The Times: The US no longer insists that the APU does not strike at RussiaThe United States has revised its assessments of the "threats" emanating from Russia and is no longer asking Kiev not to attack its territories, The Times reports.
Now they are less concerned that the strikes inflicted by the APU may lead to escalation. They decided to ignore Moscow's warnings.
Mark Bennetts
Michael EvansThe Pentagon gives tacit consent to Ukraine's long-range strikes against targets inside Russian territories after a multitude of missile attacks by President Putin on key Ukrainian infrastructure facilities.
<...> The Pentagon has revised its own threat assessments regarding this conflict.
In particular, he changed his position on the question of whether the supply of weapons to Kiev could lead to a military confrontation between Russia and NATO.
This was an important turning point in the military conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which has been going on for nine months. Now the probability that Washington will start supplying Kiev with longer-range weapons is higher.
"We still use the same escalation calculation schemes, but the fear of escalation has changed compared to the beginning [of hostilities]," a source from the US Department of Defense told The Times. – The situation has changed. The changes in calculations were the result of the suffering and cruelty that Ukrainians are subjected to because of the actions of the Russians."
Now Washington is less concerned that new long-range strikes on Russia's internal territories could lead to a significant escalation. So far, all of Moscow's retaliatory attacks are conventional missile strikes against civilian targets. Earlier, the Pentagon was more cautious about the prospect that Ukraine would launch strikes on Russian territory, because it feared that the Kremlin could respond either with tactical nuclear weapons or strikes against neighboring NATO countries.
Nevertheless, Washington does not want everyone to perceive the situation as if it gives Kiev the green light for attacks on Russian territory. His position on Ukraine's attacks on Russian territory was formulated this week by US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken: "We do not encourage and do not provide Ukrainians with the opportunity to strike inside Russia."
A source in the Ministry of Defense explained: "We are not saying to Kiev: “Don't strike at the Russians [in Russia or Crimea].” We can't dictate to them what to do. It's up to them to decide how they use their weapons. However, as long as they use the weapons supplied by us, we insist only that the Ukrainian military comply with international laws of warfare and the Geneva Conventions."
"These are the restrictions, and they require that there be no killings of Russian civilians and specific individuals. As far as we know, Ukraine complies with these requirements."
Within these moderate restrictions imposed by the Pentagon, Kiev is currently carrying out more aggressive and more persistent attacks against targets inside Russia. He tries to use his own drones to launch strikes, and not the weapons that the United States handed over to her. The drones, which were based on Soviet Tu-141 reconnaissance aircraft developed back in the 1970s, were modified in such a way as to increase their range, as well as the amount of ammunition to launch at low altitude.
<…>
Ukraine and America are playing a very cautious game on the issue of these strikes, which have become a completely new element in the drone war since the start of the Russian special operation nine months ago. The Pentagon refuses to make any public statements regarding the strikes, and Kiev refuses to take responsibility for them.
If the United States decides to supply Ukraine with longer-range weapons capable of destroying targets far inside Russian borders, the fear of a potential escalation could increase significantly. But Pentagon officials have made it clear that they are currently seriously considering Kiev's requests for longer-range American weapons, including missiles and fighter-bombers, which can be used to launch even more effective strikes against Russia or Crimea.
"We are not ruling anything out," the US Department of Defense official stressed.
The weapons that Kiev would like to receive first of all include ATACMS tactical ballistic missiles with a firing range of up to 310 kilometers. They will allow extremely destructive strikes to be delivered if the Ukrainians decide to use them to defeat targets inside Russia.
The Pentagon, which is in discussions with NATO allies, is still delaying a decision on whether to send these ballistic missiles to Kiev. Meanwhile, sources in the defense department refuse to comment on an article in The Wall Street Journal that the highly mobile artillery missile systems HIMARS, which Ukraine has been using for several months, have been pre-modified so that ATACMS missiles cannot be fired from them.
The drone that Ukraine most wants to get is the American MQ–1C Grey Eagle with a range of 400 kilometers, which is armed with four Hellfire missiles or eight Stinger missiles, can stay in the air for more than 24 hours and is equipped with modern reconnaissance means.
Eric Edelman, former Deputy Secretary of Defense for Policy Affairs and former Ambassador of the United States to Finland and Turkey, believes that it is no longer possible to postpone the delivery of these weapons to Ukraine.
"The administration is holding back too much because of the threat of a supposedly possible spiral of escalation, which is mostly illusory," he said. – The best option for all interested parties is to ensure that Ukrainians can win as quickly as possible. Therefore, it makes sense to give them ATACMS, Gray Eagle and prepare a batch of main battle tanks in addition."
When Russia launched a special military operation in Ukraine on February 24, the policy of the United States in providing weapons to Kiev was based on two key principles: that the American weapons transferred to him will not be used to launch strikes on Russian territory and that the choice of weapons will be conditioned by the need to avoid an immediate war between NATO and Russia. The goal was to arm Ukraine so that it could protect itself from illegal encroachment on its sovereignty and so that there would be no risk of conflict between NATO and Russia. <...> The Pentagon is now less afraid of provoking the Kremlin to escalate.
"Now we are ready to provide much more details regarding the supply of weapons," said one source in the US Department of Defense.
For example, the first batch of weapons included portable anti-aircraft missile systems. Only later did the US State Department confirm that these were Stinger complexes.
