Ukraine ups pressure on US to allow strikes in Russia: ‘This is insane’

Ukraine’s struggle to fend off a large-scale Russian offensive in the Kharkiv region has highlighted a pressing issue that Kiev has long sought to overturn: a ban on launching U.S.-made weapons to attack Russian soil.

Russia launched the Kharkow offensive from neighboring Belgorod Oblast, but some Ukrainian officials argue that the attack could have been slowed if it had been allowed to attack targets in the Russian oblast.

A delegation of five Ukrainian lawmakers traveled to Washington this week to meet with Biden administration officials and members of Congress to press the U.S. to lift the ban.

However, during a media roundtable event in Washington, Ukrainian lawmakers expressed clear frustration that the United States remains opposed to the policy.

“That’s the same as someone attacking Washington, D.C., from Virginia and then saying, for some reason, they’re not going to attack Virginia,” said the president of the Ukrainian Congressional Group on U.S. Relations, a member of Congress. Councilman David Alahamiya said. This week I led a delegation.

“It’s crazy. The soldiers don’t understand it, as do the generals. That’s why they’re forcing us as politicians to stop. [the policy] This is insane. ”

Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who is visiting Kiev this week, said the United States is committed to ensuring Ukraine wins its war with Russia, but Kiev should focus on retaking Ukrainian territory. emphasized.

“Ukraine must decide for itself how to wage this war, a war it is waging to protect its freedom, sovereignty and territorial integrity,” Blinken said at a news conference. “We have made our policy clear.”

Ukraine’s lobbying for the U.S. to lift the ban comes as Russia moves into northeast Kharkiv and puts pressure on Ukrainian forces on the 600-mile Eastern Front.

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Kiev is struggling due to months of delays in passing the U.S. National Security Supplemental Act, which includes $61 billion in aid to Ukraine. .

But “we must always weigh what we are offering and what we are willing to use weapons for against the desire to avoid provoking a conflict that extends beyond Ukraine,” he said. -Told Hill.

Regarding Russia’s momentum, Kerry added that it makes sense that Ukraine is “trying to come up with some options on how to turn this situation around.”

Ukraine has long argued that the ability to attack legitimate military targets inside Russia is essential to its defense.

Instead of changing policy, Ukraine has resorted to attacking Russia with its own weapons, including cheap drones that can attack Russian targets such as oil refineries. The campaign to attack refineries with drones has increased in pace and scale in recent months.

However, Ukrainian officials say there are no replacements for U.S.-made weapons, including valuable long-range artillery such as the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) and the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS).

Maksym Skripchenko, head of the Transatlantic Dialogue Center, a Ukrainian think tank that advises Kiev, said Russia had moved its headquarters within its own borders and outside the range of HIMARS.

“And they feel completely safe,” he said in an email. “Imagine how strange this situation is. Whenever something goes wrong, the Russians can always retreat to their own territory, regroup and start over. Ukraine is ATACMS You cannot attack the Russians with such effective weapons.”

Skripchenko said if the ban had been lifted before the Kharkiv offensive, it could have prevented Russia from amassing troops on the border.

“Weapons like the Stinger inside Russia could also help defeat Russian frontline bombers that drop guided bombs on frontline cities and defensive positions in Ukraine,” he said. “Together with the F-16, it could be a game-changer that deters Russian expansion in many places.”

Ukrainian parliamentarian Oleksandra Ustinova, deputy head of the parliamentary group on relations with the United States, warned that Kharkiv could become the next Mariupol, a city in southeastern Ukraine that was destroyed early in the war.

“If we do not have permission to fire Russian weapons on our borders now, we are very likely to lose large cities and regions. [Russia] Please be aware of these limitations,” she said at a roundtable discussion in Washington this week.

Institute for the Study of War (ISW) argued in the analysis He announced earlier this week that US policy was “senseless” and “severely undermined Ukraine’s ability to defend itself” in response to the Kharkov attack.

U.S. policy prevents Ukraine from countering the threat of precision-guided glide bombs, but the Ukrainian military is having a hard time defeating them, says the Russian team in the Russia-Ukraine War at ISW. George Barros, head of geospatial intelligence, wrote:

Baros said Russia uses its airspace as a “sanctuary” and that Ukraine cannot effectively defend against the glide bomb threat without intercepting Russian aircraft in Russian airspace.

“Neither Russia nor any other state has the right to consider its sovereign territory inviolable in a war of aggression that it has initiated,” he wrote. “Establishing the principle that nuclear-armed states can obtain such inviolability through the threat of escalation means that other such potential predators can also attack with impunity and attack their own countries with impunity.” We encourage you to imagine that you can demand protection in your territory.”

Ukraine’s Western allies have long feared an escalation of war between Ukraine and Russia, especially since Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons.

But Skripchenko of the Transatlantic Dialogue Center said Ukraine has repeatedly attacked Russian soil with its own weapons and worked with Russian volunteers to attack targets inside the country, all without nuclear escalation.

“So maybe it’s time for us to stop drawing our own red lines and keep Russia informed about the red lines,” he said. “This is an existential war for the survival of the Ukrainian people, and not just a conflict in which the parties seek to achieve some strategic goals within each other’s territory.”

But significant Russian advances on the Eastern Front have prompted calls for further action, with French President Emmanuel Macron floating the idea of ​​sending NATO troops to Ukraine.

During a visit to Kiev earlier this month, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron suggested that London would not stand in the way of Ukraine using British weapons to attack inside Russia.

in Reuters interview“Ukraine has that right,” Prime Minister David Cameron said.

“It’s easy to understand why Ukraine feels the need to ensure its own defense as Russia attacks inside Ukraine,” he said.

However, the United States remains committed to its policy. Sabrina Singh, the Pentagon’s assistant press secretary, said the United States frequently conveys that message to Ukrainian authorities.

“We believe that the equipment and capabilities that other countries are providing Ukraine should be used to reclaim Ukraine’s sovereign territory.” “Again, the weapons provided are for use on the battlefield.”

John Herbst, senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center and former ambassador to Ukraine, said the U.S. policy undermines America’s own objective of preventing Russia from winning the war.

“This is contrary to U.S. geopolitical interests and unacceptable from a humanitarian perspective.”

“We crossed countless Kremlin red lines without seeing a mushroom cloud. And of course, [British] We have told the Ukrainians that they can use our weapons wherever they send them… so the line that should not be crossed has already been partially crossed. ”

On Capitol Hill, some Republicans want Ukraine to use American weapons to its advantage.

“They should use weapons to win the war,” said Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“I have no problem with that,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R.S.D.), also on the committee.

“If they were actually attacking and destroying civilian targets, it might be a different story,” he says. “But in this particular case, there seems to be no escalation. An escalation has already taken place on the part of the Russian military.”

But Democrats have been reluctant to question Biden’s policies.

Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) said she had questions about what kind of weapons Ukraine wanted to use and how they would be used specifically, while other U.S. He first sought assurances about how the weapon was used, like a cluster bomb.

“At this time, restrictions should remain in place,” she said.