Oct 18 (Reuters) – Washington’s decision to send long-range ATACMS missiles to Ukraine was a grave mistake that will have serious consequences, Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. said on Wednesday, after Kyiv said it used the weapons for the first time.
“The consequences of this step, which was deliberately hidden from the public, will be of the most serious nature,” , Ambassador Anatoly Antonov said on the Telegram messaging app.
After media reports that the U.S. secretly provided Ukraine with ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile Systems) in recent days, the White House confirmed on Tuesday that it had recently provided Kyiv with a type of ATACMS capable of hitting targets up to 165 km (102 miles) away.
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskiy also confirmed his forces used the ATACMS after his military reported on Tuesday striking two air bases in Ukrainian territory now controlled by Russia.
Ukrainian Special Forces said nine helicopters, an air defence missile launcher, runways and other equipment had been destroyed near Luhansk in Ukraine’s east and in Berdiansk in the south, on the Sea of Azov, both under Russian control.
Ukraine had repeatedly asked the U.S. administration for the ATACMS and pledged not to use inside Russia’s territory. It said the powerful weapons would alter the course of the 20-month-old war that Russia launched.
It remains to be seen how much of an advantage the missile system will give Ukraine, but Kyiv officials have said they will push Russia to move its key air assets far back from the front lines.
The Kremlin has said U.S. supplies of ATACMS missiles and Abrams tanks to Ukraine would not change the situation on the battlefield.
“Washington is consistently pursuing a policy of completely curtailing bilateral relations,” Antonov said. “The United States continues to push for a direct conflict between NATO and Russia.
Reporting by Lidia Kelly in Melbourne; Editing by Christopher Cushing and Lincoln Feast
“The consequences of this step, which was deliberately hidden from the public, will be of the most serious nature,”
What this scumbag means is, you are supposed to tell us first to give us chance to move our shit. We know the consequences, more schools and hospitals will be targetted.
The usual breathtaking hypocrisy from a bunch of murderous nazis that use long range missiles and long range izlamonazi drones to murder Ukrainian children and whose rat dictator offers his services to bring peace to a M.E. war that he himself started.
We need the 300km version as well.
^bert
The grave mistake was moskovia invading.
Interesting article:
Inside Biden’s Reversal on Sending Long-Range Missiles to Ukraine
The story is more complex than a caricature in Washington that President Biden is cautious to a fault, and says no until the pressure is insurmountable.
From the opening days of the war in Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelensky told President Biden there was one weapon he needed above all others: Long-range missiles, known as ATACMS, that could reach air bases and Russian troops more than 100 miles behind the lines.
For the better part of 18 months, Mr. Biden had one response, both publicly and in his sometimes tense private meetings with Mr. Zelensky: No.
The weapons, he said, could cross one of the “red lines” of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, a possibility the president had to take seriously since Mr. Putin was episodically threatening to unleash tactical nuclear weapons.
After blasts at two air bases in Russian-held territory in southern and eastern Ukraine on Tuesday, it became clear that Mr. Biden had changed his mind, again. Amid the wreckage of Russian helicopters, there was evidence that the bases had been struck by American-supplied ATACMS — Army Tactical Missile Systems — that were the last big unfulfilled ask from Mr. Zelensky.
The story of how that happened, as described by several administration officials, is more complex than a caricature circulating in Washington that Mr. Biden is cautious to a fault, and says no until the pressure is insurmountable.
In this case, there was plenty of pressure. Some came from members of Congress, including Representative Jason Crow, a Colorado Democrat and former Army Ranger, who wrote to the White House that Ukraine needed weapons “to target deep supply lines and Russian command and control centers.” Mr. Crow added that while systems already provided to Ukraine were being used “to devastating effect,” the Russians “have adapted to ensure key assets are outside their range.”
A push also came from Mr. Zelensky at the NATO summit in Vilnius in July, when the Ukrainian leader made no secret of his anger that Mr. Biden and Chancellor Olaf Scholz of Germany had blocked any clear statement that Ukraine was on a path to NATO membership.
With a touch of bitterness, he told reporters “there is no decision” from Mr. Biden on the issue of ATACMS, and he added: “It is better not to raise the issue because there are expectations of the people, the military, everyone.” It would be better, he said, “to do it first, and then share information on how it happened.”
