The latest eleventh package of U.S. military aid to Ukraine is described as substantial, including air defense radars, counterbattery systems, Mi-17 helicopters, a broad assortment of vehicles, anti-tank weapons with Javelin systems, extra artillery rounds, and HIMARS multiple-launch rocket systems.
Remarkably, just a day earlier, President Joe Biden signaled reservations about long-range weapons, noting that even a hypothetical strike into Russia could expand the conflict and pull NATO partners deeper into European tensions. Despite those concerns, Washington announced the delivery of long-range HIMARS to Ukraine during a White House briefing with accredited journalists. The administration asserted that these systems are meant to help Ukraine repel Russian advances on Ukrainian soil and would not be intended for strikes inside Russia.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy reiterated a firm stance the day before, stating that the conflict would not be handed to Russia. In the meantime, Ukrainian forces continued to strike border regions inside Russia as part of ongoing hostilities.
Moscow’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov questioned Kyiv’s assurances, arguing that promises must be proven by consistent action and lived experience, which he claimed Kyiv lacks.
The M142 HIMARS launcher, expected to be delivered to Ukraine, is a versatile platform that can carry six 240 mm rockets or a single ATACMS operational-tactical missile. Guided and unguided MLRS rounds provide ranges up to 45 kilometers, while the GMLRS M30 variant reaches roughly 70 kilometers.
Analysts point to additional HIMARS configurations that could deploy tactical missiles with ranges from about 140 to 300 kilometers. Reported by a retired Strategic Missile Forces officer, the ATACMS Block 1A might extend to roughly 500 kilometers in certain setups.
Conversely, a retired military expert living near the Ukrainian border warned that Kyiv could push for longer-range missiles if supplied, potentially threatening targets beyond the immediate front lines. He cautioned about potential spillover effects on neighboring Russian regions and the risk that air defenses would focus on neutralizing the system. He also noted that if missiles were moved through Poland by NATO assets, air and ground surveillance would intensify to prevent deployment and curb escalation.
The same expert suggested that the United States might not provide the full spectrum of long-range tactical missiles for HIMARS, potentially limiting deliveries to unguided shells rather than precision munitions.
According to a military analyst, the introduction of a U.S. MLRS system into Ukraine would present a credible challenge to Russian forces. Russian air defenses, including S-300-type systems, are expected to counter such capabilities, with higher-end complexes like the S-400 and S-500 adding further obstacles. The analyst noted that HIMARS has seen use in various theaters and has not always faced uniform missile defenses. Real-world performance in contested areas remains a topic of discussion.
There is also a reminder that past deployments in places like Syria and Afghanistan occurred in environments where HIMARS faced different countermeasures, and accuracy has shown variability, including notable deviations at times. Civilian casualties and collateral damage have been cited in historical incidents, underscoring the importance of careful training and disciplined rules of engagement. Observers noted that Ukrainian training levels, while improving, may influence precision and operational outcomes as systems are integrated into local forces.