President Biden has made headlines with his recent decision to allow Ukraine to use long-range missiles to strike deep inside Russian territory. This significant policy shift marks the first time Washington has authorized such action, previously careful to restrict Ukraine's access to American-made ATACMS missiles within the borders of Russia. Biden’s green light for these strikes, set against the backdrop of the looming threat of North Korean troops aiding Russia, reshapes the dynamics of the war for Ukraine, adding much-needed firepower to their arsenal.
Prior to this announcement, the U.S. had held back, fearing escalation of the conflict with Russia. The reversal of this policy not only reflects heightened support for Ukraine but also raises questions about future military strategies and geopolitical stability as Biden prepares to exit the presidency—just two months before Donald Trump takes office. With Trump asserting intentions to reduce American involvement and support for Ukraine, the window for Biden to assert influence and aid is drawing to a close.
The ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile System) missiles represent one of the most formidable weapons provided to Ukraine, capable of hitting targets up to 300 kilometers (approximately 186 miles) away. Ukrainian officials had long argued against restrictions on missile use, comparing it to fighting with one arm tied behind their back. Their frustrations have been palpable as they faced off against Russian forces, who, as of late, have been gaining ground.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky hasn't yet publicly confirmed the new operational capabilities but is firmly advocating for decisive military action. He stated, "Strikes are not made with words… the missiles will speak for themselves," hinting at strong intentions to utilize the missiles swiftly and effectively.
Strategically, initial strikes using ATACMS are expected to focus on the Kursk region, where Ukraine has controlled substantial territory since August. With panic rising among Russian and North Korean forces gearing up for attacks of their own, the Ukrainian military is likely to use the missiles defensively to target key Russian military bases and supply lines. Though important, experts warn these missiles alone might not shift the war’s balance decisively; they will, undoubtedly, serve as symbolic support from the U.S., indicating commitment to Ukraine’s defense.
Politically, this decision from the Biden administration has reignited discussions over what constitutes escalation in this conflict. Vladimir Putin has consistently warned against allowing Western weapons to be deployed against Russia, framing such actions as direct NATO involvement. Historically, many Western military supports have crossed previously drawn red lines without igniting global war, but fears of overstepping remain at the forefront of U.S. foreign policy.
Trump's impending presidency poses potential uncertainties. Although the exact stance he will adopt on military assistance to Ukraine remains unclear, many—both allies and executives within his party—have voiced skepticism about continued U.S. military support. Trump Jr. has even criticized the current military aid, evoking concerns of unintentional escalation, such as stumbling toward World War III.
While Ukraine embraces the opportunity to strike back, there are voices within the nation cautioning against complacency. Kyiv MP Mariia Ionova emphasizes the need for comprehensive strategies beyond missile use. Ionova argues, "Missiles are not the silver bullet against our common enemies… we need change in strategy, more training, more western military instructors." Highlighting the urgency of international support for Ukraine resonates deeply as the war drags on, with lives continually at stake.
Meanwhile, the bloodshed continues unabated. Russian missile strikes recently claimed the lives of eleven civilians, including two children, highlighting the situation’s severity. Moscow's air defense reportedly intercepted numerous Ukrainian drone incursions during this same time, showcasing the intensity of the conflict and Russia's reactive posture.
European voices are also increasingly vocal. Keir Starmer, leader of the UK Labour Party, has reiterated calls for stronger support for Ukraine, positioning the issue as one of prime importance at this week’s G20 summit. Starmer insists, "We need to double down" on efforts to back Ukraine amid the shifting political currents.
Looking forward, the decision to authorize strikes inside Russia using ATACMS could pave the way for similar permissions for Ukrainian forces to use other Western-supplied weapons, like the Storm Shadow missiles from France and the UK. These developments indicate movement toward more cohesive military support across allies as they address the perception of growing Russian aggression.
At this juncture, one fundamental question remains: is this new military capability—a calculated risk taken by Biden’s administration—a step toward resolving the conflict or merely heightening tensions? Observers will have to wait and see how the pieces of this complex puzzle align,”
