Explainer: Drones blunt the impact of expensive tech aimed at protecting against missiles, jets
Its interception range is up to 70km against aircraft and cruise missiles for the Patriot PAC-2 version, and between 20km and 35km against ballistic missiles for the Patriot PAC-3, according to US Army data.
Lockheed Martin, the manufacturer of the PAC-3 MSE missile, plans to increase production from 500 missiles in 2024 to 650 in 2027.
Raytheon, which produces the missiles for PAC-2, expects to boost its monthly output by 150% by 2028, Tom Laliberty, its president in charge of air defence systems, told AFP. He did not, however, reveal its current production level.
How useful against Russian attacks?
The challenge for Ukrainians is that the Russians are aiming more airborne weapons at their cities — including many cheap drones — and these attacks are also becoming increasingly effective.
Over the past week, Russia launched over 1800 Geran-2 (the Russian version of the Iranian Shahed-136) alongside decoy long-range drones, according to Fabian Hoffman, a research fellow at the University of Oslo.
'This marks a sharp increase in the average intensity of long-range drone attacks per day, peaking at 728 combined drones and decoys on July 9', not counting ballistic and cruise missiles, he said.
In comparison, the most intense salvo in the last northern winter, on February 23, involved 267 drones.
While Patriots are useful against high-performance missiles, their deployment against a mass of Shahed drones is 'a waste of resources', researcher Joseph Henrotin, who is editor-in-chief of the Defence and International Security journal, said in a podcast last week.
Each Geran-2 costs an estimated US$30,000 to US$70,000, according to Hoffman, who said that Western arsenals currently lack cost-effective interceptors for defence against long-range drones.
'This forces Ukraine — and, in a future conflict, European states — to choose between expending interceptor missiles that cost 20 times more than the drone, relying on anti-aircraft guns that are not widely available, or allowing the drone through and accepting the resulting damage,' he said.
Even against manoeuvring Russian ballistic missiles like the Iskander or Kinzhal, the Patriot's performance is limited.
'Until a few weeks ago, Patriots regularly intercepted Iskander missiles. Now, they struggle more because the Russians have started using their manoeuvring capabilities,' said a European missile defence specialist who did not wish to be identified.
The rate of successful interceptions of such missiles has fallen by about 10% from last northern winter to 86% currently, said Henrotin.
What impact on the course of the war?
With its missile strikes aimed at cities, Russia is forcing Ukraine to allocate significant resources to the protection of its population.
'Additional means can indeed help to better concentrate Ukraine's air defence efforts,' said one Western military source who declined to be named.
However, the overall trend points to a slow and steady weakening of Ukrainian positions amid Russian territorial gains.
'I fear that Russia might be able to last five minutes longer' than Western support for Ukraine, French armed forces chief-of-staff Thierry Burkhard said last month.
And even if the US delivers Patriot systems to Ukraine 'over the next year or two', Russia will be able to hike missile and drone production in response, said a high-ranking Western officer who declined to be named.
The current annual production of Patriot systems - between 850 and 880 - is only just above the lowest estimate for Iskander and Kinzhal production, cautioned Hoffman.
Russian cruise missile production, of the Kalibr et Kh-101 type, is greater still, he said.
