This week revealed another new challenge in Ukraine’s defense of its sovereign territory – vicious drone attacks against civilian targets in Kyiv. Dozens of attacks on energy infrastructure and indiscriminate strikes on civilian targets occurred in just one day. Some drones were shot down before reaching their destinations, but the many of them made it to their intended targets. This begs the question, what is the way forward from here?
First, let us look backward in history to the Second World War. Hitler’s war machine created one of the first drones to attack the city of London in the form of the V-1 Flying Bomb, or the “Buzz Bomb” as it became known to Britons for its characteristic buzzing sound as its jet engine closed in on a target. Launched from the north coast of France because of its limited range, the Buzz Bomb’s lack of accuracy contributed to its reputation as a weapon of terror. Who could forget the images of the V-1s attacking and destroying civilian targets during the Battle of Britain. As a result of its success, the Nazis produced the next generation of stand-off weapons in the form of the V-2 – a longer range, more accurate ballistic missile with a heavier warhead. The German weapons were often inaccurate, and Winston Churchill described their effect on the British capital saying, “‘London is, therefore, the unique target of the world for the use of a weapon of such gross inaccuracy. The flying bomb is a weapon literally and essentially indiscriminate in its nature, purpose, and effect.”
By reverting to inexpensive Iranian made drones, Putin has revealed much added information about his “Special Operation” campaign. First, western sanctions are working. The Russian industrial base cannot keep up with the demand for weapons. Tech transfer has ground to a halt and war material is hard to find. Second, Putin had to turn to Iran, a developing country under autocratic rule, for assistance. Third, the newfound solidarity between Beijing and Moscow has provided Russia some economic relief in terms of cash for fuel and food, outside of the sanction’s realm, but no lethal military aid. Although Ukrainians are suffering while being subjected to Russia’s terrorist tactics, the Western strategy to cut off Russia from the rest of the world is having an effect.
Remarkably, Ukrainian resistance remains steadfast, and Ukrainians continue to make gains on the battlefield. To break their spirit, Russia has resorted to indiscriminate strikes on civilian apartment buildings, but also more strategically targeting Ukrainian centers of gravity in energy production, command and control, and communications. Thus far, the drone strikes have not been a game changer for Russia in the war effort, but it is likely that more Shahed-136 strikes are yet to come.
So where do we go from here? The obvious answer is to supply Ukraine with a robust network of missile defense. So far, the United States has provided over 8,500 Javelin missiles to Ukraine, which contributed to heavy losses in the Russian Air Forces – both fixed and rotary wing. Slovakia has also contributed the S-300 missile defense system. Most recently, at last week’s Contact Group meeting in Brussels, chaired by U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, both Germany and Spain committed to providing air defense assets to Ukraine. But the need is immediate, so we must be asking, what can we do now?
An “Iron Dome” defense of Ukraine, as it is in Israel, would be ideal. That system, however, took years to develop and deploy, notwithstanding the requirement for sophisticated training of personnel and Israel’s ambivalence on the subject. As a minimum, the western allies should be providing a family of air defense systems to assist Ukraine in its defense, including large numbers of deployable air defense radars as well as precision guided munitions like the Counter Rocket Artillery Mortar system, or C-RAM, used by U.S. land and sea-based forces. C-RAM includes a system of advanced targeting and networking that see incoming threats from the air and engage them kinetically before they reach the target. While there is no doubt that the West has done a lot to assist Ukraine and Eastern Europe, there is much more left to be done. As with other Russian choices its war against Ukraine, the decision to conduct terror attacks with suicidal drones will likely not achieve their intended results. Rather, this decision is likely to stimulate even greater aid to the embattled Ukrainian state.
Admiral James G. Foggo, U.S. Navy (ret.), is the Dean of the Center for Maritime Strategy. Admiral Foggo is the former commander of U.S. Naval Forces Europe and Africa, and Allied Joint Force Command, Naples. He Commanded BALTOPS in 2015 and 2016 as well as Exercise Trident Juncture in 2018.
The views expressed in this piece are the sole opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Center for Maritime Strategy or other institutions listed.
Center for Maritime Strategy
By Admiral James G. Foggo, U.S. Navy (Ret.)
This week revealed another new challenge in Ukraine’s defense of its sovereign territory – vicious drone attacks against civilian targets in Kyiv. Dozens of attacks on energy infrastructure and indiscriminate strikes on civilian targets occurred in just one day. Some drones were shot down before reaching their destinations, but the many of them made it to their intended targets. This begs the question, what is the way forward from here?
