Is Ukraine Balancing the Forces in Deep Drone Strikes? #aerial attacks#air defence#Chasiv Yar#drone#Pokrovsk#Russia#Russian aggression#Shahed#Ukraine#War in Ukraine

War conflict in Ukraine: Attacks, negotiations, and drone warfare. Transcript of the interview for Czech TV CT24 on Aug 04, 2025.

#aerial attacks #air defence #Chasiv Yar #drone #Pokrovsk #Russia #Russian aggression #Shahed #Ukraine #War in Ukraine

Latest attacks on both sides

Flames engulfed dozens of shops. According to local authorities, there were no casualties in the attacks. In the Kherson region, Russian shelling of the village of Antonivka caused the death of one man.

Ukraine also attacked. According to local reports, an unmanned aerial vehicle that hit a railway station in the Volgograd region in southwestern Russia damaged power lines. A fire broke out at the site.

The most significant damage in Odesa occurred at an electronics shopping center, where stores with electronics and household appliances caught fire. Rescuers, together with volunteers, also extinguished a fire in an abandoned building near the railway tracks.

Ceasefire negotiations and the threat of sanctions

US envoy Steve Whitkoff could negotiate a ceasefire in Ukraine in Moscow on Wednesday or Thursday. President Donald Trump announced this and again warned that Russia would face severe sanctions if it did not agree to stop the fighting by Friday when the specified ten-day deadline expires.

Trump said he plans to impose up to 100% import duties on countries that buy Russian oil. Such a measure could particularly affect Brazil, China, and India.

„We will impose sanctions, but it looks like they are quite good at circumventing them. You know, they are cunning people, so we’ll see what happens.“ – Donald Trump

„It is unacceptable for India to continue financing this war by purchasing oil from Russia. It may be shocking for people to learn that India is essentially at the same level as China in purchasing Russian oil. It presents itself as one of our closest allies, but it doesn’t buy our products.“ – Steve Miller

Interview with General Pavel Macko

Moderator: We will continue discussing the current development of the war in Ukraine in the ČT 24 studio in the following minutes. Pavel Macko, Lieutenant General (Retired), former commander of the NATO Joint Forces Training Center, is already with us. Good afternoon.

Pavel Macko: Good day.

Moderator: Ukraine today confirmed a drone attack on an airport in Crimea, where it reportedly destroyed one fighter jet and damaged four other aircraft. How significant is this strike from a military perspective, especially regarding Russia’s ability to maintain air superiority in the region?

Pavel Macko: We have seen several such Ukrainian attacks over the last two to three days. Regarding Crimea and the attack on the Saky base, where a Su-30MS fighter was destroyed, another such fighter was damaged, and three Su-24 fighter-bombers were damaged, this was carried out by the Ukrainian SBU service, Team Alpha. This means that it was likely done using shorter-range drones, but directly from Crimean territory or its immediate vicinity.

But meanwhile, we have also seen massive attacks deep into Russian territory. The attack on the Volgograd region was already mentioned in the report, but we also saw attacks in the Krasnodar region on the Sochi base or Sochi airport, where there is also an oil terminal of the Russian company Rosneft. That was burning too. We saw Ukrainian strikes on multiple industrial facilities.

This means that Ukraine is gradually improving its ability to penetrate Russian air defense and simultaneously destroy not only military objects but also the military-industrial complex – factories that supply either electronic components or radio-electronic warfare systems for Russian weapon systems.

The Russians are responding by trying to fortify facilities being built in Milerovo, Gvardeysk, and also in Crimea, where the Russians are trying to build improved shelters for air equipment, even after the successful „Spider web“ operation that the Ukrainians carried out in early July.

Moderator: Ukraine has also admitted responsibility for hitting a fuel depot in Sochi. Is this more of a signal for the Russian leadership, or potentially the Russian public, or does it change something about the current balance of forces?

Pavel Macko: It’s not just a signal. Simply put, Ukraine is gradually trying to equalize in the capability of long-range attacks. The Russians attack with ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and especially Shahed drones. Ukrainians have a wider spectrum of these long-range drones, they are developing other drones as well, and we will see increasingly frequent attacks on these bases.

The Russians are improving aircraft positions, fortifying all facilities, trying to strengthen air defense, but similar to how Ukraine has problems intercepting Russian drones, this applies to the opposite side as well. Through this, Ukraine is clearly demonstrating that Russia is not invulnerable.

Basically, for Ukraine, this is the only effectively possible way to defend against increasing Russian aggression – to act asymmetrically, disrupt the Russian rear, meaning logistical and air bases, and thus not allow the Russians to escalate the transfer of forces and offensive means to the Ukrainian battlefield.

Moderator: How challenging is it to hit such targets without direct air support, only with the mentioned drones, and what does this possibly tell us about the current capabilities of the Ukrainian army?

Pavel Macko: The Ukrainians have demonstrated not only on land but also at sea that they can equip these resources with relatively good navigation and communication tools. Thus, they can control them remotely, or they operate in a semi-autonomous mode. In any case, they need to guide them to the target area.

This means that the Ukrainians have this communication relatively resistant, the Russians cannot completely jam it and cannot destroy all these targets. As a result, Ukrainians penetrate deeper and deeper into these areas, and that’s why the Russians are resorting to mechanical fortification of objects.

Of course, it’s a never-ending story, because Ukrainians will escalate these attacks. Ukrainians are definitely advancing technologically. It’s a kind of duel – we see that in the drone area, the basic cycle is 3 to 6 months. This means that what works well today may not work in 3 months because the other side has a counter-tool.

For example, the Ukrainians recently put into operation Interceptor 2.0. It’s their own product, but there are also components from Western countries. It’s a drone designed to hunt Russian drones, and this will likely continue on both sides.

