COMMENTARY: Ukraine strikes Moscow where it hurts most — the economy and the prestige

A June night that will go down in history

In the night of June 17 to 18, 2026, nearly 200 Ukrainian drones targeted Moscow and its surrounding region, triggering one of the most massive aviation disruptions ever recorded in Russia. 527 flights cancelled or delayed across the four airports of the Russian capital — Sheremetyevo, Domodedovo, Vnukovo, and Zhukovsky — according to data compiled by the Russian newspaper Kommersant. Tens of thousands of stranded passengers. A country supposedly winning its war, suddenly unable to get its planes off the ground.

The attack also set fire to the Kapotnya refinery, the capital's only major refinery, which supplies more than a third of Moscow's fuel needs. It will be out of service for at least six months, according to industry sources cited by Reuters. This was no accident — it is a strategy. Kyiv has decided to bring the war where it hurts most — into the Russian economy, into its citizens' daily lives, into financial markets, and into the Kremlin's national pride.

The shift in Ukrainian doctrine

President Volodymyr Zelensky was explicit: Ukraine will carry out preemptive strikes against every installation Russia uses to sustain its war. This is no longer simply military against military. It is a deliberate economic campaign, planned and executed with drones capable of striking at more than 2,000 kilometres from the border. In June 2026, 28 long-range strikes on Russian oil infrastructure were recorded by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), compared to 33 in May and 18 in April.

It took four years of all-out war for Ukraine to grasp a truth strategists should have articulated back in 2022: striking a refinery in Moscow is more effective than destroying a tank in the Donbas. Economic warfare is also a war of survival.

Oil production in free fall

The data are eloquent. According to Bloomberg, Russian gasoline production has fallen 15% since June 2025 and 9% since May 2026. The main cause? Repeated Ukrainian strikes on refineries. Facilities hit in June 2026 include the Kapotnya refinery in Moscow, struck on June 12 and 18, as well as the Ufaneftekhim and Bashneft-Novoil refineries in Ufa, in Bashkiria, more than 1,500 kilometres from the border, struck on June 25. The TANECO refinery in Tatarstan was also hit, with a cumulative processing capacity of approximately 600,000 barrels per day taken offline, according to Carnegie Endowment.

The concrete result: fuel queues at petrol stations across 25 Russian regions, panic buying of fuel, rising prices at the pump. Russia's war economy, already under pressure from inflation and sanctions, is now facing additional strain of a different nature — no longer coming from the outside, but from within its own territory. The Kremlin can no longer shield its citizens from the consequences of the war it triggered.

The impact on Russia's military logistics

Beyond civilian petrol stations, Russian armed forces also depend on domestic refineries. Scarcer and more expensive fuel complicates resupply for front-line units, lengthens logistical timelines, and raises the operational costs of an army already under strain. ISW documented that Operation Torch, launched by the Russia Freedom Legion (RFL) on June 24, targeted six gas distribution facilities in the Moscow and Tver oblasts, disrupting the energy supply to military infrastructure.

Here lies the cruel paradox of Russia's strategy: Putin built a war economy designed to absorb shocks. But that economy rests on physical infrastructure that Ukrainian drones now reach with relative ease. The Kremlin's economic bunker has windows — and Kyiv knows them by heart.

Moscow's airspace under de facto Ukrainian control

That four major international airports had to suspend operations simultaneously is the most visible proof: Moscow is no longer a protected city. On June 18, during the war's largest strike on the Russian capital, airports shut down for hours. 50 outbound flights cancelled and 71 delayed at Sheremetyevo alone. Passengers evacuated to shelter areas inside terminals. Israeli airline El Al suspended its Tel Aviv–Moscow route on June 26, explicitly citing "recent aviation incidents."

The signal is global. When a foreign airline suspends a route to a supposedly secure capital, it means the international perception of Russian aviation security has fundamentally changed. Insurance premiums, risk tariffs, the commercial reputation of Russian civil aviation take a hit that goes well beyond the symbolic. Moscow is becoming more isolated.

