
What Ukraine's drone attack on Russia means for peace talks
How can the Ukrainian attack on Russian air assets affect the negotiations? What will Russia be looking for as it investigates the drone strikes? What does the attack mean for President Putin? Alind Chauhan put these questions to one of India's foremost experts on Russia.
Ukraine's massive drone attack on Russia on Sunday came a day before the second round of peace talks between the two sides in Istanbul. The talks ended within an hour — the two sides agreed to swap thousands of dead and wounded soldiers, but there was no progress towards ending the war. The first round of talks in mid-May had also ended without a consensus on a ceasefire agreement.
This was the first time that such large numbers of Ukrainian drones attacked Russian airfields. At least five of them were attacked, and some of them are located very deep inside Russian territory, including in the Far East.
If the attacked sites have facilities that contain nuclear-related equipment such as strategic bombers and nuclear weapons, then the Russians will take a serious view.
So far in the war, the Ukrainians have not needed to target Russia's nuclear weapons facilities as the Russians will not use nuclear weapons as long as the NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) does not get involved.
That's why the Russians would be concerned if their nuclear facilities were targeted. They would be investigating if the attack was just an adventure by Ukraine — an attempt by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to get President Donald Trump on his side somehow and get him involved in the war — or if someone in NATO put the Ukrainians to it, trying to achieve some greater goals.
The Russians would be investigating the second angle because drones typically do not fly by themselves and need navigation, which Ukraine cannot do without the help of United States satellites.
No. Over the past month, both sides have been attacking each other quite heavily with drones. Ukrainian drones attempted to attack Moscow during Russia's Victory Day parade on May 9. More than 20 leaders from various countries had gone to attend the parade.
It was the depth at which the Ukrainians hit Russia which was unexpected. They attacked airfields in the Irkutsk region, which is deep in Siberia, and far from where the military action has been taking place. The method of launching the drones was also unusual. The Ukrainians launched drones from trucks that are used to haul loads over long distances.
It is unusual for the Russians to realise that they can be hit so deep. But they are too far gone in the war against Ukraine. And the support for Putin is way too solid for this attack to make any significant difference.
So from a military and a strategic perspective, the Russians may be worried. However, from a political perspective, Putin will not be concerned too much.
Currently, both countries are looking at some technicalities as they have not been able to square the fundamental disagreement.
The Ukrainians are saying that before any negotiations start, the Russians should agree to a month-long ceasefire. The West, except the US, has supported this demand.
The Russians are saying that they are not opposed to a ceasefire, provided there is a roadmap to the ultimate resolution. That's because the Russians have got initiative on the ground. Although they are advancing slowly, they are advancing — and the Ukrainians are just trying to hold on to territory. The Ukrainians are also exhausted and running out of material for the war. The Russians do not want to give up this advantage and allow the Ukrainians a whole month to regroup and replenish their stocks.
Also, the Russians have said there are certain reasons why the war began — such as the question of Ukraine's neutrality and the protection of the Russian-speaking population in Ukraine. Unless there is a possibility of an agreement on these issues, the Russians say, there is no point in a ceasefire. The Russians also do not want to give up territory that they have captured.
That's why the Russians had earlier suggested that the two sides come up with plans or outlines of how they visualise peace, and meet on June 2 to compare notes.
The negotiations are still at a very preliminary stage and involve second-level officials. Both Russia and Ukraine are under pressure from the US which wants to see a peace deal soon. However, both sides have red lines on what they want to talk about.
The Russian delegation is led by Vladimir Medinsky, a former Cultural Minister, and includes some officials from the security services and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Ukrainian delegation is led by the country's Defence Minister Rustem Umerov.
However, these delegations do not have the authority to make the final decision. They are just trying to narrow down the differences and come to a document that is acceptable to both sides, which will be presented to Putin and Zelenskyy for a decision.
Nandan Unnikrishnan is Distinguished Fellow at Observer Research Foundation.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Economic Times
21 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Rising uncertainty over trade wars and de-dollarisation are pushing up global demand for gold — its supply is limited: Campbell R. Harvey
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel Campbell R. Harvey is Professor of Finance at the Fuqua School of Business, Duke University. Speaking to Srijana Mitra Das, he discusses the value of gold — through the ages:A. Part of my work looks at gold historically and why this is so valuable now. Gold has a very long track record which spans millennia. It's easy to work with because it's a soft metal. It doesn't tarnish — it keeps its lustre and it has artistic worth. Also, gold has held its value through time. I tell two stories about that — one is the cost of a loaf of bread in Nebuchadnezzar's time around 2,500 years ago. There is historical data on how many loaves you could buy for an ounce of gold then. If you convert that to today's prices, it's about $7 a loaf — that's what I pay at my artisanal bakery other story dates from Roman times almost 2,000 years ago in Emperor Augustus' reign. There is data on how much Roman centurions were paid in gold as well as the coins themselves to discern the gold's purity — what Roman centurions were paid in gold 2,000 years ago would cover the wage of an army captain in the US today. That means gold has held its value over the long term.A. Yes. In recent years, the first driver has been the financialisation of gold — physical gold is awkward to store. People who might have wanted it in their portfolio didn't want to take the risk of buying the actual metal. Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs) were introduced in the United States in 2004 — that made it possible for the average investor to hold gold at 25 to 40 basis points a year, with the ETF provider taking care of storage. Institutional investors who didn't want to bother with warehousing bullion could do the same thing — hence, the price of gold increased. Previously, demand was unfulfilled because of institutional constraints — suddenly, those were broken and the price rose. Another force is what I call 'de-dollarisation' or the 'weaponisation' of the US dollar, particularly against Russia in terms of sanctions which have meant Russian entities being banned from the SWIFT system for transfer in US could do this, being the reserve currency of the world. I think certain countries — in particular, China — took note of that. The 'weaponisation' of the dollar spurred a move to be independent of it. Hence, the idea of 'de-dollarisation' with China taking actions consistent with that. One step towards doing this is to bolster the credibility of your own currency — to have gold in reserve does this and China's been a there is heightened uncertainty, given the potential for a trade war. In such times, people tend to increase their allocation to safe assets — gold is in that group. Another issue is a perception that the United States might not be the safe haven it was 10 or 20 years ago. When the US dollar suddenly becomes riskier and Moody's downgrades the US credit rating, some countries start thinking,'We need to diversify our reserve holdings and reduce dollar exposure.' So, you sell bonds — however, you need to replace them with something else. Gold is an option. This isn't just central banks — when uncertainty grows, institutional investors increase safe assets like consider supply and demand dynamics — gold's supply is very sticky, being a combination of mining and re-cycling. Mining supply doesn't move much. Even though gold's price has risen dramatically in recent years, actual mining supply has essentially stayed the same. It's hard to ramp up supply — opening a new mine takes years. Hence, gold prices are very sensitive to shifts in demand.A. Gold holds its value over the long term. I quoted two examples about that, one from 2,000 years ago and one from 2,500 years ago. Historically, gold has held its value over a very long horizon. That's not very relevant for most investors with a much shorter horizon though — and gold is an unreliable inflation hedge over shorter horizons. Its volatility is approximately the same as the S&P we look over the last 20 years, gold has more than held its value — it's actually gained in inflation-adjusted value. But if you look at the 20 years before that, gold underperformed inflation — it did not hold its value. The longer the horizon historically, the better gold is in terms of a hedge. However, gold's risk should also be measured by how it interacts with other assets in your portfolio. It turns out gold historically is uncorrelated with the stock makes it an attractive hedging property. In my research, I've looked at the last 11 major drawdowns in the S&P 500 — each had very large negative returns for the stock market. Gold, in 8 out of 11 situations, provided a positive return. In three, it was negative but that number was small. Gold could actually act to reduce a portfolio's risk — but, given its volatility, sometimes it'll work, sometimes, it won't, as the historical data shows expressed are personal


India Today
29 minutes ago
- India Today
Trump says Ukraine, Russia should ‘fight for a while' before peace efforts
US President Donald Trump suggested on Thursday that delaying peace efforts between Ukraine and Russia might be preferable, stating the nations may need to 'fight for a while' before a meeting at the Oval Office with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Trump used a striking metaphor to describe the grinding war in Ukraine: likening it to a playground or hockey rink see it in hockey, you see it in sports,' Trump said. 'Let them go for a couple of seconds.' Calling the war a 'bloodbath,' Trump added, 'Maybe you're going to have to keep fighting. It's probably not going to be pretty.'The latest comment came as European allies and US lawmakers ramped up pressure to hold Russia accountable for its 2022 invasion of Ukraine. The German leader, sitting beside Trump, made clear Berlin's position: 'We are looking for more pressure on Russia' to end the about a sanctions measure put forth by top Senate ally Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Trump said, 'At the right time, I'll do what I want to do.'Over the weekend, Graham and Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal traveled to Kyiv and met with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. They've co-sponsored a measure that would impose strict tariffs on called the sanctions proposed in legislation 'bone-crushing' and said it would place Russia's economy 'on a trade island.'Trump so far has seemed reluctant to pressure Russian President Vladimir Putin despite Trump saying 'I want to see the killing stopped.'Tune InTrending Reel
&w=3840&q=100)

Business Standard
32 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Russia to respond to attacks on airfields as military deems right: Kremlin
Russia will respond to Sunday's Ukrainian drone attacks on its airfields when and how the military deems appropriate, the Kremlin said on Thursday. On June 1, Ukraine used drones to carry out attacks against airfields in the Murmansk, Irkutsk, Ivanovo, Ryazan, and Amur regions, home to Moscow's nuclear triad. Replying to a media query on when Russia could retaliate and how, the Kremlin spokesman said, In such a way and at such a time as our military deems appropriate. On Wednesday night, in an unscheduled phone call with his US counterpart Donald Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin said he would have to respond to Ukrainian drone attacks on Russia's nuclear-capable bomber fleet. Agreeing with his Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov's view voiced at the cabinet meeting on Wednesday, Putin also described peace talks with Ukraine as "useful." Russian planes that were damaged after Ukraine's attack on Jun 1 will be repaired, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said on Wednesday. "As the defence ministry said, these aircraft were not destroyed but damaged. They will be repaired, he told the state-run news agency TASS when asked about the attack's potential impact on the strategic balance. So, draw your own conclusions. Apart from that, the aircraft we are talking about are not necessarily covered by any particular agreements. As for the START treaty, we have suspended it, as you know, Raybkov said. The Strategic Arms Reduction Talks (START) is an agreement for nuclear arms reduction between the US and Russia, and establishes a limit on deployed strategic warheads. Raybkov refuted Kyiv's statements about the destruction of 41 aircraft in the attack's aftermath. There is nothing of the kind, he stressed, adding that one should rely on the data released by the Russian defence ministry. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)