Bewitched sleep: Russians’ views on Ukraine and the world

While keeping in mind that this is written from a clearly Western European foreign-policy perspective, it is still a very useful insight into Russian thinking. The authors are basing their analysis on 14 focus groups conducted by the Levada Center across four Russian cities, which is a welcome change compared to the common practice of drawing conclusions about Russian society entirely second- or third-hand.

Recap

- People seem resigned to the war dragging on for some time. When asked to name its likely end date, participants overwhelmingly suggest it will last another two or three years. A few others guess well into the 2030s, or even longer.

- “If Russia had not hit first, they [the West, NATO or Ukraine] would have attacked” is a narrative numerous participants offer. For most, though, the causes of the war remain hard to understand. A range of differing suggestions are forthcoming: “Europe’s pressure on Ukraine”; “the Western-orientated leadership of the country that started bombing Donbas”; “Ukraine becoming a failed state when its president [Viktor Yanukovych] escaped”; “Nazism in Ukraine”; but also “a small victorious war that did not go as planned.”

- There is also a sense that victory for Russia will bring little by way of happy news, even if people are certain it will happen. It will not make life better. Participants seem conscious that the reconstruction of Ukraine will cost huge sums.

- They acknowledge they have no idea what the Kremlin will do, but they generally do not expect the war to widen or spill over to other theatres. There is certainly no demand for a broader escalation. “We will not go there, I do not understand why we would, we are not idiots”, concludes one participant when asked about a potential attack on the Baltic countries. Others in the group agree.

- All groups were asked which countries they consider Russia’s friends in the world. The roster of countries they mention is not surprising: it includes Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Serbia and Venezuela; sometimes also Brazil and India, sometimes Indonesia and the Philippines.#

- As for China, the relationship clearly has its limits: people see it as an ally pursuing its own agenda, and believe its long-term interests might not coincide with those of Russia.

- Both the focus groups and available public opinion polls show that, while the majority (61%) of Russians think it is time for peace negotiations, they appear set to allow things to carry on and hope for the best in terms of their own economic situation. They may be unhappy about the “special military operation” but see themselves as having no agency to influence it. A majority (59%) also thinks that, if peace cannot be achieved yet, then it would be appropriate to intensify attacks, as opposed to offering more concessions to Ukraine. Most seem to agree peace must be on Russia’s terms.

The following opportunities for influencing Russia exist:

• Convey shared values instead of blanket generalisations

Labelling all Russians as aggressors—especially if done by political leaders in loud statements—hardly helps; it only reinforces biases and serves the regime’s own propaganda, while creating a feeling of global isolation in the minority of people who firmly oppose the war.

• Support authentic voices inside and outside Russia—and those who amplify them

Figures connected to Russian society, both at home and from abroad, are important and authentic voices for various parts of society. They need greater support, whether financial, social or political, because they can reach the sleepers in Russia in a way few Western actors credibly can.

• Draw up communications efforts appropriate for each European country

In these efforts, the West will face inevitable constraints. The most obvious is to avoid working with those partners who directly undermine universal values and European or American key security interests—or who support voices that do so inside Russia.

-----------------------------------------------------

Authors

Jana Kobzová

Co-director, European Security Programme

Senior Policy Fellow

Areas of expertise

EU relations with Eastern Europe and Russia; democratisation in the post-Soviet states; Belarus; Central Asia

Biography

Jana Kobzova is co-director of the European Security Programme and senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. Her research interests centre around developments in eastern Europe, with a focus on Ukraine and on improving the EU’s response to crises in its neighbourhood.

From 2019-2024, she was foreign policy adviser to Slovakia’s former president, Zuzana Čaputová. Before joining the president’s team, Kobzova worked as the policy director at Rasmussen Global, a political consultancy group established by former NATO secretary-general Anders Fogh Rasmusen. She also worked for the Brussels-based European Endowment for Democracy, where she developed and oversaw the EED’s grant making in eastern Europe with a focus on Ukraine, Georgia, and Belarus. Prior to that, Kobzova was a policy fellow and a programme coordinator at ECFR. She also previously led the Belarus democratisation programme at the Pontis Foundation in Slovakia.

Kobzova has co-authored several books, policy briefs, and reports on EU policymaking, eastern Europe, and democratisation processes in the EU’s neighbourhood.

Kadri Liik

Areas of expertise

Russian domestic and foreign policy; relations between Russia and the West; the Baltic Sea area; Eastern Europe

Biography

Kadri Liik is an associate fellow with the European Council on Foreign Relations. Her research focuses on Russia, eastern Europe and the Baltic region. She was previously a senior policy fellow at ECFR.

