There are roughly 500 miles between Kiev and Moscow. And since the very beginning of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. has provided weapons to Ukraine that are designed to cover long distances. First, the Pentagon sent long-range artillery pieces that could fire targets around 20 miles away. Months later, the U.S. sent artillery rockets that can launch an explosive roughly 52 miles away. And now President Vladimir Zelensky has set his sights at an even greater distance, 190 miles.
That is the reach of the U.S. made long-range missile that has the potential to hit military targets deep inside Russia. For months now, President Zelensky has been requesting access to these advanced weapons from the U.S. and other Western nations. Here's U.S. Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, responding to a reporter from Sky News earlier this month on whether the U.S. was considering the request. We never rule out, but when we rule in, we want to make sure it's done in such a way that it could
advance what the Ukrainians are trying to achieve. But Russian President Vladimir Putin has already warned that such a tactic could mean war with the U.S. and his allies. Putin said in an interview quote, this will mean that NATO countries, the United States, European countries, are fighting with Russia. And that, of course, raises concerns about nuclear weapons. Consider this. The Western long-range missiles have the potential to transform Ukraine's ability to defend itself.
But at what cost? From NPR, I'm Scott Detra. Look, raising a teen is tough. You know, it's always been hard to be a teenager and it's always been hard to raise a teenager. I think a lot of parents feel like their kid has broken up with them. But this school year can be different, with LifeKids guide on supporting your teenager. Listen to the LifeKid podcast from NPR.
It's easy to get caught up in life on Earth. It's being human, but we're just one species on one planet in a whole universe. Come get out of your head and explore that universe with us, with fun, fascinating stories of science and discovery. Listen now to the Showwave podcast from NPR. It's considered this from NPR. The war in Ukraine will soon enter its third year. And over that period, the U.S. and its NATO allies have slowly and incrementally provided military assistance to Ukraine.
At every step, the Biden administration has been cautious about both the weaponry and the training it supplied, hoping to prevent escalating the war that Russia started. And this is frustrated to Ukrainian officials and its most ardent supporters in the U.S. The latest debate for months the Ukrainians have been pressing for American long-range missiles with the ability to strike deep into Russia.
Move that some officials fear could place the U.S. and its allies in direct conflict with Russia. If he has Tom Bowman, joins us now to talk about it. Hey Tom. Hey Scott. So I want to get to all the context in a moment. But first let's directly start with this latest question. Throughout the conflict, the Biden administration has been cautious in improving American-made missiles hitting targets deeper into Russia. Do we think that request is ultimately going to be approved?
It's really hard to say at this point Scott, we keep hearing its under discussion. Secretary of State Antony Blinken met almost two weeks ago with his British counterpart Foreign Secretary David Lamy. And Blinken seemed to indicate it would happen. Let's listen. We have adjusted and adapted as needs have changed, as the battlefield has changed. And I have no doubt that we'll continue to do that.
Again, it sounds like they're moving in that direction. And of course President Biden later had a meeting with the British Prime Minister Kier Starmer and talked about allowing long-range weapons to be used. But it appears again there's still deliberations and no final decision. Now Britain seems to be leaning forward on this issue because they see the recent move by Iran to provide hundreds of missiles to Russia.
It really changed the debate. The Brits have long-range missiles too. It's called the Storm Shadow. And the French, by the way, have their own the scalp. But here's the things Scott, they both have American-made components and therefore would require US approval. And even as over the last few years we have seen some of the initial hard-line warnings from Russia not play out. If you do X that we will consider it a grave threat.
If you do Y we'll consider it a grave threat. It's hard not to see this particular one as having some merit. We are talking about missiles partially American-made striking deep into Russia. And Putin has said that would be a move that would effectively mean Russia is an out-fighting NATO. No, that's absolutely right. And again, from the start the US has been slowly ramping up military support to Ukraine. Well, always weighing how Russia would respond.
Putin has hinted at using tactical nuclear weapons, which gets everyone's attention. These are real concerns. But Putin, again, has made similar threats after the US allowed, you know, Patriot missiles, F-16s. So a lot of this people say is bluster. Now the current issue is allowing what's called a TACOMS, an acronym that military loves acronyms. It stands for Army Tactical Missile System.
Get this. Contrable 190 miles. Right now the US is allowing Ukraine only to use them in Crimea to strike Russian military targets. And they've been quite successful. Now, again, give back to the British and the French long-range missiles. They can travel about 155 miles. So you can imagine the Ukrainians are pressing for that American weapon to use deep inside Russia, which can go, you know, farther.
