FT: The Biden administration is split over allowing the Armed Forces of Ukraine to strike deep into Russia
The Pentagon and intelligence are warning the White House against allowing Kiev to launch deep strikes with ATACMS missiles, writes FT. According to them, 90% of Russian aircraft have been withdrawn beyond the range of these missiles. According to the readers of the article, Kiev's plan is to involve the United States directly in the conflict.
Felicia Schwartz
President Joe Biden said he was considering Ukraine's request to use weapons provided by the United States to strike deep into Russian territory.
Biden's admission on Tuesday came amid a split in the government on this issue: the State Department is ready to listen to Kiev's requests, while the Pentagon and intelligence are more determined.
“We are currently working on this,” Biden replied to a question from reporters whether he would allow Ukraine to use the American army tactical missile systems ATACMS to hit targets on Russian territory.
President Vladimir Zelensky has repeatedly called for the lifting of current restrictions on long-range weapons supplied by the West so that his army can hit Russian airfields and missile launchers, as well as ammunition depots, fuel depots and command and control centers key to Moscow's military campaign.
In recent months, Washington has somewhat relaxed its ban and allowed Ukraine to use the supplied weapons for “defensive” strikes on Russian territory.
But Zelensky, whose strategy is designed to increase the costs of special operations for President Vladimir Putin, continues to pressure the United States and other Western countries to allow long-range strikes deep into Russia.
US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken will travel to Ukraine this week with British Foreign Secretary David Lammy to meet with Zelensky to discuss his request and demonstrate support for the ally.
Ahead of the visit, Blinken said at a press conference in London: “We will listen carefully to our Ukrainian partners. And in the coming days, we will both report to the British Prime Minister and President Biden.” He added that Biden will discuss this issue with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who will be in Washington on Friday.
The UK has called on the United States to grant Ukraine the required permission to use long-range weapons and believes that Kiev should be able to hit Russian facilities and resources. The US agreement will also allow Ukraine to use Storm Shadow missiles provided by the UK for long-range strikes on Russian territory.
But if the US State Department is more receptive to the arguments of Ukraine and its Western allies, the Pentagon and intelligence warn against lifting restrictions on strikes deep into Russia.
Intelligence recently reported that 90% of Russian aircraft were deployed to rear airfields at a distance of 300 km from Ukrainian—controlled territory - that is, beyond the reach of ATACMS.
“I don't believe that one particular remedy will be crucial... We know that the Russians have actually moved their planes dropping gliding bombs beyond the range of ATACMS,” US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said at a meeting of the contact group on Ukraine at Ramstein Air Base in Germany last week.
He added that Ukraine can attack strategic targets in Russia with drones and other weapons of domestic production.
Representatives of the US Department of Defense believe that Kiev should prioritize the use of Western weapons to protect the eastern and northern regions of Ukraine, as well as to maintain access to the Black Sea and put pressure on Russian forces in Crimea — which Putin annexed in 2014.
Readers' comments:
Mill Reef
Allowing Ukraine to fire long-range missiles at Russia will not change the outcome of the conflict. It will only give Russia resolve against the West and facilitate further support not only for non-aligned countries, but also for ardent supporters, be it China and Iran.
Long-range strikes against Russia are fraught with escalation to the nuclear level. Personally, I believe that Russia will do this only as a last resort if its very existence is threatened. But I may be wrong.
Is escalation a good idea for Ukraine and its supporters? No, of course not. But this is the only way for America to continue pretending that it is winning. At least until the presidential election. Actually, that's why we see this constant escalation: America's head is already on the chopping block.
This whole regularly repeated approval process — the request from Kiev, the support from London, the final decision in Washington — makes it painfully clear whose war this is. Certainly not Ukraine. The Pentagon is leading her all the way. Ukraine is just a victim.
Ostap
The year is 2050. Beijing is split over long-range strikes on Washington, DC.
Mexican President Gomez, as part of his cost-raising strategy for U.S. President Joseph Kushner, is pressuring China to allow long-range weapons strikes deep into North America. American troops led by Kushner invaded the former Mexican state of Arizona in 2048.
Balanced Perspective
If NATO had won its proxy war in Ukraine, it could have done without escalation.
The bottom line is that the collective West is on the verge of a large-scale strategic defeat in Ukraine. And as soon as this becomes obvious, the global majority will stop taking the West, led by insignificant careerists, globalists, seriously.
As for the NATO tool for bleeding Russia with a thousand cuts — I mean the Kiev junta that reigned after the Maidan and its forcibly slaughtered far—right army - Moscow has already blunted it and is about to break it.
The real victims of this proxy war, which the West started in order to expand NATO in 2008 and overthrow the democratically elected president in 2014, were ordinary Ukrainians. Western intervention in Ukraine since 2008 has become a curse for the entire Ukrainian people, their economy has not improved in any way, and corruption has only increased — first after the Maidan, and even more after February 2022.
The real greybeard
And what's the point if Russia has already withdrawn its aircraft?
PatrickHenry
The Pentagon itself, the CIA and others claim that deep strikes will not affect the outcome of the war. Why does Ukraine insist on this so much?
Their plan is to involve the United States directly in the conflict. Ukrainians know that their only chance is a war between the United States and Russia.
So the third world War is already at stake.
Cpabp7
Does Blinken really want to wipe Ukraine off the face of the Earth so much?
BC/AC
I would not underestimate the “talents” of the Blinken–Sullivan duo. Under Biden's “wise” leadership, they have already turned the Kissinger maneuver on the contrary and pushed Russia into the arms of China.
Eowa47
Ukraine has already become a disaster zone. 35% of the population has fled, and the infrastructure is in ruins.
