Ukraine is secretly rejuvenation its domestic missile industry as it adapts to the intense pressures of conflict with Russia. According to reports from The Economist, the nation is embarking on multiple projects, spearheaded by both state-backed initiatives and private ventures. Vice Prime Minister Mykhailo Fedorov has made bold claims, predicting, "2025 will be the year of the Ukrainian cruise missile," aiming at producing 3,000 missiles by the end of the year.
Yet, the road to rebuilding Ukraine's missile capabilities is fraught with obstacles. Chief among these challenges are the aggressive Russian attacks targeting missile production facilities. Just recently, the Kyiv area faced devastating strikes; December 2023 saw cruise missiles hit Neptune missile production sites, followed by November 2024's attack on Pivdenmash in Dnipro, where the deployment of the 'Oreshnik' intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) marked another chapter of destruction.
These orchestrated attacks have had dire consequences. The onslaught on Pivdenmash resulted not only in significant structural damage but also casualties, emphasizing the extent to which Russian forces are willing to go to thwart Ukraine’s military advancements. The reality is so dire, reports the The Economist, the assembly of these missiles has been forced underground, with operations now taking place within fortified bunkers and satellite production scattered across hidden locations.
Volodymyr Horbulin, Ukraine’s former national security advisor and missile industry veteran, stated emphatically, "We will carry out the missile programme regardless." His words encapsulate the resilience of Ukraine's defense objectives, though practical hurdles remain on the horizon. Financial constraints loom large over the missile development timeline. While the government is willing to back the production of proven missiles with attractive profit margins, developers must initially invest their own capital, adding to the financial strain.
Despite these challenges, innovation is coming to the fore. Ukraine's defense sector is not short of creativity; projects like the Trembita cruise missile have made headlines. Named after the Ukrainian alpine horn, this missile boasts technology reminiscent of the engines used during World War II yet now has been updated for modern warfare. It is reported to fly at 400 km/h with a range of 200 km, and its production costs are significantly low; variants are priced at just $3,000 for decoys and up to $15,000 for equipped models.
According to Serhii Biriukov, who oversees the volunteer engineering team, developments are also underway for more powerful variants capable of reaching Moscow. But Ukraine's missile program development is not simply contingent on domestic capabilities; the urgency for Western partnerships is palpable.
Countries like Denmark and Britain have begun taking steps to support Ukraine's missile ambitions. Nevertheless, as pointed out by senior security officials, Ukraine might still be at least one year away from achieving production levels and capabilities significant enough to genuinely threaten Russia.
This elapsed time is significant, especially considering the shifting political winds on the international stage, with concerns surrounding the ramifications of Donald Trump's potential influence following his anticipated inauguration as the U.S. president next year. The bipartisan support for Ukraine's defense initiatives could face scrutiny or modification, possibly impacting the all-important missile projects.
On the flip side of this conflict, Russia has also intensified its missile capabilities. The November 21, 2024, attack on Pivdenmash saw six warheads delivered via the Oreshnik IRBM, showcasing Russia’s increased military sophistication. This missile can deliver kinetic weaponry rather than traditional explosives, presenting new challenges for Ukrainian defense strategies. Putin himself likened the impact of the conventional Oreshnik strike to nuclear weaponry, signaling Russia’s willingness to escalate tactics.
The Pentagon has identified the IRBM as possibly linked to past terminated projects, raising questions about the development and potential future applications of similar systems. Ukrainian reports, juxtaposed with Russian claims, have also disputed the effectiveness and the extent of damage from these missile strikes, adding to the fog of war.
Interestingly, experts from NATO and the U.S. have begun investigating the aftermath of the Pivdenmash strike and remain vigilant over the growing sophistication of Russian missile technology. The continued development of missile technologies and their operational use highlight the shifting dynamics on the battlefield.
Importantly, the use of kinetic submunitions—as demonstrated during the Pivdenmash strike—raises serious logistical and operational questions about future engagements. The ability of these new munitions to impact targets significantly without the need for traditional explosives opens up new avenues and could potentially change the approach to missile warfare.
With the current backdrop of innovative Ukrainian efforts and Russian advancements, the balance of power may hinge on both nations' ability to adapt and innovate. Each missile launched, each factory struck, plays its part in this complex game of defense and offense.
This convoluted environment, filled with ambition and obstacles, paints the challenging portrait of modern warfare exemplified by Ukraine's struggle to reclaim sovereignty under pressure. The interplay of technological ingenuity and relentless conflict continues to dictate the course of this tragic but necessary quest for national security.
