When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

You've reached your limit of one free article.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime .


Exclusive International news coverage

Ad-free experience NEW

Weekly digital Magazine NEW

9 daily & weekly Newsletters

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Free trial

30-days free access, then $2.90
per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch
In The News

600 Miles To Moscow? Attack? Defend? What Ukraine’s Drone Strikes In Russia Really Mean

600 Miles To Moscow? Attack? Defend? What Ukraine’s Drone Strikes In Russia Really Mean

A Ukrainian soldier from the 63 brigade was seen flying a drone as part of military training simulating an attack

Anna Akage

As they’ve done for the past year, Ukrainians have spent the past three days studying maps and calculating distances. But there's a difference now: The maps are of Russia.

Stay up-to-date with the latest on the Russia-Ukraine war, with our exclusive international coverage.

Sign up to our free daily newsletter.

The unprecedented drone attacks this week of airfields deep inside Russian territory open a new phase in the war that is both tactical and symbolic. Though still without official confirmation from Kyiv, nobody doubts that the Ukrainian military executed the three strikes between Monday and Tuesday hundreds of kilometers inside Russia, which killed three and injured at least nine, including the strategic military air base of Engels.

Alexander Kovalenko, a Ukrainian military and political observer of the Information Resistance group, writes on his Telegram channel: "International war observers have seen that regardless of what struck the Russian airfields, it bypassed the lauded Russian air defense system and accomplished the task," he said. "They see not only that the supposed No. 2 military in the world not only drags old T-62 tanks and D-1 howitzers into the combat zone in Ukraine, but that it essentially has no air defense."

French weekly magazine L’Express declared: “Ukraine wants to show that Russian territory is not safe.”

The weapons used are believed to be Soviet-era Strizhs, which were originally reconnaissance drones with a maximum range of about 600 kilometers, which accounted for the distance they had to return to reach original base with the information collected. But reimagined and reconfigured as kamikaze drones means they don’t have to return, effectively doubling their range.

Some Ukrainian commentators have in fact begun calculating where else such weapons could reach: Sevastopol, in Crimea? Or even Moscow?

Russia's air advantage

Still, military experts say it’s not about dreaming about the Kremlin in flames. The breakthrough this week is above all strategic. It’s about the airbases, explained Mykhailo Samus of the Center for Army, Conversion and Disarmament Studies, in an interview with Radio Liberty, Ukrainian edition. "Engels remained such a unique airfield. And just the strike on this airfield is an extraordinary event in the history of Russia,” Samus said. “This story will continue, and I hope that there will be less and less strategic aviation in Russia. If we destroy this complex, they will have a problem with basing strategic aviation. Especially in terms of the European part (of Russia)."

Indeed, since the beginning of the war, the air advantage has been Russia's main trump card in the war with Ukraine. Kyiv’s Western allies made it clear right away that a No-Fly-Zone was off the table, as were official deliveries of long-range missiles that could take out Russia’s air arsenal. Though Ukraine was especially vulnerable to Russia’s air superiority, Western assistance to reverse that was considered a major risk of escalating the war.

And Ukrainians have continued to face ever deeper and wider consequences of Russia’s air superiority, especially over the past two months with a constant barrage of air and missile attacks on the civilian infrastructure across the country. This in fact may have prompted Kyiv to activate the response inside Russian territory.

However, the point is not only that the old modified Soviet Strizh could fly about 700 kilometers of Russian airspace, but that they also managed to hit a strategic facility like Engels, where there were bombers Tu-95MS and Tu-160. These aircraft are part of the nuclear triad of the Russian Federation, which, according to the Kremlin, are supposed to carry nuclear warheads to strike Washington and other vital targets in the U.S. and Europe in case of a nuclear war.

Satellite imagery of Engels air base


Will the U.S. help Ukraine attack Russia?

Still, truth be told, neither the Russian air defense system nor the defense around the strategic object worked. The strikes were not very effective; so far, all that is known is that nine people were injured, three died, and a tanker truck and two aircraft were damaged. These first attempts to hit military targets inside Russia is, above all, a test of Ukrainian intelligence and air force capabilities.

But no less important than the technical execution was that it was a “trial balloon” of sorts to gauge the reaction of Kyiv’s Western partners.

Both Washington and Europe still make it clear they don’t want the war to spillover or escalate. And yet…. Unpacking responses from both U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin shows that something has changed.

Blinken said: “We have neither encouraged nor enabled the Ukrainians to strike inside of Russia.” The careful language, without any hint of condemnation, likely indicates that Washington is not displeased with Ukraine’s actions.

Lloyd was also coy, answering a reporter Tuesday. “So, your question was: Is the U.S. working to prevent Ukraine from developing its own long-range strike capability? The short answer is no, we’re absolutely not doing that.”

It's an “absolute” double negative that speaks volumes about what Ukraine and its allies could be planning next.

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.


The Colonial Spirit And "Soft Racism" Of White Savior Syndrome

Tracing back to Christian colonialism, which was supposed to somehow "civilize" and save the souls of native people, White Savior Syndrome lives on in modern times: from Mother Teresa to Princess Diana and the current First Lady of Colombia, Verónica Alcocer.

photo of a child patient holding hand of an adult

Good intentions are part of the formula

Ton Koene / Vwpics/ZUMA
Sher Herrera


CARTAGENA — The White Savior Syndrome is a social practice that exploits or economically, politically, symbolically takes advantage of individuals or communities they've racialized, perceiving them as in need of being saved and thus forever indebted and grateful to the white savior.

Although this racist phenomenon has gained more visibility and sparked public debate with the rise of social media, it is actually as old as European colonization itself. It's important to remember that one of Europe's main justifications for subjugating, pillaging and enslaving African and American territories was to bring "civilization and save their souls" through "missions."

Even today, many white supremacists hold onto these ideas. In other words, they believe that we still owe them something.

This white savior phenomenon is a legacy of Christian colonialism, and among its notable figures, we can highlight Saint Peter Claver, known as "the slave of the slaves," Bartolomé de Las Casas, Mother Teresa of Calcutta, Princess Diana herself, and even the First Lady of Colombia, Verónica Alcocer.

Keep reading...Show less

The latest