Russia builds layered defence: naval drone attacks became more difficult, Ukrainian Navy says
Source: Vice Admiral Oleksii Neizhpapa, Commander of the Naval Forces of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, in an interview with Krym.Realii, a Radio Liberty project
Quote: "There was a time when we could calmly enter Sevastopol Bay with naval drones, but now it is not that simple. The enemy has set up a layered defence system. It begins with a layered detection system – long-range, mid-range and close-range zones for detecting our uncrewed systems. Then comes the procedure for destroying them… And, of course, to overcome it, we have to make different decisions – technical decisions, first of all…
We need to be more flexible, smarter, and always ahead in technology. Those naval drones that were just kamikaze are already nearly history. Now, all USVs must be able to carry various types of weapons, with different methods of use, to be more effective and to achieve success."
Details: When asked whether Russia has analogues of such drones, Neizhpapa noted that Russian forces are trying to develop them.
Quote: "There have been a few uses, more or less successful. And they are working on it. And we are also preparing to repel these drones and their possible use. Just like during the ground war, it was something new for them back then. Now, as you can see, it is a drone war. And at sea, too, they are preparing to do the same things. So we are also getting ready, not only to use drones against the enemy, but also to defend ourselves from them."
Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
American Military News
5 hours ago
- American Military News
Russia's War Economy Is Heading To Recession. It Probably Won't Slow Down The War.
This article was originally published by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and is reprinted with permission. At Russia's annual marquee event for business investment, a Kremlin-funded bubbly celebration of promise and opportunity, the country's top economic minister poured cold war on the party. 'According to the numbers, yes, we've got a cooling down now,' Maksim Reshetnikov said at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. 'Based on current business sentiment, it seems to me we are on the brink of transitioning into recession.' If that wasn't enough of a damper, the head of the Russian Central Bank seconded the downbeat sentiment. 'We have been growing for two years at a fairly high rate due to the fact that free labor resources were used,' Elvira Nabiullina said during the same panel discussion on June 19. 'But we need to understand that many of these resources have really been exhausted. We need to think about a new model for growth.' And there was also this from German Gref, the head of the state-owned banking giant Sberbank, on the sidelines of the forum: 'We are colliding with a large number of problems, which today we can call a perfect storm.' For more than 40 months now, since the start of the all-out invasion of Ukraine, Russia's economy has been on a war footing, growing at a robust — at times torrid — rate, and showing resilience — unexpected to many Western experts — in the face of punishing sanctions. People walk past an exchange office screen showing the exchange rates of the U.S. dollar to the Russian ruble in St. Petersburg, Russia, in April ALSO: In Russia's War Economy, The Warning Lights Are Blinking The Kremlin has retooled the economy to power its war, pouring money into defense industries to churn out guns, tanks, drones, and uniforms. It's poured money into wages for defense industry workers and paid soldiers sky-high salaries and benefits to entice them to fight in Ukraine. That's transformed local economies in many of the country's poorer, remote regions, and also bought support for the conflict. But high wages have fueled inflation, and Nabiullina hiked the key interest rate to 21 percent in October to try and tamp it down. Despite public complaints from the country's industrial lobby, she has held firm, committed to slowing inflation and downshifting the economy. It's working, and now Russia is facing the first significant economic slowdown since the start of the full-scale war. 'I think a lot of indicators point to growth stopping, or close to it,' said Iikka Korhonen, head of research at the Bank of Finland's Institute for Emerging Economies. 'Manufacturing is still growing, but most other things are not.' 'For two years [the] Russian economy was overheated and growing at a pace way above its normal growth rate,' said Alexander Kolyandr, an economics expert with the Center for European Policy Analysis in Washington. 'So what's happening now is the economy returns to where it should be. For the moment it stands as a correction, coming back to the long-term growth rate.' 