Russian missiles struck Kyiv before the warning sirens went off. In Kharkiv, too, the first explosions came before the alarm. Anyone looking for shelter in those cities didn't get word of the danger until it was already right above their homes. After the attacks late Monday evening, October 12, one question hangs in the air, and the answer could mean the difference between life and death: Why was there no warning in time?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has now confirmed that his country received no intelligence from its foreign partners this week about the impending missile attack on Kyiv. Earlier that morning, Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Yuriy Ihnat had pointed to the missing intelligence on Ukrainian television. Similar incidents had happened before, including in border regions, he said. If technical problems were involved this time, specialists would investigate and resolve them together with Ukraine's partners, he assured the public. That only sounds reassuring if you forget the order of events: first the explosion, then the siren.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ukrainian military expert Serhiy \"Flash\" Beskrestnov had also pointed to recurring problems with intelligence sharing the previous day. In his assessment, foreign intelligence agencies had simply failed to detect the missile launches. There was no indication that intelligence cooperation had been suspended. Another explanation came from the Ukrainian government that afternoon. Speaking at the Warsaw Security Forum, Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said the agreements on intelligence sharing between Washington and Kyiv remained in effect. The alarm had been delayed because Russia had used a particular type of weapon, he explained. That left the exact technical cause unresolved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The uncertainty comes amid a political dispute that goes far beyond a missing warning. Several foreign reports, citing sources familiar with the matter, had previously described how Washington threatened to suspend intelligence sharing with Kyiv if Ukrainian forces continued their attacks on Russian energy facilities. Those warnings had reportedly been delivered to diplomats in Ukraine and Europe over the previous weekend. According to those reports, the Trump administration had also called into question the delivery of ammunition and military equipment under existing procurement arrangements. A threat is not the same as an actual suspension. That is precisely why the missing warning carries so much weight: The smoke from the explosions hangs over the question of whether this was political pressure or a technical failure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On Sunday, October 11, Donald Trump had declared an energy ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine to be in effect. According to Zelenskyy, Ukraine had not attacked Russian energy or oil facilities since then. Moscow, however, had ignored Trump's demand and bombarded Ukrainian energy facilities and other essential infrastructure. Over those 2 days, 19 regions of the country had been hit. In his account, the Russian attacks left no doubt that Moscow intended to continue its strikes. While Washington talks about an agreement, Ukrainian cities are counting the damage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Kharkiv was hit particularly hard. According to the latest available figures, at least 41 people were injured in the overnight attack. Part of an apartment building collapsed. What diplomats may treat as a delayed transmission is measured on the ground in the seconds between impact and warning. Whether intelligence agencies missed a launch or a particular Russian weapon overwhelmed their surveillance capabilities is something those responsible must determine. The fact that intelligence sharing continues, according to Kyiv, still doesn't answer the most urgent question: Why did the warning reach people only after the missiles?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
To be continued ...<\/p>\n\n\n\n