Ukraine’s requests for HIMARS mobile artillery systems, Abrams tanks and F16 jets have followed a similar pattern of refusal and procrastination. In the end, all these requests were granted, when it seemed too late.
Now, Western analysts and strategists are wondering whether it is too late for ATACMS, the military’s US-made tactical missile systems, to make any difference if they hit targets inside Russia.
The answer seems complex and may explain some of the reluctance of the Washington administration to grant the Ukrainians permission to use this type of weaponry.
The reasons for American reluctance
First, there is a limited stock of ATACMS that could enter the Ukrainian military. Therefore, even if Kiev is able to strike deeper inside Russia, the “detente” given to Ukraine by the Americans will not bring about a radical change on the battlefield.
Analysts have already listed the enormous volume of Russian targets within range of these missiles.
The Institute for the Study of War – the prestigious US research and analysis group on modern armed conflict – listed hundreds of targets, even after the Biden administration announced that Moscow had evacuated attack aircraft from Russian airfields within ATACMS range, inside Russia.
In other words, most likely, Ukraine will not get enough ATACMS to be able to change the course of the war.
Read on Antena3.ro
One gram of this rare substance costs more than 62,000,000,000,000 dollars. It is man-made and has amazing properties
Second, Ukraine has been able to penetrate deeper into Russian territory using domestically produced drones, which, moreover, are much cheaper. The United States agreed to help finance the development of these devices, which appear to have caused damage to Moscow’s airports as well as Russia’s energy infrastructure.
Third, the permission to use American precision missiles to strike deeper inside Russia is, as it sounds, extremely provocative.
Even though Russia now appears quite weakened militarily and is unlikely to enter into an all-out conflict with NATO or the US, the Kremlin will at some point try to restore its deterrence capability.
Moscow’s secret services have already been accused of sabotaging European civilian targets, including in recent Western intelligence reports that the Russians placed explosive packages on courier planes in Europe.
From this perspective, the Biden administration was justified in weighing the practical utility of longer-range strikes against the potential for civilian collateral damage caused in NATO member states should Russia feel compelled to retaliate against “green wave” given to Kiev by the Americans.
In this context, it was not as simple or obvious a decision as some of Kiev’s supporters made it out to be.
The White House raises the stakes. Trump and the difficult legacy
At first glance, the permission given to Kiev can be interpreted as an attempt to strengthen Ukraine’s position, before a possible major change in American policy.
At the same time, however, the White House seems to be pursuing an even higher stake. The Biden administration wants to emphasize that its decision on ATACMS was decisively influenced by the deployment of North Korean troops in Russia’s Kursk region, and therefore represents the US response to an escalation initiated by Moscow.
The ATACMS missiles supplied by the US should first be used in the Kursk area, on the border with Russia, where Kim Jong-un’s soldiers have been deployed in support of Russian military units, the publication “The New York Times” also claims ”, which quotes, under the cover of anonymity, American officials.
Analysts across the Ocean have noted in unison that sending North Korean troops to the front line is expanding the conflict in Ukraine and turning it into a much more global confrontation for America, in which US adversaries in the Indo-Pacific region are now playing a direct role .
In Biden’s eyes, this is an escalation in response to another escalation, and the fact that he’s delayed so long because of the huge implications of this endorsement only adds to the power of the decision he just made.
From this perspective, President-elect Donald Trump, who thinks he can talk peace, will inherit a war in which the stakes have just gotten significantly higher.
A fearsome weapon
ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile System) missiles are considered short-range ballistic missiles. They can hit targets at a distance of about 300 kilometers and carry about 225 kilograms of explosive charge, as specified by their manufacturer, Lockheed Martin.
The missiles can be launched by the HIMARS mobile artillery systems, which are already in the equipment of the Ukrainian forces. Ukraine has so far used ATACMS missiles against the Russians, but they had a limited range of about 160 kilometers and cluster munitions.
Also, the new version, with an almost doubled range, was first used by the Ukrainian army in April 2024. At that time, the use of this type of missile was limited to Ukrainian territory. In fact, only the targets in Crimea, annexed by Russia in February 2014, and in other occupied territories were targeted by Ukrainian forces.
