Washington’s decision to let Kyiv’s forces hit targets in Russia with US-supplied long-range missiles removes another of the “red lines” that have hampered Ukraine’s defence, but leaves the bloodied country wondering – as with the provision of western-made tanks, fighter jets and other advanced weapons – why it had to wait so long.
“After months and months of discussions, while days and days of deaths from Russian missiles and drones strikes were happening in Ukraine. However, late is always better than never,” Daria Kaleniuk, a prominent Ukrainian commentator and executive director of the country’s anti-corruption action centre, said of the White House move.
Joe Biden waited until the last months of his presidency to lift a ban on Ukraine using Atacms ballistic missiles to strike Russian territory, and reports suggest that clearance extends only to targets in the Kursk border region, where North Korean troops are now helping Russia try to retake 1,000sq km of land that Ukraine seized in a lightning advance in August.
The US repeatedly refused to deliver Atacms to Ukraine over fears that Russia would view it as “escalatory”, before finally supplying a version with a range of 165km to Kyiv in October 2023 and then a 300km version earlier this year.
EU spending ‘too long’ hesitating on support for Ukraine, says foreign affairs chief
Ukraine fears US permission for long-range missile strikes on Russia will have limited effect
North Korean leader calls for expanded nuclear forces to counter US threats
Ukraine authorised to fire US missiles at targets inside Russia for first time
Washington barred Ukraine from firing Atacms at Russia, however, even after allowing it to use other shorter-range rocket systems, such as Himars, to strike units in Russian border areas that were involved in a new assault in May on the eastern Kharkiv region.
“The decision on the range of Ukrainian weapons use was completely arbitrary and was done out of fear of ‘provoking’ Russia, rather than any moral or legal concern,” said Kurt Volker, a former US special envoy to Kyiv. “This unnecessary restriction on Ukraine’s self-defence should simply have been removed – full-stop.”
US officials indicated that Biden’s change of heart had been prompted by Pyongyang’s deployment of at least 10,000 soldiers to Russia but that permission to use Atacms applied, at least for now, only to Kursk, where clashes between Ukrainian and North Korean units have already taken place.
The Washington-based Institute for the Study of War warned that “Russian forces will benefit from any partial sanctuary if western states continue to impose restrictions on Ukraine’s ability to defend itself… The US should allow Ukraine to strike all legitimate military targets … within range of US-provided weapons.”
There is also frustration in Ukraine over why the US policy change was made public, allowing Russia to move key weapons systems out of range, and doubt over whether it will receive enough Atacms to make an impact before Donald Trump returns to the White House in January and may immediately reverse his predecessor’s decisions.
- Listen to our Inside Politics Podcast for the latest analysis and chat
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date