How long-range missiles striking Russia could affect Ukraine war 8 hours ago Ido Vock BBC News US officials say President Biden has given the green light for Ukraine to use long range missiles supplied by Washington to strike deep inside Russia.
Washington had previously refused to allow such strikes with US-made ATACMS missiles because it feared they would escalate the war.
Why has the US allowed Ukraine use long-range missiles inside Russia?
But the US has never allowed Kyiv to use the missiles inside Russia – until now.
“This will mean that Nato countries, the USA and European states, are fighting with Russia.” Russia has set out “red lines” before.
The potential impact of long-range missiles on Russia on the conflict in Ukraine.
Eight hours ago. .
Vock, Ido.
The BBC News.
According to US officials, President Biden has approved Ukraine’s use of Washington-provided long-range missiles to launch an attack deep inside Russia.
For fear of escalating the conflict, Washington had previously prohibited such strikes using US-made ATACMS missiles.
Two months before President Joe Biden cedes power to Donald Trump, whose election has sparked concerns about the future of US support for Kyiv, the significant policy reversal takes place.
Why has Ukraine been permitted to use long-range missiles inside Russia by the United States?
Over a year has passed since Ukraine began firing the Army Tactical Missile System, or ATACMS, at Russian targets inside occupied Ukrainian territory.
Up until now, however, the US has never permitted Kyiv to use the missiles inside Russia.
Some of the most potent ballistic missiles Ukraine has yet received are those made by Lockheed Martin, which can travel up to 300 kilometers (186 miles).
Ukraine had maintained that it would be like asking a hand tied behind its back to fight if it were prohibited from using such weapons inside Russia.
The recent stationing of North Korean troops to back Russia in the Kursk border region—which Ukraine has controlled since August—is said to be the reason for the policy shift.
Additionally, concerns about the future of US assistance for Ukraine are being raised by Donald Trump’s impending return to the White House, and President Biden seems eager to do everything in his power to support Ukraine during his brief tenure.
According to the theory, Ukraine could gain leverage in any future peace negotiations if its military might is strengthened.
President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine has not yet affirmed the action. However, he stated on Sunday that “words do not make strikes.”. The missiles themselves will do the talking. “..”.
What impact will the missiles have on combat?
Ukrainian forces now possess more than 1,000 square kilometers of territory in the Kursk region, which is likely to be the first area inside Russia that Ukraine can target.
US and Ukrainian officials anticipate a counteroffensive by North Korean and Russian forces to retake Kursk.
Ukraine may defend against the attack by using ATACMS, which would target Russian targets such as infrastructure, military installations, and ammunition depots.
It is unlikely that the missile supply will be sufficient to change the course of the conflict. Jets and other Russian military hardware have already been relocated to airfields located farther inside Russia pending such a decision.
However, the weapons might give Ukraine a slight edge at a time when morale is low and Russian forces have been advancing in the east of the country.
A Western diplomat in Kyiv told the BBC, requesting anonymity because of the delicate nature of the situation, “I don’t think it will be decisive.”.
But it’s a long overdue symbolic move to show Ukraine military support and up the ante.
“It could increase Russia’s war costs. “.”.
Evelyn Farkas, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense in the Obama administration, stated that there are also concerns regarding the amount of ammunition that will be supplied.
“The Pentagon has reportedly warned that they can’t provide Ukraine with a large number of these missiles, so the question is, of course, how many do they have? “.”.
Farkas went on to say that if the ATACMS are used to attack targets like the Kerch Bridge, which connects Crimea to mainland Russia, they could have a “positive psychological impact” in Ukraine.
An additional consequence of the US authorization is that it may allow the UK and France to authorize Ukraine to use Storm Shadow missiles inside Russia. The American ATACMS and the French-British Storm Shadow are both long-range cruise missiles with comparable capabilities.
Would it cause the war to escalate?
Fearing that the war would worsen, the Biden administration had for months denied Ukraine permission to strike Russia with long-range missiles.
Vladimir Putin has cautioned that allowing Western weapons to be used against Russia would be interpreted by Moscow as the “direct participation” of NATO nations in the conflict in Ukraine.
Putin stated in September that it would “significantly alter the very essence, the nature of the conflict.”. This will indicate that the United States, European nations, and NATO members are engaged in combat with Russia. “.”.
In the past, Russia has drawn “red lines.”. Several have since been crossed without starting a direct conflict between Russia and NATO, such as giving Ukraine modern battle tanks and fighter jets.
“The United States was unjustifiably imposing unilateral restrictions on Ukraine’s self-defense by limiting the range of Ukraine’s use of American weapons,” stated former US ambassador to NATO Kurt Volker. “.”.
“The decision to restrict the use of ATACMS was entirely arbitrary and done out of fear of ‘provoking’ Russia,” he continued. “.
Making such a change public is a mistake, though, as it gives Russia advance notice of possible Ukrainian strikes. “.”.
How is Donald Trump going to respond?
The action is taken just two months before Donald Trump takes office again.
He may stop using the missiles after he assumes office, as he has already stated that he wants to end the conflict in Ukraine quickly, though he has not disclosed how he intends to do so.
Although some of his closest allies have already criticized the policy, President-elect Trump has not yet stated whether he would continue it.
On social media, Trump Jr. wrote: “It appears that the military-industrial complex wants to start World War Three before my father has an opportunity to bring about peace and save lives. “.
JD Vance, the vice president-elect, is among the many Trump administration officials who believe that the United States should stop giving Ukraine military assistance.
However, some members of the incoming Trump administration disagree. Michael Waltz, the national security adviser, has suggested that the United States could force Russia to engage in negotiations by speeding up the delivery of weapons to Ukraine.
It’s unclear which way the president-elect will go. However, many in Ukraine, including ATACMS, are afraid he will stop delivering weapons.
“We fear. We hope [Trump] won’t overturn [the ruling],” Ukrainian MP Oleksiy Goncharenko told the BBC.
