EDWARD LUCAS: Can we defend ourselves against a Putin missile strike?

For more than 1,000 days, since Vladimir Putin launched his barbaric invasion of Ukraine, the West has feared an 'escalation' in the conflict.

Now those fears are becoming realised.

Yesterday, the Russian dictator denied claims that Moscow had launched an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) at the Ukrainian city of Dnipro - which would have been the first time such a weapon had been fired in combat.

He insisted, instead, that the projectile was a new 'medium-range missile tested in response to Western aggression' - specifically the use of long-range Western missiles, including British Storm Shadows, in Ukraine.

But as the Kremlin separately warned that a US military base in Poland was 'on a list for potential destruction', and the Russian ambassador stated that Britain was now 'directly involved' in the war, thoughts have turned as to how Putin might respond.

Like many Russia-watchers, I believe the dictator's nuclear threats are empty bluster. Even a nuclear test, let alone the deployment of a 'tactical' atomic weapon, would bring devastating retaliation.

But could he launch a conventional missile attack on Britain? And if he did, could we properly defend ourselves? 

And what else might he do in the weeks ahead to destabilise the democratic world and advance his filthy cause?




For more than 1,000 days, since Vladimir Putin (pictured)  launched his barbaric invasion of Ukraine , the West has feared an 'escalation' in the conflict





Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, left, walks with Vadym Fiashkin, head of the Donetsk Regional Military Administration, right, during a tour of frontline positions

If Putin did launch a conventional missile strike, our air-defence radars, as well as our allies', would spot the projectiles well before impact.

On paper, at least, we have some protection: primarily our six Type 45 destroyers. Each of these formidable warships carries 48 state-of-the-art Aster air-defence missiles.

However, only two of our Type 45s are currently deployable. These billion-pound warships have been plagued by maintenance issues. 

HMS Daring, for example, has spent most of its 15-year life in refits: more than it has spent in active service.

The powerful HMS Duncan is in service and does carry Aster missiles - which would buy time for our Prime Minister to invoke allied support and authorise countermeasures. 

A lot would be riding on the ship's efficacy - and in the hope that Putin's strike would be limited, as its stock of Asters would be swiftly depleted.

Moreover, the Type 45s provide only a partial shield.

If one happens to be in the Thames Estuary at the time of attack, for example, London might be covered - but the rest of the country would be left defenceless.




An intercontinental ballistic missile strike would be hard if not impossible to defend against. Pictured: An image released by the Russian Defence Ministry purports to show the test firing of an intercontinental ballistic missile belonging to the country's nuclear deterrence forces




Read More

Kremlin's stark WWIII warning to West after 'escalation' as UK hints Kyiv can use their missiles too


Needless to say, an intercontinental ballistic missile strike would be many orders of magnitude worse - and far harder if not impossible to defend against.

Although we have a handful of state-of-the-art short-range Sky Sabre land-based missile-defence systems, we wholly lack defences against ICBMs that could prevent utter disaster, such as Israel's Arrow 3 anti-balllistic missile.

However, even without such a grim scenario - which could ultimately presage a nuclear exchange, and with it the end of civilisation - a more pressing immediate concern is that Britain is already under attack from Russia, through sabotage and other mischief, and has been for years. 

This will now escalate.

Russia has become an expert in these ignoble arts, which range from murder to sabotage via cyber-attacks and propaganda operations. 

They are often carried out by Proxies Buy: that is, criminals hired for cash.

Only last month, 20-year-old Dylan Earl, from Leicestershire, pleaded guilty at the Old Bailey to aggravated arson on a Ukrainian-linked business in London, carried out on behalf of the Russian mercenary Wagner Group - which has not gone away following the death of its bloodthirsty leader Yevgeny Prigozhin in a plane crash last year. 

Sixty firefighters were needed to bring the blaze in March under control, though luckily no one was injured.

Counter-terrorism police are separately investigating a parcel bomb in Birmingham, aimed at bringing down a plane carrying freight. 




The powerful HMS Duncan (pictured) is in service and does carry Aster missiles - which would buy time for our Prime Minister to invoke allied support and authorise countermeasures if the UK was under attack

The deadly package, along with others targeting Poland and Germany, was posted in Lithuania - a hop across the border from the Russian puppet state of Belarus.

