Opinion: Russia-Ukraine War - ATACMS vs Oreshniks Amid Escalation Fears

In a show of resolve in defending Ukraine against Russian aggression and to ensure Moscow's deployment of North Korean troops in Kursk did not go unchallenged, the US, along with the UK and France, granted Kyiv permission earlier this month to use long-range weapons to strike Russia. Within 24 hours, Ukraine fired 6 ATACMS missiles into Bryansk and launched Storm Shadow cruise missiles into Kursk the following day. In response, Russian President Vladimir Putin approved changes to the nuclear doctrine, which had been proposed in September this year.

The revised doctrine lowered the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons. Russia further retaliated with the test-launch of a new hypersonic intermediate-range ballistic missile, Oreshnik, hitting a defence industry production facility in Dnipro. This marked the first time Russia had used medium-range ballistic missiles in combat, opening a new chapter in the conflict and bringing it closer to the brink of nuclear escalation.

Ukraine's request to use American ATACMS and Anglo-French Storm Shadow and SCALP missiles was initially considered by US President Biden in September. However, the request went unanswered after Russia's Security Council proposed updating its nuclear doctrine. With aggressive posturing from Moscow, Kyiv's request to use these weapons was ultimately denied. Following Donald J. Trump's victory in November, a potential end to the conflict seemed imminent, as Trump expressed his desire to bring the war to a close and secure a ceasefire in Ukraine. However, Biden remains committed to keeping Washington involved, potentially dragging the next administration into defending Ukraine.

The Shift In Tempo

Following Russia's strike on Dnipro, Kyiv targeted an advanced air defence system in Kursk. On November 25th, a salvo of ATACMS struck Khalino in the Kursk region. Ukraine now has the capability to strike up to 300 km into the Russian territory, with areas such as Smolensk, Kaluga, Tula, Kursk, Bryansk, Oryol, Voronezh, and Rostov-on-Don within range. These regions host military bases, airfields, and large concentrations of troops.

Moscow views these attacks as a direct indication of US and European involvement in the war, as Ukrainian forces would need to coordinate with Western troops to operate these advanced weapons systems. Furthermore, Biden's approval of anti-personnel mine transfers to Ukraine violates the 1997 Ottawa Convention, which was ratified by Kyiv. In response to these developments, Moscow has escalated its strikes on Ukraine. According to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, since Kyiv's first long-range strike, Moscow has launched over 800 KAB bombs, 460 drones, and 20 missiles at Ukrainian targets.

Ukraine is manoeuvring on fragile ground, as Russian forces continue to advance in Donbass, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson, while inching closer to the Kharkiv region. Kyiv is losing territory in Kursk, with over 40% of the land it claimed in Russia having been recaptured by Russian forces, bolstered by the presence of thousands of North Korean troops. It is likely that Washington's approval was a last-ditch symbolic effort to slow Russia's advance and prevent Ukraine from losing further territory.

Nuclear Sabre-Rattling

Along with increasing attacks and strikes, Russia's new nuclear doctrine aims to reinforce its red lines to the West. Among the new ground rules is the potential use of nuclear weapons by Moscow in the event of a conventional attack. This marks a departure from the 2020 doctrine, which stipulated that nuclear weapons would only be used if Russia was struck by nuclear weapons or if the state's existence was threatened by a conventional attack. Russia's nuclear sabre-rattling has continued since the conflict began in 2022. According to some estimates, Kremlin has made over 230 references to its nuclear capabilities, signalling its readiness to escalate further.

All Eyes On Trump

The arrival of Trump in the White House is eagerly anticipated by Putin, as Trump's peace plan suggests a potential shift in Washington's policy and a possible endgame to the war. As a result, further escalation from Moscow appears unlikely. In light of recent developments, Trump's pick for national security advisor, Michael Waltz, has called on both parties to exercise restraint and bring the current escalation to a "responsible end," while restoring the importance of deterrence and peace. Yet, despite Trump's campaign promise to end the war in Ukraine, the evolving situation on the ground may compel him to pursue a policy similar to that of his predecessor, sustaining American support for Ukraine. All the stakeholders in this conflict, including the Biden administration are aiming to shape the choices of the incoming Presidency of Trump.

(Harsh V Pant is Vice President for Studies at Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi.  Rajoli Siddharth Jayaprakash is a Research Assistant at ORF)

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of NDTV and NDTV does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.