Seldom in war does the weaker side deliver a decisively devastating blow to the stronger. However, that may be just what happened last weekend (May 31-June 1). Ukraine launched a small drone attack deep into Russia that significantly damaged or destroyed an estimated 34% of Russia’s strategic cruise missile carriers. Like that of the United States, Russia’s strategic bomber force is a key element of its nuclear triad. Even more significant is that the airfields hit by Kyiv’s massive drone armada are deep inside Russia; one, Belaya in the Irkutsk region, is nearly 2,500 miles from Ukraine.
As President Donald Trump’s patience grows thin over Russian President Vladimir Putin’s slow-walking of the ceasefire talks, the success of the small drone ambush of Kremlin strategic bombers cannot be overstated. It took place on the eve of the June 2 ceasefire talks in Istanbul, Turkey, led by Ukraine’s Defense Minister Rustem Umerov. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has consistently pushed priorities such as an unconditional ceasefire and the return of prisoners and abducted children. The strike so close to the talks suggested Ukraine intended to negotiate from a position of strength. “Ukraine launched a ‘large-scale’ drone attack deep into Russian territory that security officials claim destroyed 40 [now 41] military bombers as it gears up for another round of talks in Istanbul to explore prospects of a ceasefire,” according to a CBS News report.
It’s possible the impact of Ukraine’s drone bombardment has not yet fully registered. The First-Person View (FPV) remote-controlled, small, and agile quadcopter-style drones, measuring 13-15 inches in size, are built for one-way attack flights. Laden with explosives, the drone is guided by real-time video feeds, enabling the operator to achieve precise targeting. What makes the Ukrainian operation, codenamed Spider’s Web, impressive is that, according to reports, the attack had been in preparation for 18 months.
Spider’s Web involved complex logistics planning, in which the FPV drones were smuggled into Russia and hidden in containers with retractable roofs placed on flatbed trucks already in Russia. The trucks were prepositioned near the four targeted airfields: Belaya, Olenya (Murmansk Region, approximately 1,200 miles from Ukraine), Dyagilevo (Ryazan Region), and Ivanovo (Ivanovo Region). Some reports mentioned a fifth base, Voznesenska, near Moscow, but no mention of damage. Damaged or destroyed were Tu-95 “Bear” and Tu-22M3 “Backfire” bombers used for long-range missile strikes against Ukraine. Airborne early-warning, command-and-control aircraft A-50s were also among those struck.
The drone strikes were a powerful demonstration of Ukraine’s military capability and its skill at executing with strategic timing to coincide with the ceasefire talks. There is significant psychological value in the attack. We learned that, according to the Ukraine Security Service, the entire operation had been coordinated from an office located next to the Russian intelligence and security service, the FSB. If accurate, that should be embarrassing for the Russians. Additionally, the successful drone raid is painful evidence for the Russian military that it cannot protect its strategic nuclear capability. Without fortified revetments and aircraft hangers, the bombers were sitting ducks.
Perhaps the most important result was the demonstration of the cost-benefit of Ukraine’s small drone program. Although precise price tags are not available, the off-the-shelf FPVs used range from $430 to $600, with extra cost for weaponizing. Nonetheless, if they cost as much as $1,000 each, the strike on Russia would have had a price tag of $117,000. Compared to the $7 billion in lost or damaged strategic Russian aircraft, the return on investment seems quite favorable. For a minimal dollar cost, Ukraine has shaped international opinion in its favor. The Ukrainians have exhibited innovation, courage, and stalwart battlefield excellence. Waiting patiently for the best time to strike its adversary, Kyiv has proven to be a strategic geopolitical player.
The views expressed are those of the author and not of any other affiliate.