New US Policy Allows Ukraine to Strike Russian Targets: Implications and Controversies

Concerns that allowing Ukraine to strike deeper into Russian territory could escalate the conflict and potentially lead to unintended consequences
Experts argue that allowing Ukraine to strike back against Russian forces is necessary for ensuring its victory or negotiating a peace from a position of strength
New policy has reportedly led to a reduction in some Russian attacks but restricts Ukraine's range
President Biden has reportedly focused on providing Ukraine with defensive weapons and support instead of granting permission for strikes at Russian air bases and military targets
Ukraine now permitted to use certain American weapons against Russian targets across the border
New US Policy Allows Ukraine to Strike Russian Targets: Implications and Controversies

In recent developments regarding the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia, there have been significant shifts in US policy that could potentially alter the course of the war. According to multiple sources, including The Associated Press, CNN, Business Insider, and The Washington Post, Ukraine is now permitted to use certain American weapons against Russian targets across the border. This new policy has reportedly led to a reduction in some Russian attacks but also restricts Ukraine's range enough that it cannot hit key airfields used by Russian jets.

The US restrictions have been met with frustration from Ukrainian officials, who are eager to defend their territory and deter further aggression from Russia. However, there are concerns that allowing Ukraine to strike deeper into Russian territory could escalate the conflict and potentially lead to unintended consequences.

According to a report by The New York Post, President Biden has been hesitant to grant Ukraine the ability to strike at Russian air bases and military targets due to fears of escalation. Instead, he has reportedly focused on providing Ukraine with defensive weapons and support.

Despite these concerns, some experts argue that allowing Ukraine to strike back against Russian forces is necessary for ensuring its victory or negotiating a peace from a position of strength. They point out that Russia has been dictating terms in the unlawful and immoral invasion of Ukraine, and Putin has threatened dark consequences if Biden or NATO allows Ukraine to strike back.

The Institute for the Study of War notes that Russia's forces are not entirely out of reach of Ukraine's armaments. However, they are kept safe due to US restrictions on Ukrainian military actions. This situation has led some to question whether the US is doing enough to support its ally in the face of Russian aggression.

As tensions continue to rise between Ukraine and Russia, it remains unclear what the future holds for this long-standing conflict. However, one thing is certain: history is watching how world leaders respond to this crisis and will not forget their actions.


Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image

Confidence

85%

Doubts
  • It is unclear which specific American weapons Ukraine is now permitted to use against Russian targets
  • The extent of the reduction in Russian attacks and its impact on the overall conflict remains uncertain

Sources

78%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

U.S. restrictions put key Russian air bases out of firing range, officials say

The Fixing Site: A Summary of the Article. Siobhán O'Grady, Friday, 21 June 2024 17:13
  • Unique Points
    • U.S. policy allows Ukraine to fire certain American weapons at Russian territory
    • New U.S. policy has led to a reduction in some Russian attacks but restricts the range enough that it prevents Ukraine from hitting key airfields used by Russian jets
    • Permission to use U.S. weapons in Russia changed things for Ukrainian military and enemy forces have felt it
    • Ukraine is waiting for its first batch of US-made F-16 fighter jets to help deter Russian glide bomb attacks
  • Accuracy
    No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
  • Deception (30%)
    The article contains selective reporting as it focuses on the restrictions placed on Ukraine's use of American weapons against Russian territory and the impact on Ukrainian defenses. It fails to mention that these restrictions were put in place due to concerns about escalating conflict with Russia. The article also implies that these restrictions are preventing Ukraine from effectively defending itself, but it does not provide any evidence to support this claim beyond the assertions of two unnamed Ukrainian officials. Additionally, the article uses emotional manipulation by describing the damage caused by Russian glide bombs and quoting statements from Ukrainian officials expressing frustration and desperation.
    • Neither spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the rule.
    • The Ukrainian officials said the United States has restricted Ukraine to firing less than 100 kilometers, or about 62 miles, from the border.
    • A new U.S. policy allowing Ukraine to fire certain American weapons at Russian territory has led to a reduction in some Russian attacks but still restricts the range enough that it prevents Ukraine from hitting key airfields
  • Fallacies (85%)
    The article contains several instances of imprecise language that could potentially be interpreted as fallacies. The authors state that 'Ukraine is permitted to use U.S.-supplied air defense systems to strike Russian planes if they're about to fire into Ukrainian airspace.' This statement could be seen as an appeal to authority, as it implies that the information comes from a reliable source (the Pentagon spokesman). However, without further context or evidence, it is unclear whether this is an accurate representation of the situation. Additionally, the authors quote Kharkiv Mayor Ihor Terekhov stating that 'Russia fired six glide bombs on Kharkiv city, killing one person and injuring seven.' This statement could be seen as a potential example of inflammatory rhetoric, as it emphasizes the harm caused by Russian attacks. However, without further context or evidence, it is unclear whether this statement is an accurate representation of the situation or if it is being used to elicit an emotional response from readers.
    • ]The U.S. has agreed to allow Ukraine to fire U.S.-provided weapons into Russia across where Russian forces are coming to attempt to take Ukrainian territory.[
  • Bias (80%)
    The article mentions that Ukrainian officials claim the U.S. has restricted Ukraine to firing less than 100 kilometers from the border, but U.S. officials deny this and say it's not about geography or a certain radius, but if Russia is attacking or about to attack from its territory into Ukraine, Ukraine has the ability to hit back against the forces that are hitting it from across the border. However, Ukrainian officials and think tanks report that this policy change has only reduced Russia's 'ground sanctuary' by 15%, preserving Russia's military advantage against Ukraine. The article also mentions that Kharkiv city has experienced much-needed respite after months of relentless attacks by Russian missiles since the U.S. restrictions were lifted, but it remains under constant threat from glide bombs that are typically dropped from more than 15 miles behind the Russian border and cannot be intercepted by Ukrainian air defense systems.
    • Kharkiv Mayor Ihor Terekhov said his city remains ‘under the constant threat’ from glide bombs – modified Soviet-era weapons that Russia drops from airplanes. The bombs can weigh thousands of pounds and are equipped with guidance systems. They are typically dropped from more than 15 miles behind the Russian border, but the planes take off from bases farther away, beyond the U.S.-approved strike range.
      • The ISW reported this month that the U.S. policy limiting Ukraine’s usage of American weapons in Russia had effectively created ‘a vast sanctuary … which Russia exploits to shield its combat forces, command and control, logistics, and rear area support services that the Russian military uses to conduct its military operations in Ukraine.’
        • Ukrainian officials said the United States has restricted Ukraine to firing less than 100 kilometers, or about 62 miles, from the border.
        • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
          None Found At Time Of Publication
        • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
          None Found At Time Of Publication

