Russia’s “Systematic Strikes” Are Reshaping The Ukrainian Conflict’s Strategic Dynamics

Ukraine’s dearth of air defenses created a strategic opportunity for Russia to ruthlessly exploit.

Russia’s latest large-scale strikes against military targets in Ukraine were incredibly successful after Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Colonel Yury Ignat admitted that not a single missile was intercepted. This came as Ukraine pleaded with nearly 40 of its allies for them to transfer their Patriot interceptor missiles amidst the global shortage caused by the Third Gulf War depleting half of the US’ stockpile. The unclear number of missiles that Poland reportedly transferred in secret in springtime weren’t enough.

Lockheed Martin earlier declared that it can’t confidently predict when the next deliveries to US allies will begin, which followed a report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies concluding that this could take at least several years. British media warned around the same time that “Patriot missile shortage has created ‘window of vulnerability’ Russia is exploiting in Ukraine”. Shortly beforehand, Russia said that it’ll carry out “systematic strikes” against Ukraine, which now seem to have begun.

The explanation for the delay over one month after Russia’s announcement is that it’s retaliating against Ukrainian terrorist attacks, which is true, since Ukraine has begun to carry out a spree of US-assisted strikes as part of Zelensky’s 40-day influence operation for coercing Russia into freezing the conflict. While Ukraine’s latest attacks are more showmanship than strategy at this point as explained here, particularly to distract from setbacks along the front like in Konstantinovka, they’re part of a larger plan.

Trump recently decided to “escalate to de-escalate” with Russia through a “war of attrition” waged by Ukraine. Nevertheless, “If Trump sees that his new ‘war of attrition’ isn’t unfolding as planned, then he might opt to reach a fairer deal with Russia just like he did with Iran after the Third Gulf War didn’t unfold as planned either” as was assessed here after his latest call with Putin. About that, Putin’s aide Yury Ushakov said that Putin briefed Trump about the real situation on the battlefield, which is crucial.

That’s because “Russia Exposed Ukraine’s New Three-Pronged Infowar Campaign About The Battlefield” a day earlier for misleading the US about the state of the conflict ahead of this week’s NATO Summit where Zelensky hopes to obtain more financial and military support for his new “war of attrition”. Trump might accede to his requests, but perhaps only within certain limits as suggested by a source telling TASS that his envoys might return to Russia by the end of August, the timing of which would be important.

Russia’s next Duma elections will take place in late September, after which the US midterms will follow in November, and the failure to reach a deal over Ukraine before then could delay any political solution till 2029 at the earliest if the Democrats regain control over at least part of Congress. Unlike the ruling Republicans, they’re dead-set against offering even limited sanctions relief to Russia as an incentive for compromising, and Putin’s credibility would be at risk at home if he ends the conflict without that.

For these reasons, there are four distinct periods to closely monitor across the next four months: between now and the potential return of Trump’s envoys to Russia by the end of August; between then and the Duma elections in late September; between then and the midterms; and after the midterms. The success of Ukraine’s “war of attrition” or lack thereof in each period will influence the odds of a political solution since Putin and Trump both have reasons to reach one before their respective elections.