Russian war bloggers blame military command for stunning Ukrainian attack on bomber fleet
By Mark Trevelyan
LONDON (Reuters) -Russian military analysts are hunting for scapegoats after Ukraine stunned Moscow with weekend drone attacks that destroyed a number of strategic bomber planes, weakening a key component of Russia's nuclear arsenal.
Aerospace forces commander-in-chief Viktor Afzalov and former defence minister Sergei Shoigu - now secretary of Russia's Security Council - are among those being publicly singled out for blame.
The drone strikes have prompted accusations of negligence, complacency and corruption. How was it possible, commentators are asking, for nuclear-capable aircraft to be left exposed, unprotected by hangars, and for Ukrainian intelligence to smuggle the drones within close reach of air bases and unleash them with devastating effect?
Two influential military blogs, Voyenkor Kotenok and Two Majors, said Shoigu had promised as far back as April 2021 to build more than 300 reinforced concrete shelters for aircraft, but this had not happened.
Military analyst Vladislav Shurygin condemned the "blatant irresponsibility and negligence" of the aerospace command headed by Afzalov, accusing the top brass of failing to anticipate threats and learn from past mistakes.
The Russian defence ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Another blogger, Roman Alekhin, said the attacks had demonstrated Ukraine's ability to penetrate deep inside Russia with saboteurs. Moscow had underestimated its enemy, he said, comparing the blow to Japan's 1941 attack on the U.S. navy at Pearl Harbor.
The heated online debate contrasts with near-silence from the authorities and scant coverage in state media. The Kremlin has said an investigation is underway.
President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday condemned what he called terrorist attacks by Ukraine that killed seven people in southern Russia on Sunday, but made no reference to the strikes on the air bases that took place on the same day.
BOMBER FLEET
Russia operates two types of nuclear-capable heavy bomber planes - the Tu-160 and Tu-95 MS, which NATO calls the Blackjack and Bear-H, respectively.
The Federation of American Scientists, in its annual review of Russian nuclear forces, said last month that it estimates Russia has only about 67 strategic bombers in its active inventory, although there is uncertainty about the numbers.
It said Russia had historically housed all its strategic bombers at Engels, in the Volga region, and Ukrainka in the Far East. But in 2022, the first year of the war, it redeployed some bombers from Engels to Belaya in Siberia and Olenya in the northern Murmansk region, apparently assuming they would be less vulnerable there to Ukrainian attack.
That assumption was disproved on Sunday, when Belaya and Olenya bore the brunt of the Ukrainian attacks. According to Western and Russian analysts, the aircraft that were hit were Tu-95 MSs and Tu-22 M3s - a type of intermediate-range bomber - though it remains unclear exactly how many were taken out.
Satellite images of Belaya, obtained by Reuters and reviewed by military experts, showed at least several strategic bombers there were destroyed or badly damaged. Russian analysts estimated a dozen or more aircraft in total were damaged or destroyed at Belaya and Olenya.
To replace them, military blogger Colonel Cassad wrote, it was likely that Russia would have to speed up production of the Tu-160 because it was only making four of those every year. Reuters could not verify that figure.
Aviation analyst Alexei Zakharov said even if as many as 15 Tu-95 MSs had been taken out, it would only reduce the number of nuclear cruise missiles that Russia was capable of firing by fewer than 100. He noted that strategic bombers are only part of a much larger nuclear force including ground- and submarine-launched missiles.
Even so, he said, Russia had learned a lesson that was "offensive and insulting. The main thing is that the right conclusions are drawn from this lesson".
