Long-range strikes alone won’t shift the battlefield dynamic — expert Zgurets

He shared this perspective on Espreso TV.

“When we talk about long-range weapons, it’s crucial to remember lessons from World War II — specifically, the bombing campaigns by the British, Germans, and Americans and how they influenced the war’s progression. We should also recall Operation Desert Shield and the extensive use of cruise missiles to hit the enemy’s defense. Currently, Russia is using missiles to target our energy infrastructure. All of this proves that long-range strikes alone can’t change the battlefield,” Zgurets pointed out.

He highlighted that weapons must always align with a cohesive strategy.

“When we say we need missiles with a range of at least 1,000 km in addition to our drones, this is a critical factor for our military’s success in operations. Weapons shouldn’t just aim to destroy targets — they need to fit into a larger concept, whether it’s breaking through enemy lines or weakening their economy, energy, or battlefield capabilities,” Zgurets explained.

He also mentioned that strike complexes alone can’t fully address these goals, and the restrictions on Ukraine reduce its potential. In this context, Zelenskyy’s plan isn’t focused solely on long-range weapons.

• For a while, Ukraine has urged its Western allies, particularly the U.S. and the UK, to authorize long-range missile strikes deep into Russian territory. While some “red lines” have shifted, the final decision is still pending.