In what seems to be one of the most questionable decisions, President Biden has recently approved the use of American long-range missiles by Ukraine to target locations within Russia. This stunning shift in American policy comes at a time when the Biden administration is on the way out, and President-elect Trump waits in the wings to take over, promising an end to the ongoing conflict and expressing doubts over continuous US support. The decision to use these weapons can likely be traced back to North Korea’s unexpected dispatch of several troops to Russia, believed to be an indicator of their support for President Putin’s invasive actions in Ukraine.
Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, along with some Western allies, has been urging Biden for an extended period to authorize Ukraine to use Western-supplied missiles to strike military establishments within Russia. They argue that the denial from the United States has represented an insurmountable obstruction to Ukraine’s attempts to halt Russian aggressions against its cities and electrical infrastructures. It seems that a fear of escalating the situation towards a direct confrontation between the United States, other NATO countries, and Russia was a significant reason for Biden’s initial opposition.
However, the deployment of thousands of North Korean troops to assist Moscow in reclaiming territory from Ukraine in the Kursk border region, which was previously appropriated by Ukraine, seemed to have shifted Biden’s stance. The involvement of North Korean military personnel in the conflict has seemingly tipped the scales in Moscow’s favor, providing Putin with more leverage to enforce his demands and perpetuating a situation that benefits those who don’t support Ukraine’s sovereignty.
In the wake of this situation, President-elect Trump has hinted at potentially persuading Ukraine to capitulate and relinquish some parts of the land occupied by Russia. This suggestion provides a possible pathway towards tranquility, albeit one that primarily impacts Ukraine negatively and serves Russia’s interests. An estimated count of 12,000 North Korean soldiers has allegedly been dispatched to Russia, as assessed by American, South Korean, and Ukrainian authorities.
Not only are North Korean troops bolstering Russia’s military force, but intelligence officials from America and South Korea have also reported that North Korea has supplied significant quantities of munitions to Russia to maintain its military capabilities. These actions are an affront to Ukraine’s efforts for maintaining territorial integrity and sovereignty, while at the same time, offering aid and abetment to Russia’s agenda.
Trump, who will officially occupy office come January, has shown a marked avoidance of expressing a clear-cut stance on whether he would like Ukraine to triumph in this conflict. He had unveiled his thoughts regarding his desire to end the war in Ukraine during his presidential campaign, yet avoided any direct commitment to Ukraine.
Despite this, Trump has routinely criticized the Biden administration for unreasonably providing Kyiv with billions of dollars in aid. This has raised the specter of a biased settlement towards Russia, creating an atmosphere of anxiety among Ukraine’s supporters who worry about a potentially unfair deal under Trump’s administration.
Putin’s aggressive standpoint towards granting authorization to use long-range weapons on Russian targets has implications of direct conflict with Russia. Moreover, he has issued warnings that such moves from the United States might indeed be construed as the initiation of an all-out war against Russia.
In Biden’s final stages of presidency, it seems that he has only amplified the crisis confronting Ukraine. Despite the evidence pointing to North Korea’s support of Russia and the alleged militarization aid provided, the Biden administration chose to enter this risky arena, perhaps causing more harm than good.
It’s highly possible that Biden’s controversial decision to permit Ukraine to use Western missiles could exacerbate the situation instead of remedying it. Such a dire scenario could result in an increase in tension and potential harm to the already fragile situation.
Besides, Biden’s reluctance to stand strong against potential Russian aggression demonstrates a lack of firm resolve during his tenure. This wavering might end up paving the way for a future U.S. administration to tackle an even more arduous geopolitical arena.
The evolution of these events paints an image of an American foreign policy filled with questionable decisions and a perceptible lack of decisive leadership. It has significantly compromised Ukraine’s position while encouraging Russia’s blatant breaches of sovereign territories.
As the reins of presidency proceed into Trump’s hands, the world will watch with bated breath to gauge how these unfolding scenarios will be addressed. The hope remains that the end of the war arrives sooner rather than later, without any more harm befalling Ukraine.