President Biden wants to avoid provoking Russia at a time when American officials fear that Vladimir V. Putin may escalate the war to compensate for recent losses.
As a subscriber, you have 10 free articles to give away every month. Anyone can read what you share.
WASHINGTON – With success in northeastern Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelensky is pressing President Biden for a new and more powerful weapon: a missile system with a range of 190 kilometers, which can reach far into space of Russia.
Mr. Zelensky insists to US officials that he has no intention of hitting Russian cities or targeting civilian targets, even though President Vladimir V. Putin’s forces have hit apartments, halls and hospitals in Ukraine throughout. of war. The move, Mr. Zelensky says, is essential for starting a wider war, possibly as early as next year.
Mr. Biden is opposed, in part because he is convinced that in the past seven months, he has succeeded in showing Mr. Putin that he does not want a full-scale war with the Russians – he just wants them out of Ukraine.
The deployment of long-range guided missiles, which would give Ukraine new options for striking Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014, may be seen by Moscow as a major challenge, Mr. Biden concluded. .
“We’re trying to avoid World War III,” Mr. Biden keeps reminding his aides, repeating a statement he’s also made publicly.
Senior aides to the president also said that when Mr. Biden asked the Pentagon in recent weeks how long-range missile systems would help Ukrainian forces in the next phase of the war, he was told that the benefits would be it is weak. That made him come to the conclusion, they said, it was not worth the risk.
The controversy surrounding the Army Tactical Missile System, or ATACMS, comes at a critical time, when officials at the White House, State Department, Pentagon and American intelligence agencies seem more concerned than ever that Mr. Putin may increase the war to pay for the payment of the payment. for his humiliating retreat.
They don’t know what kind of increase that might be. But many of the options they are preparing for are bleak: indiscriminate bombings of Ukrainian cities, a campaign to assassinate senior Ukrainian leaders, or an attack on supply facilities outside Ukraine – which in NATO countries like Poland and Romania – which run a staggering majority. of arms, ammunition and military equipment in the country.
This account of the administration’s efforts to control the spread of the war is based on interviews with more than a dozen senior US officials as they struggle to determine next steps – in the hope of building on with the development of Ukraine without causing a wider conflict. It comes as the Ukrainians are on the rise and the Russians, meanwhile, are in a frenzy.
American officials believe that, so far, they have succeeded in “boiling the frog” – increasing their military, intelligence and economic assistance to Ukraine step by step, without provoking Moscow to retaliate in action. any major.
They say Mr. Putin would have backed down if Washington had, at the start of the war, given Ukraine the kind of support it now receives, such as the intelligence that allowed Ukraine to kill Russian officials. and aiming weapons. depots, tanks and Russian air defenses with precision-guided rocket attacks. Instead, the Americans believe their escalation policy, and their refusal to provide Ukraine with weapons or advanced aircraft capable of reaching deep into Russia, has set expectations for conflict.
But Mr. Putin has become increasingly frustrated as he fights for the military.
“Indeed, we are reacting steadily, but for now,” Mr. Putin said on Friday, after attending a regional meeting in Uzbekistan. “If the situation continues in this way, the response will be more serious.”
He said Ukraine was trying to commit “terrorist acts” in Russia, and described recent Russian missile attacks against Ukrainian buildings as “warning shots.”
That same day, speaking at an intelligence conference in Washington, the deputy director of the C.I.A., David S. Cohen, said Mr. Putin would ask his military leaders “what happened, why is it happening, what can we do to push back and keep our position.”
“I don’t think we should underestimate Putin’s adherence to his first goal, which is to control Ukraine,” Mr. Cohen said. He added: “We shouldn’t underestimate his willingness to take risks.”
Colin H. Kahl, under secretary of defense for policy, said in a statement to The New York Times on Friday that “Ukraine’s success on the battlefield could make Russia feel backed into a corner, and it’s something we have to keep in mind.”
But he said that while the United States is willing to provide Ukraine with the equipment it needs to fight Russian aggression, the Pentagon has assessed that Ukraine does not need ATACMS for “targets directly related to the current conflict.”
On Capitol Hill, Democrats and Republicans have expressed support for preventing the conflict in Ukraine from spiraling into a major conflict. But many lawmakers say the Biden administration was too careful to deny Ukraine more advanced weapons.
Ukraine has asked for more Western aid, such as fighter jets, tanks and long-range missiles. Although Mr. Zelensky requested ATACMS, the Pentagon instead provided thousands of satellite-guided rockets and 16 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, or HIMARS, launchers to fire them. The rockets hit more than 400 Russian weapons depots, posts and radars.
