twitter-tools-public/frontend/tui/commission-jobs-tui/39/06-russia-ukraine-nato.md.md

Direct answer Since late September 2025 the most important Russia/Ukraine war developments and related NATO-country actions are: intensified Ukrainian strikes (especially by drones and unmanned systems) hitting Russian energy and military logistics nodes, growing NATO defensive steps and readiness after repeated airspace incursions, and active diplomatic / weapons debates among Western capitals (including a high-profile U.S. exchange about long‑range Tomahawk strikes). These developments are producing tangible effects inside Russia (fuel shortages, refinery damage) while NATO states expand air policing, test counter‑drone technologies and consider tougher rules of engagement.

Key themes and topics

• Drone warfare and counter‑drone defence: Ukraine is using attack and interceptor drones to strike Russian fuel and logistic targets and to defeat Russian Shahed/FPV strikes; Ukraine is also creating specialized air‑defense unmanned systems units and reporting interceptor success rates above 70% see discussion of the new unmanned air‑defense branch and interceptor performance. NATO members are responding by testing low‑cost drone countermeasures and accelerating procurement of interceptors and related tech in exercises in Portugal, the Netherlands and elsewhere Reuters summary of NATO tests.
• Targeting Russia’s energy/logistics: Ukrainian strikes have increasingly focused on refineries, fuel hubs and gas distribution points, causing fuel shortages in parts of Russia and disrupting refining capacity (FT/Reuters reporting that 16 of 38 refineries have been hit, disrupting >1 million barrels/day of refining capacity) source. Notable specific attacks include strikes on the Afipsky refinery in Krasnodar reported here.
• NATO airspace incursions and allied responses: Several NATO states reported airspace violations and drone incidents (Denmark temporarily shut airports after drone activity; Lithuania got a Turkish warning plane deployed), and Baltic/Polish allied air policing increased. European diplomats warned Moscow that NATO is prepared to shoot down aircraft that violate allied airspace Denmark/Reuters and Bloomberg summary on the NATO warning.
• Political/diplomatic moves and defence aid debates: High‑level diplomacy and meetings (Zelensky’s U.S. engagements) are ongoing; debates continue over enabling Ukraine to strike deeper into Russia — Zelensky asked for Tomahawk cruise missiles and U.S. messaging is mixed, with officials saying restrictions might be eased but no firm commitment yet reported exchange and followups. EU sanctions and the idea of using frozen Russian assets to finance Ukraine face internal friction (Hungary as an obstacle) POLITICO.

Notable patterns and trends

• Increased use of low‑cost drones to impose asymmetric effects: Repeated Ukrainian drone campaigns are degrading Russian fuel and repair capacity while also amplifying logistical pain on Russian forces and civilian fuel markets; social reports show gas station closures and rationing in some Russian regions coverage of closures and refinery hits.
• NATO moving from passive monitoring to more active deterrence posture: Greater Baltic/Poland air policing, deployment of partner assets (e.g., Turkey to Lithuania under NATO measures) and public warnings that NATO will respond forcefully to violations signal a harder line and readiness to intercept/shoot down intruders Reuters on Turkey deployment.
• Operational innovation in Ukraine: creation of specialized unmanned air‑defense forces and effective pairing of mechanized systems (e.g., arrival of Patria carriers from Latvia) to counter drone-heavy Russian tactics are recurring operational notes mechanized capability reporting.
• Political friction within the West about the next escalation steps: While many NATO allies push for stronger measures (weapons, sanctions, assets usage), some political actors (e.g., Hungary) and divergent U.S. messaging create friction in implementing unified measures.

Important mentions, interactions and data points

• Refinery/energy strike metrics: FT reporting (shared by @Mylovanov) that since August Ukraine struck 16 of 38 Russian refineries, disrupting over 1M barrels/day of refining capacity source. Reuters coverage also highlights the operational and political friction caused by successful strikes Reuters.
• Dobropillia counteroffensive: Zelenskyy’s briefing reported 168.8 km² liberated and 187.7 km² cleared of sabotage groups since the operation began, with Russian losses ‘‘nearly 3,000’’ in that operation Zelenskyy briefing.
• Specific facility strike: Afipsky oil refinery in Krasnodar was struck by Ukrainian drone forces overnight (fire reported) NOELreports; images and operational claims around multiple gas distribution sites in Luhansk were published by Ukrainian Unmanned Systems EuromaidanPress.
• NATO responses and exercises: NATO testing counter‑drone tech, conducting increased air policing in the Baltics and launching planning on a European “drone wall” to protect airspace after incursions Reuters on NATO tests and POLITICO on drone wall plans.
• U.S./Tomahawk debate: Zelensky requested Tomahawk cruise missiles in private talks; U.S. officials say restrictions might be eased but no definitive delivery was promised at the time of reporting NOELreports/WSJ/Axios coverage.

Significant events / announcements (each addressed briefly)

1. Ukrainian strikes on Russian fuel infrastructure and refinery network: Multiple outlets and analysts report a concentrated Ukrainian campaign against refineries and gas distribution nodes that has damaged Russian refining capacity (reportedly 16 of 38 refineries hit, >1M bpd capacity disrupted). The attacks have produced fuel shortages, station closures in parts of Russia and forced Russian logistics/operations adjustments; specific high‑value strikes include Afipsky in Krasnodar see FT/Reuters repost via @Mylovanov and the Afipsky strike report NOELreports.

2. NATO airspace incidents, allied responses and counter‑drone acceleration: Several NATO allies reported incursions or drone incidents (Denmark airports, Baltic airspace, Hungary‑involved intercepts). In response NATO allies have ramped up air policing, deployed partner assets (Turkey to Lithuania), publicly warned Moscow that violations may be met with shoot‑down responses, and accelerated testing and procurement of counter‑UAV systems and low‑cost interceptors Denmark/Reuters on airport incidents, Osinttechnical/Bloomberg on NATO warning, and Reuters on NATO tests.

3. Diplomatic/arms debate over long‑range strikes (Tomahawks) and Western unity: Zelensky’s outreach to the U.S. raised the question of providing Ukraine with long‑range Tomahawk missiles to strike deeper Russian infrastructure; U.S. messaging was mixed—reports say restrictions might be eased but no firm commitment was delivered at the time—highlighting tension between Ukraine’s operational requests and allied political calculations NOELreports/press summaries.

Bottom line The conflict’s tactical center of gravity is shifting toward high‑volume drone warfare and targeted strikes on Russian logistics/energy infrastructure; NATO countries are reacting by strengthening air policing, experimenting with and acquiring counter‑drone systems, and debating tougher political/financial measures. These actions are producing real strategic effects on Russian logistics and domestic economy, while allied political coordination — especially on weapons policy and asset‑seizure financing — remains contested and consequential.