'The main challenge for the government at this point is to make this a soft landing, rather than a complete collapse,' he said. With the Russian war effort now in full flow, millions of Russians have been working in factories, manning around-the-clock shifts. (file photo)SEE ALSO:For Some In Russia's Far-Flung Provinces, Ukraine War Is A Ticket To ProsperityWhat Comes Next? Russia's gross domestic product grew by 1.4 percent in the first three months of the year, compared with the same period in 2024, according to government statistics. In the last six months of 2024, however, the economy was humming along — with average growth of around 4.4 percent. Official estimates now forecast GDP growth at around 2 percent in 2025. The International Monetary Fund predicts even lower growth — 1.5 percent. The unemployment rate stands at a historic low of around 2.3 percent, underscoring how distorted the labor market has become as men are drawn away from civilian jobs to fight in Ukraine. Faced with inflation running at over 10 percent in the first half of 2025, Nabiullina has warned repeatedly about an 'overheated economy.' In early June, she engineered a small rate cut, to 20 percent, which experts called largely symbolic. But the impact of the high interest rate is showing up in official statistics, according to data and forecasts from the Center for Macroeconomic Analysis and Short-Term Forecasting, a government-linked research group. For some in the Kremlin, a soft landing would be a welcome correction to the two torrid previous years. The danger is if it becomes a hard landing. 'By keeping the key rate very high, despite the state continuously pumping money into the economy, they have been able to achieve economic slowdown,' said Maria Snegovaya, a senior fellow in the Russia program at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. The Kremlin has sought to avoid any mass mobilization of Russian men to fight in Ukraine. A September 2022 order for a partial mobilization was widely ALSO: More War, Less Money: What A Cut In Signing Bonuses May Reveal About Russia's Fight In Ukraine 'It's unclear how sustainable the situation is for the Kremlin if the economy is actually declining. It's not something that they want either,' she said during an online discussion on June 17. 'In general, the Russian macroeconomic team seems to be quite concerned.' What this means politically is harder to predict. So far, President Vladimir Putin has given Nabiullina and other top economic officials his blessing for their handling of the economy. A day after the panel discussion at the St. Petersburg forum, Putin weighed in himself, with a cautionary note in a speech at the business forum: 'Some specialists, experts, point to the risks of stagnation and even recession,' he said. 'Of course, this should not be allowed under any circumstances.' 'Our most important task this year is to transition the economy to balanced growth,' Putin said. President Vladimir Putin applauds during a plenary session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum on June Vladimir Putin applauds during a plenary session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum on June 20. With other parts of the economy crimped by sanctions, Kremlin coffers are even more heavily dependent on oil and gas revenues than they have been in the past. But oil prices have fallen since the beginning of the year, and the Finance Ministry has lowered its forecast for oil-linked revenues for 2025. 'Unless we see a decline in oil prices, [or] some significant increase in sanctions enforcement, and an overall decline in civilian production, then I think there will be a soft landing,' Kolyandr said. Balanced — or slower — growth will ripple through the economy, putting a brake on wage growth. It will also crimp household budgets at a time when Russians have been accustomed to fatter wallets, which could fuel discontent. A growing number of companies and factories are also falling behind in wage and salary payments to workers, according to the newspaper Nezavisimaya Gazeta. And a growing number of regions have started cutting recruitment bonuses for new volunteer soldiers — a trend that reflects worsening economic conditions on a local level. Still, Putin seems determined to push forward in the war — even faced with eyewatering casualty rates that are approaching 1 million men killed or wounded. The government plans on spending about 13.1 trillion rubles ($144 billion) on defense- and security-related expenditures in 2025. That's 6.3 percent of its GDP, one of the highest levels since the Soviet era. 'Unfortunately, yes, this war will not stop for economic reasons, and Russia can continue to produce [weaponry] at the current level for quite a while,' Korhonen said. 'The only economic factor that could really hamper Russia's war effort is the price of oil.'
