4 October 2024

Ukraine’s Argument For Striking Back – Analysis

Maria Avdeeva

On a sunny Sunday afternoon, August 30, Russia launched five glide bombs toward Kharkiv. One bomb obliterated the entrance of a twelve-story residential building, where a seventy-one-year-old burned alive. Another killed a fourteen-year-old girl sitting on a bench in a park, leaving six people dead in total. In September, Russia began showering Kharkiv with deadly glide bombs almost daily, most targeting densely populated residential areas. These bombs were launched from fighter jets just across the border in Russia’s Belgorod region, leaving Kharkiv residents no chance to take cover because of its close proximity. These brutal assaults have turned Kharkiv into a symbol of daily terror but also a powerful emblem of Ukraine’s resilience, underscoring with brutal clarity that limiting Ukraine’s use of Western-supplied weapons is neither viable nor effective.

As Russia escalates its aggression, the question is no longer whether Ukraine should be allowed to strike deep into Russian territory, but when. The time to lift restrictions on Ukraine’s use of Western-supplied weapons to target Russia’s military infrastructure is long overdue. During his visit to the United States, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky will likely push to secure guarantees before the upcoming US elections, “while all the officials who want the victory of Ukraine are in official positions.” Among Kyiv’s urgent requests is the ability to use British, French, and Italian Storm Shadow missiles, as well as US-made Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) to strike airbases and other critical military targets inside Russia.

No comments: