US Stands Firm on Ukraine Using US Weapons for Deep Strikes in Russia

A delegation from Ukraine recently visited Washington, bringing with them a list of proposed targets in Russia that they wish to strike using American weapons. Despite this, the White House is likely to maintain its current restrictions on the use of long-range U.S. munitions within Russian territory, according to a U.S. official.

Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov and Andriy Yermak, head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, outlined their case for why these strikes could significantly impact the ongoing conflict, which has now entered its third year. They believe that striking these targets could alter the balance of the war.

Sources speaking on the condition of anonymity, due to the sensitive nature of the discussions, revealed that the Ukrainian delegation is making a concerted effort to persuade U.S. officials of the efficacy of these potential strikes.

The Biden administration has already made some concessions concerning U.S. arms. They have allowed Ukraine limited defensive operations against Russian forces across the border. However, the concern remains regarding any aggressive actions deep within Russia itself, as such strikes could spark a direct confrontation between the U.S. and NATO on one side and Russia on the other.

One of the most sought-after weapons by Ukraine includes the Army Tactical Missile System, known as ATACMS. The U.S. has provided a longer-range variant that can target positions as far away as 190 miles, including sites in Russian-occupied Crimea. This supply of long-range capabilities has been ongoing, but the administration wishes to avoid crossing lines that could escalate tensions with Moscow.

A U.S. official familiar with the discussions highlighted the Biden administration’s hesitation to allow the use of ATACMS to target deeper into Russian territory, pointing to the limited number of these systems available. The official noted that using these missiles to target areas beyond the current operational zones would not necessarily yield significant advantages.

Currently, ATACMS are effectively deployed in areas within Ukraine that are under Russian occupation, including Crimea. Retrieving these systems for different target campaigns could also weaken defensive positions in those regions, thus lessening their operational effectiveness.

Moreover, there are questions about the real impact of loosening the restrictions overall. Intelligence reports suggest that Russia has relocated over 90 percent of its aircraft beyond the reach of the ATACMS, potentially negating the intended impact of such strikes.

According to the U.S. official, there isn’t a simple solution to achieving victory in this protracted conflict. Changing the current policy would mean Ukraine would need to make strategic decisions regarding where to deploy its limited resources — whether to strike in the highly contested regions of Donbas and Crimea or target objectives within Russia.

President Volodymyr Zelensky has persistently called for the West to supply Ukraine with more weaponry without constraints. At a press conference in Kyiv, he indicated his intention to propose a framework for achieving victory at the forthcoming United Nations General Assembly in September. He emphasized the importance of unwavering support from international allies, urging them to advocate for lifting the restrictions on Ukraine’s use of long-range weapons.

Zelensky stated, “We need no less determination from our partners in these matters. Each of our friends who can persuade our allies to lift restrictions on Ukraine’s use of long-range weapons can truly help bring our shared victory closer.”