As the Russo-Ukrainian War hits it 1,000 day mark, hopes for a settlement deal have grown more tenuous amidst increasing violence. NCF Research Officer Silvia Luthi presents the latest developments down below:
Russia Launches Hypersonic Ballistic Missile
On Thursday, November 21st, Russia struck a factory in the city of Dnipro with a hypersonic intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) named ‘Oreshnik’ (hazel tree) – previously only used in trials – threatening to follow with more attacks. This missile which travels at ten times the speed of sound, has a range that spans between 3,000 km to 5,500 km, and importantly, is crafted to hold a nuclear warhead. The nuclear capacity of such a weapon is especially meaningful in light of Putin’s recent approval of an updated nuclear deterrence doctrine. Notably, this revised policy broadens the conditions under which a nuclear attack is warranted, and includes “aggression by any non-nuclear state, but with the participation or support of a nuclear country” as a considerable example of a “joint attack” on Russia.
The timing of this approval has raised speculation about the intent with which it was made. The Kyiv Independent suggests this is yet another attempt made by Putin to drive off Western involvement and support for Ukraine. In a similar vein, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot claims this decision to be “rhetoric” and follows with “We are not intimidated”. Several other international entities have expressed their disapproval but also unsurprise at such advancement, as reported by Reuters. Contrastingly, and under the auspices of their friendly relations with Russia, Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, backed the Kremlin leader’s decision, emphasising Russia’s rights and needs “to have the power and the measures to protect itself”. The US Embassy in Kyiv did not however take Putin’s decision lightly, and announced their closure just a day later, Wednesday November 20th, in light of a potential air attack.
Though the IRBM launched on Thursday was not loaded, it still sent a clear message in retaliation to Ukraine’s recent missile attacks this week (see down below). The Kremlin leader declared the move to be a warning to the West, demonstrating Russia’s preparedness for “any developments. If anyone still doubts this, they shouldn’t. There will always be a response”. Ukrainian President Zelensky reacted to this event on X, describing it as a “clear and severe escalation” of the war. Additionally, NATO will host an emergency meeting this upcoming Tuesday with Ukraine at its headquarters in Brussels, in order to discuss the ballistic attack further. This development signals a significant turning point in the course of the war, with no promising signs of de-escalation on the horizon.
Biden Authorizes Long-Range Missiles and Anti-Personnel Mines
The Biden administration is engaged in an 11th-hour scramble to provide Ukraine with billions of dollars in additional weaponry, a massive effort that is generating concerns internally about its potential to erode U.S. stockpiles and sap resources from other flash points. Since the start of its military incursion on February 24th, 2022, Russia has gained control of an estimated fifth part of Ukrainian territory, including the entirety of Crimea, and most of the Donbas, i.e. the Zaporizhzhia and Kherson regions. This amounts to over 110,000 square kilometres, a figure that stands out when measured against the 650 square km of Russian Kursk land that Ukraine has (so far) gained control of. These figures highlight the power asymmetry, namely, the Kremlin’s military superiority, both in terms of size and resources. The US has consistently been Ukraine’s largest provider of arms following the war’s onset.
Map of Russia’s Offensive Campaign Status
Source: Institute for the Study of War (November 2024)
North Korea is expanding a key weapons manufacturing complex that assembles a type of short-range missile used by Russia in Ukraine. On Sunday, 17th November, following the deployment of an estimated 10,000 North Korean soldiers to the Kursk region, current US President Joe Biden authorized Ukraine’s use of US long-range missiles. This decision signified a shift in Biden’s approach – given his previous aversion to Zelensky’s requests for such missiles, specifically named Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) – and importantly, took place only two weeks after President Trump’s re-election. The upcoming US president has already been critical of the amount of US military aid invested to support Ukraine, and alluded to reducing this if he took office.
The Kremlin leader had forewarned the West against taking such a course of action previously in September, where he declared that “If this decision is taken, it will mean nothing less than the direct involvement of NATO countries”. Earlier this week on Monday, during the Group of 20 (G20) conference in Brazil, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, declared the move to be “a signal that they want to escalate” and stated they will be “taking this as a qualitatively new phase of the Western War against Russia”. The consequences of such have already been revealed, as detailed above.
Importantly, no less than six of these ATACMS missiles reportedly struck an ammunition warehouse in the Russian Bryansk border region already this Tuesday, 19th of November, followed by British Storm Shadow missiles in Kursk a day later.
