# ANALYSIS: The SBU's 40-day campaign — Zelensky wants to compel Russia to peace through pressure

> On June 25, 2026, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky announced that he had approved a "40-day influence operation" by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), officially designated in Ukrainian as the SSU. The stated objective is unambiguous: "compel the aggressor state to end the war." These words are not rhetorical formulas. They describe a deliberate, planned strategy form

- Author: Maxime Marquette
- Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co)
- Section: Analysis
- Published: 2026-06-29
- Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/analyse-la-campagne-de-40-jours-du-sbu-zelensky-veut-contraindre-la-russie-a-la-

## Introduction: An operation of unprecedented scope approved on June 25

### Zelensky's announcement and his precise words

On **June 25, 2026**, Ukrainian president **Volodymyr Zelensky** announced that he had approved a "**40-day influence operation**" by the **Security Service of Ukraine** (**SBU**), officially designated in Ukrainian as the **SSU**. The stated objective is unambiguous: "**compel the aggressor state to end the war**." These words are not rhetorical formulas. They describe a deliberate, planned strategy formally authorized at the highest level of the state.

The decision followed a meeting with **Lieutenant General Yevhenii Khmara**, acting head of the **SBU**, who presented **Zelensky** with "our plan of long-range sanctions, medium-range sanctions — meaning strikes — and the results achieved by the SBU." The phrasing itself is telling: strikes are no longer presented solely as defensive operations, but as "sanctions" — a term drawn from the register of diplomacy and grand strategy.

### The logic of a fixed-duration operation

Forty days. This number is not arbitrary. It corresponds to a strategic window long enough to accumulate cumulative effects on the Russian war economy, yet short enough to sustain operational intensity and psychological pressure on **Moscow**. **Ukraine** is coming off a record series of strikes in June: the **VZPP-S** semiconductor plant in **Voronezh**, the **Azot** chemical plant in **Novomoskovsk**, the **Moscow Oil** refinery.

These strikes are not accidents. They are the opening chapters of a coherent plan. The **40-day campaign** formalizes what was already underway and gives it a framework, a timeline and measurable objectives. It is a signal sent simultaneously to **Moscow**, Western allies and the Ukrainian population.

*Zelensky has approved a 40-day military operation whose stated objective is to compel Russia to end the war. This is not a communications exercise. It is a three-axis plan with defined targets and allocated resources. And the first strikes — on the Vtorovo pumping station in the Vladimir region — show that Ukraine has moved to action. This analysis examines what is known about this strategy.*

*Zelensky is no longer asking for permission. He is approving operations. This shift in posture — from defensive resistance to offensive strategic initiative — may be the most important development in this war since autumn 2022. Ukraine has moved from survival to pressure.*

## The SBU as the armed instrument of strategic pressure

### The SBU's capabilities in 2026

The **SBU** is not merely a counterintelligence service. Since **2022**, it has developed strike capabilities that make it a full-fledged military actor. Its **Special Group Alpha** is cited by **Zelensky** himself as ranking first in terms of "strikes on the personnel and equipment of the occupation forces." This unit combines human operations, drones, and coordination with regular armed forces.

For "several consecutive months," in **Zelensky**'s words, the **SBU** has demonstrated the **highest performance indicators** in protecting Ukrainian front-line positions through the use of **various types of drones**. This public acknowledgment is significant: it signals that the **SBU** is now an operational pillar of Ukrainian military strategy, not just a domestic intelligence service.

### Three axes of action: long range, medium range, front line

**Khmara**'s presentation to **Zelensky** identifies three axes of action. The "**long-range sanctions**" target the deep infrastructure of the Russian war economy — refineries, component plants, energy installations thousands of kilometers from the front. The "**medium-range sanctions**" — explicitly designated as "strikes" — target logistical and defense infrastructure in the depth of Russian territory. The front-line axis maintains direct pressure on the **occupation forces**.

This three-tier architecture is that of a simultaneous economic and military warfare strategy. It does not aim to capture territory week by week — it aims to make the war **economically unbearable** for **Moscow**.