Drone warfare and production capacities

Pavel Macko: First of all, Ukraine is significantly ramping up drone production and is also receiving increased aid. Most recently, Britain announced that it would deliver around 100,000 drones, and these are mostly combat drones for contact combat.

Ukraine specializes primarily in long-range drones, but it is also developing ballistic missiles, which it has already tested, and now they are waiting for serial production to start. Similarly, Ukraine is trying to produce cruise missiles.

Moderator: And what do we actually know, or conversely, don’t know at all, about Russian reserves and Russian production capacities? Because during July, according to Ukrainian authorities, Russia attacked with 6,300 long-range drones and sent 198 missiles and rockets, which in the case of drones is the most per month, and there were more missiles only in June. So how long can Russia still maintain this?

Pavel Macko: It’s a battle for survival on both sides and a race against time. Both sides are escalating production. The Russians are capable of producing about 120 missiles of various types per month.

In their latest use, the Russians also deployed missiles such as the Kh-22, which is an anti-ship missile originally designed to destroy aircraft carriers or as a nuclear weapon carrier. It is very inaccurate, by the way – it has an inaccuracy of up to 600 meters, which is why it is extremely dangerous to use it in built-up areas and very difficult to intercept.

The Russians are producing around 100 to 150 Shahed drones daily, and their planned capacity is that they would like to achieve a capacity of up to 300 drones per day by the end of the year. This would mean a significant increase in the use of these drones from the 5,000 in June, and 6,000 plus in July.

Simply put, after depleting their resources in artillery, where primarily the artillery systems themselves are failing, the Russians are shifting a large part of the focus to drone technology. This is both in contact combat on the front line and in deep attacks.

In short, Shahed drones and their Geran derivatives, which have been modernized, will be the main combat tool of the Russians in the coming months. And the same is happening on the Ukrainian side, but there it’s for the opposite reason – the Ukrainians never had very numerous artillery, and therefore were forced to resort to the dronization of the entire fight.

Strategically important points on the front

Moderator: On the front, the greatest attention is now focused on the locations of Pokrovsk and Chasiv Yar. What exactly are the Russians trying to do? Why is this section of the front important?

Pavel Macko: When I consider Pokrovsk, it’s an important logistical hub, which would allow the Russians, if they controlled it, to proceed then from the salient northward and in a kind of arc maneuver try to open up the space of the so far unoccupied Donbas. Of course, in connection with further attacks, or they also have the alternative to continue further into the Dnipropetrovsk region.

Simply put, it’s an important supply route for Ukrainian forces from the direction of Dnipro. Dnipro is a large industrial center, a supply center, and has further connections to central Ukraine.

If we look at Chasiv Yar, it’s a kind of elevated terrain and is actually a direct gateway to the basin where Sloviansk and Kramatorsk are located. Of course, there are other villages there as well.

In the case of Chasiv Yar, the Russians have it almost under control after 16 months, but the Ukrainians are still holding on in the western part. As far as Pokrovsk is concerned, they haven’t directly attacked it, although some reconnaissance and sabotage groups have penetrated there. The Russians are concentrating more on a bypassing maneuver, where they are trying to bypass Pokrovsk from the southwest and from the north and gradually isolate it, interrupt supply routes directly to Pokrovsk, and subsequently either exhaust it or try to take control of it.

In short, both of these cities are important. One is in the western part, the as yet unoccupied part of the Donetsk region, the other is more in the west-central part, that’s Pokrovsk. And it allows the Russians, if they were to acquire them, to contemplate a further attack towards the as yet unoccupied part of the Donetsk region.

Nuclear rhetoric and deployment of American submarines

Moderator: One last thing. The deployment of American nuclear submarines closer to Russia. Is this, in your opinion, an adequate reaction from Donald Trump to the words of Dmitry Medvedev, and does it potentially have any escalation potential? Because spokesman Peskov has already called for caution, saying that everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric.

Pavel Macko: It’s good that Dmitry Peskov is saying this, because Russia has been constantly intimidating, literally blackmailing with nuclear weapons for three and a half years. President, ex-president Medvedev is not just anyone, because he is after all a deputy of the Security Council and doesn’t say anything into the wind without it being approved from the Kremlin. Or if he were speaking arbitrarily, they would silence him very quickly.

This means that Russia has long been conducting this so-called reflexive control, where it is constantly hinting, suggesting that it is prepared to use nuclear weapons. We hear this from Russian state television every week, that Europe should look forward to an attack, President Putin himself has repeatedly threatened a nuclear „solution.“

And then, of course, came just a verbal reaction from President Trump, which from a military perspective doesn’t have any real significance, because part of these submarines with nuclear missiles is permanently in combat service and is permanently hidden in such areas where the adversary doesn’t know about them.

It’s part of the nuclear triad, and it’s precisely these submarines that are meant to guarantee that in the case of even a first strike from the other side, the one who has these submarines retains the capability of a retaliatory strike. From this perspective, it should be seen only as signaling from President Trump.

Some may have criticized it as an unfortunate word. He used it on an unofficial platform, on his social media. But it was a clear message to the Russians that today’s „language“ from the Russians cannot go on indefinitely. And he implied by this that the United States, like Russia, also has nuclear weapons, and both sides know well that they have the capability of mutual self-destruction. And thus the reproach from Dmitry Peskov should primarily be directed within the Russian ranks.

Moderator: Says Pavel Macko, former commander of the NATO Joint Forces Training Center. Thank you very much for your time. Have a nice day.

Pavel Macko: Thank you for the invitation. Have a nice day.

See also:

How Long Will Russians Continue to Escalate Terror Against Civilians?

Is Russia provoking President Trump?

NASPAŤ