By Qamar Bashir
In a dramatic escalation of the ongoing conflict, Ukraine launched a highly sophisticted
drone strike on Russian airbases, reportedly damaging and destroying a substantial
portion of Moscow’s strategic bomber fleet. This operation, codenamed “Spiderweb,”
involved the deployment of 117 AI-guided drones, which targeted five key Russian
airbases across regions including Murmansk, Irkutsk, Ivanovo, Ryazan, and Amur. The
attack resulted in the destruction and severe damage of over 40 aircraft, including Tu-95,
Tu-22M3, Tu-160 bombers, and A-50 airborne early warning and control aircraft. The
damage to Russia has been estimated to be round $7 billion, marking a significant blow
to Russia’s long-range aerial capabilities.
The timing of this strike coincided with peace talks in Istanbul, mediated by Turkish
President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The peace talks highlighted the fundamentally
opposing objectives of Russia and Ukraine. Russia demands recognition of its control
over annexed territories, including Crimea and four other regions, the withdrawal of
Ukrainian forces, and a commitment from Ukraine to remain neutral and non-aligned,
effectively preventing NATO membership .
Conversely, Ukraine insists on the complete withdrawal of Russian troops, the restoration
of its territorial integrity, and security guarantees from Western countries to prevent
further aggression. Ukraine also seeks the prosecution of Russian leaders for war crimes
and the return of abducted Ukrainian children.
The latest attack—an advanced, high-tech, and professionally maneuvered drone
strike—has dealt a severe blow to Russia. If such attacks continue and Russia finds itself
unable to respond with conventional forces in kind, there is a growing possibility that
Moscow may seriously consider the use of tactical nuclear weapons.
Russia may seek not only to counterbalance the damage inflicted but also to punish those
directly involved in planning, executing, and supporting the operation. This could mean
that Russia may expand the scope of the war, targeting European capitals that have been
providing aid and resources to Ukraine—actions which have now become a significant
concern for the United States and its allies, as the war risks spiraling beyond its current
boundaries.
By striking deep into the heart of Russia with such precision and devastation, Ukraine has
gained a position of relative strength compared to Moscow, a factor that will provide
Kyiv with greater bargaining leverage in any potential future negotiations—if such talks
materialize at all. However, Russia is even more astute. It is unlikely to enter into any
meaningful negotiation from a position of weakness.
Instead, Russia will likely seek to counterbalance the damage inflicted upon it, and may
even surpass Ukraine’s gains with its own retaliatory strikes, in order to restore its
strategic advantage before considering any talks. This tit-for-tat escalation is a profoundly
dangerous dynamic, one that risks undermining any prospects for peace and threatens to
prolong and intensify the conflict between the two nations
As the war drags into its fourth year, both Russia and Ukraine—along with their allies in
Europe and the United States—are beginning to grasp the immense toll this war has
taken. Russia has sustained military losses exceeding $94 billion as of May 2025, with
inflation and a weakened ruble further straining its economy. Ukraine’s economy has
been crippled, with a cumulative GDP loss of $120 billion, infrastructure damages
topping $1 trillion, and reconstruction needs projected at a staggering $524
billion—nearly triple its pre-war GDP. Meanwhile, European allies have not been spared:
German companies alone faced losses of at least €200 billion in 2022, particularly in the
automotive, energy, and chemical sectors, as the sanctions and war-driven economic
disruptions ripple across the continent. The war is bleeding resources, depleting tax
bases, and pushing all involved nations toward economic strain.
The countries directly or indirectly involved in this conflict are draining their national
wealth in a futile pursuit of land, power, and hegemony, while other nations, uninvolved
in the war, are conserving their resources and channeling them into productive
investments: building modern infrastructure, advancing research and development,
exploring space, and fostering innovation. As a result, the economies of the United
States, Russia, Europe, and their allies will bear the long-term costs of this war, while
their adversaries—particularly China, which has been labeled a strategic
competitor—will continue to grow stronger. China stands to benefit the most from this
prolonged conflict, as the Western powers exhaust themselves financially, militarily, and
diplomatically, effectively handing Beijing the advantage on the global stage.
Ukraine, heavily reliant on Western support, faces the risk of donor fatigue. Ukrainian
officials have expressed concerns about growing donor fatigue, noting a $43 billion
budget shortfall for 2024. Conversely, Russia, with its larger economy and resources,
may continue to absorb the war’s costs, albeit at the expense of its own economic
stability.
The recent talks in Istanbul, while limited in progress, have set the stage for potential
future negotiations involving Presidents Putin, Zelenskyy, and Trump. For meaningful
dialogue to occur, both sides must address the core issues: territorial integrity, security
guarantees, and the future of Ukraine’s alignment with Western institutions.
This is perhaps a shorter and more intense replica of the First and Second World Wars,
where alliances were drawn, and massive resources were expended. Now, allies are on
one side, and Russia is on the other, both depleting their resources and indirectly enabling
their adversaries to gain strength. The solution to this quagmire lies in recognizing the
mutual losses and the unintended empowerment of non-involved nations.
It would be naive to think that European leaders and the USA have not calculated these
aspects—their own losses and the strengthening of their adversaries—while they continue
to fund and fuel the war. Sanity should prevail among all parties. The conflict results in
losses for Russia, Ukraine, and their allies, while those outside the conflict stand to gain.
The entire geopolitical landscape is undergoing a profound shift due to this war, with a
heightened possibility of shrinking the economic, trade, investment, business, and
military influence of the warring nations—primarily European powers this time—while
simultaneously creating space for their adversaries to expand. Let us hope that sanity will
prevail sooner rather than later, bringing an end to the erosion of the geopolitical space of
the warring parties and, conversely, halting the encroachment of their adversaries into
their traditional spheres of influence.
Writer is Press Secretary to the President (Rtd)
Former Press Minister at the Embassy of Pakistan to France
Former MD, SRBC
Macomb, Michigan, USA