(Additional reporting by Lidia Kelly in MelbourneEditing by Gareth Jones)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
10 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Ukraine's defense industry says the fight against Russia has shown it that the West's approach to weapons is all wrong
Ukraine's defense industry is urging the West to abandon its longtime fixation on sleek, expensive weaponry in favor of cheaper, mass-produced arms, the kind needed to survive and win a grinding war of attrition against Russia. Serhiy Goncharov, the CEO of the National Association of Ukrainian Defense Industries — which represents around 100 Ukrainian companies — told Business Insider that the West's longstanding focus on fielding limited numbers of cutting-edge systems could be a serious disadvantage in a protracted conflict. Those systems are good to have, but mass is key. An argument for mass The war in Ukraine shows you don't need a handful of ultra-precise, expensive weapons, Goncharov told BI. You need a massive supply of good enough firepower. He said that the expensive weapons like the US military's M982 Excalibur guided munition (each shell costs $100,000) "don't work" when the other side has electronic warfare systems and the kind of traditional artillery rounds that are 30 times cheaper. Goncharov pointed to the M107, a self-propelled gun that was first fielded by the US in the 1960s, as an example of inexpensive firepower that can be effective in large numbers. "You don't need 10 Archers from the Swedish that are probably one of the best artillery systems in the world," he said, referring to the artillery system made by BAE Systems that was given to Ukraine by Sweden. Instead, you need 200 cheap howitzers like the Bohdana one that Ukraine makes. The "enormous rate of damage," the significant rate of ammo and equipment attrition, in a fight like this means you need a constant supply of weaponry to keep fighting, especially when there isn't any guarantee the high-end weapons will be the game changers promised. Russia's grinding attritional warfare Russia's invasion of Ukraine has been one marked by extensive use of artillery and tremendous ammunition expenditure. The war in some ways resembes the huge, destructive battles of World War I and World War II, with high casualties and substantial equipment losses. Russia has one of the world's largest militaries backed by a large population. The country has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to pursue an attritional style of warfare, committing a lot of troops and weaponry to a fight to slowly wear down its foe. Russia's invasion has chewed through equipment. The UK Ministry of Defense said in December that Russia had lost over 3,600 main battle tanks and almost 8,000 armored vehicles since the full-scale invasion began in February 2022. The Russians have the mass to absorb those losses. Ukraine has struggled with weapon and ammo shortages, as well as deficiencies in manpower. Ukraine turned to small, cheap drones as an asymmetric warfare alternative; Russia has employed uncrewed systems in battle as well. China, another concern in the West, has built a similar kind of force, one with the mass to take losses. The West, on the other hand, has spent the last two decades and change fighting lower-level adversaries where its forces can win the day with superior capabilities. European and NATO are waking up Goncharov's warning is one that has been echoed by other Western defense officials and companies. Countries have been keen to learn lessons about fighting Russia from the conflict in Ukraine, particularly in Europe, where many countries warn Russia could pursue further aggression in the future and defense spending is growing rapidly. Gabrielius Landsbergis, the former defense minister of Lithuania, a NATO ally bordering Russia, previously described the war to Business Insider as one of "high quantities." He said that while the West has largely focused on new and expensive weaponry that takes a long time to manufacture, Russia has been "building something that's cheap, that's expendable, that's fast." He said the West has "been preparing for a different kind of war" than what it would face in one against Russia, focusing on impressive equipment that is "very expensive." Troels Lund Poulsen, the Danish defense minister, previously told BI that "one of the lessons" from Ukraine is that the West needs far greater quantities of inexpensive weaponry to meet the threats posed by Russia and China. The head of NATO, Mark Rutte, urged countries to take similar learnings earlier this year, saying the alliance is too slow at developing weapons. He said the alliance works toward perfect, "but it doesn't have to be perfect." He said that Ukraine will go ahead with equipment that is a "six to seven" out of 10, while NATO militaries insist on reaching "nine or 10." He said it wasn't about getting rid of the expensive weaponry completely, but about finding a balance. It's about "getting speed and enough quality done in the right conjunction." That's something warfare experts have also told BI. Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow and the director of research in the foreign-policy program at the Brookings Institution, said the West's approach needs to change. The American military, for instance, is far more used to wars where "the whole point is you're not going to be slogging it out for months and years on end." But he also said that doesn't mean the West needs to completely abandon the development of advanced systems. "Those things have not become unimportant just because we realized that other things are also important," he said. The UK's armed forces minister also warned last month that the war showed the West needs to change how it procures weaponry. Luke Pollard said Ukraine's fight showed NATO "the way we have run our militaries, the way we have run our defense, is outdated." He said NATO militaries "build and procure really expensive high-end bits of kit. And it will take you five, 10 years: five years to run a procurement challenge, another 10 years to build it." Industry has taken note, too. Kuldar Väärsi, the CEO of Milrem Robotics, an autonomous unmanned ground vehicle company in NATO ally Estonia, told BI in May that "we need to learn from Ukraine, and we need to get more pragmatic about what kind of equipment we buy." He said Europe needs to learn that "having a hundred more simple pieces of equipment is better than having 10 very sophisticated pieces of equipment." He said countries need to start buying less-sophisticated pieces of weaponry en masse so industry can adjust. "Industry has to manufacture what the customer is buying. And if the customer is still buying only a few very sophisticated items, then the industry just aligns with that." And the reality is that may not work.
