ANALYSIS: Drones Over Ufa: The 1,300-km Strike That Is Changing the Course of the Russian War

A Symbol Struck Twice

The Kapotnya district, on the southeastern outskirts of Moscow, is home to the Russian capital’s main refinery. On June 18 and 25, 2026, this facility was struck twice within a week. The Moscow refinery, already damaged by previous strikes, is, according to Reuters estimates published on June 24, unlikely to resume operations before 2027.

For Moscow’s residents and for fuel distribution networks in central Russia, this signals a lasting deterioration. Refining capacity around Moscow is structurally compromised. And striking the same site twice in one week also sends a message of deliberate relentlessness: Ukraine is not giving Russia time to repair the damage between waves of attacks.

The Logic of Cumulative Pressure

This pace of strikes is part of a strategy clearly articulated by President Volodymyr Zelensky, who announced on June 26, 2026, a 40-day pressure campaign targeting Russian logistics and military infrastructure. Moscow, railways, fuel depots, weapons production sites: each strike fuels the next; every fire at a refinery is a message sent to Putin.

The concept of coercion through degradation is well known to military theorists. It involves subjecting an adversary to pressure that is sufficiently intense and sustained to alter its political calculations. Ukraine may not have the conventional firepower to defeat Russia on the battlefield, but it can gradually make the cost of the war unbearable for the Russian economy—and for the Russians living within range of its drones.

Two strikes on the same refinery in seven days: I don’t know if this is operational genius or calculated obstinacy, but the result is the same. Moscow is burning, and Putin cannot protect his own capital. This is as much a geopolitical humiliation as it is an energy disaster.

Kyiv’s Doctrine of Deep Strikes

Zelensky’s announcement of a 40-day campaign of strikes targeting Russian logistics and military infrastructure marks a doctrinal turning point. Until now, Ukrainian deep strikes had been presented as one-off, reactive, or defensive operations. Now, Kyiv is claiming to be conducting a planned campaign, with a stated duration and clearly defined strategic objectives.

This operational transparency is itself a communication tool: it aims to reassure Western allies of Ukraine’s strategic rationality, demoralize Russian populations exposed to the strikes, and force Putin to spread his defensive resources across the entire Russian territory rather than concentrating them on the Ukrainian front.

Crimea and Complementary Strikes

In parallel with strikes on Russian mainland refineries, the operation also targets occupied Crimea. The peninsula serves as the forward logistics base for Russian naval forces in the Black Sea and a resupply hub for forces deployed in southern Ukraine. Striking its infrastructure directly weakens Russia’s posture on the southern front.

The combination of strikes on Moscow, the Urals, and Crimea creates simultaneous pressure on geographically distinct fronts that Russia struggles to defend effectively. This is the central objective of the 40-day operation: to overwhelm Russian response capabilities across an area too vast to be fully covered.

Forty days of publicly declared pressure—it’s bold to the point of being almost arrogant. And yet, it is precisely this displayed confidence that gives Ukraine a psychological advantage that the raw numbers of the conflict do not reflect. Zelensky is playing a game more complex than the simple destruction of infrastructure.

The Oil Sector as the Lifeblood of the Economy

Exports of oil and petroleum products account for a significant portion of Russia’s budget revenue—estimated at between 30 and 40 percent, depending on the period. Russia’s budget deficit already exceeds $80 billion, according to data published by United24 Media on June 23, 2026. Striking refineries is a direct blow to Putin’s ability to finance the war.

What the report—revealed by Reuters via Militarnyi on June 24, 2026—that Russia now plans to import gasoline by sea reveals is the extent of the damage. An oil-producing country forced to import its own refined fuels to supply its domestic market: this is the state of Putin’s empire after months of Ukrainian strikes.

The Military Supply Chain Is Under Strain

The Russian armed forces are major consumers of fuel. Tanks, armored vehicles, aircraft, helicopters, and generators at rear bases: every liter of fuel that is missing means one fewer tank that can advance. The destruction of refining capacity in Moscow and the Urals creates logistical strain that ultimately affects military operations.

This link between strikes on oil infrastructure and the erosion of Russia’s conventional military power is neither immediate nor automatic, but it is real. As early as June 23, 2026, the Kiel Institute pointed to a structural exhaustion of the Russian economy, with GDP contracting slightly in the first quarter of 2026. Ukrainian strikes are measurably amplifying this trend.

A country that has to import gasoline by ship even though it is one of the world’s largest oil producers: if it weren’t so tragic for the Ukrainians dying on the front lines, it would almost be comical. Yet this is the reality that Zelensky’s drones have built, brick by brick, refinery by refinery.

Deep Defense: Too Little, Too Late

Faced with an increase in deep strikes, Moscow has attempted several adjustments. It has deployed Pantsir systems around oil facilities deemed critical, stepped up fighter patrols, and attempted to identify and neutralize Ukrainian launch teams before takeoff. None of this has prevented strikes on Kapotnya, Saratov, and now Ufa.

The fundamental problem for Russia is one of dispersion: its territory is vast, its vulnerable sites are numerous, and its resources for anti-drone systems are finite. Ukraine, on the other hand, can strike anywhere in Russia with drones that have a low radar signature—and every successful strike forces Moscow to reinforce a new perimeter, further diluting its overall defensive capabilities.

