Zelenskyy's Reckless Gambit: A Tactical Masterstroke That Threatens Strategic Collapse
M A Hossain
By any military measure, Ukraine's 'Operation Spider Web' was an astonishing success. In a meticulously planned operation, Ukrainian drones struck deep into Russian territory, obliterating at least 40 military aircraft—including nuclear-capable Tu-95 and Tu-22M3 bombers—in a single, devastating blow. The attack revealed not only meticulous Ukrainian planning over 18 months but also the glaring vulnerabilities of Russia's so-called impenetrable airspace. It was a coup de main that will be studied in military academies for decades. But as history too often reminds us, tactical brilliance can be the prelude to strategic disaster. The world now holds its breath, waiting to see what comes next.
The immediate question is not whether Russia will respond—it will—but how. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy must now reckon with that distinction. Launched on the eve of scheduled peace talks in Istanbul, Spider Web didn't just dismantle a third of Russia's strategic bomber fleet—it may also have dismantled the fragile architecture of diplomacy that remained. If this was a calculated move to strengthen Ukraine's bargaining position, it was cynically timed and perilously shortsighted. It risks transforming what was still, however tenuously, a brutal regional war into an epoch-defining catastrophe.
ADVERTISEMENT
We've seen this before. In 1914, the assassination of an Austrian archduke triggered a cascade of commitments, mobilizations, and miscalculations that led to a global conflagration. In 1941, Japan, feeling cornered by U.S. embargoes, attacked Pearl Harbor—a masterstroke of surprise that ultimately led to its own annihilation. And in 1962, the Cuban Missile Crisis brought the planet within inches of nuclear oblivion, saved only by backchannel diplomacy and the mutual recognition of unacceptable costs.
Ukraine's gamble did not occur in a vacuum. It came at a time when President Trump has been seeking to limit American exposure and end the war, while Europe is increasingly divided over how far to support Kyiv without inviting catastrophe. It also came amid a U.S. political landscape reshaped by Donald Trump's return to the White House, a president who has made clear his disinterest in 'forever wars' and who, notably, has remained silent on this latest escalation. The American public, too, seems less inclined to bankroll Kyiv's ambitions, particularly when those ambitions risk dragging NATO into a direct confrontation with a nuclear adversary.
Zelenskyy's supporters will argue this operation was necessary—a bold stroke to jolt Russia from its entrenched positions and to demonstrate Ukraine's capability for long-range asymmetric warfare. They will say it sends a signal to Moscow: Ukraine cannot be intimidated and has the resolve to strike at the heart of Russian military power. They may even compare it to Israel's 1981 strike on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor—a preemptive blow to degrade a long-term threat.
But the analogy doesn't hold. Israel acted in secrecy against a latent, undeclared threat. Ukraine struck openly, on the record, against a nuclear-armed power just hours before peace talks. Worse, it struck not against fielded forces in battle, but strategic nuclear bombers inside Russia, a move that risks prompting a doctrinal response from Moscow. Since its updated nuclear posture last year, Russia allows for nuclear use in response to conventional strikes that threaten its strategic deterrent—exactly the kind of attack Spider Web represents.
It is no exaggeration to say that Zelenskyy has lit a fuse dangerously close to a powder keg. Which raises a larger question: What exactly was the purpose of this attack?
ADVERTISEMENT
Some suspect it was less about battlefield utility and more about political optics. With Western support waning and battlefield momentum stalled, Zelenskyy may have felt compelled to show that he still commands initiative—that he remains a credible partner worth backing. There's also speculation that this operation was a plea for continued arms shipments now under threat from Trump's 'America First' administration.
But if this was an attempt to impress or pressure Western allies, it may backfire. The attack has already emboldened voices in Washington and Brussels who argue that the war is spiraling out of control. And it gives ammunition to Moscow's propaganda machine, which is portraying the strike as Russia's own Pearl Harbor. When a nuclear power perceives itself as the victim of an existential assault, dangerous decisions follow.
We must also ask: was NATO involved? Did European allies—through satellite intelligence or remote drone operations—have a hand in the planning or execution? If so, this operation could cross a previously avoided threshold, bringing NATO into direct conflict with Russia. That's not just a strategic misstep—it's a generational blunder.
President Zelenskyy must now answer for the consequences of his audacity. Yes, the strike humiliated Russia. Yes, it exposed the rot within Moscow's security establishment. But the cost of that humiliation could be paid not just in Ukrainian lives, but potentially in the lives of millions across Europe and beyond, should Putin interpret this as justification for escalation.
History is littered with leaders who mistook tactical victories for strategic triumphs. Napoleon's march into Moscow, Hitler's advance into Stalingrad, even George W. Bush's 'Mission Accomplished' moment in Iraq—all stemmed from an overestimation of short-term success and a blindness to long-term consequence.
Zelenskyy, admired as he rightly is for his courage and resolve, must now be judged for his judgment. By launching Spider Web when he did, and in the manner that he did, he may have sabotaged the very peace he claims to seek. Worse, he has placed the entire international order at the mercy of a man like Vladimir Putin, whose worldview is shaped not by cost-benefit logic but by grievance, pride, and a paranoid sense of historical destiny.
