠的城镇供粮方式。据报道，这批物资投放到了约100个地点。此次行动的具体日期以及有多少人领到食品，均未得到确认。¹²⁵

关键事实

~2,000据估计，城镇及附近村庄的平民人数 1
4吨据报道通过无人机运送的食品 25 16
~100据报道的物资投放地点，并非获得食品的家庭数 25

赫尔松州州长奥列克桑德尔·普罗库金的说法是9月27日发布的食品运送报道的依据。他表示，这类行动自3月以来一直有系统地开展。这并不能确定任何特定家庭多久能收到一次包裹，但确实修正了“自5月以来奥列什基完全没有食物进入”的说法：据报道，常规配送在该月之后停止，另有报道称5月26日是最后一次常规配送；与此同时，也有间歇性无人机空投的报道。4吨等于4,000千克。声称运送了400吨或4,000 吨的标题，与配送报道中的4吨说法相矛盾；约100个投放地点并不会增加货物总量。²⁵¹⁶¹⁵¹¹⁹³⁴

奥列什基位于第聂伯河对岸、乌克兰控制的赫尔松市对面。据报道，河上通道已关闭，相关说法还提到，沿途布设了地雷，无人机也威胁着试图通行的人和车辆。空运食品越过这道障碍或许能让居民吃上一顿饭，却无法让他们安全领取下一份食物，也无法让他们离开。目前尚无经核实的开放陆路救援通道或正在运作的有组织撤离行动。²¹⁵

居民还能找到什么

在占领区接受采访的居民称，他们不得不减少每餐食物，依靠自己种植的蔬菜，并采摘野草充饥。一名女子告诉《卫报》，她没有东西吃，只能等占领军撤走她。另一名女子说，她的体重从战前的110千克降到了67千克。据报道减少的43千克是一个人的情况，并非对全体人口损失的测量，也不是经独立核实的医学结论。一名居民告诉BBC，夜间又有两名平民死亡，但这些死亡事件以及总体死亡人数均未得到独立证实。¹³

连受这些状况影响的人数也尚无定论。《卫报》9月27日给出的估计约为2,000人，涵盖奥列什基及周边村庄。德国之声9月23日报道，镇上约有6,000人；乌克兰人权专员德米特罗·卢比涅茨9月16日曾估计有超过6,000名平民。较晚的估计涵盖范围更广，人数却更少。目前没有经核实的人数统计能够调和这些差异；两组数字的差别也不能证明四天内有数千人撤离。战前的24,000人指的是奥列什基市区，因此不能与今天涵盖城镇及村庄的估计直接比较。乌克兰官员还报告称，9月22日仍有47名儿童留在市区——这并非9月27日重新核实的人数。¹⁴⁴⁸⁴⁷

奥列什基乌克兰行政机构负责人泰季亚娜·哈萨年科告诉《卫报》，无人机使人们无法从医院地下室及其他地点取出遗体。她还指称，一名74岁男子拒绝让士兵进入自己正在挖掘、用于储存食物的地窖后，被士兵杀害。居民和当地官员描述了掠夺和袭击事件。这些是在独立进入受到严格限制的地区传出的严重指控：所谓杀人事件尚未经过法医确认，无法取出遗体的数量也未经核实，相关报道亦未指出每一起涉嫌行为分别由哪一方实施。¹⁹

关于救援车队受阻的两种说法

2026年9月1日运送食品的尝试，体现了其中的危险，也说明能得到确认的信息有限。哈萨年科称，运送食品的车辆遇到地雷或诡雷后折返。俄罗斯外交部代表罗季翁·米罗什尼克则另行指称，乌克兰无人机在奥列什基附近袭击了一支由四辆车组成、运载食品和药品的车队，并造成一名志愿者受伤。据称展示无人机袭击援助车辆的画面于9月2日发布；画面发布并不能确定袭击发生的时间。现有报道无法证明遇到地雷的车辆与据称遭无人机袭击的车队是否属于同一事件，也未能核实伤情或确定袭击责任。任何一种说法都无法解释短缺的全部原因。⁵⁰²³²²

乌克兰外交部长安德里·瑟比加呼吁联合国和红十字国际委员会运入援助，并为希望离开的人安排安全撤离。截至9月26日，这项呼吁已有记录；但其他报道所称一份于星期一发布的声明，其确切日期尚不清楚。他指责俄罗斯阻挠援助进入。克里姆林宫发言人德米特里·佩斯科夫承认局势危急，但指责乌克兰军队阻拦人道主义物资。这是相互对立的说法，并非经独立查明的救援无法进入原因。⁴²⁴³¹

