How crucial are long-range missiles in the Ukraine war? | Inside Story

no green light for Ukraine to use longrange western-made missiles in Russian territory Vladimir Putin says such a move would mean allout war with NATO members but how serious is his warning and what difference could these weapons make on the battlefield this is Inside Story [Music] hello there I'm James Bay the war in Ukraine is at a critical juncture Western allies are considering a shift in their support allowing Ukraine to use long-range missiles against targets deep inside Russian territory Ukraine has been pleading for the go-ahead for months but there's no indication when or if the US President Joe Biden will grant the request the Kremlin has warned such approval would mean NATO members were directly involved in the conflict will Western Nations cross President Vladimir Putin's red line and if they do how will Russia respond we'll discuss these questions and many more with our guests in a moment but first this report from Axel zovich in Washington a summit that could reshape the battlefield in Ukraine US President Joe Biden and British prime minister Kier starmer are weighing up a critical decision should Ukraine be allowed to use Western made missiles to hit targets the deep inside Russia the weapons in question include the British French manufacturer Storm Shadow they have a range of 250 kilm and fly close to the speed of sound and the American made Army tactical missile systems known as Adams they have a range of 300 km and carry 225 kg of explosives both could reach far beyond the front lines and strike Russian military sites president V imir zalinsky has long called for these weapons saying they're crucial to Ukraine's defenses until recently Western Nations have been reluctant to give the go ahead fearing an escalation in the conflict but they're reconsidering in light of reports that Iran is supplying Russia with ballistic missiles President Vladimir Putin says the use of Western made longrange weapons in the war would be crossing a red line will mean nothing less than the direct participation of NATO the US and European countries in the war in Ukraine their direct participation significantly changes the very essence the very nature of the conflict this will mean NATO the US and European countries are fighting Russia it's not the first time he's issued such warnings since the War Began in February 2022 the West has steadily increased military aid to Ukraine testing moscow's resolve this war of attrition has reached uh a very critical stage in which now the Ukrainian front lines are beginning to collapse so the Dilemma for NATO is does it negotiate or escalate to keep the war going and uh um and it seems as if some are pushing for negotiations While others are pushing for escalation so this is why the United States is a bit cautious because it it it it should be because if they escalate this war too much they might not be able to negotiate anymore and also it's the loss of unintended consequences as at some point Russia will will retaliate a response by Russia could be severe Putin has threatened to upgrade air defenses destroy incoming missiles and even arm a western adversaries abroad such as Iran and North Korea there is also talk of revising Russia's nuclear policy despite all this President Biden seems unwilling to cross Putin's latest red line at least for nowal Axel zovic aljazera for Inside Story well let's discuss all of this further with today's panel of guests who are joining us from mosow We're joined by pavl felgenhauer he's an independent Russian defense analyst from Munich Marina Miron is post doctoral researcher at the war studies Department Kings College London and from Washington DC Lawrence Corb former assistant Secretary of Defense thank you for joining us today on Inside Story Marina let me start with you before we get into uh what has been going on in the diplomacy this week taking place in Ukraine and in Washington and before we find out what was said in Moscow let's just go back to basics what is it that Ukraine actually wants at the moment they have these long range missiles as I understand it they need permission to use them in a different way correct so what Ukraine is essentially asking for is the Storm Shadow and sculp missiles that it already has at its disposal to be used on Russian territory to strike deep into Russia and um of course it also has American atams which have a range of 300 kilm so they can reach even farther so those would be in question as well and Ukraine arguments it um as self-defense saying that it could hit military targets and degrade Russia's capability to wage war against Ukraine and just to follow up on that Marina um just to be absolutely clear I don't want to go into all the details of the military capabilities of these missiles but the Storm Shadow and the scalp the Storm Shadow is a UK missile the scalp I'm right saying is is almost identical but a French variant of the same missile and the other one which is the Army tactical missile system which is known by This Acronym attack arms that's a US missile what is the range of the of of these so that is correct so the range for air launch sculp uh Storm Shadow missiles is 250 km and for the American at camps is 300 kilm Lawrence um your take on Ukraine wanting these missiles as I understand it they've submitted to both the US and the UK a potential list of targets that that's correct basically they are prohibited from using these weapons that my colleague has just talked about the Storm Shadow and atacam to attack targets deep into Russia and that you know the their range is a couple of hundred uh a couple hundred miles because if they can attack those it'll make it more difficult for