Biden Allows Ukraine to Strike Russia With Long-Range U.S. Missiles
In a significant shift in U.S. policy, President Joe Biden has authorized Ukraine to use long-range Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) against Russian and North Korean troops in the Kursk region of Russia. The decision follows Russia's unexpected move to bring North Korean troops into the conflict and comes amid a major Russian assault on Ukrainian positions. U.S. officials have expressed that while they do not believe this change will drastically alter the course of the war, it sends a powerful message to both Moscow and Pyongyang about the risks of further escalation.
Biden’s authorization to use ATACMS—missiles with a range of approximately 190 miles—marks a notable departure from previous restrictions. Before this, the U.S. had allowed Ukraine to use shorter-range systems like the HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System) but had withheld the longer-range ATACMS due to concerns over potential Russian retaliation and broader escalation risks.
Targeting Russian and North Korean Forces
The immediate goal for Ukraine’s use of ATACMS is to defend against the ongoing Russian assault in Kursk, where an estimated 50,000 Russian soldiers, including North Korean troops, are trying to retake territory seized by Ukraine. While U.S. officials expect the missiles to be used primarily to target Russian and North Korean forces in this region, President Biden could authorize broader use of the weapons as the situation develops.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, while not directly confirming the use of ATACMS, alluded to the impact the missiles would have in a recent address. “Rockets will speak for themselves,” he said, emphasizing that the importance lies not in announcements but in the missiles’ ability to strike crucial
The decision to provide Ukraine with these advanced missiles comes in response to Russia’s surprising move to incorporate North Korean troops into the conflict. Officials in the Biden administration hope that the missile strikes will not only bolster Ukraine’s defense but also send a clear message to North Korea that its involvement in the war could come at a high cost.
Some U.S. officials voiced concerns that allowing Ukraine to use ATACMS on Russian soil could provoke a retaliatory response from President Vladimir Putin, potentially escalating the war further. However, others believe such fears are overblown, arguing that Russia's threats are largely aimed at deterring international support for Ukraine rather than precipitating direct conflict with the U.S. or its allies.
Biden’s decision has sparked debate within his administration. Some advisers have expressed concerns about escalating tensions with Russia, especially following a U.S. intelligence assessment that warned of possible retaliatory actions by Russian military or intelligence agencies against U.S. and European targets. These could range from cyberattacks to direct assaults on military bases. On the other hand, proponents of a more aggressive stance argue that Biden has been too cautious in his approach, allowing Russia to gain an advantage while limiting Ukraine’s ability to effectively defend itself.
The debate reflects the broader challenges Biden faces as he navigates the complex dynamics of international diplomacy and military support for Ukraine. While the U.S. has provided substantial assistance to Ukraine, it has also sought to avoid direct conflict with Russia, particularly as Russia continues to push back against Ukraine’s territorial gains.
For months, Ukraine's President Zelensky has sought permission from the U.S. and its allies to use long-range missiles against Russian soil. Both the British and French have provided Ukraine with their own longer-range systems—such as the Storm Shadow and SCALP missiles—but with a range of about 155 miles, they are less advanced than the ATACMS. These European allies, however, have insisted that any broader use of long-range missiles by Ukraine would require U.S. approval.
Biden’s decision comes at a time when Republican lawmakers are divided on the issue, with some praising the move while others believe it should have happened sooner. Some argue that the delay in providing Ukraine with long-range strike capabilities has hindered its ability to push back against Russian advances more effectively.
While Biden's decision represents a significant step in supporting Ukraine, it also marks a pivotal moment in the broader geopolitical landscape. The introduction of North Korean troops into the war has added a new layer of complexity, and the U.S. is keen to show both Moscow and Pyongyang that further escalation will not go unchecked. At the same time, there are concerns that the use of long-range missiles could prompt further retaliation from Russia, possibly expanding the war beyond Ukraine's borders.
Despite these risks, Biden’s advisers have argued that the benefits outweigh the potential costs. The ability to strike high-value targets deep within Russian territory could help Ukraine weaken Russian and North Korean forces, potentially turning the tide in regions like Kursk, where Russian troops have been gaining ground.
Biden’s authorization to send long-range ATACMS missiles to Ukraine represents a major shift in U.S. policy, signaling stronger support for Ukraine’s defense as it faces an increasingly aggressive Russian-North Korean assault. The decision also highlights the complexities of balancing military support with the risks of escalating a conflict that has already drawn in multiple international actors. As Ukraine prepares to use these weapons, the broader implications for the war—and for U.S.-Russia relations—remain uncertain, but the move is certain to influence the course of the conflict in the months ahead.
Patrick Effah
Tags
Newsroom