Eelaththu Nilavan | Kyiv.
A Calculated Retaliation Framed as Counterterrorism
On Friday, the Kremlin officially stated that the latest wave of missile and drone strikes on Ukrainian cities, including Kyiv, was a “direct response to terrorist acts by Kyiv”—a rhetoric commonly employed by Moscow to justify escalatory military operations under the broader umbrella of its so-called “special military operation.”
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov reiterated the official Russian line, referring to these strikes as “measured military responses,” while the Russian Ministry of Defense claimed that the targets included drone manufacturing plants, weapons production centers, and military training camps. However, civilian casualties and widespread infrastructure damage tell a different story.
■. Overnight Assault: Scope and Impact
In one of the most intense aerial offensives in months, Russia launched over 400 drones and 40 cruise missiles, saturating Ukrainian airspace and deliberately targeting Kyiv and its surrounding regions. These attacks killed at least four civilians, caused metro disruptions, and left large swaths of the city in blackout conditions.
This escalation demonstrates Moscow’s evolving combined-arms strategy—integrating cruise missile precision strikes with mass drone swarms—to overwhelm and disorient Ukrainian air defense systems. It is a textbook example of hybrid aerial warfare, where low-cost drones (like Iran-made Shahed-136s) are deployed in waves to draw fire and open airspace corridors for more lethal cruise missiles to follow.
■.The Role of Tu-95 Strategic Bombers: Russia’s Airborne Arsenal
Central to this campaign is Russia’s continued use of its aging but still potent Tu-95 “Bear” strategic bombers, Cold War-era aircraft capable of launching Kh-101 cruise missiles with remarkable range and precision.
Missile Specs:
The Kh-101 has an estimated range of 5,500 km (3,400 miles), making it one of the longest-range cruise missiles in the world.
Stealthy terrain-hugging capability
Satellite-guided via GLONASS, Russia’s version of GPS
Can be launched without leaving Russian airspace—a tactical advantage against Ukrainian defenses
Flight Patterns:
These bombers typically fly over the Caspian Sea or remain deep within Russian airspace, launching from standoff distances to avoid interception.
This method shows Russia’s shift to long-range precision warfare, in which it avoids direct air combat while inflicting heavy infrastructural and psychological damage on Ukrainian cities.
■.Intelligence-Guided Targeting
Sources confirm that Russian military intelligence and electronic surveillance systems are deeply integrated into this campaign. Reportedly, Russia has identified and marked over 40 high-value targets across Ukraine, including:
Energy systems
Airbases
Transport infrastructure
Weapons assembly lines
These targets are being sequentially hit in synchronized salvos, with the aim of crippling Ukraine’s defensive resilience and industrial military production.
■. Geopolitical Implications: A Dangerous Feedback Loop
This barrage comes amid mounting tensions between Russia and NATO, particularly after recent cross-border drone strikes by Ukraine that hit military facilities inside Russia. While the Kremlin claims these operations were a response to “terrorist acts,” Western analysts argue that Russia is attempting to shift international attention from its ongoing aggression by painting Ukraine as the instigator.
There is also a propaganda element to these operations: Russia frames these attacks as “surgical strikes” on military targets, but the use of civilian-targeting drones and infrastructure strikes belies this narrative.
■. Ukrainian Response and Air Defense Strain
Ukraine’s Western-supplied air defense systems, such as the Patriot and NASAMS, have intercepted many of the incoming threats. However, missile saturation tactics—using swarms to overwhelm detection systems—are putting these defenses under unsustainable strain.
Challenge: The cost of launching a Shahed-136 drone is under $30,000, while intercepting it with a Western SAM costs millions per shot.
Outcome: Ukraine is forced into a cost-inefficient defense posture, while Russia expends relatively inexpensive offensive assets to exhaust Ukraine’s munitions stockpile.
■. Civilian Toll and Morale Warfare
While the military implications are severe, the human cost remains paramount. Repeated blackouts, public transportation halts, and housing damage in major urban centers such as Kyiv, Lviv, and Odesa show that Russia’s strikes are also designed to sap civilian morale and foster internal unrest.
These strikes constitute a form of psychological warfare, reminiscent of WWII-era strategic bombing campaigns, aimed less at military victory and more at breaking the spirit of resistance.
■. Conclusion: A Strategic Inflection Point
Russia’s renewed missile and drone campaign reflects a broader shift in military doctrine—from attritional ground warfare to strategic air campaigns aimed at paralyzing Ukraine’s infrastructure and morale. These developments reveal the resilience of Russia’s long-range strike capability, even amid international sanctions and supply chain restrictions.
However, the intensification of aerial warfare also raises the stakes for a NATO response, especially if cross-border escalation becomes uncontrollable. For Ukraine, the challenge will be balancing air defense sustainability with domestic security and resilience, as the war enters yet another volatile phase.
