By John Q. Hosedrinker 
With US President Biden’s approval, France and Britain have authorized Ukraine to use their SCALP and Storm Shadow missiles for long-range strikes on Russian territory. This decision follows months of Ukrainian requests and ends previous Western hesitancy. The authorization allows Ukraine to employ these weapons alongside US-provided ATACMS missiles. This development potentially marks a significant escalation in the conflict. Ukrainian strikes using these long-range weapons are expected imminently.
Read the original article here
France and Britain’s decision to allow Ukraine to use Storm Shadow missiles against Russia marks a significant escalation in the conflict. It’s a move that many see as long overdue, a necessary step to help Ukraine defend itself against the ongoing Russian aggression. The timing, however, raises questions about potential pre-planning and the influence of the recent US elections.
This authorization has ignited a wave of mixed reactions. While many applaud the decision, seeing it as a powerful tool to potentially shift the balance of power on the battlefield, others express concern about potential consequences. The fear of further escalation, even the terrifying prospect of a wider conflict, is palpable. There’s a sense of apprehension regarding the potential response from Russia and its allies.
The high precision of the Storm Shadow missiles is a frequently mentioned point. The missiles’ limited range, preventing attacks on targets deep within Russia like Moscow, is viewed by some as a crucial factor in mitigating escalation risks. Nevertheless, the potential for striking key infrastructure targets within Russia’s borders has raised the stakes considerably.
Concerns have been raised about the potential for the missiles to exacerbate the conflict and trigger a chain reaction, leading to wider involvement. This fear is fueled by the uncertainty of Russia’s response and the possibility of retaliatory actions. The possibility of this leading to a broader, perhaps even nuclear, confrontation is a significant concern weighing on many minds.
There’s a sense of frustration expressed towards the Western powers, particularly those who have been hesitant to provide more robust military support to Ukraine. Many feel that this assistance should have been provided much sooner, rather than only now, after considerable Ukrainian losses. There’s a feeling that the initial hesitancy stemmed from a fear of provoking Russia, a fear perceived as prioritizing self-preservation over supporting a nation under attack.
The decision is also viewed through the lens of geopolitical strategy. Some believe that this move was strategically timed, perhaps waiting for the dust to settle after the US elections and ensuring alignment with the prevailing American approach. It’s interpreted by some as a calculated risk, designed to provide Ukraine with a much-needed advantage without necessarily triggering an immediate major escalation.
The reactions from other European countries are keenly awaited. Germany, in particular, is highlighted as a key player whose stance on providing further military assistance to Ukraine will be crucial. The political complexities within Germany, including the influence of pro-Russian narratives and parties, are seen as potentially delaying or hindering further military aid.
Ultimately, the decision to supply Storm Shadow missiles represents a pivotal moment in the ongoing conflict. It signifies a deepening commitment from France and Britain to supporting Ukraine’s defense, although it also brings with it a heightened sense of risk and uncertainty. The long-term consequences remain to be seen, but the immediate effect is a tangible shift in the dynamics of the war. The deployment of these advanced missiles undoubtedly represents a turning point, with unpredictable ramifications for the future of the conflict.
The hopes of many are that the decision will successfully turn the tide of the conflict without triggering wider conflict. The situation is complex, the risks are significant, but for many, the alternative – continued inaction in the face of Russian aggression – is simply unacceptable. The hope now is that the calculated risk will pay off for Ukraine, while simultaneously preventing a catastrophic escalation of the war.