Michael Kofman on Ukraine's Energy and Air Defense Crisis: Why Bombardment Fails to Secure Victory

Assessing Bombing Efficacy and the Ukrainian Situation

According to ХВИЛЯ: In a Foreign Affairs podcast, military analyst Michael Kofman evaluated the situation with Ukraine's energy grid and air defense on the fourth anniversary of the invasion, while also discussing the ineffectiveness of strategic bombing for achieving political goals. Kofman noted that the volume of Russian missiles and drones has grown almost exponentially over the last two years, profoundly impacting the country.

The analyst described days in Kyiv with only an hour and a half to two hours of electricity and heating. In this context, Kofman stressed that Ukraine is currently 'running on two treadmills at once': fighting a ground war while also adapting to an aerial strike campaign that demands air defense. He pointed out that Western-provided air defense systems primarily target ballistic and cruise missiles, while the bulk of the attacks now consist of kamikaze drones. Simultaneously, Ukraine is expanding its use of interceptor drones to counter this threat.

Perspectives on Strategic Bombing

I have a low opinion of bombing civilian infrastructure as a strategic alternative. For Russia, it won't work-it hasn't worked for anyone before them, though many have tried.

Michael Kofman

Kofman's analysis highlights a critical juncture for Ukraine, where intense military conflict converges with severe energy challenges. The surge in Russian attacks, particularly using drones, makes robust air defense vital for civilian safety and national resilience. His assessment of bombardment as an ineffective tool underscores the complex nature of modern warfare, where inflicting pain on civilian populations rarely translates into strategic victory or forces political concessions.