Andrew Rettman, EUobserver’s foreign editor since 2005, specializes in foreign and security affairs. A Polish national raised in the UK and currently residing in Brussels, his expertise is reflected in his contributions to prominent publications such as The Guardian, The Times of London, and Intelligence Online. His background provides a unique perspective on European affairs.
The Biden administration’s authorization of long-range ATACMS strikes inside Russia represents a significant policy shift, potentially bolstering Ukraine’s defense against a large Russian-North Korean force. This action, likely influenced by the upcoming Trump presidency, allows Ukraine to target key Russian infrastructure, such as command centers and logistics, thereby weakening their offensive capabilities. Retired General Ben Hodges emphasizes that while not a “game changer” in itself, the ATACMS authorization is a positive step, although its restricted use remains a concern. However, the long-term impact remains uncertain given President-elect Trump’s stated intentions to quickly end the war, raising concerns about future U.S. support for Ukraine.
In a recent Fox News interview, Ukrainian President Zelensky asserted that the war’s conclusion hinges more on the United States than Russia, citing President Putin’s relative weakness. He expressed hope that President-elect Trump’s potential influence, particularly regarding energy prices, could pressure Putin to end hostilities. However, Zelensky warned that reduced U.S. aid under a Trump administration risks Ukraine losing the war, despite its continued resistance. Trump’s campaign promises to negotiate a swift end to the conflict have introduced significant uncertainty into the situation.
Analysis suggests that recent Ukrainian strikes on a Russian military depot, utilizing US-supplied long-range missiles, targeted ammunition supplies supporting Russian forces in the Kursk region. Western intelligence likely aided the precision of these strikes, which were well within the missiles’ range. While initial reports suggested restrictions on missile use to the Kursk area, Ukraine will likely argue that the attack, approximately 120 miles from Kursk, directly supports their efforts to disrupt Russian logistics there. The efficacy of Russian air defenses against the six missiles fired remains unclear.
On the 1000th day of the war, Ukraine reportedly launched six American-made ATACMS missiles into Russia, targeting a military facility in the Bryansk region. Russia claims to have intercepted five of the missiles, resulting in minimal damage and no casualties. This attack, the first confirmed use of ATACMS missiles by Ukraine inside Russia, coincided with Russia announcing a lowered threshold for nuclear retaliation, specifically mentioning the use of Western-supplied long-range missiles as a potential trigger. This new nuclear doctrine, signed by Putin, significantly escalates tensions in the ongoing conflict.
Putin sees America hurtling towards disaster, and he believes Donald Trump is the driver steering the nation towards the precipice. This isn’t simply a matter of political disagreement; it’s a calculated assessment of a strategy unfolding successfully. The perception isn’t just of internal strife, but a deliberate fracturing of American society, weakening the nation from within.
The idea that a weakened, divided America benefits Russia isn’t a new one. It’s rooted in the belief that internal conflict diminishes a nation’s global influence, making it less of a threat and potentially more susceptible to external pressures. This isn’t a matter of military conquest; it’s about subtle manipulation and the exploitation of existing social and political divisions.… Continue reading
Marking the war’s 1,000th day, Ukrainian President Zelensky addressed the European Parliament, urging allies to increase pressure on Russia for a “just peace,” emphasizing that Putin will not stop without external pressure. Zelensky’s speech followed reports of a possible first use of US-supplied ATACMS missiles within Russia, and coincided with escalating tensions including the reported deployment of North Korean troops and Russia’s updated nuclear doctrine. The conflict continues to inflict devastating casualties, with recent drone attacks in Sumy resulting in civilian deaths. Zelensky warned that delaying action allows Russia to strengthen its position.
In response to Chancellor Scholz’s recent phone call with Vladimir Putin, Polish President Andrzej Duda voiced strong disapproval, deeming the conversation a mistake and questioning its coordination with allies. Duda criticized the negotiation with the aggressor while Russia continues its brutal assault on Ukraine. The Polish president highlighted the problematic nature of a major European leader engaging in dialogue with Putin. Zelenskyy similarly expressed concern, referring to the call as a “Pandora’s box.”
In response to media reports of a Turkish peace plan, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov declared the proposed frontline freeze unacceptable to Russia. Peskov denied any discussion of such a plan between Putin and Erdoğan, stating a lack of information regarding its details. These reports, alongside similar proposals circulating in the US, suggest a potential strategy of freezing the conflict and delaying Ukrainian NATO membership. However, Russia’s firm rejection indicates significant obstacles to any such peace initiative.
President Biden’s decision to provide Ukraine with long-range missiles capable of striking inside Russia has elicited a furious response from the Kremlin. Russian officials, including Senator Vladimir Dzhabarov, have warned of a “serious escalation” and even “World War Three.” The Kremlin views this as direct NATO involvement, a red line previously established by President Putin. This action follows months of warnings from Russia against supplying Ukraine with such weaponry, prompting concerns about potential escalatory responses from Moscow, including retaliatory actions and adjustments to its nuclear doctrine.
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood