Russia Will Soon Fire 2,000 Drones a Day: ISW
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Russia's drone production has expanded so much that within months, it might be able to launch up to 2,000 of the devices in a single night, according to a report.
Moscow fired another barrage of drones and missiles on Ukrainian cities overnight Sunday. Ukraine's Air Force said Moscow launched 450 drones and missiles targeting Kyiv and the cities of Ivano-Frankivsk and Kharkiv.
But Ukrainian and German officials have raised the alarm that Russia's production of Shahed-type drones had grown to such an extent that strike packages four times bigger could be possible by November.
Newsweek has contacted the Russian defense ministry for comment.
Ukraine's emergency services tackle a fire after a mass Russian drone and missile attack on Kyiv July 4, 2025 in Kyiv, Ukraine.
Ukraine's emergency services tackle a fire after a mass Russian drone and missile attack on Kyiv July 4, 2025 in Kyiv, Ukraine.Why It Matters
Moscow continues to step up its drone bombardment of Ukrainian cities as Russian President Vladimir Putin ignores calls for a ceasefire.
Moscow's forces initially relied on Iranian-made Shahed or "kamikaze" drones to wreak havoc in strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure but is now using the technology to produce its own devices in its own factories across Russia.
Reports by German and Ukrainian officials about this increasing capacity will raise alarm about Moscow's intentions come winter when it could use the colder months to target the Ukrainian population.
What To Know
Russia has been stepping up its Shahed-type strike drones and decoy drones in overnight strikes with the largest attack so far including 728 drones taking place on July 8.
But Moscow is boosting drone production capacity with the aim of launching 2,000 drones in one overnight strike package by November.
That is according to the head of the German Ministry of Defense's Planning and Command Staff, Major General Christian Freuding, reported by Ukrainian outlet Suspilne citing comments he made to the a German military podcast.
In reporting the comments, the Institute for the Study of War said current growth in Russia's drone production and usage makes this number achievable in that time frame although such a strike package would not be sustainable every night.
This is a double the estimate to one made July 4 by commander of the Ukrainian Unmanned Systems Forces Major Robert Brovdi who said increased production and stockpiles means Russia could launch 1,000 drones in a single strike package.
This figure is also a marked increase from the assessment on June 9 of Ukraine's Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) that Russia plans to increase production capacity to 190 drones per day, by the end of 2025.
Freuding said Saturday that Ukraine and its allies must look at cheaper ways to counter this threat because traditional air defense methods, like Patriot interceptors, are not best suited to defend against drones.
It comes as Russia showcased a drone factory near Kazan in the Tatarstan region which is producing drones, including the Geran-2 which is also an Iranian design.
In a propaganda video, teenagers are seen assembling the devices for use against Ukraine at the facility at the Alabuga industrial park.
the Russian Defense Ministry's television channel it produces a 5,200 Shahed-type strike drones and decoy models a month as of May and will make thousands of Geran drones at the "largest plant in the world."
What People Are Saying
German Major General Christian Freuding: "The Russian army plans to launch up to 2,000 drones over Ukraine at one time."
Institute for the Study of War on Sunday: "Russia may be able to launch up to 2,000 drones in one night by November 2025, should this current growth trend in drone usage continue."
Timur Shagivaliev, CEO of the Alabuga Special Economic Zone, told Russian defense ministry outlet Zvezda the drone factory in Tartastan is "the largest such plant in the world and the most secret...the plan was to produce several thousand (Geran drones) — now we are producing nine times more than planned."
What Happens Next
Russia is likely to continue its drone attacks on Ukraine which Freuding said Kyiv could counter by striking drone production sites and lowering interception costs.
Ukraine has also increased its domestic drone production with President Volodymyr Zelensky saying Kyiv can produce up to 8 million drones annually but it needs more foreign funding.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
15 minutes ago
- The Hill
In the US, a factual National Archives still exists — but for how long?
When I arrived in New York City two years ago — a Russian journalist fleeing my country after its full-scale invasion of Ukraine — I was routinely asked: 'Do all Russians support Putin?' A good question, perhaps, but I'm unable to provide a fact-based answer. When a regime like Russia silences the press, takes control of all branches of government and installs loyalists to oversee historical records, the truth quickly disappears, becoming accessible only to the ruler's inner circle. Since Trump's inauguration, conversations in the U.S. have changed. Now, when I meet Americans, they rarely mention Russian politics outside of the Ukraine war. Instead, they share their anxieties about their own country, often with a nervous laugh. I recognize that laugh. In Russia, independent journalists and human rights activists spent years laughing over worst-case scenarios — until every single one of them came true. My Ukrainian friends have become masters of gallows humor. Then Americans ask: 'What should we do? What advice do you, who have seen this happen in your country, have for us here in the U.S.?' This again makes me laugh, given we weren't exactly successful in stopping our own dictator. Still, hindsight does provide some clarity, and while I don't have immediate solutions, I do have two urgent suggestions: Safeguard your independent media and defend your national archives. The war in Ukraine shows how, without a strong independent press and by employing a warped version of history, a dictator can act however they please. While outsiders struggle to understand how Russians accept Putin's justification for the invasion as a mission to 'de-Nazify' Ukraine, a country led by a Jewish president, or as the reclamation of historically Russian territory (a claim that quickly unravels under serious historical scrutiny), the reality is that within Russia these narratives are now embedded in the national story. This is the result of a deliberate reshaping of the historical narrative by the government. Putin's first steps in controlling Russia's narrative was dismantling the post-Soviet independent media. It began with television, shuttering the independent NTV channel under the pretense of a business dispute. He then tightened his grip on the media through laws, including the ' foreign agent ' designation, jailing reporters he disagreed with. Three days after invading Ukraine in 2022, he imposed military censorship, forcing over 1,500 journalists into exile. Today, it is illegal for journalists to contradict the government's version of events. This is why, in 2023, a few fellow exiled journalists and I launched the Russian Independent Media Archive: to preserve the fact-based journalism the Kremlin was so intent on erasing. Today, the archive holds 3.5 million documents from 131 (and counting!) independent national, regional and investigative outlets dating back to Putin's first years in office. Designed to resist takedowns and censorship, with a powerful search engine, the Russian Independent Media Archive is open to all, empowering readers, researchers and historians to challenge propaganda about a particular era with truth, and to answer questions with verified facts. Others are better placed than I to say if a similar closing down of free speech and independent media is possible in the U.S.. The signs are certainly there in the Trump administration's accelerated book banning campaign, ending federal funding for NPR and PBS and shutting down Voice of America. Beyond that, Trump has unleashed a wave of chaotic actions that have directly harmed innocent people and disrupted businesses both in the U.S. and around the world — from mass deportations and abrupt firings to sweeping tariffs and threats of international conflict. Amid this endless barrage of harmful actions, one seemingly benign yet potentially extremely dangerous move risks slipping by unnoticed: Trump's bid to take control of the National Archives' leadership. Putin closed Russia's archives stealthily, cloaking his actions in language that maintained an illusion of transparency. In 2004, he signed a Federal Archives Law restricting access to anything labeled a 'state secret.' Today, that list includes 119 broad categories — enough to conceal almost anything from public view. As a result, we Russians no longer have access to a trusted record of our country's past. If Americans know the National Archives, it's usually as the home of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. But it's much more than a home for documents. It safeguards billions of records vital to government transparency, public accountability, historical preservation, veterans' services and the integrity of elections. These documents hold facts upon which a great many important decisions are made. If access were restricted or content altered or erased, as is already happening on numerous government websites, truth, as in Russia, begins to disappear. For as Orwell presciently wrote in 1984, 'he who controls the past controls the future.' Covering tracks, destroying evidence, blocking websites, interfering in elections, distorting history — it's hard to say who does it better, Putin or Trump. But there's still a crucial difference between my country and yours: In the U.S., your institutions are intact enough that if I ask, 'Do all Americans support Trump?' you could still answer based on facts. The question now becomes: For how much longer?
