The Hypersonic Game: A Dangerous New Chapter in the Ukraine War

On November 19 and 21, Ukraine's strategic use of U.S.-made ATACMS and British Storm Shadow missiles marked a significant shift in the conflict, targeting Russian facilities with precision. NATO’s unwavering military support for Ukraine, including advanced weaponry like HIMARS and long-range missile systems, has played a pivotal role in prolonging the war. While such support strengthens Ukraine's defenses, it also intensifies the scale and complexity of the conflict, pushing both sides to adopt more advanced and destructive technologies.

In response, on November 23, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a retaliatory strike on Dnipro using a hypersonic ballistic missile nicknamed "Oreshnik." Equipped with a Multiple Independently-targetable Reentry Vehicle (MIRV), the missile—designed for nuclear delivery—was deployed with conventional warheads. This “experimental” weapon signals a troubling escalation, one that underscores Russia's readiness to counter Western-backed advancements with cutting-edge military capabilities.

Why "Oreshnik" Matters

MIRVs, Cold War-era innovations, allow a single missile to carry and deliver multiple warheads, targeting different locations simultaneously. While the "Oreshnik" carried conventional warheads, its deployment reveals a dangerous shift in modern warfare strategies, where the line between conventional and nuclear capabilities grows increasingly thin.

Tap to view the video

Strategic Calculations and Warnings

Russia notified the United States of the missile launch through the National Nuclear Risk Reduction Center, adhering to pre-launch protocols. Putin framed the strike as retaliation against Ukraine’s use of NATO-supplied long-range weapons, warning, “We consider ourselves entitled to use our weapons against the military facilities of those countries that allow their weapons to be used against us.” The Pentagon criticized this rhetoric as “reckless,” raising concerns about further escalation.

NATO's Role in Prolonging the War

NATO’s continuous supply of advanced weaponry has undoubtedly bolstered Ukraine’s ability to resist Russian aggression. However, this support has also fueled the conflict, making diplomatic solutions increasingly elusive. By empowering Ukraine to strike deeper into Russian-controlled territories, NATO risks intensifying hostilities, pushing both sides to adopt riskier and more destructive measures.

Biden’s Last Moves in Office

Interestingly, until recently, President Joe Biden had restricted Ukraine’s use of long-range weapons inside Russia, fearing broader repercussions. But with his electoral loss and impending departure from the White House, Biden appears to be making bold, last-minute moves, allowing escalatory actions that may have long-term consequences. Critics argue these decisions, driven more by political posturing than strategic foresight, are adding fuel to an already raging fire.

Ukraine’s Stance

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has called Russia's new missile strike “a clear and severe escalation.” Despite NATO’s backing, Kyiv maintains that it has the right under international law to target legitimate military facilities in Russia, reinforcing its commitment to defending its sovereignty at any cost.

My Thoughts on This Conflict

This war has moved far beyond a regional dispute—it has become a stage for global powers to assert influence, with Ukraine caught in the middle. NATO’s continued weapons support has undeniably strengthened Ukraine, but it has also prolonged the conflict and escalated tensions to dangerous levels.

President Joe Biden’s recent approval for Ukraine to use long-range weapons inside Russian territory is a concerning shift, especially as it comes in the twilight of his administration. Until his electoral defeat, Biden had resisted such moves, fearing the global repercussions. Now, these last-minute decisions seem more like an attempt to secure a political legacy than a well-thought-out strategy.

I firmly believe this conflict can be resolved without the interference of third-party nations. The endless supply of advanced weaponry and retaliatory actions only pushes the world closer to a tipping point. True resolution lies in direct dialogue between Ukraine and Russia—diplomacy, not destruction, should shape the future of this region.