US decision to allow Ukraine to fire deeper into Russia did not raise risk

28/11/2024 6:06

        The U.S.
        decision to allow Ukraine to fire American weapons deeper into
        Russia has not increased the risk of a nuclear attack, which is
        unlikely, despite Russian President Vladimir Putin's
        increasingly bellicose statements, five sources familiar with
        U.S. intelligence told Reuters.
        
        But Russia is likely to expand a campaign of sabotage
        against European targets to increase pressure on the West over
        its support for Kyiv, said two senior officials, a lawmaker and
        two congressional aides briefed on the matter.
        
        A series of intelligence assessments over the past seven
        months have concluded nuclear escalation was unlikely to result
        from a decision to loosen restrictions on Ukraine's use of U.S.
        weapons. That view has not changed following President Joe
        Biden's changed U.S. stance this month on weapons, said the
        sources, who were granted anonymity to speak freely about
        sensitive intelligence.
        
        "The assessments were consistent: The ATACMs weren’t going
        to change Russia’s nuclear calculus," said one congressional
        aide briefed on the intelligence, referring to American missiles
        with a range of up to 190 miles (306 km).
        
        Russia's launch of a new ballistic missile last week, which
        analysts say was meant as a warning to Washington and its
        European allies, has not changed that conclusion.
        
        One of the five U.S. officials said while Washington
        assessed that Russia would not seek to escalate with its nuclear
        forces, it would try to match what it views as U.S. escalation.
        The official said fielding the new missile was part of that
        effort.
        
        U.S. officials said the intelligence has helped guide an
        often divisive debate over recent months inside Biden's
        administration about whether Washington loosening restrictions
        on Ukraine’s use of American weapons was worth the risk of
        angering Putin.
        
        Officials initially resisted such a move, citing escalation
        concerns and uncertainty over how Putin would respond. Some of
        those officials, including in the White House, the Pentagon and
        the State Department, feared lethal retaliation on U.S. military
        and diplomatic personnel and attacks on NATO allies.
        Others were specifically worried about nuclear escalation. Biden
        changed his mind because of North Korea's entry into the war
        before the U.S. presidential election, U.S. officials have said.
        Some officials now believe the escalation concerns, including
        the nuclear fears, were overblown but stress that the overall
        situation in Ukraine remains dangerous and that nuclear
        escalation is not out of the question. Russia's ability to find
        other covert ways of retaliating against the West remains a
        worry.
        “Russia's hybrid response is a concern,” said Angela Stent,
        director of Eurasian, Russian and East European studies at
        Georgetown University, referring to Russia’s sabotage in
        Europe.
        
        “The chance of escalation was never not there. The concern
        now is greater.”
        
        The White House and the Office of the Director of National
        Intelligence declined to comment.
        
        The Kremlin did not immediately respond to a request for
        comment about the intelligence assessments.
        
        
        
        REACTION AND COUNTER-REACTION
        Since August, when Ukraine launched a surprise incursion into
        Russia's Kursk region, Moscow and Kyiv have been locked in a
        cycle of escalating moves and counter-moves.
        
        Russia has enlisted help from North Korea, which sent
        between 11,000 and 12,000 soldiers to help its war effort,
        according to the United States.
        The same day as Ukraine's first strike under the relaxed U.S.
        policy, Russia changed its nuclear doctrine, lowering the
        threshold for a nuclear strike.
        
        Fear of nuclear escalation has been a factor in U.S.
        officials' thinking since Russia invaded Ukraine in early 2022.
        CIA Director William Burns has said there was a real risk in
        late 2022 that Russia could use nuclear weapons against Ukraine.
        
        Even so, the White House moved forward with Ukraine aid,
        sending billions of dollars' worth of military assistance.
        
        The concerns faded for some officials as Putin did not act
        on his threats but remained central to how many in the
        administration weighed decisions on how the U.S. should support
        Kyiv.
        
        In May, the White House allowed Ukraine to use American
        missiles in limited circumstances to strike across the border
        but not deep inside Russia, citing risk of escalation by Moscow,
        marginal tactical benefit and a limited supply of ATACMs.
        
        One of the intelligence assessments from early summer, drawn
        up at the White House's request, explained that strikes across
        the border from the Ukrainian city Kharkiv would have limited
        impact because 90% of Russian aircraft had been moved back from
        the border – out of distance of the short-range missiles.
        
        But the assessments also noted while Putin often threatens
        to use nuclear weapons, Moscow is unlikely to take such a step
        in part because they do not provide a clear military benefit.
        Intelligence officials described the nuclear option as a last
        resort for Russia and that Putin would resort to other means of
        reprisal first, noting Russia was already engaged in sabotage
        and cyberattacks.
        
        Still, some officials inside the White House and Pentagon
        argued that allowing Kyiv to use the missiles to strike inside
        Russia would put Kyiv, the U.S. and American allies in
        unprecedented danger, provoking Putin to retaliate either
        through nuclear force or other deadly tactics outside the war
        zone.
        
        Pentagon officials worried about attacks on U.S. military
        bases.
        
        
        
        THE NORTH KOREA FACTOR
        
        The introduction of North Korean troops convinced the
        administration, particularly a group of officials at the White
        House and the Pentagon concerned about escalation, to allow the
        long-range strikes, said a senior U.S. official.
        
        Russia was making battlefield gains and the North Korean
        troops were viewed internally as escalation by Moscow
        necessitating a response from Washington, the official said.
        
        Given the early intelligence assessments downplaying the
        risk of nuclear escalation, the nuclear fears were overstated
        and the decision to allow wider use of ATACMs came too late,
        said a senior U.S. official and a lawmaker, citing Russia's
        recent advances.
        
        Intelligence sources say Moscow's most robust and successful
        reprisal operations are likely to come through sabotage. Russian
        intelligence services have launched a massive international
        effort in Europe to intimidate countries who support Ukraine,
        one European diplomat said.
        
        A U.S. official added Moscow was actively looking to advance
        its "gray-zone" warfare against the West and that Russia has an
        extensive network of agents and it exploring options for using
        them.