*Calling military strikes "sanctions" is a deliberate semantic act. Zelensky is speaking the language of Western chancelleries to remind them that Ukraine is doing the work their own political constraints prevent them from doing directly. This is armed diplomacy.*

## The Crimea campaign: the operational reference model

### How the "middle strike" strangled Russian logistics

The **Kyiv Independent** describes Ukraine's campaign against occupied **Crimea** as the reference model for the new 40-day operation. This "**middle strike**" campaign "**strangled logistics in the peninsula**," cutting **crucial Russian supply routes** while striking **critical infrastructure**.

The results of the Crimea campaign are documented: fuel depots destroyed, air defense systems degraded, supply lines disrupted, air bases partially neutralized. **Crimea**, which **Putin** had presented as an impregnable sanctuary since **2014**, became a zone of permanent logistical vulnerability. The new **40-day campaign** aims to replicate this model at the scale of the entire Russian territory.

### Moscow struck in June: fuel shortages as the result

Consecutive **drone strikes on Moscow** forced the temporary closure of the **Moscow refinery** — one of the Russian capital's primary fuel supply sources. This closure worsened an already developing **fuel crisis** in several Russian regions. Queues at gas stations were documented in cities such as **Bryansk**, **Krasnodar** and **Rostov-on-Don**.

The correlation between Ukrainian strikes on refineries and fuel shortages in the Russian rear is no longer theoretical — it is measurable. **Putin** himself acknowledged that Ukrainian strikes were contributing to fuel tensions in **Russia**, in a statement reported by The Guardian on **June 28**. That is an extraordinary admission.

*Putin admits that Ukrainian strikes are worsening fuel shortages in Russia. That is the kind of statement no one anticipated two years ago, when everyone assumed Russia would crush Ukraine in three days. War has its own surprises.*

## The strike on the Vtorovo pumping station — Vladimir region

### June 27: an energy infrastructure hit in the Vladimir region

On **June 27, 2026**, two days after the official approval of the **40-day campaign**, the **Vtorovo pumping station** in the **Vladimir region** was struck. This region lies more than **200 kilometers** northeast of **Moscow**, well outside the combat zone. The strike illustrates concretely what **Zelensky** means by "long-range sanctions" on Russian energy infrastructure.

Pipeline pumping stations are critical nodes in Russia's hydrocarbon distribution network. Their destruction or damage disrupts the flow of fuel to affected regions, compounding the supply tensions already created by strikes on refineries. This strike follows systemic logic: every link in the Russian energy chain is a potential target.

### Strategic depth as a political message

Reaching the **Vladimir region** sends a message that Russia's "strategic depth" — long considered a structural advantage — is no longer a refuge. **Ukraine** does not have the means to invade Russian territory, but it can demonstrate that **no one in Russia lives beyond the reach** of this war. This represents a major psychological and political shift in Russian society, which had been largely shielded from the direct consequences of the conflict until **2025**.

*The Vladimir region is not the border. It sits next to Moscow. When residents of Vladimir begin hearing explosions and smelling burning fuel, the war is coming through their window. That is what Zelensky calls "compelling Russia to peace."*

## The three target categories: mapping the Russian war economy

### Energy infrastructure: refineries, pipelines, depots

**Energy infrastructure** constitutes the first priority target category of the **40-day campaign**. **Russia** finances its war machine with oil revenues. Reducing its refining capacity simultaneously reduces its export revenues and the fuel supply of its armed forces. The **Moscow refinery**, the **Slavyansk ECO** refinery in **Krasnodar**, the **Vladimir** pumping station: a systematic map of the Russian energy sector is being redrawn by Ukrainian strikes.

**Russia** operates numerous refineries and can partially redistribute the load. But every successful strike creates additional tension in the system. Russia's cumulative **refining capacity** is not unlimited. The **40-day campaign** is built on the conviction that accumulated damage will eventually create ruptures in the military supply chain.

### Logistical and defense infrastructure: plants, depots, transport hubs

The second category targets weapons component plants (**VZPP-S** in **Voronezh**), chemical component plants for explosives (**Azot** in **Novomoskovsk**), and Russian military logistical infrastructure. These targets are chosen for their role in the **military supply chain**: without electronic components, without explosives, without fuel, Russian forces at the front cannot fight indefinitely.

