The United States is finally providing Ukraine with the long-range weaponry it has been requesting for months. However, the previous approach of arming Ukraine for a caricature of modern warfare rather than the actual situation on the ground has not been effective.
After more than 500 days since Russia’s invasion, the front line has only seen small incremental changes. While the Ukrainians have made some progress in certain regions, they have not yet achieved a full-scale armored breakthrough. On the other hand, Ukrainian missile strikes behind enemy lines have had notable successes, such as forcing Russia to withdraw major elements of their Black Sea Fleet from occupied Crimea.
The initial expectation of a tank-led Russian invasion that shaped Western policy during the conflict has proven to be inaccurate. The provision of armored vehicles and combined-arms-warfare training by the U.S. and NATO has mainly focused on direct attacks on Russian front lines, which has proven to be challenging. Defensive weaponry has rendered even the best tanks and vehicles vulnerable to damage from various cheaper and more numerous types of equipment, including drones.
The only successful breakthrough exploitation occurred when Ukraine attacked a lightly defended part of the Russian line in the Kharkiv region. This highlights the need for Ukraine to identify weak points or create them by striking military installations and logistics deep behind the front. To achieve this, Ukraine has been adamant about obtaining the U.S.-made Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS). Unfortunately, the U.S. has only offered limited supplies of long-range weapons, hindering Ukraine’s offensive capabilities.
The United Kingdom’s provision of Storm Shadow cruise missiles and France’s SCALP missiles has allowed Ukraine to hit high-value targets in Russian-occupied areas, including Crimea. Despite their success, the supply of these missiles is limited. Ukraine has already fired approximately 100 of them and needs to be strategic in their usage.
Russia’s most successful campaign has been its “great escalation bluff,” where they implied that providing Ukraine with greater reach could trigger a broader conflict or a nuclear response. The muted reaction to the attacks on Sevastopol in September has exposed this rhetoric as empty and desperate.
It is unfortunate that this bluff has succeeded. Western nations should stop falling for it. Although Ukraine will now receive ATACMS ammunition and F-16 fighters, it comes too late for the summer counteroffensive. The Biden administration should not repeat this mistake and should consider providing other useful kinds of equipment, such as the AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) and the Taurus missile system. These weapons would have significantly weakened Russian forces and allowed Ukraine to reclaim its territory.
Helping Ukraine win the war quickly is crucial to minimize destruction and casualties. The prioritization of long-range weapons by Western allies will wear down Russian resistance and aid Ukraine’s territorial reclamation.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