Boston Globe
6 hours ago
- Boston Globe
It's time for a United States of Europe
Advertisement But history wasn't done with him. In 2030, Russia invaded Estonia, a former Soviet republic in northeastern Europe. It was Ukraine all over again. Estonia was a NATO member, but the United States, still led by the Republican Party's isolationist right wing, refused to intervene. Europe was on its own. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up In those dark years, Macron emerged as Europe's moral and military leader. His cause: the creation of a single European nation — a United States of Europe. In 2035, seven European countries — France, Italy, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Poland — merged and established the European Federation. Macron was elected its first president. Now, a decade later, Macron is finishing his second term. Under his leadership, the Federation has expanded to more than 20 countries. It has repelled the Russian threat. And it has grown into a global superpower to rival America and China. Advertisement Not just make-believe The idea of a United States of Europe might sound like a fantasy, but it is a serious proposition whose time has come. Threatened by Vladimir Putin on its eastern flank and abandoned by Donald Trump's America, Europe must evolve or fall apart. As the new German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, The best way to do that will be to form a European federation. A federation would unite Europe far more extensively than the European Union does — it would bind countries into a truly unified system of government like what exists in the United States. And it's the only way the continent can guarantee its security, protect its democratic values, and secure its influence in the 21st century and beyond. The current EU is a constitutional Frankenstein: a byzantine economic and political union whose power is split between the That's not all. There's also a Advertisement Oh, and 20 EU countries Confused? You're not alone. Everything would be simpler with a European federation. The historian Brendan Simms, who leads Cambridge University's Think of how the United Kingdom or the United States works: There is one central government, with devolved governments at the regional or state levels. As Simms outlines in his book ' A federal Europe isn't a new idea. It became a real possibility after World War II. In 1951, six countries — including France, West Germany, and Italy — formed a Advertisement At the end of the Cold War, Europe had another chance to become a federation with the advent of the EU in 1993. The German chancellor, Helmut Kohl, But Kohl's warning fell on deaf ears. Pundits predicted that the EU would soon rival the United States as the apex of liberal civilization. Books appeared with grand titles like ' They were all wildly mistaken. First there was the 2008 financial crash, then the eurozone debt crisis, the 2015 migration wave, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the war in Ukraine. Political power mattered more than ever. But under pressure, the EU has started to show some teeth. Take Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The EU has given Advertisement In recent years, the EU has also Macron deserves much of the credit for Europe's awakening, despite France's historic resistance to a unified Europe. 'Only Europe can guarantee genuine sovereignty or our ability to exist in today's world to defend our values and interests,' he said At the height of the pandemic, Macron spearheaded the creation of an Advertisement But Europe must unite more closely still. The circumstances demand it. It's become obvious that Russia At the same time, Europe's longstanding ally, America, is stepping back. Trump no longer wants the United States to underwrite the continent's security. Instead, he seems hellbent on going over the heads of Europeans Europe must strike out on its own Fortunately, both Macron and Merz seem to understand that Europe must now chart its own path. The United States of Europe would be a force to be reckoned with — thanks to a Europe should also become a federation to better rein in multinational corporations and build an economy that works for the many. The continent has a unique socioeconomic model: social democracy. But only if countries pool their resources will Europeans be able to preserve their cherished welfare states and long summer holidays. What's more, the two great challenges of the 21st century — climate change and artificial intelligence — will require sustained collective action. Again, only a federation can deliver that. There's only one way forward — and now is the time 'A United States of Europe isn't some utopian dream, it's a necessary evolution,' says Daniela Vancic of the History is also on the side of a European federation. 'Federations are established when there's an external threat,' says Matt Qvortrup, a senior research fellow at Australian National University's This was the case with the United States. After declaring independence in 1776, the states were But, even in a crisis, a European superstate won't magically appear. It has to be willed into existence. The political landscape across Europe isn't helping. The EU is divided between pro-European parties and Euro-skeptic nationalist parties. The pro-European faction must do more than simply defend against nationalist attacks; it must start advocating for a federation outright. Otherwise, it risks being seen as apologists for the EU's bureaucracy. The choice shouldn't be between the EU as it is now and nationalism. It should be between deeper integration and nationalism. If pro-Europeans don't offer that choice, nationalists will prevail. Far from pursuing a United States of Europe, some countries could even slam the door on the status quo: the EU. After all, Brexit showed that leaving the bloc is possible. But failure is not inevitable. Public opinion across Europe is complicated — and more pro-European — than it might seem. Voters may be frustrated with the EU, but they are not opposed to a unified Europe. To the contrary. According to Yet Europeans won't clamor for a federation if leaders fail to champion it. More than anyone else, that responsibility falls to Macron. Rumor has it he It will require all of his political courage. As a wise man
