The Ukrainians have a point. Since the Russians stage men and weapons systems just over the border and store ammunition and fuel close to Ukraine, why not let Kyiv strike with heavy-duty end items like ATACMS missiles and F-16s at these targets – including destroying Russian cities?
Su-34 Fullback. Creator: Vitaly V. Kuzmin. Credit: Vitaly V. Kuzmin
After all, it is Russia that invaded first and steadfastly bombed Ukrainian population centers, killing untold civilians.
In fact, reports are breaking that the Biden Administration might allow non-U.S. weapons to be used for long-range strikes. Is that a good idea?
Will Long-range Strikes Unnecessarily Escalate the War?
However, doubts surely remain–and nothing is set in stone. The United States and its NATO allies are unsure about upping the ante in this fashion.
Russia is a nuclear power after all, and Vladimir Putin has threatened to use nuclear weapons then and now. He could also prod his generals to make attack plans to hit NATO countries and create an all-out World War Three type of situation in Europe. The risk of Russian escalation is palpable.
Let Ukraine Give Russia a Taste Of Its Own Medicine
But Volodymyr Zelensky is undeterred. The Ukrainians want revenge, payback, and a decisive end to the war. Attacks in the Russian heartland (beyond small drone strikes) could improve Ukraine’s strategic footing and allow them to negotiate for better terms if talks to end the war ever commence. It would also be nice if the Russians called no joy and put up the white flag.
Putin Says Don’t Mess Around, Or the West Will Find Out
Putin has warned long-range strikes from Ukraine would be a reason for all-out war against NATO and the United States by association.
“This will mean that NATO countries – the United States and European countries – are at war with Russia. And if this is the case, then, bearing in mind the change in the essence of the conflict, we will make appropriate decisions in response to the threats that will be posed to us,” Putin told journalists on September 12.
Biden Is Non-Committal
Besides recent reports, the Biden administration has been vague about its plans. Secretary of State Antony Blinken made a vapid comment about how the battlefield has changed and how the situation has “evolved,” but he gave no clear indication that the United States would support Ukraine’s desire for long-range strikes from heavy-duty weapons.
Long-range Strikes Could Mean American Military Advisors in Ukraine
Using these types of weapons doesn’t mean the United States would just stand by innocently. There would need to be assistance and that could mean American personnel in the theater to help out. Ukraine would need a hand with intelligence, overhead satellite imagery, targeting, battle damage assessment, and other types of in-person support. One thing that the United States has been clear on throughout the war in Ukraine is no boots on the ground – even unarmed military advisers are out of the question.
A member of 2nd Battalion, The Parachute Regiment fires a Next-generation Light Anti-tank Weapon (NLAW)…Paratroopers have demonstrated the firepower that they could bring to bear during combat missions as the British Army’s global response force. ..As the culmination of a course in support weapons skills, paratroopers staged a firepower demonstration on Salisbury Plain. ..The Next-generation Light Anti-tank Weapon (NLAW) is the first, non-expert, short-range, anti-tank missile that rapidly knocks out any main battle tank in just one shot by striking it from above…NLAW utilises predicted line of sight guidance and has overfly top and direct attack modes, and it is easy to use, making it a valuable tank destroyer for light forces that operate dismounted in all environments, including built up areas…It also has night vision capability and is designed for all climate conditions and environments..
Pressure for Supporting Ukraine Long-range Strikes
Nevertheless, Congressional lawmakers from both parties and the established foreign policy blob in Washington, DC, plus many voters, are in favor of long-range strikes.
This places pressure on President Joe Biden, even though he is a lame duck. The Ukrainians want concrete answers and permission as soon as possible. They need more good news and progress in the war.
Time for Ukraine to Bomb Kursk?
The Kursk incursion operation has been a success, but it has bogged down, and the Russians are now counter-attacking. That area of operations would be one target of long-range strikes with heavy-duty weapons. Plus, Ukraine would love to hit railroad infrastructure to punish Russia. The Kremlin depends on a large network of rail to transport its arms and supplies to the front. And then there are Russian cities. If Russia sustained a large number of civilian casualties, it could sue for peace when Putin loses public support for the war.
Let’s Do an Armistice and Korea-like DMZ in Ukraine
My own position on escalation is different. I want peace negotiations now to discuss terms of an immediate ceasefire and eventual armistice that would create a Korea-like demilitarized zone. I discussed this peace plan in my latest book. Both sides would have to give up territory for the compromise. Russia would allow Ukraine to stay in Kursk and Ukraine would allow Russia to remain in Donbas. Freeze the battle lines where they are, back up ten miles and establish the DMZ. This would be administered by the United Nations as it is in Korea. This has kept the peace on the Korean-peninsula since 1953 and peace is what we need in Ukraine and Russia.
Stop Military Aid Until Ukraine and Russia Come to the Table
The United States and NATO allies could make this happen by freezing all future aid to Ukraine – giving the allies leverage to force a ceasefire and negotiations. This war has gone on too long. I do not support long-range strikes into Ukraine. Let’s stop the fighting and killing. No-one but Donald Trump has talked about ending the war, but he doesn’t have a concrete peace plan. What would he do if elected but talk on the phone pointlessly? He probably has no idea.
