What lessons can be drawn from Ukraine’s drone attack on Moscow?

Beyond the military aspects, the most important point after this drone attack is to interpret the messages Ukraine is sending to Russia.

First of all, it is important to note that the military effect is limited. The attack was carried out using lightweight, medium sized drones with relatively small military payloads. The objective was not to weaken Russia militarily, but to send a number of messages to the Russians and to Vladimir Putin.

The first message is political in nature. Throughout the winter campaign, Russia struck all of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure in order to weaken the Ukrainians’ capacity to resist. The aim was to undermine their morale. The message conveyed by this strike is to show that, as winter comes to an end, Ukraine is still standing, that Ukrainian morale has not been broken by Russia’s winter military campaign, and that Ukrainians are not merely defending themselves: they can also attack.

The second message being sent is that Ukraine’s defence industrial and technological base (BITD) remains intact despite all of Russia’s strikes, and that Ukrainians are capable of producing large numbers of drones which, while rudimentary, are inexpensive and capable of striking Russian territory. Ukraine’s defence therefore does not rely solely on weapons delivered by the Europeans, or on weapons the Europeans may have bought from the Americans in order to supply them to Ukraine. This is a “made in Kyiv” strike, not a “made in NATO” one, and its aim is therefore also to affect Russian morale: Ukraine is capable of resisting them, even without the weapons delivered by the Europeans.

The third message is that Kyiv can now strike Moscow. This operates on two levels.

First, since the beginning, the war has been taking place on Ukrainian territory, and the West has taken great care to ask the Ukrainians not to strike deep inside Russian territory with the weapons it has supplied to them. Here, however, there is indeed an escalation in the conflict, not so much because of the intensity of the strikes, but because of the extension of its geographical scope to Russian territory, and as far as Moscow. The Ukrainians nevertheless took great care to use their own weapons rather than Western weapons, so as not to embarrass the Europeans, or even trigger a negative reaction from Donald Trump.

Second, Ukraine has shown that it is capable of launching a massive strike, at least in terms of numbers, and of going so far as to target Moscow. These drones travelled more than 500 km, they were not stopped by Russian air defences, and it is striking to observe that the videos that circulated were filmed by residents of Moscow and its suburbs. The psychological impact is enormous, and this is precisely the intended effect: to show Russian citizens that Russia’s “special operation” in Ukraine is a failure and that, more than four years after the beginning of this war, fear can change sides.