Ukraine and Russia are not only fighting a drone war, but also deception

The phrase was literal from a Ukrainian high command. The war they have been fighting since the Russian invasion in 2022 is currently the closest thing to a cat and mouse hunt. In the current asymmetric conflict between Russia and Ukraine, where every night a kind of war is fought over energy infrastructurewhat has put both commands on alert is not only the destructive effect of armed drones, but the massive expansion of cheap decoys that force defenses to be spent. Curiously, Russia and Ukraine have resorted to the same thing: Second World War. Alarm. While the Russian Shahed cause blackouts and the Ukrainian Lyutyi and FP-1 they light refineriesboth parties they use decoys whose objective is to saturate, deceive and exhaust the enemy interception layer, and it is precisely this logic of multiplication (the effectiveness not only of the direct impact but also of the distraction) that turns these decoys (decoys) into a strategic multiplier capable of amplifying an already harmful campaign. The historical precedent. The tactic it’s not new: modern military history contains paradigmatic examplesfrom the shadow analemmas to the jet-decoys of the 20th century. And, of all, the case of the ADM-20 Quail illustrates better than any the conversion of vulnerability into advantage through transient imitators that consume defender resources. The Quail, small and cheap compared to the bomber it simulated, carried reflectors and simple patterns of flight to deceive radars and force the expense of expensive interceptors. Today that principle applies miniature and industrial scale with easily manufactured platforms that, although lacking lethal capacity, force the adversary to decide whether to fire a missile worth hundreds of thousands of dollars or take the risk of missing what could be the real target. A B-52 launching a Quail decoy The Russian range and its role. Moscow, which in 2024 industrialized the shahed of Iranian origin to saturate defensesalso produces lures like the Gerbera and the simple Parodiya; some are volumetric replicas with lower mass and range, others incorporate equipment electronic warfare to scout and mark radar locations, and some even carry small explosives to wound recovery teams. This variety pursues three purposes: inflict material wear on missile and air-to-air missile reserves, reveal defense positions, and complicate radar discrimination with reflectors Luneburg type that make targets the size of larger vehicles appear on the screens. The practical result is an increase in false positives that degrades the efficiency of the defense chain. An Lyutyi The Ukrainian range. Ukraine, later to scale its drone campaign, has combined attack vehicles such as the FP-1 either the Lyutyand with low-cost devices designed in local workshops (plastic tubes, wooden frames, metal foil to increase radar section) to explore corridors and distract responses while the units that cause real damage take another route. When working as “pathfinders”these devices allow Ukrainian planners to plot and verify secure routes, test defense sectors and create temporary penetration windows. In other words, its appeal lies in the reduced cost and ease of production, which makes the lure a repeatable tactical capital. Ukrainian decoy Cost asymmetry. The economy of confrontation is brutally simple: a Shahed of a few tens of thousands of dollars can force a response with air-to-air or surface-to-air missiles whose unit price can multiply to those of the target by factors of tens or hundreds. It we have counted: recent examples, like Sidewinders or similar missiles, reach prices that make them strategically scarce. That cost-benefit ratio tilts tactical and political decisions: waste a critical capability on potential decoys or hold on to it and accept the damage? Its proliferation makes the first option a safe way towards the depletion of stocks and the second in a bet for local resilience and operational trickery. Gerbera Lures Defensive capabilities. Although Ukraine has developed anti-aircraft artillery units and interceptor drones that have proven effective, comprehensive defense continues to depend on missiles and systems that are finite. Electronics, spectrum warfare and mobile units provide mitigation, but the physics of aerial combat continues to offer opportunities to those who have the volume and creativity to saturate. The introduction of decoys with EW components or communications relays adds another layer: they not only distract, but can map defenses, degrade chains and amplify subsequent attacks with greater precision. Foreseeable evolution. The scenario drawn by the combination of attack drones and lures is dynamic: iterative improvement of decoys (more realisticwith greater electronic signatures, with active deception capabilities) will match the technical challenge with costly countermeasures (better discrimination, multisensory sensors, finer intelligence). At a strategic level, the proliferation of these tactics erodes sustainability from the intensive use of conventional interceptors and pressures nations to invest in alternatives: low-cost missiles for home defense, AI-directed interceptors, mobile deployments, and greater reliance on offensive electronic warfare. Meanwhile, in the short term, the Ukrainian tactic of using lures as a multiplier It increases the likelihood of real material damage to critical Russian systems and highlights a legitimate fear in Moscow: that its defenses will be exhausted before the real threat is neutralized. So? If you like, the decoys work like power amplifiers: not only for what they destroy, but for what they force the adversary to burn, reveal or reconfigure. The lesson historic quail applied to mini-UAVs provokes a contemporary dilemma where economics, logistics and homemade innovation can tip the tactical balance. For Russia, the proliferation of Ukrainian decoys represents a operational and symbolic threat: The erosion of advantage in expensive systems and the realization that modern warfare rewards not just direct explosion but the ability to manipulate enemy perception and expenditure, transforming false targets into a strategic weapon in their own right. Image | StahlkocherGASTELLO DESIGN BUREAU, In Xataka | Ukraine accelerates the assault on Russia with an unprecedented army of robots: they are aquatic, carry rocket launchers and are lethal if stopped In Xataka | Ukraine cannot believe what it found inside Russia’s ballistic missiles: déjà vu

