Ukraine calls for weapons while Russian attack threatens to change course

Ukraine is on a race against time to save the eastern Donbas region, as relentless Russian artillery and airstrikes threaten to turn the tide of war, and it appears that support for Kyiv’s continued challenge among some allies ‘Western Europe seems to be shrinking.

Ukrainian officials say they urgently need advanced US-made multiple mobile rocket launch (MLRS) systems to stop Russian advances in Luhansk and Donetsk. The rockets would be able to attack Russian firing positions, military bases, airstrips and supply lines at a distance of up to 300 km (185 miles).

“We have a great need for weapons that will allow us to face the enemy at long range,” said the commander-in-chief of Ukraine, General Valeriy Zaluzhnyi. “The price of delay is measured by the lives of people who have protected the world [Russian] fascism ”.

Ongoing disagreements in Washington have hampered MLRS deliveries. It is said that some of President Joe Biden’s national security advisers fear that Ukraine could use rockets to hit targets inside Russia, a novelty that could lead to an escalation in the US and NATO. Kyiv has already launched attacks on Russian soil.

Moscow, well aware of the game-changing potential of rocket systems, has already expressed strong objections. “If Americans do that, they will clearly cross a red line,” said Olga Skabeeva, an influential Russian state television presenter whose views reflect those of the Kremlin. Russia’s response could be “very harsh,” he warned.

U.S. media reported on Saturday that Biden had agreed to provide some rocket systems as part of a new U.S. weapons package for Ukraine that would be announced this week. The package may also include another advanced weapon, the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, known as Himars.

The decision came after talks between US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Dmytro Kuleba, Ukraine’s foreign minister. “Heavy weapons are at the top of our agenda and more are coming at us,” Kuleba said after the talks.

But there are doubts about what weapon systems will be provided and when the U.S. move. The White House and the Pentagon have not yet confirmed the reports.

“I will not go ahead with decisions that have not yet been made,” Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said. Despite the delay, he insisted that “it was not too late” to send new weapons to Ukraine.

If the U.S. defies Russia’s warnings and goes ahead this week, the UK is expected to simultaneously announce that it will also supply advanced long-range rocket systems. The British version of the MLRS, which can fire 12 missiles in less than a minute, has a more limited range of 84 km (52 ​​miles). Earlier this month, Britain announced an additional £ 1.3 billion in military support.

Speaking in Prague on Friday, Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said it was “completely legitimate” for NATO and EU countries to provide more weapons, including tanks and planes, in Ukraine despite Russia’s objections. . Like Boris Johnson, Truss says Russia’s leader Vladimir Putin must be seen losing the war. The United Kingdom has demanded a return to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders.

An injured man is being transported on a stretcher to Kharkiv on Thursday after being wounded by a Russian bombing. Photography: Bernat Armangué / AP

The uncompromising position of the United Kingdom is not shared by the major European countries shaken by Russia’s advances, whose focus is increasingly focused on notional peace negotiations. Veteran US diplomat Henry Kissinger fueled the debate last week in Davos by suggesting that Kyiv should be prepared to make concessions, which would amount to a possible de facto partition.

Emmanuel Macron and Olaf Scholz held an 80-minute telephone conversation with Putin, during which they urged the Russian president to hold “serious direct negotiations” with Volodymyr Zelenskiy. The French president and German chancellor called for an “immediate ceasefire and the withdrawal of Russian troops.”

Keir Giles, of the London think tank Chatham House, said a quick end to the conflict seemed to be a priority for France and Germany.

“There are already worrying indications that the most squalid of Western European partners may be arguing among themselves about how to force a surrender to Ukraine in the form of land concessions to end the fighting … It’s more important to them. [France and Germany] to end the struggle than to achieve a viable outcome, “Giles said.

This apparent change has angered Eastern European governments such as Poland, whose president accused Germany of failing to keep its promise to provide heavy weapons. After Italy presented a peace plan last week, which the Kremlin called a “fantasy,” Edgars Rinkēvičs, Latvia’s foreign minister, warned that in any case, Putin could not be trusted. ‘adhere to any agreement.

“Any agreement with Russia is not worth a penny,” said Ukrainian presidential adviser and peace negotiator Mykhailo Podolyak. “Is it possible to negotiate with a country that always cynically lies? … Russia has proven to be a barbaric country that threatens world security. A barbarian can only be stopped by force. “

The pressure to talk about peace or make concessions is fueling Ukraine’s concern that it is in a race against time to turn its fortunes on the battlefield. The Kyiv government said on Saturday that its forces may have to withdraw from Luhansk to avoid the siege.

Russia’s Defense Ministry said the city of Lyman in eastern Ukraine had fallen under the full control of Russian-backed Russian-backed forces in the region. Meanwhile, a group of independent international legal experts has accused Russia of committing genocide.

Despite recent setbacks in Ukraine, Peter Ricketts, a former UK national security adviser, said the West should not back down now.

“Having supported Ukraine and encouraged them to face Russian aggression in the initial phase, we now have a real obligation to carry it out in the long run,” he said. “It would be disastrous to reduce Western support after doing the very hard thing to face the Russians. We have to shut down in the long run. Military support can be reduced over time and financial support will probably become more important as the fighting gradually subsides. “

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *