By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In response to Russian strikes targeting critical infrastructure, Ukraine is implementing a long-term strategy to protect its electrical substations by relocating them underground. While one substation has already been secured in an underground bunker with a second underway, this initiative is a costly and time-consuming endeavor, requiring significant external financing. Ukraine’s state-grid operator, Ukrenergo, plans to seek funding from the European Investment Bank after restructuring its substantial debt, which is expected to be finalized soon. This move aims to enhance energy security and resilience, ensuring the continued flow of electricity across the country despite ongoing attacks.
Read the original article here
It strikes me as a remarkably sensible, albeit challenging, strategy for Ukraine to begin moving its power grid underground in an effort to shield it from ongoing Russian attacks. While the initial thought might be that burying power lines is an unnecessarily expensive endeavor, the context of constant bombardment fundamentally shifts the economic equation. The sheer cost and effort involved in repeatedly repairing above-ground infrastructure, which is vulnerable to destruction, quickly makes the upfront investment in undergrounding a far more pragmatic long-term solution.
The idea behind this move is quite straightforward: make it significantly harder for the enemy to cripple the nation’s power supply. Above-ground infrastructure, by its very nature, is exposed and relatively easy to locate and target. A simple drone, perhaps costing a mere fraction of what a serious bombardment of underground infrastructure would require, can cause significant damage. Moving crucial components like substations and power lines beneath the earth’s surface introduces a substantial layer of protection that wasn’t there before.
While it’s true that sophisticated weaponry like bunker busters exists, and these are designed to penetrate hardened targets, their deployment against every single underground power substation is a different matter entirely. These weapons are incredibly expensive, and their effective use requires precise intelligence about the target’s exact location and depth. It becomes strategically far less feasible, and significantly more costly, for an aggressor to consistently employ such specialized and expensive munitions against civilian infrastructure like power grids. They are not the go-to tools for simply disrupting power in a given area unless absolutely necessitated.
The process of targeting an above-ground substation is, comparatively, much simpler. With modern guidance systems, pinpointing and striking a visible target is a relatively straightforward military operation. Once that same substation is buried, however, the challenges for the attacker multiply exponentially. Knowing precisely where it is, how deep it lies, and what kind of protective measures are in place transforms the act of targeting from a relatively simple strike into a complex intelligence and engineering problem.
It’s also crucial to consider how rapidly warfare evolves, especially with the increased prevalence of drone technology. What might have been a devastatingly effective tactic a year ago can quickly become obsolete as the other side adapts. The growth of drone warfare has undeniably altered the cost-benefit analysis for military actions. For instance, if Russia were to rely heavily on GPS-guided glide bombs, Ukraine’s response could involve developing and deploying effective GPS jamming technology. Similarly, if Russia focuses on destroying power infrastructure, Ukraine’s strategic adaptation is to move that infrastructure underground, thereby invalidating the previous, simpler methods of attack.
This strategic shift isn’t about creating an invincible system; nothing in war truly is. Rather, it’s about making the cost and difficulty of attack so prohibitive that it becomes an unreasonable or impractical option for the aggressor. The ability to destroy a major substation with relatively inexpensive drone components and basic munitions is what has been exploited. By burying these vital components, Ukraine effectively raises the barrier, demanding a much higher level of investment and technological sophistication from Russia to achieve the same disruptive effect.
Therefore, while the initial outlay for undergrounding may seem substantial, the long-term security and resilience it provides, especially in the face of relentless and indiscriminate attacks, make it a sound investment. It’s a proactive measure designed to safeguard essential services and maintain some semblance of normalcy and operational capacity for the nation, even under extreme duress. The ongoing efforts to improve national resilience through such infrastructure hardening are vital for Ukraine’s continued ability to function and resist.