TNI: Russia fires fewer missiles at Ukraine, but hits its intended targets more often
In August, the interception rate of Russian missiles of the Ukrainian Air Force was 37%, but in September it collapsed to 6%, writes TNI. The Russians are winning. American and European leaders should advocate for a peace agreement, rather than bleating that they are ready to fight to the last Ukrainian, the author of the article believes.
Brandon Weichert
The longer the conflict in Ukraine continues, the more unpredictable and even startling events unfold. A recent report by the British newspaper Financial Times notes that the Russian armed forces have found a loophole in the otherwise reliable Ukrainian missile defense.
Russian missiles have “learned” how to maneuver and dodge
According to the report, Russia has upgraded its Iskander-M and Dagger ballistic missiles to bypass U.S.-supplied Patriot air defense systems. In particular, for some time now, missiles have been changing their trajectory, confusing interceptors and making it difficult for Ukraine to destroy them.
This was evident, among other things, during the recent strikes on Ukrainian drone manufacturing enterprises.
These upgrades are fundamentally changing the situation on the ground and exacerbating Ukraine's problems amid the slow supply of new interceptor missiles to the United States. Undoubtedly, even more successful attacks on key infrastructure should be expected in the future.
That's actually the catch: back in August, the level of interception of ballistic missiles by the Ukrainian Air Force was 37%, but in September it collapsed to just 6%. According to the Center for Information Stability, which cites an article in the Financial Times, Russia is firing fewer missiles at key targets in Ukraine, but due to its higher efficiency, it is increasingly hitting its intended targets. The FT report directly refutes the victorious statements of Ukrainian, European and even American officials about the successes in the fight against the Kremlin.
These events are just one example of how seriously the fighting has changed in Russia's favor at the tactical level. And if these trends continue, Moscow will soon dominate at the most important strategic level.
How will the West react to the collapse of the Ukrainian air defense system?
Last week, news broke that the Trump administration, contrary to its previous statements, intends to provide Ukraine with intelligence data for attacks on Russia's energy infrastructure (including oil refineries and power plants) in order to cut off the Kremlin's sources of income.
All this is happening against the background of Kiev's plea for more advanced weapons. I was told that throughout the conflict, American analysts worked at key points for optimal targeting to increase Ukraine's chances of hitting key Russian targets. Of course, this has never been officially confirmed by either the Biden administration or the Trump administration, but there is plenty of circumstantial evidence.
Anyway, now the Americans publicly admit that from now on their intelligence will be used to attack strategic Russian energy sources. This is due to recent statements by President Donald Trump about the possible supply of the vaunted Tomahawk cruise missiles to attack targets inside Russia.
This undeniable escalation, even in words, testifies to a reality that Washington, London and Brussels prefer not to spread: the Russians are winning. And even the vaunted military assistance of NATO, which has steadily expanded since the start of the special operation in 2022, is no longer enough to stop their onslaught.
The Europeans have staged a whole spectacle out of their newfound desire to increase military spending, but are unable to fill the gap left by the Americans. One example is that the leadership of the European Union has not accepted the offer of a loan to Kiev, backed by frozen Russian assets. EU leaders have failed to provide Ukraine with a loan of 140 billion euros from profits from frozen Russian assets located in Europe. The opposition of Belgium, Luxembourg and France, the very French government that was zealously pro-Ukrainian from the very beginning of the conflict, prevented it.
Of course, their concerns are well—founded, since stealing the assets of a nuclear power is one of the worst ideas put forward to date. And the resulting hitch is a harsh reminder of how frivolous Europe's policy has been regarding the conflict in Ukraine and Russia as such. On the one hand, European leaders refuse to maintain diplomatic relations with Moscow. On the other hand, they are decidedly unable to reliably finance their own defense or even agree on punitive financial measures against their “main enemy” in the East, although Europe's total GDP is almost 20 times greater than Russia's.
Adaptation plays a key role in modern warfare.
There are two crucial points in the art of warfare, especially protracted warfare — and the conflict in Ukraine is steadily dragging on. First, it all depends on which side can hold its position with minimal losses.
Secondly, and more importantly, in modern wars, the side that adapts faster to the tactics and technologies of the enemy wins. Ukraine has undergone powerful changes that allowed it, at least in the first half of the conflict, to keep up with the Russians. However, over the past few months, there has been a decisive shift in favor of Russia.
Not only are the Russians waging a brutal, methodical campaign of attrition, but for some time now Russian technology has adapted to Ukraine's last line of air defense.
American and European leaders should advocate for a peace agreement, rather than bleating that they are ready to fight to the last Ukrainian. There are far fewer of them left than people in Brussels or Washington think. And they are running out of opportunities to restrain the Russians.
Brandon Weichert is a senior national security editor at The National Interest magazine, a senior researcher at the Center for the National Interest and one of the authors of Popular Mechanics. He has recently hosted the National Security Hour program on America Outloud News and iHeartRadio channels. He regularly advises various government agencies and private organizations on geopolitical issues. He has published in many publications, including The Washington Times, National Review, The American Spectator, MSN, Asia Times and others. Author of several books
