
Forget nukes. This is Russia's new deterrence weapon
The explosion that followed – precise, deep, and eerily silent on the surface – tore through the massive Yuzhmash defense facility in southeastern Ukraine. Footage of the strike spread within hours, picked apart by open-source analysts and intelligence services alike. But it wasn't until Russian President Vladimir Putin confirmed it that the world had a name for what it had witnessed:
Oreshnik – a new kind of Russian ballistic missile.
Capable of reaching speeds above Mach 10, surviving reentry temperatures of 4,000C, and delivering kinetic force that rivals tactical nuclear weapons, the Oreshnik isn't just fast. It's different.
In less than a year, it has moved from classified prototype to serial production, with confirmed plans for forward deployment in Belarus by the end of 2025. Its emergence suggests that Russia is rewriting the rules of strategic deterrence – not with treaty-breaking escalation, but with something quieter, subtler, and potentially just as decisive.
So what exactly is the Oreshnik missile? Where did it come from, what are its capabilities – and how might it reshape the battlefield?
RT explains what's known so far about Russia's latest breakthrough in non-nuclear strategic weaponry.
The missile that struck the Yuzhmash facility in Dnepropetrovsk (known in Ukraine as Dnipro) left behind no scorched landscape, no flattened perimeter. Instead, analysts examining satellite imagery noted a narrow impact zone, structural collapse below ground level, and almost surgical surface disruption. It wasn't the scale of destruction that stood out – it was its shape.
This signature pointed to something new. According to available data and expert observations, the Oreshnik carries a cluster-type penetrative warhead, likely composed of multiple high-density submunitions. The detonation occurs only after the payload burrows into its target – a design meant to maximize internal damage to hardened military infrastructure.
Putin has stated that Oreshnik's warheads can withstand reentry temperatures up to 4,000C. To survive such heat and remain stable at terminal speed, the payload would need to be encased in advanced composite materials – likely drawing on recent developments in heat-resistant ceramics and carbon-carbon structures used in hypersonic glide vehicles.
One of the defining features of the system is its ability to maintain hypersonic velocity during the final phase of flight. Unlike traditional ballistic warheads that decelerate as they descend, Oreshnik reportedly retains speeds exceeding Mach 10, possibly Mach 11, even in dense atmospheric layers. This enables it to strike with massive kinetic energy, increasing penetration and lethality without requiring a large explosive charge.
At such speeds, even a non-nuclear warhead becomes a strategic weapon. A concentrated high-velocity impact is enough to destroy command bunkers, radar sites, or missile silos. The weapon's effectiveness doesn't rely on blast radius, but on precise, high-energy delivery. That makes it both harder to detect and harder to intercept.
In doctrinal terms, Oreshnik represents a new category: A non-nuclear strategic ballistic missile. It occupies the space between conventional long-range strike systems and nuclear ICBMs – with enough reach, speed, and impact to alter battlefield calculations, but without crossing the nuclear threshold.
Though the Oreshnik missile system entered the public spotlight in 2024, its technological roots trace back decades. The architecture, design philosophy, and even its name follow a lineage shaped by one institution: The Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology (MITT).
Founded during the Cold War to develop advanced solid-fueled missile systems, MITT has long been responsible for some of Russia's most sophisticated mobile strategic platforms. These include the Temp-2S, Pioner, and later, the Topol family – Russia's first mobile intercontinental ballistic missiles.
The naming convention has remained surprisingly consistent over the years. Most of MITT's missiles are named after trees: Topol (Poplar), Topol-M, Osina (Aspen), Yars (a type of ash), Kedr (Cedar). The new system, Oreshnik (Hazel), fits within that tradition – both symbolically and organizationally.
Analysts believe that the Oreshnik may be based in part on the RS-26 Rubezh, a mobile ICBM developed by MITT and tested from 2011 to 2015. The RS-26 was essentially a shortened version of the Yars ICBM, designed to deliver high-precision strikes at intermediate ranges. Development was quietly paused in the mid-2010s – likely in response to the constraints of the INF Treaty, which prohibited land-based missiles with ranges of 500-5,500km.
That treaty is no longer in force. After the US formally withdrew in 2019, Russia was free to resume development in a domain that had been frozen for decades. The appearance of Oreshnik just five years later suggests that its core components – propulsion systems, targeting modules, and mobile chassis – were already well advanced.
What began as a one-off operational strike has since evolved into a full-scale weapons program. In June 2025, during a meeting with graduates of Russia's top military academies, Putin announced that the Oreshnik missile system had entered serial production.
'This weapon has proven itself extremely effective in combat conditions, and in a very short time,' he stated.
