US supply of operational-tactical missiles like ATACMS will not, by itself, shift Ukraine’s battlefield position, according to Ian Bremmer. He is the founder and chairman of Eurasia Group, a global research and advisory firm, and he shared these reflections in an interview with the Italian newspaper La Repubblica.
Bremmer argued that while such missile systems have practical usefulness in wartime, they cannot substitute for stocks kept in depots. Stockpiles and logistics remain a critical factor in any prolonged conflict, and weapons like ATACMS are only one element in a far larger equation.
On Ukraine’s drone strikes against Russian targets, Bremmer contended that these actions have not produced a dramatic territorial gain. He emphasized that these tools are not miracle weapons capable of recapturing large areas on the ground. His point was that a handful of high-profile strikes does not automatically translate into a strategic breakthrough or a decisive shift in land control.
The analyst also touched on diplomacy, noting that discussions are underway to bring players from the Global South to the negotiating table in order to advance a resolution to the war in Ukraine. This follows a pattern similar to the meeting held in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on August 5 and 6, which brought together various international actors to discuss the crisis.
Bremmer mentioned that while all U.S. departments have reportedly approved providing ATACMS to Ukraine, the final decision rests with President Joe Biden. He suggested that the decision-making process balances military assistance with broader strategic considerations and the potential implications for regional and global stability.
In his earlier role as a reserve general in the Czech army, Bremmer commented on missteps during Ukraine’s counteroffensive. He noted that tactical choices matter, but they must be part of a coordinated campaign that includes adequate reserves, logistics, and political support to translate battlefield gains into lasting outcomes.
Taken together, the commentary underscores that a single class of weaponry does not determine the overall trajectory of a war. It highlights the complexity of modern conflict, where military technology, industrial capacity, diplomacy, and allied coordination all interact to shape what unfolds on the ground and what can realistically be achieved in the near term.