The third category, the most direct, is **pressure on the personnel and equipment** of the occupation forces at the front, delivered by the **SBU**'s **Special Group Alpha** and its drones. These three axes reinforce each other: weakening deep logistics degrades the army at the surface.

*This three-tier strategy resembles what American military theorists call "deep battle." Ukraine has reinvented it with modified commercial drones and allied cruise missiles. It is a lesson for all of NATO.*

## Diplomatic implications: pressuring Moscow before the NATO summit

### The NATO summit in Ankara: July 7–8, in the middle of the 40-day campaign

The **40-day campaign** approved on **June 25** covers exactly the period of the **NATO summit in Ankara**, scheduled for **July 7–8, 2026**. This overlap is probably not coincidental. By demonstrating concrete results during discussions on military aid, **Ukraine** strengthens its negotiating position for an aid package estimated at **70 billion euros**.

The strategic message is clear: **Ukraine** is not asking its allies to fight on its behalf. It is fighting — and demonstrating that the tools its allies have provided work and are hurting **Russia**. This is the most powerful argument for justifying additional deliveries of long-range missiles and other deep-strike capabilities.

### Moscow's response and its communication constraints

**Russia** faces a communication dilemma: admitting the damage caused by Ukrainian strikes means acknowledging the vulnerability of its territory and war economy. Denying the strikes means losing credibility in the face of satellite imagery and testimonies from Russian residents spreading despite censorship. **Putin** has chosen a third path: acknowledging the fuel effects without recognizing the strategic scope of the campaign.

This Russian communication management reveals genuine pressure. When an authoritarian regime begins acknowledging domestic supply problems, it is because concealment is no longer possible. The **40-day campaign** aims to make that pressure untenable.

*Russia censors images of drones overflying Vladimir and bans posts showing explosions. But Russians have smartphones. They see the fires. They queue for fuel. This dissonance between official propaganda and daily lived experience may be the most powerful lever of this entire campaign.*

## Risk analysis: escalation, limits, uncertainties

### The risk of Russian escalation

A **40-day campaign** of deep strikes on Russian territory carries escalation risks that must not be minimized. **Russia** could respond by intensifying its own strikes on Ukrainian cities, by cyberattacks against Western critical infrastructure, or by provocations against the **Baltic states** or **Poland** — which Western intelligence already identifies as a real risk.

However, analysis of the preceding months suggests that **Russia** has already been striking Ukrainian infrastructure at maximum capacity. Its missile arsenal is constrained by damage to production plants. Escalating further would require resources that **Moscow** may no longer freely hold.

### The limits of the strategy and the open questions

Can the **40-day campaign** truly "compel Russia to peace"? The honest answer is: probably not on its own. **Putin** has shown no sign of willingness to negotiate since the failed attempts of **2022**. But the strategy may not be aimed at immediate capitulation — it aims to **durably degrade Russian combat capacity** and to **raise the domestic cost** of the war for the regime.

*Compelling an authoritarian regime to peace through economic pressure takes time — months, sometimes years. Zelensky knows this. The 40-day campaign is not a sprint to victory. It is the start of an endurance race that he hopes Moscow cannot sustain at this pace.*

## The preliminary results of the 40-day operation

### Initial strikes and the first documented effects

Within days of **Zelensky**'s formal approval of the 40-day operation on June 25, Ukrainian armed forces intensified their strikes deep into Russian territory. The **Vtorovo pumping station** in the Vladimir region, struck on June 27, is among the first targets of this phase — a critical energy infrastructure feeding industrial zones linked to military production. The **Slavyansk refinery** in Krasnodar, burning through the night of June 27–28, is another concrete example of this strategy in action.

These strikes represent a **measurable increase in intensity** over preceding weeks. The number of drones deployed per night, the distances covered, the sophistication of approach trajectories — all indicate that Ukraine has mobilized additional resources for this operation. Satellite images published by open-source analysts confirm damage to multiple targets and allow realistic assessment of their scale. This transparency, forced by commercial imagery, is itself an element of Ukrainian strategic communication.

