Das falsche Versprechen der Ukraine, tief in Russland vorzudringen: Der Angriff auf weit entfernte Ziele wird den Krieg nicht aus der Fassung bringen

[SS from essay by Stephen Biddle, Professor of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Defense Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations. He is the author of [*Military Power: Explaining Victory and Defeat in Modern Battle*](https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/blank#buy).]

Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the United States has provided Kyiv with extensive military aid. But that aid has long been subject to restrictions. Some have to do with the type of equipment provided, such as limits on transfers of long-range missiles or aircraft. Others constrain how U.S. weapons can be used. Washington has designed many of these restrictions to limit Ukraine’s ability to hit targets far behind the front, fearing that deep strikes would be unduly escalatory.

That position has been controversial. Both Ukrainian officials and outside critics argue that the Biden administration exaggerates the risk of Russian escalation, needlessly denying Kyiv critical military capabilities. Before making an assessment, it is important to consider just how militarily valuable deep strikes would be for Ukraine—how, if at all, the war’s prognosis would change if the United States were to lift its restrictions and Ukraine were to acquire the necessary capabilities. Only then would it be possible to judge whether the military benefits are worth the escalatory risk

It was never to tip the balance of the war, it is to protect civilians. It is to hit deep targets/infra that nazi russia is using to launch planes that are dropping glide bombs on civilians inside Ukraine.

Whole premise of the title is wrong. Of course they cannot tip the balance. But no one said the deep strikes had that purpose.

Tipping the balance is not in the offing yet. And Kyiv knows that very well.