-Agence France-Presse
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
44 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
Since his election, South Korea's President has tried reverse the hardline stance of his predecessor towards Pyongyang
She added that South Korean officials were 'spinning a daydream' over the potential invitation to the conference. She challenged South Korea's 'blind trust' in its alliance with the United States, saying it makes the new government no different from the previous one. 'We clarify once again the official stand that no matter what policy is adopted and whatever proposal is made in Seoul, we have no interest in it and there is neither the reason to meet nor the issue to be discussed with' South Korea, Kim Yo Jong said in a statement carried in state media. She cited the upcoming joint drills between the US and South Korea next month. The drills, which the allies say are defensive in nature, have long been an irritant for the North Korean regime, which views them as hostile and practices for invasion. Under previous US and South Korean administrations, the allies suspended or scaled back their drills as they worked to engage North Korea through diplomacy and denuclearisation talks. Those talks collapsed in 2019. In 2022, under the conservative South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, the US and South Korean militaries resumed large-scale field exercises. Following Kim's remarks, South Korea's new Unification Minister, Chung Dong Young, told reporters he plans to propose adjusting the military drills scheduled for mid-August. Relations between the two Koreas deteriorated under Yoon, who hewed closely with Washington and emphasised military co-operation and strengthening deterrence efforts with the US. Lee has said it is important for South Korea to strengthen its security alliance with the US and has said he would co-operate with both Washington and Tokyo. But he has also said he wants to improve relations with Pyongyang. President Donald Trump has also expressed interest in re-engaging in talks with Kim Jong Un, as he did in his first term. However, North Korea has become one of Russian President Vladimir Putin's staunchest supporters since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, and analysts say it is unclear whether Pyongyang has much interest in engaging with Trump again. In January 2024, North Korea also took a major step of declaring South Korea an enemy state and formally abandoning the nation's long-standing principle of peacefully reunifying the two halves of the peninsula. The North Korean regime began removing and blowing up symbolic references to reunification, including monuments and roads connecting the two Koreas. Kim Yo Jong reiterated that the relationship between the two nations has changed irreversibly. 'No matter how desperately the Lee Jae Myung Government may … pretend they do all sorts of righteous things to attract our attention and receive international attention, there can be no change in our state's understanding of the enemy,' she said. 'And they cannot turn back the hands of the clock of the history, which has radically changed the character of inter-Korean relations.'
NZ Herald
5 hours ago
- NZ Herald
The far-right in Germany wants to soften its image, not its policies
The AfD's new strategy emerged from an internal analysis of its performance in national elections in February. It ran on an anti-elite, anti-immigrant platform that included promises of mass deportations. It also vowed to reignite the nation's industrial economy, powered by German coal and Russian natural gas. The party finished second, winning more than one-fifth of the vote. But the AfD found itself shut out of government, with no other party in Parliament willing to work with it. Unable to cement its place in the Bundestag, the AfD decided that it needed to expand its appeal at the ballot box and in circles of power in Berlin. Enter the new approach, which takes as its starting point the idea that German voters are fundamentally conservative — an assertion that centre-left parties dispute. It is based largely on a surface read of February's election, when more than half of the voters either backed the AfD or the centre-right sister parties of Merz, the Christian Democrats and Christian Social Union. Merz's voters broadly agree with AfD's view that Germany needs to strengthen the economy and reduce migration, said Beatrix von Storch, a senior AfD Member of Parliament and an architect of the new strategy. Opinion polling shows that Germans are worried about migration and security above all other issues. The AfD, she said, will try to appeal to centre-right voters through those issues. It will also try to provoke Germany's major liberal parties to move to the extreme left on social issues like abortion and transgender rights, she said, by raising the profile of those matters and of Germany's growing far-left party. 'There is a cultural war in the Western world and we will win it,' she said. She said she hoped for an echo of last year's American presidential election. 'Moderate Republicans voted for Donald Trump, even though they don't approve of everything he says or does,' von Storch said. 'But the divide between moderate Republicans and the progressive Democrats is so deep that these reservations no longer mattered.' There are many reasons why the AfD's effort could fail. Merz's voters disagree with the AfD's stances on several issues, surveys suggest, most notably Germany's backing of Ukraine in its war against Russia. And Germans tend to be consensus builders. While its political extremes are growing, many voters still baulk at supporting any party seen as too far on one end or the other. 'You could say that the political centre is a kind of ideal in Germany, which is why I believe that, despite the potential for polarisation, there is no great desire for division among the German population,' said Johannes Hillje, a political scientist who has studied the new AfD strategy. Some voters have also been turned off by the AfD's sharp rhetoric, particularly on immigration. German intelligence has formally declared the AfD to be extremist over what the Government called an unconstitutional campaign to treat migrants differently from other German residents. The extremism designation could someday lead to the party being banned from German politics. The force of many voters' distaste for the AfD helped prompt the other part of its strategy, the effort to soften its image without retreating on policy. In May, AfD drafted penalties for members who had acted uncivilly in parliament, including fines of up to €5000 ($9760) and a three-month ban from giving speeches in the chamber. Earlier, it dissolved the Junge Alternative, the party's notoriously radical youth wing. The AfD is now polling around 25% nationally, but it has lost ground to the centre-right since Merz took office in May. His party gained support after loosening government borrowing limits, cutting some taxes and tightening border controls. The Chancellor has rallied Germans around increased military spending, as long-standing American security guarantees for Europe have faltered. Until recently, he had avoided the sort of coalition bickering that brought down former Chancellor Olaf Scholz's Government last year. To rattle Merz's coalition, the AfD needed a controversy — one that combined hot-button social issues and hot-tempered political infighting. This month, Merz's Government provided both. A progressive law professor named Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf had been nominated for a seat on the nation's constitutional court by Merz's centre-left coalition partner, the Social Democrats. But Merz's party was baulking at supporting her. The far-right had helped provoke the dispute. The AfD and social conservatives had been attacking Brosius-Gersdorf, claiming without evidence that she supported legalised abortion to the ninth month of pregnancy. Such a stance would have been far outside the German mainstream, were it true. Abortion is illegal in Germany, but there are no penalties for the procedure through to 12 weeks of pregnancy. Brosius-Gersdorf had worked on a commission to change the law to decriminalise those early-term abortions, but she never publicly supported late-term abortion. The AfD, which opposes abortion, cares little about that distinction. When Merz took questions in Parliament this month, von Storch asked whether he could in good conscience vote to seat Brosius-Gersdorf. After verbally attacking von Storch, Merz said yes. Soon, an edited version of the exchange raced across social media. Outrage built among conservatives, who fumed that Merz had effectively endorsed legalised abortion. Some Catholic bishops warned against confirming the nominee. Merz's governing coalition had to postpone the vote, fearing Brosius-Gersdorf had insufficient support. The nomination remains unresolved, though Merz has refocused his attention in recent days onto foreign policy. Government aides say the best way for Merz to thwart the AfD is to stay out of culture wars and stick to solving problems that rank high among voters' concerns. That includes restarting economic growth, reducing migration and restoring German leadership on the global stage. And doing so while projecting unity inside the government. Some AfD leaders agree that policy wins would be Merz's best weapon against them. Von Storch said AfD voters could flock to Merz if he effectively adopted the party's platform on immigration, including blocking new migrants from crossing the German border and deporting millions of asylum-seekers from Syria and elsewhere. Merz has tightened border controls and stepped-up deportations, but there is no indication he would support anything close to the full AfD migration agenda. Even as she stressed the importance of culture wars to divide the Merz coalition, von Storch said that for the AfD to grow in popularity, it must sell Germans on its plans for their wallets. 'Voters want a government that can lead the economy out of crisis, secure prosperity and ensure sound public finances,' she said. 'The AfD will gain massive acceptance and support if we aggressively stake out these areas.' This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Written by: Jim Tankersley and Christopher F. Schuetze Photograph by: Lena Mucha ©2025 THE NEW YORK TIMES
NZ Herald
19 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Round three - United States and China hold economic talks as trade truce nears end
The Trump Administration has been trying to win concessions from many countries before an August 1 deadline for reimposing tariffs announced in April. Those levies were suspended in order to reach trade deals. Over the last week, the Trump Administration has announced deals with some of America's biggest trading partners in quick succession. Last week the US and Japan finally agreed to a deal that included a 15% tariff on Japanese imports and a pledge from Japan to invest US$550 billion in the US. Today, Trump announced that he had also reached a deal with the European Union, whose economies rely on exports to the US. The deal would put a 15% tariff on many European exports, including cars. One of the biggest unknowns is what will happen with China, which remains one of America's largest source of imports. After a tit-for-tat period of tariffs and retaliation, the two nations have come to something of an uneasy truce after talks in Geneva in May, and in London in June. Today, before he met with European officials, Trump implied that some kind of trade arrangement with China might be close at hand. 'We just struck a deal with Japan as you know, and we're very close to a deal with China,' he said. This will be the first meeting between the countries without an imminent crisis, like the tariff standoff or China's economically crippling ban on rare earth exports this year. Trade experts said the list of potential topics for discussion was long, ranging from Trump's push to get China to stop the flow of fentanyl to the US, to America's concerns about its purchases of Russian and Iranian oil, and recent exit bans that have prevented US citizens from leaving China. US officials appear to be looking forward to more ambitious trade talks in the months to come. Those could include Chinese purchases of American products, steps to open the Chinese market and, potentially, Chinese investment in the US. They are also likely seeking to lay the groundwork for a potential meeting between Trump and Xi Jinping, the Chinese leader, this year. Administration officials are considering a trip to Beijing before a meeting of Asian and Pacific countries in South Korea in October or potentially connecting Trump and Xi on the sidelines of an international meeting. Michael Pillsbury, a former government official who has advised the Trump Administration on China, said this would be Trump's sixth summit meeting with Xi. Each of those summits had a minimum of two hours of dialogue, and Trump went prepared with specific dealmaking requests, he said. 'The President feels it's better to deal face to face,' he said. Trade experts are also wondering whether US technology controls or an agreement to transfer ownership of TikTok may be on the negotiating table. On CNBC last week, Howard Lutnick, the Secretary of Commerce, said that the US had submitted a proposal to China for transferring ownership of TikTok to American companies, and that the Administration was waiting for the Chinese response. The topic was 'not officially' part of the trade talks, he said, 'but unofficially, of course'. Tensions between the US and China started to spiral after Trump announced his 'Liberation Day' tariffs in early April. China was the only country to immediately retaliate, matching Trump's tariffs of 34% with 34% tariffs on American products. Beijing also set up a licensing system to restrict exports of seven rare earth elements that are processed almost exclusively in China and used in electric cars, smart bombs and other high-tech devices. Trump then responded by ratcheting up tariffs on Chinese products to a minimum of 145%, which brought much of the trade between the countries to a halt. The previous rounds of negotiations secured a temporary truce that included China's relaxing its restrictions on shipments of valuable rare earth minerals and magnets needed by US manufacturers. In return, US officials agreed to roll back limits on exports of US products and technology, including ethane and airplane parts, as well as the proposed visa restrictions. US tariffs on Chinese imports were scaled back to 30%, while China has 10% tariffs on American products. The truce is scheduled to expire on August 12, after which tariffs would rise by 10%. However, Bessent has been optimistic that the truce could be extended. In an interview on the Fox Business Network last week, Bessent said that 'trade is in a good place' with China. He added that he hoped to begin having broader discussions with his counterparts about rebalancing the Chinese economy and encouraging China to curb purchases of Russian and Iranian oil. Bessent said China was in a manufacturing slump and faced a residential real estate market crisis. He argued Beijing must focus on building a consumer economy. 'They can't export their economic problems to the rest of the world; they need to solve them,' Bessent said. US companies continue to have a rash of criticisms about doing business in China, including the country's newly established rare earth licensing system. The processing time for licences is long, American firms say, and China requests proprietary and sensitive business information as part of the applications. In a survey released this month, members of the US-China Business Council said strained relations and tariffs between the two countries remained their biggest concerns. But they also said Chinese policies favouring domestic companies were eroding confidence in doing business in the country. This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Written by: Alan Rappeport and Ana Swanson ©2025 THE NEW YORK TIMES