Russia to continue to bomb in uh in Ukraine we have been very careful about not letting them do that because we are basically up to now been concerned that Putin would take this as an excuse to possibly even use nuclear weapons against uh uh Ukraine Marina you are there in Munich but you work uh for the war studies Department of King's College London so you understand the UK position I think it's worth focusing for a little bit before we find out what has happened in the last few days on the UK position the UK seems to be pretty Keen to let Ukraine use its Storm Shadow missiles in a new way is that your your understanding and is this a rare moment of slight disagreement between these two allies the UK and the US in recent weeks yes that is correct at least um as far as the top of the government is concerned that is a UK position UK wants to permit Ukraine to use those Storm Shadow missiles and sculp missiles to attack Russian targets now the problem is that um the navigational data for these missiles um is American therefore uh Great Britain needs um the American permission that being said it doesn't mean that the opinion within the UK is uniform as one former UK Diplomat said we should not discount the fact that Putin has not acted yet on his red lines that it's going to continue that way and Lawrence if we look at the um at the NATO countries 32 nations in NATO I think it's fair to say is it not that the UK is one of the most hawkish countries along perhaps with Poland and the Baltic Nations which all are geographically close uh to Russia and of course the Baltic nations were once part of the Soviet Union yeah there's no doubt about the fact that the UK is probably the after the United States the most significant military power in NATO and don't forget the United Kingdom along with France they have nuclear weapons I think people forget that because they're focusing only on the United States uh nuclear weapons and basically I think what the British are trying to do quite correctly is present the united front against Putin and by getting American per permission even if the United States does not at this time allow aams it basically sends a signal to Putin that the Western Alliance is United against him particularly upset at him for recently getting missiles uh you know from Iran and and North Korea and continuing to get uh components from China okay bringing pavl in from Moscow now on specifically the UK if you look at the NATO countries um is it right in saying my impression is that of all the NATO countries um the UK is the one that rils Moscow more than the others and we also had the recent news that I think it happened some time ago but the announcement that six UK diplomats had been expelled from Moscow yes the relationship between Moscow and London is a very low key Britain has been seen as an adversary very much in Moscow as during the Cold War I would not say that Britain is seen as the most uh uh uh unfriendly in NATO there's of course the Baltic states there's Poland that as kind of seen as in Russia as being as aggressive as Britain uh but of the bigger nule Square kind of powers yes most likely it is the seen as the worst and things are not getting better because well now Britain seems to be pressing along uh to allow Ukraine to use uh Precision guided Western Long Range weapons on Russian territory not only in Crimea but in other places too okay so let's now move to the diplomacy that took place uh this week Marina we had the US Secretary of State Anthony blinkin going to London meeting his um UK counterpart the new foreign secretary David Lamy also meeting the Prime Minister k stama then Mr Lamy and Mr blinkin went to go and see President zalinski uh in uh Ukraine and it seemed like there was sort of choreography here it seemed like they were edging towards something because the UK prime minister uh then was due in Washington and was in Washington at the end of the week it looked like they were going to make an announcement and let me just read to you the New York Times um headline on Thursday Biden poised to approve Ukraine's use of long-range Western weapons in Russia everyone thought it was going to happen didn't they absolutely everybody was thinking that this is going to take place however I think getting that um Coalition formed and getting an agreement given the fact that um the United States also understands the risks being um a country pre-election now is problematic and so what Britain is trying to do essentially is what we have seen with the Challengers with with the tanks when Britain was the country to open the flood gates for others to supply Ukraine with tanks because um sending 14 Challenger tanks to Ukraine didn't substantially change the situation but it was a very sign political move and so we're seeing a repetition of that here the problem is that the circumstances have changed the battlefield configuration looks different and of course the US politics play a lot into this as well as the British domestic Politics as we have seen the political turbulence in the past years so that's problematic and of course if we remember how France was trying to um create that same Coalition by S suggesting that NATO might be willing to send boots on the ground or at least France would be the first country to send boots on the ground in Ukraine and how that didn't work out and so there is a different strategy now so let's try with the long range weapons and and see if that's a lower bar in terms of risk but one other thing happened didn't it pavl uh between that New York Times headline saying Biden was poised to approve this and the meeting that took place in the Oval Office between the UK prime minister and President Biden and that was the intervention by