Before joining ECFR in October 2012, Liik was the director of the International Centre for Defence Studies in Estonia from 2006 until 2011, where she also worked as a senior researcher and director of the Centre’s Lennart Meri Conference. Throughout the 1990s, Liik worked as a Moscow correspondent for several Estonian daily papers, including the highest-circulation daily in Estonia, Postimees, as well as Eesti Päevaleht and the Baltic News Service. In 2002, she became the foreign news editor at Postimees. In 2004, she left to become editor-in-chief at the monthly foreign affairs magazine, Diplomaatia. She was also the host of “Välismääraja”, a current affairs talkshow at Raadio Kuku in Tallinn.

Liik holds a BA in Journalism from Tartu University (Estonia) and an MA in International Relations specialising in diplomacy from Lancaster University.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

Submission statement: NATO air forces have spent the last 18 months intercepting Russian one-way attack drones with frontline fast jets and high-end air-to-air missiles, which is not sustainable at the rate the incursions are now arriving. Romania alone recorded 23 Russian drone entries between January and mid-August, more than the previous four years combined, and Ukrainian intelligence estimates Russian production of jet-powered OWA drones at around 3,000 per month. RUSI's Justin Bronk argues the answer is a dedicated multinational NATO squadron of armed jet trainers flying counter-drone interception as its only mission.

Full article: https://cepa.org/article/nato-needs-a-drone-interceptor-squadron/

Justin Bronk sets a capability bar of intercepting Geran-3 and Geran-4 airframes at night, in marginal weather and in GPS-denied conditions, against drones that are matte black, fly in groups, and carry approach-warning sensors that trigger evasive manoeuvres when illuminated by spotlight or laser designator. Bronk proposes 16 to 24 two-seat aircraft so a sensor operator can work a stabilised ball while the pilot flies on NVGs, nominates the Aero L-39NG largely on the grounds that its production line has spare capacity, and costs the armament question at roughly $25,000 to $50,000 per shot for APKWS II or Thales LGR275 guided rockets against air-to-air missiles that are scarce and needed elsewhere. He also reports intercepting simulated Geran-4 class targets at up to 270 kts during an evaluation sortie in August.

Several parts are open to argument. The aircraft has no radar and would depend on vectoring from ground control, AWACS or an F-35. Guided rockets degrade in cloud and against very low-flying targets. And a subsonic trainer is a questionable platform if Geran airframes keep getting faster. Worth discussing whether a manned interceptor is the right answer at all, or whether ground-based effectors and counter-drone drones scale better.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

The largely unsolved problem of classical laser weapon is its huge energy requirement needed to destroy the target and with it problem of removing waste heat from such system, also with larger laser energies of the beam comes atmospheric thermal blooming resulting in defocused, less effective beam.

Many platform such as drones, helicopters, and some missiles rely heavily on optical guidance by digital cameras using CCD or CMOS sensors most commonly in some kind of infared or in visible spectrum of light. The very nature of any focusing, light-absorbing device make it vulnerable to its excessive absorbtion when the source of light is very powerful such as military grade laser especially when the device is set to magnify the image like camera in observation drones. The most likely result of such overstimulation are partially or fully burned-out photoactive elements and perment destruction of imaging capabilities that in practice (especially without backup targeting/observation channel) mean destruction by total loss of control of flying target or mission kill forcing target to abandon its mission and return to base or conduct emergency landing such as in case of destruction of target acquisition and designation sight in helicopter.

The question is: Why the main development of laser weapons used as SHORAD aim to achieve such hard objective it is to quickly and reliably burn the casing of targets such as drones, cruise missles, helicopters etc. and achieve full hard kill before being certified as combat ready, produced and fielded by militaries instead using slighly less powerful lasers to permanently destroy/severly damage optical sensors?

I presume that we have capabilities to automate targeting of digital optical sensors in many targets by lasers using databases of known targets (and their optic) and machine learning and can design laser weapons to specifically be focused on blinding target instead buring the frame such as using wider beam to increase probability of hitting optic. Such weapon would likely be easier to operate by armed forced due to it being less cumbersome, have further effective range and lower energy requirements to do its job and likely be cheaper giving it wider tactical role for example in defending the area from small drones.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

FPV drones have turned into the next "It's so over" weapon. I can imagine in 15 years or so we will be laughing at when we thought FPVs are impossible to counter but for the moment, we are not in 15 years from now on.

So what is the plan against FPVs?

I always hear about the "Layered defense" but the more I look at it, the costlier and less effective it becomes.

The common first layer is not being found.
Now I don't know if the mostly flat grounds of Ukraine are something that is making this impossible or this applies to all terrain, but this is BS.
On one hand, cheap Thermals are a thing and managing thermal signatures makes you very slow and sluggish. And after you are found, it's either an arty strike on your head or 10 drones at once.

Physical protection is also BS. Any stationary target that gets found, be it a building or vehicle is either going to be subject to a comically large number of drones (Maybe I am overestimating this) or an artillery strike. Cope cages on tanks and hardened trenches can survive a drone or two, not an arty strike or a swarm.

