With the introduction of the long-range guided ATACMS missiles, Ukraine can strike targets much farther away, including those deep inside Russia and not just the front lines or the occupied lands. Authorizing these strikes by Washington was a significant move that diverged from previous policies. Almost the entire period of the war, U.S. officials refrained from permitting such actions, fearing that direct attacks on Russian territory could lead to escalation of the conflict.
Most of the reasons for the reluctance to make this change turned out to be incorrect after information about North Korean troops operating with Russian troops in the Kursk area was revealed, and there was also scepticism about how long the U.S. political support for Kyiv would last. The decision was broadly interpreted as a move to empower Ukraine’s stance before changing the American policy.
Kyiv did not waste time in testing the extent of its new capabilities. A missile depot near Karachev, Bryansk region, was the target of the very first strike inside Russia, confirmed. The explosion destroyed a large quantity of artillery shells, air-defense missiles, and other munitions, in which drones were used for targeting the bomb. Russia said that most of the launchers were shot down, but the facility was damaged severely, as can be seen in videos.
The attacks did not end there. The Ukrainian army attacked the units in the Kursk area, the S-400 surface-to-air systems closest to Lotarevka were among the main targets—Russia’s most advanced defensive armament and the counterpart of the U.S. Patriot.
Moscow’s Defense Ministry informed that two of the five missiles that were incoming managed to evade interception; thus, a radar was destroyed, and personnel were injured. The airbase at Khalino was hit in another attack, although the officials portrayed the incident lightly. What is most significant is that the Russians, who are very reluctant to admit losses, did so this time.
In Crimea, the impact of the missiles was no less critical. At least 10 fire attempts were aimed at S-300 and S-400 batteries on the peninsula, resulting in their destruction or disablement and the death of personnel. Independent satellite images confirmed destruction at a number of places, including the very important center of Dzhankoy. These hits made the Russians relocate their air defense further from the front line, thereby creating more challenges for delivery and leaving other areas vulnerable.
Moscow’s reaction has been both aggressive in words and deeds. It has escalated its missile and drone campaigns against Ukrainian cities in the war zone, attacking energy infrastructures, a strategy that has been widely condemned as one that deliberately targets civilians in their homes.
The Kremlin also brought back the nuclear menace at the political level. Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that the updated Russian nuclear doctrine that comprises reactions to attacks from non-nuclear countries that have support from nuclear ones might be the cause for any nuclear strike resulting from NATO-supplied missile attacks on Russian soil.
The missiles have definitely made the Russians uneasy. Within about 300 kilometers, there are no more safe airfields, command posts, and supply hubs that have been considered so before and are now targets that can be hit. As a result, Russia has relocated its aircraft further inside its territory and installed additional air defense systems. On the ground, ATACMS strikes have disrupted the provision of supplies to the area, complementarily weakened the defensive line, and increased the morale of the Ukrainian soldiers at the time of difficult fighting in the east.
Despite that, some experts still point out that the missiles’ impact is not as big as is often presented. There is still only a limited number of missiles that are given to Ukraine. The Russian commanders are already working on the changes to their tactics, whereas the missiles alone cannot be the determining factor of the war. Political decisions in Washington will also affect the delivery of weapons in the future.
Despite that, their arrival has changed the conflict’s limits. ATACMS demonstrated how a single change of viewpoint can impact strategic planning, draw new risk considerations, and add to the unpredictability of a war that was already in place.