President Putin coming out and saying that if they did this it would mean that NATO countries were at war with Russia how significant pav do you think the words were of Putin because we have heard Bellos statements from him before well from Putin maybe not um his his subordinates yes uh U the former president and now deputy secretary of Security Council n medve was talking about this all going into nuclear warfare maybe or war in general uh but now it was Putin uh Putin is praying the uh well honored and very effective card used during the Cold War by both sides uh it's called brinkmanship a term uh coined by John Foster Dallas in the 50s means balancing on the brink of nuclear war uh one side threatens that it may go nuclear demanding the other back down and it works it works time and again it works again uh so the United States withal election uh Donald Trump has been all the time talking about that if he's not elected there's going to be a third world war uh and this has an effect on the decision making in Washington they're holding back it it worked in general during this conflict many times and so yes that's basically for what nuclear weapons were used mostly during the Cold War for brinkmanship and now it's working again uh Putin said that we'll go to war uh but that really does not mean we'll go to war but that is a a very Ser a threat that will make the other side and do something or make some concessions okay well let's discuss in moment whether we think Putin really means it and what he he could do but Marina just to be clear to us if he did mean it if he said that this was now a war between Russia and the 32 NATO members I mean under article five of uh the North Atlantic Treaty when one NATO member is attacked then it's known as the All For One article that's considered an act on of all 32 so just to be just to go down that route for a moment for me that hypothetical route that would mean NATO versus Russia in a war that would effectively mean World War III would it not well perhaps yes um because of the collective self-defense that being said it depends on where it starts and how and NATO has been projecting the possible Russian invasion in the baltics which is an interesting scenario Pro the problem with the scenario is even if that were to happen as it stands right now NATO itself admits that it lacks Readiness when it comes to an armed conflict or an armed conflict with Russia certainly we don't know in what shape this would take place but yes essentially that would lead to a third world war and we have to remember the unchanged Russian nuclear Doctrine if Russia feels that um its state survival is at stake that is clearly written they res the right to use all means including nuclear weapons so I think that also increases the possibilities that Russia might indeed use nuclear weapons okay Lawrence what's your view do you think that President Putin means it or is it just brinkmanship I mean you um served as the assistant Secretary of of Defense in the Reagan Administration what would Reagan say would he say call Putin's Bluff I think he would BAS based on where we are now because Russia is in a relatively weak position when it comes to this war don't forget they have had 600,000 troops either killed or wounded and basically if you allow these uh deeper attacks into Russia I think this would have an impact on Russian public opinion about this war because if you listen to what they're saying in Russia basically they're tell the Russian Putin and his people are telling the Russian people everything's going well we're winning the war we have you know minimum casualties we don't need to send draes there yet but I think if you had these attacks come deep inside Russia then the Russian people would say wait a second what's going on so it's hard to calculate what Putin is talking about I guess you want to ER on the side of caution but the fact of the matter is I think in this particular case it's probably time to call Putin's Bluff and Biden has tremendous support in the Congress senator Jean Shaheen who's a Democrat from New Hampshire Mitch McConnell the Republican minority leader in the Senate they're both saying no uh use the a tacks to go deeper into Russia so this war won't not drag on you know forever now the other complicating factor is Biden only has a couple couple months left in office and if Trump gets in we completely change our whole strategy toward Ukraine based upon what he has said so far so pavl you heard there from Lawrence he says the US should call Putin's Bluff how do you see that in Moscow and do you think the situation is the same as other key decision points uh for the West in this war because of course it comes uh nearly 6 weeks after that kers in incursion that daring Ukrainian incursion seizing 1,300 square kilometers of Russian territory which they're still holding does that change things and change the calculations do the Ukrainian tactical success in K uh is important but Russia has done tactical successes during this summer in the donbas so Russia was advancing in one place the ukrainians broke through in another uh all and all in summary it's still a bloody Quagmire on the front line neither side has been capable of translating its uh tactical successes into anything strategic and there's increasingly developing what something I would call like the war of the cities during the Iraq Iran War in the 80s when there was also body Quagmire on the front line and uh both sides were hitting deep into their own territory of the other side because Ukraine has been hitting deep into Russia using its own uh uh drones long range which it has now is mass producing there were attacks in Moscow just say several just recently there was attack uh and a