Cruise missiles: why they have returned to the pedestal and are not going to yield

When discussing the future of warfare, drones and AI are always at the center. However, analysts and practitioners are increasingly bringing the conversation back to missiles — those very cruise and ballistic munitions that maintain a unique combination of range, accuracy, and destructive power.

Michael Bonert from RAND stated directly in a column for Defense News: despite the hype around drones and “stealth” aircraft, the main weapon of future wars will likely remain cruise missiles. They can paralyze enemy air defenses and command, open the way for other means, and at the same time be economically justified — their strike on key targets often fully covers the cost of the missile itself.

Drones, Stealth Aircraft, and Battlefield Reality

Recent years have shown that strike drones have caused significant damage in local conflicts — and they indeed dominated in the number of targets hit until 2025. However, the events of June 2025, when the Iran-Israel campaign demonstrated the role of fast precise airstrikes (including the F-35) and strategic aviation (B-2), brought back the importance of high-tech aviation into the discussion.

Bonert emphasizes that neither drones nor stealth aircraft alone cover the whole picture: cruise missiles are that first salvo that disables critical infrastructure, air defenses, and command nodes, making any further defense less effective.

Why Missiles Are More “Resilient” Than Drones and More Economical Than Air Raids

Cruise missiles fly at low altitudes, evading radars, and have a range that makes it economically inefficient to install enough air defenses on the borders of a large country. Unlike expensive airstrikes or vulnerable drones, a missile can “break through” the system, hitting the central points of the enemy — from power grids to transport logistics hubs.

Bonert provides examples of the use of Tomahawk and similar systems in the early stages of conflicts by the USA, UK, and France — it was these strikes that ensured the subsequent development of operations. At the same time, strike drones remain a cheap and mobile tool, but they work differently — more often as a “force multiplier” rather than a means of strategic paralysis.

Ukraine: Its Own Missiles and the Path to Strategic Independence

Ukraine is already making a qualitative step from consumer to producer. Several key projects and facts are mentioned directly in the material:

— “Neptune” (R-360 Neptune) — a Ukrainian cruise missile that many experts call one of the best in its class in Europe; the declared range of “Long Neptune” in some estimates reaches about 1000 km, with a warhead of about 260 kg; this makes the system a real factor for deep strikes on critical enemy targets.

— “Flamingo” — its use was mentioned in attacks on targets in occupied Crimea: according to media reports, the production of such missiles could be expanded to large volumes — up to hundreds of units per month with the establishment of serial production. These data should be interpreted as forecasted and partially unannounced official plans of the industry.

— Projects of tactical ballistic systems (Sapsan / Hrim-2 and private developments like FP-7/FP-9) give an idea that Ukraine is moving towards its own technological sovereignty: not only cruise but also ballistic solutions are already being tested and going into series.

What World Powers Are Doing

The USA, China, Russia, the UK, and other countries are increasing investments in cruise and hypersonic technologies, as well as in underwater missile basing. This is a game of anticipation: whoever can deploy more autonomous, long-range, and less accessible carriers for air defenses will dictate the strategy.

Practical Logic: First Salvo and Space Control

Cruise missiles are a tool of the first strike: they open up space for subsequent maneuvers, whether it be aviation, landing, or massive drone strikes. That is why they are favored by both states with global ambitions and countries striving to ensure their own defense capability.

Risks and Ethics

The scalability of missile strikes also generates new risks: escalation, erroneous launches, cyber threats to control systems. International control mechanisms and “digital deterrence” are needed, but so far, the political resolution of these issues lags behind technical progress.

Conclusion

Yes, drones and AI are important tools of modern warfare, but cruise missiles remain and will continue to be a key element of states’ arsenals. For Ukraine, this is an opportunity: the development of “Neptune,” “Flamingo,” and local ballistic projects transforms it from a recipient country into a producer of strategic weapons. For the world, this is a reminder: technological progress creates not only new levers of power but also new obligations for their control.