The psychological effect on the Russian population

Kremlin propaganda presents the war as distant, waged somewhere in the east against an "artificial regime." But when Moscow's skies are crossed by drones, when columns of black smoke rise from the southern suburbs of the capital, when 17 people are wounded, including children — and a girl of 8 is killed by debris according to Meduza — the official narrative collapses. Mayor Sergei Sobyanin posted dozens of messages on Telegram throughout the nights of attacks, each acknowledging new drones shot down, each claiming "no damage." The reality filmed by Moscow residents contradicts this version.

I sometimes wonder what ordinary Muscovites think when they hear explosions in the night, then read in the morning that "everything is fine." The gap between the official narrative and the smoke visible from their windows must create a deep cognitive fracture. That, too, is the economic and psychological war Ukraine is waging.

A cold, rational logic

Ukraine's strategy is not improvised. It follows a rigorous economic logic: oil revenues finance 35% of Russia's federal budget. Reducing refining capacity reduces exports, reduces revenues, and dries up the financing of the war. Every refinery struck is a budgetary victory as much as a military one. The strikes on Krasnodar's oil depots, Orenburg's gas facilities, the Vladimir space centre — all these targets share one thing in common: they directly or indirectly fuel Russia's war machine.

On June 25, Ukrainian drones struck the Bashneft refineries in Ufa (Bashkortostan), more than 1,500 km from the front. That same night, an oil depot in Krasnodar supplying Russian forces in occupied Ukrainian territory was hit. This is no coincidence — it is a precise mapping of Russian logistical flows, targeted with surgical precision that took months to prepare.

Russia's response: permanently inflated interception figures

Against this campaign, Russia responds with two tools: air defence and communications. On the first point, the Russian Ministry of Defence claimed to have shot down 555 drones on June 18, then 660 on June 26. These figures are unverifiable, often inflated, and include occupied territories Moscow claims to have annexed. On the second point, the Kremlin continues to insist that the strikes have "no significant impact" — while its own citizens queue at petrol stations.

There is something almost absurd about the Kremlin's communications: every downed drone is presented as a victory, while refineries burn, airports close and pump prices rise. Russian propaganda has become so detached from facts that even Russians struggle to believe it.

A telling set of priorities

According to President Zelensky, Russia has massively redirected its air defence systems to protect Moscow, St. Petersburg, and a handful of strategic sites. This move leaves other Russian regions more vulnerable — exactly what Ukraine had hoped to trigger. The Washington Times confirmed that air defence assets stripped from the front line were repositioned to protect the capital.

This means that Ukrainian pressure produces a multiplier effect: not only does it strike infrastructure, but it forces Russia to strip certain defensive positions to reinforce others. Every drone sent toward Moscow is a drone that forces the adversary to choose what it truly wants to protect. And Moscow's answer is revealing: the elite first, the country second.

The limits of Russian defence against swarms

Military experts consulted by The Moscow Times note that Ukrainian drone swarms are difficult to intercept precisely because they saturate detection and neutralisation systems. On June 18, Russian soldiers were filmed firing handheld missiles from a motorway crowded with civilians in Moscow — an image symptomatic of an overwhelmed system. Ukraine produced 100,000 interceptor drones in 2025 and doubled that output in just four months in 2026, according to Ukrainian minister Mykhailo Fedorov.

The image of Russian soldiers firing missiles from a Moscow motorway encapsulates the true state of Russian air defence. It is no longer an impregnable fortress — it is an improvised setup under permanent pressure. Zelensky has transformed the trench war into a war of economic attrition, and Putin has not yet found the counter.

An international summit disrupted

The timing of Ukrainian strikes is not accidental. The major attack of June 2026 on Moscow coincided, like the St. Petersburg strike earlier that month, with an international summit hosted by Russia. The suspension of flights at Moscow's four airports directly disrupted foreign delegations. That world leaders and diplomats experienced in real time the closure of airports in the supposed "world capital" was no accident — it was an unambiguous diplomatic message sent without words.

The El Al suspension fits this context: airlines don't do politics, they calculate risk. When Moscow's skies become a danger zone for international civil aviation, Russia loses its status as a global aviation hub, with all that this implies for its commercial, diplomatic, and cultural connections with the rest of the world.

