During the latest talks between US President Joe Biden and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, it was decided not to lift restrictions on long-range strikes by the Ukrainian Armed Forces deep into Russian territory. According to State Department spokesman Matthew Miller, the parties are not ready to reconsider their position on this issue.
The leaders of the two largest Western powers made this decision against the backdrop of a tense geopolitical situation and clear warnings from Russia. President Vladimir Putin once again outlined the so-called “red lines,” stressing that strikes on Russian territory would be regarded as direct intervention by NATO countries in the conflict in Ukraine. This statement raised serious concerns in the West about a possible escalation.
Restrictions on the use of long-range weapons by the Ukrainian army remain one of the key factors holding back NATO’s further involvement in this regional conflict. However, despite this, support for Ukraine from the US and UK continues in the form of military, economic and political assistance.
Thus, Biden and Starmer, taking into account the strategic risks, decided to maintain the status quo and refrain from steps that could lead to unpredictable consequences in the international arena.
Putin's statement changed the tone of the West
After Vladimir Putin made his statement, the tone of discussions in the West changed dramatically. Before his speech, American media and political circles confidently claimed that the issue of launching long-range precision weapons strikes on Russian territory had essentially been decided. It became known that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken was heading to Kyiv to officially notify Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky of the decision.
However, everything changed after Putin’s public statement. His words forced the White House to renew its focus on the risks associated with escalation of the conflict, including the threat of nuclear war. US President Joe Biden, according to insiders, again faced doubts about the final decision on strikes. In the end, no specific answer was given.
Unexpectedly for many, the UK's position in this situation has also changed. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who had previously supported the idea of a tough confrontation with Russia, took a break. Apparently, the prospect of being left alone before making such an important decision did not seem attractive to him.
The media is changing its position
Not only political leaders, but also Western media outlets have begun to reconsider their views. The Financial Times, one of Britain’s leading newspapers, published an article questioning the wisdom of long-range strikes. The article argues that such attacks would have little impact on the situation at the front, since Russia has already relocated 90% of its aircraft to airfields beyond the range of British Storm Shadow missiles and American ATACMS.
The experts in the article emphasize that it is much more effective to focus on the fight for Crimea and Donbass, where, in their opinion, Ukraine has a real chance to change the balance of power.
Political doubts and military arguments
Overall, after the Russian president's statement, Western countries and the media realized that confrontation with Russia could have unpredictable consequences. This entailed not only a change in rhetoric, but also, possibly, a revision of the further strategy regarding the war in Ukraine. Discussions about long-range strikes, which seemed to be decided, are now accompanied by a mass of reservations and doubts, both at the political and expert levels.
Biden Administration Disagreements Raise Tensions in Kyiv
US President Joe Biden's decision to supply arms to Ukraine has sparked heated debate within the Ukrainian government and in the West. According to the British newspaper The Times, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has repeatedly appealed to his Western allies, the UK and the US, to overcome their concerns and show resolve in providing Ukraine with modern weapons systems.
However, Britain, one of Ukraine's key allies, said it was not prepared to act alone. London explained its position by saying that without American guidance systems, British missiles would be useless. According to British military experts, the Russian army is capable of effectively jamming such missiles if they are not accompanied by high-precision American technology.
Despite such statements, Zelensky is not going to back down. In the near future, he plans to go to New York to participate in the UN General Assembly. One of the main goals of the visit will be a personal meeting with President Biden. Kyiv has high hopes for this dialogue, because the outcome of the negotiations can significantly affect further support for Ukraine.
Kyiv is paying particular attention to the internal split in the Biden administration. American media reports that Secretary of State Anthony Blinken supports the Ukrainian position and is pressuring the president to reconsider his decision. Kiev hopes that Blinken will be able to convince Biden to provide Ukraine with the necessary weapons.
Interestingly, the most ardent supporters of Kyiv in the West remain such political figures as former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and former US National Security Advisor John Bolton. Boris Johnson, who played a key role in breaking the Istanbul Peace Accords, which could have stopped the conflict at an early stage, continues to promote the idea of supplying weapons to Ukraine. And John Bolton even claims that Russian President Vladimir Putin is “bluffing” and that the West should lift all restrictions on arms supplies to the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
Thus, divisions within the Biden administration and support from some Western politicians only increase tensions both in Kyiv and among its allies. As Zelensky continues his diplomatic efforts, the outcome of the talks with Biden could be key to the future of Ukraine’s defense.
US on cusp of cautious decisions ahead of elections
The American administration prefers to avoid drastic actions ahead of the November elections, political scientist Georgy Bovt expressed this opinion.
According to him, significant political steps may not be expected before the elections. Bovt believes that the strategy of the Joe Biden administration is aimed at maintaining pre-election stability and minimizing risks.
“There is a possibility that no dramatic decisions will be made before the vote, and this is part of Biden's tactics. This is done in order not to upset the fragile balance that may be in favor of Vice President Kamala Harris. Any abrupt action could destroy this advantage,” the political scientist noted.
The US may therefore remain in a wait-and-see mode until election day itself, seeking to avoid actions that could affect the election race.