        73%

        The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
        (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

        A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

        Terrified of 'escalation,' Biden is being bluffed into losing Ukraine to Putin

        New York Post Post Editorial Friday, 21 June 2024 23:04
        • Unique Points
          • President Biden spoke on the two-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, expressing support for freedom and standing up to no one.
          • Russia has been dictating terms in the unlawful and immoral invasion of Ukraine.
          • Putin has threatened dark consequences if Biden or NATO allows Ukraine to strike back.
          • Allowing Ukraine to strike air bases and military targets inside Russian territory is the only way to ensure its victory or negotiate a peace from a position of strength.
        • Accuracy
          No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
        • Deception (5%)
          The article contains editorializing and pontification by the author, as well as emotional manipulation through phrases like 'History is watching' and 'the end of Pax Americana'. The author also engages in selective reporting by focusing on Biden's supposed weakness towards Putin while ignoring any potential context or counterarguments. There is no clear evidence of deception regarding facts, but the intentional framing of the situation in a way that favors a particular narrative can be considered deceptive.
          • History is watching.
          • We aren't willing as a country to do what it takes to stand up for the free world in the face of rising fascism. We aren't showing restraint, we're showing weakness.
          • Putin faces far more risks that we do from escalation, and China does not want its ally to start World War III.
        • Fallacies (85%)
          The author makes an appeal to fear by stating that 'History is watching' and implying that the consequences of not supporting Ukraine will be severe. This is a form of emotional appeal and can be considered a fallacy if it is used to manipulate the reader rather than provide evidence or logical reasoning for why this is the case.
          • History is watching.
          • Do not let Putin bluster his way through barbarism.
        • Bias (80%)
          The editorial expresses a clear bias against President Biden and his handling of the Ukraine situation. It accuses him of 'bowing down' to Putin and allowing Russia to dictate terms in the conflict. The editorial also implies that Biden is weak for not allowing Ukraine to strike back at Russian targets, suggesting that this is necessary for victory or at least a strong negotiating position.
          • And so Russia rains down missiles and drones on Ukraine civilians from its own territory, and Ukraine is told it can’t strike back.
            • Biden has told President Volodymyr Zelensky that US weapons can’t be used to attack targets in Russian territory, with some minor exceptions.
              • Putin thunders that if Biden or NATO allows otherwise, that there will be dark consequences. Russian television plays fantasies of nuclear war.
                • We aren’t willing as a country to do what it takes to stand up for the free world in the face of rising fascism. We aren’t showing restraint, we’re showing weakness.
                • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                  None Found At Time Of Publication
                • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                  None Found At Time Of Publication

                96%

                The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
                (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

