In wartime, defense industries face sustained pressure that can, if left unchecked, lead to their eventual collapse. As this article highlights, body armor innovations that come about in times of peace seldom prove perfectly effective in times of war. On the contrary: war demands innovation and industry restructuring, on a grand scale.
On October 3rd, the Moscow Arbitration Court ruled that Russian textile factory Peredovaya Tekstilishchitsa failed to deliver 400,000 linear metres of specialized fabric to defense contractor Teknikom. Attributed to a shortage of Aramid fibers, the issue resulted in a fine of $3,600 for Peredovaya Tekstilishchitsa, and a huge halt in body armor production nationally.
Industry Pressures in Times of War
The dispute highlights the dangers of manufacturer overeliance. Peredovaya Tekstilishchitsa claims the Ruslan Aramid fiber requested by Teknikom is only available from supplier Kamenskvolokno. Their capacity is limited and, thus, the disruption was observed. Had Russia diversified its industry more, such consequences would not be seen.
Kamenskvolokno remains Russia’s sole large-scale producer of aramid fibers, with an annual production capacity of roughly 350 tons. In comparison, European and Asian producers such as DuPont (Kevlar) and Teijin (Twaron) collectively produce thousands of tons annually. The massive gap underscores the scale of Russia’s industrial stall.
An interesting legal precedent has also been set. Since 2022, companies in Russia have been prohibited from refusing contracts linked to supplies for armed forces. This court case exemplifies how the Russian government has weaponized its legal system to force the hand of local manufacturers.
Analysts note that this is part of a broader pattern of “mobilized industry,” where civilian enterprises are increasingly coerced into military production under wartime decrees. Russian defense firms that fail to deliver are now subject not only to fines but also to criminal investigations for “sabotage.” Such policies may keep short-term production running but risk long-term collapse due to burnout, inefficiency, and a lack of raw materials.
Sanctions and the Aramid Bottleneck
The shortage of aramid fibers is not a new phenomenon. A 2014 research paper, “Russian Aramid Fibres: Past – Present – Future,” found that domestic aramid development had long lagged behind Western standards, relying heavily on outdated Soviet-era production lines. Even with the introduction of newer terpolyaramides like AuTx™, made by Kamenskvolokno, Russia has struggled to measure up to standards established in the West.
Originally, AuTx™ was meant to serve as a domestic counterpart for Western Aramids like Kevlar and Twaron. However, the program’s expansion has been limited. Sanctions have presented a significant challenge, limiting the import of chemical precursors from the EU required for manufacturing.
Above all, this should be a good sign for EU Member States engaging in heavy sanctions. Russia is now entirely dependent on local suppliers or supportive states willing to lend a hand. Sanctions are, in the body armor context, an incredibly effective tool in halting defensive development. This occurrence has the potential to greatly destabilize Russian military power, at least temporarily. With crackdowns on Chinese tech goods entering through the Kazakh border intensifying, there is the potential for a strategic advantage for Ukraine.
Implications for Ukraine and Beyond
While Ukraine has identified its manufacturing weaknesses and rushed to counter them, Russia lags behind. Military forces continue to deploy models like the “Ratnik” and “Zabralo” vests, which rely heavily on scarce aramid-based components. This continued reliance on armor that is demonstrably difficult for domestic producers to put out can worsen Russia’s current position.
In all, these developments showcase that Russia’s aramid shortage is more than a temporary supply problem: it points towards key vulnerabilities of the body armor industry. For global players, the Russian case study should serve as an example of the dangers of overreliance on single producers and the importance of diversification of national production.
For Ukraine and its allies, this situation provides a strategic window. Delayed protection for Russian soldiers can translate to a clear advantage for Ukraine, beyond existing military development. Perhaps, EU states should prioritize sanctions, such as these, which destabilize national suppliers with reduced civilian carryover effects. These developments should be noted by policymakers, to help Ukraine maintain its strong position.
