The Biden administration released video Thursday of a Russian fighter jet dumping fuel on a U.S. Air Force surveillance drone as the U.S. sought to hold Russia responsible for the collision that led to the drone's crash into the Black Sea without escalating already fraught tensions with the Kremlin.
Poland, meanwhile, said it's giving Ukraine a dozen MiG-29 fighter jets, becoming the first NATO member to fulfill Kyiv's increasingly urgent requests for warplanes.
The U.S. military's declassified 42-second color footage shows a Russian Su-27 approaching the back of the MQ-9 Reaper drone and releasing fuel as it passes, the Pentagon said. Dumping the fuel appeared to be aimed at blinding the drone's optical instruments to drive it from the area.
On a second approach, either the same jet or another Russian Su-27 that had been shadowing the MQ-9 struck the drone’s propeller, damaging a blade, according to the U.S. military, which said it then ditched the aircraft in the sea.
The video excerpt does not show the collision, although it does show the damage to the propeller.
Russia said its fighters didn’t strike the drone and claimed the unmanned aerial vehicle went down after making a sharp maneuver.
While calling out Russia for “reckless” action, the White House tried to strike a balance to avoid exacerbating tensions. U.S. officials said they have not been able to determine whether the Russian pilot intentionally struck the American drone and stressed that lines of communication with Moscow remain open.
“I can’t point to that video and say this is a deliberate attempt to escalate or ... tangibly bring about Putin’s false claim that this is about the West versus Russia.,” White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said. “We have made clear on many occasions, we do not seek a conflict with Russia.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that by providing weapons to Ukraine and sharing intelligence information with Kyiv, the U.S. and its allies have effectively become engaged in the war, now in its 13th month.
Nikolai Patrushev, the secretary of Russia’s Security Council, said Wednesday that an attempt would be made to recover the drone debris.
U.S. officials have expressed confidence that nothing of military value would remain from the drone even if Russia retrieved the wreckage. They left open the possibility of trying to recover portions of the downed $32 million aircraft, which they said crashed into waters that were 4,000 to 5,000 feet (1,200 to 1,500 meters) deep, although the U.S. does not have any ships in the area.
Russia and NATO member countries routinely intercept each other’s warplanes, but Tuesday's incident marked the first time since the Cold War that a U.S. aircraft went down during such a confrontation, raising concerns it could bring the United States and Russia closer to a direct conflict.
Moscow has repeatedly voiced concern about U.S. intelligence flights near the Crimean Peninsula, which Russia seized from Ukraine in 2014 and illegally annexed.
The top U.S. and Russian defense and military leaders spoke Wednesday about the destruction of the drone, underscoring the event's seriousness.
The calls between U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, as well as between Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley and Gen. Valery Gerasimov, chief of Russian General Staff, were the first since October.
The Russian Defense Ministry said in its report of the call with Austin that Shoigu accused the U.S. of provoking the incident by ignoring flight restrictions the Kremlin had imposed because of its military operations in Ukraine. The U.S. said the drone was operating in international airspace.
The MQ-9, which has a 66-foot (20-meter) wingspan, includes a ground control station and satellite equipment. It is capable of carrying munitions, but Air Force Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder, a Pentagon spokesperson, would not say whether the ditched drone had been armed.
The video's release is the latest example of the Biden administration making public intelligence findings over the course of the war. The administration has said it wants to highlight Russian malicious activity as well as plans for Russian misinformation operations so allies remain clear-eyed about Moscow’s intent.
The White House deferred to Austin on the decision to release it, with the Pentagon and President Joe Biden’s national security aides agreeing it was important to let the world see what happened, according to an administration official familiar with the decision-making process. The official, who requested anonymity to discuss the deliberations, said it took time to go through the declassification process and insisted the administration was not concerned it would further escalate tensions with Russia.
Because the video does not show the actual collision, some involved in the decision to release the footage wondered whether the Russians would seize on that as proof there was no contact between the jet and the drone, according to another official familiar with the discussions about making it public. Those concerns were overcome when the Pentagon explained that the video showed the immediate aftermath and damage to the drone’s propeller, which could have come only from a collision, according to the second official, who spoke on condition of anonymity in order to disclose the details.