New York Times
12 minutes ago
- New York Times
Amid Russian Strikes, a Remote Corner of Ukraine Beckons
It was well past midnight in Mukachevo, a city of cobblestone streets tucked into Ukraine's western tip, and a group of students lingered by the river, debating what to grab from a nearby 24/7 supermarket. A van pulled up, and out spilled a rowdier crowd of young men — loud, tipsy and visibly thirsty for more. It looked like a classic Sunday night, before the workweek begins. But in wartime Ukraine — where curfews and Russian air assaults have turned the nights into something between tense silence and sudden explosions — it was an exceptional scene. 'Here, we do not hear the sound of explosions, we do not have rockets, we do not have frequent air alarms,' said Oleksandr Pop, 20, one of the students. 'We don't have the same experience of war.' Ukraine's capital region of Kyiv has reeled from several recent nights of record-breaking Russian drone attacks, with air raid alerts wailing for nearly 130 hours over the past month. By comparison, Mukachevo and the surrounding region of Transcarpathia have endured only one-tenth as much time under alert. In more than three years of war, only a few drones and missiles have struck the remote, mountainous region of Transcarpathia. It is the only Ukrainian region without a nighttime curfew, making it a rare pocket of relative calm. 20 MileS Kyiv POLAND UKRAINE Pokrovsk Mariupol Detail area CRIMEA UKRAINE SLOVAKIA Uzhhorod Mukachevo TRANSCARPATHIA HUNGARY ROMANIA By The New York Times Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
New York Times
17 minutes ago
- New York Times
Russian Drone Barrage Kills 3 in Ukraine's Second-Largest City
An overnight Russian drone barrage that targeted Kharkiv, Ukraine, on Wednesday killed three people, set cars and buildings on fire and sent exhausted residents running to bomb shelters, according to the local authorities. Russia has been increasing the scale of missile and drone attacks for months, with nightly attacks on various regions and cities in Ukraine. On Tuesday, it hit Kyiv, the capital, with one of the most intensive drone barrages of the war. On Wednesday, Ukraine's Air Force reported that its air defense units had shot down 49 out of 85 drones launched by Russia during the overnight assault on Kharkiv, Ukraine's second-largest city. Russian forces also launched an Iskander-M ballistic missile from Russia's Kursk region, according to the Ukrainian Air Force. Most of the damage from the overnight assault was reported in Kharkiv, but the barrage also affected the Donetsk region, near the front line, and the Odesa region, the air force said. It confirmed strikes at 14 locations. In addition to the three people killed in the drone attack on Kharkiv, 64 others were wounded, including nine children, according to the local police. The drones struck a trolley bus depot, a private house and several multistory residential buildings. Fires broke out in apartments, as well as in parked vehicles and on a children's playground. Ukraine does not report strikes on military sites, so it was unclear whether any were hit in the assault. The strike on the Odesa region destroyed and damaged houses, cars and civilian boats, the local authorities said.