Kremlin Propaganda Put to the Test

The Kremlin has long presented the war in Ukraine to its population as a controlled special military operation far from Russia’s borders. Every drone that strikes Moscow or Ufa contradicts this narrative. Russians see fires in their cities, hear air raid sirens, and are beginning to realize that physical distance no longer protects them.

This erosion of trust in the official narrative is a secondary effect of the Ukrainian strikes that military analysts tend to underestimate. The psychological pressure on Russian society—combined with inflation, massive human losses at the front, and the growing budget deficit—constitutes an invisible but real front in Ukraine’s war against Russian impunity.

Putin sold the Russian people on a clean, swift war, far from home. His refineries are burning in Ufa. His main facility in Moscow is out of commission. And he has to import gasoline. I wonder how much longer Russians will believe that everything is fine.

How Far Should We Go in Supporting Deep-Strike Operations?

Ukraine’s deep-strike operations pose a delicate question for Kyiv’s allies. The United States, the United Kingdom, and several European countries have gradually lifted restrictions on the use of their weapons to strike Russian territory. But the strike on Ufa—1,300 km away—was carried out using domestically manufactured Ukrainian drones, not Western missiles.

This distinction is important: it demonstrates Ukraine’s capacity for innovation and industrial autonomy, and it spares the West from bearing direct responsibility for the deepest strikes. But it also raises questions about coordination between Kyiv and its allies in defining targets and managing the risks of escalation.

Escalation or Deterrence: The Debate Raging in Western Capitals

In Washington, London, Paris, and Berlin, Ukraine’s deep-strike operations are fueling an ongoing debate about the risk of escalation. Some advisors warn that striking the Urals could prompt Putin to launch disproportionate retaliation. Others argue that it is precisely Ukraine’s ability to strike far that discourages further escalation by Moscow.

The NATO summit scheduled for July 7–8, 2026, in Ankara will provide an opportunity for allies to recalibrate their positions in light of this new reality. Ukraine has fundamentally changed the rules of the game—and Western capitals will have to decide whether to go along with this shift or try to slow it down, at the risk of undermining a strategy that is working.

Western capitals concerned about escalation should also be concerned about what happens when they fail to respond. Allowing Putin to strike Ukraine with impunity from deep within his territory is tantamount to letting him win the war through attrition. The strikes on Ufa are Ukraine’s response to this logic. And honestly, I find this response more coherent than the West’s hesitation.

What This Strike Changes for the Long Term

The strike on Ufa on June 25, 2026, is not just another incident in the long list of drone warfare operations. It marks a qualitative turning point. It demonstrates that Ukraine now possesses a strategic deep-strike capability that extends across the entire Russian territory—including its industrial heartlands in the Urals. This capability will grow, not diminish.

For Russia, this means that no critical infrastructure is now truly safe. For Ukraine’s allies, this means they are dealing with a militarily creative and determined partner, capable of autonomous strategic initiatives. And for Putin, this means that the war he started has turned into something he did not anticipate and can no longer control.

The war on refineries is not over

The 40 days announced by Zelensky are underway. Further strikes on other Russian refineries are to be expected. The Kapotnya operation proved that Ukraine could strike the same site twice in a week. The Ufa operation proved that no Russian petrochemical hub was out of reach. The combination of these two demonstrations is redefining the conflict: Putin can no longer fight from within Russia as if it were an inviolable sanctuary.

What Ukraine is building—strike after strike, refinery after refinery—is a new strategic reality: Russia is vulnerable deep within its own territory. And this vulnerability, if Western allies have the courage to act on it, can change the outcome of this war in favor of those who are suffering through it.

Every refinery struck is a brick in the wall being built between Putin and his ability to finance this war indefinitely. That wall won’t come crashing down tomorrow. But it is being built. And as for me, I’ve chosen my side: I’m with those who are building it.

Ukrainian Innovation as a Response to Asymmetry

Ukraine’s domestic drone program is one of the most remarkable military stories of this conflict. Funded in part by private donations and developed in scattered workshops to avoid Russian strikes, it has produced drones capable of reaching the Ural Mountains from Ukraine. This capability did not exist two years ago. It is now operational and continues to develop.

Faced with this asymmetric innovation, Russia is responding with the tools of a conventional power: more air defense systems, more fighter patrols, and more military spending. But defending a territory the size of Russia against cheap and numerous drones is a challenge that even the most generous military budgets struggle to meet over the long term.

Lessons for Western Military Doctrine

Ukraine’s campaign of deep strikes offers important lessons for all Western military doctrines. It demonstrates that non-state actors or small nations can develop long-term strategic strike capabilities at relatively modest costs. It reveals the limitations of even the most sophisticated air defense systems when faced with multiple, low-altitude threats.

These lessons will be incorporated into the discussions at the Ankara summit on future defense architectures. Drone warfare is no longer a tactical curiosity—it is a strategic tool that is profoundly altering the balance of power in modern conflicts. And Ukraine, despite everything it has endured, has become the world’s most advanced testing ground for it.

Ukraine was thrust into a war it did not ask for, and it has transformed it into a laboratory for military innovation. There is something deeply human about this ability to create under the most extreme pressure. It is not just strategy—it is survival transforming into excellence.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist