Shahed Drones to Be Built in Occupied Areas of Ukraine

Kyiv’s Center for National Resistance (CNR) reported on Oct. 11 that Moscow has tasked the Kremlin appointed authorities in Ukraine’s occupied territories to investigate the use of seized factories and enterprises for the production of Shahed/Geran kamikaze drones.

According to the CNR as well as covertly producing the drones the assembly work would be carried out by students from vocational schools. The basis of the Russian plan is that producing the unmanned aerial vehicles in eastern Ukraine would reduce the logistic effort because the time for delivery to launch sites would be shortened.

The CNR statement says: “At the same time, they plan to store the drones in urban areas, effectively using the local residents as human shields. Currently, the occupation administrations in the east are looking for the final places for assembling and arranging.”

As Kyiv Post reported, Ukraine’s intelligence and security services supported by naval forces attacked the Russian Yeysk airfield in the Krasnador region, a site frequently used for the launch of Shahed drones on Wednesday Oct. 9. The attack also destroyed around 400 of the UAVs which were stored in a warehouse in the village of Oktyabrske about 20 kilometers south of the airfield.

Moscow’s forces are believed to be increasingly and intentionally storing ammunition in locations close to or in the middle of residential areas. This will not only make it harder for Ukraine to track down the assembly and storage sites but presents them a moral conundrum.

Other Topics of Interest

SBU Reports Capturing Ukrainian Officer Leaking Special Ops Plans to Moscow

The SBU detained an alleged GRU agent who reportedly leaked data on Ukrainian operations to Moscow. He faces life imprisonment for high treason committed during wartime.

If they identify a location, do they strike the warehouse or factory come what may? Do they warn nearby civilian occupants of an impending attack? Do they choose attack weapons which minimize the likelihood of collateral damage or is the military imperative such that the destruction of the enemy’s weapons of war outweighs concerns about “innocent” bystanders?