Newsweek
16 minutes ago
- Newsweek
JD Vance Chances of Beating Leading Democratic Candidates in 2028—Poll
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Vice President JD Vance held a narrow lead over three potential Democratic presidential candidates who have led recent surveys of the 2028 primary, according to a new Emerson College poll released Friday. Newsweek reached out to Vance's office and each of the candidates for comment via email. Why It Matters Vance, President Donald Trump's second-in-command, is viewed as a potential Republican front-runner in the 2028 election, when Democrats will aim to win back control of the White House. Although the Democratic primary is still years away, prospective candidates are already making early moves, such as fundraising, building national name recognition, and traveling to key primary states to meet with voters. Early polling can provide insights into how Americans view potential candidates ahead of the election, although surveys aren't always predictive this far in advance. What To Know The Emerson College poll found that Vance held a single-digit lead over three potential candidates: former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, California Governor Gavin Newsom, and New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The poll surveyed 1,400 U.S. voters from July 21 to July 22, 2025, and had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. Of those three, Buttigieg was held to the tightest margin, with 44 percent backing Vance for president and 43 percent supporting Buttigieg. Buttigieg fueled speculation that he could run for president earlier this year when he announced he would opt out of running statewide in Michigan, where he has lived since his time in President Joe Biden's administration. Newsom, who traveled to early-voting primary state South Carolina this summer, received 42 percent support against Vance's 45 percent, according to the poll. Vice President JD Vance participates in a debate in New York City on October 1, 2024. Vice President JD Vance participates in a debate in New York City on October 1, Ocasio-Cortez, who is a favorite of many progressives, received 41 percent to Vance's 44 percent. Ocasio-Cortez hasn't signaled she plans to run for president, and is also speculated to be a potential Senate candidate against incumbent New York Democrat Chuck Schumer. It notably did not ask about former Vice President Kamala Harris, who has not said whether she plans to run again. She is also reportedly considering a bid for California governor. The poll also found that 47 percent of respondents disapproved of Trump's job performance, while 46 percent approve of him so far. An Overton Insights poll released last month showed that Harris would have a slight lead over Vance, with 45 percent of respondents backing her and 42 percent supporting Vance. That poll surveyed 1,200 registered voters from June 23 to June 26, 2025, and had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.77 percentage points. What People Are Saying Spencer Kimball, executive director of Emerson College Polling, wrote in the polling memo: "A key takeaway from the ballot tests is that about 13% of the electorate remains persuadable, while the other 87% have already settled on a party preference." Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, in May: "Democrats do not have the best brand around here or in a lot of places. There's a lot of reasons for that. Some fair, and some not fair." California Governor Gavin Newsom told The Wall Street Journal in June: "I'm not thinking about running, but it's a path that I could see unfold." What Happens Next The 2028 presidential race will continue to unfold over the coming years. Typically, candidates do not announce plans to run until after the midterms, which will be held next November. But speculation about who may be gearing up for a presidential run is sure to continue.
Newsweek
16 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Questions Congress Might Have for Ghislaine Maxwell
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Ghislaine Maxwell, the longtime co-conspirator of Jeffrey Epstein, may soon offer new insights to Congress about her knowledge of—and involvement in—the late financier's sexual abuse network. On Wednesday, the House Oversight Committee voted to subpoena Maxwell—currently serving a 20-year sentence in Florida following her conviction on federal sex trafficking charges in 2021—to testify remotely next month. Maxwell has already taken part in a meeting with the Department of Justice, during which she answered "every single question," according to her attorney, David Oscar Markus, and is set to do so again on Friday. However, experts believe congressional testimony could shed new light on the saga that has for weeks dominated headlines and captivated the American public. "She is the Rosetta Stone," Harvard Law professor and former Epstein attorney Alan Dershowitz told Fox News this week. "She knows everything. She arranged every single trip with everybody." In this courtroom sketch, Ghislaine Maxwell enters the courtroom escorted by U.S. marshals at the start of her trial on November 29, 2021, in New York. In this courtroom sketch, Ghislaine Maxwell enters the courtroom escorted by U.S. marshals at the start of her trial on November 29, 2021, in New York. Elizabeth Williams/AP Photo/File photo What Questions Could Congress Ask Maxwell? Newsweek spoke with experts in the case and the crimes in which Maxwell was involved, about what questions Congress could ask should her testimony take place. Matthew Mangino Mangino, the former district attorney of Lawrence County, Pennsylvania, told Newsweek that there are still several pieces of information Maxwell could divulge, given that she never testified at the 2021 trial, primarily regarding her former accomplice's associates. "She was Epstein's co-conspirator," he told Newsweek. "Presumably, she knows who partied with Epstein, where they partied and what they did during the partying." Mangino said Congress should question Maxwell about whether she coordinated travel for Epstein, who accompanied him on these trips, whether President Donald Trump was among them, as well as which members of Epstein's social network were involved in the sexual assault of underaged girls. Mangino hopes her testimony would provide be greater clarity around whether Epstein—through Maxwell—solicited