The speed of this transition – from battlefield debut to mass production – is notable. It suggests that both the missile system and its supporting infrastructure had been maturing quietly in the background, likely building off earlier research conducted under the RS-26 program.
Even more significant than the production itself is the plan for forward deployment. On July 2, 2025, during an Independence Day gathering in Minsk, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko publicly confirmed that the first Oreshnik units would be stationed on in Belarus by the end of the year.
'We agreed with Putin in Volgograd,' Lukashenko said. 'The first Oreshnik positions will be in Belarus. You've seen how this system performs. It will be here before the year is out.'
The move carries both logistical logic and strategic weight. Belarus has long provided heavy-duty mobile chassis for Russian missile systems – including the one used by Oreshnik. That industrial synergy makes Minsk a natural hub for deployment, but this is more than technical convenience.
With a minimum range of 800km and a maximum reportedly almost 5,500, the Oreshnik stationed in Belarus would place virtually all of Central and Western Europe within reach. For Russia, it represents a non-nuclear forward deterrent. For NATO, it introduces a new class of threat – one that is fast, precise, and difficult to intercept, yet remains below the threshold of nuclear retaliation.
In practical terms, this also opens the door to a possible joint Russian-Belarusian command structure for missile operations outside Russian territory – a development that would further formalize military integration between the two states.
For decades, the term 'strategic weapon' has been synonymous with nuclear arms – tools of last resort, deployed not for use but for deterrence. Oreshnik changes that equation.
By combining intercontinental reach, hypersonic speed, and precision penetrative capability, the system introduces a new tier of force: One that sits below the nuclear threshold, but far above conventional long-range artillery or cruise missiles.
Unlike nuclear warheads, Oreshnik's payloads can be used without inviting global condemnation or risking escalation beyond control. Yet their destructive potential – especially against hardened military targets or critical infrastructure – makes them a credible tool of strategic coercion.
This is the core of what we can call a 'non-nuclear deterrence doctrine': The ability to achieve battlefield or political objectives through advanced conventional systems that mimic the strategic impact of nuclear weapons – without crossing the line.
In this emerging framework, Oreshnik is not just a missile. It is a prototype of future war logic: Fast enough to strike before detection, survivable enough to evade interception, and powerful enough to shape decisions before war even begins.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Russia Today
2 hours ago
- Russia Today
NATO member sets up gates and barriers at Russian border checkpoint
Estonian authorities have begun installing metal gates and barriers at a key border crossing with Russia, local broadcaster ERR reported on Saturday citing the country's defense ministry. The measure, reportedly aimed at bolstering security, comes amid growing tensions between Moscow and the NATO countries. These infrastructure upgrades are located at the Narva crossing, one of the main transit points between Estonia and Russia. Metal gates are being set up at the entrance to the bridge on the Estonian side, with additional structures for pedestrian and vehicle control positioned midway across. 'The barriers help prevent vehicles from forcefully driving through the border checkpoint. Essentially, they help to prevent evasion of border control,' said Antti Eensalu, head of the Police and Border Guard Board's Narva checkpoint, as quoted by ERR. He added that installation work is expected to be completed next month, stressing that the upgrades would make it possible to completely shut down the checkpoint if necessary. Authorities are reportedly planning to install similar drive-through barriers at the Luhamaa and Koidula border checkpoints in southern Estonia. Like its Baltic neighbors Latvia and Lithuania, Estonia has adopted an increasingly hardline stance toward Russia since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, and has speculated that Russia could invade once the Ukraine conflict ends. The Kremlin has repeatedly rejected the claim and branded related measures taken by Estonia and other Baltic states as 'Russophobic'. On Sunday, Estonia's Ministry of Defense announced that NATO is considering establishing a German-Dutch Allied Corps presence in the country, a move that would further expand the alliance's footprint in the Baltic region. Earlier this year, Estonia signaled its readiness to host allied forces operating F-35 jets, including aircraft with nuclear capabilities. The Kremlin responded that such deployments would be regarded as a direct threat to Russian national security. In 2024, Estonia also unveiled plans to build hundreds of concrete bunkers along its entire eastern border as part of the Baltic Defense Line, a coordinated regional initiative with Latvia and Lithuania aimed at boosting collective defense readiness. Moscow has reiterated that it poses no threat to Europe, expressing doubt about the necessity of spending money on such fortifications.