已知

9月16日，卢比涅茨表示，俄罗斯尚未确认准备好执行人道主义撤离任务；之后的报道也未证实双方达成了协议。 13 11

未知

据报道有多少户家庭收到了食品空投，以及他们何时可能再次收到物资。

后续

是否会建立一条经双方同意、安全且持续的援助与撤离通道，以取代间歇性空投。

对于今天正在寻找食物的人来说，这一区别直接关系到眼下的处境。如果无人机投送的包裹送到了他们手中，那就是真正的救济。但这并不意味着道路重新开放、明天的物资有了保障，或他们可以安全离开。目前尚无经核实的证据表明联合国或红十字会已进入奥列什基、组织撤离已经完成，或有可靠的替代渠道取代原有食品运输路线。¹¹¹³²⁵

播出原貌 10 行

Ukrainian drones flew four tonnes of food into a town where residents are eating weeds. About two thousand civilians are estimated to remain in Russian-occupied Oleshky and nearby villages. A food drop may provide a meal, but it does not give families a dependable way to get supplies or leave. Can a safe, sustained route replace these intermittent deliveries?
The four tonnes—four thousand kilograms—were flown across the Dnipro to about a hundred reported locations. Those are drop sites, not a count of households fed. The date of this particular operation, how many people received food and how often households get deliveries have not been established. The regional governor said drone deliveries of this kind had been made systematically since March; that does not tell us how reliably they reach residents. Headlines claiming four hundred or four thousand tonnes conflict with the repeatedly stated figure of four tonnes.
Ordinary food deliveries reportedly ended after May, with May twenty-sixth identified as the last regular delivery. So it is too absolute to say no food at all has arrived since then. But intermittent airborne drops are not a reopened road, a reliable supply chain or an evacuation corridor.
Oleshky is across the Dnipro from Ukrainian-held Kherson. The crossing is reported closed. Mined approaches and drones endanger people trying to move and vehicles trying to bring food in. No safe overland relief route or functioning organized evacuation has been verified. The same dangers can leave people unable to fetch supplies even when food enters the area.
Inside Oleshky, residents describe cutting meals, eating vegetables they grow and foraging for weeds. One woman said she had nothing to eat and was waiting for occupying forces to evacuate her. Another said her weight had fallen from a hundred and ten kilograms before the war to sixty-seven: a reported loss of forty-three kilograms for one person, not a measured population average or an independently established medical finding. A different resident said two more civilians had died overnight. Those deaths and any overall death toll remain unverified; restricted access also makes it difficult to establish conditions in every home.
The population count is a major uncertainty. A September twenty-third estimate put roughly six thousand in Oleshky town. The September twenty-seventh estimate puts about two thousand in the town and surrounding villages—a broader area, yet a smaller number. Ukraine’s human rights commissioner had estimated more than six thousand civilians on September sixteenth. There is no verified count or explanation reconciling these figures; they do not prove that four thousand people evacuated in four days. Oleshky city had twenty-four thousand residents before the war, but that city-only figure is not directly comparable with today’s town-and-villages estimate. Ukrainian officials also counted forty-seven children in Oleshky on September twenty-second; that is not a verified count for the twenty-seventh.
The danger extends beyond hunger. Oleshky administration head Tetiana Hasanenko says drones have prevented the retrieval of bodies from a hospital basement and elsewhere. She also alleges that soldiers killed a seventy-four-year-old man who refused to let them into a cellar he was excavating to store food. Residents and local officials describe looting and attacks as well. These are grave accounts, but the alleged killing has not been independently confirmed, there is no established number of unretrieved bodies, and the available accounts do not identify which force committed each alleged act.
A September first attempt to bring in food illustrates why assigning blame is difficult. Hasanenko described vehicles encountering mines or booby traps and turning back. Russian foreign ministry representative Rodion Miroshnik separately alleged that Ukrainian drones attacked a four-vehicle convoy carrying food and medicine near Oleshky and wounded a volunteer. Drone-attack footage was published on September second, but its publication date does not establish when any strike occurred. It is not known whether these accounts concern the same convoy; the alleged injury and responsibility for an attack have not been independently established. Neither account determines the cause of the entire shortage.
Andrii Sybiha called on the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross to deliver aid and secure safe evacuation for people who want to leave. He accused Russia of standing in the way. His appeal was documented by September twenty-sixth, though the exact date of a statement also labeled as having been published on a Monday is unclear.
On September sixteenth, human rights commissioner Dmytro Lubinets said Russia had not confirmed readiness to permit a humanitarian evacuation mission. By September twenty-sixth, no agreement had been established. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov acknowledged a critical situation but accused Ukrainian forces of blocking humanitarian supplies. Moscow and Kyiv thus blame each other; responsibility for preventing access has not been independently determined. The immediate answer to whether a safe, sustained route can replace the drops is no—not yet: no verified access agreement, UN or Red Cross entry into Oleshky, completed organized evacuation or dependable supply route has been established.

来源

追溯本篇报道的依据。图谱展示其关联；下方链接可打开本文引用的来源。

来源图谱将在您阅读时加载。

探索完整的新闻编辑室图谱 ↗

引用来源

译文更新于 2026年9月27日 GMT-5 10:17

修订记录

r12026年9月27日 GMT-5 10:17首次发布。