January 10, 2026

Institute for the Study of War: Russian IRBM was aimed at arms production plant 

Institute for the Study of War

Available visual evidence indicates that the Russian Oreshnik intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) strike on the night of January 8 to 9 struck a Ukrainian defense industrial enterprise in Lviv City. Geolocated footage published on January 9 of the Oreshnik strike indicates that Russian forces struck in the vicinity of southwestern Lviv City.[1] OSINT analysts on X (formerly Twitter) and Russian milbloggers assessed that the geolocated footage indicates that Russian forces were targeting the Lviv State Aircraft Repair Plant in southwestern Lviv City.[2] Reuters reported on January 9 that a senior Ukrainian official stated that the Oreshnik struck an unspecified state enterprise in Lviv City, and a Ukrainian source reported on the night of January 8 to 9 that the strike hit the southwestern outskirts of the city.[3] A local Ukrainian Telegram channel and some Russian milbloggers had claimed on January 9 that the missile may have targeted the underground gas storage facility in Stryi, Lviv Oblast, but the sources did not provide evidence of a strike on Stryi, and Ukrainian officials and expert sources denied the claims at the time.[4] Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada Member Serhiy Nahornyak also stated on January 9 that gas infrastructure in Lviv Oblast was not the target of the strike and that Russian forces struck an unspecified facility that is not connected to gas supplies.[5] A pro-Russian Ukrainian Telegram channel, whose website Ukrainian authorities banned in 2019, was among the first to report that Russian forces may have struck gas infrastructure in Stryi, but amplified on January 10 the geolocated footage indicating that Russian forces had struck southwestern Lviv City.[6] Russian media have notably been amplifying the various reports from the pro-Russian Ukrainian channel about the Oreshnik strike.[7]

Russian officials are explicitly using the recent Oreshnik strike to deter Western states from deploying troops to post-war Ukraine, in line with ISW’s assessment about the purpose of the strike. Russian Security Council Chairperson Dmitry Medvedev, on January 10, on his English-language X account, threatened that Russia could use Oreshnik missiles to strike European or NATO troops that deploy to post-war Ukraine as part of security guarantees.[8] Russian State Duma International Affairs Committee Chairperson Leonid Slutsky stated on January 9 that Russian retaliation against future “blatant violations of red lines” is “inevitable.”[9] ISW recently assessed that the Kremlin likely targeted the westernmost part of Ukraine with an Oreshnik missile to deter Europe and the United States from providing security guarantees to Ukraine, particularly the deployment of a multinational assurance force, as the Coalition of the Willing is currently discussing.[10]

The United Kingdom (UK) is preparing for the possible deployment of troops to Ukraine as part of security guarantees in a future peace agreement. The UK government announced on January 9 the allocation of £200 million (about $268 million) to prepare British forces to deploy as part of a multinational force to post-war Ukraine.[11] The funding will go toward upgrading vehicles, communications systems, counter-drone protections, and force-protection equipment. The Kremlin has repeatedly stated that Western security guarantees would be “unacceptable” for Russia and that foreign troops would be “legitimate” targets for the Russian military.[12]

Ukraine continues to collaborate with its Western partners to expand the production of the interceptor drones that are crucial to Ukraine’s ability to down Russian long-range drones on the front and in the rear. UK Defense Minister John Healey announced on January 9 that the UK will begin production of the Ukrainian-designed “Octopus” interceptor drones, which can intercept Russian Shahed-type drones, in January 2025.[13] Healey stated that the UK aims to make thousands of these Octopus drones per month for Ukraine and noted that the production cost of each Octopus drone is less than 10 percent of the cost of the Russian Shahed-type drone. Healey stated that the UK will update the design every six weeks in order to stay ahead of Russian technological adaptations. Russian forces have been increasingly adapting and modifying their Shahed-type drones, including by adding integrated cameras and radio control capabilities that have allowed Russian forces to strike moving targets such as locomotives and by equipping Shaheds with thermobaric warheads and man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS).[14] Ukrainian and Russian forces have been engaged in an offense-defense race to develop new technologies throughout the full-scale invasion, as Russian forces have escalated their long-range strike campaign and Ukrainian forces have responded by innovating new air defense countermeasures. Russia’s continued efforts to degrade Ukrainian air defenses through constant innovation and adaptation underscore the need for a flexible, well-rounded, and well-provisioned Ukrainian air defense umbrella, including an arsenal of interceptor drones. ISW continues to assess that Ukraine’s ability to field technological adaptations at scale ahead of Russian adaptations is crucial for Ukraine’s ability to offset Russia’s quantitative materiel advantages.[15] ISW continues to assess that Western support for Ukraine’s interceptor drone program is vital not only for Ukraine’s defense against Russian strikes against the frontline and the rear but also for the defense of Europe.[16]

Key Takeaways

  1. Available visual evidence indicates that the Russian Oreshnik intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) strike on the night of January 8 to 9 struck a Ukrainian defense industrial enterprise in Lviv City.
  2. Russian officials are explicitly using the recent Oreshnik strike to deter Western states from deploying troops to post-war Ukraine, in line with ISW’s assessment about the purpose of the strike.
  3. The United Kingdom (UK) is preparing for the possible deployment of troops to Ukraine as part of security guarantees in a future peace agreement.
  4. Ukraine continues to collaborate with its Western partners to expand the production of the interceptor drones that are crucial to Ukraine’s ability to down Russian long-range drones on the front and in the rear.
  5. Ukrainian forces recently advanced in the Kostyantynivka-Druzhkivka tactical area.
Share the Post:

Wilson Center

Forced displacement represents one of the most pressing humanitarian issues of our time. Individuals and families, torn from the fabric of their communities, find themselves navigating a world of uncertainty, often without basic necessities or a clear path to safety. There are currently some 110 million forced displaced, and this number is growing by 10 million each year!

At the heart of this crisis are the political triggers. Armed conflicts, ethnic or religious persecutions, and systemic human rights abuses force millions to flee their homes in terror. Many are displaced within their own national boundaries, while others seek asylum abroad. If these factors change as a result of political shifts at home or the pressures from abroad, they can return to their homes. Forced displacement is thus different from environmentally driven displacement, as victims of climate change may never be able to return to their homes.

The ramifications of any sort of displacement are profound, not just for those directly affected, but also for host communities and countries. Overburdened infrastructures, socio-economic strains, and cultural tensions can arise, necessitating comprehensive strategies to foster harmony and integration. Yet the root causes of forced displacement can be remedied with a concerted focus by local players and international diplomacy.

Organizations like Refugees International play a crucial role in this arena, advocating for the rights and needs of the displaced, conducting on-the-ground assessments, and influencing policymakers to take informed actions. Their relentless work underscores the gravity of the situation and the urgency ofinternational cooperation. But they, too, are overwhelmed by the rapid expansion of the crisis.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), with its core principles centered on the protection of civilians during conflicts, plays a pivotal role in this discourse. Yet, despite clear legal frameworks, compliance remains
inconsistent. This initiative emphasizes the importance of upholding and reinforcing these international standards.

It’s not just about recognizing the problem; it’s about active engagement. We urge governments, organizations, and individuals to prioritize the rights and needs of the forced displaced. Through collective efforts, informed policies, and sustained advocacy, we can shift the narrative from passive acknowledgment to proactive intervention.