### Russia's response and its limits

Russia has responded to Ukrainian strikes on its territory with a combination of **aggressive rhetoric** and practical defensive measures. Rhetorically, Moscow has described these strikes as terrorist acts justifying proportional reprisals — without specifying how those reprisals would differ from its routine strikes against Ukraine. Practically, Russia has reinforced its air defenses around the most valuable industrial installations, deployed additional **electronic jamming systems**, and multiplied surveillance patrols.

These defensive measures have yielded partial results. Some Ukrainian drones have been intercepted. Some trajectories have been disrupted by jamming. But penetration remains significant: from swarms of **50 to 100 drones**, even if 70 percent are intercepted, the remaining 30 percent still represent a **destructive strike force**. And Ukraine continues to improve its techniques to circumvent Russian defenses — varying altitudes, trajectories, attack windows, radar signatures. This adaptation competition is permanent. And Ukraine, for now, maintains its edge.

## Conclusion: The SBU enters a new strategic dimension

### What the 40-day campaign reveals about Ukraine in 2026

The decision of **June 25, 2026** marks a profound transformation in Ukrainian strategic posture. **Ukraine** is no longer fighting only for its survival — it is fighting to impose its terms. By approving a **40-day influence operation** targeting the Russian war economy thousands of kilometers from the front, **Zelensky** demonstrates that his country has the capabilities, the will and the doctrine to wage a sustained long-term strategic pressure campaign.

This transformation has been made possible by three factors: long-range weapons supplied by allies, the growing operational expertise of the **SBU**, and the political determination of a commander-in-chief who has never stopped seeking the initiative. This is not the end of the war. But it may be the beginning of the end of the Russian illusion that it can last indefinitely without consequences on Russian soil.

### 40 days to change the equation

At the time of this analysis, the **40-day campaign** is underway. Results are accumulating: refineries damaged, component plants destroyed, pipelines disrupted, fuel crises documented in several Russian regions. **Zelensky** has told **Moscow** — and the world — that **Ukraine** has a plan and will execute it. **Putin** no longer has peace at home.

*Forty days to compel Putin to the negotiating table — the objective may seem ambitious. But it is not the objective that matters as much as the process. Every strike on Russia's deep infrastructure reinforces the lesson Kyiv wants to teach: there is no safe zone in Russia as long as its armies occupy Ukrainian territory. That lesson, applied systematically, will eventually weigh on Moscow's calculations.*

**By Maxime Marquette, columnist**

## Columnist's transparency note

### Editorial stance

I am not a journalist but a **columnist and analyst**. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies.

I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. **I claim analytical clarity**, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events.

### Method and sources

This text keeps the basic distinction between **verified facts and interpretive analysis**. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under **Sources**, never here.

**Primary source families** used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies.

**Secondary source families**: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations.

When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under **Sources**.

### Nature of the analysis

The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a **critical, contextual synthesis** based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted.

My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors.

This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text.

## Sources

### Primary sources

- [Kyiv Independent — Ukraine's SBU 40-day pressure campaign — June 25, 2026](https://kyivindependent.com/ukraines-sbu-to-wage-40-day-pressure-campaign-against-russia-zelensky-says/)

- [Pravda Ukraine — Zelensky approves 40-day SSU operation — June 25, 2026](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/06/25/8041138/)

### Secondary sources

- [The Guardian — Zelensky 40-day Russia blitz briefing — June 26, 2026](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jun/26/ukraine-war-briefing-zelenskyy-40-day-russia-blitz)

- [Euromaidan Press — Ukraine strikes Orenburg helium and gas complex — June 24, 2026](https://euromaidanpress.com/2026/06/24/ukraine-strikes-russias-only-helium-plant-and-largest-gas-complex-1200-km-from-the-front/)

- [Kyiv Independent — Strike on Voronezh VZPP-S factory — June 22, 2026](https://kyivindependent.com/smoke-rises-above-voronezh-as-ukraine-strikes-key-russian-military-parts-factory/)

- [Militarnyi — Drones strike Azot Novomoskovsk — June 26, 2026](https://militarnyi.com/en/news/drones-strike-azot-chemical-plant-in-novomoskovsk/)

---

Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/analyse-la-campagne-de-40-jours-du-sbu-zelensky-veut-contraindre-la-russie-a-la-