Ukraine attacked Russia’s Bryansk region on Tuesday night with six American ATACMS ballistic missiles. According to TASR, Russian air defense systems shot down five missiles and damaged one.
This comes after US President Joe Biden’s administration broke another taboo on military aid to Ukraine, allowing Kiev to use US long-range missiles against targets in Russia. In an interview, the military analyst adds that no one has yet directly answered the question of whether Ukraine can use ATACMS missiles everywhere or only in the Kursk region.
“The deployment of weapons would primarily concern military targets such as ammunition depots, command posts or a military airport. ATACMS systems can be used against areas where Russian or North Korean soldiers will be concentrated,” he explains. RICHARD STOJAR from the Center for Security and Military-Strategic Studies of the University of Defense in Brno.
In the interview you will read:
– why Joe Biden changed his mind,
– what the US is looking for,
– how it can change the conflict,
– what he thinks about the fear of the third world war.
Joe Biden authorized Ukraine to use long-range missiles against targets in Russia. This is a significant change in Biden’s policy. Why did the US president change his mind?
Apparently, Joe Biden did not want to make a fundamental decision before the presidential election, which could affect the chances of the Democrats in the elections. He did not want to bring this topic into the campaign. According to him, that was one of the main reasons. In the longer term, there was an effort not to drive the escalation spiral too high.
Probably one of the main reasons for allowing weapons is the presence of North Korean soldiers. This may be a signal to the Russian side not to cross red lines. If the means are primarily intended to hit North Korean troops, then the Russian side should be clearly warned that, from the point of view of the United States, the red line has been crossed.
Experts’ views on Biden’s clearance vary. In your opinion, did the American president make the right or wrong decision?
It is not certain where everywhere Ukrainians can use ATACMS. It is said that it can only be the Kursk region, where the Ukrainians occupied part of the Russian territory. We do not have exact information at this time. Of course, if the permit were to cover the entire territory, it would be a decision of a different scope. It would bring much bigger and more fundamental problems to the Russian Federation. On the other hand, the American would lose one of his levers against Vladimir Putin.
I think that at the moment it is really just a means of warning Russia. And the impact of the involvement of North Korean soldiers in the conflict should be eliminated.
So Washington raised the first warning finger?
It could be one of the first steps. As I mentioned, the news is confusing. But information is emerging that it is a permit in the Kursk region and the first target of the weapons is to be a North Korean element in order to make the Russian side withdraw from the deployment. Or that the Russian-North Korean military partnership is not strengthened too much and that the contingent of 10,000 North Korean soldiers does not grow to the size of 100,000 that is being considered.
You can also listen to the interview with military expert Richard Stojar in the form of the Aktuality Nahlas podcast:
What can Ukrainians use American missiles for? What goals can they aim for?
I will repeat here that it is a fundamental question whether the permit will be limited to the Kursk region or will have a wider character along the entire perimeter of the Russian-Ukrainian border. The range of ATACMS is 300 km. The deployment of the weapons would involve primarily military targets such as ammunition depots, command posts or a military airfield. This means: these would be high value targets.
These missiles are very accurate and can have an area effect. They can be used against areas where Russian or North Korean soldiers will be concentrated. Their use for ammunition depots would restrict or limit the use of Russian artillery as a dominant element on the current Russian-Ukrainian battlefield. And also, for example, if a Russian military airport was within range of the missiles, it would make it impossible for the Russian air force to attack the Ukrainian front line.
It is also questionable how many systems the Americans can supply to the Ukrainians. It is a more sophisticated means and relatively economically expensive. This will certainly save the Ukrainians and use their most important and sensitive military targets.
Operations are getting complicated for the Russians
How can this affect the current situation on the Russian-Ukrainian front and the dynamics of the war?
At this point, it’s again a big unknown. And again, it depends on what the Ukrainians are allowed. If they are restricted to the Kursk region, the effects will not be as great as if they were given a free hand to operate along the entire length of the front line. The second factor is, of course, the number of funds. If they had enough of them, it would cause considerable problems for Russia. If they are supplied in more limited numbers, they will be used only for the most valuable targets.
Probably the majority of observers agree that they will not bring about any fundamental turning point in the conflict. Similarly, it was not brought by HIMARSI or F-16, from whom much was expected, but their action is still very limited. But it can complicate Russian operations. Russia, for example, would have to withdraw part of its air defense assets from a section that would become vulnerable.
Prime Minister Robert Fico recorded a video entitled Who supports the decision of US President Joe Biden, supports the start of the third world war. Words about the third world war are also heard from Russia. Could the US president’s decision cause a third world war?
Such rhetoric could be expected from Russia. The Russian side takes any similar step negatively. And there is of course the question of how far the escalation spiral would go. I think that the American approach is trying to keep the Russian reaction within an acceptable standard. Russia will try to argue again about the possible use of tactical nuclear weapons, but I think it is premature to talk about a conflict on a global scale.
Of course, it certainly moves the escalating spiral a bit somewhere else and it can lead to, say, processes that will be difficult to regulate.
But you don’t expect it to start the third world.
I don’t think it’s that big of a problem at the moment.
What is ATACMS?
The ATACMS missile system (Army Tactical Missile System) has been a key part of the US missile arsenal since the 1990s. It is a ballistic missile with a flat flight path and a range of up to 300 kilometers, which can carry a warhead weighing 230 kilograms. The ATACMS is launched from the same system as the HIMARS missiles, but each launcher can only carry one ATACMS missile instead of the six standard HIMARS missiles. Hitting accuracy is within 10 meters of the target, which enables precise strikes on military targets such as ammunition depots, command posts or troop gatherings. The US first deployed them in combat during Operation Desert Storm in 1991, and since then they have undergone several modernizations.
Ukrainians were supposed to use ATACMS on Russian territory for the first time today. Will we be seeing more of these moves over the next two months — because Donald Trump may revoke Biden’s clearance in January?
Probably yes. The attacks will certainly continue. But it will affect the number of funds available to Ukraine. But I don’t think the new president, Donald Trump, will outright rescind this current permit. Rather, it will limit or completely stop the supply of ATACMS to Ukraine.
Today is exactly the thousandth day of the war. Can it be said that the permission of Joe Biden, the presence of North Korean soldiers in the Kursk region indicates that we are watching some new phase of fighting and the development of the conflict?
Today is a symbolic date. At the beginning, probably someone could not imagine that there would be a conflict that would last more than a thousand days. Plus at the moment the situation is still deadlocked. I don’t think we’ll see a dramatic turnaround or reversal in the coming weeks or months. On the other hand, both parties undoubtedly have the will to continue and the resources to carry it out.
Several media reports that the Russians have had a successful month in terms of conquered territories. Does this phase of the war show that the war is currently in favor of Russia?
Yes, Russia is maintaining its initiative at the moment. And perhaps the permission of the American president will help to reverse and stabilize this situation, so that there is no significant erosion of the front line to Ukraine’s disadvantage.