Separately, Polish President Andrzej Duda said Warsaw would give Ukraine four Soviet-made MiG-29s “within the next few days” and that the rest needed servicing and would be supplied later. The Polish word he used to describe the total number of warplanes can mean between 11 and 19.
“They are in the last years of their functioning but they are in good working condition,” Duda added. He did not say whether other countries would follow suit, although Slovakia has said it would send Ukraine its disused MiGs.
While Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has pleaded for fighter jets from the West, some NATO members — including the U.S. — have expressed hesitancy.
The White House said Poland gave the U.S. advanced notice of its decision to provide the MiGs.
Kirby, the White House spokesman, called Poland’s providing the fighter jets a sovereign decision and cheered the Poles for continuing to “punch above their weight” in assisting Kyiv, but insisted that Duda's decision would have no bearing on the U.S. president's decision, thus far, not to provide American-made F-16s.
Before Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine had several dozen MiG-29s it inherited in the 1991 demise of the Soviet Union, but it’s unclear how many remain in service.
Duda said Poland’s air force would replace the planes it gives to Ukraine with South Korean-made FA-50 fighters and American-made F-35s.
A crucial ally of Kyiv, Poland hosts thousands of U.S. troops and is taking in more people fleeing the war in the neighboring country than any other nation. It has suffered invasions and occupations by Russia for centuries and still fears Russia despite being a member of NATO.
Authorities in Warsaw also said the security services have detained members of a Russian espionage ring, alleging they were preparing acts of sabotage in Poland and had been monitoring railroad routes used to transport weapons into Ukraine.
© Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
115 Comments
sakurasuki
Afraid to send ships to avoid another encounter on the sea.
International space but in near distance away from sovereign country border that can be considered as a threat.
Haaa Nemui
Just like the Russian refueling plane near Estonian airspace in the report yesterday.
wallace
The released video shows the Russian fighter striking the drone and damaging the propeller.
bass4funk
There have been so many incursions by the both the Chinese and the Russians in US airspace and waters and Subs as close to the California pacific, none were shot down or sank and that’s incidents were considered a threat as well because they were already deep within US sovereign territory. There was no justification at that precise point to do what they did given the history of these nations coming very close and being in US territory.
Yubaru
Hell an ICBM sitting in North Dakota is considered a threat by your "logic"
Cards fan
Sovereign country airspace in which Russia wasn't invited. Nowhere near Russian airspace.
stormcrow
Not surprising. Luckily it was a drone and not a manned plane of some kind.
diagonalslip
from whence was the video taken? was there another drone i wonder? or what?
Axel
Which countries sovereign airspace was that?
wallace
The video was taken by the drone which was struck by the fighter jet. The software was wiped before it crashed.
Cards fan
Not Russia's, that's for sure.
Cards fan
Wrong. He died fighting for fascism.
Why would anyone believe anything the defense minister would say?
fallaffel
And you believed it...
Superlib
Russia screwed up and downed an aircraft in international airspace.
Perhaps they should learn more about flying their planes. This is how escalations start.
Mr Kipling
The Russians said they would deal with spy drones over the Black sea back in January.
US response...
Proxy war only.
Haaa Nemui
Explains why they went into full denial over this.
UChosePoorly
This is what awaits invaders, traitors, and collaborators in the occupied Oblasts of Ukraine. The partisans are being courteous by providing them reminders to think about what they are doing and if the Rubles are worth roasting in one's car.
https://twitter.com/LvivJournal/status/1635984252557729794
Rodney
I would like to apologize for doubting USA claims. But in my defense, the the drone was sending real time intelligence to Ukrainian so they can target Russian speaking Ukrainians and Russians soldiers trying to protect them...so justified.
diagonalslip
so DOES anyone know how the video was taken? where from? another aircraft? or what?