Also on Tuesday, President Biden executed another volte-face by approving the use of anti-personnel (AP) mines to boost Ukrainian defence lines against Russian ground forces, particularly in the Eastern Donetsk region. This decision significantly diverges from (and arguably undoes) Biden’s previous ban on AP mines outside the Korean Peninsula in 2022, which aligned the US more closely with international norms on arms control. AP mines have earned a poor reputation over time, particularly among human rights activists, due to the hazard they infringe upon civilian populations. They are tedious to remove after a conflict’s conclusion and sometimes not surely deactivated, which makes them exceptionally dangerous when deployed near habited areas. Reuters, however, reports confirmation from a US official assuring that these mines will not be used in Ukraine civilian areas, and further adds that they will be rendered inactive after a predetermined time-frame.
The demonstrated increase in US-backed support to Ukraine this week can be seen as a direct response to Russia’s heightened military aggression last Sunday.
Russia’s Large-Scale Aerial Attack
On Sunday 17th November, Russia struck various regions in Ukraine, including the capital Kyiv, with over 200 missiles and drones – resulting in at least seven casualties and substantial damage to the nation’s key energy infrastructure. This compelled Ukrenergo, the state’s largest energy supplier, to introduce power restrictions starting on Monday. Russia’s ministry of defence declared its offensive to be on “essential energy infrastructure supporting the Ukrainian military-industrial complex”. Ukrainian President Zelensky, however, openly condemned the attack via Telegram, stating “Russian terrorists once again want to scare us with cold and lack of light”.
An attack of this proportion has not occurred since August earlier this year, and took place only two days after Russian President Vladimir Putin and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s first telephone call in 2 years. During this call, Russia expressed its ongoing willingness to resume peace talks on the proviso that its territorial and security concerns be addressed, and the ‘original causes of the conflict’ eliminated. Zelensky strongly opposed this interaction, claiming Chancellor’s move to be a ‘Pandora’s box’. The sequence of such events sets a cautionary tone on the Kremlin’s conduct going forth, as the ingression of the US’ 47th President Donald J. Trump draws near.
Suspicions Rise amidst Underwater Cable Damage
Simultaneous to the aforementioned events on Sunday 17th November, a 730-mile fibre-optic telecommunication cable between Lithuania and Sweden was reported to have been severed. The Swedish company Arelion, to which the cable pertains, stated that although the exact causes of damage were still unknown, the extent of it was comprehensive, and not just partial. In response, both Sweden and Lithuania’s military forces have upped their maritime surveillance, with the former leading preliminary criminal investigations into the matter.
Compellingly, less than 24 hours after this event, on Monday 18th November, another underwater cable linking Finland and Germany was also announced to be cut. This time Cinia, Finnish owner of said cable, reported the causes of such infraction were still undetermined and repairs could take up to 15 days. On this day, the Foreign Ministers of Finland and Germany published a joint statement expressing their deep concern over the incident. Though they did not directly point their fingers at anyone, they used their speech as a reminder that “Our European security is not only under threat from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, but also from hybrid warfare by malicious actors”.
German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius took a more direct approach when stating “No one believes that these cables were cut accidentally…We also have to assume, without knowing it yet, that it is sabotage”. However, European Union Policy Chief Josep Borrell assumed a more charitable stance on the situation, declaring it to be “irresponsible from my side to attribute this, let’s say incident or accident or whatever you want to call it, to anyone”. These recent occurrences are reminiscent of the numerous telecommunication cable cuts that took place in the Baltic Sea last year. Investigators suggested that evidence pointed towards the Chinese ship Newnew Polar Bear, as the main perpetrator of such damages, but did not confirm whether or not this was intentional.
What’s Next?
The current tit-for-tat dynamic between Russia and Ukraine is one which encourages bellicose tactics and therefore also the potential for a new point of escalation. Additionally, the heightened involvement of third-party actors on both sides, but particularly NATO’s support to Ukraine, is capable of expanding the impact of such a conflict onto a global level. The Kremlin leader himself has warned of the danger of an international conflict, provided that the West continues delivering its aid to Ukraine. It remains to be seen how Ukraine will respond to Russia’s latest missile attack. However, as of right now, the road to a negotiated settlement seems increasingly complex.
