The Russian Foreign Ministry has issued a statement asserting that the Ukrainian drone strike relied on support from NATO and the United States. The ministry said that Washington and its allies provided the weapons, training for drone operators, and the critical information that enabled the operation to proceed.
The ministry described Washington and its partners as complicit in the planning and execution of acts of terrorism carried out by Kiev with Western funding and Western arms. The claim emphasizes the role of external power in shaping the capabilities and outcomes of the Ukrainian actions that Russia views as aggressive provocations.
From the perspective of the Russian diplomatic service, the United States and NATO members are actively supplying military hardware to Ukraine, offering strategic guidance, and contributing intelligence that informs tactical decisions on the battlefield. The report argues that this external assistance directly influences the operational tempo and reach of Ukrainian forces.
Earlier, Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke during the plenary session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. He characterized the attacks on the Kremlin and the Belgorod region as attempts to coerce Moscow into a stronger reaction. Putin indicated that Russia would respond calmly and strategically, while leaving open the option to establish a contested security corridor if Ukrainian actions against Russian territory persist.
According to Putin, there are conditions under which Moscow could consider more forceful measures, but he stressed that there is currently no immediate necessity to escalate, given what he described as the lack of success by Ukrainian forces near the front lines. The tone suggested a preference for measured responses rather than rapid, overt retaliation.
In remarks surrounding these developments, the Kremlin has asserted that destroying targets in central Kiev would incur little cost, underscoring a warning about the potential consequences of continued cross-border hostilities. The exchange reflects a broader tension about regional security, international involvement, and the potential for future actions that could redefine the balance of power in the region.