Haaa Nemui
The purpose of the Russian refueling plane in airspace near Estonia was to expand the war range of Russian fighter planes. Justification…
deanzaZZR
Send a bill for $32 million to the Russian embassy in DC.
fallaffel
It was taken by the drone itself.
rainyday
Oh, the Russian side is concerned about the sanctity of sovereign borders now, is it?
Great news. I look forward to them promptly withdrawing what is left of their army to their side of it.
Haaa Nemui
For the actions of the Russians regarding the incident this article is about… Obviously.
Toblerone
In other news, the Russian economy is rapidly failing.
Really? Not sure about that. I do know there are ominous signs re economy and banks coming from USA and Western Europe.
deanzaZZR
It's obvious from the photo that the next drone that goes up in that area needs to have a remote controlled Bic lighter.
Haaa Nemui
Lol. Russia invaded Ukraine. They decided a long time ago they don’t care about international law.
PTownsend
Based on lies from Putin and the Kremlin, Russia's military invaded a sovereign nation, after using the Wagner Group and others to foment violence in Donbas many years before. This war is on Russia, and on Putin and the Kremlin's inability to accept the reality that Russia's neighboring countries have little interest in once again being under Moscow's jackboots.
After Russian forces return to Russia there may be peace in Eastern Europe. Unless the Kremlin launch another invasion.Let sovereign nations determine for themselves which nations to side with.
Yrral
Why was the GPS Coordinates not ,it would of verified everything,they got them
Axel
If that were so, would Russian be alone in that?
elephant200
Back in 1983, then Soviet airfirce shot down a South Korean airliner KAL007 killing 269 people.Then Soviet leader Andropov did not apologize but stepup the defence status. Now this is a drone, nobody dies, so don't listen to America's provocative languages, they are stupid!
Toblerone
According to international law, the US and all it's lackey states except for South Korea (which only send weapons Poland bought) are party to the conflict. The Russians should have taken much more aggressive measures long ago.
Exactly.
lucas777
US go and fight directly with Russia not via Ukraine.
UChosePoorly
Lucas - I agree. The Russian media tries to elevate their clumsy attempt at a land and resource grab in Ukraine as some kind of civilizational war against the 'Decadent West' / USD Hegemony / NATO / Nazis, etc, but if that's the case, why mess around in Ukraine? Come at us properly if you're feeling it, otherwise everyone knows it's just a land and resource grab from your smaller neighbor.
Haaa Nemui
Of course the Russians are not alone in their disregard for international law. They certainly don’t care for international law though, so using that in your argument means nothing.
Awa no Gaijin
Was the refueling plane armed with lazer guidance missiles and bombs and designed to be a killer predator spy plane remotely controlled ?
I think not !
Your comparison has issues !
Toblerone
Of course the Russians are not alone in their disregard for international law.
For a stellar example of disregard for international law you need look no further than the USA.
bass4funk
And so now what? What’s Biden going to do?
Haaa Nemui
Oh, did the drone fire on the planes? I missed that part.
elephant200
@Haaa: Back in 2003 ,round the world told US/UK/Aus not to invade Iraq, including calls from the United Nations.
When did they ever respect of international law?
Eastman
russians did what is expected from them.
protect own country security,safety,borders and interests.
if russian drone will fly from Cuba to Florida us air force will do SAME THING.
kanec filma.
Awa no Gaijin
It was at 50 thousand ft so nobody's airspace !
wallace
bass4funk
What would you want him to do?
Awa no Gaijin
Or so we've become told ?
Or perhaps you have found time to recover the drone and personally can verify the software was wiped ?
Haaa Nemui
I was against the invasion of Iraq too. And I’m against the invasion of Ukraine. You’re right about America, but bringing international law into the argument to support the nation that has broken international law in the manner it was done here is just dumb.
Strangerland
Do you think he should escalate?
Rodney
as Russia has only used 8 hypersonic multiple glide missiles so far in one year, not deployed its s-500, S-550 missile defense systems, and only deployed around 600,000 military compared to Ukraine’s basically, half the male population over 18, I don’t understand “what is left”.