Russia Today
4 hours ago
- Russia Today
Why Russia and the US are bound to cooperate beyond Earth
The head of Roscosmos, Dmitry Bakanov, has made a rare visit to the United States – his first official trip since assuming the top job at Russia's space agency. The occasion? To attend the launch of Russian cosmonaut Oleg Platonov aboard a SpaceX spacecraft and to meet with his counterpart, acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy. Whether or not he meets Elon Musk remains to be seen. But this trip is significant far beyond the question of private handshakes. This was, first and foremost, a political and diplomatic visit – the kind that's planned months in advance and requires high-level approval. That it's taking place now, in the midst of a direct confrontation between Moscow and Washington over Ukraine, speaks volumes. It marks the first in-person meeting between the heads of Roscosmos and NASA since 2018, when Dmitry Rogozin hosted Jim Bridenstine at Baikonur. Rogozin's own planned return visit to the US was blocked in late 2018, despite his openness to meeting Musk. His inclusion on Western sanctions lists made it politically toxic for Washington to host him. Subsequent Roscosmos chief Yury Borisov never even got the opportunity for face-to-face talks – the Biden administration declined, citing political optics during the Ukraine conflict. Communications were limited to a few phone calls. But with the return of Donald Trump to the White House and a reshuffled US space leadership, conditions for engagement have shifted. It hardly matters that the American side was represented by an acting official – Sean Duffy, appointed just two weeks ago – or that NASA has seen more leadership turnover than Roscosmos in recent years. Duffy doesn't make key decisions. He speaks for the White House. The symbolism lies in the fact that a meeting is happening at all, after years of virtual silence under the Biden administration. The timing is not accidental. The meeting coincided with the anniversary of the 1975 Apollo-Soyuz mission, when the US and USSR docked their spacecrafts in orbit at the height of the Cold War. Back then, both sides had nuclear weapons aimed at each other's capitals. And yet, they still shook hands in space. If they could do it then, the logic goes, they can do it now. The second reason for the visit – the flight of a Russian cosmonaut on an American spacecraft – sends an equally pointed message: despite geopolitical conflict, collaboration remains possible. NASA's reliance on Musk's rockets has only grown, especially after Boeing's Starliner program stumbled again. The next Starliner launch is planned as a cargo-only mission; crewed flights are on hold. Caution prevails. In this context, the Roscosmos visit functions as a subtle form of diplomacy: why fight down here when we could build together up there? The International Space Station (ISS) remains the last major joint venture between Russia and the US. Beyond it, nothing binds the two powers in peaceful cooperation. While technical matters were on the agenda, diplomacy took precedence. Still, two important points emerged from the talks. First, Sergey Krikalev – Russia's special presidential envoy for space – hinted that both sides have preliminarily agreed to extend ISS operations until 2030. Previously, the Russian government had only committed to supporting its segment of the station until 2028, anticipating that the first module of its next-generation Russian Orbital Station (ROS) would be launched by then. The US, meanwhile, has committed to operating its segment until 2030, with the possibility of continuing through 2032. Krikalev's statement carries weight. As a presidential envoy, he can speak with more flexibility than Bakanov, who is still bound by formal government directives. Nevertheless, the implication is clear: the door is open to extending joint operations well beyond 2028. Second, Bakanov stated that the two sides also discussed future space cooperation – including potential collaboration on the Russian orbital station and on deeper space missions. If negotiations go well, we could see the ISS extended through 2035, with Russia possibly participating in – or helping shape – a successor project: an ISS-2. For Trump, a renewed global space station could be cast as a diplomatic victory, potentially traded for Western concessions on Ukraine. If that happens, Russia's role in ISS-2, especially in partnership with BRICS countries, would elevate the project into a truly multipolar enterprise. A space station that is not just international, but universal. And then there is the Mars question – Musk's long-standing obsession and a second pillar of any future space agenda. A meeting between Bakanov and Musk, if it happens, would be behind closed doors and entirely unofficial. Just like when Vladimir Popovkin, a former Russian space chief, secretly met with Musk years ago. Bakanov's goal, it seems, is to demonstrate that Russia's aerospace sector has something to offer – that it is not a relic, but a relevant partner in humanity's next leap. If Russia does not participate in the Mars project, it risks being left behind. But what could attract Musk's attention? In reality, Russia has two trump cards: its nuclear-powered space tug technology and its deep, unmatched experience in space medicine. If harnessed wisely, these assets could give Moscow a seat at the Mars table – whether as partner or competitor. In sum, the Roscosmos visit to the US is about far more than a launch or a handshake. It's a signal – deliberate and strategic – that Russia still sees space as a domain for cooperation, not conflict. And that in the great void above us, there may yet be room for common article was first published by the online newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team


