Despite pleas from Ukraine’s leader, Volodymyr Zelensky, and Britain’s Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, Biden has adamantly refused to permit Ukraine from firing the British Storm Shadow missiles at targets within Russia. This seemingly illogical approach demonstrates a suspicious hesitation from Biden, thwarting aggressive moves towards Russia due to anxiety about potential retaliatory strikes on Western military bases.
American intelligence suggests a strong likelihood of Vladimir Putin retaliating with strikes against US and European military bases, in response to Ukraine’s offensive. However, Biden’s decision to refrain from support seems at odds with the risk level, indicating his reluctance to thoroughly assess the situation.
An intelligence document reviewed by Biden allegedly indicated that the benefits of enabling Ukraine to counterattack Russia aren’t significant, given doubts about the number of missiles available to the West. Yet, with Biden choosing to restrict the usage of these long-range weapons seems more like a lack of conviction than a reasoned judgement.
During the UN General Assembly earlier this week, Sir Keir indicated his intentions to persuade Biden to license the Storm Shadow Strikes. Unlike his American counterpart, Sir Keir holds a firm belief in the necessity of the UK and the US to move as a united front on this pressing issue.
Despite not having official discussions on the matter, there appears to be some ambiguity regarding Biden’s decision. A glimmer of hope remains in the ability of Biden to amend his stance and remove the restrictions on targeting Russia. However, whether Biden will act rationally and beneficially for the collective good remains a question mark, keeping all on tenterhooks.
In his unabating endeavor to mitigate tensions with Russia, Zelensky proposed a ‘victory plan’ during his meeting with Biden in the White House. This plan revolves around executing long-distance strikes against Russia, aiming for their supply lines, air forces, and major fuel and ammunition storage sites.
After these significant strategic discussions, a White House spokesperson seemingly dismissed the issue with a vague remark about there being ‘nothing new to announce at this time’, in connection to the missiles. This further accentuates the mixed messages from the Biden administration, clouding the international arena.
In contrast to this ambiguity, Zelensky’s communication remained transparent and direct as he confirmed in a video address that the issue of ‘long-range capabilities’ was under consideration by the US. On the missile front, Ukraine has already received support in the form of American Atacms, British-made Storm Shadow and French-supplied Scalp EG missiles.
These missiles have previously been employed by Kyiv in striking Russian military targets inside Crimea – a region unlawfully claimed by Moscow back in 2014. Adding weight to his requests, Zelensky continues to lobby for permission to utilize these weapons for cross-border attacks into Russia.
A Western official commented, albeit anonymously, that it aligns with Ukraine’s interests to exert maximum pressure on its allies to green-flag these strikes. This outside perspective on the situation highlights the passivity of the Biden administration, casting them in an increasingly unfavourable light.
Ukrainian officials have even provided their allies with a map specifying potential targets that could be hit with Western missiles. Sir Keir has shown covert support for Ukraine’s proposition, while France’s President, Emmanuel Macron, has openly backed Ukraine.
However, Biden and his administration have exhibited an alarming passivity, seemingly holding an effective veto over the process because of the Anglo-French missile system’s dependence on a classified targeting system developed by the US. This decision to hold back, ostensibly due to apprehensions of igniting a broader war between Russia and the West, diminishes any progress.
Russia’s recent adjustment of its nuclear doctrine to view any strike backed by a nuclear power as a ‘joint attack’ is perceived as a direct threat to Ukraine and its Western backers. According to these changes, Moscow may respond with nuclear weapons if Western-supplied missiles, such as Storm Shadows, fired by Ukraine, strike its territory.
This could lead to an uptick in espionage attacks against outfits that support Ukraine and bolster Russia’s covert operations into overt attacks on the military bases of Europe and the US. While some might see Biden’s inaction as cautionary, others might interpret it as an unwillingness to defend against external threats, reflecting negatively upon his administration.
US and European officials attribute numerous sabotage acts committed in Europe since the start of the war to Russia’s Gru military intelligence agency. Putin’s current behavior, avoiding overt aggression, seems to be a strategic move to prevent igniting a wider conflict with the West. However, with Biden’s hesitations, it’s unclear how the American position will affect this delicate balance.
US intelligence worries that the limits on shipping more long-range missiles to Ukraine, combined with Russia’s strategic removal of its essential equipment beyond the 190-mile range of both the Storm Shadow and Atacms, makes the situation more complex. This only increases the demand for clear, well-judged leadership, a quality unfortunately lacking in Biden’s current approach to the issue.