Stealth Fighters and Deniability: The Dilemma in Ukraine

The question of deploying stealth fighters over Ukraine has sparked significant debate among military strategists and policymakers. With a potential Russian escalation especially considering the recent history involving nuclear threats, the stakes are high. However, the strategic implications of sending stealth fighters into this volatile region are complex and multifaceted.

The Risks Involved

The deployment of stealth fighters like the F-22, F-35, or F-117 carries inherent risks. These aircraft are designed for high-stakes missions and are often considered a symbol of a nation's military prowess. However, they are not without drawbacks. For instance, the F-22, as a twenty-year-old model, represents outdated technology, which may not be as effective in a modern conflict. Similarly, the F-35, while technologically advanced, has faced reliability issues that could hinder its performance in critical missions. The F-117, while iconic, is an old and obsolete bomber, making it less suitable for contemporary warfare.

The Dilemma of Deniability

The concept of deniability – or the ability to claim ignorance or lack of direct involvement in a military action – is crucial in contemporary warfare. The use of stealth fighters would dramatically increase the risk of losing deniability. If an F-35 were to fire a non-stealthy rocket, the signal would be detectable, leaving no room for ambiguity about the origin of the attack. This would immediately compromise the strategic advantage of remaining covert, potentially escalating tensions and leading to broader military conflicts.

Strategic Considerations

Another consideration is the known locations of Ukrainian fighters. Russian air defense systems have advanced radars and other technologies capable of detecting stealth fighters. Any attempt to launch from a different direction would still result in detection, thanks to the physical remains of the aircraft and the warhead fragments. Moreover, even with highly advanced interception capabilities, visual sightings or anti-aircraft hits could compromise deniability.

The Contemporary Arsenal: Cruise Missiles

A more focused discussion would be on the cruise missiles sold by Turkey to Ukraine. These weapons represent a significant capability and their impact is a primary concern for Russian forces. The missiles offer a way to target infrastructure and strategic assets without the need to engage in aerial combat, thus maintaining a lower risk profile for both sides involved.

Additional Considerations

The use of stealth fighters would also require AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) coverage, such as the E3 Sentry, to provide constant radar and communication support. However, these systems are highly detectable, making them a significant tell for the enemy. Additionally, Russia has advanced radars capable of deterring stealth aircraft from launching attacks. These systems might not be able to engage stealth fighters directly, but they can track and report their movements.

Avoiding Escalation

The primary goal of modern warfare, especially in regions of high conflict like Ukraine, is to avoid direct confrontation and military escalation. NATO relies on precision-guided missiles like the AIM-120D AMRAAM for air-to-air engagements. These missiles emit different radar signals during their terminal phase, which could be detected by Russian radar warning receivers (RWR). This would further complicate any covert operation and increase the risk of direct conflict.

Conclusion

Deploying stealth fighters over Ukraine, while a tempting solution, carries significant risks. The concept of deniability is essential in maintaining a low profile and avoiding unnecessary escalation. Alternative strategies, such as utilizing cruise missiles, should be prioritized. Above all, the aim must be to de-escalate rather than escalate the conflict. As tensions continue to rise, the international community must navigate these challenges with careful consideration and diplomacy.