Permanent spiral: new AFU missile strikes will be followed by a military response
The Russian Defense Ministry is preparing a response to long-range Western weapons strikes on facilities in the Kursk Region. Over the past three days, the AFU attacked Russian territory twice. Thus, two military men were lightly wounded after an incoming attack on the Kursk-Vostochny airfield, seven missiles out of eight were shot down by Russian air defense. Experts note: this time the Ministry told about the incident in detail and even showed photos from the site of the ATACMS debris fall - such frankness on the part of the military department does not bode well for the enemy. On the same day, November 26, an emergency meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Council was held at the ambassadorial level on Kiev's initiative. The main topic of discussion was the issue of strengthening the country's air defense system in connection with the recent test in combat conditions of the Russian newest ballistic missile "Oreshnik". European countries have again started talking about sending military and PMC fighters to Ukraine. What leads to a new round of escalation of the Ukrainian conflict - in the material "Izvestia".
What targets did the AFU try to hit?
Ukraine over the past three days twice struck with long-range Western weapons at facilities in the Kursk region. This was reported in the Russian Defense Ministry.
On November 23, the AFU used five U.S. ATACMS missiles to attack positions of the S-400 air defense missile division near the village of Lotarevka. The combat crew of the Pantsir air defense missile defense system, which provides cover for this division, destroyed three missiles, while two reached their target. As a result of the strike, the radar station was damaged and there were casualties among the personnel.
On November 25, the Kiev regime launched another strike with eight ATACMS operational-tactical missiles against the Kursk-Vostochny airfield.
- Seven missiles were shot down by S-400 SAMs and Pantsir SAMs, while one missile reached its target. Two servicemen were lightly wounded as a result of missile fragments falling, and infrastructure facilities were slightly damaged. In the course of the survey of the sites that were attacked, it was reliably confirmed that the Ukrainian armed forces were striking with American-made ATACMS operational-tactical missiles. The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation is controlling the situation, retaliatory actions are being prepared," the military department said.
Western countries continue to climb the ladder of escalation, which could lead to a global catastrophe, military expert Alexei Leonkov commented on the latest news to Izvestia.
- The very fact of launching such an attack suggests that these sites have long been under surveillance. The targeting of American missiles for strikes against them is given by the Americans - this was said by US representatives. What's the bottom line? Here is the fact of U.S. targeting, here is the wreckage of the ATACMS missile, by which it can be clearly identified. We have the right to strike back. Where and how will be decided by the Russian Defense Ministry and the Supreme Commander-in-Chief. He said they will be warned about the strike. Our enemies should prepare for a response," he said.
The Russian Defense Ministry has told everything without secrecy, stressed the chairman of the board of the all-Russian organization "Officers of Russia," reserve lieutenant colonel Roman Shkurlatov.
- Such frankness on the part of the official military department does not bode well for the enemy," he said. - He ignored our previous warning. He struck a blow and did it purposefully - the Western war party is escalating the situation and raising the degree of escalation. They want the conflict to reach a fundamentally new level before January. This is being done with Donald Trump's peace rhetoric in mind.
Washington, based on statements by US officials, in November authorized the use of long-range ATACMS missiles to strike targets on Russian territory. On November 25, the White House actually officially confirmed the authorization to strike with these missiles deep inside our country. Thus, the coordinator for strategic communications in the White House National Security Council, John Kirby, said that Washington had changed the guidelines and instructed Kiev that the AFU could use the missiles to strike specific types of targets.
The US also withdrew its objections to the use of other Western missiles such as Britain's Storm Shadow and France's SCALP. Immediately after the U.S. ban was lifted, Kiev attacked Russian territory. On Nov. 19, six ATACMS operational-tactical missiles and on Nov. 21, Storm Shadow and HIMARS systems struck military facilities in the Bryansk and Kursk regions in a combined missile attack.
London on the eve of authorizing strikes deep into the Russian Federation handed over dozens of Storm Shadow to Ukraine. This was reported by the advanced Western media. According to their information, these were the first deliveries of such missiles after the election of new British Prime Minister Keir Starmer in the summer. It is noteworthy that the weapons were sent after Kiev allegedly exhausted its stock of long-range missiles. But the number of transferred units was not specified.