As Donbass and two other provinces are now officially part of Russia, and the USA tore up the Nuclear treaty, Russia can now position medium range nuclear warheads that can target any area from the new territories that can destroy any city in EU or UK. These missiles can’t be shot down. Luckily Russia only has over 3000 nuclear warheads so some small remote islands may be spared.
Russia also has the technology to destroy USA GPS system, making allied weapon response difficult. Hypersonic ICBM can hit any city or base belonging to the US. Argis cannot, at this time, stop these high tech missiles.
for the sake of the whole world, Ukraine should accept that borders change, and Russia should respect Ukraine as a sovereign independent state.
regarding reconciliation. After Ukraine purges the neo-Nazis, Russia and Ukraine could strengthen relations. Together they could rebuild Ukraine and provide jobs and economic stimulus. I went to East Berlin before the wall came down, and after. Germany is now the strongest country in EU.
there is hope.
Blacklabel
so Russia just supposed to let the USA spy on them from 200m outside “international waters”? Especially during a war where the US is actively helping the other side?
The jet dumping something behind it while approaching the drone from even further behind.
Strangerland
Yes. They are international waters.
Yes, because they are international waters, and attacking another nation in international waters can start a world war.
Open-minded
Will Putin now claim that drone attacked its pilots? Or will he pull a Chinese excuse out of his hat and redraw the territorial borders like has been attempting to do with Ukraine?
Blacklabel
So you attack things that you are behind by attacking behind yourself where nothing is.
interesting approach. Sounds like a conispiracy to me.
deanzaZZR
Fly another drone in international airspace.
ClippetyClop
But it's a 'proxy war', right? The US is 'the other side'.
Russian assets in international waters & air space are now fair game for the US to destroy them. They can even destroy their satellites.
This is what you want.
Superlib
I don't think Black understands the concept of international waters.
Imagine the situation over Russian waters. Then his comments make sense.
But that didn't happen.
Strangerland
Or is it coming at the drone?
Blacklabel
Nah I was just in the military for like a decade operating underway in…………wait for it…..”international waters”
so there is that.
UChosePoorly
Blacklabel - have you seen the video?
wallace
The fighter jet covers the drone in fuel and on the second fly-by hits the propeller.
https://youtu.be/5fHw6FN9m3w
Blacklabel
There is no rule that I have to allow you to spy on me to help my opponent when I am at war. Why would I allow that?
and if you aren’t part of the war (like the IS supposedly isnt) you shouldn’t be instigating like that. You might find yourself in the war too.
Blacklabel
yep the jet was climbing to try to avoid hitting the drone. Didn’t work.
Strangerland
You clearly don't understand how international waters work.
wallace
Blacklabel
lack of concern for an America aircraft downed in international air space.
Blacklabel
I clearly do as I operated in them for over a decade.
ask general Milley. He saw all the videos available even the secret ones and he said he can’t even determine if it was intentional or not.
what do you think happened?
UChosePoorly
Blacklabel - Countries are allowed to spy on other countries as long as they do it from international waters (or space). You should know this. Russia f'ed up.
Regarding the video, the jet started dumping fuel when it was coming up from behind and continued dumping after it had overtaken the much slower drone.
Blacklabel
It’s an unmanned drone what would I be concerned about? All the people who were not on board?
Was the drone’s feelings hurt?
collision that it can’t he determined if it was intentional or not. Anything more than that?
Blacklabel
Yep that’s what you thought up until now.
yet seems that’s not the case anymore is it?
Strangerland
How is it not?
fallaffel
Of course.
Blacklabel
By the fact that the US was not “allowed” to just spy on other countries this time from right inside international waters like supposedly always happens.
something intentional happened to their spy drone didn’t it? Or was all this just an accident?
What do you think?
Hiro S Nobumasa
Russia overreacted.
It’s just a US weather drone!
Blacklabel
their spy drone now being at the bottom of the ocean and soon to belong to Russia stopped them, no?
Awa no Gaijin
Was the refueling plane armed with lazer guidance missiles and bombs and designed to be a killer predator spy plane remotely controlled ?
