There’s been some kerfuffles in the comments on the diaries about the drone attack that happened in Moscow. A big part of it is pushback against people saying that it’s unlikely that Ukraine was responsible for the attack, and mostly accusing those taking that position as being prejudiced or indulging in fantasies.
And yes, it’s true, we have no confirmation one way or another who is responsible. It’s pretty damned obvious that anything anyone has to say about this is based on incomplete information.
In case you missed it, Russia claims to have shot down or electronically disabled eight drones in Moscow airspace, and falling debris caused some property damage and a few minor injuries.
Some Russian news sources claim as many as 25 drones were used.
Personally, I’m of the view that while it’s not impossible that Ukraine is directly responsible for this attack, I’m skeptical and think a more likely explanation is EITHER a false flag by Russia, or an attack by a non-state actor (either an anti-Putin or pro-Ukrainian partisan group acting within Russia).
Let’s ponder this for a moment. Let’s start with “Why would Ukraine do this?”
Well, the first obvious choice is just retaliation for the many missile and drone attacks Russia has inflicted on Ukraine over more than a year now. But so far, that hasn’t been Ukraine’s style and they’ve been very restrained in that respect, to keep the moral high ground.
Second is that maybe they were trying to hit some military target. But what military target would be worth going all the way to Moscow for, when there are presumably many others less likely to be protected by the same level of air defense, much closer to Ukrainian territory?
Third is that they could be trying to break the morale of the Russian people by showing they can reach out and hit Moscow and turn public opinion against the invasion.
Ok. But what are the downsides?
Well, first of all, that’s a long way to send drones and expect them to not be noticed. One thing Russia HAS demonstrated some competence in militarily in this war is air defense. What’s the likelihood that these drone flew from Ukraine to Moscow, which at the shortest distance from the Ukrainian border is nearly 300 miles, without any of them being noticed?
Then let’s look at the payoff. Drones are not known for their large payload. Those Iranian Shaheed drones that Russia uses? They max out at about 100 pounds of explosive. Compare that to Russian Kalibr cruise missiles that can pack up to 1,100 pounds of explosive, or the hypersonic Khinzai missile that can carry up to 960 pounds. So, yeah, drones can do some damage, but the amount of damage is likely to be, relatively speaking, minor unless you can hit a vulnerable target. If you’re using drones like this to hit a military target, you’d better have good coordinates and a target soft enough for the relatively light payload to work on. There’s a reason Russia used Shaheeds on Ukrainian power stations over the winter — they were “soft” enough targets for the Shaheeds to potentially have an effect. So I’m dubious that Ukraine would go after a military target in Moscow because of the high probability that none of them would get through plus the low probability of destroying the target even if some did.
Another possibility is that Ukrainian special forces are actually INSIDE Russia and sending these drones a significantly shorter distance than the Ukrainian border. If so, then Russia has way more problems than we know, if Ukrainian special ops are THAT good.
Terror? Was Ukraine just looking to hit some apartment buildings and make some Muscovite residents feel some pain? So far, that has not been Ukraine’s stye, and Ukraine HAS to know that starting such a campaign would risk the international goodwill it has. The potential downside of such a thing would FAR, FAR outweigh the benefits of such a campaign.
And then there’s the potential risk of a drone attack on Moscow actually galvanizing Russian support for the invasion.
Look at bombing campaigns throughout history. Have ANY of them ever broken the will of the civilian population? Is the Russian campaign breaking Ukrainian willpower, after more than year of missile and drone attacks? The Brits were proud of being able to go about their daily business in the midst of The Blitz. Germans being bombed by the Allies carried on. There’s precious little evidence that bombing campaigns significantly turn the opinion of the population on the receiving end, and in fact sometimes results in a hardening of resolve. And I’m pretty sure at least one Ukrainian commander has read a history book or two.
For all of the above, I have a hard time believing that Ukraine decided to risk international support, and to risk galvanizing Russian civilian support in favor of the war, by sending some relatively piddly drone attack with a very low chance of success right at the Russian capitol, which is going to have some of Russia’s best air defenses. Cuz as we see in Ukraine, big, slow targets with light payloads are doing SO well as substitutes for missiles, right?
Was it a Russian false flag? Plenty of people believe that the FSB was responsible for bombing Russian apartment buildings in 1999 to create an excuse to initiate the 2nd Chechen War, and no Chechen group has ever claimed responsibility for them or been conclusively tied to the bombings. If Russia was willing to blow up a few apartment buildings of Russian civilians to get an excuse to have another go at Chechnya, dropping a drone or two into the Moscow suburbs is small potatoes.
Or it could be a partisan group. Last week a group of Russians “invaded” Russia and caused a bit of mayhem near the Russia/Ukraine border. There are certainly groups in Russia or Russian occupied states that might be willing to drop a few drones on Muscovites. Would any of them have the resources to do something like this?
Now, you are 100% free to disagree with me. There may be something I’m missing. We don’t have all the facts. Maybe Ukraine is responsible. I don’t rule that out, I just have a hard time seeing where an attack like this has any benefit to Ukraine that would justify the potential downsides.