The Ukrainian Air Force claims that Russia launched a conventionally armed intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) today at the city of Dnipro, in the center of the country. They offered no proof and some U.S. and Western officials are pushing back on the specific ICBM claim, stating that an intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) was used. In either case, the act is unprecedented for the war in Ukraine and it would mark the first use of either one of these types of weapons in combat anywhere. Officials in Moscow had previously warned they might use a weapon never previously employed on Ukrainian territory, in response to the United States and other allies last week allowing Ukraine to fire long-range missiles into Russia.
New details have emerged about the missile the Russians fired. You can check out the latest on this story in our new article here.
Among the conflicting claims about exactly what kind of missile was used, it appears that it was a ballistic missile with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) capability. Videos emerging on social media show what appears to be six warheads hurtling toward the ground and multiple impacts as a result. This analysis could change as more information comes available.
An explosion and the aftermath of the attack were captured in images photographed by Ukrainian emergency services.
At least one of the warheads reportedly struck a rehabilitation center for people with disabilities, wounding two people, according to Ukrainian emergency services.
The Ukrainian Air Force claimed Dnipro was attacked by an ICBM — the longest-range, fastest flying ballistic missile class that otherwise carries a strategic nuclear warhead or warheads.
“On the morning of November 21, 2024, between 05:00 and 07:00, Russian troops attacked the city of Dnipro (enterprises and critical infrastructure) with missiles of various types,” the Ukrainian Air Force claimed on Telegram. “In particular, an intercontinental ballistic missile was launched from the Astrakhan region of the Russian Federation.” The Air Force added that eight ballistic and cruise missiles were also fired in this attack.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky hedged that claim a bit.
“Today, it was a new Russian missile. Its speed and altitude suggest intercontinental ballistic capabilities,” he said on X. “Investigations are ongoing.”
A Western official told ABC News that the attack did not appear to be an ICBM.
“It was instead a ballistic missile, which was aimed at Dnipro, in Ukraine’s southeast,” the Western official told the network.
U.S. officials told CBS News that the missile was not an ICBM, but an intermediate-range ballistic missile or IRBM.
A National Security Council official told @TBowmanNPR that Russia launched an “experimental medium-range ballistic missile” against Ukraine.
Adding to the mystery of the nature of this weapon, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova was interrupted during a press briefing.
“A hot mic captured Zakharova’s phone conversation with an unidentified caller who instructed her not to comment ‘on the ballistic missile strike,'” The Guardian reported. “Notably, the caller did not use the word intercontinental. In the brief telephone exchange – footage of which remains available on the foreign ministry’s official account on X – the caller appears to disclose that the strike targeted the Yuzhmash military facility in Dnipro.”
Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Yuri Ignat pushed back on statements that the missile was not an ICBM.
“Let them reject it,” he told The War Zone. “Do not call the rocket — it has arrived!”
There are claims, as yet unverified, that Russia might have used its RS-26 Rubezh missile. While Russia has previously described this as an ICBM, its range is actually consistent with an IRBM. You can read more about Russia’s halting development of this weapon here.
TWZ spoke to Pavel Podvig, a Senior Researcher in the WMD Program at the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR), who noted that it would not be a problem to strike Dnipro with an ICBM or an RS-26, even given the relatively short range involved — roughly 500 miles from the reported launch site at Kapustin Yar. Still, it’s worth noting that doing so would have required a very steep parabolic flight profile similar to what we see North Korea use for many of its test launches.
“Back in the day, even in the 1970s, you can see that those missiles [ICBMs] had a minimum range of about 1,000 kilometers. The maximum was about 11,000 kilometers [6,800 miles]. So I think it is entirely possible and shouldn’t be a problem for modern ICBMs, like Topol-M or Yars, they should be able to do 800 kilometers [500 miles]. If we’re talking about RS-26 then it’s even less of a problem, because, of course, it is a shorter-range missile, an intermediate-range missile, and so 800 kilometers would be perfectly within its capabilities. But we don’t know what kind of missile it is at this point.”
Bearing in mind the fact that Russia has previously described the RS-26 as an ICBM, it could be that this is the descriptor that Ukraine is using, as well.
In the meantime, U.K. Defense Secretary John Healey referred to reports that Russia had fired “a new ballistic missile into Ukraine,” which could also apply to the RS-26, or a related missile.
“The way it worked with RS-26 for example, was that the project was kind of stopped sometime in the mid-2010s,” Podvig added. “So maybe it could be a new type, similar to the RS-26, or maybe he meant that the RS-26 has never been deployed, has never been operational. So any kind of operational [RS-26] missile would be a missile of a new type. That’s hard to tell, but basically, there is not much you can do in terms of new types. The easiest thing is to take what they did before — using the stages from Yars — and basically make an RS-26 kind of missile.”
As to whether the RS-26 program might have been revived, Podvig considers that a definite possibility.
“It is entirely possible that they are just going to revive the program,” Podvig said. “That is possible, especially after the demise of the INF Treaty, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some effort to create a missile that would be kind of similar to the RS-26, or SS-20 and things like that. That’s my take. I would not be surprised if design bureaus started putting together a project of that kind.”
Hans Kristensen, Director of the Nuclear Information Project, Federation of American Scientists, added his thoughts on the possible missile used, in a post on X.
“Claim of Russian use of ICBM against Ukraine was not correct,” he tweeted. “Something else and speculations it might have been RS-26 canceled years ago. Launch location should tell us more. They might just have seen an opportunity to test a prototype.”
Meanwhile, video emerged on social media claiming to be fragments of the missile, which could give investigators more information about what type it was.
As TWZ Editor-in-Chief Tyler Rogoway pointed out, the use of this weapon would have triggered a series of alarms throughout the U.S. military and have been picked up by a wide array of sensors and exactly what the U.S. had in terms of intelligence prior to launch, or even notification from Russia, remains unclear.
If Russia did use an ICBM or IRBM, it would be a very expensive method of attack. However, such weapons can provide a tactical advantage and certainly showcase a strategic message.
Intercepting multiple warheads at the speed and angle of these weapons in the terminal phase is beyond what Ukraine’s donated Patriot batteries can defend against.
Defeating these weapons requires a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) or Aegis Ashore air defense system, David Shank, a retired Army colonel and former commandant of the Army Air Defense Artillery School at Ft. Sill, Oklahoma told us. The Ground-based Midcourse Defense missile defense system (GMD) would work best, he added. Ukraine has none of these systems.
Deploying these weapons also sends a message that Russia is willing to take another step up the escalation ladder in the wake of having its territory struck by U.S.-donated ground-launched Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) and U.K.-donated air-launched Storm Shadow long-range missiles.
“The strike itself proves: Russia does not seek peace,” Heorhii Tykhyi, a spokesman for the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry stated on X. “To the contrary, it makes every effort to expand the war.”
There are reports that Ukraine responded by attacking the Kapusin Yar facility in Russia that reportedly launched the missile. If true, it would mark at least the second strike against that facility.
With Iran and China providing weapons and North Korea providing troops and weapons to aid Russia’s war on Ukraine, the former head of the Ukrainian military suggested that WWIII has already begun.
As analysis of this weapon pours in over the coming hours, we will have a better sense of what Russia used. Regardless, this attack has clearly rattled Ukraine and raised concerns in the U.S. and across NATO as both sides continue to escalate.
Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com