Why Russia's Engels air base became Ukraine's No 1 target
Credit: Telegram/@exilenova_plus
First they felt the shock wave as it tore through their homes, then they saw the mushroom cloud.
Stunned residents of Saratov ran from their roofless houses after what local authorities called the 'largest-ever' aerial attack on the region, which scattered debris for miles.
Ukraine's target was obvious; the style of its strike was seen before.
A swarm of low-flying, slow-moving drones overwhelmed local air defences and struck Russia's sprawling Engels bomber base, in southern Russia.
It was the third such attack in just 10 weeks but the timing was significant this time.
Hours before, Volodymyr Zelensky said he was willing to commit to a US-proposed ceasefire on energy targets, but warned that 'everything will fly' until actual parameters were agreed upon and documents signed.
The Ukrainian leader had just accused Vladimir Putin of yet again breaking his agreement with Donald Trump that he would halt attacks on Ukraine's grid and civilian infrastructure.
As a clear military target, Engels was not protected under any such truce. But the strike could be interpreted as a warning from Kyiv to Moscow – that even with energy raids off the table, they can still hit Russia's war machine where it hurts.
In the attack, Ukraine's drones hit a huge stockpile of munitions, aviation fuel and – according to analysts – recently delivered cruise missiles, igniting a series of violent secondary explosions that turned the sky a menacing red.
The Ukrainian Centre for Strategic Communication (Stratcom) mocked afterwards, saying Engels 'is now facing serious difficulties'.
Russian sources reported the damage was 'massive' and satellite images later showed multiple huge warehouses on the site were entirely wiped out.
It was the clearest sign yet that the Soviet-era base, home to Putin's prized nuclear-capable heavy strategic bombers, had been pushed to the top of Ukraine's target list.
The long-range raid, like the ones before it, was audacious, precise and smartly timed.
Ukraine has always chosen its high-value targets carefully – knowing Russia's missile arsenal dwarfs its own – and hitting high-value targets at opportune moments.
Last week was proof, when Ukraine targeted the Russian capital with its largest-ever drone bombardment of the war just hours before high-level delegations from Washington and Kyiv were due to meet in Saudi Arabia.
It served as a reminder that despite three years of grinding war and huge losses, Ukraine can still hit back.
Dmytro Zhmailo, the executive director of the Ukrainian Security and Cooperation Center, said the destruction of military facilities in Engels has always been a 'priority goal' for Ukraine.
He said the long-range missiles the strike targeted would be used to bomb Ukraine, while the secondary detonation of the ammunition 'could have destroyed or damaged Tu-95 and Tu-160 aircraft along with their flight and technical crew'.
In other words, it underscores Ukraine's ability to aim 'left of the boom' – US army slang for getting ahead of a problem by striking the source – prevent (or get 'left' of) an attack before it happens.
Ukraine has increasingly been targeting weapons factories, ammunition warehouses and aviation fuel depots far inside Russia, grinding down Russia's ability to wage war and blunting its crippling aerial bombardment.
Over 400 miles east of Ukraine's frontline and 450 miles south of Moscow, Engels houses three types of Russian strategic bombers, Tu-95, Tu-22 and Tu-160, which are all regularly used to launch strikes on Ukrainian cities.
Built in 1952, it is also the only permanent base for the Tu-160, Russia's largest and fastest supersonic bomber also known as 'White Swan' to the Russian air force and 'Blackjack' to Nato.
Before the war, Engels was the main base for all Russian missile carriers and aircraft cruise missiles. According to Maxim Starchak, an expert on Russian defence and strategic weapons, it had housed 16 Tu-160s and 18 Tu-95s.
But in December 2022, Ukraine hit the base three separate times, when its military was first showing its ability to successfully penetrate Russia's air defences and strike long-range targets, damaging a Tu-22 and a Tu-95
After that, 'at least two-thirds of the aircraft were relocated to other military airfields in the country,' Mr Starchak told The Telegraph.
Engels, however, remains a critical launch base for long-range strikes on Ukraine.
And the airbase has had a rough time of it lately.
On Jan 8, Ukrainian drones targeted a fuel depot there, triggering a huge blaze that raged for six days as it burnt through thousands of litres of precious jet fuel.
