There was no white smoke emanating from the chimney on the thorny issue of allowing western-supplied precision missiles to be used by Ukraine against Russia after Britain’s Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer met US President Joe Biden last week.
Starmer and accompanying British Foreign Secretary David Lammy were there to discuss a number of security issues, but top of the agenda was the lifting of restrictions on the use of such weaponry against Russian territory.
To recap, this has particularly apposite to the deployment of the 190-mile range US ATACMS ballistic missiles and the 155-mile range UK/French Storm Shadow/SCALP cruise missiles, with which the Ukrainians will be able, all things being equal, to strike deep into mainland Russia.
This article is the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the UK Defence Journal. If you would like to submit your own article on this topic or any other, please see our submission guidelines.
Now, whilst it appears that no such agreement was hammered out between the allies, it is always possible that is has indeed been made, but announcing it to the world would be counterproductive and warn the Russians what was coming. But call me a cynic; I doubt this is the case.
The prospect of “weapons free” being declared for Ukraine has prompted the usual bombast and threats from the Kremlin, but they don’t have a leg to stand on. Not only have they illegally attacked and occupied parts of Ukraine, but they have also just received a shipment of 200 ballistic missiles from Iran which they fully intend to launch at Ukrainian cities and infrastructure. Hypocritical doesn’t cover it.
Nonetheless, once again the Biden administration seems to have balked at the prospect. Lammy has since returned to the UK saying that the UK and its allies “will not be bullied by Putin’s shameless grandstanding”, but that’s exactly what has happened – again.
It’s quite obvious that American politicians – those same dead-eyed men (and women) in sharp suits I have written of before – have swallowed Putin’s rhetoric. In Margaret Thatcher-speak they are “frit”, and shame on them for being so. While they dance on the pinhead of petty politics and go home to safe beds, Ukrainian servicemen and women die on the frontlines in the defence of their country. The Americans have blood on their hands.
The paradox is that Putin’s threats show that he really is feeling the pain, and Ukraine being allowed to turn it up even higher has got him worried. He is the one who should be “frit”, not the other way round. The west is practicing self-deterrence which plays right into his pocket.
Ukraine has now using its own indigenous long-range drones to strike deep into Russia with considerable success, but they remain vulnerable to Russian air defences. The advantage of weapons like Storm Shadow and the US ATCMS is that they fly faster, are more difficult to intercept, and carry a greater payload.
So why is Biden hesitating? The first and most obvious reason, already allude to, is that the White House is reluctant to provoke a major response from Putin and escalate the conflict. They believe that Russia seriously considered using tactical nuclear weapons in response to the successful Ukrainian counter-offensive at Kharkiv in September 2022 and that has put the wind up American strategists.
The other possibility is that Biden’s administration sees a possible end to the war as both sides exhaust themselves in attritional warfare which will ultimately bring them to the negotiating table.
Both sides are only too aware that the US Presidential Elections this November could have a major impact on US and western support for Ukraine. Putin will be hoping that Trump will get in – better the devil you know – and pull the plug on Zelensky’s allies’ backing. He’ll be hoping that Trump will demand a compromise settlement which will favour Russia.
It is also of the utmost importance for Zelensky, who will occupy the White House come 2025. He will not wish any settlement that looks like freezing the conflict and locking in Russian gains and will seek a return to the status quo ante bellum. The Kursk incursion, designed to draw away Russian reserves from more critical parts on the frontline and possibly capture Russian territory for exchange at peace talks, is part of his longer-term planning.
But the US and the west sitting on its hands is not a good look for either Ukraine or for the wider global audience. My personal opinion has always been that we should facilitate every means to help Zelensky expel the invaders.
The USA and the UK should not be deterred by Putin’s increasingly deranged bluster. If anything, it should be the other way around.
Lt Col Stuart Crawford is a political and defence commentator and former army officer. Sign up for his podcasts and newsletters at www.DefenceReview.uk. This was first published in the Daily Express.
It’s political! Biden doesn’t want to give trump the chance to slaughter Harris before the election if something goes tits up! ie: Russian proxies attacking a base in Iraq causing casualties and then claiming it was revenge for attacking Russia with missiles,Trump would have a field day with something like that.
Hmm, that’s a good point Jacko.
Using proxies would avoid the big risk for Putin whilst still getting the headlines in the West.
Harris has understandably been quiet on detail, at least I haven’t seen anything in the press or online, other than she would continue to support Ukraine at current levels which says nothing about how Ukraine can use the kit being delivered…
Cheers CR
Sorry to say mate but it’s not my idea got it off ‘Jake Broe’ podcast on YouTube which is a good watch👍😀another snippet of info gleaned was we can’t actually let Ukraine use our missiles unless SACEUR gives the ok due to this being a NATO OP and as it’s always an American we all know who he answers too!