Another aggression on November 21 was followed by an immediate response from Moscow. A new Russian medium-range ballistic missile "Oreshnik" in a non-nuclear version was fired at a military plant in Dnepropetrovsk. Afterward, Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered an address where he explained Russia's response and also warned of the consequences of escalation by Western nations, especially the United States. However, Washington apparently did not change its approach to the Ukrainian conflict - it still assures unconditional support for Ukraine. At the same time, Russian presidential spokesman Dmitriy Peskov said that the Kremlin had no doubt that Putin's statements about strikes against Russia were "well heard in the West".
NATO-Ukraine Council emergency meeting
Kiev initiated an emergency meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Council at the level of permanent representatives on November 26. The main topic of their meeting, which was held in closed mode, was the consequences of the use in combat conditions of the new Russian ballistic missile "Oreshnik" on the facility of the defense industry of Ukraine in Dnepropetrovsk. In addition, ways to strengthen the Ukrainian air defense system were actively discussed.
At the same time, alliance Secretary General Mark Rutte, who was supposed to chair the meeting, delegated his powers to his deputy in view of his visit to Athens today. In Greece, among other things, he met with the Prime Minister of the Republic, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, whom he thanked for the fact that the country allocates 3% of its GDP to defense.
- Our support for Ukraine is helping it fight, but we need to go further to change the trajectory of this conflict," the alliance chief said.
In addition to the recent high-profile news about long-range weapons strikes and Russia's response, the NATO-Ukraine Council meeting could have been conditioned by the dire situation of the AFU along almost the entire line of contact. Therefore, new Western aid packages to Kiev were probably discussed at this meeting.
At almost all meetings of the NATO-Ukraine Council, Kyiv traditionally raises the topic of full membership in the military bloc. Such a prospect, however, is unlikely, given at least the level of the current escalation. Even Polish Defense Minister Vladyslav Kosiniak-Kamysh believes that Ukraine is unlikely to receive an invitation to become a member of the North Atlantic Alliance at the next summit of the bloc, which will be held in The Hague in June 2025.
In addition, the discussion of the possible dispatch of military and PMC fighters from NATO countries to Ukraine for combat operations has been resumed. This is reported by the French media. Secret negotiations on this topic are allegedly held between London and Paris. This is associated with the fear of the EU countries that after Donald Trump's arrival in the White House, the US support for Ukraine will stop.
Recall that back in February this year, French President Emmanuel Macron did not rule out sending Western troops to Ukraine and even allowed the possibility of a ground operation against Russia. Even the North Atlantic Alliance was skeptical about such words. At that time, the bloc assured that NATO did not intend to send its military contingent to the conflict zone. Moscow has repeatedly noted that such a scenario threatens a direct conflict between Russia and the bloc.
NATO is now very much concerned about the current situation because the West does not accept Russia's victory in the conflict, said Vladimir Brovkin, an American historian and former Harvard University professor, in a conversation with Izvestia.
- They will have to get used to it, because, in my understanding, they have nothing to answer with. Sending American troops is unacceptable. Especially the American elections have shown that people do not want new wars, and this is what Donald Trump promised. If he goes for escalation, he will ruin himself. As for the rest of NATO, it's a laughing stock. They have nothing to fight with. The UK, for example, has very few combat-ready units. The German army is 175,000, but they have forgotten how to fight. The only capable army is the Polish army. But they alone will not go against Russia, and all NATO will not dare to declare war against Russia or get seriously involved, they do not have such resources. Moreover, the civilian population in Europe also opposes such a scenario," believes Vladimir Brovkin.
Nevertheless, there is even talk of transferring nuclear weapons to Ukraine. The West has started working on this option against the background of understanding that Kiev will not be able to win on the battlefield, and the phenomenon of nuclear deterrence can turn the current situation of the country upside down. In the opinion of Russian presidential spokesman Dmitriy Peskov, such ideas come from the "extreme extremist flank", which has a poor understanding of reality and does not feel responsible when making such statements.