Just hours after the fire was finally contained on Jan 14, drones struck the same target a second time. 'There will be no rest for the wicked,' Ukraine's Stratcom warned.
On the morning of the March 20 strike, Ukrainian accounts say there were three Tu-95 and two Tu-160 strategic bombers at Engels.
But the aircraft was not the target.
Andrii Kovalenko, the head of Ukraine's Center for Countering Disinformation, said that the strike caused a significant loss of missiles, including the Kh-101, estimated to cost $13 million (£ 10 million) a piece.
Mr Kovalenko said: 'The exact number will be determined later. This airbase stores the largest stockpile of missiles used by Russia's strategic aviation for strikes against Ukraine.'
The footage of the strike also supports his report.
The size of the explosion, the mushroom cloud it produced, and the subsequent fires it triggered, are in line with the theory that a weapons storage area was hit — and well.
Open-source analysts reported that an Il-76 Candid airlifter had recently arrived, supposedly carrying additional missiles for the bombers.
A bomber – although incredibly costly – can be replaced, but destroying a warehouse full of long-range cruise missiles has the potential to reduce the capabilities of Russia's strategic bombing fleet 'for months', said Mr Starchak.
He added: 'The Kh-101 and Kh-55 are expensive missiles that still have Western components in their composition, access to which is limited, which means these missiles are produced in small batches.
'If Russia has lost a significant supply of them, the effect will be very large.'
The strike also underscores the ability of relatively slow and low-flying Ukrainian drones, which are often hard to detect, to travel deep into Russian territory and strike strategic military targets.
It also points to critical issues in Russian air defence capabilities.'There are not enough air defence systems [in Russia], and they are not being used effectively in all areas,' said Mr Starchak.
For now, it is unlikely Ukraine will strike Engels again soon as Russia will be busy transferring additional air defences there, dragging them away from another target.
Instead, its military will likely be looking to strike next where Russia is not prepared.
Mr Zhmailo said: 'Engels is certainly an important target, but it is not the only one in the priority of the Ukrainian military.'
Ukraine plans to produce 30,000 long-range drones in 2025. Kyiv knows where Russia's airfields are and they are large, stationary and visible targets. Ukraine is also reported to have tested a drone with a 3,000km range, potentially putting even more Russian targets within each.
If Ukraine's targets are limited as part of Mr Trump's plans to push towards peace, Mr Zhmailo said to expect near-daily strikes deep inside Russian territory.
And on the political front, as Mr Zelenksy prepares for the next round of peace negotiations in Saudi Arabia, his country has proven it has far more cards to play.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Barabak: Trump could help feed hungry people. Instead he's throwing a vanity parade
On Saturday, on the streets of Washington, Donald Trump will throw himself a costly and ostentatious military parade, a gaudy display of waste and vainglory staged solely to inflate the president's dirigible-sized ego. The estimated price tag: As much as $45 million. That same day, the volunteers and staff of White Pony Express will do what they've done for nearly a dozen years, taking perfectly good food that would otherwise be tossed out and using it to feed hungry and needy people living in one of the most comfortable and affluent regions of California. Since its founding, White Pony has processed and passed along more than 26 million pounds of food — the equivalent of about 22 million meals — thanks to such Bay Area benefactors as Whole Foods, Starbucks and Trader Joe's. That's 13,000 tons of food that would have otherwise gone to landfills, rotting and emitting 31,000 tons of CO2 emissions into our overheated atmosphere. It's such a righteous thing, you can practically hear the angels sing. "Our mission is to connect abundance and need," said Eve Birge, White Pony's chief executive officer, who said the nonprofit's guiding principle is the notion "we are one human family and when one of us moves up, we all move up." Read more: Barabak: Putting the bully in bully pulpit, Trump escalates in L.A. rather than seeking calm That mission has become more difficult of late as the Trump administration takes a scythe to the nation's social safety net. White Pony receives most of its support from corporations, foundations, community organizations and individual donors. But a sizable chunk comes from the federal government; the nonprofit could lose up to a third of its $3-million annual budget due to cuts by the Trump administration. "We serve 130,000 people each year," Birge said. "That puts in jeopardy one-third of the people we're serving, because if I don't find another way to raise that money, then we'll have to scale back programs. I'll have to consider letting go staff." (White Pony has 17 employees and about 1,200 active volunteers.) "We're a seven-day-a-week operation, because people are hungry seven