                A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

                Ukraine's Neptune missiles are homegrown answer to ATACMS restrictions

                Business Insider Jake Epstein Saturday, 22 June 2024 05:59
                • Unique Points
                  • Ukraine has been using domestically produced Neptune anti-ship missiles, modified for land attack, to strike ground targets inside Russia.
                  • The R-360 Neptune is a subsonic, long-range cruise missile developed by Luch Design Bureau in Kyiv.
                  • Ukraine used the Neptune missile to sink the Russian guided-missile cruiser Moskva earlier in the war.
                • Accuracy
                  No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
                • Deception (100%)
                  None Found At Time Of Publication
                • Fallacies (85%)
                  The article contains inflammatory rhetoric and appeals to authority. It also presents a dichotomous depiction of the situation by framing the US restrictions as limiting Ukraine's ability to strike Russia effectively. Additionally, it highlights Ukrainian innovations in response to these restrictions.
                  • . . . continuing prohibition on striking into Russia with these US-provided weapons.
                  • The locations of both strikes are some 150 miles from the front lines and within the range of the 190-mile long-range ATACMS variant. But the US has prohibited Ukraine from using these powerful missiles to strike military targets inside Russia, thus awarding Moscow what experts and officials have described as sanctuary space.
                  • Ukraine first debuted Neptune anti-ship missiles against Russian naval targets in April 2022 and has had to further develop and modify these missiles to conduct deep strikes against Russian territory.
                • Bias (95%)
                  The author expresses frustration towards the US for limiting Ukraine's ability to use certain weapons against Russia and highlights Ukraine's use of homemade Neptune missiles as a workaround. The author does not explicitly state a bias but the tone of the article implies a negative view towards US restrictions on Ukraine's use of weapons.
                  • But Ukraine isn’t completely without options.
                    • In late May, Ukrainian forces used Neptune missiles to strike an oil depot near Kavkaz, a port along the Black Sea in Russia’s Krasnodar Krai region.
                      • Several weeks later, on Monday, Ukraine again used its Neptune missiles on a ground target, this time striking an oil terminal in nearby Chushka, just over the Kerch Straight from Crimea.
                        • There are indications Ukraine previously used the modified version of this weapon against Russian air defenses, including its S-400s, stationed on the occupied Crimean peninsula, per officials and media reports.
                          • The US has prohibited Ukraine from using these powerful missiles to strike military targets inside Russia
                          • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication
                          • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication

                          100%

                          The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
                          (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

                          A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

                          Ukraine may fire US-provided missiles into Russia wherever it is coming under attack, Pentagon says

                          The Associated Press Friday, 21 June 2024 14:13
                          • Unique Points
                            • Ukraine is allowed to use longer-range missiles provided by the US to strike targets inside Russia if it is acting in self-defense.
                            • Ukraine can use air defense systems supplied by the US to take down Russian planes in Ukrainian airspace if they are about to attack.
                          • Accuracy
                            No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
                          • Deception (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication
                          • Fallacies (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication
                          • Bias (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication
                          • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication
                          • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication

                          99%

                          The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
                          (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

                          A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

                          US signals that it has expanded policy to allow Ukraine to counterstrike into Russia

                          CNN News Site: In-Depth Reporting and Analysis with Some Financial Conflicts and Sensational Language Haley Britzky, Thursday, 20 June 2024 17:03
                          • Unique Points
                            • The US has expanded its agreement with Ukraine to strike into Russian territory wherever Russian forces are engaging in cross-border attacks into Ukraine.
                            • National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan confirmed that the agreement allows Ukraine to fire US-provided weapons into Russia.
                            • Pentagon spokesman Maj. Charlie Dietz stated that the US has agreed to allow Ukraine to conduct counterstrikes against Russian forces attempting to take Ukrainian territory.
                          • Accuracy
                            No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
                          • Deception (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication
                          • Fallacies (95%)
                            The authors make an appeal to common sense and authority in their reporting. They quote Jake Sullivan and Maj. Charlie Dietz making statements that the US policy allows Ukraine to strike into Russian territory wherever Russian forces are attempting to invade, not just in the Kharkiv region as previously reported. However, they also quote Maj. Gen. Patrick Ryder stating that there has been no change in policy and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin suggesting the policy is limited to the Kharkiv region. This creates a dichotomy and leaves room for confusion about the current US policy towards Ukraine's counterstrikes into Russian territory.
                            • ]The agreement with Ukraine to fire into Russia extends wherever Russian forces are coming across the border from the Russian side to the Ukrainian side to try to take additional Ukrainian territory.[/
                            • It only makes sense to allow Ukraine to hit back against the forces that are hitting it from across the border.
                            • [I]f you look back over the course of the conflict, you can find a number of areas where we were reluctant to do something, and then we did it.[/
                          • Bias (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication
                          • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication
                          • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication