The war in Ukraine has assumed a new character with the introduction of Western long-range missiles, including the American ATACMS and the British-French Storm Shadow. These weapons have altered tactics and strategy, compelling Russian forces to re-examine operations in regions such as Crimea, Donbas, and other disputed areas.
The ATACMS, or Army Tactical Missile System, is a surface-to-surface ballistic missile with the capability of attacking targets at a distance of up to 300 kilometers. For months, Ukraine was constrained from firing ATACMS at Russian positions for fear of escalation. New policy changes, however, permitted Kyiv to attack deeper into enemy lines, providing its military with unmatched reach.
This shift responds not just to the changing needs of the battlefield—i.e., the availability of more troops in proximity to critical locations—but also to wider political realities attached to continued American support.
Storm Shadow, conversely, is a stealthy, air-launched cruise missile with a range of more than 500 kilometers. Its ability to be both precise and stealthy renders it extremely useful for engaging high-value targets deep in enemy territory. Storm Shadow has been employed by Ukraine to break up Russian supply lines, take out airbases, and target infrastructure in Crimea. Combined, ATACMS and Storm Shadow provide Ukrainian military forces with immense flexibility, as they are able to target key assets and counter Russian capabilities in contested areas.
Its impact on the battlefield is evident. ATACMS has destroyed helicopters, shut down airfields, and knocked out advanced air defense systems such as the S-300 and S-400. Storm Shadow has compelled Russian naval forces to shift from Crimea inland. Attacks on ferry crossings, supply lines, and logistics centers have made it more difficult to resupply Russian operations.
In turn, Russia has been spending on layered air defenses and intensifying electronic warfare capabilities. While the S-300 and S-400 can still intercept cruise and ballistic missiles, the synergy of range, speed, and stealth in Western systems has pushed these defenses to their limits.
The Russian army now has difficult decisions regarding where to position its best defenses, leaving other positions more vulnerable. Pulling forces together, relocating key facilities further into the back, and putting their faith in drones and asymmetric warfare have become core to their developing strategy.
The impact of these long-range attacks extends beyond the battlefield. They have psychological significance, showing that high-priority targets are vulnerable and that Ukraine can project power well behind enemy lines. These missiles have increased Ukrainian morale while raising the operational cost for Russia at the same time.
ATACMS is also a symbol of U.S. commitment, clearly indicating continued support. Despite the Russian threat of “red lines,” these strikes have taken place without initiating immediate direct reprisals, although Moscow still threatens responsibility for civilian loss of life.
The use of long-range missiles also poses strategic issues. How will the Russian strategy evolve further? What can other militaries learn from combining advanced precision weapons with intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities? The war demonstrates the value of coupling precision strike options with responsive, flexible planning.
In the end, Storm Shadow and ATACMS have changed the face of the battlefield in Ukraine. They illustrate the revolutionizing power of contemporary long-range, precision-strike systems, forcing opponents to adapt rapidly and providing Ukraine with a significant advantage. How this balance develops—and lessons are learned by other militaries—will likely shape strategic planning for years to come.