US greenlights long-range strikes: Ukraine's new war front
- These will be painful attacks, more significant than the Battle of Kursk. Ukraine is now able to regularly target the logistics of the Russian army, disrupting its rear, which will limit Russian operations on the front, says WP military analyst Lt. Col. (Res.) Maciej Korowaj. He refers to the decision by the US allowing Ukraine to use long-range weapons.
- Using long-range systems will not change the course of the war, in the sense that any occupied territories will be liberated. The Ukrainian army lacks the strength for that. It is unlikely that they will regain territory by the end of the year, assesses Lt. Col. (Res.) Maciej Korowaj.
On Sunday, American media reported on the decision by Joe Biden's administration permitting Ukraine to execute strikes aimed at Russian territory using long-range weapons. In the ATACMS system, missiles have a range of up to 186 miles, and Storm Shadow missiles can reach up to 311 miles.
Military experts have long criticized the existing restrictions on the use of Western military systems. Ukraine could not effectively respond to preparations for an offensive, such as troop concentrations or stockpiling, occurring within Russia. Ukraine attacked targets in Russia, including refineries, only using long-range drones.
"Critical decision". How will Russia respond to NATO?
- This should be recognized as a critical decision. However, I draw attention to the statement about selective targeting that appeared in American media. This may mean that it will be US officials who approve whether a target can be struck, most likely in a specific region, such as Kursk. It will also involve American approval concerning the quantity of resources used and their duration. In this case, it is a very limited area in terms of operational scope, not strategic, which will not fundamentally affect the course of the war, indicates Lt. Col. Korowaj.
The WP interviewee refers to the reaction of Russian politicians. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov commented on the permission for Ukraine, describing it as a "new stage of tension" in the conflict. Russian media recall Putin's comments from September that allowing long-range missile strikes on Russian territory would mean "direct involvement" of NATO in the war. "This would significantly change the essence, the nature of the conflict. It would mean that NATO countries, the United States, and European countries are fighting against Russia," Putin said in September.
- Russia, of course, responds with threats, suggestions of nuclear conflict. It will continue using a rhetoric of fear towards the West. I believe that Russia currently does not have sufficient forces to do anything militarily. However, I fear that all kinds of sabotage will intensify, with effects below the threshold of regular, open warfare - summarizes Lt. Col. Maciej Korowaj.
The world awaits Ukraine's strikes
Reuters reported on Sunday evening that Ukraine plans to conduct its first long-range attacks using ATACMS missiles in the coming days. However, even commentators within Ukraine doubt that the use of these weapons will automatically lead to Russia's defeat.
"It is probable, however, that the number of missiles will not be sufficient to turn the tide of the war. In response, Russian forces have already relocated fighters to airports deep within Russia. Nevertheless, the new weapon may provide Ukraine with an advantage, especially given the low morale of Russian troops and their increasing presence in eastern Ukraine," reads a commentary by the Ukrainian agency Unian.
Unian cites a comment from an anonymous Western diplomat residing in Kyiv: - I don't think this will be decisive. However, it is a delayed, symbolic decision aimed at raising the stakes and demonstrating military support for Ukraine. It may increase the costs of the war for Russia, the diplomat commented.
"I don't think anyone will want to launch any Western missiles at our land after this. America, which imposes escalation, must understand: (...) we are capable of causing them irreversible damage," wrote Andrey Gurulev, a Russian deputy and retired general, on Telegram.
"To start, I would move 1-2 divisions of Iskander in the nuclear version to Anadyr (a city in the far east of Russia - ed. note) to directly threaten Alaska; it is possible. There are other options, but in one way or another, we must show determination," added the Russian politician.
