Breathe
By Raquel López-Portillo Maltos
The 300-kilometer range now covered by U.S. missiles employed by Ukraine on Russian territory is not just a distance, it is a statement that transcends the military. Allowing Kiev to extend its attacks beyond the border areas is a calculated U.S. adjustment to influence, more than on the battlefield, the inevitable negotiations that will seek to shape the outcome of this war. But what does this decision imply at a time when the red lines seem more blurred than ever?
On the military front, this move comes too late to dramatically change the course of the war against a backdrop of significant Russian advances in eastern Ukraine, an upcoming offensive backed by North Korean troops, and attacks on power infrastructure in the face of a harsh winter ahead. While the use of U.S. missiles allows Ukraine to attempt to strike at Russian operational capabilities by opening up the possibility of attacking logistics centers, ammunition depots and command posts, the impact is limited.
But the real gamble is political and aims to buy time, not to win the war. On the one hand, Washington seeks to shield Ukraine from the impact of Donald Trump's return to power and the withdrawal of U.S. support for Ukraine. While Trump's strategy of "ending the war in 24 hours" has not been openly delineated, there are lines that point to a dynamic that would favor Moscow. Some of the terms would involve the ceding of Ukrainian territory now controlled by Russia, a commitment of non-membership in NATO by Ukraine, as well as the creation of a demilitarized zone.
In this sense, what the use of these missiles could potentially achieve is to delay the Russian-North Korean offensive and shield the Russian region of Kursk, now occupied by Ukrainian troops, which would give them a certain advantage at the time of negotiation. It will depend on how many missiles are sent and how they are used to determine whether these strikes succeed in slowing down the offensive and securing key territories for Ukraine to come to the negotiating table in a stronger position. In addition, Biden's decision also triggered other allies such as France and the United Kingdom to match his efforts, which may last even after the start of the Trump administration in January 2025.
Russia's response, while predictable in its rhetoric, remains fraught with risk. Putin has broadened the parameters of his nuclear doctrine, leaving open the possibility of using nuclear weapons not only in the event of direct aggression, but against conventional attacks backed by nuclear powers. The threats serve a clear purpose: to deter the West and keep its allies wary.
However, Putin's strategic calculus also involves U.S. policy. Although the risk is latent, for Putin, a future with a potential ally in the White House is more promising than initiating a nuclear escalation immediately. If the negotiation led by the Trump administration materializes under the terms proposed, this would fulfill virtually all the objectives Russia had at the time of the invasion more than 1,000 days ago.
Against this backdrop, are we close to a third world war? The possibility of a global escalation exists, but it still seems distant. The balance is being maintained by containment measures, but it is still fragile. The widening of the conflict beyond Ukraine, whether through cyber attacks, aggression against countries that support Kiev or incidents in supply corridors, could ignite a spark that is difficult to control. For now, the major powers seem to be carefully measuring every step, aware that a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia would be catastrophic.
Ukraine's use of longer-range missiles is a risky but calculated move. It represents a strategic maneuver to change the rules of a game in which none of the players seems willing to budge. What is at risk is not only Ukraine's territorial integrity, but also that of other Eastern European countries, as well as the West's ability to articulate a coherent response in the face of a faltering international order. Every additional kilometer covered by these missiles is also an extension of the tensions and risks of a conflict that still shows no signs of being resolved free of far-reaching consequences.
The opinions expressed are the responsibility of the authors and are absolutely independent of the position and editorial line of the company. Opinion 51.
Comments ()