HIMARS can carry up to six guided missiles at once, each of which can hit targets up to 50 miles away – a range that Pentagon officials say covers most of the intended target range. of Ukraine. In comparison, the HIMARS launcher can deliver one larger ATACMS missile at a time before needing to reload.
Analysts say the military aid the West has provided so far is enough to keep Ukraine in the war but not win.
Representative Jason Crow, a Colorado Democrat who serves on the House Intelligence and Armed Services committees, said the United States should send ATACMS to Ukraine.
“Honestly, the increase is worrisome, and we have to be aware of that threat,” said Mr. Crow, a former Army Ranger. But I don’t think providing ATACMS is worse. We need to give Ukraine what it needs to win. ”
The increasing advice of weapons and advice now, said some former officials, is important to help the Ukrainian people to spend more money in order to offend and survive the coming winter.
“We have an opportunity,” said Evelyn Farkas, executive director of the McCain Institute and a former national security official during the Obama administration, speaking at an intelligence and security conference in Washington. “I’m worried that if we don’t give the Ukrainians the weapons they need to push back, to gain more ground, they won’t have enough leverage at the negotiating table and the Russians might regroup.”
Some American officials express concern that the most dangerous time is yet to come, as Mr. Putin has avoided escalating the war in ways that have sometimes puzzled Western officials.
He has made little effort to destroy critical infrastructure or target Ukrainian government buildings. He has not attacked the supply chain outside of Ukraine. Although he has ordered low-level cyberattacks against Ukrainian targets every week, they have been relatively unsophisticated, especially compared to the capabilities Russia has demonstrated, including in the SolarWinds attack against and the American government and business processes discovered earlier in Mr. Biden took the job.
Some officials have expressed concern that Mr. Putin could detonate a smart nuclear weapon — perhaps in a showdown in the Black Sea or Arctic Ocean, or on Ukrainian territory. But there is no evidence that he is transporting those weapons, officials say, or planning such a strike.
A senior intelligence official said there was an ongoing debate within the US intelligence community over whether Mr Putin believed such a move would risk Russian isolation. countries that need it the most – especially China – or whether you hold that option.
Mr. Biden addressed the issue directly in an interview with CBS for “60 Minutes,” scheduled to air Sunday, when he warned that turning to nuclear or other unconventional weapons would “change the face of of war unlike anything since World War II,”‘ referring to America’s use of nuclear weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan.
“They will become more people in the world than ever before,” said Mr. Biden, in a statement broadcast by CBS. “And depending on the magnitude of what they do will dictate what the response will be.”
That last statement appeared to refer to discussions within the U.S. security community about how to respond to a demonstration explosion — similar to a nuclear test, though one that went off done to warn of a possible escalation – against a strike in a populated area of Ukraine.
Mr Putin, despite his initial setbacks, seemed generally satisfied with how the war had progressed in recent months, content to give his army time to advance slowly as is hitting the Ukrainian lines with a brutal weapons campaign.
But as he made clear on Friday, he is not satisfied. American officials say Moscow is more willing to blame the United States for its problems than before the war.
“The announcement that US intelligence is helping the Ukrainian side has changed the Russian narrative even more to the message: We are fighting NATO now,” said Larissa Doroshenko, a researcher at Northeastern University.
There are also signs that Mr. Putin may be worried about his political status. Public criticism in Russia is growing after the protest. Commentators, for the most part, avoided direct criticism of Mr. Putin. But some academics see the harsh reviews of the Russian military command as a clear criticism of Mr. Putin.
The challenges facing Mr Putin – from growing criticism to the strength of the Ukrainian military – mean his rising numbers could change.
That made the decision on long-range weapons very difficult.
The latest comments from Russia may be designed to make the United States think twice about ATACMS. The missiles would allow Ukraine to enter Russia or Crimea. Mr Zelensky has vowed to take back the peninsula, and has carried out surprise attacks on Russian targets there in recent weeks.
However, missiles would not allow the Ukrainians to break through the defenses that the Russians are now trying to rebuild. And some experts warn that they are unlikely to provide stability in the war.
Throughout the war, US intelligence has proven adept at studying Russian military plans, but its record on Mr. Putin’s targets is more mixed.
Intelligence officials have said publicly that Mr Putin’s war plans have remained the same since the start of the war – which includes the removal of Mr Zelensky.
In response to the latest setbacks, Mr. Putin may also consider another type of military buildup, according to U.S. officials. Mr. Putin has so far not committed to a full-fledged meeting. But military experts said he could call in more conscripts, or men who have served in the military – which would have more political problems and could bring troops to the battlefield sooner.
What Mr. Putin decides to do will depend on his assessment of his own power at home, whether he thinks Ukraine might regroup and try another offensive — and what he might do. preventing, rather than encouraging, more American support.
