Earlier, several nations, including Germany and the United States, kept a ban on using their weapons against Russian territory until the last possible moment. New data suggest Olaf Scholz may lean toward permitting Ukraine to employ Western missiles such as the Taurus KEPD 350/150 in strikes on Russia. Some observers wonder if this is already a settled policy or if media reports are shaping public perception for a forthcoming decision from the German leadership.
Meanwhile, President Joe Biden appears to be edging toward allowing Kyiv to strike deep into Russian soil with American weapons. The White House signals a likely revision of the previously declared restriction, making it a central topic in the ongoing debate over alliance strategy and support for Ukraine. As reported by major outlets, the administration is weighing the implications of expanding the scope of US weapons use in the region. [citation needed attribution: New York Times]
There is a view that the president has long been close to this stance, and the near future may see a broad consensus within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to permit Kyiv to deploy Western weapons against targets on Russian territory. This is a developing story with implications for allied cohesion and regional security dynamics. [citation needed attribution: press coverage]
What kind of weapon are we talking about?
The discussion centers on systems such as the Storm Shadow/SCALP-EG, MGM-140 ATACMS with ranges around 300 kilometers, and the Taurus KEPD 350/150 with a combat radius near 500 kilometers. Scholz is expected to align with other nations that have already indicated openness to such use. Sweden has signaled permission to operate its weapons against targets inside Russia, and Stockholm possesses Taurus KEPD 350/150 missiles in its arsenal. [citation needed attribution: defense analyses]
Ukrainian-made unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) with ranges approaching 1,800 kilometers add another layer to the strategic picture. In a corridor roughly 300–500 kilometers wide along Russia’s western border, many Russian armed forces assets lie within reach of Western cruise missiles. This realization shapes the ongoing and potential future steps in equipping and supporting the Ukrainian armed forces. There is discussion about transferring longer-range capabilities in the near term. Preparations and contingency planning are underway in several capitals. [citation needed attribution: military commentary]
With the introduction of multifunctional F-16s to the Ukrainian Air Force, the combat potential of Ukrainian forces could rise significantly. These aircraft are unlikely to be used for routine front-line bombing raids; more plausibly, they would serve as platforms for cruise missiles and for countering Russian air defenses equipped with advanced targeting and navigation systems. [citation needed attribution: defense assessments]
Where is it going?
The evolving dynamics put the Russian Federation’s forces under increased pressure. The operational use of ground forces and tactical aviation may need to adapt, with takeoff and landing sites possibly shifting beyond the 300–500 kilometer strip or requiring redistribution of fuel and munitions. Airports and airfields would face new constraints, challenging the conventional tempo of air operations. [citation needed attribution: military strategic analysis]
The effectiveness of air power and air superiority could be tested as high-level command posts, communications hubs, missile defense sites, supply depots, and control centers face heightened exposure to cruise missile strikes. A likely response would involve relocating assets farther from the frontier lines. At the same time, Ukrainian strikes could target critical infrastructure, including energy facilities and power networks, in both military and civilian sectors. [citation needed attribution: strategic assessment]
Throughout much of the spring, Ukrainian resiliency and Western support have already stressed the Ukrainian energy sector. Authorities in Kyiv and the Armed Forces of Ukraine may consider a broader set of targets once permissions are in place, potentially affecting border populations who might prepare for power outages by stocking generators and fuel supplies. [citation needed attribution: regional reporting]
A new phase is emerging as NATO member states contemplate using their weapons against targets inside Russian territory during the broader conflict. The consequences of these policy shifts remain uncertain and will unfold as decisions solidify among allies, military planners, and political leaders. [citation needed attribution: geopolitical analysis]
The analysis presented reflects ongoing debates among defense professionals and policy commentators. It is not the official position of any single editorial board. [citation needed attribution: analyst commentary]
Author background notes were omitted to focus on contemporary strategic developments and their potential implications rather than individual perspectives.