days a week," Birge said. "We've talked about having to pull back to five or six days." She had no comment on Trump's big, braggadocious celebration of self, a Soviet-style display of military hardware — tanks, horses, mules, parachute jumpers, thousands of marching troops — celebrating the Army's 250th anniversary and, oh yes, the president's 79th birthday. Marivel Mendoza wasn't so reticent. "All of the programs that are being gutted and we're using taxpayer dollars to pay for a parade?" she asked after a White Pony delivery truck pulled up with several pallets of fruit, veggies and other groceries. Mendoza's organization, which operates from a small office center in Brentwood, serves more than 500 migrant farmworkers and their families in the far eastern reaches of the Bay Area. "We're going to see people starving at some point," Mendoza said. "It's unethical and immoral. I don't know how [Trump] sleeps at night." Certainly not lightheaded, or with his empty belly growling from hunger. Those who work at White Pony speak of it with a spiritual reverence. Paula Keeler, 74, took a break from her recent shift inspecting produce to discuss the organization's beneficence. (Every bit of food that comes through the door is checked for quality and freshness before being trucked from White Pony's Concord warehouse and headquarters to one of more than 100 community nonprofits.) Keeler retired about a decade ago from a number-crunching job with a Bay Area school district. She's volunteered at White Pony for the last nine years, on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. "It's become my church, my gym and my therapist," she said, as pulsing rhythm and blues played from a portable speaker inside the large sorting room. "Tuesdays, I deliver to two senior homes. They're mostly little women and they can go to bed at night knowing their refrigerator is full tomorrow, and that's what touches my heart." Keeler hadn't heard about Trump's parade. "I don't watch the news because it makes me want to throw up," she said. Told of the spectacle and its cost, she responded with equanimity. "It's kind of like the Serenity Prayer," Keeler said. "What can you do and what can't you do? I try to stick with what I can do." It's not much in vogue these days to quote Joe Biden, but the former president used to say something worth recollecting. "Don't tell me what you value," he often stated. "Show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value.' Trump's priorities — I, me, mine — are the same as they've ever been. But there's something particularly stomach-turning about squandering tens of millions of dollars on a vanity parade while slashing funds that could help feed those in need. Michael Bagby, 66, works part time at White Pony. He retired after a career piloting big rigs and started making deliveries and training White Pony drivers about three years ago. His passion is fishing — Bagby dreams of reeling in a deep-sea marlin — but no hobby can nourish his soul as much as helping others. He was aware of Trump's pretentious pageant and its heedless price tag. "Nothing I say is going to make a difference whether the parade goes on or not," Bagby said, settling into the cab of a 26-foot refrigerated box truck. "But it would be better to show an interest in the true needs of the country rather than a parade." Read more: Arellano: Trump wants L.A. to set itself on fire. Let's rebel smarter His route that day called for stops at a middle school and a church in working-class Antioch, then Mendoza's nonprofit in neighboring Brentwood. As Bagby pulled up to the church, the pastor and several volunteers were waiting outside. The modest white stucco building was fringed with dead grass. Traffic from nearby Highway 4 produced an insistent, thrumming soundtrack. "There are a lot of people in need. A lot," said Tania Hernandez, 45, who runs the church's food pantry. Eighty percent of the food it provides comes from White Pony, helping feed around 100 families a week. "If it wasn't for them," Hernandez said, "we wouldn't be able to do it." With help, Bagby dropped off several pallets. He raised the tailgate, battened down the latches and headed for the cab. A church member walked up and stuck out his hand. "God bless you," he said. Then it was off to the next stop. Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter. Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond, in your inbox twice per week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
UN nuclear watchdog's board declares Iran in breach of non-proliferation obligations
UN nuclear watchdog's board declares Iran in breach of non-proliferation obligations VIENNA, June 12 (Reuters) - The U.N. nuclear watchdog's 35-nation Board of Governors declared Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations on Thursday for the first time in almost 20 years, raising the prospect of reporting it to the U.N. Security Council. The major step is the culmination of several festering stand-offs between the International Atomic Energy Agency and Iran that have arisen since President Donald Trump pulled the U.S. out of a nuclear deal between Tehran and major powers in 2018 during his first term, after which that deal unravelled. Since Iran bristles at resolutions against it and this is the most significant one in years, it is likely to respond with a nuclear escalation, as it has said it will. That could complicate the current talks between Iran and the U.S. aimed at imposing new curbs on Iran's accelerating atomic activities. More: 'Constructive' and 'positive': What to know about the rare US-Iran nuclear talks The resolution also comes at a time of particularly heightened tension, with the staff out of the Middle East, and Trump warning the region could become dangerous and saying Washington would not let Iran have nuclear weapons. Diplomats at the closed-door meeting said the board passed the resolution submitted by the United States, Britain, France and Germany with 19 countries in favour, 11 abstentions and three states - Russia, China and Burkina Faso - against. DAMNING REPORT The text, seen by Reuters, declares Iran in breach of its obligations given a damning report the IAEA sent to member states on May 31. "The Board of Governors… finds that Iran's many failures to uphold its obligations since 2019 to provide the Agency with full and timely cooperation regarding undeclared nuclear material and activities at multiple undeclared locations in Iran … constitutes non-compliance with its obligations under its Safeguards Agreement with the Agency," the text said. A central issue is Iran's failure to provide the IAEA with credible explanations of how uranium traces detected at undeclared sites in Iran came to be there despite the agency having investigated the issue for years. The May 31 IAEA report, a board-mandated "comprehensive" account of developments, found three of the four locations "were part of an undeclared structured nuclear programme carried out by Iran until the early 2000s and that some activities used undeclared nuclear material". More: What countries are on Trump's travel ban list? 12 countries include Haiti, Iran U.S. intelligence services and the IAEA have long believed Iran had a secret, coordinated nuclear weapons programme it halted in 2003, though isolated experiments continued for several years. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi said this week the findings were broadly consistent with that. Iran denies ever having pursued nuclear weapons. While the resolution alluded to reporting Iran to the U.N. Security Council, diplomats said it would take a second resolution to send it there, as happened the last time it was declared in non-compliance in September 2005, followed by referral in February 2006. (Reporting by Francois Murphy; Editing by Ed Osmond)
Vox
an hour ago
- Vox
Trump is frustrated by his own success on immigration
is a senior correspondent at Vox. He covers a wide range of political and policy issues with a special focus on questions that internally divide the American left and right. Before coming to Vox in 2024, he wrote a column on politics and economics for New York Magazine. The primary cause of this unrest has been less visible, but no less disorderly or disruptive. Behind the tensions in LA lies a radical escalation in the Trump administration's crackdown on undocumented immigrants. To accelerate deportations, top White House adviser Stephen Miller instructed Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in late May to dispense with norms and legal niceties that had previously constrained its activities, according to a Wall Street Journal report. Since then, the agency has deprioritized the removal of immigrants implicated in crimes, opting instead to target undocumented workers at random. It has stopped drafting lists of immigrants suspected of being in the country illegally and started arresting day laborers at businesses like Home Depot and 7-Eleven en masse, ensnaring some US citizens in the process. One such raid ignited the LA protests. Under Joe Biden, ICE had generally refrained from raiding schools, churches, and hospitals. Now it is reportedly arresting new mothers in maternity wards and then denying them their right to legal counsel. Most alarmingly, some ICE agents have allegedly embraced violent and unconstitutional tactics, according to the Journal's report. A union organizer for Washington farmworkers was driving his wife to her job at a tulip farm, when ICE agents stopped him, smashed in his car windows, and pulled him from the vehicle, all without showing badges or identification. A Russian man with a pending asylum case was reporting for his scheduled check-in at an ICE office, when a team of agents arrested him and then allegedly beat him. And ICE has not merely been targeting undocumented immigrants, but also those who exercise their First Amendment rights on the undocumented immigrants' behalf. In Irvine, California, ICE sent a 'phalanx of military vehicles' into an Orange County suburb to arrest a man who had allegedly posted fliers warning neighbors that ICE was in their area. The Trump administration's decision to greenlight such tactics might seem like an act of desperation — unable to stem the tide of undocumented immigration by conventional means, the White House is resorting to radical ones. But the opposite may be closer to the truth: The Trump administration is escalating its war on migration because it is winning that