The change in policy is being considered after Russia placed weapons across the border from northeastern Ukraine, The New York Times reports.
  • US officials are considering letting Ukraine strike Russia with US weapons, The New York Times reports.
  • Ukraine says it’s necessary to fight cross-border attacks.
  • But fears of crossing Russia’s red lines have long made the US hesitate.

The US has barred Ukraine from striking targets in Russian territory with its arsenal of US weapons.

But that may be about to change. The New York Times on Thursday reported that US officials were debating rolling back the rule, which Ukraine has argued severely hampers its ability to defend itself.

The proposed U-turn came after Russia placed weapons across the border from northeastern Ukraine and directed them at Kharkiv, the Times reported, noting that Ukraine would be able to use only non-American drones to hit back.

The Times reported that the proposal was still being debated and had yet to be formally proposed to President Joe Biden.

  • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.eeEnglish
    2·
    6 months ago

    Ding ding ding on all points but - it’s not ‘the end of history’ anymore, definitely not after 9/11 and GWOT.

    There are headwinds coming for US and western leadership, and the unlimited ‘bear hug’ support for Bibi Israel has America standing alone at the UN, a global hypocrite in the “rules based international order” whilst pointing the finger at Russia and Ukraine, or China and the 11 10 9 dash line/Taiwan/Senkaku Islands/etc…

    The global south is turning against western leadership; South Africa’s dogged case at the ICC, the French getting ejected from their peacekeeping missions in multiple former colonies, India is sending assassins to run hits on US and Canadian soil, OPEC expansion, that nut in Argentina… There’s growing rejection of the Pax Americana and/or Bretton Woods, and not in same bipolar competition like in the Cold War

    • ricecake@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      2·
      6 months ago

      Oh, totally. Don’t disagree with anything you said. 😊

      To be clear, I was just trying to illustrate “how nations choose to act” and a bit of the context of “why Ukraine and not Palestine?”.
      Location and advertising reliability as an ally are just the easiest to convey, but there are of course so many different things that go into everything a nation as big as the US does.
      The state department has tens of thousands of workers, before you even get to the “boring” parts of what the CIA does to get them the data (analyzing public shipping records mostly) they need to make those policies and agreements. Any attempt to summarize the considerations of those people will have to cut some content.