underage girls for influential men in business, entertainment, sports and government. Jeffrey Abramson Abramson believes Maxwell, as one Epstein's closest associates, should be asked about the existence of the "client list" he is alleged to have possessed, and whether there are names on the list of persons involved in the abuse of underage girls that have never been made public. Abramson, an emeritus professor of law and government at the University of Texas at Austin, believes Maxwell may also be able to provide more details on The Wall Street Journal's recent report that Trump sent Epstein an illustrated birthday card in 2003. Donald Trump and then-girlfriend, former model Melania Knauss, financier (and future convicted sex offender) Jeffrey Epstein and British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell at the Mar-a-Lago club, Palm Beach, Florida, on February 12, 2000. Donald Trump and then-girlfriend, former model Melania Knauss, financier (and future convicted sex offender) Jeffrey Epstein and British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell at the Mar-a-Lago club, Palm Beach, Florida, on February 12, Abramson said a "complicating factor" in the case is that Trump could pardon Maxwell, who was convicted of federal crimes. "Maxwell should be asked whether anyone in the DOJ or Trump administration has promised her anything in exchange for how she testifies," he said. "If Congress offers Ghislaine Maxwell immunity for her testimony, then there is a very good chance that Maxwell will obey a subpoena to testify, probably before the House Oversight Committee. The type of immunity she would get is called 'use immunity,' which guarantees she would not be prosecuted for anything she says during her congressional testimony." Spencer Kuvin Maxwell appearing in an open session would allow the public to get a first-hand look at her story and her credibility, said Kuvin, a Florida lawyer who represented several of Epstein's victims. "She has been linked to one of the most infamous pedophiles in history," he told Newsweek. "She will undoubtedly be able to shed light on all of the individuals that they supplied young girls to over the years and the potential influence that they were seeking to gain." Kuvin said he would like to see Congress ask Maxwell to identify by name those who visited Epstein at his mansion in the Virgin Islands; whether there is video evidence of these visits; and whether the pair provided underaged girls to any politicians, corporate executives or celebrities. Marci A. Hamilton Hamilton is a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, CEO of child rights-focused think tank CHILD USA, and previously worked as a consultant for the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program. Hamilton told Newsweek that, based on the information already known, the most valuable thing that could come from Maxwell's testimony would be confirmation of the men who played the "most salient role" in helping to orchestrate Epstein's sex trafficking operation. "Who was it who was identifying the girls that were ready for abuse because they were already in a difficult situation and wanted to be a model?" she said as an example. "I would want to ask her: Who were the men that were most frequently with Epstein, either in New York City or in Palm Beach or in New Mexico. Who were the men that kept coming back. "The reality is that Epstein wasn't abusing one girl a day. There were multiple incidents every day. He was a monster. And she made it happen." However, Hamilton said that Maxwell's status as a "reputable witness" was questionable, given the severity of her crimes and the two perjury charges stemming from allegedly false claims made while under oath in a 2016 civil case. Prosecutors declined to move forward with the perjury charges following her conviction in 2021. "Relying on her, either from the Trump administration or Congress, is in my view a fool's errand," she said. Deborah Tuerkheimer Tuerkheimer, author of Credible: Why We Doubt Accusers and Protect Abusers, said that, as well as active participants, questions need to be asked about those who were aware of Epstein's abuse, and who tacitly contributed to it by interacting with him in ways that normalized his behavior and expanded his influence within powerful groups. She added that several questions also surround his legal treatment, in particular the 2008 non-prosecution deal—or "sweetheart plea deal"—that allowed Epstein to avoid federal charges for the sexual abuse of minors and serve only a 13-month sentence in state prison. "When you sort of put all of this together, you see that there's a real cast of characters here that you could think of as enabling this behavior," she said. However, against Dershowitz's suggestion that Maxwell could be the "Rosetta Stone" for the entire case, Tuerkheimer said she was skeptical that Maxwell "is the key to unlocking this." Tuerkheimer said rather than a "myopic focus" on Maxwell, whose testimony may be suspect, many questions surrounding who was involved in the abuse could be answered by the victims. "There's sort of many dozens of victims of Epstein who stand, I think, ready to supply an account," she said. David Oscar Markus, attorney for Ghislaine Maxwell, speaks during a news conference outside the federal courthouse in Tallahassee, Florida, on July 24, 2025. David Oscar Markus, attorney for Ghislaine Maxwell, speaks during a news conference outside the federal courthouse in Tallahassee, Florida, on July 24, 2025. John Raoux/AP Photo What Happens Next It remains unclear whether Maxwell will testify. On Wednesday, her attorney said that if Maxwell chooses to testify before the House Oversight Committee, she would do so "truthfully." Dershowitz has said that, if given use immunity—meaning comments given cannot be used in a subsequent prosecution—Maxwell could be "compelled to testify." "I'm told that she actually would be willing to testify," he added. As Tuerkheimer told Newsweek: Congressional hearing or not, the Epstein story "is not something that is going to go away. This is not something that people will let drop." "This is a child sex trafficking set of crimes, in which powerful men have gotten away with it," Hamilton said. "And at this point, it doesn't matter what administration it is, the American people deserve the truth because they deserve to understand how this happened and how it can be prevented."