7 hours ago
Brazil hosts BRICS summit, eager to avoid provoking Trump's ire
RIO DE JANEIRO -- Brazil will play host to a summit of the BRICS bloc of developing economies Sunday and Monday during which pressing topics like Israel's attack on Iran, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and trade tariffs imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump are expected to be handled with caution. Analysts and diplomats said the lack of cohesion in an enlarged BRICS, which doubled in size last year, may affect its ability to become another pole in world affairs. They also see the summit's moderate agenda as an attempt by member countries to stay off Trump's radar. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva will have some of his priorities, such as debates on artificial intelligence and climate change, front and center for the talks with key leaders not in attendance. China's President Xi Jinping won't attend a BRICS summit for the first time since he became his country's leader in 2012. Russian President Vladimir Putin, who will make an appearance via videoconference, continues to mostly avoid traveling abroad due to an international arrest warrant issued after Russia invaded Ukraine. The restraint expected in Rio de Janeiro marks a departure from last year's summit hosted by Russia in Kazan, when the Kremlin sought to develop alternatives to U.S.-dominated payment systems which would allow it to dodge Western sanctions imposed after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. A source involved in the negotiations told journalists Friday that some members of the group want more aggressive language on the situation in Gaza and Israel's attack on Iran. The source spoke under the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about the matter publicly. 'Brazil wants to keep the summit as technical as possible,' said Oliver Stuenkel, a professor at the Getulio Vargas Foundation think tank and university. Consequently, observers expect a vague final declaration regarding Russia's war in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East. As well as suiting Brazil, a watered-down and non-controversial statement may be made easier by the absences of Putin and Xi, Stuenkel said. Those two countries have pushed for a stronger anti-Western stance, as opposed to Brazil and India that prefer non-alignment. A Brazilian government official told The Associated Press Thursday that the group is expected to produce three joint statements and a final declaration, 'all of which less bounded by current geopolitical tensions.' The official spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the summit's preparations. João Alfredo Nyegray, an international business and geopolitics professor at the Pontifical Catholic University in Parana, said the summit could have played a role in showing an alternative to an unstable world, but won't do so. 'The withdrawal of Egypt's President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and the uncertainty about the level of representation for countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are confirming the difficulty for the BRICS to establish themselves as a cohesive pole of global leadership,' Nyegray said. 'This moment demands high level articulation, but we are actually seeing dispersion.' Brazil, the country that chairs the bloc, has picked six strategic priorities for the summit: global cooperation in healthcare; trade, investment and finance; climate change; governance for artificial intelligence; peace-making and security; and institutional development. It has decided to focus on less controversial issues, such as promoting trade relations between members and global health, after Trump returned to the White House, said Ana Garcia, a professor at the Rio de Janeiro Federal Rural University. 'Brazil wants the least amount of damage possible and to avoid drawing the attention of the Trump administration to prevent any type of risk to the Brazilian economy,' Garcia said. While Brazil will continue to advocate for the reform of Western-led global institutions, a cornerstone policy of the group, the country wants to avoid becoming the target of tariffs — a predicament it has so far largely escaped. Trump has threatened to impose 100% tariffs against the bloc if they take any moves to undermine the dollar. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Egypt's Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi will also be absent. Those two countries joined the BRICS in 2024, alongside Ethiopia, Indonesia and the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia has been invited and is participating in member discussions, but it has yet to send its confirmation letter. As well as new members, the bloc has 10 strategic partner countries, a category created at last year's summit that includes Belarus, Cuba and Vietnam. That rapid expansion led Brazil to put housekeeping issues — officially termed institutional development — on the agenda to better integrate new members and boost internal cohesion. Despite notable absences, the summit is important for attendees, especially in the context of instability provoked by Trump's tariff wars, said Bruce Scheidl, a researcher at the University of Sao Paulo's BRICS study group. 'The summit offers the best opportunity for emerging countries to respond, in the sense of seeking alternatives and diversifying their economic partnerships,' Scheidl said. For Lula, the summit will be a welcome pause from a difficult domestic scenario, marked by a drop in popularity and conflict with Congress.
