The Desire for Long-Range Capabilities
Ukrainian military forces are pleading for the ability to strike deep into Russian territory, at least up to 500 kilometers, as this would fundamentally alter the landscape of the war and significantly weaken the aggressor's capabilities. It appears that Washington is already considering providing such weaponry, but has yet to authorize its use for these types of strikes. Ukraine is still defending itself with one hand tied behind its back.
Neither the United States nor its NATO allies seem willing to allow Ukraine to attack Russian military targets inside of Russia. European partners of Kyiv have provided Storm Shadow and Scalp missiles, which have a range of up to 550 kilometers. The Ukrainian Air Force has been using these missiles for over a year, having integrated them into Soviet-era aircraft. However, according to available information, these missiles have only been used against targets on Ukrainian territory, including in Crimea, which was occupied in 2014.
There have also been calls to provide Ukraine with Taurus missiles, another European-made missile with similar range capabilities, but Germany has yet to grant permission. In fact, the situation for Taurus has not progressed to the point of granting permission, as no deliveries of these missiles have yet been made. It is worth noting that the argument about the need for extensive time to train Ukrainian forces to effectively use these missiles is baseless. Even launches of Storm Shadow and Scalp missiles from outdated Soviet aircraft have yielded significant results—destroying modern Russian air defense systems like the S-400 and warships of the Black Sea Fleet.
On 15 August, a report emerged that the Biden administration is actively working on supplying Ukraine with American air-to-surface missiles, the AGM-158 JASSM, which are well-integrated with the F-16 multirole fighter jet. Ukraine has already received and started operating this aircraft.
However, there are some doubts regarding the range of the AGM-158 JASSM. There are two versions of this missile: the older AGM-158A JASSM, with a range of up to 370 km, and the more modern JASSM-ER, capable of striking targets at distances of up to 900 km.
According to a Biden administration official cited by Politico, no final decision has been made on whether to send these missiles to Ukraine. Discussions are underway regarding the control of this system, which contains sensitive technologies. Additionally, there are concerns about whether Ukrainian aircraft can launch the JASSM, which weighs 2,400 pounds (approximately one tonne) and has a warhead weighing 1,000 pounds (approximately 450 kg).
Control over usage is indeed a serious issue, but it has already been successfully addressed in the provision of Patriot air defense systems and ATACMS surface-to-surface missiles (range of 300 km) to Ukraine. The use of JASSM would certainly not pose difficulties if launched from the F-16s provided to Ukraine, as this is a standard function for the aircraft.
Everything seems fine, but the supply issue still needs to be resolved. There are, however, some military problems. Considering the capabilities of the Russian air defense system and their fighter jets, Ukrainian pilots must launch air-to-surface missiles from at least 120 kilometers from the front line to ensure their own safety. This leaves a clear strike range of no more than 350 km for Storm Shadow and Scalp missiles, no more than 250 km for the older AGM-158A JASSM, and no more than 800 km for the more modern JASSM-ER.
Of course, the most experienced Ukrainian pilots can get somewhat closer, but the gain is just a few dozen kilometers, while the risk of being hit by a Russian missile increases disproportionately. Therefore, there seems to be little sense in supplying Ukraine with the older version of the JASSM missile. In contrast, supplying the newer JASSM-ER could indeed change the course of the war.
If launched from a Ukrainian aircraft near Poltava (Ukraine), the JASSM-ER could reach any Russian military airfield used by Russian bombers launching glide bombs. Including for military airfields located as far as the North Caucasus or the Volga. These glide bombs currently pose one of the greatest challenges to the resilience of Ukraine's ground defenses. They are also devastating large Ukrainian border cities like Kharkiv and Sumy.
However, there is "concern"—specifically, concern about the potential use of these systems against deep Russian territory. For example, if launched from the Chernihiv region, the JASSM-ER could reach Moscow.
Providing the older AGM-158A JASSM would hardly change anything, aside from the fact that the United States has large stockpiles of these missiles. Supplying the JASSM-ER, on the other hand, would require simultaneous approval for its use against targets in Russia's rear. In May 2024, in response to barbaric attacks on civilian targets in Kharkiv, Joe Biden authorised retaliatory strikes on missile and artillery launch sites across the Russian border near Kharkiv. However, this was more of an exception.
At a briefing on 15 August, Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh confirmed that "from a policy standpoint, nothing has changed" when responding to questions about the possibility of using long-range weapons against military targets on Russian territory.
Yet, perhaps something will change. On 12 August, two highly influential US senators, Richard Blumenthal (Democrat) and Lindsey Graham (Republican), visited Kyiv. They met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and separately with Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal. The senators were primarily interested in the circumstances surrounding Ukraine's offensive in Russia's Kursk region. At the end of their visit to Kyiv, Senators Blumenthal and Graham urged the US administration to lift restrictions on Ukraine's use of weapons supplied by Washington.
Bipartisan support for the idea of allowing Ukraine to strike military targets in Russia's rear could indeed change the course of the war—the largest in Europe in the last 79 years.