Permission to strike Russia: The West is on the brink of an important decision for Ukraine
The topic of allowing Ukraine to use long-range weapons has once again become active in the Western political community after massive Russian missile and drone strikes on the territory of our country.
A meeting of the Ukraine-NATO Council took place on Wednesday. NATO states pledged to continue to support Kyiv, but did not reach an agreement on lifting restrictions on the use of Western weapons for strikes on Russian territory. The opinions of our partners differ.
German security circles say that they are preparing for the worst-case scenario – a blackout in Ukraine due to Russian attacks and a corresponding increase in the flow of refugees from Ukraine to Europe. In Germany, this is considered a sufficient argument to explain why it is in the interests of the EU countries to finally stop the Russian energy terror.
German quality edition The world writes: Kyiv’s partners should eventually allow the Ukrainian army to strike with the use of long-range Western weapons against targets – exclusively military – on the territory of Russia: airports where warplanes are stationed, warehouses where missiles are stored. Until now, Ukraine was content with striking targets located in Russia with drones of its own production. Restrictions remain on UK-supplied SCALP-EG cruise missiles and US MGM-140 ATACMS ballistic missiles.
In Germany, it is believed that the context for lifting restrictions has never been more favorable than now. It is time to provide Ukraine with the necessary resources for defense. The latest massive combined attack proved that Ukraine has little ability to resist Russian attacks, which are carried out with the help of drones and high-speed missiles of the “Kinzhal” type. The limitation in the confrontation is also explained by the fact that the Western Allies provided too few air defense systems to provide even close to full protection of the country.
The opposite opinion is held in the Italian establishment, calling Putin’s repression of Ukraine unsuccessful. Moscow cannot consider these strikes successful, claims the leading Italian newspaper La Stampa: “After the introduction of Ukrainian troops into Russian territory, we expected repression from the Kremlin, which was called for by Russian politicians and propagandists. These actions were aimed at satisfying public opinion in Russia and assessing political and military reaction. However, the result was not impressive, judging by the careful silence of Kremlin communicators. Of the 127 missiles and 109 drones launched by Russia, the majority (102 missiles and 99 drones) were shot down by Ukrainian air defense.
The Greek political community expresses a rather restrained opinion regarding the lifting of restrictions on the use of long-range weapons by Ukraine.
Greek news publication “Proto Thema” critically examines the statement of the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyi, who considers Putin’s “red lines” a “bluff” after the successful advance of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Kursk region and, on this basis, calls on the allies to lift the ban on attacks deep into Russia.
The publication calls this an extremely dangerous assessment, which can drag the West into a trap of direct conflict with Russia with unpredictable global scope and consequences. And although Zelensky’s position takes into account the fact that there was no significant and decisive response from Moscow to Kursk, this does not mean that Russia and Vladimir Putin will not respond when they are ready and in the way they choose.
The Greek political community warns that there is a warning from Moscow that the lifting of restrictions on the use of long-range weapons will be regarded as a direct NATO attack on Russia, with all the consequences, including the use of strategic and nuclear weapons. At the same time, unofficial data are also mentioned, according to which the bridge, which became the target of the Ukrainians on the Seim River in order to cut off the Russian forces, was hit by American HIMARS missiles.
Regarding the French reaction to Ukraine’s request to increase its armed resources, France’s largest state-owned radio company Radio France reports that the means by which the Russian-Ukrainian war is being waged are not proportionate. This is an existential struggle that includes many problems for Ukraine. It is also about the disparity of funds between huge Russia and the more modest Ukraine, and about problems imposed by Western politicians who are always worried about Russia’s reaction.
Where do these experiences come from? The answer to this question is given in the recently published book “New Cold Wars” by David Sanger, a defense specialist for the leading American publication “The New York Times”. He explains that the Biden administration still fears that Zelensky can drag it into the third world war. Joe Biden publicly expressed this fear on the eve of the Russian invasion, and this fear has never left him. Ukraine’s frustration with the West’s caution has lasted for more than two and a half years, despite the continuous increase in the supply of more sophisticated weapons.
The French publication L’Humanité believes that Kyiv took a risky step when it decided to invade the Kursk region, and could have made a mistake. Ukraine’s plan worked quite well, but the tactical goal is still far from being achieved. Moscow not only did not transfer its forces, but also intensified its offensive in the east, and now Pokrovsk is in danger of falling. Putin also appears to have made a bet: to break through the defenses in the Donbass to force the Ukrainian army to redirect forces and weaken the Kursk offensive. The bombing of energy infrastructure in several regions means that the war will not end until winter, – warns L’Humanité.
“A strong Ukraine is in the interests of the EU”, – expresses the position of the Spanish establishment of the publication The World. The war has been going on for two and a half years, which shows that neither side can achieve complete victory. Therefore, both Kyiv and Moscow, whose losses are three times greater than Ukrainian losses, according to some data up to 500,000, seek to obtain a certain privileged position on the eve of hypothetical negotiations. The invasion of the Kursk region has not yet destroyed Putin’s project, which consists in dictating the terms of peace. At the same time, the invasion is a unique opportunity for Kyiv to strengthen its position in order to achieve a just peace that would deter Putin from starting aggression against the EU. This is a real threat, the publication emphasizes, against which the EU must stand up.
As we can see, the international community continues to be divided on the issue of providing Ukraine with long-range weapons. It is important that decisions are made taking into account all possible consequences and strategic interests of both Ukraine and world security. The right to apply and remove restrictions on the use of military equipment remains a purely political issue. And it is up to each individual government that allows the provision of weapons manufactured by its industry to decide whether or not to lift these restrictions.
This rule applies even when the production of these weapons is financed by multinational funds, such as the European Peace Fund. In fact, the future of restrictions on French-made missiles, for example, remains in the hands of Paris. In addition, even if the Netherlands wants to transfer American-made fighter jets to Ukraine, the decision on their use will still remain in the hands of Washington.
Palianytsia, a Ukrainian missile-drone with a long range (600-700 kilometers) can be a solution to the lack of Western equipment. Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated that it was successfully used for strikes on the territory controlled by Russia.