The West must now perform a high-wire act. It must reaffirm support for ending the war. It must also demand restraint and a return to diplomacy. A nuclear confrontation, even a 'demonstrative' one over a deserted military base, would rewrite the rules of war and peace for generations to come. It would show that nuclear blackmail works—or that nuclear retaliation can be normalized. Neither outcome is acceptable.
Operation Spider Web may be remembered as a brilliant military feat. But unless it is followed by swift and sober diplomacy, it risks becoming a historical monument to hubris—the kind that ignites wars from which there is no return. The lesson from history is chillingly clear: great fires often begin with a single, dazzling spark.
Also published on Medium.
Notice an issue? Arabian Post strives to deliver the most accurate and reliable information to its readers. If you believe you have identified an error or inconsistency in this article, please don't hesitate to contact our editorial team at editor[at]thearabianpost[dot]com. We are committed to promptly addressing any concerns and ensuring the highest level of journalistic integrity.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Dubai Eye
4 hours ago
- Dubai Eye
Ukraine fighting 10,000 Russian troops in Kursk region
Around 10,000 Russian soldiers are fighting in Russia's Kursk region, about 90 square km of which is controlled by Ukraine, Ukraine's top military commander said. "We control about 90 square kilometers of territory in the Hlushkov district of the Kursk region of the Russian Federation, and these are our preemptive actions in response to a possible enemy attack," Oleksandr Syrskyi said without elaborating, in remarks released by his office for publication on Sunday. The Ukrainian military said the activity in this area prevented Russia from sending a significant number of its forces to Ukraine's eastern region of Donetsk, where some of the heaviest fighting has taken place in the more than three-year-old full-scale invasion. Syrskyi's troops are repelling Russian forces along the frontline, which stretches for about 1,200 km, where the situation remains difficult, the Ukrainian military said. Russian gains have accelerated in May and June, though the Ukrainian military says it comes at a cost of high Russian casualties in small assault-group attacks. While the military says its troops repelled Russian approaches toward Ukraine's Dnipropetrovsk region borders last week, the pressure continues in the country's eastern and northern regions. The Russian military also continues its deadly drone and missile attacks on the Ukrainian cities further from the front, prompting Ukraine to innovate its approaches to air defence. Ukraine's military said it currently destroys around 82 per cent of Shahed-type drones launched by Russia but requires more surface-to-air missile systems to defend critical infrastructure and cities. The military said the air force was also working on developing the use of light aircraft and drone interceptors in repelling Russian assaults which can involve hundreds of drones. Ukraine also relies on its long-range capabilities to deal damage to economic and military targets on Russian territory, increasing the cost of war to Moscow. Between January and May, Ukraine dealt over $1.3 billion in direct losses in the Russian oil refining and fuel production industry, energy and transport supplies as well as strategic communications, the Ukrainian military said. It also dealt at least $9.5 billion more of indirect damages through the destabilisation of the oil refining industry, disruption of logistics and forced shutdown of enterprises, it added. It was not clear whether the Ukrainian military included the damages from its operation "Spider's Web" which damaged Russian warplanes -- and Ukraine said cost billions in losses -- in the estimates.
Middle East Eye
4 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
US orders Lebanon evacuation amid regional tensions
The United States has ordered non-essential staff and families of diplomats to leave Lebanon, citing security concerns after Washington carried out strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. A statement posted by the US embassy in Beirut said the decision was made due to 'the volatile and unpredictable security situation in the region'. 'On June 22, 2025, the US Department of State ordered the departure of family members and non-emergency U.S. government personnel from Lebanon,' the embassy said. The US State Department has already classified Lebanon under its highest travel warning — 'do not travel' — urging American citizens to avoid the country entirely.
Middle East Eye
7 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
US Defence Secretary claims Iran strikes were 'overwhelming success'
US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth on Sunday described the overnight strikes on Iran's nuclear sites as 'incredible and overwhelming,' calling the operation one of the most complex and successful in recent military history. Speaking from Washington, Hegseth said the mission was the result of weeks of planning and coordination, aimed solely at dismantling Iran's nuclear capabilities - not targeting its population or military forces. 'President Trump's plan was bold and brilliant,' he said. 'American deterrence is back.' According to Hegseth, the operation involved: 14 Massive Ordnance Penetrators, or bunker busters, dropped at around 2:10 am local time on Sunday, followed by Tomahawk missiles. A total of 75 precision-guided weapons were used. "Deception tactics" were employed, and Iran's air defenses never detected the strike, he said. All three targeted nuclear sites - Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan - sustained "extreme damage and destruction," he added. The mission marked the "largest B-2 bomber strike in US history". Hegseth warned Iran against retaliation, calling it a 'poor choice.' He emphasised that the mission 'was not and has never been about regime change.' US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth speaks at the Pentagon after strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, 22 June 2025 (Reuters/Handout)