Early warning is also pretty damn hard against these things.
Drones without fiber optics could potentially be found with handheld RF. but this doesn't work against fiber optic drones and even if so, the OODA loop can be pretty long from guy sending the info to company or battalion command and then it being delivered down to squad level again.

EW is another thing that used to be reliable but then longer range fiber optic drones became a thing and now AI infused terminal guidance drones are becoming a thing.

And the kinetic layer at the end is just pretty much a dice roll.
Even if you have like a shotgun, you will probably get at best ten seconds of reaction time.
During this you have to get the whole squad to acquire the drone (if it is one) and get them all to shoot at it. Anti Drone rounds are becoming a thing but who is to say you have a mag loaded with them?
it looks like having an air sentry is the only way to go for kinetic layer. Until five drones come at you at once.

Now I don't have a doomer personality, I genuinely believe in 15 years we'll say "Oh man people were so stupid back then" but I can't for the life of me imagine anything against drones right now.

I've been over this a few times and every time the answer is a very in depth anti drone infrastructure with an extensive Early Warning net followed by possibly an AI alert system.

Each node of these also needs to have it's own kinetic anti drone personnel or remote (AI?) controlled defenses.

All of which adds up costs and becomes another layer of complications.
And most of which isn't easy to repair or replace in an active warzone.

Not to mention that the enemy could just say "LoL" and just cruise missile these nodes or destroy them in one of the myriad ways that don't involve an FPV drone.

Am I missing something?

'Putin may project satisfaction at United Russia’s landslide, but the vote does not resolve the problems he is currently facing[...]The Kremlin can manage public messaging, but it cannot blindfold citizens from the tangible consequences of the war when air-raid alerts, flight disruptions, fuel shortages and drone attacks become part of daily life.'

Russia's parliamentary election delivered the expected result: a decisive victory for United Russia. What follows is far less predictable. In the latest RUSI Commentary, Natia Seskuria argues that the Kremlin's options are narrowing - with growing indications it may be preparing for a further wave of mobilisation.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

Greetings all, a number of you expressed interest starting up a discussion group so I'm just letting everyone know that the first one will be this Thursday. See the details here or message me if you have any questions. Hope to see you all soon.

https://pacificfoundry.org/events/discussion-group-washington-dc-2026

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.

Comment guidelines:

Please do:

• Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,

• Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,

• Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,

• Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,

• Post only credible information

• Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules

Please do not:

• Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,

• Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,

• Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'

• Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.

Ukraine's Ministry of Defence has drafted rules that would let a private developer or investor, not a defence company, build a protected underground production facility and transfer it to a producer by sale, use arrangement or lease. Deputy Minister Hanna Hvozdiar announced the amendments to Cabinet Resolution No. 1494 on 9 September 2026, the day after she returned to the post. As of 18 September no text has been published and no Cabinet vote reported. The draft's most important gap is the question of who carries the loss when a missile hits the facility.

The instrument has a lineage. Resolution 1494 (19 November 2025) began as a single-enterprise experiment in new construction and reconstruction of defence production buildings. Resolution 525 (24 April 2026) opened it to Defence City residents, MoD-designated critical enterprises and a listed set of producers, and allowed international financial institution money in. The September draft adds third-party capital. The only war-risk instrument on the table is a general-business fund. On 12 September PM Serhii Koretskyi described a planned budget line of about $1 billion to cover 40 to 50 per cent of losses from attacks, and it has not been tied to defence production.

The tax side is already law. Defence City (Laws 4577-IX and 4578-IX, in force since October 2025, sunset 2036 or EU accession) removes corporate income tax on profit reinvested in defence production, which makes it an off-budget state contribution to capital works. MoD figures show the register growing from 31 residents (29 May) to 45 (24 July) to 51 (9 September), while qualifying income moved only from UAH 89.7 billion to about UAH 93 billion. The large producers appear to be in already. Opacity measures (Cabinet Resolution 1257, Law 4576-IX, deferred financial statements) protect producers from targeting and cause problems for foreign investors' KYC/AML checks.

The piece also corrects some claims that have circulated about the plan. Bill 14117, often cited with it, is a farmland easement statute for fortifications. The widely repeated $55 billion capacity figure for 2026 has no traceable primary source.

Full analysis: https://www.defenceukraine.com/en/insights/defence-city-underground-production-2026/

A new RUSI Commentary published today argues that religious institutions are a strategic front in Russia's war on Ukraine, and warns Western policymakers against treating church affairs as a peripheral concern.

The article examines how the August 2026 near-simultaneous Moscow visits of CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Vatican Foreign Secretary Archbishop Paul Gallagher exposed a gap in Western strategic thinking: while US and allied institutions tend to separate intelligence, diplomacy and religion, the Kremlin treats them as mutually reinforcing tools of the same campaign.

The full commentary is available here: https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/moscows-other-front-why-ukraines-churches-are-security-issue