By Stepehen Bryen*
This article was issued by Weapons and Strategy and is being republished with their permission.
WASHINGTON, D.C. | 19 November 2024 (IDN) — Joe Biden has got Donald Trump out of a bind. In his Presidential campaign Trump claimed he could quickly bring an end to the Ukraine war and force a negotiation between Kiev and Moscow.
That pledge is now by the board now thanks to Joe Biden’s decision to unleash ATACMS missiles on Russia.
On the night of November 18, only hours after the public announcement allowing strikes inside Russian territory, the Ukrainians fired five or six ATACMS missiles at the Bryansk area of Russia, around 75 miles inside the Russian border with Ukraine.
The Russians say that they destroyed 5 of the six missiles, with one missile hit but not completely destroyed. That missile, according to the Russians, fell to the ground and exploded, but caused minimal damage. The Ukrainians say that the middle hit an ammunition depot and blew it up.
The Russians used their air defenses, most notably the S-400 and Pantsir. The S-400 has long range; Pantsir was probably used to go after missiles that the S-400 did not intercept.
ATACMS is a large missile. The US HIMARS launch system can fire only one ATACMS at a time and then has to be reloaded. The missile weighs 3,690 lbs. and travels at a speed of around Mach 3 (2,300 mph), making it faster than conventional jet fighters.
In 2021 dollars an ATACMS missile costs $1.7 million, meaning that a replacement cost would be more than $2 million per copy. However, the US plans on replacing ATACMS with the Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) which will have longer range. ATACMS can reach 190 miles; PrSM can reach 250 miles, a modest but expensive improvement since the replacement missile cost will be over $3 million a copy. Using AI-supported math (just kidding), replacing 6 missiles will cost US taxpayers $30 million or more.
The idea of using ATACMS is intentionally provocative and is used by the Biden administration to block negotiations between Ukraine and Russia. Biden’s intention is to prolong the war, and to make it impossible, or nearly so, for Trump to make a deal.
We do not know how may ATACMS missiles are in Ukraine. Probably not more than a couple of dozen, although there is no confirmed information.
Replacement of Zelensky with a more “democratic” leader?
The current administration has a right hand left hand problem. A part of the administration, namely the State Department and elements in the CIA, allegedly want to replace Zelensky in Ukraine with a more “democratic” leader and start talks with the Russians. The other part of the administration wants to prolong the war and screw Trump. That explains the remarkably ambivalent posture yesterday on the question of the use of ATACMS against Russia. Nonetheless, it is well to keep in mind that the Europeans were briefed in advance about the Biden decision, which is why German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who heads a failed government, called Putin and, on the day of the public announcement of ATACMS authorization, said Germany would not supply Taurus missiles to Ukraine, notwithstanding the US decision on ATACMS.
No dramatic impact on the war
From a war fighting point of view, the use of ATACMS will not have any dramatic impact on the war. In fact, the decision to attack targets in the Bryansk region, and not (at least so far) in Kursk, which is where really tough fighting is going on, and where the administration insists North Koreans are fighting alongside Russian troops, highlights the fact that firing ATACMS has nothing really to do with the war, at least not yet. Could the Bryansk attack be a warning to the Russians? Maybe, but wasting $30 million on a warning seems nonsensical.
The Russians, of course, have their own long-range missiles. They could be used against targets in Europe just as easily as they are being used against targets in Ukraine. One presumes that Biden knows this, and probably hopes it will trigger a wider war and subsequent NATO intervention in Ukraine. That is part of the White House calculus.
It is doubtful Russia will attack Europe right now in retaliation. There are plenty of good targets in Ukraine for the Russians to respond.
Mr. Trump’s nominated National Security advisor, Mike Waltz, says that the Biden decision will not help Mr. Trump end the Ukraine war. Waltz says that he was not briefed by the Biden administration on the ATACMS decision, a breach of normal protocol where incoming officials are briefed on national security matters and often asked for their views. Biden and his people did neither, and on purpose.
Mr. Trump now has an excuse that he cannot solve the Ukraine problem so long as ATACMS missiles and other weapons are used by Ukraine, with help from NATO technicians and intelligence assets. Perhaps after January 20 he can try and roll that decision back, but a lot can happen between now and then that could well foreclose negotiations of any sort, namely that Ukraine is defeated and the Zelensky government collapses.
It now seems Biden will do whatever he wants without conferring with Mr. Trump. The promise of a smooth transition of government made by Biden turns out to be insincere and deceptive.
[Note: An ATACMS missile in 2021 dollars costs $1.7 million per copy. In 2024, taking into account inflation and rising costs. a replacement missile would cost around $2.4 to $$2.8 million per copy.] On the night of November 18, Ukraine fired either 5 or 6 of these at Russia (with considerable US help). One of them may have hit its target, although the Russians say that it was intercepted and did not cause much damage. The total cost of this debacle was at least $12 million, perhaps $15 million. But that does not take into account forthcoming Russian response to the attack. This is a stupid waste of taxpayer’s money, aside from its inherent recklessness, could cause a much bigger war beyond Ukraine, and the attack had almost nothing to do with the actual war on the ground in Ukraine. Congratulations to Joe Biden who on a good day can’t find the bathroom.
*Stephen D. Bryen is a former US Defense Department official, Senior Fellow, Center for Security Policy, Senior Corresponden Asia Times. [IDN-InDepthNews]
Original link: https://substack.com/home/post/p-151876533
Photo source: Weapons and Strategy.