/nginx/o/2025/05/22/16862511t1h613b.jpg)
/nginx/o/2025/04/08/16764125t1h3520.jpg)
- The SBU was able to organize an attack on the aggressors' land that observers considered impossible.
- Russia cannot dictate peace terms to Ukraine (and Europe).
- Russia is forced to respond to the humiliating and seriously damaging attack by Ukraine.
Ukraine dealt the aggressor an effective and devastating blow at five airfields, even in eastern Siberia, likely damaging dozens of extremely valuable aircraft. It no longer matters whether the estimated damage is two or seven billion euros or dollars. What is important is that Russia's ability to attack Ukraine from a distance, with strategic bombers, as well as its ability to conduct aerial reconnaissance, surveillance and targeting, has been significantly reduced, Kalev Stoicescu, chairman of the Riigikogu’s national defense committee (Estonia 200), writes.
In addition, this is a very strong political and strategic blow that does not yet knock the aggressor down, but the domestic and international consequences of which are very serious for Putin's Russia.
What does Ukraine’s attack show?
Ukraine's strength is by no means exhausted or waning, as many tend to think or even hope, especially in Russia. It is not only Russia who is playing with escalation, but Ukraine is also capable of surprising and organizing increasingly large-scale and effective attacks, catching the aggressor on the wrong foot.
Russia is very vulnerable. It is increasingly vulnerable, so continuing the war may not be in the aggressor's interest. It is another matter how they understand it and how it motivates them to continue or end the war.
In Russia, which is already a highly controlled country and society, paranoia is deepening. Hopefully so is insecurity, or the loss of blind and unjustified self-belief. At least in the near future, no truck driver will dare to transport any cabins or the like in that country. There is a growing sense of danger that no region of Russia is beyond Ukraine's reach, not even Siberia.
The SBU proved convincingly, practically, not just theoretically, that it is possible to seriously wound Russia with cheap means and apparently with a fairly small operational budget. [---] What they thought was supposed to be their monopoly is now the exact opposite.
Russia's transport/logistics has also been hit, not just its airports and strategic aircraft. Let's not forget that recently railway bridges collapsed in the Russian regions surrounding Ukraine. All this is continuing and is not good news for the aggressor's economy, which – due to its huge territory – depends heavily on railways, roads, bridges and other infrastructure, which Ukraine is systematically destroying.
Russia’s FSB, GRU, etc. are showing their incompetence, that is, inability to prevent an attack that was prepared for so long and organized in so many places on the aggressor's own territory. Essentially right under their noses, and they were unable to even foresee the attack, let alone prevent it.
The SBU, which organized the attack, is an incredibly capable organization that was able to organize an attack on the aggressor's land that most observers considered likely and practically impossible (due to the very high risk of failure). The SBU proved convincingly, practically, not just theoretically, that it is possible to seriously wound Russia with cheap means and apparently with a fairly small operational budget (compared to the effect achieved). This turns things upside down for the aggressors, because causing large or greater damage with cheap means was – in their opinion – their monopoly. Now it is the exact opposite.
A successful attack is a lesson for everyone, including us in Estonia, because Russia also learns from every attack and counterattack. Drones, of any size, range and equipment, with explosive charges, can be used by the aggressor not only from its own territory, across the front line, but also in the territory of the attacked countries, if its own agents and collaborators can operate there.
A successful attack is a lesson for everyone, including us in Estonia, because Russia also learns from every attack and counterattack.
Russia cannot dictate peace terms to Ukraine (and Europe). The current dynamics do not correspond to the ambition of Russian dictates. The aggressor presented Ukraine with another act of capitulation in Istanbul, calling it a peace memorandum, which of course is in no way acceptable to Ukraine. Russia needs to receive a few more similar blows to bring it back down to earth. If it ever does. It is clear that Medinsky & Co. flew to Istanbul with a text previously – before Ukraine’s attack – agreed with dictator Putin, but this memorandum clearly does not «fly.»
Russia’s dilemma
Russia is forced to respond to Ukraine's humiliating and seriously damaging attack. Some observers have correctly used the chess term Zugzwang – this is a forced move by a (chess) player in the sense that he has an OK position, but he still has to make a move (his turn to move), which is unfortunately completely detrimental to him.
The question is not whether, but how Russia will respond. Theoretically, it is of course possible for Moscow to pretend that the Ukrainian attack does not actually affect Russia in any way (significantly) and that it does not need to respond (significantly). This depends on the possibility of minimizing, blurring the consequences of Ukrainine’s attack. Acknowledging the scale and effectiveness of the Ukrainian attack is, of course, out of the question. This option – refraining from responding in an escalatory manner – is unlikely, but not impossible.
Putin's Russia does not have to react (organize a counterattack) immediately, it may take a week or two, but it still faces a big dilemma. When responding, it must escalate, that is, show even more force, but how? Are there so many missiles, drones and glide bombs to organize a saturation attack across the whole of Ukraine that Ukraine cannot possibly handle? A saturation attack would not be a surprise attack, as Ukraine's attack on Russia was (consequently, tiblas* are stupid and incapable of coming up with anything new).
With such an attack with a nuclear signature, Russia will not achieve a decisive breakthrough in the war, but will instead blow up the peace negotiations, as well as the patience of Trump and likely also China.
Or should Russia carry out the «Oreshnik» threat, i.e. attack Ukraine with a multi-headed nuclear dragon (Dnipro was attacked with an Oreshnik light)? This would undoubtedly be an escalation, but a clearly harmful development for Russia. With such an attack with a nuclear signature, Russia will not achieve a decisive breakthrough in the war, but will instead blow up the peace negotiations, as well as the patience of Trump and likely also China.
Yes, China is preparing for aggression against Taiwan itself, but it seems that Beijing is in no way interested in launching nuclear weapons and has also warned Russia about this.
Russia may threaten Ukraine and the entire Western world with nuclear strikes, but it must not use nuclear weapons. The Kremlin benefits as long as Russia's nuclear threats are taken seriously and feared. China, it seems, does not want nuclear war. And Russia will not sail very far without Chinese support.
More of such self-defense attacks are needed
In conclusion, hats off to Ukraine for being able to mount such a large-scale and effective attack against a vile aggressor. A list of ultimatums drawn up before the attack was presented in Istanbul, but in the next round of negotiations, if Russia were to suffer further serious blows, we may see – unfortunately not necessarily – a weakening of Russia's position.
It would be completely illogical and stupid in itself, unfortunately according to our logic, if there were no steps between Russia's maximalist demands and actual destruction. All or nothing (destruction). Unfortunately, this cannot be ruled out in the case of Russia.
I wish Ukraine a lot of success. More of such self-defense attacks are needed.
Slava Ukraini!
*tibla – an insult in the Estonian language that typically refers to a Russian-speaking citizen of the former Soviet Union who is hostile towards other cultures and countries