But officials in the White House insist that it runs a vigorous review process to make sure that weapons meet needs. In July, Mr. Biden’s aides said, they came to see what one called a “clear use case” for ATACMS. It was the one Mr. Crow had identified, using the ATACMS to target supply lines and air bases that Ukraine could not reach. At a July 14 meeting in the office of Jake Sullivan, the president’s national security adviser, he and Jon Finer, his primary deputy, talked with a small group of officials about developing options.
The study came at a moment of division in the Biden administration. Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken had long been pressing for giving the Ukrainians more weapons sooner. Otherwise, Mr. Blinken said, the United States looked reluctant to give aid, and reactive. In public, he was more discreet, saying only that he was “forward leaning” on arming Ukraine.
Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III took the other side. The United States had a limited supply of ATACMs, and turning them over to the Ukrainians, who were running through ammunition at a much faster clip than needed, would leave the United States and its allies vulnerable. Readiness is not just a word, Mr. Austin argued, it is a necessity.
There was also a budget issue. The White House was running down more than $40 billion Congress had allocated for military help to Ukraine, and a growing number of Republicans were objecting to more spending. ATACMS were not cheap, about $1.5 million each.
By September, the group Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Finer organized came back with an analysis and a proposal. Escalation no longer seemed a major issue, they concluded. Britain had started supplying its Storm Shadow missiles in June, with ranges approaching the ATACMS, and Mr. Putin barely reacted.
The helicopters and other aircraft that the Russians were lining up on occupied territory, usually at airports, were targets. At meetings, Mr. Austin agreed because the version of the ATACMS under discussion had a range of only 100 miles and were armed with cluster munitions that spread out to do maximum damage to unprotected targets like the aircraft.
Cluster munitions are banned by an international convention because “duds” left on the ground can injure civilians, often children, who pick them up. The United States has never ratified the convention, but would be highly unlikely to use the weapons. In July, the United States sent other types of cluster munitions to Ukraine, drawing widespread condemnation.
The ATACMS proposal was embraced by other administration officials, and Mr. Biden agreed. He told Mr. Zelensky when they met in Washington last month, but they agreed not to announce the decision.
It leaked out, but the timing of the shipments remained secret, part of an effort to take the Russians by surprise, before they had time to move their helicopters out of range. Which is what appears to have happened on Tuesday.
“Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III took the other side. The United States had a limited supply of ATACMs, and turning them over to the Ukrainians, who were running through ammunition at a much faster clip than needed, would leave the United States and its allies vulnerable.”
Lies. Telling filthy lies is what Washington and the Pentagon have in common.
It is said that the ATACMS rocket motors are about to expire. They are around 30 years old, after all. So, according to Austin, our defense must rely on this sort of stuff?
Both the WH and the Pentagon know exactly what Ukraine needs, this includes the M-48 variety of the ATACMS and the M-57, modern Western aircraft, and permission to use them in mafia land. Don’t ask me why nothing is being done to provide Ukraine with all of this. I say it’s cowardice, fear, and stupidity, but maybe there’s something else going on behind the scenes.
Anyhow, thanks for the interesting article, Larry.
In addition, Ukraine’s valiant Air Force, whose pilots have taken unnecessary losses because of their cruddy old Soviet aircraft, yet achieved amazing things, have been begging for long range AAM’s for at least a year, to give them a better chance of taking out those damn putinaZi helis. So far to no avail.
The Swedes were supposed to be sending long range AAM’s that could be retrofitted to Ukraine’s SU25’s, but so far nothing came through.
The new shorter range ATACM’s are of course welcome, but are just another example of trickledown.
They give Scholz another excuse for delay.
It’s sickening, the slowness and the cowardice of our inglorious “leaders”!
What was sent was an older version; the US has newer ones. According to Politico, the APAM (Anti-Personnel/Anti-Materiel) ATACMS were sent because they’re not part of any Pentagon war plans, and so wouldn’t affect the military’s readiness.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/17/biden-decision-send-longer-range-missiles-to-ukraine-00121969
So, they could’ve been sent last year already.