British-manufactured long-range drones have reportedly been used by Ukrainian forces to attack targets deep inside Russia for the first time, marking another expansion in Western-supplied weaponry being employed against Russian military and economic infrastructure and prompting renewed warnings from Moscow.

The Sunday Times reported, citing British and Ukrainian government sources, that drones produced by two British companies have successfully carried out long-range missions against targets well beyond the front lines in recent months. Among the systems reportedly supplied to Ukraine is the Callen-Lenz/BAE Systems-developed Nyan drone, which has allegedly been involved in attacks on “oil refineries in Volgograd, southwest Russia, and Yaroslavl, near Moscow”.

The Nyan is a carbon-fiber, jet-powered aircraft built around a compound delta-wing design. Also described as a “One-Way Effector (OWE) Uncrewed Air System (UAS),” the weapon is intended to perform missions similar to those of a cruise missile while costing substantially less. The drone incorporates some stealth characteristics and backup navigation capabilities that allow it to continue toward its target when GPS and other guidance systems are disrupted by electronic warfare. Its design is also intended to permit rapid, relatively inexpensive mass production.

The system has previously undergone testing with the British military, including launches from Royal Navy vessels using a catapult rail. Britain is reportedly planning to provide Ukraine with “over 150,000” drones this year, though most of those aircraft are expected to be cheaper, shorter-range systems rather than the British-built long-range strike drones that have reportedly entered Ukrainian combat operations in recent months.

Moscow responded to reports of the British weapons being used against targets inside Russia with another round of warnings directed at the West, including references to the possibility of nuclear escalation. Russian state media ran the headline “UK moves toward nuclear war by allowing Ukraine to launch British-made UAVs against Russia” while circulating comments from a Norwegian academic discussing the development. The Russian Embassy in London issued its own warning to Britain.

According to The Daily Telegraph, the embassy accused the British government of hypocrisy for publicly supporting peace efforts while continuing to arm Ukraine. Moscow also alleged that London had become complicit in Ukrainian “terrorist attacks” — terminology rejected by Western governments, which regard Ukrainian strikes against military and war-related targets as part of Kyiv’s defense against Russia’s invasion.

The Russian Embassy did not specify what retaliation Britain could face but warned that continued British involvement in the conflict would carry consequences.

“London’s actions will inevitably have consequences, for which it will have to answer. The deeper its involvement in this conflict and the greater its support for the terrorist machine of Kyiv, the higher the price will be.”

Russia has repeatedly issued severe warnings over Western military assistance to Ukraine, while Britain has steadily supplied Kyiv with increasingly sophisticated equipment. British support has included tactical weapons, armored vehicles, artillery and long-range cruise missiles.

British officials are also increasingly concerned about a different form of Russian retaliation. The Times reported that sources fear factories producing drones for Ukraine could become priority targets for sabotage as Moscow intensifies what Western governments describe as “hybrid warfare” operations across Europe.

Such concerns are heightened by the relative ease with which individuals or small groups could potentially attack defense-related industrial facilities without sophisticated weapons or training — and, in some cases, without necessarily knowing that they were acting at Moscow’s direction.

British defense-related sites have already faced attacks by anti-Israel activists in recent years. Some incidents involved little more than protesters equipped with paint and sledgehammers, while others were significantly more aggressive.

In one particularly serious incident, activists rammed the entrance of a defense-related facility using a prison van before entering the property and damaging equipment. Prosecutors alleged that security personnel and responding police officers were also attacked with hammers. A jury later failed to reach a verdict in the case, after which pro-Palestinian activists declared “victory.”

{Matzav.com}