Follow us on social

google cta
Signal-2022-06-15-131044_001

Smith bucks Biden, says Ukraine needs long-range missiles and killer drones

The congressman, who also accused Russia of “genocide,” said anything else would be “buying into Putin’s rhetoric” about potential escalation.

Europe
google cta
google cta

Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) has called for the U.S. to send long-range missiles and armed drones to Ukraine, accusing the Biden Administration of caving to Vladimir Putin’s warning that the West should not send weapons capable of hitting targets in Russia.

“I don't agree with the President on the notion that we shouldn't give them long range strike missiles, because I think he's sort of buying into Putin's rhetoric here,” Smith, who chairs the House Armed Forces Committee, said at the Center for a New American Security’s annual foreign policy conference today. 

“Every single piece of artillery we send them is capable of striking Russia, because Ukraine's like right on the border with Russia,” he continued. “The longer range stuff is not about going into Russia, it's about giving you the ability to have a more standoff capability to hit the Russians who are in Ukraine.”

The remarks suggest a rift between Smith and President Joe Biden on the issue. They also coincided with the announcement of another reported $1 billion weapons sale to Ukraine. The package is expected to include anti-ship missiles, which Kelley Vlahos of Responsible Statecraft warned back in May could increase the “odds of a wider war dragging NATO into the fray, and worse, nuclear conflict.”

Some analysts see Smith’s approach as risky, both for Ukraine and the world. “Sending advanced missile systems with a range long enough to threaten the Russian state could not only prolong the war and cause more suffering for Ukrainians [but also] put Ukraine in a weaker position at the negotiating table,” wrote Ted Snider in a recent column for Responsible Statecraft.

Smith, who said Russia is “engaged in genocide” in parts of Ukraine and seeks to “enslave” the country, also pushed aside concerns that greater U.S. involvement there could lead to nuclear escalation. 

“Putin has drawn like 12 different red lines already that we’ve crossed, and he hasn’t done anything because he knows, if he does anything to bring NATO in, he’s done,” he said. “There’s no way he wins if we come in, so I think we’re giving him too much ability to stare us down when we have a more than adequate deterrent, and we have more that we could be doing.”


Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) speaking at Wednesday's CNAS event. Via screengrab cnas.org
google cta
Europe
Why SCOTUS won’t deter Trump’s desire to weaponize trade
Top image credit: U.S. President Donald Trump talks to Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts on the day of his speech to a joint session of Congress, in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., March 4, 2025. (REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)

Why SCOTUS won’t deter Trump’s desire to weaponize trade

QiOSK

In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court today ruled against the White House on a key economic initiative of the Trump administration, concluding that the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) does not give the president the right to impose tariffs.

The ruling was not really a surprise; the tone of the questioning by several justices in early November was overwhelmingly skeptical of the administration’s argument, as prediction markets rightly concluded. Given the likelihood of this result, it should also come as no surprise that the Trump administration has already been plotting ways to work around the decision.

keep readingShow less
Trump Iran
Top image credit: Lucas Parker and FotoField via shutterstock.com

No, even a 'small attack' on Iran will lead to war

QiOSK

The Wall Street Journal reports that President Donald Trump is considering a small attack to force Iran to agree to his nuclear deal, and if Tehran refuses, escalate the attacks until Iran either agrees or the regime falls.

Here’s why this won’t work.

keep readingShow less
As Iran strikes loom, US and UK fight over Indian Ocean base
TOP IMAGE CREDIT: An aerial view of Diego Garcia, the Chagossian Island home to one of the U.S. military's 750 worldwide bases. The UK handed sovereignty of the islands back to Mauritius, with the stipulation that the U.S. must be allowed to continue its base's operation on Diego Garcia for the next 99 years. (Kev1ar82 / Shutterstock.com).

As Iran strikes loom, US and UK fight over Indian Ocean base

QiOSK

As the U.S. surges troops to the Middle East, a battle is brewing over a strategically significant American base in the middle of the Indian Ocean.

President Donald Trump announced Wednesday that he would oppose any effort to return the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, arguing that a U.S. base on the island of Diego Garcia may be necessary to “eradicate a potential attack by a highly unstable and dangerous [Iranian] Regime.” The comment came just a day after the State Department reiterated its support for the U.K.’s decision to give up sovereignty over the islands while maintaining a 99-year lease for the base.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.