Ukrainian Preemptive Strikes Order Puts Russian Infrastructure and Air Defenses Under New Pressure
President Volodymyr Zelensky has ordered Ukrainian intelligence and the military to hit preemptively at facilities Russia uses to “expand the scale of the war,” as Moscow pulls advanced air defenses back to protect its leadership and critical assets. The move raises the stakes for Russian infrastructure far from the front and tests how far Western partners are willing to back deep Ukrainian strikes.
Ukraine’s war is moving deeper into Russia’s rear. On 24 June, President Volodymyr Zelensky said he has instructed Ukrainian intelligence services and the army to act preemptively against facilities that Russia uses to expand its war, framing long‑range strikes as a way to force the Kremlin toward peace rather than simply match it on the front line.
Zelensky, speaking publicly, argued that Russian leaders are now shifting air defense systems to shield Moscow, the Valdai area and the Kerch Strait bridge, concentrating what he described as hundreds of launchers for S‑400, S‑500 and Pantsir systems around the capital and nearly 90 launchers in Valdai. He cast this as evidence that Ukrainian pressure, including operations targeting Crimea, is forcing Russia to make hard choices about what to protect. The claims cannot be independently verified, but they align with visible patterns of Russian air‑defense activity around key strategic sites.
The Ukrainian leader linked his preemptive‑strike order directly to ongoing talks with G7 partners about providing longer‑range weapons and enablers. He said Kyiv’s current campaign, particularly in and around Crimea, is “precisely calculated,” and that if Ukraine receives the capabilities discussed with partners, his forces will be able “to promptly create conditions under which Russia will be forced to choose peace.” A senior U.S. State Department official, Jeremy Levin, separately said Washington assesses that Ukraine is “currently winning the war,” citing Kyiv’s ability to change the “battlefield dynamic” and maintain pressure, including attacks on infrastructure inside Russia.
For civilians and workers in Russia’s border regions and energy, logistics and defense hubs, this shift is not abstract. Rail junctions, fuel depots, drone airfields and command facilities that once felt distant from the front are now plausible targets. Each successful strike risks power outages, industrial disruption and new waves of internal displacement, even as Russian authorities urge the population to see the war as manageable and contained.
On the Ukrainian side, the order raises expectations among troops and drone operators who have already been probing targets from Crimea to deep inside Russian territory. It also puts Ukrainian planners under pressure to select targets that meaningfully degrade Russia’s ability to wage war without crossing Western red lines on the use of certain weapons or hitting politically explosive sites. The distinction between “facilities used to expand the war” and symbolic targets will matter for continued Western support.
Strategically, a Russian decision to ring‑fence Moscow and the Kerch bridge with more air defenses, if sustained, could leave other regions more exposed. Systems redeployed northward are not available to defend refineries, bases and logistics corridors supporting operations in Ukraine, nor to shield Belarus if Minsk chooses to remain closely tied to Russia’s military network. Zelensky has already claimed that relay stations in Belarus used to support Russian strikes on western Ukraine have been switched off after he issued an ultimatum to President Alexander Lukashenko, suggesting that pressure on enabling states is part of the same campaign.
This is also unfolding as European partners recalibrate what support looks like. Denmark has confirmed it will send 15,000 long‑range artillery rounds to Ukraine after Kyiv asked partners to prioritize range over sheer volume, while EU financial assistance is being reshaped, with an initial payment from a €90 billion Ukraine facility now tilted more toward budget support than immediate drone production. Together, these moves signal that the war’s center of gravity is shifting from static trenches to long‑range fires, deep reconnaissance and economic endurance.
The shareable lesson is simple: once a war turns into a contest of strategic depth, geography stops being a guarantee of safety and becomes a question of which assets you can afford to leave undefended.
Key indicators to watch now are whether Ukrainian strikes inside Russia become more frequent and coordinated, whether Western capitals further loosen restrictions on the use of their weapons against targets on Russian soil, and how visibly Russia thins air defenses over its regions and frontline units to protect Moscow, Valdai and the Kerch corridor. Any Russian retaliation doctrine publicly tied to these deep strikes would mark a new phase of escalation.
Sources
- OSINT