First, let us look backward in history to the Second World War. Hitler’s war machine created one of the first drones to attack the city of London in the form of the V-1 Flying Bomb, or the “Buzz Bomb” as it became known to Britons for its characteristic buzzing sound as its jet engine closed in on a target. Launched from the north coast of France because of its limited range, the Buzz Bomb’s lack of accuracy contributed to its reputation as a weapon of terror. Who could forget the images of the V-1s attacking and destroying civilian targets during the Battle of Britain. As a result of its success, the Nazis produced the next generation of stand-off weapons in the form of the V-2 – a longer range, more accurate ballistic missile with a heavier warhead. The German weapons were often inaccurate, and Winston Churchill described their effect on the British capital saying, “‘London is, therefore, the unique target of the world for the use of a weapon of such gross inaccuracy. The flying bomb is a weapon literally and essentially indiscriminate in its nature, purpose, and effect.”
Putin’s drone campaign against Kyiv is equally barbaric and desperate. Putin launched his “Special Operation” with air strikes, artillery strikes, and sophisticated long-range missile strikes on Ukraine. He never gained air superiority and with no air cover for operations on the ground, the Russian Army has taken a beating. Putin has continued to punish Ukraine with stand-off weapons launched from the airspace inside Russia or from ships in the Black Sea. It seems that he started with a Blitzkrieg of advanced, V-2-like weapons, but in doing so, he has depleted much of his arsenal. Moreover, the Russian industrial base cannot keep up with demand for replenishment of weapons, like the Kalibr cruise missile, so Putin has fallen back on using “V-1s” in the form of Iranian made Shahed-136 drones. The Shahed-136 has a range of 1,500 miles and carries an 80-pound warhead. It can be launched from a mobile platform, and it dives straight down on its target, complicating terminal defense measures.
By reverting to inexpensive Iranian made drones, Putin has revealed much added information about his “Special Operation” campaign. First, western sanctions are working. The Russian industrial base cannot keep up with the demand for weapons. Tech transfer has ground to a halt and war material is hard to find. Second, Putin had to turn to Iran, a developing country under autocratic rule, for assistance. Third, the newfound solidarity between Beijing and Moscow has provided Russia some economic relief in terms of cash for fuel and food, outside of the sanction’s realm, but no lethal military aid. Although Ukrainians are suffering while being subjected to Russia’s terrorist tactics, the Western strategy to cut off Russia from the rest of the world is having an effect.
Remarkably, Ukrainian resistance remains steadfast, and Ukrainians continue to make gains on the battlefield. To break their spirit, Russia has resorted to indiscriminate strikes on civilian apartment buildings, but also more strategically targeting Ukrainian centers of gravity in energy production, command and control, and communications. Thus far, the drone strikes have not been a game changer for Russia in the war effort, but it is likely that more Shahed-136 strikes are yet to come.
So where do we go from here? The obvious answer is to supply Ukraine with a robust network of missile defense. So far, the United States has provided over 8,500 Javelin missiles to Ukraine, which contributed to heavy losses in the Russian Air Forces – both fixed and rotary wing. Slovakia has also contributed the S-300 missile defense system. Most recently, at last week’s Contact Group meeting in Brussels, chaired by U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, both Germany and Spain committed to providing air defense assets to Ukraine. But the need is immediate, so we must be asking, what can we do now?
An “Iron Dome” defense of Ukraine, as it is in Israel, would be ideal. That system, however, took years to develop and deploy, notwithstanding the requirement for sophisticated training of personnel and Israel’s ambivalence on the subject. As a minimum, the western allies should be providing a family of air defense systems to assist Ukraine in its defense, including large numbers of deployable air defense radars as well as precision guided munitions like the Counter Rocket Artillery Mortar system, or C-RAM, used by U.S. land and sea-based forces. C-RAM includes a system of advanced targeting and networking that see incoming threats from the air and engage them kinetically before they reach the target. While there is no doubt that the West has done a lot to assist Ukraine and Eastern Europe, there is much more left to be done. As with other Russian choices its war against Ukraine, the decision to conduct terror attacks with suicidal drones will likely not achieve their intended results. Rather, this decision is likely to stimulate even greater aid to the embattled Ukrainian state.
Admiral James G. Foggo, U.S. Navy (ret.), is the Dean of the Center for Maritime Strategy. Admiral Foggo is the former commander of U.S. Naval Forces Europe and Africa, and Allied Joint Force Command, Naples. He Commanded BALTOPS in 2015 and 2016 as well as Exercise Trident Juncture in 2018.
The views expressed in this piece are the sole opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Center for Maritime Strategy or other institutions listed.