Let Kyiv build its own Patriot missiles to ease the pressure on its complacent allies

Con Coughlin

Executive Defence and Foreign Affairs Editor

A leading expert on global conflict, international security and the Middle East. Con worked as a foreign correspondent for 20 years in the Beirut, Jerusalem, New York and Washington bureaux. More recently he covered the conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Ukraine. He is a Senior Visiting Fellow at the War Studies Department, King’s College, London.

Published 06 August 2026

If there is one key lesson to be learnt from the wars in Ukraine and Iran, it is that the ability to adjust quickly to the changing nature of the battlefield is vital to achieving victory.

Whether it is enhancing drone technology so that it can identify and destroy enemy positions, or adapting ballistic missiles so that they can evade sophisticated air defence systems, undertaking rapid modifications of existing weapons systems is essential for gaining the upper hand over an adversary.

At present, there is a broadly held consensus that Nato, despite committing to invest tens of billions of pounds in new military hardware, is lagging behind its adversaries, notably Russia, Iran and China.

As Valerii Zaluzhnyi, Ukraine’s former commander-in-chief who is now serving as Kyiv’s ambassador to Britain, has observed, Nato’s snail-like embrace of technological changes means that it would take more than a decade just to match half of Russia’s battlefield capabilities. The alliance, moreover, appears to be making the classic mistake of preparing to fight the last war instead of accepting that future conflicts will not be fought along the lines of the Second World War.

Ukraine, of course, cannot afford to be so complacent. It has shown itself to be particularly adept at recognising the new requirements of the modern battlefield, a response fashioned as much by the need to be self-sufficient in defending itself as the first-hand experience it has gleaned from four-and-a-half years of brutal conflict with Russia.

During the early phase of the conflict, Kyiv relied heavily on its Western allies to provide the necessary military hardware to keep the Russians at bay. But constant disputes over what type of weaponry the West was prepared to contribute, as well as burdensome restrictions on their use, persuaded the Ukrainians to go their own way.

The result is that the Ukrainians have developed their own arsenal of weapons – especially drones, but also home-grown missiles – that have allowed them to gain the advantage over the Russians on the battlefield, while expanding their attacks to targets deep within Russia. Despite living in one of the world’s largest oil-producing countries, many Russians now have to queue for hours to buy petrol. Home deliveries have similarly been severely disrupted following a series of Ukrainian attacks against the depots of Wildberries, the Russian equivalent of Amazon.

Ukraine’s growing confidence in taking the war directly to Russia is not universally welcomed in some Western circles, especially among those who have argued in favour of imposing restrictions on Ukraine’s military operations, lest Kyiv’s military surprise everyone by actually winning its war against Russia.

These anti-Ukraine sentiments were very much in evidence earlier this week when a Ukrainian drone hit a Russian Black Sea beach resort, killing several holidaymakers. Even though there was a strong suggestion the drone only caused civilian casualties because it was shot down by the Russians, Ukraine was immediately accused of indulging in acts of terrorism, with some commentators suggesting Western leaders needed to rethink their support for Kyiv.

Such calls should be dismissed. There is no moral equivalence between Putin’s Russia and Ukraine. It is also very much in the West’s interests that Ukraine prevails in its fight against Russia, to persuade the Kremlin that it has nothing to gain from committing further acts of military aggression.

Rather than worrying about Ukrainian strategy, Western leaders should concentrate on addressing their own shortcomings, such as the alarming revelation that the US military has almost exhausted its entire stockpile of long-range missiles and missile interceptors.

Despite Ukraine’s success in developing new battlefield technologies, it still remains vulnerable to Russian ballistic missiles, a vulnerability that was exposed this week when the Ukrainian military failed to intercept a single Russian missile fired at Kyiv. Shortages of expensive Patriot anti-missile systems in the US mean that the Trump administration cannot come to Ukraine’s aid, even if it wanted to.

It is a similar story in the Iran conflict, where Tehran’s ability to modify its ballistic missiles – reportedly with China’s help – has enabled it to carry out strikes against key US military installations, including last week’s attack on the Muwaffaq Salti air base in Jordan which killed three American soldiers.

Whereas, previously in the conflict, the US military was able to intercept the majority of Iranian drones and missiles, a chronic shortage of interceptors has left it vulnerable to attack, a development that could ultimately have an impact on the eventual outcome of the war.

If the key lesson to be drawn from the conflicts in Iran and Ukraine is the vital role adaptability has to play in modern warfare, it is also important that Western powers have the industrial capacity to sustain combat operations beyond the short term.

In Ukraine’s case, undoubtedly the best solution would be to allow Kyiv to produce its own version of the US Patriot system, a proposal that was discussed in detail when Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky visited the White House last month. Donald Trump has since questioned whether this might happen.

Allowing Kyiv to produce its own version of the missile interceptor would not only ease the pressure on Washington’s own dwindling stockpiles. It would deny Putin the ability to continue terrorising Ukraine’s civilian population. And perhaps the ever-innovative Ukrainians would find a way of producing the expensive interceptors more cheaply.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/08/06/ukraine-might-have-answer-to-wests-depleted-militaries/?recomm_id=cabf90c8-fd0b-4bdc-970f-ec925c0bdcf1