On the 1,000th day of the war between Ukraine and Russia, kyiv made a strategic move that could redefine the course of the conflict. For the first time, Ukraine used long-range ATACMS missiles, supplied by the United States, to attack Russian territory, which Moscow has called a “significant escalation.”
THE ATTACK AND ITS IMPLICATIONS
On Tuesday, Russia said its forces shot down five of six missiles fired at a military facility in the Bryansk region. However, one of them hit the target without causing casualties or significant damage, according to Russian authorities.
For its part, Ukraine claimed to have hit a Russian weapons depot 110 kilometers inside enemy territory, causing secondary explosions. Although kyiv did not confirm the type of weapons used, American sources assured that they were ATACMS missiles.
WHAT IS ATACMS AND WHY IS IT RELEVANT?
Developed by Lockheed Martin, the ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile System) was designed during the Cold War to destroy strategic targets at depth. With a range of up to 300 kilometers, these missiles can hit ammunition depots, headquarters and troop concentrations, facilitating attacks beyond the front lines.
A key feature of this weaponry is its ability to disperse bomblets over large areas, causing considerable damage. Its use by Ukraine marks an important tactical change, allowing direct attacks on Russian territory.
THE POSITION OF THE UNITED STATES
After years of pressure from Ukraine, Washington recently authorized the use of long-range missiles against Russia. According to US officials, the decision responds to Russian support from North Korean troops, with around 11,000 soldiers deployed in border regions.
President Joe Biden justified the measure as an endorsement of Ukrainian sovereignty, although his administration has been cautious in avoiding direct confrontation with Moscow.
A CHANGE ON THE CONFLICT BOARD?
The attack with the ATACMS has been received with forceful statements. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sibiga noted that this action can have a positive impact on the battlefield. For his part, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated that the use of these missiles inaugurates a new phase of the war, accusing the West of actively participating in the conflict.
Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin issued an update to Russian nuclear doctrine, lowering the threshold for the use of atomic weapons in the face of threats to its territorial integrity, a clear warning to the West.
A CONFLICT THAT DOES NOT GIVE
The war, which has already left thousands dead and displaced more than six million Ukrainians, continues to escalate with new tools and strategies. Although the use of ATACMS strengthens the Ukrainian position, military experts consider it unlikely that this will be enough to change the course of the conflict, which is approaching three years in duration.
The international community, meanwhile, is cautiously observing a confrontation that not only redefines borders, but also global balances of power.
What are the specific tactical advantages of using ATACMS missiles in the Ukraine-Russia conflict?
Interview Between Time.news Editor and Military Expert on ATACMS Missile Usage in the Ukraine-Russia Conflict
Editor: Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us today. We’re here to discuss a significant development on the 1,000th day of the Ukraine-Russia war, where Ukraine has utilized long-range ATACMS missiles against Russian territory. To help us unpack this situation, we have military expert Dr. Elena Petrova with us. Welcome, Dr. Petrova!
Dr. Petrova: Thank you for having me. It’s good to be here.
Editor: Let’s get straight into it. Ukraine’s recent missile strike marks a notable shift in the conflict. Could you explain the importance of using the ATACMS missiles for the first time?
Dr. Petrova: Absolutely. The use of ATACMS missiles represents a significant tactical escalation. These missiles have a range of up to 300 kilometers, meaning they allow Ukraine to strike deep into Russian territory, targeting critical assets like ammunition depots or military headquarters. This adds a new dimension to Ukraine’s military strategy, moving beyond the frontlines and changing the dynamics of the conflict.
Editor: Indeed, many analysts are calling this a ’significant escalation.’ How do you interpret Russia’s response to this missile strike?
Dr. Petrova: Russia’s acknowledgment that they shot down five of the six missiles shows their concern over being targeted in their own territory. Although they claim that the attack did not cause significant damage, the mere fact that Ukraine can reach and strike within Russia is a psychological and strategic blow. It challenges the narrative of invulnerability and highlights vulnerabilities in their defense systems.
Editor: You mentioned the psychological aspect. How do you think this might affect the morale of both Ukrainian and Russian forces?
Dr. Petrova: For Ukraine, successfully striking a target within Russia can be a tremendous boost to morale. It showcases their capability and resilience, reassuring troops and the public. For Russian forces, however, it could create a sense of vulnerability and fear, knowing that they are not safe even within their own borders. This may lead to increased pressure on their command structures and could potentially affect their operational effectiveness.
Editor: Speaking of operational effectiveness, what are the tactical advantages of the ATACMS that make them particularly relevant in this conflict?
Dr. Petrova: The ATACMS are designed for precisely what Ukraine needs: striking high-value targets with precision. Their ability to disperse bomblets over a large area means they can disable multiple assets in a single strike, making them highly effective against logistical centers, troop concentrations, and potentially even command posts. This new capability allows Ukraine to disrupt Russian supply lines and coordination, which can significantly affect their combat operations.
Editor: There have been ongoing discussions about the role of the United States in this conflict. How critical was U.S. support in enabling Ukraine to use ATACMS?
Dr. Petrova: The U.S.’s decision to authorize the use of long-range missiles was a pivotal moment. It reflects a shift in U.S. policy, showcasing increased support for Ukraine amidst ongoing Russian aggression. This sends a clear message to Moscow that the U.S. stands firmly with Ukraine and is willing to provide critical weaponry to balance the scales. Moreover, this moral and logistical support is crucial for Ukraine as it continues to defend its sovereignty.
Editor: As we look ahead, what implications might this development have for the broader conflict and potential peace negotiations?
Dr. Petrova: The tactical shift could lead to a re-evaluation of strategies on both sides. Russia might intensify its defensive measures, while Ukraine could look to further exploit these capabilities. In terms of negotiations, this could either strengthen Ukraine’s position by demonstrating resilience or, conversely, compel Russia to confront the realities of the conflict more seriously. Ultimately, it adds layers of complexity to any potential dialogue on peace.
Editor: Thank you, Dr. Petrova, for your insightful analysis on this development. It’s clear that the use of ATACMS could hold considerable implications for the ongoing conflict.
Dr. Petrova: Thank you for having me. It’s always a pleasure to discuss these important issues.
Editor: And thank you to our audience for joining us. Stay informed as we continue to follow the evolving situation in Ukraine.