Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy launched a “40-day campaign” of escalated strikes against Russian targets on June 26, aimed at coercing Russia to end the war. The operation focuses on disrupting oil refining capacity, hitting military industrial sites, and bringing the conflict directly to Moscow and St. Petersburg via long-range missile and drone attacks.
Strategic Objectives of the 40-Day Campaign
The campaign serves as both a military operation and a psychological tool. Orysia Lutsevych, head of the Ukraine Forum at the Chatham House thinktank, describes the “40-day” framing as an Orthodox Christian reference to purgatory, signaling to Vladimir Putin that the aggressor state must decide whether to “save themselves.”
Beyond the symbolism, the timing aligns with political vulnerabilities in Russia. Lutsevych notes that with Duma elections scheduled for September, the strikes on major cities are designed to undermine Putin’s hold on power by proving the Kremlin cannot protect its own heartland.
Phillips O’Brien, a professor of strategic studies at the University of St Andrews, argues the campaign is a “psychological campaign” intended to shift the narrative. While he doesn’t expect a total Russian surrender, he suggests Zelenskyy is using these strikes to show Ukrainians—and the world—that Kyiv is “dynamic and taking the initiative” rather than stuck in a battlefield quagmire.
Did you know? The 40-day timeframe is widely viewed by analysts as a narrative performance intended to create a sense of urgency and impending judgment for the Russian leadership.
Impact on Russian Oil Infrastructure and Economy
A primary pillar of the operation is “strategic coercion by attrition.” Retired Australian general Mick Ryan, writing in his Futura Doctrina Substack, identifies the targeting of oil refineries as a direct attempt to cripple Russia’s war economy.
The data reflects significant disruption. By July 5, Ukraine’s general staff reported that 42.74% of Russia’s oil refining capacity had been disabled. This includes eight refineries hit in a single month and the destruction or damage of over 60 storage tanks, resulting in cumulative industry losses of $13.5 billion.
Recent strikes attributed to this campaign include:
- The St. Petersburg oil terminal.
- The Yaroslavl oil refinery (north-east of Moscow).
- A refinery in the Kaluga region.
- The oil loading terminal at the Vysotsk seaport on the Baltic.
These attacks have triggered a visible fuel crisis. Reports indicate long queues at petrol stations, with some Russian citizens sleeping in their cars for days to secure fuel.
Shifting Dynamics in the US and NATO Relations
The ability of Ukraine to project power deep into Russian territory appears to be influencing Western diplomatic stances. Lutsevych suggests these successes contributed to a shift in the Trump administration’s approach toward Kyiv.
This contrast is sharp when compared to February 2025, when President Donald Trump told Zelenskyy in the Oval Office that “you don’t have the cards,” while Vice President JD Vance accused the Ukrainian leader of “disrespect.”
By the recent Nato summit in Ankara, the tone shifted. Trump suggested Ukraine could produce Patriot missile interceptors under license. Lutsevych describes this as a “psychologically important” development, as the US providing licenses for such sophisticated systems was previously considered unlikely.
Future Trends: Ballistic Missiles and Territorial Recovery
While the campaign was framed as 40 days, evidence suggests it will persist and potentially intensify. Denys Shtilerman, chief designer and co-founder of the missile producer Fire Point, indicated that strikes on protected military facilities in Moscow may begin in September using newly produced ballistic missiles.
Shtilerman expressed near-certainty that Russian defenses “won’t be able to intercept effectively” these new munitions.
Additionally, the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) reports that these strikes are creating internal friction within Russia. Russian ultranationalists are reportedly blaming the federal government for failing to establish a cohesive air defense system to protect critical infrastructure.
Military analysts are also speculating on a potential Ukrainian effort to retake territory, citing assessments that Russian forces are increasingly thinly spread across nearly half of the areas where they previously attempted to advance.
Pro Tip: To track the effectiveness of these campaigns, monitor the “industrial loss” reports from Ukraine’s General Staff and correlate them with Russian fuel price volatility and refinery downtime reports.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary goal of the 40-day campaign?
According to President Zelenskyy and analysts like Mick Ryan, the goal is to influence the Russian state to end the war by striking critical energy infrastructure and military sites.
How much damage has been done to Russian oil refineries?
Ukraine’s general staff claimed by July 5 that 42.74% of Russia’s oil refining capacity was disabled, with industry losses totaling $13.5 billion.
Are these strikes affecting the Russian public?
Yes. Reports indicate fuel shortages and long queues at petrol stations, as well as psychological shock in Moscow and St. Petersburg due to drone flights over the cities.
What do you think about the shift in US policy regarding Patriot missile production? Does it change the strategic balance of the war? Let us know in the comments or subscribe to our newsletter for deeper geopolitical analysis.
Keep reading