US finds Ukraine's arguments for authorizing strikes deep into Russia unconvincing
Illustrative photo (Getty Images)
Representatives from the White House and Pentagon have said that Ukrainian leaders have not presented sufficiently persuasive arguments to support the claim that strikes on Russian targets using long-range missiles would significantly impact the course of the war, citing The Washington Post.
According to US officials, previous attacks on Crimea, conducted by Ukraine, proved effective by forcing Russian forces to retreat from the peninsula.
One American official said that Ukraine's current request does not justify the risk of escalation from Russia.
He added that missile supplies are limited, and Russia has already moved 90% of the aircraft that launch guided bombs beyond the range of ATACMS missiles. Therefore, a shift in US policy on long-range weapons is unlikely to significantly affect the combat situation.
However, European military and diplomats oppose this approach, arguing that strikes on Russia from greater distances could have a more substantial impact on the conflict and criticize the US for refusing to lift restrictions on the use of Western weapons.
Strikes deep into Russia
Recently, Ukraine's allies have renewed discussions on allowing the Ukrainian Armed Forces to use provided weapons for strikes on Russian territory.
According to The Guardian, the US and the US have allegedly already made such a decision but have not yet announced it officially. These reports have not been confirmed at this time.
Meanwhile, Voice of America reports that US President Joe Biden has not lifted restrictions on Ukrainian strikes within Russian territory. At the same time, the UK is engaged in "delicate" negotiations with the White House on this issue.
Nonetheless, the British government has said that its stance on strikes within Russian territory has not changed.