Sadly then we go on to Martins post below so lets all give up and go home then in case we upset Pootin🙄
Confidently predict US foreign policy status quo, at least through 5 Nov 24. Democratic administration will be in a risk averse mode until then, not desiring to alienate voters w/ any potentially provocative foreign policy changes. The fascinating feature may be what changes occur on/after 6 Nov 24. Personally, have to admit to having no freaking clue. 🤔
I honestly think the west is concerned that if Ukraine push to hard and have to much success supported by western aid Putin will drop a tactical nuc…would Putin actually do that..we forget at our peril that Russia is not a European nation and does think differently than Western European nations so just maybe he would.
Recent disclosure that US foreign policy/security bureaucracy believed precisely that during the UKR counteroffensive breakout during the autumn of 2022. Suspect there were at least a few intelligence indicators to that effect. Uncertain whether British Intelligence came to the same conclusion. Eventually the details will be revealed either by respective governments or perhaps in someone’s memoir. Many individuals believe Putin is bluffing, but should probably reread accounts of the Cuban Missile Crisis. One or two different decisions/acts, and Northern Hemisphere would have been toast. Unfortunately, some of the same players participating sixty plus years later.
People often see or project their own thoughts and motivations onto others…I often hear that about the population of china not wanting a war..forgetting the chinese people have their own set of beliefs that are completely independent of the west..it’s the same with Russia….people also forget how bloody and intransigent the west has been when it felt threatened.
Lets not try piss of the unhinged Russian nutter, its a balance but may we should ease it back a bit. Careful what you war mongers wish for.
Buying weapons for you Ukraine when the old will get a cold winter, giving away most of our operational tube Artillery, most of our ammo, shutting ranges to our own troops, so Ukraine can use them.
Help Ukraine i agree, but may be not at our own Army’s expense, We spent more ammunition to give to Ukraine than we have on Ammunition to restock our selves. Any one who thinks that sensible is may be in need of a wake up call.
Only one war monger going about that’s wee putin you do know he wouldn’t stop at Ukraine right? We should push as much as possible against the wee rat so maybe he gets taken out by some of his own team as for nukes we should keep reminding him we have them as well, the way your talking we’d have commi overlords in no time so instead of shouting about everyone else maybe check if u still have a set of nuts and growl at the wee madman or be like most other people and don’t have a clue what’s going on and be happy 🇬🇧
Because your only reply would be to appease Putin, do you really think being soft with him is the right way to go?
We are not appeasing him, but we can only give so much, its not a bottomless pit on the endless money tree. It is have a bad effect on our own Army, wish was already in shit state.
There has to be a limit, to what we can give with out replacing it which has not been done either in kit or ammo. We do not have the money to replace in service kit or ammo stocks given.
Do you think we just carry on blindly when we can not afford it and our own Army is weaker for it?.
Fair point about how much we give but let’s give them long range and let them use it the way they should be used and let the russian people know they’re in a war for once.
And the risk of it all going a bit Pete Tong? be ask for any country to cross the line.
Sorry but this guy will not stop unless he has real pressure put on him, keep hearing we shouldn’t push him if that’s the case we’re screwed already
Not a stable person, he has nukes and a lot of them, he old likely has cancer, may be best not to poke the bear too much for many reasons. He likes to win yes but even he has a breaking point if pushed. Which is what Ukraine want us to do for their benefit.
That’s a long winded way of telling everyone you have no kids and want it all to end.
Supporting a nation to defend its sovereign integrity from a brutal invader is not warmongering…
Far too late. We already pissed off the Russian nutter when we colluded in the fall of the Soviet Union. Rather than choosing between domestic and Ukrainian supply, we should be expanding our capabilities to cope with both.
And how do we pay for that? never going happen no money for it. The MOD has to find £400 million to pay for this years pay rise, no extra money for that either.
The politicians will decide,and they will decide on salami slicing as it has the fewest negative headlines.
For the West, it is much cheaper (now) to provide munitions to Ukraine as they are doing a wonderful job dismembering the russians (literally, small ‘r’ intended no respect intended), than doing the ‘job’ themselves.
If it were me, I’d remove all weapons restrictions and provide everything Ukraine asks for… Remembering of course the UK, USA (amongst others) convinced Ukraine to give up their nukes in the 90’s (3rd largest stockpile at the time) quaranteeing their sovereignty…and look how that turned out.
Stop being push-overs 🙃
Very well said 👍👏
The West has no real strategy in Ukraine. What the West has instead is slogans: “Ukraine must recover all of its territory, including Crimea” … “Putin must be put on trial” … “Russia must be made to pay full reparations” … etc.. But there is no real strategy explaining how any of that is going to/can be acheived against a nuclear-armed state.
So what we get is occasional musing about providing Ukraine with this or that new capability … and then quickly retreating when it is clear that this could provoke a dangerous Russian reaction, or when certain allies say “no way”.
This situation has meant that the Russians continue to crawl forward: two steps forward, one step back. But generally moving forward. Where this is all heading is toward a likely negotiation and we will then ask what the hundreds of thousands of casualties were for.