MACRON TELLS ISTRES TROOPS EUROPE NEEDS ITS OWN ORESHNIK FAST

By Martin Foskett | Newswire | Knelstrom Media

​FRANCE, Istres -- President Emmanuel Macron has urged France and its European partners to accelerate the development of long-range "deep strike" weapons, arguing that Russia's latest use of its Oreshnik missile in Ukraine underlines how much of Europe now sits within reach of a new generation of high-speed systems.

​In a New Year address to the armed forces at the Istres-Le Tubé Air Base on Thursday, 15 January 2026, Macron said Europe needed a credible answer to Russian capabilities that, in his words, could "change the balance of power" in the short term. He pointed directly to Oreshnik, a Russian intermediate-range ballistic missile described by Moscow as hypersonic and presented by the Kremlin as difficult—if not impossible—to intercept.

Macron's appearance drew secondary attention after he arrived with a visibly puffy, reddened eye and wore sunglasses during an outdoor inspection before speaking indoors. He told personnel it was "completely harmless" and made a brief "Eye of the Tiger" joke as he began. Russian state-aligned outlets, meanwhile, framed the optics as something else: a Western leader supposedly unnerved by Russian missile technology. Macron did not respond to that characterisation, instead returning to the practical question of capability and production.

"We are within range"

Macron said Russia's second known combat use of Oreshnik was a strategic signal as much as a military act, warning that European security could no longer treat long-range strike as a remote, theoretical problem. France, he said, was "within range" of systems of this class—language intended to compress the distance between a missile launch in southern Russia and the planning assumptions of European capitals.

The president argued that deterrence now depended not only on nuclear posture but also on conventional options able to reach key targets at a distance. That, he suggested, required Europe to build weapons that can penetrate modern air defences, arrive quickly, and hold an adversary's infrastructure and command nodes at risk.

At Istrés, Macron linked the argument to a broader push to shorten procurement timelines and scale industrial output. Europe's current position, he implied, is a mismatch between accelerating threats and unchanging production systems.

What Oreshnik is—and why it has landed politically

Russia says Oreshnik—Russian for "hazel tree"—is a road-mobile, nuclear-capable intermediate-range ballistic missile with speeds around Mach 10 and the ability to carry multiple warheads that can be released against separate targets. Western analysts caution that Moscow's public claims can be inflated. Still, the missile's reported configuration, including multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles, is considered a serious development, even if the whole performance envelope remains unclear.

Oreshnik first appeared in combat in November 2024, when Russia fired the weapon at the Ukrainian city of Dnipro. Ukrainian sources told international media at the time that the missile carried multiple warheads but no explosives, causing limited physical damage—an episode widely read as a controlled demonstration shot intended to warn Western backers of Ukraine.

The second use has been more politically pointed. On 8–9 January 2026, Russia fired an Oreshnik missile during a wider strike package that hit targets in western Ukraine near the Polish border. Kyiv and several European governments described the launch as an attempt to intimidate NATO and the EU by bringing the conflict's most escalatory hardware closer to allied territory.

Russia's defence ministry later said the missile struck the Lviv State Aviation Repair Plant, claiming it damaged workshops and warehouses, affected drone-related production, and disrupted maintenance activity. Russian statements also said the facility serviced aircraft types including F-16s and MiG-29s. Ukrainian sources, while not confirming the precise impact assessment, indicated the missile may have carried inert warheads—again pointing to signalling value over immediate destructive effect.

The January launch fed directly into diplomatic channels. It was discussed at the United Nations Security Council, where Western representatives condemned the strike as reckless and escalatory. The episode also arrived against a backdrop of fresh European debate about long-term security arrangements for Ukraine, including the idea of post-war reassurance forces—an area in which Moscow has repeatedly sought to create political deterrence through military messaging.

A European programme, and a French warning to industry

Macron used the speech to endorse the European Long-Range Strike Approach (ELSA), a consortium launched in 2024 by France, Germany, Italy and Poland to develop ground-launched long-range strike capabilities, with later participation from additional partners including Sweden and the United Kingdom. The initiative aims to field missiles with ranges extending beyond current European norms, with a focus on improving deterrence and reducing reliance on non-European systems.

In Macron's telling, ELSA "makes perfect sense" after the second Oreshnik deployment. The emphasis was on speed: Europe must be able to "change the situation" in the short term, not merely commission a future capability that arrives after the strategic environment has already shifted again.

He also delivered a sharper message to the domestic industry. French officials have been calling for a "war economy" approach since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Yet, Macron again suggested the label risks becoming a slogan rather than a production plan. He highlighted drones as a particularly uncomfortable comparison point, noting Ukraine's rapid scaling and innovation while France's output remains relatively modest.

The subtext was not subtle: if French firms cannot deliver quickly, procurement will increasingly turn to European partners that can. That framing reflects a broader European shift, in which national industrial champions are still protected but no longer treated as untouchable when ammunition, air defences and drones are in short supply.

Deterrence logic, arms-control anxiety

Macron's argument rests on a familiar deterrence proposition: if one side can introduce a "game-changing" system without a comparable counterweight, it gains room for coercion and miscalculation increases. The president presented long-range conventional strike as complementary to France's nuclear deterrent, not a substitute for it—an attempt to keep escalation management inside a more controllable traditional band.

Critics, however, see the same logic as the beginning of an arms dynamic that Europe had avoided mainly since the end of the Cold War. Intermediate-range missile classes were once constrained by arms-control frameworks that no longer exist. The result is a strategic grey zone: countries pursue new capabilities while insisting they are defensive and stabilising, even as the overall inventory of high-speed, long-range systems grows.

In practical terms, Europe faces double pressure. First, there is an immediate need to supply Ukraine and replenish national stockpiles. Second is the longer-term requirement to build a deeper industrial base capable of sustained output. Macron's speech was aimed at both audiences: the troops and officers in front of him, and the procurement and industrial systems behind them.

Moscow's intended audience

Russia's use of Oreshnik appears calibrated to reach beyond Ukraine. By firing an intermediate-range system near NATO borders—reportedly with limited explosive effect—Moscow created a high-visibility event with an implied message to European capitals: geography does not protect, and the next rung on the ladder exists.

Macron's response suggests that European leaders increasingly accept that such messaging must be met with more than diplomatic statements. The push for independent European strike capabilities has been gathering momentum since 2022, but Russia's January launch has provided a simple, blunt example around which policy can crystallise.

There is also a rhetorical shift at work. When leaders begin publicly naming specific adversary weapons, the intention is rarely to educate the public. It is to prepare budgets, industries and parliaments for decisions that once lived quietly in classified briefings.

A cold air base, and a warmer message than it looked, Istrés offered the usual theatre of a military address: winter light, floodlit tarmac, aircraft lined up in the background, and ranks of uniformed personnel standing motionless as a suited civilian leader spoke about the hard edges of strategy. The president's sunglasses, initially practical, became a symbol contested by others.

Macron's core point, though, was administrative rather than theatrical. Europe must move faster, build deeper, and treat long-range strike as a capability gap no longer tolerable. Russia has supplied a name—Oreshnik—and a demonstration. Macron is asking Europe to provide an answer.

The question now is whether European programmes can deliver at a pace that matches the urgency leaders describe, or whether the continent will spend the next few years announcing frameworks. At the same time, the strategic weather is worsening.
​