By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In a recent address, President Putin proposed a technological demonstration involving a Russian Oreshnik missile strike on a target in Kyiv, chosen by Western and Ukrainian forces. This challenge, highlighting the missile’s purported 5,500 km range and invulnerability to existing air defenses, is framed as a “high-tech duel” to test the West’s claims of its capabilities. Putin’s suggestion implies that even NATO systems in neighboring countries would be unable to intercept the missile. The name’s origin, however, remains unknown to the president himself.
Read the original article here
Putin’s recent proposal for a “duel” involving the Oreshnik missile is, to put it mildly, bizarre. He suggests that Ukraine and the West select a target in Kyiv, focus all their air defenses on it, and then Russia will launch an Oreshnik missile, allowing them to test their interception capabilities. This isn’t a duel in any traditional sense; it’s more of a thinly veiled demonstration of power, a provocative act disguised as a technological experiment. The very idea of framing a potential missile strike on a civilian target as a “duel” is profoundly disturbing, stripping the situation of its inherent gravity and minimizing the potential for immense human suffering.
The proposal highlights Putin’s penchant for escalating conflict rather than engaging in constructive dialogue. The whole thing feels like a childish game of one-upmanship, a desperate attempt to portray Russia’s military technology as superior and invincible. His repeated claims that the Oreshnik missile is uninterceptable ring hollow given the consistent Ukrainian successes in thwarting Russian attacks. This bold assertion is likely just more propaganda aimed at intimidating potential adversaries and bolstering his image at home.
The absurdity of this “duel” is evident. It’s not a fair fight; it’s a blatant power play. Putin is essentially challenging the West to attempt to defend against a strike, knowing the stakes are incredibly high. A failed interception would be a significant propaganda victory for Russia, while a successful one would likely be downplayed or dismissed. This highlights the fundamentally asymmetrical nature of his proposition.
The reaction to this proposal ranges from incredulity to outrage. Many see it as a deeply cynical ploy, a continuation of Russia’s pattern of aggression and disregard for human life. The focus shouldn’t be on a “duel” or a test of military technology but on the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in Ukraine. The proposal trivializes the immense human cost of the war, the countless deaths, injuries, and displacements. It’s callous and disrespectful to the victims of the conflict.
Even setting aside the ethical concerns, the practical implications of this “experiment” are questionable. If the Oreshnik missile is as advanced as Putin claims, why would Russia risk it in a test? The potential for failure – a missile failing to hit its target or being intercepted – would be a major blow to Russia’s image and credibility. This seems less like a genuine experiment and more like a gamble fueled by bravado.
The numerous alternative suggestions, ranging from a boxing match between Putin and the mayor of Kyiv to a more conventional military exchange, reveal the incongruity of Putin’s proposal. The counter-proposals, while often humorous, underscore the unsettling reality that Putin is using the language of a game to describe a situation with potentially catastrophic consequences. His behavior is indicative of someone far removed from the reality faced by the Ukrainian people.
This “duel” concept should be viewed not as a scientific challenge, but as a dangerous escalation of rhetoric, a blatant attempt to normalize the potential for violence and to further destabilize an already volatile region. The focus should remain firmly on ending the conflict peacefully and holding those responsible for the suffering accountable. The notion of a “duel” is a distraction from the urgent need for diplomatic solutions and the tragic reality of the ongoing war. The world should not fall for this deceptive tactic.