[SS from essay by Stephen Biddle, Professor of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Defense Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations. He is the author of [*Military Power: Explaining Victory and Defeat in Modern Battle*](https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/blank#buy).]
Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the United States has provided Kyiv with extensive military aid. But that aid has long been subject to restrictions. Some have to do with the type of equipment provided, such as limits on transfers of long-range missiles or aircraft. Others constrain how U.S. weapons can be used. Washington has designed many of these restrictions to limit Ukraine’s ability to hit targets far behind the front, fearing that deep strikes would be unduly escalatory.
That position has been controversial. Both Ukrainian officials and outside critics argue that the Biden administration exaggerates the risk of Russian escalation, needlessly denying Kyiv critical military capabilities. Before making an assessment, it is important to consider just how militarily valuable deep strikes would be for Ukraine—how, if at all, the war’s prognosis would change if the United States were to lift its restrictions and Ukraine were to acquire the necessary capabilities. Only then would it be possible to judge whether the military benefits are worth the escalatory risk
I don’t think anyone is arguing that striking deep targets would tip the balance but it most definitely would change the public opinion of Russians who think they are safe. I don’t know how you could argue that that mindset wouldn’t put more pressure on both sides to come to a ceasefire.
I also don’t see any reasonable reality where that ceasefire results in all territory returned to Ukraine. I’m sure most Ukrainians are coming to realize that too.
It was never to tip the balance of the war, it is to protect civilians. It is to hit deep targets/infra that nazi russia is using to launch planes that are dropping glide bombs on civilians inside Ukraine.
The goal is to force Russia to divert troops away from the front line. Also to use the territory as a bargaining chip in any negotiations, and finally simply as a morale booster for Ukraine. It’s a risky strategy but there are sound reasons behind it.
4 comments
[SS from essay by Stephen Biddle, Professor of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Defense Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations. He is the author of [*Military Power: Explaining Victory and Defeat in Modern Battle*](https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/blank#buy).]
Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the United States has provided Kyiv with extensive military aid. But that aid has long been subject to restrictions. Some have to do with the type of equipment provided, such as limits on transfers of long-range missiles or aircraft. Others constrain how U.S. weapons can be used. Washington has designed many of these restrictions to limit Ukraine’s ability to hit targets far behind the front, fearing that deep strikes would be unduly escalatory.
That position has been controversial. Both Ukrainian officials and outside critics argue that the Biden administration exaggerates the risk of Russian escalation, needlessly denying Kyiv critical military capabilities. Before making an assessment, it is important to consider just how militarily valuable deep strikes would be for Ukraine—how, if at all, the war’s prognosis would change if the United States were to lift its restrictions and Ukraine were to acquire the necessary capabilities. Only then would it be possible to judge whether the military benefits are worth the escalatory risk
I don’t think anyone is arguing that striking deep targets would tip the balance but it most definitely would change the public opinion of Russians who think they are safe. I don’t know how you could argue that that mindset wouldn’t put more pressure on both sides to come to a ceasefire.
I also don’t see any reasonable reality where that ceasefire results in all territory returned to Ukraine. I’m sure most Ukrainians are coming to realize that too.
It was never to tip the balance of the war, it is to protect civilians. It is to hit deep targets/infra that nazi russia is using to launch planes that are dropping glide bombs on civilians inside Ukraine.
The goal is to force Russia to divert troops away from the front line. Also to use the territory as a bargaining chip in any negotiations, and finally simply as a morale booster for Ukraine. It’s a risky strategy but there are sound reasons behind it.