Biden adding 'fuel to fire', Kremlin says - as Ukraine allowed to fire US missiles into Russia

The Kremlin has criticised President Joe Biden for adding “fuel to the fire” after giving Ukraine permission to launch US missiles into Russia.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters: “It is obvious that the outgoing administration in Washington intends to… continue adding fuel to the fire and provoking further escalation of tensions around this conflict.”

Russia‘s Foreign Ministry added that the action by Mr Biden‘s administration would fundamentally alter the nature of the war and trigger “an adequate and tangible” response.

The UK has refused to reveal if it plans to follow suit, for example extending the use of British-supplied Storm Shadow missiles by Ukraine to hit targets inside Russia.

Follow latest: Ukraine war live updates

Britain’s Defence Secretary John Healey told the House of Commons commenting would “compromise operations and security”, adding that he will speak with the US and Ukrainian defence secretaries on Monday evening.

At the G20 Summit in Brazil, Sir Keir Starmer gave a similar response: “I’m not going to get into operational details because the only winner, if we were to do that, is [Vladimir] Putin, and I’m not prepared to do that.”

For over a year Ukraine has been calling on America changes its policy on the use of long-range missiles.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has given a muted response to Mr Biden’s decision to expand the use of the American-made Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS).

“Strikes are not made with words… the missiles will speak for themselves,” he said.

Biden risks triggering ‘World War Three’

The US has eased restrictions on the use of ATACMS, which has a range of up to 190 miles, after Russia began deploying North Korean ground troops to supplement its own forces in the conflict.

Donald Trump Jr, the son of president-elect Donald Trump, suggested in a post on X that Mr Biden was risking a third world war “before my father has a chance to create peace and save lives”.

Hungary: Policy is ‘astonishingly dangerous’

There has been a strong, but mixed, reaction across Europe to America’s change of policy.

Hungary’s foreign minister, Peter Szijjarto, said the decision was “astonishingly dangerous” – although the country’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban has a close and often sympathetic relationship with Moscow.

Click to subscribe to Politics at Jack and Sam’s wherever you get your podcasts

Slovakia’s leader Robert Fico, who has also fostered a stronger relationship with his Russian counterpart, said it was an “unprecedented escalation of tensions” and “a decision that thwarts hopes for the start of any peace talks”.

But other countries have been more positive.

Polish President Andrzej Duda said: “This decision was very necessary… Russia sees that Ukraine enjoys strong support and that the West’s position is unyielding and determined.”

Meanwhile, Estonia’s foreign minister Margus Tsahkna was equally positive. He said easing restrictions on Ukraine was “a good thing”, adding: “We have been saying that from the beginning – that no restrictions must be put on the military support [for Ukraine].”

How could Russia respond?

In the past, Russia’s president has mentioned sending weapons to the West’s adversaries to strike Western targets abroad. He didn’t mention any nations specifically, but the assumption was it was a reference to Iran.

Moscow has also recently changed its nuclear doctrine, to allow it in theory to respond with nuclear weapons if the West attacks targets on Russian soil.

So are these threats genuine? Or is it more sabre-rattling?

The calculus in Washington seems to be that this is another bluff from Moscow, following the obliteration of previous red lines without consequence.

The West has supplied missiles, battle tanks and fighter jets to Kyiv, all without invoking the escalation that was threatened.

But could Russia respond in other, more subtle ways, which it doesn’t want to broadcast? Think sabotage, cyber attacks, closer alignment with Iran (and of course North Korea).

So in that sense, it’s not the Kremlin’s public fury the West will be worried about, it’s what happens behind the scenes.

Missiles are ‘not a game changer’

Former British ambassador to Russia Sir Toby Brenton has told Sky News: “Nobody is really expecting this to be a game changer.

“They’re expecting it to make life more difficult for the Russians, slow the Russian advance down, but… from all the stories I’m hearing, there are not actually that many of these missiles available to be used.”

On Monday, a Russian ballistic missile with cluster munitions killed 11 people in a residential area of Sumy in northern Ukraine.

Another missile barrage sparked apartment fires in the southern port of Odesa, killing at least 10 people, Ukraine’s Interior Ministry said.

Meanwhile, Tuesday marks 1,000 days since Russia began its full-scale invasion in 2022.

This article was originally published by Sky.com. Read the original article here.

How could Russia respond?

Articles You May Like