Air Power

Ukraine's use of ATACMS and comparable weapons in Crimea or the Donbas suggests that strikes using these conventional weapons have been “priced in” to the Russian war effort, according to Matthew Savill, military sciences director at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), a London-based think tank.

Matthew Savill, military sciences director at defence think tank the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi), said: “Many of the best targets – helicopters and glide-bomb armed aircraft attacking Ukrainian cities and troops in the north or in Kursk – have largely moved to air bases outside the range of ATACMS. This still leaves plenty of opportunities to strike military headquarters and ammunition or supply locations supporting Russian and North Korean troops, but this would be a reduced impact from when the Ukrainians first requested these weapons... The impact may be more political, albeit with a narrowing window of opportunity... The Ukrainians need to convince the incoming US administration that they are still worth backing – in President Trump’s transactional view, a ‘good investment’. And they will want to convince him to link his and US credibility to a ‘winning’ outcome, not a major compromise that sees the US ‘lose’.”

Professor Justin Bronk from defence think tank the Royal United Services Institute told BBC News it is "very likely" that US President Joe Biden's belated decision to allow long-range strikes with ATACMS ballistic missiles will also enable Storm Shadow to be used in at least the same way. "US objections will presumably have been dropped for them," he said. "Russian threats are unlikely to be considered a significant deterrent at this stage, since Russia has threatened dire consequences - including allusions to nuclear attacks - repeatedly throughout the war at each stage when Western equipment has been supplied."