conflict. Unfortunately, the fruits of Donald Trump's victory appear to be weaker economic growth and more social unrest. Related The LA protests reveal what actually unites the Trump right Trump's bid to deter immigration has been wildly successful Trump campaigned on a promise to end the Biden-era surge in unauthorized immigration and restore order at the border. He has largely done so. Border crossings were already slowing during Biden's final year in office, after his administration tightened rules around asylum last summer. But inflows have plunged even further under Trump. Through belligerent rhetoric and restrictionist policies, the president has successfully deterred both legal and illegal migration into the United States. Over the past two months, America witnessed the largest decline in its foreign-born workforce since the pandemic in 2020. This contraction was driven partly by a collapse in unauthorized border crossings. Between January 2022 and June 2024, US Customs and Border Protection encountered an average of 200,000 people per month at America's Southwest border. According to an analysis of government data from Deutsche Bank, that figure has fallen to just 12,000 people per month since Trump's inauguration. How Trump's success on immigration is fueling his radicalism Yet the Trump administration has found little satisfaction in this success. And for a simple reason: The slowdown in border crossings has made it more difficult for the president to exceed Biden's deportation numbers. When border control was encountering 200,000 migrants each month, it was easy for the government to rack up high deportation totals. Such new arrivals possessed fewer legal protections than longtime US residents and were already in the government's custody. Although many qualified for the asylum process, border control could swiftly expel those who did not. Trump's success in deterring border crossings has therefore reduced the pace of deportations. Headlines earlier this year spotlighted the fact that Trump was deporting immigrants at a slower rate than Biden. Shortly after Trump took office, Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy posted on X, 'In the first week, Trump removed 7,300 people. On average, Biden was removing 15,000 a week…These guys are terrible at everything.' Such unfavorable comparisons apparently displeased Trump. The Wall Street Journal suggests that it was Trump's failure to exceed 'the number of daily deportations carried out by the Biden administration in its final year' that led Stephen Miller to give ICE its new, draconian marching orders. Unable to generate flashy deportation statistics by turning away new arrivals at the border, the administration has opted to ramp up enforcement against law-abiding, long-time US residents throughout the country — and to do so in a violent and seemingly lawless manner. Trump's handling of immigration has been economically and socially destructive (but politically popular) If Trump's success at deterring immigration has brought him little contentment, it has brought his country little discernible benefit. The slowdown in new arrivals is hurting the US economy. Compared to native-born workers, immigrants are more willing to relocate to US communities that have labor shortages, or to enter industries suffering from chronic shortfalls of workers, such as construction, food processing, and childcare. The mass entrance of migrants into the US during the Biden administration therefore helped to mitigate supply chain disruptions and reduce inflationary pressures in key sectors. This immigration surge was also immensely beneficial for economic growth and the national debt. America has an aging population. As a result, we need immigrants to sustain the growth of our workforce and shore up funding for Medicare and Social Security. Partly for these reasons, the Biden-era surge in immigration increased America's projected economic growth over the coming decade by upwards of $8.9 trillion, while reducing its expected federal deficits by $900 billion, according to an analysis from the Dallas Federal Reserve. Trump's successful deterrence of immigration threatens to reverse these gains, slowing growth and exacerbating labor shortages in construction, agriculture, and other key industries. According to Deutsche Bank, the collapse of immigration under Trump 'represents a far more sustained negative supply shock for the economy than tariffs.' Although immigration restriction is bad for the economy, many have argued that it's beneficial for political stability and social peace. After all, large surges of immigration tend to induce nativist backlashes. And Biden's failure to avert a historically large jump in migration plausibly helped Trump return to the White House. For the moment, however, the collapse in border crossings appears to be increasing social tension and political unrest. The migration slowdown has translated into lower deportation figures, which has led the administration to embrace radical enforcement tactics, which have predictably sown mass protest and clashes between civilians and agents of the state. We are therefore getting all the economic harms of immigration restriction, without its theoretical benefits for social harmony.
