November 20, 2024

Institute for the Study of War: Ukraine launches long range strikes into Russia

Institute for the Study of War

Ukraine conducted a successful combined strike against military assets in the Russian rear on the night of November 19 to 20 using drones and Western-provided long-range weapons. The Guardian and Bloomberg both reported on November 20, citing anonymous sources, that Ukrainian forces have conducted the first strikes against military targets within Russia using UK-provided Storm Shadow missiles.[1] Geolocated footage published on November 20 shows the aftermath of a likely Storm Shadow strike near Marino, Kursk Oblast.[2] Several Russian milbloggers claimed that Ukrainian forces launched up to 12 Storm Shadow missiles at Kursk Oblast, fragments of which struck Marino.[3] The geolocated footage of the strike suggests that the Ukrainian target may have been the Baryatinsky Estate in Marino, which the Ukrainian defense-focused outlet Defense Express suggested was housing a command post for Russian and North Korean troops operating in Kursk Oblast.[4] ISW cannot confirm this claim at this time, but Marino is about 30km from the current Kursk Oblast salient, which would be an appropriate distance for an operational headquarters for troops conducting offensives along the salient.

Ukrainian forces also conducted a large-scale drone strike against the Russian rear on the night of November 19 to 20, particularly targeting military and defense industrial assets in Voronezh, Belgorod, and Novgorod oblasts. The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed that Russian air defense systems destroyed or intercepted a total of 44 Ukrainian drones as of the morning of November 20, including 20 over Novgorod Oblast; five over Kursk Oblast; four over Oryol Oblast; three each over Belgorod, Tula, and Tver oblasts; and two each over Bryansk, Moscow, and Smolensk oblasts.[5] Head of Ukraine’s Center for Combatting Disinformation Lieutenant Andriy Kovalenko stated on November 20 that Ukrainian drones struck the 13th Main Missile and Artillery Directorate (GRAU) arsenal near Kotovo, Novgorod Oblast, at which Russian forces were reportedly storing ammunition for tube artillery; mortar mines; “Grad,” “Smerch,” and “Uragan” multi-launch rocket systems (MLRS) missiles; Iskander ballistic missiles; S-300 and S-400 surface-to-air missiles; North Korean provided KN-23 ballistic missiles; and Tor surface-to-air system missiles.[6] Ukraine’s Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) reported that Ukrainian forces also struck a command post of the Russian “Sever” (Nothern) Grouping of Forces in Gubkin, Belgorod Oblast.[7] Ukrainian and Russian sources additionally posted footage of the aftermath of a reported Ukrainian drone strike against the EFKO Factory in Alekseyevka, Belgorod Oblast, which Kovalenko stated produces cargo drones for the Russian military.[8] Russian sources reported that Ukrainian drones also hit an unspecified industrial enterprise in Voronezh Oblast and targeted an oil depot in Sosnovka, Samara Oblast.[9]

The November 19 to 20 strike series indicates that Ukraine has already begun leveraging Western-provided long-range weapons systems to assemble more complex and effective strike packages. Ukrainian forces notably utilized both long-range strike drones and Storm Shadow missiles in the November 19-20 strike and struck a diverse range of military targets across the Russian rear.

ISW has long assessed that the systems and capabilities that Western partners are providing Ukraine, alongside Ukraine’s indigenous defense industrial production and innovation efforts, are all constituent components of wider capabilities that Ukraine requires to successfully wage a multi-domain large-scale modern war.[10] Ukraine has already proven itself effective in using often domestically-produced drones to strike a variety of military targets in the Russian rear, including air bases, command headquarters, and artillery depots.[11] Ukraine’s arsenal already includes aerial and naval drones and Western-provided systems such as F-16s, HIMARS, and ATACMS, although the conditions of use on the latter systems have been restricted enough to limit the benefit Ukraine can accrue by using them.[12] The addition of more powerful and precise Western-provided systems, such as JASSMs and additional ATACMS, Storm Shadows, and SCALP systems, is crucial in enabling Ukraine to scale up the effects it can generate through long-range strikes against the Russian rear.

Russian forces, in contrast, have been experimenting and diversifying their strike packages to inflict maximum damage on Ukrainian critical infrastructure, conducting frequent strikes with a combination of Iranian-provided or Russian-produced Shahed drones and drone variants, North Korean-provided and domestically produced ballistic and cruise missiles, hypersonic missiles, and aerial bombs.[13]

Key Takeaways:

  • Ukraine conducted a successful combined strike against military assets in the Russian rear on the night of November 19 to 20 using drones and Western-provided long-range weapons. The November 19 to 20 strike series indicates that Ukraine has already begun leveraging Western-provided long-range weapons systems to assemble more complex and effective strike packages.
  • Neither Russian nor Ukrainian forces have been able to conduct optimized operational maneuver since Winter 2022-2023 due to legacy doctrinal and resource limitations, but both are learning, innovating, and adapting their respective tactics on the battlefield, emphasizing the dynamic nature of the current war.
  • The US and Germany announced additional military assistance for Ukraine on November 20.
  • Ukrainian officials continue to launch investigations into Russian executions of Ukrainian prisoners of war (POWs) and provide statistics on Ukrainians living under Russian captivity.
  • Ukrainian forces recently regained lost positions near Pokrovsk, and Russian forces recently advanced near Kupyansk Chasiv Yar, Toretsk, Kurakhove, and Vuhledar and in Kursk Oblast.
  • The Russian military command’s lack of proper treatment of Russian soldiers and continued reliance on “meat assaults” is likely contributing to mass desertions.
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.