Attack on Russian arsenal in Bryansk and U.S. weapons that will aid Ukraine. Serhiy Zgurets’ column

Attack on the Russian arsenal in Bryansk

A Russian military depot in the Bryansk region, near Karachev, was struck. This site houses the 67th arsenal of the Main Missile and Artillery Directorate of Russia's Ministry of Defense (GRAU). The depot stored a variety of munitions, some of which were left in open storage, which triggered a major chain reaction after the initial blasts. The explosions mostly involved artillery shells of various calibers, including munitions recently delivered from North Korea. The detonations continued throughout the day.

Within 700 km of Ukraine's borders, there are at least six significant GRAU arsenals. In just three weeks, this marks the third such arsenal on that list to be hit. These strikes have been highly effective, carried out with long-range drones. Although there were videos where the sound of a jet engine was heard, leading some to speculate that Ukraine is using new missiles, potentially even a secret one named Palyanytsia.

To recap, the first major strike destroyed the largest arsenal in western Russia, in Toropets. That attack wiped out around 30,000 tons of munitions and missiles. Then came the attack on the depot in Tikhoretsk. Now, the GRAU arsenal in Karachev, just 115 kilometers from the Ukrainian border, has been targeted. It is the closest of the arsenals, covering an area of 3.5 square kilometers. We expect satellite images soon, which will allow us to fully assess the damage.

Ukraine's Unmanned Systems Forces have confirmed the strike, noting that if the warehouses in Karachev were fully stocked, there could have been at least 22,000 tons of ammunition stored there. This will undoubtedly affect the Russian army's combat capabilities, as these three destroyed arsenals were supplying the Northern group of Russian forces, and in part, the Western group too. So, this will have a noticeable impact on their operational capacity. That said, there are still several more bases and arsenals that Ukraine needs to reach — not just with drones, but ideally with Western precision weaponry.

Which U.S. weapons can bring Ukraine closer to victory

CNN focused on a critical topic: which weapons could help Ukraine inch closer to victory. But this article is grounded in something bigger — a secret report presented to Congress about a month ago on military aid to Ukraine. This report came with a list of weapons Ukraine is requesting but hasn’t received yet from the United States. That list was put together by the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, General Chris Cavoli.

General Cavoli has an in-depth understanding of Ukraine’s military capabilities since he maintains constant communication with Ukraine's top political and military leaders. We don’t know the complete list of what Cavoli included, but we do know of two key items from that report. First are air-to-ground missiles. Second, a secure communication system — the Link-16 network system, which is standard in the U.S. and NATO countries.

When it comes to air-to-ground weapons, it's pretty clear we're talking about AGM-158 missiles, with a range of up to 390 kilometers. The upgraded version extends up to 980 kilometers, and Ukraine is asking for these for its F-16s. So far, the U.S. has been hesitant, stating that air parity with Russia hasn’t been achieved yet. Of course, true parity won’t happen anytime soon, but pressure on the U.S. to provide these missiles is still necessary.

The second crucial item is the Link-16 system. It's basically like a super-charged modem. In military terms, it's a standardized communication system that allows U.S. and NATO forces to securely exchange data, messages, and even confirm whether an aircraft is friend or foe. The Link-16 integrates communication between various intelligence systems, F-16s, and long-range detection aircraft. It forms a network where pilots and ground units operate with full situational awareness, knowing exactly what’s happening in the skies and on the ground.

This system is key for boosting effectiveness. Without it, the F-16s are isolated platforms, lacking integration with a broader combat system. So, Link-16 is a must for Ukraine. It will also allow the Swedish reconnaissance aircraft it expects from Sweden to work seamlessly with its Patriots and F-16s. The U.S. worries this system could fall into Russian hands, which would have serious consequences.

Cavoli highlights these two components in his report, although Ukraine likely has a much longer wishlist of equipment from its partners.

The Ramstein meeting postponed

It’s clear that the Ramstein-format meeting was meant to address military aid for Ukraine. The October 12 meeting was expected to be special — it was set to gather the leaders and presidents of all the countries currently supporting Ukraine. This gathering was supposed to deliver some optimistic signals for Ukraine.

We know Ukraine has been pushing its Victory Plan, which calls for expanding arms supplies on one hand, and addressing security guarantees on the other — although the latter is more of a political matter. During the Ukrainian president's recent visit to Washington, this Victory Plan was laid out, and among other things, it touched on weapons, including the request to use American long-range systems to target Russian assets.

Ukraine also presented a list of about 300 strategic military targets in Russia that need to be destroyed. However, Ukraine has limited capacity to hit these targets, and a decision on this was expected to be discussed at the Ramstein meeting.

