Ukraine is building a sea-facing layer of air defense along its southern coast, Kyrylo Liukov, head of the unmanned technologies department at the Serhii Prytula Foundation, wrote in a column for RBC-Ukraine. Winged interceptors now reach the Russian spy drones that guide strikes in the south.

Russia's nightly drone strikes on Ukrainian cities have turned air defense into a race to close every corridor Russia can fly through, over land first and now over the open sea. Kyiv does it with cheap interceptors rather than costly missiles, and keeps having to chase Russian workarounds. The sea was the stretch air defense could not reach, and it is where Russia keeps the spotters that make its Shahed swarms steerable.

Land and sea are two different fights

Defending the sky over land and over open water are two different problems, Liukov wrote. Multirotor copters are fast and simple to launch near the coast, but past roughly 25 km offshore, a multirotor is almost useless. Russia builds its mission routes so that drones cross dozens of kilometers over sea before they turn toward Ukrainian targets. Fixed-wing drones close the gap. Built like gliders, they loiter for over an hour and hold a link at 40 km and beyond, helped by an open radio horizon that land's terrain and buildings deny them.

Recon drones are the priority target for a reason. Beyond spotting and confirming hits, they work as relays in a MESH network for a group of strike drones. In that setup, Russian crews can steer Shaheds by hand right up to the moment of impact, Liukov wrote.

Southern units recently set three distance records with foundation-supplied interceptors. The 18th aviation commandant's office of Air Command South downed a Russian Orlan-30 reconnaissance drone 110 km out. It used a Wovkulaka Spitfire interceptor, the longest kill on record for that system.

The 12th Separate Special Purpose Center set the other two, flying a system from the miltech company TechnoTaras: an Orlan downed at 86 km, and a 145 km hunt measured from the takeoff point that held a stable digital link the whole way, Liukov wrote. That leaves Russia's drones exposed much farther from shore than its planners assume, he added—and if such results become routine, Russia has to pull its transit routes farther out still.

The Maiachnia beacon line

A less obvious problem was navigation, not shooting. A drone flying without GPS steers by landmarks, and over open sea, there are none. Late last year, the foundation, the 12th Separate Special Purpose Center, and TechnoTaras launched a project called Maiachnia. It strings radio beacons on the Skyline system along the coast from Ochakiv to Izmail. The beacons work on their own and keep backup power, tied to a central network that operators can adjust remotely. An operator can then track the drone even under GPS jamming, bad weather, or a temporary loss of link, and bring it home. More than five southern units now fly the foundation's winged drones.

The real stakes sit offshore—the southern ports and the Black Sea grain corridor that Russian drones threaten and that land-based copters can barely reach. Keeping Russian drones farther offshore would buy room there. But Russia is scaling up a faster, jet-powered Shahed, and the interceptor answer to it is early—so the offshore edge just won will have to be defended again.

The Wikimedia Foundation waited until the days following its largest worldwide conference to issue a statement saying it would not voluntarily recognize a union of its workers.

Last week, Wiki Workers United, which is organized through the Communication Workers Union and represents U.S. workers at the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation, requested voluntary recognition of their union. Wiki Workers United said that it had secured a “supermajority of union-eligible workers who have signed union authorization cards.” A group of more than 1,100 Wikipedia editors have also signed a letter of support for the union.

On Monday, just days after the massive Wikimania Conference concluded in Paris, the Wikimedia Foundation announced it would not voluntarily recognize the union and said the union would have to conduct a vote as overseen by the National Labor Relations Board.

“The Foundation’s responsibility is to ensure that they can make their own choice freely,” the foundation wrote in the statement. “So that every eligible employee has an equal voice, we believe a secret-ballot election conducted by the National Labor Relations Board is the appropriate path forward.”

“We have heard a range of views from staff, including concerns from those who have felt pressured to support union efforts and those who are confused by the unionization process,” the foundation added in a frequently asked questions section. “We have also seen a misunderstanding around what the union can do for global staff and Wikimedia movement communities.”

The Wikimedia Foundation’s statement and its frequently asked questions section is full of very carefully-worded language that is common among companies and organizations that have fought against unionization. For example, the FAQ includes a long section about the benefits that Wikimedia Foundation already offers its staff, and the statement suggests that there is a “wide range of views on unionization” among employees. 

Wikipedians immediately took issue with the timing of the statement and the language of it. On a talk page discussing the statement, the Wikimedia Foundation is getting hammered for the timing of the statement and the statement itself.

“What a shameful decision to tie the process to the willingness of Trump-controlled NLRB. Everyone involved in denying the voluntary recognition should resign in disgrace or be driven out,” one editor wrote. 

“The fact that this response came exactly 1 day after Wikimania shows that you are afraid of being confronted,” another wrote. 

“This is an extremely disappointing statement. It says that ‘Foundation leadership respects the right of staff to unionize, if they choose to do so. That decision rests with them.’ But that decision has been made - by a supermajority of US-based staff. The only thing standing between the US WWU and recognition is WMF executive leadership, who could recognize the union today if they cared to,” a third wrote. 

“As a U.S. trained labor lawyer and past organizer with WWU, this statement, alongside the WMF’s public facing community post reek of union-busting disinformation. What’s critical for the community to know is that a supermajority of the workers already did vote by signing a card. This ‘extra step’ is just a delay tactic that employers are advised to do when they don’t want a union,” a fourth wrote. “These WMF workers have already been extremely brave by expressly affirming their commitment to a union. Years of efforts to get this accomplished. This is not some rash decision by them. Moreover, the community supports their union too! It literally makes no sense as to why WMF thought this was the right decision here in this critical moment.”

At Wikimania in Paris, the Wikimedia Foundation’s Chief Executive Officer Bernadette Meehan was asked about voluntarily recognizing the union. Meehan said “our focus is on executing and helping the core organizing team execute a great event. We will respond to that particular request when we have a chance to review it.”

“We are supportive and we support employees’ right to unionize. The context is complicated because we operate in multiple different places,” she added. “We respect the right if it is the majority will of eligible staffers to unionize.” 

 The Wikimedia Foundation did not immediately respond to a request for comment.