by Olawale Abaire, Warrior Editorial Fellow
In a significant development, the United States has affirmed Ukraine’s right to use American-supplied weapons against any Russian forces attacking from across the border, broadening the scope of Ukraine’s defensive operations. This stance, articulated by National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, shows a shift in the operational latitude granted to Ukraine, though officials insist it does not represent a change in policy.
Initially, the U.S. policy was explicitly focused on the Kharkiv region, allowing Ukraine to use American weapons in response to cross-border assaults. However, a change in decision came as Ukrainian forces faced intense pressure from Russian attacks causing the recent statements by the National Security Adviser, Jake Sullivan, indicating a broader application of this policy, extending Ukraine’s right to strike any Russian forces launching attacks from Russian territory into Ukraine. Sullivan clarified, “If Russia is attacking or about to attack from its territory into Ukraine, it only makes sense to allow Ukraine to hit back against the forces that are hitting it from across the border.”
Ukrainian forces have already demonstrated the efficacy of this strategy. Utilizing American-supplied weaponry, they successfully struck targets in Belgorod, a city inside Russia, thereby thwarting further Russian assaults. This operational success highlights the strategic advantage of preemptive and responsive strikes, disrupting enemy operations and forcing them to reconsider their tactical approaches.
In a recent press briefing, Major General Patrick Ryder, the Pentagon Press Secretary, addressed several critical issues regarding U.S. military policy and ongoing conflicts. General Ryder emphasized that there has been no fundamental change in U.S. policy regarding Ukraine’s use of American-supplied munitions. “This comes down to counter-fire,” Ryder stated, highlighting the essence of the policy. He noted that during the Russian offensive in the Kharkiv region, Ukrainian forces faced concentrated artillery and preparatory fire from Russian positions.
Gen. John Murray – Ret., Former Commander, Army Futures Command
When questioned about the geographical limits of this policy, General Ryder clarified that it is not confined to the border areas near Kharkiv. “It’s focusing on the strategic intent here, which is counter-fire when you’re attacked, returning fire,” he explained. This broader interpretation allows Ukraine to target any Russian forces conducting operations from within Russian territory, provided these actions are in direct support of offensives into Ukraine.
This policy is consistent with historical military strategies where counter-battery fire and preemptive strikes are employed to neutralize enemy artillery and staging areas. For example, during World War II, Allied forces often targeted German artillery positions across the front lines to reduce the effectiveness of enemy barrages.
Regarding the use of long-range munitions like ATACMS (Army Tactical Missile System), General Ryder stated, “There’s been no change in the policy in that regard.” This highlights a strategic restraint in extending the conflict deeper into Russian territory, likely to avoid escalation and maintain a defensive posture.
The use of long-range munitions remains a contentious issue. While it offers a strategic advantage in disrupting enemy logistics and command centers, it also risks broader escalation. The U.S. policy thus carefully balances the need for effective defense with the imperative to prevent an uncontrollable expansion of the conflict.
In the current scenario, allowing Ukraine to strike into Russia could serve as a deterrent, complicating Russian logistical and strategic planning. It echoes the principles seen in Israel’s defense operations, where the immediate neutralization of threats beyond one’s borders is deemed crucial for national security.
Moreover, continuous diplomatic engagements and backchannel communications are essential to manage and de-escalate potential crises arising from these operations. The U.S. and its allies must be prepared for a spectrum of Russian responses, ranging from intensified cyber-attacks to broader military escalations.
