While the panel classes have been absorbed in the implications of Donald Trump’s conviction in New York on 34 counts, the Biden administration has authorized the crossing of a major Russian red line, that of the use of American (and foreign) weapons to hit targets in Russia. The New York Times version of the decision:
The Biden administration’s decision to allow Ukraine to strike in Russia with U.S.-made weapons fulfills a long-held wish of Kiev officials that they said was key to leveling the playing field.
.
The policy shift follows statements from nearly a dozen European governments and Canada that their weapons could be used to fire on Russia.Freed from these constraints, Ukraine can strike Russia with French SCALP missiles and, potentially soon, the same Storm Shadow missiles supplied by Britain. Even though British Foreign Minister David Cameron declared on May 3 that Ukraine should be able to attack Russia with Western weapons, London has not yet given its full permission…
The SCALP and Storm Shadow missiles have a range of about 150 miles and are fired from Ukraine’s aging fleet of Soviet-designed fighter jets.
Several countries – Britain, Germany, Norway and the United States – have equipped Ukraine with ground launchers capable of firing longer-range missiles. These systems are known as HIMARS and MLRS launchers, and they can also fire at the U.S.-made Army Tactical Missile Systems, or ATACMS, which have a range of up to 190 miles.
However, in revealing the new policy, US officials said their policy would not allow the use of ATACMS or long-range missiles capable of striking deep into Russia. Germany has also so far refused to donate its 310-mile-range Taurus missile, partly out of fear it could be fired deep into Russia and escalate the war. That is now even less likely, Rafael Loss, an arms expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said in an interview on Thursday.
Additionally, Britain, Canada and the United States have supplied Ukraine with medium-range missiles or small-diameter ground bombs that can reach Russia at a distance of 50 to 90 miles.
But the new authorizations could have their biggest impact in the war for air superiority — especially if allies allow their donated jets and drones to attack in Russian airspace.The Dutch foreign minister said on Friday that Ukraine could use all 24 F-16 fighter jets that the Netherlands has committed to sending to Russian territory for war missions.
And a Politico exclusive, Biden secretly gave Ukraine permission to strike Russia with US weapons (note that the Times does not credit Politico and Politico oddly has this story well below the fold):
The Biden administration has quietly given Ukraine permission to strike inside Russia — only near the Kharkiv region — using U.S.-supplied weapons, three U.S. officials and two other people close to the matter, a major turnaround that will help Ukraine better defend itself. its second largest city.
If I were cynical, I would see this as an excuse to repeat the same thing elsewhere. Putin said Russia had no immediate plans for Kharkiv. Kharkiv is a large, sprawling city. Taking it would require a lot of resources. Zelensky nevertheless appears to have devoted an excessive share of his dwindling resources to defense, while Russia would be wise to bypass it for now if it wanted to gain a deeper foothold in Ukraine, for example to cut more supply lines . If Russia wanted to increase the intensity of the war and accelerate attrition, the most obvious way would be to lengthen the front even further by moving its forces toward Sumy. Russia may even have planned to do so, but is now holding back from watching how NATO’s latest episode of disruption plays out.
Keep in mind that claiming that these are somehow Ukrainian weapons because they are allocated to Ukraine for use is a canard. Ukraine depends on its Western support to target information. Most experts believe that even the operation is carried out largely, if not entirely, by little green men from the West Collective. These are complex systems and it is implausible that Ukrainian soldiers were sufficiently trained to deploy them independently. Putin addressed the issue in detail in an interview earlier this week, suggesting that NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg must have developed dementia to suggest otherwise. He also warned that the move could fuel “global conflict,” as Russia could respond by hitting U.S. military assets in other theaters.
I don’t know what the US is trying to achieve by playing this game half pregnant. On the one hand, Russia managed to shoot down most of the long-range missiles launched at it. For example, Alexandre Mercouris yesterday cited a new Defense Ministry report that Ukraine fired 8 ATACMS missiles into Crimea and that Russia shot them all down. This does not mean that there was no collateral damage from the fall of the anti-aircraft missile(s). And as Mercouris likes to point out, it’s a game of chance, with some missiles liking to pass through from time to time.
On the one hand, the Times included Dutch F-16s in its weapons list. This should actually reassure the Russians as an empty threat. Scott Ritter said that any pilot who flew them against Russia only has a 20% chance of coming back alive. They would be detected almost immediately after takeoff and targeted aggressively. F-16s also require fugitives from golf greens to take off. Ukraine does not have any up to par and Russia would quickly strike any landing strips that Ukraine manages to bring up to the necessary standards. This then brings us to the next problem, which is that Russia has stated that any country that launches an attack against Russia, and that would include allowing fake Ukrainian F-16s to take off from air bases in Poland or Romania, would this country at war with Russia. and subject him to strikes in return. It does not appear that Romania or Poland have yet decided to go there.
On the other hand, if NATO members, posing as Ukraine, encounter a significant problem in Russia, and the odds are favorable, then what will Russia do? Although some have criticized Russian patience as a sign of weakness, I would venture that Russia, and many of its allies, recognize that the United States is led by reckless incompetents who act as if nuclear war is no big deal . Certainly, Aurélien in his essential NATO’s ghost armies explained at length that NATO is institutionally incapable of mounting any significant operation against Russia, even if it could get out of its own underwear (although Auerlien did not envision a less troublesome “coalition of the willing”) . But the Western powers are still seriously lacking in men and weapons. And the disparate weapon systems of NATO or a subset of NATO create a logistical nightmare.
Thus, conventional military escalation is self-limiting, even if attempted. The risk is nuclear war, says the United States, which is transporting a submarine to Russia’s east coast and thinks it would be a great idea to launch a tactical nuclear weapon in Siberia. This gang is crazy enough to do that.
I don’t think Russia will need to do anything unless one of these newly authorized weapons causes real damage in Russia. The failed attempts work to Russia’s advantage, even if they are distressing. But if the West were to strike a blow, the best course for Russia, despite the satisfaction of responding tit-for-tat and hitting a NATO target, would be to significantly accelerate the destruction of Ukraine’s power system. Russia has probably already developed several variants. Destroying more of the network now would of course make many military operations more difficult and increase the flow of refugees to Europe, which would not particularly make Polish citizens very happy.
Needless to say, at this point all we can do is speculate about a further dangerous escalation which (assuming no nuclear war) will not change the outcome of the war. So keep monitoring what happens.
_______
As for the strikes, frankly, I’m not sure what the NATO Secretary General is talking about. When he was Prime Minister of Norway, we communicated and discussed difficult issues regarding the Barents Sea and other issues, and generally speaking we managed to come to an agreement, and I am sure that He was not suffering from dementia at the time. If he talks about the possibility of attacking Russian territory with long-range precision weapons, he, as the leader of a military-political organization, even if he is a civilian like me, should be aware of the fact that long-range precision weapons cannot be used without space reconnaissance. This is my first point.
My second point is that the final selection of the target and what is called the launch mission can only be carried out by highly qualified specialists who rely on this reconnaissance data, this technical reconnaissance data. For some attack systems, such as Storm Shadow, these launch missions can be launched automatically, without the need for the Ukrainian military. Who did it? Those who manufacture these attack systems and those who would supply them to Ukraine do so. This can and does happen without the participation of the Ukrainian military. The launch of other systems, like ATACMS, for example, also relies on space reconnaissance data, targets are identified and automatically communicated to the affected crews who may not even realize exactly what they are setting up . A crew, perhaps even a Ukrainian crew, then carries out the corresponding launch mission. However, the mission is organized by representatives of NATO countries and not the Ukrainian army.
Therefore, these leaders of NATO countries, particularly those based in Europe, especially in small European countries, should be fully aware of the issues. They need to keep in mind that their countries are small and densely populated, which is a factor to consider before they start considering attacking deep into Russian territory. This is a serious matter and, without a doubt, we are following it very closely.
The focus is on developments on the outskirts of Kharkov. But they are the ones who caused these events. I said clearly publicly, I believe six months ago, that if they continue to target residential neighborhoods, a security zone will have to be created. Not too long ago we started doing what I said at the time…..
Are they looking for global conflict? I think they wanted to agree on strategic weapons, but we don’t really see that they are really keen to do that. They talk about it but don’t do much to make it happen. We’ll wait and see what happens next.