You also missed answering the first question before asking a question of something that obviously didn't happen.
No the wimpy little drone got bullied and sent to deep 6.
And why didn't the almighty USA send fighter jets to intervene ?
A true presentation of US air superiority.
Bravo !
Haaa Nemui
So where was the direct that you are trying to imply? There is as much a direct threat from the drone as there was from the refueling plane designed to extend the range of Russian war planes. That is the relevant comparison.
Haaa Nemui
direct threat.
UChosePoorly
Do you mean that we should start targeting Russian assets in international waters or airspace (or space) that may be spying on the US? Do you not agree with the concept of international waters?
Blacklabel
well we obviously wouldnt just "allow" it, right?
We would scramble some jets and maybe one of our jets might collide with the Russian asset, thats possible isnt it?
Awa no Gaijin
You mean international airspace ?
Eastman
lesson for US dont do that again.
this conflict dont need be escalated more.so much damage already done for all.
time to calm down take seat and start talk about peace.
UChosePoorly
Of course we allow it. We may not like it, but those are the rules.
Are you thinking that this was just an accident? If so, then Russia should acknowledge and apologize, but I won't hold my breath. If not an accident, then they should expect a proportional response, and maybe they have, in which case, that's fine. We got responses.
UChosePoorly
Eastman - We will fly anywhere we are legally allowed. You can take that to the bank.
Awa no Gaijin
Not to butt in - but the drone was traveling at 10 thousand feet which is 3 kilometers and outerspace /Karman line starts at 100km according to the outerspace constitution.
However the US military and NASA both define outerspace as starting 12 miles below the Karman line.
UChosePoorly
Awa - thanks for butting in. The drone was over international waters. The Black Sea does not belong to Russia, much as they would like it to.
Blacklabel
do we really "allow" it?
https://www.reuters.com/world/russian-bomber-jets-intercepted-by-norad-near-alaska-2023-02-15/
"Several Russian strategic bombers and fighter jets were intercepted by North American air defence forces as they flew over international airspace near Alaska..."
UChosePoorly
Yes, we intercept them, which we are legally allowed to do. Can't shoot at them or touch them.
UChosePoorly
Probably not allowed to dump fuel on them either, but I will have to look that up to confirm this.
Blacklabel
even in international air space where they have every right to be, spying on us?
Why would we intercept them if they have the right to be there?
Awa no Gaijin
Oh no no no definitely not!
The comparison in question is was the refueling plane unmanned and being remotely controlled and armed with lazer guided missiles and bombs and designed for the sole purpose of being a hunter killer spy drone.
And don't try to say it was unarmed drone just being used for surveillance.
To say that a refuling plane that isnt armed with the same capabilities as the drone as being equally a direct threat is ridiculous.
UChosePoorly
To keep an eye on them and to spy on them back, which we are legally allowed to do, just as they are allowed to be there as well.
Desert Tortoise actually had some informative posts on the subject yesterday. I will try to find them. Thought you were on that thread yesterday, but maybe not.
UChosePoorly
I believe he is capable of understanding it. We just have to be patient and not give up.
ClippetyClop
Because you also have the right to be there.
Is the concept of a shared space that difficult for you to comprehend? Do you attack people for walking on the same street as you?
UChosePoorly
Blacklabel - DT had some good commentary regarding international waters/airspace yesterday on this article:
https://japantoday.com/category/world/uk-german-fighter-jets-intercept-russian-plane-near-estonia
Haaa Nemui
When it’s designed to expand the range of craft that are armed with the same and more then it is still a direct threat. Should the drone have been firing on or targeting Russian craft or territory you might have a point. So did that happen?
Blacklabel
yeah I was in the same military he was.
but thanks.
Desert Tortoise
All aircraft are payload limited. There is only so much weight an aircraft can lift off the ground. For tactical jets there are limits on the weight each weapons station can carry. In practice aircraft outfitted as tankers do not carry ordnance. The weight of the fuel in one of those buddy tanks with the hose reel and basket is so much that the aircraft is maxed out for payload. There is also a consideration of underwing turbulence. Bombs hanging from pylons create huge turbulence and that doesn't work well with a refueling situation.