fire was ignited at uh oil refinery in the outskirts of the city and of course if ukrainians were allowed to use Western Precision guided weapons for to add up to their own long range drones that would be dangerous and actually the Storm Shadow or sculp according to Russian sources has a range of over 500 kilometers and could basically hit mosco and these are really though the uh Storm Shadow is uh under it's subsonic but and can be shut down but it's very precise that would be seen as a very serious development because basically it could also threaten Putin's own residence or the Russian high staffs in Moscow uh so how Russia will react I'm not saying that Russia is ready to go over the nuclear threshold the nuclear threshold is very high and Russia does not have a a nuclear Monopoly if you go over the threshold the other side might go too that's very dangerous but the situation could get much more serious as it escalates into a war of the cities where between Russia and Ukraine where the Western Long Range weapons will be also involved so Lawrence where do you think things stand right now at the moment with the U us position because no decision was made despite us all expecting one at that meeting in the Oval Office we're now told from prime minister Kama the UK prime minister that he wants to have another meeting with allies including President Biden on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York which is just over at week's time so do you think Biden blinked here was he spooked by Putin's warnings or do you think this is going to be Revisited and eventually uh that that Ukraine is going to be given this permission to strike much deeper into Russia I think it's going to be Revisited unless Russia changes the way they've been fighting this war and with the you know extreme bombardment of many places in Ukraine which has you know increased recently so at the UN meeting I think if you can get a number of other countries involved not just the United Kingdom then you will see Biden change his uh change his mind and basically I think that he has shown an incredible amount of patience he didn't cave in right away despite what the New York Times said today but uh the day before but if he goes to the UN then he can say well we talked about it I considered it and now the world Community says we need to do it because this war is dragging on and on and don't forget Russia is also represented at the United Nations and they can complain about it there but the fact of the matter is I think that's the direction that we're going to uh that we're going to go and Because unless we do this this war is going to drag on forever they'll continue to have casualties on both sides but this could be a game Cher to get Russia to come to the negotiating table okay well I want to go to Marina on that point could it be a game changer because apparently there are some in the US Administration like the defense secretary Lloyd Austin who said it won't really make much of a difference because um these missiles will not turn the tide of the war because the Russians have moved lots of their attack assets and air bases beyond the range of the missiles and there aren't that many of them the stock piles are running low what do you make of those arguments well I think those are very valid point um when it comes to the amount of missiles that are available in the US inventory and even if we're talking about storm and sculp Storm Shadow and sculp missiles so that that's the first thing the second thing is one type of missiles is air launched the other one is launched from the likes of high Mars right so we cannot compare apples and pears here but for a moment let's assume the ukrainians would get the permission to use Storm Shadow and scul missiles they would have to utilize F-16 so they would have had to train for these specific missions in order to be able to use them uh for second is there are Russian groundbased air defenses to which these jets are susceptible but even if we take away the Russian groundbased a defenses and electronic warfare because uh Storm Shadow and scul missiles they they have triple navigation but they still rely on GPS that aside if Ukraine can strike Target such as a k Airfield is it going to make a difference and this is a crucial point if we look at the military history of deep strikes what has to follow a ground maneuver and is Ukraine going to follow up with it ground maneuver does it have the capability and the answer is no because we have seen that Ukrainian armed forces were not able to master it during the last time uh last year's counter offensive and it's a very difficult task to master so those isolated deep strikes with a limited number of missiles that Ukraine has might do some damage but in military terms they're not going to change the situation and they're not going to make Russia give up its operation in in the dbass it's not going to make um the general staff withdraws the forces from Ukraine so what it carries with it are extreme political risks as we have discussed before a lot of unknowns with little military value and high cost terms of US dollar cost concern okay well thank you very much indeed thank you to all three of our guests today p p pavl felgenhauer Marina Miron and Lawrence C and thank you too for watching if you didn't catch all of the program don't worry it's available for you to view anytime you want at alo.com your views and suggestions are always welcome post them on our Facebook page that's facebook.com/ AJ insidestory or on X where our handle is at AJ Inside Story until next time from me James Bay and the team here in Doha please stay safe bye-bye for now [Music] make sure to subscribe to our channel to get the latest news from Al jazer