Russia has allegedly launched an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) during an attack on Ukraine, according to Ukraine’s Air Force.

This is believed to be the first use of such a weapon, designed for delivering nuclear strikes over long distances, in the ongoing conflict.

The Ukrainian Air Force identified the missile as an RS-26 Rubezh, capable of carrying an 800-kg nuclear warhead and with a range of 5,800 km. However, there was no indication that the missile was nuclear-armed, and Russia has not commented on the allegation. The missile reportedly targeted infrastructure in the city of Dnipro, causing damage to industrial facilities and injuring two people.

Experts have described the alleged use of an ICBM in a conventional conflict as unprecedented, noting that these weapons are typically reserved for strategic deterrence. They highlighted the potential escalation such a deployment could signify.

The launch from Astrakhan follows a week of heightened tensions, with Ukraine using Western-supplied long-range missiles to strike targets deep within Russia. Moscow has repeatedly warned that such actions could be considered major escalations in the conflict. Russian sources have claimed that British Storm Shadow cruise missiles were used to target its Kursk region, while Ukraine has also reportedly deployed U.S.-supplied ATACMS missiles.

George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison

14 COMMENTS

  1. Why are we so bothered about its flight method, i.e. unpowerd flight at the end of it flight (therefore ballistic) rather than the actual power (and therefore dmage) the explosive bit of the missile?

    • Because an ICBM launch could be misinterpreted as a nuclear strike triggering a nuclear response. This is why any test launches are planned well in advance and the plans shared between the nations.

    • Because if the Russian are so desperately short of tactical weapon that they have to resort to using very expensive ballistic missiles it gives a good indication of just how f**ked they are.

      • At least they can launch their ICBMs (it wasn’t one but whatever). Our so called government have disarmed this country while thinking it can poke about in other peoples business. We frankly deserve what is coming.

  2. I think that this might be a good time for de-escalation and negotiation before things really get out of hand. The Leaders of the the West must know how high the stakes are. I was listening to Hamish De Bretton Gordon on 5 live yesterday and quite frankly I was shocked at what he said, and he’s a Military commentator as well.

    • Russia has consistently been the one escalating things, whether that is by nuclear posturing, bringing foreign troops into the conflict, launching attacks from countries other than itself, or attacking nuclear power plants. The leaders of the west know full well what happens when they just try to appease someone like Putrid

    • by de-escalate you mean give Russia what it wants right? Given that we’re not the ones who have invaded a sovereign country, raped their Women, abducted their children and bomb their cities. There isn’t really a great deal we can do to deescalate. In fact its time we escalate and remind Russia they are not the only nuclear power in Europe and perhaps suggest to the Russian people that think its so great that they Nuke the UK that they too can expect our bombs in return. Maybe when its the mental image of their children being cooked they may not find it so funny.
      Although this isn’t really a sign of escalation, rather a sign of desperation. We already know Russia has the ability to deploy nuclear weapons so them using their ICBMs to deliver conventual weapons is merely a demonstration on how short the Russians our in smart munitions.

      • Indeed. Russia can’t ‘escalate’ in the sense of directly attacking NATO without effectively committing suicide. They won’t do that unless they think their country is about to be literally overrun by an invader. The constant hand-wringing about ‘escalation’ is the reason that this war hasn’t already been brought to a decisive end in Ukraine’s favour.

  3. Russia is wrong on so many levels but they believe in what they are doing, just like the Ukrainians are. A negotiated settlement doesn’t mean giving in to the Russians, far from it. How much of Western Civilisation are you willing to trade for your beliefs?.

    • Russian Negation is i keep what i have and i take what you have as well. They don’t understand the concept of the carrot so we should show them the stick. Western civilisation is worthless if it gives in to bullies.

    • And why would Russia negotiate anything at this point if its on the pretends of us being scared of them and withdrawing aid from Ukraine. If we show we’re not willing to kill them they will just take what they want.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here