Ukraine's Deep Strikes on Russia Are Photogenic but Inflicted Minimal Damage - Journalist 0 11

The Ukrainian campaign of deep strikes against Russia is currently yielding more propaganda effect than real economic impact. This is noted by American military journalist David Axe in an op-ed on the website of the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA).

He points out that the campaign of Ukrainian strikes deep into Russia has become noticeably more intense this year than last. However, the result of numerous strikes on Russian oil refineries and other oil and gas infrastructure has been that Russia has only reduced its oil and gas exports by 6%, Axe writes.

"No one should deny that Ukraine's deep strike campaign is excellent PR. But the fiery TikToks set to loud renditions of Ukrainian resistance anthems do not indicate an effective deep strike campaign. Despite appearances, Kyiv's drones and missiles do not deliver enough force to bring Russia to defeat and Ukraine to victory," the journalist writes.

He refers to a recent report by the British Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), which noted that Russia is managing to shoot down a large portion of Ukrainian drones and missiles: in some cases, no more than 10% of the strike assets reach their targets.

Axe cites the opinion of Berlin analyst Sergey Vakulenko, who is convinced that "the volume of economic damage that will need to be inflicted on Russia is likely greater than what Ukraine can inflict at the moment." According to Vakulenko, the Russian economy will be able to survive even if oil and gas exports fall by half.

The journalist also recalls an analysis conducted by the Ukrainian group Frontelligence Insight. They calculated that Ukrainian strikes on Russian oil refineries over the past months have inflicted $863 million in damage to Russia. However, this is a pittance compared to Russia's total oil export revenues, which amounted to $189 billion in 2024.

Axe is convinced that the effect of Ukrainian strikes could increase if Ukraine has more powerful strike assets, and in large quantities.

"The good news for Ukrainians is that there are candidates: in particular, the new cruise missile 'Flamingo' from the Kyiv firm Fire Point. The bad news is that the effectiveness of 'Flamingo' is still unclear. And the most obvious alternative to 'Flamingo', the American 'Tomahawk', remains unavailable to Ukrainians," the journalist writes.

The observer notes that "there are real questions" regarding the 'Flamingo' cruise missiles, which have yet to appear in significant quantities despite previous promises from the manufacturer. In Axe's opinion, 'Flamingo' could become a good tool for enhancing attacks on Russia, but only if the claimed characteristics, including the low price, prove to be accurate. However, so far, the journalist sees no evidence of this.

In his view, if Ukraine does not significantly increase the scale of damage to the aggressor's economy, Russia will continue to largely ignore deep strikes in 2026, "just as it ignored them in 2025 and 2024."