Yeah. Now, when you and I have had versions of this conversation with different points of will the US allow this weapon system or that weapon system to go to Ukraine, you have at times pointed out that sometimes it was more of a symbolic conversation than something that was really central to the war. So I'm wondering with these missiles, how necessary are these long-range weapons for Ukraine and are there sufficient targets that they'd like to hit?
You know, it kind of depends who you talk with. The Institute for the Study of Wars says there is some 250 targets. They could be attacked with these long-range US weapons, everything from airfields, the oil and weapons, depots, armored vehicles. And these attacks could also hurt Russia's ability to launch collide bombs into Ukrainian cities. We've been seeing a lot of that.
But some of the Pentagon will tell you that the Russians have moved a lot of this, even beyond the range of those longer-range US missiles. And defense officials also say that Ukrainians have also used most of their long-range missiles, hitting those Russian sites in Crimea. They don't have many left.
But then the question is, of course, why can't you just send them more? The US has thousands of these missiles and want to hold them in case the US is faced with an adversary, military action, the Pacific, Middle East or Europe. So, again, that's a question that's out there. Can you provide more? And we still don't have an answer to that. Let's say these get approved. Would it change the course of the war? Would it have a big difference?
Well, no one is saying that, but it clearly will continue to hurt Russia. It's war machine. Some officials are saying to Ukraine, listen, you're doing a good job with your drones and attacks deep inside Russia. Scott, just last week, a swarm of Ukrainian drones hit a massive weapons depot, 300 miles inside Russia, just west of Moscow. So, talk about deep inside Russia. And this weapons depot had also get this had missiles supplied by North Korea.
There's little doubt the US intelligence helped in that targeting. And American officials are telling Ukraine these relatively inexpensive drones are doing a great job. So, don't just look to our missiles. Also, officials want Ukraine to focus more on defensive measures in the eastern part of their country. Where right now, Russia continues to make inroads. Of course, as we know, Ukraine pushed deep into the cursed region of Russia. But what did that really achieve, US officials are asking now?
They're saying this privately. But finally, the US has been pressing Ukraine to do a better job at recruiting younger Ukrainians for its military. Right now, get this. They're not recruiting any soldiers under the age of 25. But the US military, about 87% of their new recruits are between 18 and 24 years old. Right. So, Tom, let's back up here for a moment. We're coming up on the third anniversary of the war, at least the expansion of the war.
Russia had already effectively invaded Crimea years before that. What is the path forward? Because in many ways, it's a stalemate. And there are big questions about what US support looks like, depending on who's elected president. Well, the big thing is, how do you define winning? Or as General David Petraya famously said during the Iraq war, tell me how this ends. It's kind of the same thing here.
US military officials have said neither side can win. Russia can't take over all of Ukraine. And Ukraine, they don't have the power to push all Russian forces out of their country. So, what's the way ahead? No one really answers that question. And neither side, Ukraine or Russia, at this point, seems intent on negotiations. And here at home, Trump, of course, has been skeptical of spending more on Ukraine and Kamala Harris has said, the US must keep supporting Ukraine.
So, I think next year, the third anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, you'll see more pressure for some type of negotiation, or at least talks, regardless of who's in the White House. That was Tom Bowman who covers the Pentagon for NPR. This episode was produced by Katherine Fink and Brianna Scott. It was edited by Jeanette Woods and Andrew Susman. Our executive producer is Samine Enigot.
And one more thing before we go, you can now enjoy the Consider this newsletter. We still hope you break down a major story of the day, but you'll also get to know our producers and hosts. Get some moments of joy from the All Things Consider team. You can sign up at npr.org slash Consider this newsletter. It's Consider this from NPR. I'm Scott Detra.
This message comes from NPR Sponsor Satva. You hear a lot of statistics during elections. Here's another. Over a third of Americans suffer from sleep deprivation. Satva offers handcrafted mattresses to help you sleep soundly. Visit s double a tv a dot com slash NPR. Are you looking for something a little different in your 2024 election coverage? Here at the It's Been a Minute podcast, we've looked at politics from a culture perspective.
We look at why name calling seems to be in how influencers are changing the game and how the candidates fashion choices are redefining power dressing. We're giving you a different way to look at the 2024 election. Listen to it's been a minute from NPR. Want to hear this podcast without sponsor breaks? Amazon Prime members can listen to Consider this sponsor free through Amazon music.
Or you can also support NPR's vital journalism and get consider this plus at plus dot npr dot org. That's plus dot npr dot org.