I’m the only one calling for a DMZ and I’m admittedly out on an island alone, but with the fighting entering its third year, it is time for creativity and fresh ideas. An armistice and DMZ to cease hostilities makes sense in a war that has defied prediction and expectations.
It is time for peace, and we will not see it with the execution of long-range strikes from Ukraine into Russia.
About the Author: Dr. Brent M. Eastwood
Brent M. Eastwood, PhD is the author of Don’t Turn Your Back On the World: a Conservative Foreign Policy and Humans, Machines, and Data: Future Trends in Warfare plus two other books. Brent was the founder and CEO of a tech firm that predicted world events using artificial intelligence. He served as a legislative fellow for U.S. Senator Tim Scott and advised the senator on defense and foreign policy issues. He has taught at American University, George Washington University, and George Mason University. Brent is a former U.S. Army Infantry officer. He can be followed on X @BMEastwood.
One-World-Order
September 13, 2024 at 3:52 pm
Long-range weapons put into the hands of zelenskyy for his use to equip his vaunted chabad-banderite units are exactly like the vengeance weapons of ww2.
The first result would be russia’s hunting those units with Iskander missiles.
But What if those vengeance weapons were directed against russian nuclear power plants by zelenskyy’s units with aid of western satellite transmission guidance.
The second result would be kinzhals screaming through the donbass battlefield carrying tactical warheads.
BOOM ! The resulting blasts will resonate through to the halls of brussels, berlin and london.
Then, f-35s and euro typhoons and maybe some unmanned craft would quickly wing their way eastward for the final showdown on ukrainian territory. For vengeance.
bosie
September 14, 2024 at 1:44 am
Biden and starmer could possibly collude with each other to allow zelenskyy to hit Russia with long range weapons like storm shadow missiles and ATACMs in Kursk.
The target of the trio would naturally be putin. Or maybe not.
Long range strikes could be used by zelenskyy to hit military and economic targets inside Russia.
But Biden would much prefer US-enabled long range strikes to hit putin. It could then result in the desired regime change in Moscow.
Biden has this darkened black corner in his chest that tells him putin is his sworn enemy and thus the mike Tyson president must deliver a seriously deadly knockout blow.
The best way would be a cluster of ATACM missiles fired from inside Kursk straight to Putin’s meeting room.
Putin’s days are NUMBERED !
mawendt
September 14, 2024 at 11:15 am
Dr. Eastwood, as you get older you have certainly become more compromising. My opinion, a rebuttal:
“Now Isn’t the Time for Long-range Strikes Against Russia.” True, but for the wrong reasons. First, terminology. The strikes aren’t against Russia but against strategic targets that will inhibit Russia’s ability to prosecute war in Ukraine. This neutral crafted statement sounds as if it is an aggressive action, when rather it is a strike against an aggressor. Second, *it is past time*. The West has constantly put limiters on how weapons could be employed against Russia, a nation that has invaded a neighbor, committed actual and documented war crimes, violated several Ukrainian-Russian and international treaties, UN principles, international and Geneva conventions and laws… The answer the world must have is not weakness, but “Russia, get out of Ukraine, or it’ll get worse for you”.
“Will Long-range Strikes Unnecessarily Escalate the War?” The word wrong here is ‘unnecessarily’. The war is prolonged not by the West, or Ukraine, or employment of F16 or ATCMs or any Western system – but by the invading Russians not leaving Ukraine. Your posit of nuclear war is and has always been present for many reasons, yet the West keeps a cap on nuclear war due to being GENERATIONS ahead of aggressive Russian nuclear capabilities. As much as many tout Russia’s nuclear capabilities – they suck. In production, maintenance, C4, and more. And Russia’s nuclear defense capability is virtually non-existent. If one or a few Russian ICBMs are launched, there is a 100% chance of of knocking them down with the West selectively retaliating, so Russia is faced with an all-or-nothing strike against the West to try to saturate defenses. If a SLBM or battlefield nuke is used, it couldn’t be stopped, yet the retaliation by the West would be punishing. At any time the West knows the location of the entire Russian surface fleet, and depending on the time of year, 80 to 90% of the sub-surface fleet – and the West has the technology to make that wreckage. Unless a multitude of Western satellites are destroyed, the West can effectively target all of Russia’s SAM defenses, fixed ballistic and conventional missile sites, and virtually every military thing of value at any time. It a matter of less than a day, Russia would have no military of which to speak. So when Russia threatens Nuclear war, it’s a question of how insane are the Russian leaders and how fickle and scared Western leadership are today, not any real strategy. If there is an action, there will be a response. Threats are immaterial.
“Let Ukraine Give Russia a Taste Of Its Own Medicine.” Nope. Although that thought is always there for a wronged party, nation, or ex-wife, in this case the ‘taste’ is to disrupt supply and target support units a hundred miles or more back is very strategic. The ‘medicine’ is to kill Russian military assets and war supporting industry long before it can be employed against Ukraine. Pretty effective with cheap drones, devastating with military grade long range weapons. The employment of LR systems against Russia, if done in scale, ends this conflict *or* makes Russia use a battlefield nuke, which today to me seems less likely that Russia having a coup and withdrawing in shame.