Oleksiy Yizhak, an analyst at the National Institute for Strategic Studies, offered insight into the context surrounding this event.

“It seems like there was already a similar meeting, with an odd face-to-face format, in September. Now, we were expecting something important, especially with the U.S. president nearing the end of his term. He promised to return to NATO, and he has things to say about what comes next. On top of that, NATO has a new Secretary General, a consensus figure to lead the alliance forward, which adds a kind of finality here. At least two key issues were being discussed — weapon supplies and a renewed conversation about the terms and pace of Ukraine’s NATO membership. But this meeting didn’t happen,” Yizhak said.

The reason for the postponement was a hurricane approaching the U.S., which led the president to decide he needed to remain in the country.

“In my view, that’s sort of an excuse. Right now, American politics as a whole seems to be on pause. And because of that, global politics is frozen too — no one’s making any moves that might impact the elections. With the odds being tight, anything that sways a small group of voters is significant. Global tensions — whether wars or conflicts — seem to play into Trump’s hands. He can argue that Biden’s and Harris’ diplomacy and peace strategies have failed and that he’ll restore order. On the flip side, any success in negotiations or a slowdown in conflicts would benefit Kamala Harris, the Democratic candidate,” Yizhak explained.

He suggested that the U.S. has concluded that participating in military-style meetings won’t help them in the election.

“The same thing is happening with Israel — they’re being told not to fight, at least not until after the elections. So, there’s this pause, and no one really knows what’s next. I think this meeting will eventually happen, no matter who ends up as the U.S. president. At the very least, the Europeans should come together in this format and decide on how to continue supporting Ukraine. If the U.S. plans to maintain its support, they should clearly say when or if it will end. That’s the discussion that needed to happen but didn’t,” Yizhak concluded.

Oleksiy Yizhak believes the Ramstein-format meeting will likely be rescheduled after the U.S. presidential election.

War in the Middle East

The analyst shared thoughts on the possible pros and cons of the situation in the Middle East and how it could affect the Russian-Ukrainian war.

"We need to realize that maintaining good relations with the U.S. is in our interest. These ties are important for us. Politically speaking, Israel's actions could boost the Republican candidate, while Iran's efforts to either reduce the war or avoid it help the Democratic candidate. That’s the short-term political impact. But in the bigger picture, Israel's success supports Ukraine, as it fits into the same 'one-war' strategy. Israel is effectively and systematically weakening Iran, which is often referred to as part of the 'axis of evil,'” the analyst explained.

In his view, Iran may soon find itself unable to be much help to Russia, and could even end up seeking support from Moscow.

"We might see Iran looking for any kind of assistance at the next BRICS summit. So, from a strategic perspective, what Israel is doing is good for Ukraine. Plus, Israel offers two key lessons. First, they dealt with Hamas within their borders and are now focusing on Hezbollah, which is close by. When it comes to long-range attacks or influencing Tehran's politics, Israel hits vulnerable spots but doesn't aim to overthrow Iran right away. They have a realistic goal: to cripple the regime economically while concentrating their forces on destroying immediate threats like Hamas and Hezbollah," he says.

The analyst added that Israel's ground operations have proven to be highly efficient.

"The second lesson Israel teaches us is that when you know how to fight and achieve your objectives, even the U.S. can't say much. Israel has faced enormous pressure from the U.S. to stop its operations repeatedly. But Israel kept moving forward with their plan, and now the U.S. is essentially forced to support Israel's campaign, though with some restrictions," added Oleksiy Yizhak.

He also touched on whether Israel's actions could significantly weaken Iran's defense and industrial capabilities in the future.

"My sense is that Israel and its allies have concluded that Iran’s military potential isn’t as fearsome as once thought. They're using old missiles with some minor upgrades. There aren’t many new missiles, and their accuracy isn’t great. It’s unclear how many they can even produce, and they’re probably made in underground factories. So, Israel may focus its main strikes on more vulnerable targets like oil infrastructure, which would be more impactful. Plus, there’s the direct targeting of those leading the aggression against Israel," the analyst explained.

Yizhak pointed out that Israel has already forced Iran's military leadership into hiding.

"Israel might now face a choice: either go after the military leaders in their bunkers or hit the facilities producing missiles and drones, which haven’t been very effective so far. But remember, Israel has a very strong air defense, and they don’t face restrictions from their allies when it comes to targeting Iranian assets. In fact, allies are helping Israel defend against such attacks, so the situation is different from ours. That’s why I think Israel will continue to focus on weakening the regime and cutting off its financial lifelines," Yizhak concluded.