Russia’s Next Moves – Missile threats and cyber escalation

During a Defence Committee session on December 10, marking 1,000 days since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Fred Thomas MP posed a critical question that guided much of the discussion: “What are the next things on Russia’s list of activities to make the West concerned about continuing or increasing support to Ukraine?”

Dr Patricia Lewis, former Director of the International Security Programme at Chatham House, offered a detailed response, outlining possible future moves by Russia to escalate tensions and test Western resolve.

Dr Lewis highlighted the broader context of NATO’s response to the conflict, describing a “very sensitive calibration” within NATO nations, particularly the United States, since early 2022. This careful balance aimed to ensure the war was not perceived as a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia.

“That calibration was what was holding back air defences, combat aircraft, long-range missiles and allowing deep strikes into Russian territory,” she explained. However, she noted that this boundary has since shifted, stating: “That red line has been broken, but there are still some big issues about that.”

In response to Thomas’s question, Lewis identified several potential actions Russia might take to disrupt Western support for Ukraine. She predicted increased use of the Oreshnik missile, a weapon that poses a significant challenge due to its speed, range, and the absence of effective countermeasures.

“I think that we will see more use of the Oreshnik missile to frighten—there are no defences against it—in a conventional capability,” she explained. While Russia has used other dual-capable weapons throughout the war, the Oreshnik’s specific capabilities make it particularly concerning.

Lewis also warned of further tests of advanced weapons systems, describing these as “demonstration[s] in combat conditions.” She emphasised that these displays aim to project strength and intimidate. “We are likely to see more tests of weapons systems,” she said, adding that such actions serve to highlight Russia’s ongoing military developments.

Beyond missile testing, Lewis pointed to the increasing likelihood of cyber operations and potential attacks on space-based systems. “We may see more and more cyber interference,” she noted, observing that while Ukraine has shown resilience against such threats, a concentrated cyber campaign remains a possibility. She also suggested the potential for cyber-attacks targeting critical space assets, describing this as “engagement in space, particularly cyber-attacks in space.”

Lewis framed these actions within the broader context of Russian strategy and NATO’s response. She noted concerns about maintaining cohesion within the alliance and preventing Russia from framing the conflict as NATO’s war. “We also have to be concerned about Article 5 and NATO cohesion if NATO is seen to be the fight,” she said, highlighting the importance of preserving unity among member states.

Reflecting on the challenges of deterring Russian actions, Lewis underscored the need for better intelligence and understanding of deterrence strategies. “We have to understand what deters,” she said. “Part of the problem now with our relationship with Russia is that we are increasingly distanced from the thinking of what is going on.”

Thomas’s question brought attention to the complexities of maintaining Western support for Ukraine while countering Russian efforts to escalate and destabilise.