Other mysterious blazes have sprung up around the country: at an ammunition plant in Monmouthshire in April, and earlier this month at our nuclear submarine shipyard in Barrow. 

British defence companies have also suffered alarming fires.

Scandalously, no one in government is willing to talk openly about these bizarrely synchronised conflagrations. But let me make one prediction: we are now certain to see more of them.

Then there are cyber-attacks. This summer saw a devastating 'ransomware' assault on several major London hospitals - in which hackers demanded money, often in hard-to-trace cryptocurrency, to unlock vital computer systems.

Operations were cancelled, emergency patients had to be transported to other hospitals and blood transfusions and test results were also affected.

Last year, staff at British Airways, Boots and the BBC were similarly targeted in Russia-linked cyber-attacks.

These too are surely set to proliferate - not least because North Korea, whose brainwashed soldiers are now fighting alongside the Russians in Ukraine, has its own dedicated army of cyber-hackers.

Now for a third piece of mayhem. Russia is already systematically attacking seabed cables and pipelines, the arteries of our data and energy flows.

On Wednesday this week, a Chinese ship - reportedly captained by a Russian national - was being inspected by the Danish authorities following catastrophic damage to undersea infrastructure in the Baltic Sea, in a suspected malicious attack. As an island, Britain is particularly vulnerable to such assaults - and Putin has been scheming them for years.




Only last month, 20-year-old Dylan Earl, from Leicestershire (pictured) pleaded guilty at the Old Bailey to aggravated arson on a Ukrainian-linked business in London, carried out on behalf of the Russian mercenary Wagner Group





Russia has been linked to 14 deaths on British soil in recent years, including the assassination of Alexander Litvinenko in a case of polonium-laced tea in 2006. pictured: Alexander Litvinenko is pictured at the Intensive Care Unit of University College Hospital on November 20, 2006 




Read More

Britain is now 'directly involved' in Ukraine war, Russia declares


Finally, I expect more physical intimidation - and worse - of individuals on British soil.

Not just poisonings, as we witnessed in Salisbury against top MI6 source Sergei Skripal in 2018, but also the beatings and murders of dissidents.

Russia has been linked to 14 deaths on British soil in recent years, including the assassination of Alexander Litvinenko in a case of polonium-laced tea in 2006.

But intimidation can be political, too. The Kremlin could hack into the private email accounts of senior politicians to leak compromising information - a tactic used, however much Donald Trump tries to deny it, to devastating effect against Hillary Clinton during her 2016 presidential campaign.

Britain's decision-makers are similarly a top target. Sowing division through rumours and scare stories, including on social media, can paralyse a country and its leaders surprisingly quickly.

Which all brings me to perhaps my most important point. Putin's aim is not to defeat us in military combat: he knows he cannot - for now - win against the combined might of Nato, while Beijing remains unlikely to commit its millions of troops to his cause.

His aim instead is to instil cowardice in the general population - to cause ordinary Britons to turn their backs on Ukraine, and demand that their own government stop supporting the defenders.

Why support Ukraine, these siren voices will sing, when the price is misery at home?

Why do we maintain and expense a 'tripwire' force in Estonia? 

What is the point of Nato now that an isolationist Trump is heading back to the White House?

Surely it is better to pull out of these entanglements and concentrate on our own problems?

Yet if we allow Russia to conquer Ukraine, the result will not be perfect peace. Instead, the seeds will be sown for a future conflict, one in which Britain will be in a far more parlous position.

Instead of kowtowing to our foes, we should rekindle the spirit that won previous epic contests — the world wars against Germany and its allies, and the cold war against Soviet Communism.

We need, too, a new arsenal of crafty, painful counter-measures - for example seizing the frozen £250billion assets of Russia's central bank and using it to arm and rebuild Ukraine.

So long as our enemies believe they can attack us with impunity, they will not cease from doing so. That is why we must continue to support the Ukrainians - and show Putin that we will not back down. 


LondonUkraineRussiaMoscowPoland