“Putin Says Don’t Mess Around, Or the West Will Find Out.” Putin says a lot. But so many times his bluff has been called and nothing happens. The message back should be “Bring it. Get out of Ukraine. Put up or shut up.”
“Biden Is Non-Committal.” Polite way of saying his decision makers who actually run things for a dementia ridden man are wishy-washy cowards. This admin is a presidency run by committee, and it shows in everything.
“Long-range Strikes Could Mean American Military Advisors in Ukraine.” Already there, unofficially. PMCs and surrogates, as well as ‘observers’. So… what?
“Pressure for Supporting Ukraine Long-range Strikes.” Meh. You have the people who know the right thing to do, and people that fret and do the easy thing. A rouge nation without casus belli wrongfully invades its neighbor. It could be anywhere and anyone in the world. It demands all lawful nations to take the side against the aggressor, or the world falls apart. The West ignored Georgia, Donbas-Luhansk, Crimea, Moldava – and it led to Russians trying to use force to flip a nation. Weakness and academia led us here, not employment of strength.
“Let’s Do an Armistice and Korea-like DMZ in Ukraine” This position sickens me. As a US Army trained North Korean Ground Forces Intelligence Analyst. With extensive knowledge of the conditions in North Korea, and the cost of maintaining the DMZ. As it should sicken anyone who knows why there is a Korean DMZ, and how it came to be. Russia has been fought to a standstill. It’s military suffering crippling losses that will take more than two decades to rebuild. The Russian military has showed incompetence in tactical ability and leadership to the world. The Russia government whines more that it decides. By stagnating the conflict, little Ukraine has won through attrition. Land for Peace? Please, Mr. Chamberlain, save us from ourselves. The best argument is Russia has considerable lands it doesn’t manage properly, why give Donbas and Luhansk and Crimea with it’s populations for additional mismanagement? The DMZ solution has led to a Western paradise and a Communist hell hole of generations of suffering and death – at the hands of academics and politicians that took the easy way out of a conflict. And you support that. C’mon, buddy. This is academia talking, latte in hand, sitting at some tenured position with a hidden mini-bar and plans for Lagos with the Fellows later. If Land for Peace is fine with you – send to me a transfer for your land, house or apartment with all it’s contents. Get a taste first hand how it feels to give it up for peace. And newsflash: DMZs only work when other nations commit to supporting it, like US. We already have promises in place that we would support Ukraine back when they gave up their nukes, Keep those promises. Yet your DMZ solution wants to do… what? Put 40,000 US and or NATO soldiers on the Russian border? NATO nations won’t support that. The DMZ idea isn’t particularly well thought out.
“Stop Military Aid Until Ukraine and Russia Come to the Table.” Stop aid, Russia ignores the West, and wins through brute force. And then ignores the West some more, this time with a false sense of success. Absolutely not. Here’s the table you speak of: Ukraine and Russia shows up. Ukraine says, “You can have peace by going returning all Ukrainian lands and going back to the international borders.” Russia says: “OK”. Does it. Peace. That’s what it has to be.
“It is time for peace, and we will not see it with the execution of long-range strikes from Ukraine into Russia.” I disagree. Russia is cracking in so many places. The LR strike capability probably will effect the already brittle infrastructure, particularly the energy production sector of Russia’s economy, as well as make the life of the Russian military living hell. It will also probably directly threaten the Kremlin politicians and deep C3, It will cause Russia to expend stressed assets to defend. Russian society will feel fear and the anger of a unprotected citizenry, with stories from returned injured soldiers of weakness and incompetence and failure that will fuel rebellion. As it always happens in a nation losing a conflict.
It is time for peace, and we will see it start with the use of LR strikes into Russia.
Richard Crawford
September 15, 2024 at 8:01 am
Respectfully, I take issue with any attempts to tell the Ukrainians how to prosecute their war. This is dictating to another sovereign nation what their national security and foreign policy will be, thus disrespecting their sovereignty. My opinion applies equally to Israel btw. As long as Russian troop concentrations, fuel and arms depots, and logistics hubs are safe behind the border the war will continue unabated. The repeated hand-wringing over Russian nuclear weapons is a bit of a joke. I think we all, from the common citizen to pundits to politicians, seem to forget that the West has them too. Russia would do well to remember that. Perhaps they should be reminded of this and end their rhetoric. The Russians love their children too (as Sting once wrote in a song.) Ukraine is not an aggressor and was invaded without cause. If we are to support them it should be without condition and give them the means to protect their borders, their people and their sovereignty.
Iconoclastic Tim
September 21, 2024 at 6:45 am
Logged in to say the same thing. Want to dictate their strategy? become their leader
Pingback: The Russian Air Force Is 'Dropping Like Flies' in the Ukraine War - The Pakistan Journal