Designed in the 1990s and first used in Iraq in 1991, ATACMS missiles have ceased mass production, causing concern among Americans who fear they could run out of stocks if they were sent in numbers too large to a third country.
According to a recent estimate by the specialist website “Defense Express”, Washington has 2,500 ATACMS missiles, of which 1,500 have a range of 300 kilometers.
Kremlin thunder and lightning
The permission received by Kiev from President Biden for the use of American missiles on Russian territory “pours gas on the fire” in the conflict in Ukraine, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said yesterday.
“It is obvious that the administration at the end of its term in Washington intends to take steps to continue pouring gas on the fire and to provoke a further escalation of tensions,” said Peskov.
If this decision is officially confirmed by Washington, the authorization will lead to “a fundamentally new situation in terms of US involvement in this conflict!”, Peskov warned.
In September, President Vladimir Putin declared that a possible “green wave” from the West in this regard “would be nothing more than a direct involvement of NATO countries in the war in Ukraine.”
According to Peskov, who quotes Putin, the strikes on Russian territory would not be “carried out by Ukraine, but by the countries that authorize them.”
“The coordinates of the targets are not provided by the Ukrainian military, but by specialists of these Western countries. This radically changes the nature of their involvement!” Peskov said.
The EU has yet to open the champagne
Instead, the High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, expressed yesterday his hope that the member states of the European Union will agree to allow Ukraine to use their weapons to strike Russian territory.
“I say again that Ukraine should be able to use the weapons that we have provided, not only to stop the arrows, but to be able to hit the archer,” Borrell said before a meeting of foreign ministers. from the EU, held in Brussels.
“I continue to believe that this is the right thing to do. I’m sure we’ll talk again. I hope that the member states will agree on this subject”, added the head of European diplomacy.
For her part, the head of German diplomacy declared that the US made an important decision regarding military support for Kiev, specifying that it is not a change in the West’s strategy.
“The decision of the American side, and I would like to emphasize that it is not a question of a reconsideration, but of an intensification of what has been delivered by other partners, is so important at this moment,” Annalena Baerbock pointed out, before the meeting of the Council for Foreign Affairs from Brussels.
His Lithuanian counterpart, Gabrielius Landsbergis, drew attention to the fact that the number of missiles that Ukraine has and could use to strike inside Russia is unknown.
“I’m not opening the champagne yet because we don’t know the real number of missiles that Ukraine has. Therefore, the question is whether the Ukrainians receive enough missiles that could make a difference on the front,” said Landsbergis.
The use of French missiles – an option
Meanwhile, the French Foreign Minister, Jean-Noel Barrot, reaffirmed, yesterday, that the use of French missiles by Ukrainian forces on Russian territory remains “an option”.
“You heard President Macron in Meseberg, Germany, on May 25, where we openly said that this is an option we are considering, if strikes on targets from where the Russians attack Ukrainian territory will have to be authorized” , said Barrot, in English, upon his arrival in Brussels for the meeting of Foreign Ministers.
“Therefore, nothing new under the sun,” added the head of diplomacy in Paris.
France has supplied Ukraine with medium-range “Scalp” surface-to-air missiles, but has always refused to specify how many were delivered and whether they were used by Ukrainian forces.
Asked in Brussels last month about possible “Scalp” missile strikes on Russian territory, French Defense Minister Sebastien Lecornu refused to comment.
Italy says NO
Instead, the head of Italian diplomacy, Antonio Tajani, reaffirmed yesterday, also in Brussels, Italy’s position on the weapons supplied to Ukraine, which, according to Rome, “can only be used inside Ukrainian territory”.
“Our position on the use of weapons by Ukraine has not changed, they can only be used inside the Ukrainian territory”, declared the head of diplomacy in Rome, during a meeting of the foreign ministers of the EU countries.
Tajani also declared “in favor of a peace conference, in the presence of the Russians, the Chinese, the Indians and the Brazilians.”
“I would like Beijing to be able to play a positive role in making Moscow understand that this senseless war must stop,” Tajani added. “Certainly, the presence of North Korean soldiers is not a good signal,” he added.
››› See the photo gallery ‹‹‹
Source: jurnalul.ro
