Why embassies in Kyiv closed, what is Russia's Rubezh missile, and defective mines. Serhiy Zgurets' column

Temporary embassy closures in Kyiv and Russian Rubezh missile

Yesterday, four embassies in Ukraine—those of the United States, Spain, Italy, and Greece—were closed. According to their statements, this was a precautionary measure due to reports of an increased threat of a combined attack by Russia using drones and missiles. In response, Ukraine's Ministry of Foreign Affairs commented that such alarmist narratives are unlikely to be appropriate, as the threat remains constant—on the 1,001st day of the full-scale invasion and every other day. The risks, they emphasized, are ever-present.

Adding to the tension, some Ukrainian media outlets reported that Russia might be preparing to deploy a new missile system, the RS-26 "Rubezh," for strikes against Ukraine. 

Is there such a system, is there such a technology? Indeed, Russia does have such a weapon. They were developing it from 2006 to 2017. This system was based on components for the Topol-M or Yars-S ballistic missile. And this missile was supposed to operate in the range of up to 6,000 kilometers, with the ability to carry a warhead weighing more than a ton over a distance of 3,000 to 6,000 kilometers. This is, in fact, a medium-range missile. But the real stage of its development is unknown. 

In any case, it can be assumed that Russia is trying to create such information pretexts to pressure Ukraine's partners. Regardless, whether such a missile could be used by Russia remains theoretically possible. It has happened before—Russia has deployed missiles like the "Kinzhal" and "Zircon" for the first time in combat conditions when targeting Ukraine. Therefore, the risks of new Russian weapon systems emerging remain, which may partly explain the behavior of some embassies that were not operational yesterday.

Defective mines from Ukroboronprom supplied to Ukrainian Armed Forces

Recently, during his address to parliament, the President of Ukraine announced the production of a significant number of mortar mines, citing impressive figures. However, yesterday, journalist Yuriy Butusov released a video highlighting issues with mines produced by Ukroboronprom, a Ukrainian manufacturer of weapons and military equipment.

This batch was delivered to one of the military units and is not the first such case. The first video emerged around November 6, when Ukrainian soldiers also reported significant defects in mines supplied by Ukroboronprom. Specifically, the propellant charge often fails, the mines do not detonate, and the powder charges cannot even eject the mines from the mortar. These issues involve the propellant charge, powder charges, and the TNT used in these mines.

I believe this video should serve as a significant impetus for conducting a thorough investigation into the production of this batch of mines. According to our estimates, this was the first batch, consisting of approximately 5,000 mines. Ukroboronprom was expected to receive a substantial order in the future, amounting to hundreds of thousands. However, it is clear that priority must be given to ensuring the high-quality production of such ammunition for our mortars. This video will likely push for a shift toward higher standards in projects critical to the front lines.

U.S. supplies anti-personnel mines to Ukraine

Meanwhile, the United States announced that they are finally providing Ukraine with anti-personnel mines. In my opinion, this decision is comparable to the U.S. decision to provide Ukraine with cluster munitions, as there was also a long delay in that case. Now, we're talking about anti-personnel mines. While we do not yet know the specific types of mines being provided, the Pentagon explained that this decision was made in response to Russia changing its tactics. Russia is now using infantry to break through and press Ukrainian defenses, and anti-personnel mines will be a significant deterrent to this tactic.

Anton Semenov, director of the Ukrainian Scientific Research Institute of Defense Technologies, suggested why Ukraine does not have enough anti-personnel mines.

“Our company develops technologies aimed directly at demining. If we talk about the [lack of] availability of anti-personnel mines, this is most likely due to the fact that Ukraine is a party to the Anti-Personnel Landmine Convention, signed in 1997, which has been ratified by 164 countries, while Russia, the United States, China, and India are not parties to this convention. This is probably why we do not use anti-personnel mines. Regarding the development and production of anti-personnel mines, I can say that, as a party to this convention, Article One explicitly prohibits the use, production, and so on of anti-personnel mines. The convention itself defines what exactly constitutes an anti-personnel mine. As for the supply issue, I can say that, first, we do not know which types of mines will be transferred to us, nor the quantity in which they will be provided,” he said.

Anton Semenov also believes that Ukraine will not use anti-personnel mines due to the signed convention.

"If we refer to Article 3, there are exceptions. Let me quote it: 'Notwithstanding the general obligations under Article 1, the retention or transfer of a number of anti-personnel mines for the development of and training in mine detection, mine clearance, or mine destruction techniques is permitted. The amount of such mines shall not exceed the minimum number absolutely necessary for the above-mentioned purposes.' I am confident that we will adhere to this convention because we signed it, and regarding withdrawal from the convention - this is a decision that I believe I do not have the right to comment on, as it is a political and, most likely, military decision," he noted.

The American side advises that, first and foremost, Ukrainian forces should avoid using them in cities and refrain from deploying them in certain areas without tracking their locations. They have also pledged to assist Ukraine in demining efforts later on.

"These mines are quite difficult to clear, as the area is mined remotely using various delivery methods. The most common mine is the 'Lepestok,' which is a Russian mine. We encounter many of them during demining operations. They are extremely dangerous because they are very small but still pose a significant threat. When clearing them, great caution is required. Regarding how civilians should handle mines, I would like to remind everyone: if you come across something that resembles a mine, do not approach or touch it. Step away and call 101, directly contacting the State Emergency Service to report the dangerous find and provide the coordinates," reminded the director of the Ukrainian Scientific Research Institute of Defense Technologies.

Testing of new materials for shelter construction

Currently, Anton Semenov’s company is testing new technologies with Western partners at a training ground, which will be crucial for Ukrainian defenders and civilians in using various shelters, provided the technology is scaled up.

"Unfortunately, I can't share all the details, as I’ve just returned from the training ground. We’ve successfully completed tests on the material itself. I can say that this is a Latvian-Ukrainian project, with part of the work being done by the Latvian side and the other part by the Ukrainian side. We have combined our efforts and technologies to conduct positive tests on the new materials, from which we plan to create shelters for both civilians and military personnel. For the military, additional tests will be required because of specific needs. If everything goes well, we will complete the final tests by December.

By the way, today I received positive certificates. In December, we will test the finished structure, also obtaining certificates, and then we will begin mass production. We will engage with communities, and the next step will be building protective structures specifically for military needs. I can say that we are using innovative materials that are very lightweight, easy to install and dismantle, and are multifunctional, meaning they can be used by the military not only as shelters," he shared.

Anton Semenov sees the main advantage of the development in its mobility and versatility, making it suitable for both military and civilian use.

"The specific advantage is their weight; they are very easy to assemble. Standard shelters are usually made of concrete or steel, and steel ones have their own characteristics. But these shelters can be built not only as shelters, but also for various public needs. We are currently in talks with Ukrainian architects who are very knowledgeable about building codes for shelters, the use of shelters, and public spaces. For the military, this will be very beneficial because they are highly mobile, do not require heavy equipment, and can be used for dual purposes," said Anton Semenov, director of the Ukrainian Scientific Research Institute of Defense Technologies.