Russian reaction to Biden’s decision on ATACMS
My last two essays dealing with the announcement in Washington on Sunday about the permitted use of ATACMS to strike deep within the Russian Federation have stirred up a lot of discussion among readers including some useful remarks on the limited effect of this decision given the 300 km radius of operation of these offensive weapons and the limited number of missiles that the US has given or will give to Ukraine due to production bottlenecks and the priority assigned to Israel for all US military product lines.
The limited supply addresses my concern that Kiev might deploy the ATACMS in swarms so as to overcome Russian air defenses. As we know, Moscow demonstrated more than a year ago that it can destroy incoming ATACMS when they arrive in ones and twos. If there are not enough such missiles in the hands of the Ukrainians, then such a dire threat in most unlikely.
The former point above as to the strike range of ATACMS does not remove my concern that they could be used very effectively to destroy residential buildings within the Kursk oblast, where Washington is said to permit their use, killing a great many civilians and forcing Putin to respond with much greater violence inside Ukraine or even against the marshalling points for such weapons deliveries in Poland and Romania. That kind of Russian response would jeopardize a peace settlement early in Trump’s presidency. Moreover, there is the risk that I mentioned previously and no one has responded to: namely the possibility that Kiev would attack the Kursk nuclear power plant. That remains a nightmare scenario for escalation to world war.
However, I direct attention today to reasons for us NOT to hyperventilate, to calm down and hope for the best.
These reasons for hope come firstly from President Putin’s press secretary Peskov, who said yesterday that Russia’s response will remain within what Vladimir Vladimirovich said in an interview taken in Petersburg in mid-September. Russia will consider the use of the ATACMS against its homeland as marking the entry of the United States as a co-belligerent with Ukraine. In that case Russia will determine what countermeasures to take depending on the extent of damage it suffers from such attacks. Nota bene: Russia will not attack the United States or the supply points of the ATACMS within NATO unless it suffers commensurate casualties and damage from the attacks.
Meanwhile yesterday evening’s commentary on the subject of ATACMS presented on The Great Game hosted by Vyacheslav Nikonov on the Rossiya 1 state television channel gives even more reason to be optimistic that we will all survive the two months of transition from Biden to Trump. The interpretation given to Biden’s decision on ATACMS was that the purpose is to secure his place in history, to secure his legacy as the president who stood by Ukraine to his last hour in office, so that the eventual peace treaty brokered by Trump, which will look very much like a Ukrainian capitulation, can be called a betrayal of American foreign policy, with all that will mean for the next electoral cycle in America.
In this interpretation, effectiveness of any missile strikes in holding back the Russian mop-up in Kursk or rapid advances along the 1000 km line of confrontation is not the objective of the decision on ATACMS, since everyone knows that there will be nil military value unless the Ukrainians succeed in hitting masses of Russians who are about to enter Kursk for the final liberation of the oblast.
To all of the above, I now add an important signal coming from France and Britain. Just days ago, at their meeting to jointly celebrate Armistice Day, Prime Minister Starmer and French President Macron had spoke of their continuing determination to assist Kiev by allowing the use of their Storm Shadow medium range missiles to strike deep within the RF. However, now that Biden has spoken, those two have fallen silent. It would be safe to say that their loud talk has been called for what it was, a bluff. Now that the U.S. elections have come and gone, now that Donald Trump has shown his determination to end the war in Ukraine on terms likely to equate with a Ukrainian surrender, the British and French leaders understand that it would be the height of stupidity to wreck relations with Donald Trump, with whom they will have to deal for the next four years just to curry favor with Biden, who is sent to the dustbin of history in 60 days. Trump has already threatened to unleash a trade war with Europe. To defy him now on Ukraine will only make that challenge intractable, causing great economic harm to the already weak European economy.
For all of the above reasons, I urge readers to stay closely tuned to further developments, but not to prematurely succumb to dismay.
©Gilbert Doctorow, 2024
The above points form the backbone of today’s chat with Nima Alkhorshid on ‘Dialogue Works’ entitled Will Ukraine Unleash US Missiles on Russia?
See Dr. Gilbert Doctorow: Will Ukraine Unleash US Missiles on Russia?