Deterrence Through Saturation: Analyzing Russia’s Oreshnik Ballistic Missle

Russia-Ukraine war is characterized by combat employment of niche technologies ranging from First-Person-View (FPV) drones at the lower end, and hypersonic missiles at the higher end of the conventional threshold. These advanced military systems are redefining the dynamics of conventional deterrence and modern warfare. The conflict has rapidly escalated in recent weeks following Donald Trump’s vow to terminate the conflict after handing over the charge in White House as President of United States. Both Russia and Ukraine are pushing to achieve dominance in combat grounds to secure leverage on the negotiation table. The deployment of North Korean troops by Russia in Kursk region, use of US made ATACMS and UK made Storm Shadow missiles against targets on Russian mainland, and recent strike of Russia’s Oreshnik intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) are key developments in this regard.

When Ukraine started to use ATACMS and Storm Shadow cruise missile against Russian military assets located within its territory, it was anticipated that Russia had no new and credible response in its arsenal as it has already used high-end weapons including Kinzhal Air-Launched Hypersonic Missile, Zircon Hypersonic Ship-Launch Cruise Missile (SLCM), Iskandar-M Short-Range Ballistic Missile (SRBM), and numerous. Since the beginning of the war, Russia has been using ballistic and cruise missiles to deep-strike Ukraine’s military infrastructure. However, due to remarkable performance of Ukraine’s air-defense systems, these strikes have rendered mixed results. However, considering vast stockpile of missiles and ability to develop improved systems indigenously, it was unlikely that Moscow will run out of options as far as missiles are concerned. The recent strike by the Oreshnik missile proves this assessment.

On 22nd November 2024, Russia struck a Ukrainian weapon factory located in Dnipro with a volley of missiles including six Kh-101 cruise, one Kinzhal, and a new unknown missile. The factory, operated by PA Pivdenmash, is a major hub for the production of rockets and space-related technologies, including satellites and engines. The video footage shared on social media showcased salvo of six strikes further split into six additional munitions. This suggests that each Oreshnik missile may carry six Multiple Independently Re-targetable Vehicles (MIRV), each of which further deploy six sub-munitions, allowing for substantial area saturation. The targeted factory, a sprawling complex emblematic of Soviet-era industrial design, was hit with remarkable precision. Satellite navigation systems likely guided the warheads during their terminal phase, leading to high-impact strikes across the facility’s vast area. The missile is likely carried and launched from wheeled Transporter Erector Launcher (TEL). The mobility of TEL significantly enhances its survivability by minimizing its vulnerability to pre-emptive strikes. The missile itself has been derived from RS-26 IRBM which was designed to carry nuclear payload and despite five tests, didn’t enter service.

Ukraine initially reported that Russia had used an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) equipped with conventional payload. The US refuted this assessment and stated that Russia has apparently used an IRBM instead. Later, Russian President, Vladimir Putin, announced that Russia has successfully battle-tested a new missile which can achieve ten times the speed of sound. The missile, as per initial assessment of wreckage, carried warheads with no explosives. This suggests that the inert warheads relied purely on kinetic energy and at hypersonic velocity and their destructive yield was comparable to conventional high-explosive warheads. To put into perspective, a kinetic warhead of approximately 200 kilograms, traveling at Mach 10 speed, generates energy equivalent to almost 20 tons of TNT upon impact. This kinetic force can cause significant damage to hardened structures like airbases, ports, and industrial complexes, making the Oreshnik a potent area-denial weapon.

Besides coercing Ukraine from employing further escalatory measures, Oreshnik also represents Russia’s response to the US’ unilateral withdrawal from Intermediate-Range Nuclear Force (INF) Treaty in August 2019. By employing a mid-range guided ballistic missile equipped with area-effect sub-munitions payload, Russia seeks to counterbalance NATO’s numerical and technological superiority. The hypersonic terminal speed of missile, ability to fly in lofted trajectory, and capacity to carry multiple warheads, can pose challenge to NATO’s ballistic missile defense systems. Existing defense systems like the Patriot     Air Defense System will struggle to intercept the Oreshnik due to its speed and decoys, while more advanced one like THAAD, which can engage missiles in their ascent phase, are not widely available. Countering such a system would necessitate extensive investments in interceptors, radars, and dedicated defense platforms, straining NATO’s resources. The deployment of THAAD batteries in Europe can be anticipated as a counter-measure. To overstretch NATO’s options, Russia is already dispersing its Oreshnik missiles. Recent deployment of Oreshnik missile in Belarus is a key example in this regard.

Russian military doctrine prioritizes area saturation over precision targeting, a strategy reflected in the Oreshnik missile. This approach is based on a strategy that focuses on disrupting enemy’s infrastructure and combat capabilities through the overwhelming force. In theory, by saturating NATO’s multi-layered air-defense, this missile can strike high-value military infrastructure located throughout Europe. Therefore, by threatening with overwhelming strike potential of this missile; Russia will be able to fill the crucial deterrence gap that exists between its nuclear and conventional thresholds.

The missile’s operational debut, however, raises several concerns. The success of the Oreshnik missile could inspire other nations to develop similar capabilities, exacerbating an already competitive arms race. The proliferation risks associated with the Oreshnik missile’s technology could have far-reaching consequences, potentially enabling nations such as, China, North Korea, and Iran to acquire similar capabilities for their own security interests. This would significantly alter global security dynamics, particularly in sensitive regions like the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific.

Ultimately, the Oreshnik missile represents a major shift in military strategy and technology in the employment of conventional payload at long ranges. Its combination of mobility, precision, and overwhelming kinetic force poses a direct challenge to NATO’s existing defensive capabilities. Russia’s deployment of the Oreshnik in Ukraine was more than a demonstration of strength—it was a strategic statement signaling against NATO. With the ability to deliver saturated strikes at hypersonic speeds, Oreshnik now represents a viable conventional deterrent against NATO’s growing military prowess.