Russia Today
5 hours ago
- Russia Today
Why US and Russia are bound to cooperate beyond Earth
The head of Roscosmos, Dmitry Bakanov, has made a rare visit to the United States – his first official trip since assuming the top job at Russia's space agency. The occasion? To attend the launch of Russian cosmonaut Oleg Platonov aboard a SpaceX spacecraft and to meet with his counterpart, acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy. Whether or not he meets Elon Musk remains to be seen. But this trip is significant far beyond the question of private handshakes. This was, first and foremost, a political and diplomatic visit – the kind that's planned months in advance and requires high-level approval. That it's taking place now, in the midst of a direct confrontation between Moscow and Washington over Ukraine, speaks volumes. It marks the first in-person meeting between the heads of Roscosmos and NASA since 2018, when Dmitry Rogozin hosted Jim Bridenstine at Baikonur. Rogozin's own planned return visit to the US was blocked in late 2018, despite his openness to meeting Musk. His inclusion on Western sanctions lists made it politically toxic for Washington to host him. Subsequent Roscosmos chief Yury Borisov never even got the opportunity for face-to-face talks – the Biden administration declined, citing political optics during the Ukraine conflict. Communications were limited to a few phone calls. But with the return of Donald Trump to the White House and a reshuffled US space leadership, conditions for engagement have shifted. It hardly matters that the American side was represented by an acting official – Sean Duffy, appointed just two weeks ago – or that NASA has seen more leadership turnover than Roscosmos in recent years. Duffy doesn't make key decisions. He speaks for the White House. The symbolism lies in the fact that a meeting is happening at all, after years of virtual silence under the Biden administration. The timing is not accidental. The meeting coincided with the anniversary of the 1975 Apollo-Soyuz mission, when the US and USSR docked their spacecrafts in orbit at the height of the Cold War. Back then, both sides had nuclear weapons aimed at each other's capitals. And yet, they still shook hands in space. If they could do it then, the logic goes, they can do it now. The second reason for the visit – the flight of a Russian cosmonaut on an American spacecraft – sends an equally pointed message: despite geopolitical conflict, collaboration remains possible. NASA's reliance on Musk's rockets has only grown, especially after Boeing's Starliner program stumbled again. The next Starliner launch is planned as a cargo-only mission; crewed flights are on hold. Caution prevails. In this context, the Roscosmos visit functions as a subtle form of diplomacy: why fight down here when we could build together up there? The International Space Station (ISS) remains the last major joint venture between Russia and the US. Beyond it, nothing binds the two powers in peaceful cooperation. While technical matters were on the agenda, diplomacy took precedence. Still, two important points emerged from the talks. First, Sergey Krikalev – Russia's special presidential envoy for space – hinted that both sides have preliminarily agreed to extend ISS operations until 2030. Previously, the Russian government had only committed to supporting its segment of the station until 2028, anticipating that the first module of its next-generation Russian Orbital Station (ROS) would be launched by then. The US, meanwhile, has committed to operating its segment until 2030, with the possibility of continuing through 2032. Krikalev's statement carries weight. As a presidential envoy, he can speak with more flexibility than Bakanov, who is still bound by formal government directives. Nevertheless, the implication is clear: the door is open to extending joint operations well beyond 2028. Second, Bakanov stated that the two sides also discussed future space cooperation – including potential collaboration on the Russian orbital station and on deeper space missions. If negotiations go well, we could see the ISS extended through 2035, with Russia possibly participating in – or helping shape – a successor project: an ISS-2. For Trump, a renewed global space station could be cast as a diplomatic victory, potentially traded for Western concessions on Ukraine. If that happens, Russia's role in ISS-2, especially in partnership with BRICS countries, would elevate the project into a truly multipolar enterprise. A space station that is not just international, but universal. And then there is the Mars question – Musk's long-standing obsession and a second pillar of any future space agenda. A meeting between Bakanov and Musk, if it happens, would be behind closed doors and entirely unofficial. Just like when Vladimir Popovkin, a former Russian space chief, secretly met with Musk years ago. Bakanov's goal, it seems, is to demonstrate that Russia's aerospace sector has something to offer – that it is not a relic, but a relevant partner in humanity's next leap. If Russia does not participate in the Mars project, it risks being left behind. But what could attract Musk's attention? In reality, Russia has two trump cards: its nuclear-powered space tug technology and its deep, unmatched experience in space medicine. If harnessed wisely, these assets could give Moscow a seat at the Mars table – whether as partner or competitor. In sum, the Roscosmos visit to the US is about far more than a launch or a handshake. It's a signal – deliberate and strategic – that Russia still sees space as a domain for cooperation, not conflict. And that in the great void above us, there may yet be room for common article was first published by the online newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team