A message to the entire world

Ukraine is also sending a message to its Western allies, who sometimes hesitate over the scale of support to provide. The demonstration of capability — striking a refinery 15 kilometres from the Kremlin, paralysing the airspace of a capital of 12 million inhabitants, triggering a fuel shortage in a war economy — proves that Kyiv can achieve tangible strategic results with the tools provided by the West, and even with its own domestic production.

Ukraine is proving that modern war is also won in airport terminals, in petrol station queues, and in columns of black smoke above suburban neighbourhoods. This is a lesson the West should take to heart: supporting Kyiv means investing in the most effective strategy ever deployed against a nuclear aggressor.

Zelensky's announcement: forcing Russia to negotiate

On June 26, 2026, President Zelensky announced a "40-day influence operation" designed to "force Russia to end the war." This declaration, made on X (Twitter), marks a turning point in Ukrainian communications: for the first time, Kyiv publicly announced an intensive pressure campaign with a defined timeline. The stated goal is to use Ukraine's superiority in long-range drones to degrade Russian infrastructure sufficiently to compel Moscow back to the negotiating table.

The logic behind this operation is simple but bold: every week of intensive strikes on refineries, fuel depots, and communications centres increases the economic cost of the war for Russia. As fuel shortages worsen, transport costs rise, and the Russian population feels the consequences in their daily lives, internal pressure on the Kremlin to find a way out of the conflict builds. This is a strategy of calculated economic attrition, and the first results are already measurable.

The very idea of announcing an offensive operation in advance — of telegraphing a 40-day campaign to the enemy — is counterintuitive. But Zelensky knows what he is doing: this announcement maximises the psychological effect on the Russian population and international markets, while signalling to Western allies that Ukraine has a coherent plan. This is strategic communication as much as military strategy.

A new dimension of war against gas infrastructure

On June 24, 2026, the Russia Freedom Legion (RFL), a pro-Ukrainian paramilitary unit composed of Russian nationals opposed to Putin's regime, announced the launch of "Operation Torch." Its objective: to strike gas distribution facilities in the Moscow and Tver oblasts to "significantly degrade Russian energy infrastructure." ISW confirmed that the RFL targeted six gas distribution facilities, disrupting the functioning of certain infrastructure.

This operation adds a new dimension to the Ukrainian economic campaign: beyond the drone strikes carried out by the regular armed forces and Ukrainian intelligence services (SBU, GUR), anti-Putin Russians are actively participating in the degradation of their own country's economic infrastructure. This phenomenon — Russians fighting the Putin regime from within and from without — reveals an internal fracture within Russian society that Moscow cannot paper over with propaganda alone.

The Russia Freedom Legion is one of the most fascinating phenomena of this war. Russians fighting the Russian army, striking their own country's infrastructure — this is a reality the Kremlin cannot explain to its population without admitting that its own war is divisive even among Russians. I don't know whether this movement is powerful enough to change the outcome, but its very existence is a symbolic victory for Ukraine.

The irreversibility of the damage inflicted

The Kapotnya refinery will be out of service for at least six months. The two Bashneft refining units in Ufa were taken offline simultaneously. The Orenburg gas processing plant halted production after the June 24 strikes. These repair timelines accumulate, and Russian refining capacity does not rebuild overnight. Ukraine strikes faster than Russia repairs — that is the definition of successful economic attrition.

What Putin did not foresee

When he launched his full-scale invasion in February 2022, Vladimir Putin had calculated a swift victory. Four years later, his own refineries are burning, his own airports are closing, his own citizens are queuing for petrol. Ukraine has transformed the high-intensity war into a war of economic attrition, and the strategy is working. The question is no longer whether Russia can hold militarily — it is how long its economy can absorb these blows without cracking under the combined pressure of sanctions and Ukrainian drones.

I do not forget the 17 Russian civilians wounded at Domodedovo airport on June 18. They are collateral victims of a war Putin started, of a Ukrainian strategy targeting the Russian war economy. I take no pleasure in their injuries. But I maintain that Ukraine has the right to strike the economy that finances the destruction of its cities. The real responsibility for these casualties lies with whoever started this war — not with those defending against it.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist

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.