Joe Biden’s decision may have the potential to drag the Trump administration into the conflict.
Image Source: Getty
It has been predicted that the war in Ukraine will end once the US President-elect Donald Trump takes office because, simply put, he entered the electoral race with a promise to end ongoing wars.
However, the outgoing US president, Joe Biden, who wants the US to continue arming Ukraine in its defence against Russia, has just revealed a last trick up his sleeve. On November 17, the US, along with the UK and France, approved the use of long-range missiles by Ukraine. On Tuesday, the Ukrainian forces launched strikes inside Russia using the American-made ATACMS rocket, which has a range of 300 km.
This is a critical development in the conflict in Ukraine. In the recent past, after Ukrainian forces entered Kursk, the Russian army officially began their Kursk offensive in September. Kyiv, in retaliation, asked for permission from the US and the UK to use the ATACMS and Storm shadow long-range missiles to launch attacks on Russian cities.
Washington was willing to listen to President Volodymyr Zelensky’s request. Meanwhile, Russia’s security council proposed new offensive changes to Moscow’s nuclear doctrine. Following Moscow’s aggressive posturing, the US and UK decided against permitting Kyiv to launch the missiles. However, quite clearly, as Biden’s days in the White House are numbered, the president aims to keep Washington in the fight.
The Kremlin, however, is not very optimistic about a ceasefire as Moscow holds the view that the previous Trump administration was happy about sanctions and that the US is leveraging Europe to make Nato countries spend more in arming Ukraine.
There is a general perception of a likely, and upcoming, ceasefire ending the war in Ukraine. Various plans of an endgame are in circulation including a 20-year moratorium on Ukraine’s Nato membership, freezing the conflict by creating a demilitarised zone governed by non-UN/US peacekeepers and the cessation of military aid to Ukraine, forcing Kyiv to negotiate with Russia. The Kremlin, however, is not very optimistic about a ceasefire as Moscow holds the view that the previous Trump administration was happy about sanctions and that the US is leveraging Europe to make Nato countries spend more in arming Ukraine. However, the Biden administration, citing recent changes in the battlefield, with Russian forces making quicker gains in the Donbas and the news of North Korean troops deployed in the conflict, allowed Ukraine to use long-range weapons.
Ukraine using long-range weapons to strike inside Russia will trigger a rapid escalation of the conflict. Within the outer fringes of the ATACMS range falls the regions of Smolensk, Kaluga, Tula, Kursk, Bryansk, Oryol, Voronezh, and Rostov on-Don. These regions have military bases, airfields, and large-scale troop concentrations that have the potential to slow down Russia’s advance in Donetsk and Lugansk.
The Chairman of Russia’s Duma Committee on Foreign Affairs and the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party, Leonid Slutsky, warned of the consequences of such an attack. He said it would imply the direct participation of the United States and European nations in the conflict in Ukraine, as troops from the US, UK and France would have to liaise with Ukrainian forces to use the weapons system. This would entail “the harshest response from Russia,” referring to a nuclear escalation.
However, the timing of the permission to use long-range weapons is not ideal for Kyiv as it came after a significant delay. The Ukrainian forces have had to grapple with similar delays in receiving other weapons platforms such as the HIMARs, Abrams tanks, and F16s from Washington. With close to 60 days until the next administration takes office, Ukraine may not be able to receive enough ATACMS to significantly change the course of the war.
The US signals this development not as a last-ditch effort to sustain Washington’s support to Ukraine but as a retaliation against Russia’s alleged deployment of North Korean troops in Kursk, as, in Biden’s calculus, Russia’s escalation could not be overlooked. The decision, even though rooted in symbolism, also is a very calculated step. Moscow, factoring in the ground realities of Ukraine using these weapons and the nature of Ukraine’s future attacks, may not rapidly escalate the tempo of its invasion in Ukraine, as an endgame is still in sight.
The US signals this development not as a last-ditch effort to sustain Washington’s support to Ukraine but as a retaliation against Russia’s alleged deployment of North Korean troops in Kursk, as, in Biden’s calculus, Russia’s escalation could not be overlooked.
A day after Ukraine was granted permission, six ATACMS missiles were launched at an arms depot in Bryansk Oblast; Russia intercepted five missiles and damaged one. President Vladimir Putin, in response, signed a decree approving the changes to the fundamentals of the Russian Federation State Policy in the Field of Nuclear Deterrence, which was initially proposed in September. The new doctrine lowers the nuclear threshold and stipulates the use of nuclear weapons in the event of a conventional strike that threatens the very existence of the state, creating military coalitions against Russia and planning large-scale military exercises near the borders of Russia, among other changes.
Even though Trump has promised to end the conflict within 24 hours of his taking office, Biden’s decision may have the potential to drag the Trump administration into the conflict. Republican leaders have criticised Biden’s decision as it derails their plans to de-escalate this conflict. The next 60 days will be crucial. Three key variables are at play: How would Biden proceed? How would Putin react to the Ukrainian long-range attacks? Lastly, could Trump execute a ceasefire in light of these developments and be able to sell it as a domestic victory? We will know in the months ahead.
This commentary originally appeared in Hindustan Times.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Rajoli Siddharth Jayaprakash is a Research Assistant with the ORF Strategic Studies programme, focusing on Russia's domestic politics and economy, Russia's grand strategy, and India-Russia ...
Read More +
PREV