Superlib
I think Black's concept of international airspace goes something like this:
"You are allowed to fly in international airspace, but if you are spying on another country, then that country takes ownership of the airspace and have the right to down aircraft."
When you look at his comments in that light they make complete sense.
Desert Tortoise
Btw, many sensors a recce aircraft carries are incompatible with ordnance. The electronic emissions can set them off. Some ordnance is ok depending on what it is, like anti radiation missiles that are designed for use with jammer pods sitting next to them like they do on an EA-18G or the old EA-6, but a lot of ordnance would detonate when subject to high powered electronic emissions. That is why, for example, in certain spaces on the ship we could not use battery powered fork lifts but instead had to have a few forklifts powered by CNG. Even a battery powered electric motor risks detonating some ordnance.
Legrande
It is capable of carrying munitions, but Air Force Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder, a Pentagon spokesperson, would not say whether the ditched drone had been armed.
Of course he refused to clarify that.
USNinJapan2
Blacklabel
Yes and yes. Not without actually declaring war on the U.S. because we are a non-combatant and because that's what the Laws of War dictate. It's a little surprising that you don't understand this after ten plus years of naval service.
USNinJapan2
Here's the released video for some posters who clearly haven't seen it...
https://www.dvidshub.net/video/876667/us-air-force-mq-9-camera-footage-russian-su-27-black-sea-intercept
Awa no Gaijin
Yes exactly over international waters not in the water .
At 10 thousand feet personally would say airspace and was very close to Crimea.
How close to Crimea ?
RKL
Looks like a complete misunderstanding. Nothing to be concerned about.
Awa no Gaijin
Let's not be naive.
The killer drone was more than likely armed.
I sincerely doubt it wasn't.
Perhaps we will find out
Awa no Gaijin
Yes i know that !
Hence my lack of agreement the refueling plane presented and equal direct threat as the remotely controlled unmanned armed killer spy drone
UChosePoorly
Awa - the 12 nm distance is for both international waters and airspace.
Awa no Gaijin
The drone was targeting the Russian forces by gathering intel for the sole purpose of supporting the Ukraine resistance extremely close to Crimea.
The unarmed refuling plane and the killer drone are separate incidents at different locations.
Or do you expect me to assume - that specific refuling plane was there to refule the jets that downed the spy attack drone.
In comparison i would say the refuling plane posed a threat with its ability to assist the fighter jets , however not a direct threat no !
And it was near Estonia not Crimea anyway
UChosePoorly
Which is perfectly legal to do.
Desert Tortoise
What is the difference between that RQ-9 flying over international waters in the Black Seda and a Russian electronic intelligence ship sitting 24 nautical miles off the entrance to San Diego Bay?
Desert Tortoise
The "killer drone" has a cruising speed of around 170 knots and carries maybe four short range Hellfire or a pair of 220kg bombs. But I would suspect that it had sensor pods on it and not bombs. You can't do both on the meager payload of an RQ-9.
wallace
RKL
How so? The downing of a $30 million aircraft?
Desert Tortoise
The US has been conducting recce flights over the Black Sea for decades keeping an eye on Soviet and later Russian forces in the region. It is perfectly legal to do so.
UChosePoorly
Why don't some people here understand this? It doesn't seem that hard of a concept to grasp.
2020hindsights
Unintended consequence of this: Turkey is allowing US warships into the Black Sea. Probably not what Putin wanted.
Raw Beer
Exactly. That drone was there to help Ukraine attack Russia, so they got what they deserved.
And now Russia will be able to study this advanced drone, something the US really wanted to avoid.
Superlib
Great. As long as it's in international airspace we have the right to do that.
If I'm wrong, shoot down our aircraft with malace. Tell us we can't fly in international airspace. Tell us where and when we can fly.
Sound good?
wallace
Russia has attacked a member of NATO.