Terrausrt’s collapse dragged $ 40,000 million and thousands of investors. Its creator has just confessed deception

The South Korean who promised a financial revolution has ended up confessing a fraud of 40,000 million dollars. Do kwon, Terrausd and Luna creator, He declared himself guilty on August 12 in A Federal Court of New York for two positions: conspiracy to commit fraud of raw materials, values and electronic, and electronic fraud. The case exploded in 2022 with the collapse of its cryptocurrenciessold as stable. “What I did was wrong,” He admitted in Sala. As happened with Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX, the market digests the bill of an era of excesses. In his statement, Do Kwon acknowledged having cheated investors by not revealing the role of a trading firm in Terrausd’s recovery. It was part of an agreement with the Prosecutor’s Office of the Southern District of New York that plans to request a maximum penalty of 12 years if it assumes its responsibility. Reuters remembers that Kwon was extradited from Montenegro at the end of 2024 and faced nine positions, including values fraud, electronic fraud and conspiracy to whiten capitals. The admission came almost three years after the collapse of the project. H2: How the ‘PEG’ was manufactured and how it collapsed Unlike other stablcoins backed by real assets, Terrausd was based on an algorithm that interacts with Luna, its sister cryptocurrency. The system allowed to create or destroy tokens from one and the other to maintain parity with the dollar. When Terrausd fell from 1 dollarthey could be changed to the moon, which reduced the offer and, in theory, stabilized its value. All this happened within the call Terra protocolwhich executed these operations automatically. The model depended on the balance between supply, demand and market expectations. The first alarm signal came in May 2021, when Terrausd fell below the dollar. According to prosecutors, Do Kwon said that the system had worked as planned: the algorithm had automatically restored parity. But, as he has recognized now, that version omitted a key detail. Financial Times explains thatActually, Kwon turned to a specialized trading firm that bought millions in Terrausd to hold its price. It was a deliberate and hidden operation that, according to the accusation, allowed to maintain the illusion that the system was solid. A year after the first scare, the system did not endure. In May 2022, Terrausd lost parity again, this time irreversibly. The algorithmic mechanism collapsed: Moon’s mass creation, aimed at containing the fall, caused a spiral that The price of both tokens sank. The collapse devastated with about 40,000 million dollars in market value and affected thousands of retail and institutional investors. The loss of confidence was immediate. What was presented as a robust stablecoin became a symbol of the opposite. The civil aspect of the case was resolved in April 2024, When a federal jury declared To Do Kwon and Terraft Labs responsible for fraud in a lawsuit filed by the SEC. The civil order imposed a sanction of 80 million dollars and permanent disqualification and interdiction measures, including the prohibition of making transactions with cryptoactive. In addition, Terraft agreed to pay 4,550 million in civil resolution. The company had already accepted the bankruptcy process, which conditions payments and leaves part of the compensation. Kwon could spend up to 25 years in prisonbut if it complies with the prosecution, the effective sentence would be significantly lower. The agreement contemplates A maximum request of 12 yearsas long as you collaborate and recognize your guilt. Federal Judge Paul A. Engelmayer will issue a judgment on December 11, 2025. Reuters adds that The Prosecutor’s Office will not oppose Kwon requesting a transfer to another country after serving 50% of his conviction. In parallel, the authorities of South Korea maintain open charges that could be activated once their process ends in the United States. Thousands of people, from small savers to institutional funds, were trapped in the fall of Terrausd and Luna. Since then, Terraft Labs accepted the bankruptcy procedure in the United States, under chapter 11, and advances in the liquidation plan. According to Reutersthe estimate of payments to those affected ranges between 184.5 and 442.2 million dollars, and the exact recoverable amount remains in review. As they are highly volatile assets, the current value is much lower than that they had in 2022. Refunds, if they arrive, aim to be partial and late. Images | FAQX ™ We Mining it. (CC by 3.0) | Art Rachen | Joshua May In Xataka | The US believes that it has control of cryptocurrencies because it is the one that is the most mine. Actually China controls the hardware you are using

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.