E-MAIL THIS LINK
To: 

Step Towards Escalation: Why the West Is Scaring Russia with Long-Range Missiles
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
by Mikhail Zakharov

[REGNUM] On the evening of November 17, the American newspaper The New York Times, citing sources, reported that outgoing US President Joe Biden had given the Kiev regime permission to use ATACMS tactical missiles to strike Russian territory. However, the White House officially declined to comment on this.

As The New York Times reported, Biden's decision is related to "the presence of North Korean forces in the Kursk region," which "has caused the need to strengthen the defense of the Ukrainian military." At the same time, Reuters, also citing unnamed sources, reported that the Ukrainian Armed Forces could launch the first strike with long-range missiles "in the coming days."

Almost immediately, the French newspaper Le Figaro rushed to write that France and Britain, following the US, lifted restrictions on Ukraine's strikes on Russia with SCALP/Storm Shadow missiles. But already on Monday morning, November 18, the newspaper removed from its text the information that Paris and London had lifted their veto.

Experts and world media are confident that Biden's decision will lead to an escalation of the Ukrainian conflict, but will not radically improve Kiev's position. Thus, the CNN television company noted that the Ukrainian Armed Forces are unlikely to achieve significant success due to their lack of weapons. In turn, US Senator Mike Lee said that the situation creates the preconditions for the start of World War III.

WHAT WEAPONS WERE “UNBLOCKED” FOR UKRAINE
ATACMS are ground-launched tactical ballistic missiles designed and manufactured by the American corporation Lockheed Martin. They can be launched from multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS), including the M142 HIMARS and the heavier M270 MLRS.

The Pentagon is in no hurry to disclose which modifications of ATACMS were transferred to Ukraine, but in the new versions the missiles can attack targets at a distance of up to 300 kilometers. Thus, western Russian regions and regional centers, including Kursk and Voronezh, may be in their strike zone.

As for the Anglo-French SCALP/Storm Shadow air-launched cruise missiles, they have a longer range and can cover a distance of more than 500 kilometers. However, military expert Vasily Dandykin notes, NATO weapons are unlikely to affect the course of a special military operation for two reasons. Firstly, the Ukrainian Armed Forces simply have very few such missiles, and secondly, Russian air defense is able to professionally shoot them down.

In a conversation with the Regnum news agency, Dandykin recalled that our air defense forces are already familiar with Western missiles; the Ukrainian Armed Forces fired them at Crimea and Sevastopol, but most were shot down.

“We know how to fight NATO missiles,” says the expert.

HAPPY CHOIR AND TAME "OPPOSITION"
Despite the fact that there is no official confirmation of permission to fire long-range missiles deep into Russia, American satellites are already wildly rejoicing. Volodymyr Zelensky called this a key point of the so-called plan for Ukraine's victory. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock considered Biden's possible decision "extremely important at this moment." And Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda even declared that a decisive moment had arrived in Ukraine's fight against the "aggressor."

It is noteworthy that on the same day, November 17, when information about Biden's decision appeared, an "anti-war march" was held in Berlin, organized by the "opposition" that had left Russia and various foreign agents. Among the slogans at the march was a request to transfer Western missiles to the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Obviously, this is not a simple coincidence, but a planned move by the Biden administration, which is using the "opposition".

At the same time, even in Washington, the news about permission for the Ukrainian Armed Forces to strike at Russian territories caused a mixed reaction.

The same New York Times article voiced concerns that Ukraine's use of American ATACMS missiles could provoke Moscow to respond with force against Washington and its allies.

BIDEN'S LEGACY FOR TRUMP
With his decision, Biden is trying to hit not only Russia, but also President-elect Donald Trump — this is a popular opinion in the United States. The outgoing head of state is complicating the situation for the new administration, said billionaire David Sachs.

" President Trump has a clear mandate to end the war in Ukraine. What is Biden doing in his last two months in office? Massively escalating it," Sachs wrote on social media.

In a commentary for IA Regnum, international political scientist and professor at St. Petersburg State University Stanislav Tkachenko also notes that the Democrats, who are losing power, are making Trump’s life miserable.

“If Kamala Harris had won the election, there would have been no decision,” says Tkachenko, clarifying that Biden decided to take this step “out of diplomatic and foreign policy irresponsibility.”

Unsurprisingly, there was a flurry of criticism from Republicans. Billionaire and Trump ally Elon Musk warned that Russia would “respond in kind,” agreeing with the assertion that “American liberals love war.” And Trump’s son Donald Trump Jr. went so far as to call those who allowed Ukraine to strike deep into Russian territory imbeciles. In his opinion, such a move by the current presidential administration was dictated by the desire of the US military-industrial complex to make money, spitting on people’s lives.

RUSSIA'S REACTION
The official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Maria Zakharova, recalled that President Vladimir Putin had previously spoken out about strikes on Russian territory by American long-range weapons. On September 12, the head of state noted that this would mean direct participation of the United States and other NATO countries in the war in Ukraine.

“And something very important, perhaps key: flight assignments for these missile systems, in essence, can only be entered by military personnel from NATO countries… We are talking about making a decision whether NATO countries are directly participating in a military conflict or not,” Putin said.

A month and a half later, on October 27, the president added: The Defense Ministry is studying various possible responses if Ukraine starts using Western long-range weapons to strike deep into the country. Putin also expressed hope that his warnings to the West about such actions had been heard.

In turn, the first deputy chairman of the Federation Council Committee on Defense and Security, Viktor Bondarev, stated on November 18 that the routes of military supplies for the Ukrainian army are known to the Russian Armed Forces, and the missiles will be a legitimate target for Russia.

“In any case, Russia has enough advanced means to repel attacks from any type of weapons, including long-range ones,” Bondarev added.

Overall, the situation remains in limbo. There is no official confirmation of Biden's decision, Western officials are holding a pause. Apparently, to see Moscow's reaction and decide whether to allow the Ukrainian Armed Forces to strike deep into our country or not.

However, a calm reaction should not relax them - Russia has something to respond with. And not necessarily with regard to Ukraine, notes Stanislav Tkachenko: the issue may also include NATO military bases in third countries.


Posted by: badanov 2024-11-19
http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=726078