Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has called on the United States to hand over MLRS missiles to his country in response to heavy Russian bombing in the country’s eastern Donbas region, leaving one side wanting to support Kyiv and another worried A Joe Biden administration with unnecessary escalation with Moscow is in trouble.
Ukraine has strong Republican and Democratic support in Congress, making it easier for President Zelensky to order more weapons. This prompted President Joe Biden to make it clear that “the United States will not send Ukraine a missile system that can hit Russia.”
A few days ago, the U.S. government allocated nearly $40 billion in military aid to Ukraine, but fears that the country and its NATO allies will be drawn into a direct conflict with Moscow.
Regarding the latest developments in the military situation in Ukraine, military expert and modern warfare theorist John Spencer said in an interview with Al Jazeera, “Biden’s decision is mainly political because he does not want a direct escalation with Russia. .”
The danger of supplying Ukraine with advanced offensive weapons
“We will provide the Ukrainians with more advanced missile systems and munitions that will allow them to more accurately strike key targets on the Ukrainian battlefield,” Biden wrote in an article published in The New York Times. Biden reiterated , that his country “will not send Ukraine a missile system that can strike Russia.”
A senior U.S. official told a news conference that Washington will send the HIMARS high-precision missile system to Ukraine. He added that Ukrainian officials had assured the Biden administration that the missiles would only be used to repel Russian troops in Ukraine, not attack Russian territory.
“Biden’s decision contradicts reports that the United States is considering offering MLRS and HIMARS systems,” said Alexander Downs, director of the Institute for Security and Conflict at George Washington University and an expert on international conflicts. These launchers are capable of firing the U.S. Army’s ATACM tactics. The missile system, which has a range of 300 kilometers, and the more widely used MLRS missile, which has a range of between 32 and 70 kilometers, is a system that Washington has provided to Ukraine.”
In an interview with Al Jazeera, Downes said, “Biden may be accurate because the latest reports suggest that if Washington decides to send MLRS or HIMARS systems to Ukraine, they will not be equipped with components that allow the launch of long- and medium-range missiles, Only short-range ammunition can be used. These missiles can hit Russian targets based on their location (as happened in Kharkiv).”
What does Russia consider a declaration of war?
Over the past three months, Biden and his advisers have at times sent mixed messages about Washington’s goal of helping Ukraine fend off a Russian invasion.
During a visit to Poland in April, Biden said it was necessary for the Russian president to step down in Moscow. Days later, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said the U.S. wanted to see Russia “weakened to the point where there would be no further invasion of Ukraine.” In both cases, the White House withdrew official statements about those positions.
Confused and conflicting information about U.S. military support for Ukrainian targets has overwhelmed experts. John Spencer told Al Jazeera, “The President’s National Security Council has changed his stance on supplying Ukraine with missiles that could reach the Russian hinterland. Here we’re not talking about Tomahawk missiles that can reach Kremlin buildings, but range Medium-range missiles not exceeding 300 kilometers.”
Spencer noted, “Short-range missiles with a range of up to 70 kilometers can also hit targets in Russia when fired from areas near the Russian-Ukrainian border, and we do not know whether the Biden administration has imposed any restrictions on where these missiles can be used to allow Their mission is primarily defensive and only strikes Russian targets in Ukraine.”
The danger of not supplying Ukraine with these missiles
On the other hand, Elliott Cohen, a former defense official and professor of international relations at Johns Hopkins University, blasted the Biden administration’s reluctance to provide Ukraine with missiles that would enable it to hit targets inside Russia.
Cohen said that the more armed the Ukrainians are, the sooner the war will end and the suffering will stop.
In a series of tweets, Cohen criticized Biden’s reluctance to provide Ukraine with long-range missiles, saying, “The President’s statement that the United States will not provide Ukraine with weapons that could bring war to Russian soil is an act of strategic incoherence and incompetence. , is also morally reprehensible.”
He tweeted: “There is no point in prolonging suffering and showing fear when a small country is fighting for its own survival and independence under these conditions. But that’s what a Biden administration does. Biden is destroying Our relationship with our allies, disrupting our bureaucracy, and weakening morale in Ukraine. Not only was this wrong, it was a very stupid decision, and I hope Congress and public opinion will pay for this hesitation.”
Prof Downs said his assessment was, “If the US were to send these systems to Ukraine, it would be on the condition that they be used only on the battlefield and in rear areas within Ukraine’s internationally recognized borders. Given Zelensky’s desire to acquire MLRS , making it an outsized role on the current battlefield, and he is willing to accept that limitation.”